CRIMINAL LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS a.   Conspiracy and Proposal ................ 69  

b.   Persons Criminally Liable ............... 73  
CRIMINAL LAW I ...................................... 1   c.   Multiple offenders .......................... 79  

I.   REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC) BOOK I ....... 2     PENALTIES .............................................. 84  

1.   Principles ............................................. 84  
  Fundamental and General Principles In a.   Threefold Purpose .......................... 84  
Criminal Law ...................................................... 2   b.   Capital Punishment and Death
1.   Definition of Criminal Law .................... 2   Penalty ..................................................... 84  
a.   Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita .......... 2   2.   Classification ....................................... 85  
2.   Criminal Law and Criminal Procedure, a.   Major Classification ........................ 85  
Distinguished ................................................. 3   b.   Other Classifications of Penalties .. 85  
3.   Suppletory Application of RPC to 3.   Duration and Effects ........................... 85  
Special Laws .................................................. 3   a.   Capital Punishment ........................ 88  
4.   Construction of Penal Laws .................. 4   b.   Afflictive Penalties .......................... 88  
a.   Pro Reo Doctrine ............................... 4   c.   Correctional Penalties .................... 88  
b.   Equipoise Rule .................................. 4   d.   Light Penalties ................................ 89  
c.   Spanish Text of the RPC Prevails over e.   Penalties Common to Afflictive,
its English Translation............................... 4   Correctional, and Light Penalties ........... 89  
d.   Retroactive Application if Favorable f.   Measures Not Considered
to the Accused ........................................... 4   Penalties…….. .......................................... 89  
5.   Applicability and Effectivity of the Penal g.   When the Duration of Penalty
Code… ............................................................ 4   Begins…… ................................................ 90  
a.   Generality .......................................... 4   4.   Application ........................................... 91  
b.   Territoriality ...................................... 5   a.   Indeterminate Sentence Law (RA
c.   Prospectivity...................................... 7   4103, as Amended) ................................... 91  
6.   Repeal and Amendment ....................... 8   b.   Three-Fold Rule .............................. 92  
c.   Subsidiary Imprisonment ............... 93  
  Constitutional Limitations on the Power of 5.   Graduation of Penalties ...................... 94  
Congress to Enact Penal Laws........................... 9   6.   Accessory Penalties ............................ 96  
1.   No Ex Post Facto Law or Bill of a.   Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Attainder ........................................................ 9   Disqualification ....................................... 96  
2.   Equal Protection ................................... 9   b.   Perpetual or Temporary Special
3.   Due Process ........................................... 9   Disqualification ....................................... 96  
4.   Cruel or Inhuman Punishment.............. 9   c.   Suspension from Public Office, the
Right to Vote and be Voted for, the Right
  FELONIES ................................................ 10   to Practice a Profession or Calling .......... 96  
1.   Felonies and Criminal Liability ........... 10   d.   Civil Interdiction .............................. 96  
a.   Classification of Felonies ................ 10   e.   Indemnification or Confiscation of
b.   Factors in Determining Stage of Instruments or Proceeds of the Offense . 97  
Execution of a Felony ............................... 18   f.   Payment of Costs ............................ 99  
c.   Criminal Liability and Impossible 7.   Computation of Penalties ................... 99  
Crimes ...................................................... 20   a.   Mitigating and Aggravating
d.   Complex Crimes .............................. 22   Circumstances ......................................... 99  
e.   Special Complex Crimes ................. 23   8.   Special Rules ...................................... 101  
2.   Circumstances Affecting Criminal a.   Complex Crime and Continuing
Liability......................................................... 24   Crimes ..................................................... 101  
a.   Justifying Circumstances [Art. 11] ... 24   b.   Absorption Doctrine ...................... 101  
b.   Exempting Circumstances [Art. c.   Impossible Crimes ......................... 101  
12]……....................................................... 32   d.   Crime Different from that
c.   Mitigating Circumstances [Art. 13] . 38   Intended…… ........................................... 101  
d.   Aggravating Circumstances [Art. e.   When Offender is Below 18 ............ 101  
14]…… ...................................................... 45   9.   Execution and Service of Penalties .... 101  
e.   Alternative Circumstances [Art. a.   Execution of Penalties ................... 101  
15]……. ..................................................... 65   b.   Effects of Probation Law [PD 986, as
f.   Absolutory Causes .......................... 67   amended by RA 10707] ......................... 103  
3.   Persons Liable and Degree of 10.   Suspension in Case of Insanity or
Participation ................................................ 69   Minority ...................................................... 106  

i
 CRIMINAL LAW

a.   Insane ............................................ 106   8.   Article 131 – Prohibition, Interruption

b.   Minors ........................................... 106   and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings ........ 135  
9.   Article 132 – Interruption of Religious
  Criminal and Civil Liabilities.................. 108   Worship ....................................................... 135  
1.   Extinction of Criminal Liabilities ....... 108   10.   Article 133 – Offending the Religious
a.   Total Extinction ............................. 108   Feelings ....................................................... 136  
b.   Partial Extinction ............................ 111  
c.   Compromise and Affidavit of   Title III. Crimes against Public Order ..... 139  
Desistance .............................................. 112   1.   Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup d’etat,
d.   Re-Election of Public Officer ......... 112   Sedition and Disloyalty ............................... 139  
2.   Civil Liabilities in Criminal Cases ....... 112   a.   Article 134 – Rebellion or
a.   General Rule .................................. 112   Insurrection….......................................... 139  
b.   Special Cases ................................. 114   b.   Article 134-A – Coup d’État .......... 140  
c.   What Civil Liability Includes .......... 116   c.   Article 135 – Penalty for Rebellion,
d.   Persons Civilly Liable ..................... 118   Insurrection or Coup d’État .................... 141  
e.   Extinction of Civil Liability ............. 118   d.   Article 136 – Conspiracy and Proposal
to Commit Coup d’ État, Rebellion or
CRIMINAL LAW II ................................. 120   Insurrection ............................................. 141  
e.   Article 137 – Disloyalty of Public
II.   REVISED PENAL CODE (BOOK II) ............121   Officers or Employees............................. 141  
f.   Article 138 – Inciting to Rebellion or
  Title I. Crimes against National Security Insurrection ............................................. 141  
and the Law of Nations ................................... 121   g.   Article 139 – Sedition .....................142  
1.   Crimes against National Security ...... 121   h.   Article 140 – Persons Liable for
a.   Art. 114-Treason ............................. 121   Sedition ................................................... 143  
b.   Article 115 – Conspiracy and Proposal i.   Article 141 – Conspiracy to Commit
to Commit Treason ................................. 123   Sedition ................................................... 143  
c.   Article 116 – Misprision of j.   Article 142 – Inciting to Sedition ... 143  
Treason…….. ...........................................124   2.   Chapter II: Crimes against Popular
d.   Article 117 – Espionage ..................124   Representation ........................................... 143  
2.   Crimes against the Law of Nations ....126   a.   Article 143 – Acts Tending to Prevent
a.   Article 118 – Inciting to War or Giving the Meeting of the Congress of the
Motives for Reprisals ..............................126   Philippines and Similar Bodies ............. 144  
b.   Article 119 – Violation of Neutrality b.   Article 144 – Disturbance of
126   Proceedings ........................................... 144  
c.   Article 120 – Correspondence with c.   Article 145 – Violation of
Hostile Country ....................................... 127   Parliamentary Immunity ....................... 144  
d.   Article 121 – Flight to Enemy's 3.   Chapter III: Illegal Assemblies and
Country ................................................... 127   Associations ............................................... 144  
e.   Article 122 – Piracy in General and a.   Article 146 – Illegal Assemblies ... 144  
Mutiny on the High Seas or in Philippine b.   Article 147 – Illegal Associations .. 145  
Waters..................................................... 127   4.   Chapter IV: Assault upon and
f.   Article 123 – Qualified Piracy ........128   Resistance and Disobedience to, Persons in
Authority and Their Agents ....................... 146  
  Title II. Crimes against Fundamental Laws a.   Article 148 – Direct Assault .......... 146  
of the State ...................................................... 131   b.   Article 152 – Persons in Authority and
1.   Article 124 – Arbitrary Detention ....... 131   Agents of Persons in Authority .............. 147  
2.   Article 125 – Delay in the Delivery of c.   Article 149 – Indirect Assault ........ 148  
Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial d.   Article 150 – Disobedience to
Authorities .................................................. 133   Summons Issued by Congress, Its
3.   Article 126 – Delaying Release .......... 133   Committees or Subcommittees, by the
4.   Article 127 – Expulsion ....................... 133   Constitutional Commissions, Its
5.   Article 128 – Violation of Domicile ..... 134   Committees, Subcommittees or
6.   Article 129 – Search Warrants Divisions………........................................ 148  
Maliciously Obtained, and Abuse in the e.   Article 151 – Resistance and
Service of Those Legally Obtained ............. 134   Disobedience to a Person in Authority or
7.   Article 130 – Searching Domicile the Agents of Such Persons .................. 148  
without Witnesses....................................... 134  

ii
 CRIMINAL LAW

5.   Chapter V: Public Disorders .............. 149   c.   Article 172 – Falsification by Private

a.   Article 153 – Tumults and Other Individual and Use of Falsified
Disturbances of Public Order ................ 149   Documents…. ........................................ 164  
b.   Article 154 – Unlawful Use of Means d.   Article 173 – Falsification of Wireless,
of Publication and Unlawful Cable, Telegraph and Telephone
Utterances..............................................149   Messages, and Use of Said Falsified
c.   Article 155 – Alarms and Messages ............................................... 165  
Scandals……… ....................................... 149   e.   Article 174 – False Medical
d.   Article 156 – Delivering Prisoners Certificates, False Certifcates of Merits of
from Jail ................................................. 150   Service, Etc. ........................................... 166  
6.   Chapter VI: Evasion of Service of f.   Article 175 – Using False
Sentence .................................................... 150   Certificates….. ........................................ 166  
a.   Article 157 – Evasion of Service of g.   Article 176 – Manufacturing and
Sentence ................................................ 150   Possession of Instruments or Implements
b.   Article 158 – Evasion of Service of for Falsification ...................................... 166  
Sentence on the Occasion of Disorders, 4.   Other Falsities ................................... 166  
Conflagrations, Earthquakes, or Other a.   Article 177 – Usurpation of Authority
Calamities ............................................... 151   or Official Functions .............................. 166  
c.   Article 159 – Other Cases of Evasion b.   Article 178 – Using Fictitious and
of Service of Sentence ............................ 151   Concealing True Name ........................... 167  
7.   Chapter VII: Commission of Another c.   Article 179 – Illegal Use of Uniforms
Crime during Service of Penalty Imposed for and Insignia ............................................ 167  
Another Previous Offense ...........................152   d.   Article 180 – False Testimony Against
a.   Article 160 – Quasi-Recidivism .....152   a Defendant ............................................ 167  
e.   Article 181 – False Testimony
  Title IV. Crimes against Public Interest . 158   Favorable to the Defendant .................. 168  
1.   Acts of Counterfeiting ....................... 159   f.   Article 182 – False Testimony in Civil
a.   Article 161 – Counterfeiting the Great Cases...................................................... 168  
Seal of the Government of the Philippine g.   Article 183 – False Testimony in
Islands, Forging the Signature or Stamp of Other Cases and Perjury in Solemn
the Chief Executive ................................ 159   Affirmation ............................................ 168  
b.   Article 162 – Using Forged Signature h.   Article 184 – Offering False
or Counterfeit Seal or Stamp ................ 159   Testimony in Evidence ........................... 169  
c.   Article 163 – Making and Importing i.   Article 185 – Machinations in Public
and Uttering False Coins ....................... 159   Auctions ................................................. 169  
d.   Article 164 – Mutilation of Coins .. 159   j.   Article 186 – Monopolies and
e.   Article 165 – Selling of False or Combinations in Restraint of Trade ...... 169  
Mutilated Coin, without Connivance ..... 160   k.   Article 187 – Importation and
f.   Article 166 – Forging Treasury or Disposition of Falsely Marked Articles or
Bank Notes or Other Documents Payable Merchandise Made of Gold, Silver, or other
to Bearer; Importing and Uttering Such Precious Metals or their Alloys ............... 170  
False or Forged Notes and Documents 160  
g.   Article 167 – Counterfeiting,   Title V. Crimes Relative to Opium and
Importing, and Uttering Instruments Not Other Prohibited Drugs ................................... 173  
Payable to Bearer ................................... 161  
2.   Acts of Forgery ................................... 161     Title VI. Crimes against Public Morals ... 179  
a.   Article 168 – Illegal Possession and 1.   Chapter I: Gambling and Betting....... 179  
Use of False Treasury or Bank Notes and 2.   Chapter II: Offenses against Decency
Other Instruments of Credit ................... 161   and Good Customs ..................................... 181  
b.   Article 169 – How Forgery is a.   Article 200 – Grave Scandal ......... 181  
Committed .............................................. 161   b.   Article 201 – Immoral Doctrines,
3.   Acts of Falsification ............................162   Obscene Publications and Exhibitions and
a.   Article 170 – Falsification of Indecent Shows ......................................182  
Legislative Documents ...........................162   c.   Article 202 – Prostitution (Amended
b.   Article 171 – Falsification by Public by R.A. 10158) ......................................... 183  
Officer, Employee or Notary or
Ecclesiastical Minister ............................162  

iii
 CRIMINAL LAW

  Title VII. Crimes Committed by Public c.   Article 225 – Escape of Prisoner

Officers ............................................................ 187   under the Custody of a Person Not a Public
1.   Chapter I: Preliminary Provisions...... 188   Officer .................................................... 202  
a.   Art. 203 – Who Are Public d.   Article 226 – Removal, Concealment,
Officers……............................................. 188   or Destruction of Documents ................ 202  
2.   Chapter II: Malfeasance and e.   Article 227 – Officer Breaking
Misfeasance in Office ................................. 188   Seal……. ................................................. 202  
a.   Article 204 – Knowingly Rendering f.   Article 228 – Opening of Closed
Unjust Judgment ................................... 188   Documents ............................................ 203  
b.   Article 205 – Judgment Rendered g.   Article 229 – Revelation of Secrets by
Through Negligence .............................. 189   an Officer ............................................... 203  
c.   Article 206 – Unjust Interlocutory h.   Article 230 – Public Officers
Order ...................................................... 189   Revealing Secrets of Private
d.   Article 207 – Malicious Delay in the Individuals……… .................................... 203  
Administration of Justice....................... 189   6.   Chapter VI: Other Offenses or
e.   Article 208 – Prosecution of Irregularities by Public Officers ................. 203  
Offenses; Negligence and Tolerance .... 190   a.   Article 231 – Open Disobedience .. 203  
f.   Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by an b.   Article 232 – Disobedience to the
Attorney or a Solicitor – Revelation of Order of Superior Officer When Said Order
Secrets ................................................... 190   Was Suspended by Inferior Officer ........204  
g.   Article 210 – Direct Bribery ............ 191   c.   Article 233 – Refusal of
h.   Article 211 – Indirect Bribery ..........192   Assistance……. .......................................204  
i.   Article 211-A – Qualified Bribery ....192   d.   Article 234 – Refusal to Discharge
j.   Article 212 – Corruption of Public Elective Office ........................................204  
Officials ...................................................192   e.   Article 235 – Maltreatment of
3.   Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal Exactions Prisoners ................................................204  
and Transactions ........................................ 197   f.   Article 236 – Anticipation of Duties of
a.   Article 213 – Fraud against the Public a Public Officer ......................................205  
Treasury and Similar Offenses ............... 197   g.   Article 237 – Prolonging Performance
b.   Article 214 – Other Frauds ............. 197   of Duties and Powers.............................206  
c.   Art. 215 – Prohibited h.   Article 238 – Abandonment of Office
Transactions…….. .................................. 198   or Position ..............................................206  
d.   Article 216 – Possession of Prohibited i.   Article 239 – Usurpation of
Interest by a Public Officer .................... 198   Legislative Powers .................................206  
4.   Chapter IV: Malversation of Public j.   Article 240 – Usurpation of Executive
Funds or Property ...................................... 198   Functions ...............................................206  
a.   Article 217 – Malversation of Public k.   Article 241 – Usurpation of Judicial
Funds or Property - Presumption of Functions ...............................................206  
Malversation .......................................... 198   l.   Article 242 – Disobeying Request for
b.   Article 218 – Failure of Accountable Disqualification .....................................206  
Officer to Render Accounts .................. 200   m.   Article 243 – Orders or Request by
c.   Article 219 – Failure of a Responsible Executive Officer to Any Judicial
Public Officer to Render Accounts Before Authority…… .......................................... 207  
Leaving the Country ............................. 200   n.   Article 244 – Unlawful
d.   Article 220 – Illegal Use of Public Appointments…. .................................... 207  
Funds or Property ................................. 200   o.   Article 245 – Abuses against
e.   Article 221 - Failure to Make Delivery Chastity…. .............................................. 207  
of Public Funds or Property .................. 200  
f.   Article 222 – Officers Included in the   Title VIII. Crimes against Persons ........ 208  
Preceding Provisions ............................. 201   1.   Chapter I: Destruction of Life ........... 208  
5.   Chapter V: Infidelity of Public a.   Article 246 – Parricide ................. 208  
Officers…….. ............................................... 201   b.   Article 247 – Death or Physical
a.   Article 223 – Conniving With or Injuries Under Exceptional
Consenting to Evasion ........................... 201   Circumstances…… ................................ 208  
b.   Article 224 – Evasion through c.   Article 248 – Murder ....................209  
Negligence............................................. 201   d.   Article 249 – Homicide ................. 210  
e.   Article 250 - Penalty for Frustrated
Parricide, Murder or Homicide ............... 211  

iv
 CRIMINAL LAW

f.   Article 251 - Death Caused in c.   Article 277 - Abandonment of Minor

Tumultuous Affray .................................. 211   by Person Entrusted With Custody;
g.   Article 252 - Physical Injuries Caused Indifference of Parents .......................... 233  
in Tumultuous Affray .............................. 212   d.   Article 278 - Exploitation of
h.   Article 253 - Giving Assistance to Minors……. ............................................. 233  
Suicide .................................................... 212   e.   Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to
i.   Article 254 - Discharge of Dwelling................................................. 234  
Firearms……. ........................................... 212   f.   Article 281 - Other Forms of
j.   Article 255 – Infanticide ................ 213   Trespass… .............................................. 235  
k.   Article 256 - Intentional Abortion . 213   g.   Article 282 - Grave Threats .......... 236  
l.   Article 257 - Unintentional h.   Article 283 - Light Threats............ 236  
Abortion…… ............................................214   i.   Article 284 - Bond for Good
m.   Article 258 - Abortion Practiced by Behavior…. ............................................. 237  
the Woman Herself or by Parents ..........214   j.   Article 285 – Other Light
n.   Article 259 - Abortion by a Physician Threats…….. ........................................... 237  
or Midwife and Dispensing of k.   Article 286 - Grave Coercions ....... 237  
Abortives………. .......................................214   l.   Article 287 - Light Coercions ........ 238  
o.   Article 260 - Responsibility of m.   Article 288 - Other Similar
Participants in a Duel .............................215   Coercions ............................................... 238  
p.   Article 261 - Challenging to a n.   Article 289 - Formation,
Duel……. .................................................215   Maintenance, and Prohibition of
2.   Chapter II: Physical Injuries................215   Combination of Capital or Labor through
a.   Article 262 – Mutilation .................215   Violence or Threats ................................ 239  
b.   Article 263 - Serious Physical 3.   Chapter III: Discovery and Revelation of
Injuries….. ...............................................215   Secrets ....................................................... 239  
c.   Article 264 - Administering Injurious a.   Article 290 - Discovering Secrets
Substances or Beverages ....................... 217   through Seizure of Correspondence ..... 239  
d.   Article 265 - Less Serious Physical b.   Article 291 - Revealing Secrets with
Injuries .................................................... 217   Abuse of Office ...................................... 239  
e.   Article 266 - Slight Physical Injuries c.   Article 292 - Revelation of Industrial
and Maltreatment .................................. 217   Secrets ...................................................240  
f.   Article 266-A – Rape (as amended by d.   Special Laws .................................240  
TA 8353) .................................................218  
g.   Special Laws .................................. 221     Title X. Crimes against Property ........... 248  
1.   Chapter I: Robbery in General .......... 248  
  Title IX. Crimes against Personal Liberty a.   Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of
and Security ................................................... 228   Robbery ................................................. 248  
1.   Chapter I: Crimes against Liberty ..... 228   b.   Article 294 – Robbery with Violence
a.   Article 267 - Kidnapping and Serious against or Intimidation of Persons ........ 249  
Illegal Detention .................................... 228   c.   Article 295 - Robbery with Physical
b.   Article 268 - Slight Illegal Injuries, in an Uninhabited Place and by a
Detention….. .......................................... 230   Band.......................................................250  
c.   Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest ....... 230   d.   Article 296 – Robbery by a Band ..250  
d.   Article 270 - Kidnapping and Failure e.   Article 297 - Attempted and
to Return a Minor ................................... 231   Frustrated Robbery with Homicide ........251  
e.   Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to f.   Article 298 - Execution of Deeds
Abandon His Home ................................ 231   through Violence or Intimidation ...........251  
f.   Article 272 – Slavery ..................... 232   g.   Article 299 - Robbery in an Inhabited
g.   Article 273 - Exploitation of Child House or Public Building or Edifice
Labor ...................................................... 232   Devoted to Worship ............................... 252  
h.   Article 274 - Services Rendered h.   Article 300 – Robbery in an
Under Compulsion in Payment of Debt 232   Uninhabited Place and by a Band......... 253  
2.   Chapter II: Crimes against Security .. 232   i.   Article 301 - What is an inhabited
a.   Article 275 - Abandonment of House, Public Building Dedicated to
Persons in Danger and Abandonment of Religious Worship and Their
Own Victim ............................................ 232   Dependencies….. ................................... 253  
b.   Article 276 - Abandoning a j.   Article 302 – Robbery In an
Minor…….. .............................................. 233   Uninhabited Place or Private Building .. 253  

v
 CRIMINAL LAW

k.   Article 303 - Robbery of Cereals, 2.   Article 334 – Concubinage................ 274  

Fruits or Firewood in an Uninhabited Place 3.   Article 336 - Acts of Lasciviousness.. 274  
or Private Building ................................. 254   4.   Article 337 - Qualified Seduction ...... 276  
l.   Article 304 - Possession of Picklock 5.   Article 338 - Simple Seduction ......... 277  
or Similar Tools ..................................... 254   6.   Article 339 - Acts of Lasciviousness with
m.   Article 305 - False Keys ............ 254   the Consent of the Offended Party ............ 277  
2.   Chapter II: Brigandage ...................... 254   7.   Article 340 - Corruption of Minors .... 278  
a.   Article 306 - Who Are Brigands.... 254   8.   Article 341 - White Slave Trade ......... 278  
b.   Article 307 - Aiding and Abetting a 9.   Article 342 - Forcible Abduction ....... 278  
Band of Brigands ................................... 255   10.   Article 343 - Consented
3.   Chapter III: Theft ............................... 255   Abduction……............................................ 280  
a.   Article 308 - Who Are Liable for 11.   Article 344 - Prosecution of Private
Theft……................................................. 255   Offenses .................................................... 280  
b.   Article 309 – Penalties ................. 256   12.   Article 345: Civil Liability of Persons
c.   Article 310 - Qualified Theft.......... 256   Guilty of Crimes Against Chastity ...............281  
d.   Article 311 - Theft of the Property of 13.   Article 346 – Liability of Ascendants,
the National Library and National Guardians, Teachers and Other Persons
Museum… .............................................. 259   Entrusted with the Custody of the Offended
4.   Chapter IV: Usurpation ..................... 259   Party…… ......................................................281  
a.   Article 312 - Occupation of Real 14.   RA 7877: Anti-Sexual Harassment
Property or Usurpation of Real Rights in Act…….. ...................................................... 282  
Property ................................................. 259  
b.   Article 313 - Altering Boundaries or   Title XII. Crimes against the Civil Status of
Landmarks .............................................260   Persons ........................................................... 283  
5.   Chapter V: Culpable Insolvency ........260   1.   Chapter I: Simulation of Births and
a.   Art. 314 - Fraudulent Insolvency ...260   Usurpation of Civil Status .......................... 283  
6.   Chapter VI: Swindling and Other a.   Article 347 - Simulation of Births,
Deceits….. ..................................................260   Substitution of One Child for Another, and
a.   Article 315 - Estafa ........................260   Concealment or Abandonment of a
b.   Article 316 - Other Forms of Legitimate Child .................................... 283  
Swindling and Deceits ........................... 266   b.   Article 348 - Usurpation of Civil
c.   Article 317 - Swindling of a Minor . 268   Status..................................................... 283  
d.   Article 318 - Other Deceits ............ 268   2.   Chapter II: Illegal Marriages ............. 284  
7.   Chapter VII: Chattel Mortgage .......... 268   a.   Article 349 – Bigamy .................... 284  
a.   Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or Pledge b.   Article 350 - Marriage Contracted
of Mortgaged Property .......................... 268   against Provisions of Laws .................... 285  
8.   Chapter VIII: Arson and Other Crimes c.   Article 351 - Premature Marriage . 285  
Involving Destruction ................................. 269   d.   Article 352 - Performance of Illegal
9.   Chapter IX: Malicious Mischief........... 271   Marriage Ceremony ............................... 286  
a.   Article 327 - Who Are
Responsible…….. .................................... 271     Title XIII. Crimes against Honor ........ 286  
b.   Article 328 - Special Cases of 1.   Chapter I: Libel .................................. 286  
Malicious Mischief .................................. 271   a.   Article 353 - Definition of Libel..... 286  
c.   Article 329 - Other Mischiefs ......... 271   b.   Article 354 - Requirement for
d.   Article 330 - Damage and Publicity ................................................. 288  
Obstruction to Means of c.   Article 355 - Libel by Writing or
Communication…… ................................ 271   Similar Means ........................................ 289  
e.   Article 331 – Destroying or Damaging d.   Article 356 - Threatening to Publish
Statues, Public Monuments or and Offer to Prevent Such Publication for a
Paintings…… .......................................... 272   Compensation ....................................... 289  
10.   Chapter X: Exemption from Criminal e.   Article 357 - Prohibited Publication of
Liability….................................................... 272   Acts Referred to in the Course of Official
a.   Article 332 - Exemption from Proceedings (Gag Law) ......................... 289  
Criminal Liability in Crimes Against f.   Article 358 - Slander.....................290  
Property ................................................. 272   g.   Article 359 - Slander by Deed ......290  
h.   Article 360 - Persons Responsible for
  Title XI. Crimes against Chastity ........... 273   Libel…. ....................................................291  
1.   Article 333 – Adultery ....................... 273   i.   Article 361 - Proof of Truth ............291  

vi
 CRIMINAL LAW

j.   Article 362 - Libelous Remarks .... 292  

2.   Chapter II: Incriminatory
Machinations…… ....................................... 292  
a.   Article 363 - Incriminating Innocent
Person .................................................... 292  
b.   Article 364 - Intriguing against Honor
293  
c.   RA 10175: The Cybercrime Prevention
Act of 2012 ............................................. 293  

  Title XIV. Quasi-Offenses ...................... 294  

1.   Article 365 - Imprudence and
Negligence ................................................. 294  

vii
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

CRIMINAL LAW I
Criminal Law

Page 1 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
I.   REVISED PENAL
CODE (RPC) BOOK I
*From hereon, all Articles refer to the RPC, unless
otherwise indicated.
  Fundamental and
General Principles In
Criminal Law
1.   Definition of Criminal Law
That branch of public substantive law which defines
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their
punishment. [Reyes, citing cyc 129]
A crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of
a public law forbidding or commanding it. It a generic
term used to refer to a wrongoing punished by either
the RPC or a special law. [Ortega]
Felonies are crimes punished under the RPC, while
offenses are crimes punished under the special law.
The Philippines does not have common law crimes.
Therefore, even though an act or omission is wrong
per se, there is no criminal liability if the act is not
punishable by a particular provision in penal law or
special penal law. There is no crime when there is no
law punishing the same (Nullum crimen nulla poena
sine lege).
However, not every lawa punishing an act or omission
may be valid as a criminal law. If the law punishing
an act is ambiguous, it is null and void on its face.
Sources of Criminal Law:
a.   The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) – enacted
January 1, 1932; based on the Spanish Penal
Code, US Penal Code, and Philippine Supreme
Court decisions.
b.   Special penal laws
c.   Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial
Law.
a.   Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita
MALA IN SE (“evil in itself”)
A crime or an act that is inherently immoral, such as
murder, arson or rape. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9
th
Ed.]
Page 2 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
When the acts are inherently immoral, they are mala
in se, even if punished under special law, like plunder
which requires proof of criminal intent. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560 (2001); Garcia v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 157171 (2006); Ysidoro v.
People, G.R. No. 192330 (2012)]
Where malice is a factor, good faith is a defense.
MALA PROHIBITA (“prohibited evil”)
An act that is a crime merely because it is prohibited
by statute, although the act iself is not necessarily
th
immoral. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9 Ed.]
General Rule: Performance of the act itself will
constitute the offense. Dolo is not required in crimes
mala prohibita.
In those crimes which are mala prohibita, the act
alone irrespective of the intent, constitutes the
offense.
Good faith and absence of criminal intent are not
valid defenses in crimes mala prohibita.
Exceptions:
1.   People v. Landicho [G.R. No. 116600 (1996)] – If
the act is done in order to comply with
government policies.
An individual is not criminally liable despite a law
prohibiting carrying of firearms if he was
authorized to buy and collect guns, then sell to
authorities later on.
2.   US v. Samson [G.R. No. 5807 (1910)] – Civilian
guards acting in good faith in carrying firearms
with no intention of committing an offense were
able to claim lack of intent as a defense.
3.   People v. Mallari [G.R. No. L-58886 (1988)] – A
pending application for permanent permit to
possess a firearm, and did not hide possession of
firearms in front of authorities was also free from
liability because of good faith.
4.   People v. Lucero [G.R. No. 97936 (1995)]– When
the accused was given authority to carry a
revolver in order to capture or kill a wanted
person.
5.   Cuenca v. People [G.R. No. L-27586 (1970)] – The
accused had assumed that his employer had the
necessary license to possess firearm which was
turned over to him while he was on duty as one of
the security guards of the licensed security
agency.
A crime in the RPC can absorb a crime punishable by
a special law if the latter is a necessary element of
the felony defined in the Code; but a special law can
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

never absorb a crime punishable under the RPC,

because violations of the Revised Penal Code are
2.  C riminal Law and Criminal
more serious than a violation of a special law. [People Procedure, Distinguished
v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 13981 (1960)]
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure
Mala in Se Mala Prohibita It is substantive. It is remedial.
As to nature Prospective in
Wrong from its very application.
nature; So serious in
Wrong because it is
their effects on society as Exception: If it is
prohibited by law;
to call for condemnation favorable to the
of members. accused.
As to use of good faith as a defense
Good faith a valid Exceptions to the
Good faith is not a Retroactive in
defense, unless the crime Exception:
defense. application.
is the result of culpa a.   When the accused is
As to criminal intent as an element a habitual
Criminal intent is delinquent. (Art. 22)
Criminal intent is an immaterial, BUT still b.   Where the new law
element. requires intelligence & expressly made
voluntariness inapplicable to
As to degree of accomplishment of crime pending actions or
Degree of existing causes of
The act gives rise to a
accomplishment is taken actions. [Tavera v.
crime only when
into account for the Valdez]
consummated.
punishment. May be promulgated by
As to mitigating and aggravating circumstances Statutory; it is passed by the Legislature (e.g.
They are taken into the Legislature. jurisdiction of courts) or
They are not taken into the Judiciary (e.g. Rules
account in imposing
account. of Court)
penalty
As to degree of participation
Degree of participation is It is essential for the State to punish crime in order to
When there is more than maintain peace and order, protect life, liberty, and
generally not taken into
one offender, the degree property, and promote the general welfare of the
account. All who
of participation of each in people for the enjoyment of the blessings of
participated in the act
the commission is taken democracy. [Art. II, Sec. 5, 1987 Constitution]
are punished to the same
into account.
extent.
As to stages of execution 3.  Suppletory Application of
There are three stages:
attempted, frustrated &
No such stages of
execution
RPC to Special Laws
consummated
As to persons criminally liable General Rule: RPC provisions supplement the
The principal, provisions of special laws. [Art. 10]
Generally, only the
accomplice & accessory.
principal is liable. The Revised Penal Code supplies what is lacking in
Penalty is computed on special laws.
Penalty of offenders is
the basis of whether he is
same whether they acted Examples
a principal offender or
as mere accomplices or a.   Art. 39 – Imprisonment in case the person
merely an accomplice or
accessories convicted cannot pay fine (Subsidiary
accessory
As to what laws are violated Imprisonment)
Generally, the RPC. Generally, special laws. b.   Art. 45 – Confiscation of instruments used in the
As to division of penalties commission of the crime
Penalties may be divided There is no such division Exceptions:
into degrees and periods. of penalties. a.   Where the special law provides otherwise. [Art
10]

Page 3 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b.   When the provisions of the Code are impossible When the evidence of the prosecution and the
of application, either by express provision or by defense are equally balanced, the scale should be
necessary implication, as in those instances tilted in favour of the accused in obedience to the
where the provisions in question are peculiar to constitutional presumption of innocence. [Ursua v.
the Code. [Regalado] CA, G.R. No. 112170 (1996); Corpuz v. People, G.R. No.
74259 (1991)]
Provisions of the RPC on penalties cannot be applied
to offenses punishable under special laws. Special c.   Spanish Text of the RPC
laws do not provide a scale of penalties where a given
penalty can be lowered by one or two degrees. Prevails over its English
Special laws use the term “imprisonment” instead. Translation
[Reyes]
In the construction or interpretation of the provision
The stages of commission of the RPC (Attempted, of the RPC, the Spanish text is controlling, because it
Frustrated, Consummated) cannot be applied to was approved by the Philippine Legislature in its
offenses punished by special laws. An accused may Spanish text. [People v. Manaba, G.R. No. L-38725
be acquitted because mere attempt to commit a (1933)]
crime is not punishable under the special law. [US v.
Basa, G.R. No. L-3540 (1907)]
d.   Retroactive Application if
In the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, Favorable to the Accused
the general provisions of the RPC which, by their
nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied See Characteristics of Criminal Law, Prospectivity and
suppletorily. [Ladonga v. People, G.R. No. 141066 Art. 22.
(2005)]
5.  A pplicability and
4.  C onstruction of Penal Effectivity of the Penal
Laws Code
Strict construction against the State and liberally in
favor of the accused a.   General
b.   Territorial
c.   Prospective
a.   Pro Reo Doctrine
Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied
a.   Generality
and the law admits of two interpretations – one
lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, General Rule: Penal laws are obligatory on all persons
that interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the who live or sojourn in Philippine territory, regardless
offender will be adopted. of nationality, gender, or other personal
circumstances, subject to the principles of public
Basis: The fundamental rule that all doubts shall be international law and to treaty stipulations. [Art. 14,
construed in favor of the accused and presumption of NCC]
innocence of the accused. [Art III, Section 14(2), 1987
Constitution] Exceptions:
1.   TREATY STIPULATIONS
Penal statutes should be strictly construed against
the State only when the law is ambiguous and there Art. 2. – “Except as provided in the treaties or laws of
is doubt as to its interpretation. Where the law is preferential application …”
clear and unambiguous, there is no room for the
application of the rule. [People v. Gatchalian, G.R. No. Art. 14, Civil Code. – “… subject to the principles of
90301 (1998)] public international law and to treaty stipulations.”

b.   Equipoise Rule Example:

Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) is an agreement
between the Philippine and US Government

Page 4 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
regarding the treatment of US Armed Forces visiting
the Philippines. It was signed on Feb. 10, 1998.
The US and Philippines agreed that:
a.   US shall have the right to exercise within the
Philippines all criminal and disciplinary
jurisdiction conferred on them by the military law
of the US over US personnel in RP;
b.   US authorities exercise exclusive jurisdiction over
US personnel with respect to offenses, including
offenses relating to the security of the US
punishable under the law of the US, but not
under the laws of RP;
c.   US military authorities shall have the primary
right to exercise jurisdiction over US personnel
subject to the military law of the US in relation
to:
d.   Offenses solely against the property or security of
the US or offenses solely against the property or
person of US personnel; and
e.   Offenses arising out of any act or omission done
in performance of official duty. [Reyes]
Rule On Jurisdiction Under The VFA
Crimes Jurisdiction
Crime punishable under
Philippines has exclusive
Philippine laws, but not
jurisdiction.
under US laws
Crime punishable under
US has exclusive
US laws, but not under
jurisdiction.
Philippine laws
There is concurrent
Crime is punishable
jurisdiction, but the
under both US and
Philippines has primary
Philippine laws
jurisdiction.
Crime is committed by a
US personnel against the US has exclusive
security and property of jurisdiction.
the US alone
Generally, the Philippines cannot refuse the request
of the US for waiver of jurisdiction and has to approve
the request for waiver except if the crime is of
national importance:
a.   Those crimes defined under RA 7659 (Heinous
crimes)
b.   Those crimes defined under RA 7610 (Child
Abuse cases)
c.   Those crimes defined under RA 9165 (Dangerous
Drugs cases)
Laws of Preferential Application
R.A. No. 75 penalizes acts which would impair the
proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants of
the Philippines of the immunities, rights, and
privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic
representatives in the Philippines.
Page 5 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
General Rule: The following persons are exempt from
arrest and imprisonment, and their properties are
exempt from distraint, seizure and attachment:
[AMS]
a.   Ambassadors
b.   Public Ministers
c.   Domestic servant of ambassadors or ministers
Exceptions:
a.   The person is a citizen or inhabitant of the
Philippines
b.   The writ or process issued against him is founded
upon a debt contracted before he entered upon
such service or the domestic servant is not
registered with the Department of Foreign
Affairs.
Note: RA 75 is not applicable when the foreign
country adversely affected does not provide similar
protection to our diplomatic representatives.
2.   Warship Rule
A warship of another country, even though docked in
the Philippines, is considered an extension of the
territory of its respective country. This also applies to
embassies.
Offenses committed in warships or embassies,
though in the Philippines, are therefore not covered
by the generality principle.
3.   Principles of Public International Law
The following persons are exempt from the provisions
of the RPC: [SCAMMP]
a.   Sovereigns and other heads of state
b.   Charges d’ affaires.
c.   Ambassadors
d.   Ministers
e.   Minister resident
f.   Plenipotentiary
(Article 31, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations)
Consuls, vice-consuls, and other commercial
representatives of foreign nations do not possess the
status of, and cannot claim the privileges and
immunities accorded to ambassadors and ministers.
[Wheaton, International Law, Sec. 249]
b.   Territoriality
General Rule: Penal laws of the country have force
and effect only within its territory.
It cannot penalize crimes committed outside its
territory.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The territory of the country is not limited to the land
where its sovereignty resides but includes also its
maritime and interior waters as well as its
atmosphere.[Art. 2]
Exceptions:
1.   Extraterritorial crimes
Punishable even if committed outside the
Philippine territory. [Art. 2]
a.   Crimes committed aboard a Philippine ship
or airship [Art 2, Par. 1]
The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels if
the crime is committed while the ship is
treading:
i.   Philippine waters (intraterritorial), or
ii.   The high seas (extraterritorial)
Requisites:
i.   The ship or airship must not be within
the territorial jurisdiction of another
country
ii.   The ship or airship must be registered
in the Philippines under Philippine
laws
Merchant Vessels
Two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes
committed aboard merchant vessels while in
the territorial waters of another country (i.e. a
foreign vessel treading Philippine waters OR
Philippine vessels treading foreign waters):
i.   FRENCH RULE: It is the flag or
nationality of the vessel which
determines jurisdiction UNLESS the
crime violates the peace and order of
the host country.
ii.   ENGLISH RULE: the location or situs
of the crime determines jurisdiction
UNLESS the crime merely relates to
internal management of the vessel.
The Philippines adheres to the ENGLISH
RULE.
The general rule will create a presumption of
jurisdiction, and identifies upon whom the
burden of proving a contrary jurisdiction
belongs to.
Thus, when a felony is committed on a
merchant ship within Philippine territory,
Philippine jurisdiction is presumed, and the
accused must prove lack of jurisdiction
Page 6 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
because the felony relates to the internal
management of the ship.
Foreign warships
When the crime is committed in a war vessel
of a foreign country, the nationality of the
vessel will always determine jurisdiction
because war vessels are part of the
sovereignty of the country to whose naval
force they belong.
Note: The country of registry determines the
nationality of the vessel, not its ownership.
Thus, Filipino-owned vessel registered in
China must fly the Chinese flag.
International Theories on Aerial Jurisdiction
Free Zone Theory
The atmosphere over the country is free and not
subject to the jurisdiction of the subjacent state,
except for the protection of its national security and
public order.
Relative Theory
The subjacent state exercises jurisdiction over the
atmosphere only to the extent that it can effectively
exercise control thereof.
Absolute Theory
The subjacent state has complete jurisdiction over
the atmosphere above it subject only to the innocent
passage by air craft of a foreign country.
Under this theory, if the crime is committed in an
aircraft, no matter how high, as long as it can be
established that it is within the Philippine
atmosphere, Philippine criminal law (See Anti-
Hijacking Law) will govern.
Note: The Philippines adopts the Absolute Theory.
2.   Forging/Counterfeiting of Coins or Currency
Notes in the Philippines [Art 2, Par. 2]
Forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or
bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or
to order the appearance of a true genuine
document or by erasing, substituting,
counterfeiting or altering, by any means, the
figures, letters, words, or signs contained therein.
If forgery is committed abroad, it must refer only
to Philippine coin, currency note, obligations and
securities.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
3.   Should introduce into the country the above-
mentioned obligations and securities. [Art 2,
Par. 3]
The introduction of forged or counterfeited
obligations and securities into the
Philippines is as dangerous as the forging or
counterfeiting of the same, to the economic
interest of the country.
Those who introduced the counterfeit items
are criminally liable even if they were not the
ones who counterfeited the obligations and
securities. On the other hand, those who
counterfeited the items are criminally liable
even if they did not introduce the counterfeit
items.
4.   When public officers or employees commit an
offense in the exercise of their functions. [Art 2,
Par. 4]
The crimes which may be committed are:
a.   Direct bribery (Art.210)
b.   Qualified Bribery (Art. 211-A)
c.   Indirect bribery (Art.211)
d.   Corruption (Art.212)
e.   Frauds against the public treasury (Art.213)
f.   Possession of prohibited interest (Art.216)
g.   Malversation of public funds or property (Art.
217)
h.   Failure to render accounts (Art.218)
i.   Illegal use of public funds or property (Art.
220)
j.   Failure to make delivery of public funds or
property (Art.221)
k.   Falsification by a public officer or employee
committed with abuse of his official position
(Art.171)
l.   Those having to do with the discharge of
their duties in a foreign country. The
functions contemplated are those, which are,
under the law:
i.   Performed by the public officer;
ii.   In the foreign service of the
Philippine government;
iii.   In a foreign country.
A crime committed within the grounds of a
Philippine embassy on foreign soil shall be
subject to Philippine penal laws, although it may
or may not have been committed by a public
officer in relation to his official duties. Embassy
grounds are considered as extensions of the
sovereignty of the country occupying them. [See
Minucher v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142396
(1992)]
Page 7 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
5.   Commit any of the crimes against national
security and the law of nations defined in Title
One, Book 2, RPC [Art 2, Par. 5]
Crimes against national security
a.   Treason (Art.114)
b.   Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
(Art.115)
c.   Misprision of treason (Art.116)
d.   Espionage (Art.117)
Crimes against the law of nations
a.   Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
(Art.118)
b.   Violation of neutrality (Art.119)
c.   Correspondence with hostile country
(Art.120)
d.   Flight to enemy’s country (Art.121)
e.   Piracy in general and mutiny on the high
seas or in Philippine waters (Art.122)
Note: Crimes against public order (e.g., rebellion,
coup d’etat, sedition) committed abroad is under
the jurisdiction of the host country.
Terrorism is now classified as a crime against
national security and the law of nations.
R.A. 9372, Human Security Act of 2007 has
extraterritorial application.
Section 58 provides that the Act shall apply to
individual persons who, although physically
outside the territorial limits of the Philippines
shall:
a.   Conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes
in the Act;
b.   Commit any of said crimes on board a
Philippine ship or airship;
c.   Commit any of said crimes within the
embassy, consulate, or diplomatic premises
belonging to or occupied by the Philippine
government in an official capacity;
d.   Commit said crimes against Philippine
citizens or persons of Philippine descent
where their citizenship or ethnicity was a
factor in the commission of the crimes;
e.   Commit said crimes directly against the
Philippine government.
c.   Prospectivity
General rule: Acts or omissions will only be subject to
a penal law if they are committed AFTER a penal law
has taken effect. [Art. 21]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Conversely, acts or omissions which have been
committed before the effectivity of a penal law could
not be penalized by such penal law.
Exception: Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect
in so far as they favour the person guilty of a felony.
[Art. 22]
Exception to the Exception:
a.   The new law is expressly made in applicable to
pending actions or existing cause of actions; or
b.   The offender is a habitual criminal. [Art. 22]
6.  R epeal and Amendment
KINDS OF REPEAL
a.   Absolute or Total Repeal – A repeal is absolute
when the crime punished under the repealed law
has been decriminalized by the subsequent law.
If the new law totally repeals the existing law
so that the act which was penalized under the
old law is no longer punishable, the crime is
obliterated. [Reyes]
1.   Pending cases are dismissed, regardless of
whether the accused is a habitual criminal.
2.   Unserved penalties imposed are remitted.
3.   The offender already serving sentence is
entitled to be released unless the repealing
law is expressly made inapplicable to those
who are serving sentence at the time of
repeal.
applied, EXCEPTwhen there is reservation to that
effect or when he is a habitual criminal.
EFFECTS OF AMENDMENT OF PENAL LAW
If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new
law, the new law shall be applied, EXCEPT when the
offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law
is made not applicable to pending action or existing
causes of action.
If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law in
force at the time of the commission of the offense
shall be applied.
If the fine is increased but the penalty of
imprisonment is decreased, it is not ex post facto
law and the penalty is retroactively applied. [Cruz]
Rule of prospectivity also applies to judicial decisions,
administrative rulings and circulars. [Art. 8, Civil
Code]
Rationale for the prospectivity rule: the
punishability of an act must be reasonably known for
the guidance of society. [People v. Jabinal, G.R. No. L-
30061 (1974)]

Note: Habitual criminals will continue serving

their sentence.

Habitual Criminal
Pending case Serving sentence
Continue serving
Case is dismissed
sentence

b.   Partial or Relative Repeal – A repeal is partial

when the crime punished under the repealed law
continues to be a crime in spite of the repeal.
[Ortega]

If the case is still pending in court and the

repeal is favorable to the accused, the
repealing law must be applied, regardless of
whether he is a habitual criminal or not, EXCEPT
when there is reservation in said law that it does
not apply to pending cases.

For offenders already serving sentence, the

repealing law which is more lenient must be

Page 8 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
  Constitutional
Limitations on the Power
of Congress to Enact
Penal Laws
1.   No Ex Post Facto Law or
Bill of Attainder
Sec. 22, Art. III, Constitution. No ex post facto law or
bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex Post Facto Law
An ex post facto law is one which:
a.   makes criminal an act done before the passage
of the law and which was innocent when done,
and punishes such an act;
b.   aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it
was, when committed;
c.   changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime
when committed;
d.   alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes
conviction upon less or different testimony than
the law required at the time of the commission of
the offense;
e.   assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of a
right for something which when done was lawful;
and
f.   deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful
protection to which he has become entitled, such
as the protection of a former conviction or
acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty [In re:
Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., G.R. No. L-32485 (1970)]
Bill of Attainder
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts
punishment without trial. Its essence is the
substitution of a legislative act for a judicial
determination of guilt. [People v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L-
32613-14 (1972)]
2.  E qual Protection
Sec. 1, Art. III, Constitution. No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the
equal protection of the laws.
Page 9 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Penal laws must apply generally to all people who
are under the same class. Such acts and omissions
punished as crimes must be clearly defined.
3.  Due Process
Sec. 14 (1), Art. III, Constitution. No person shall be
held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
4.  C ruel or Inhuman
Punishment
Sec. 19, Art. III, Constitution. Excessive fines shall not
be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving
heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for
it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be
reduced to reclusion perpetua.
Under RA 9364, An Act Prohibiting the Imposition
of Death Penalty in the Philippines, RA 8177 (Act
Designating Death by Lethal Injection), RA 7659
(Death Penalty Law), and other acts imposing the
death penalty were repealed or amended
accordingly.
In lieu thereof,
a.   Reclusion perpetua shall be imposed when the
law violated makes use of the nomenclature of
the penalties of the RPC.
b.   Life imprisonment shall be imposed when the law
violated does not make use of the nomenclature
of the penalties of the RPC.
The death penalty is still in the statutes but the law
prohibits its imposition.
Persons convicted of crimes punished by reclusion
perpetua shall not be eligible for parole under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

  FELONIES iv.   Conniving with or consenting to

evasion (Art 223) – Failure to act on
the responsibility to take charge of a
1.   Felonies and Criminal prisoner
v.   Refusal to Discharge Elective
Liability Office (Art 234) – Refusal to
discharge one’s duties
Crime vi.   Abandonment of person in danger
Whether the wrongdoing is punished under the and abandonment of one’s own
Revised Penal Code or under a special law, the victim – Failure to render assistance
generic word “crime” can be used. when required by law to do so
vii.   PD 1153 – Requiring the planting of
Felony one tree every month for five
Refers only to violations of the Revised Penal Code. consecutive years by every citizen of
the Philippines
A crime punishable under a special law is not referred b.   Comitted by means of:
to as a felony. “Crime” or “offense” is the proper 1.   Dolo (i.e. willfully) or
term. 2.   Culpa (i.e. negligently)
c.   Punished by the Code
Provisions in the RPC that use the term “felony” do
not extend to crimes under special laws. Offense
A crime punished under a special law is called a
How committed statutory offense.

Art. 3. Definitions. – Acts and omissions punishable Misdemeanor

by law are felonies (delitos). A minor infraction of the law, such as a violation of an
ordinance.
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit
(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). a.   Classification of Felonies
There is deceit when the act is performed with Purpose. To bring about proportionate penalty and
deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful equitable punishment.
act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight, or lack of skill. ACCORDING TO GRAVITY OF PENALTIES

General Elements of Felonies:
a.   An act or omission
1.   Act – Any kind of body movement which
tends to produce some effect in the external
world; includes possession
2.   Omission – The failure to perform a positive
duty which one is bound to do under the law.
It is important that there is a law requiring
the performance of an act; if there is no
positive duty, there is no liability.
i.   Misprision of Treason (Art 116) –
Failure to report knowledge of
treason despite allegiance to the
Philippines
ii.   Disloyalty of Public Officers (Art
137) – Failure of Public Officers to
act properly upon a rebellion
iii.   Prosecution of Offenses;
negligence and tolerance (Art 208)
– Maliciously refraining from
prosecuting violators of law
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light
felonies –. - Grave felonies are those to which the law
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in
any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with
Art. 25 of this Code.
Grave felonies
Those to which the law attaches the capital
punishment or penalties which in any of their periods
are afflictive.
1.   Reclusion perpetua
2.   Reclusion temporal
3.   Perpetual or Absolute DQ
4.   Perpetual or Temporary Special DQ
5.   Prision mayor
6.   Fine more than P6,000
Less grave felonies
Those which the law punishes with penalties which in
their maximum period is correctional.
1.   Prision correccional

Page 10 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
2.   Arresto mayor
3.   Suspension
4.   Destierro
5.   Fines equal to or more than P200
Light felonies
Those infractions of law for the commission of which
the penalty is arresto menor, or a fine not exceeding
P200, or both.
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable – Light
felonies are punishable only when they have been
consummated, with the exception of those
committed against person or property.
Why punishable only when consummated
They produce light, insignificant moral, and material
injuries that public conscience is satisfied with
providing a light penalty for their consummation.
Who are punished
Principals and accomplices only.
Examples (MATHS)
1.   Malicious mischief when the value of the damage
does not exceed two hundred pesos or cannot be
estimated
2.   Alteration of boundary marks
3.   Theft when the value of the thing stolen is less
than 5 pesos and theft is committed under the
circumstances enumerated under Art. 308 par. 3
4.   Intriguing against Honor
5.   Slight physical injuries
Importance of Classification
1.   to determine whether these felonies can be
complexed or not;
2.   to determine the prescription of the crime and the
prescription of the penalty.
Take note that when the Revised Penal Code speaks
of grave and less grave felonies, the definition makes
a reference specifically to Art. 25 of the Revised Penal
Code (Penalties which may be imposed).
PHP-200 fine. A fine of exactly PHP-200 is for light
felony under art. 9; but is correctional penalty under
art. 26.
In determining prescription of crimes, apply Art. 9. In
determining the prescription of penalty, apply Art.
26.
If the penalty is exactly P200.00, apply Art. 26 (with
respect to prescription of penalties). It is considered as
a correctional penalty and it prescribes in 10 years.
Page 11 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
ACCORDING TO STAGES OF EXECUTION
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated and attempted
felonies – Consummated felonies as well as those
which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present; and it is frustrated when the offender
performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences
the commission of a felony directly or over acts, and
does not perform all the acts of execution which
should produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than this own spontaneous
desistance.
The three stages are:
1.   Attempted – When the offender commences the
commission of a felony directly by overt acts but
does not produce the felony by reason of some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance
2.   Frustrated – When the offender performs all the
acts of execution which would produce the
felony but does not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
3.   Consummated – When all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment
are present; the felony is produced
The classification of stages of a felony in Article 6 is
true only to crimes under the Revised Penal Code. It
does NOT apply to crimes punished under special
laws.
However, even certain crimes which are punished
under the Revised Penal Code do not admit of these
stages.
ATTEMPTED
Elements:
1.   The offender commences the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts;
2.   He does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony;
3.   The non-performance of all acts of execution was
due to cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Overt Act
Some physical activity or deed, indicating the
intention to commit a particular crime
More than a mere planning or preparation, which if
carried to its complete termination following its
natural course, without being frustrated by external
obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the
perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a
concrete offense. (Reyes, 2008)
Marks the commencement of the subjective phase
Subjective phase
That portion of the acts constituting a crime, starting
from the point where the offender begins the
commission of the crime to that point where he still
has control over his acts including their (act’s) natural
course
If between those two points, the offender is stopped
by reason of any cause outside of his own voluntary
desistance, the subjective phase has not been passed
and it is merely an attempt.
Desistance
An absolutory cause which negates criminal liability
because the law encourages a person to desist from
committing a crime.
Does not negate all criminal liability, if the desistance
was made when acts done by him already resulted in a
felony, the offender will still be criminally liable for the
felony brought about by his act.
What is negated is only the attempted stage, but
there may be other felonies arising from his act.
Example: An attempt to kill that results in physical
injuries leads to liability for the injuries inflicted
Note: Desistance is recognized only in the attempted
stage of the felony.
If the felony is already in its frustrated stage,
desistance will NOT negate criminal liability.
People v. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433(2000):
The mother of the 4-year-old victim caught the
houseboy Campuhan in the act of almost raping her
daughter.
The hymen of the victim was still intact. However,
since it was decided in People v. Orita that entry into
labia is considered rape even without rupture and full
penetration of the hymen, a question arises whether
what transpired was attempted or consummated
rape.
Page 12 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Held: There was only attempted rape.
•   Mere touching of external genitalia by the penis
is already rape.
•   Touching should be understood as inherently
part of entry of penis penetration and not mere
touching, in the ordinary sense, of the
pudendum.
•   Requires entry into the labia, even if there be no
rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina,
to warrant a conviction for consummated rape.
•   Where entry into the labia has not been
established, the crime amounts to an attempted
rape.
•   The prosecution did not prove that Campuhan’s
penis was able to penetrate victim’s vagina
because the kneeling position of the accused
obstructed the mother’s view of the alleged
sexual contact. The testimony of the victim
herself claimed that penis grazed but did not
penetrate her organ.
•   There was only a shelling of the castle but no
bombardment of the drawbridge yet.
FRUSTRATED
Elements:
1.   The offender performs all the acts of execution;
2.   All the acts performed would produce the felony
as a consequence;
3.   But the felony is not produced;
4.   By reason of causes independent of the will of
the perpetrator.
The end of the subjective phase and the beginning of
the objective phase.
Objective phase
The result of the acts of execution, that is, the
accomplishment of the crime.
If the subjective and objective phases have been
passed there is a consummated felony.
People v. Listerio, G.R. No. 122099 (2000):
Brothers Jeonito and Marlon were walking when they
met a group composed of men who blocked their
path and attacked them with lead pipes and bladed
weapons. One stabbed Jeonito from behind. Marlon
was hit on the head.
Held:
•   The crime is a frustrated felony not an attempted
offense considering that after being stabbed and
clubbed twice in the head as a result of which
Marlon lost consciousness and fell. His attackers
apparently thought he was already dead and
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

fled. •  If there is a meeting of the minds, there is

•   A crime cannot be held to be attempted unless consummated bribery or consummated
the offender, after beginning the commission of corruption.
the crime by overt acts, is prevented, against his •   If there is none, it is only attempted.
will, by some outside cause from performing all 4.   Adultery
of the acts which should produce the crime. •   This requires the sexual contact between two
•   In other words, to be an attempted crime, the participants.
purpose of the offender must be thwarted by a •   If that link is present, the crime is
foreign force or agency which intervenes and consummated.
compels him to stop prior to the moment when 5.   Physical Injuries
he has performed all of the acts which should •   Under the Revised Penal Code, the crime of
produce the crime as a consequence, which acts physical injuries is penalized on the basis of
it is his intention to perform. the gravity of the injuries. There is no simple
•   If he has performed all the acts which should crime of physical injuries. There is the need
result in the consummation of the crime and to categorize because there are specific
voluntarily desists from proceeding further, it articles that apply whether the physical
cannot be an attempt, but is a frustrated felony. injuries are serious, less serious or slight.
Thus, one could not punish the attempted or
Crimes which do not admit of frustrated stage frustrated stage because one does not know
1.   Rape what degree of physical injury was
•   The essence of the crime is carnal committed unless it is consummated.
knowledge. 6.   Theft
•   No matter what the offender may do to •   Once there is unlawful taking, theft is
accomplish a penetration, if there was no consummated.
penetration yet, it cannot be said that the •   Either the thing was taken or not.
offender has performed all the acts of •   It does not matter how long the property was
execution. in the possession of the accused; it does not
•   We can only say that the offender in rape has matter whether the property was disposed or
performed all the acts of execution when he not
has effected a penetration.
•   Once there is penetration, no matter how Rule of thumb: Felonies that do not require any
slight it is, the offense is consummated. For result do not have a frustrated stage.
this reason, rape admits only of the
attempted and consummated stages, no Attempted and Frustrated Felonies
frustrated stage. [People v. Orita, G.R. No. The difference between the attempted stage and the
88724 (1990)] frustrated stage lies in whether the offender has
2.   Arson performed all the acts of execution for the
•   One cannot say that the offender, in the accomplishment of a felony.
crime of arson, has already performed all the
acts of execution which could produce the Attempted
Frustrated Felony
destruction of the premises through the use Felony
of fire, unless a part of the premises has Overt acts of All acts of
begun to burn. execution are execution are
•   The crime of arson is therefore started finished
Acts
consummated even if only a portion of the BUT BUT
Performed
wall or any part of the house is burned. The Not all acts of Crime sought to be
consummation of the crime of arson does execution are committed is not
not depend upon the extent of the damage present achieved
caused. [People v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L- Due to reasons Due to intervening
31770 (1929)] other than the causes
3.   Bribery and Corruption of Public Officers Why spontaneous independent of the
•   The manner of committing the crime desistance of will of the
requires the meeting of the minds between the perpetrator perpetrator
the giver and the receiver. Position in Offender still in Offender is already
the subjective in the objective
Timeline phase because phase because all

Page 13 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
he still has acts of execution
control of his are already present
acts, including and the cause of its
their natural non-
cause. accomplishment is
other than the
offender’s will
CONSUMMATED
If the subjective and objective phases have been
completed.
Development of a Crime
1.   Internal Acts
•   Intent, ideas and plans; generally not
punishable, even if, had they been carried
out, they would constitute a crime
•   The intention and act must concur.
•   Illustration: Ernie plans to kill Bert
2.   External Acts
a.   Preparatory Acts
•   Acts tending toward the crime.
•   Ordinarily not punished except when
considered by law as independent crimes
(i.e. Art. 304 – possession of picklocks)
•   These acts do not yet constitute even the
first stage of the acts of execution.
•   Intent not yet disclosed.
•   Illustration: Ernie goes to the kitchen to
get a knife.
b.   Acts of Execution
•   Usually overt acts with a logical relation
to a particular concrete offense.
•   Punishable under the RPC.
•   Illustration: Ernie stabs Bert
Felony is commenced when:
1.   There are external acts.
2.   Such external acts have a direct connection with
the crime intended to be committed.
Indeterminate Offense
It is one where the intent of the offender in
performing an act is not certain. The accused may be
convicted of a felony defined by the acts performed
by him up to the time of desistance.
The intention of the accused must be viewed from
the nature of the acts executed by him and the
attendant circumstances, and not from his
admission
Page 14 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
People v. Lamahang, G.R. No. L-43530 (1935):
Aurelio Lamahang was caught opening with an iron
bar a wall of a store of cheap goods in Fuentes St.
Iloilo. He broke one board and was unfastening
another when a patrolling police caught him. The
owners of the store were sleeping inside store as it
was early dawn. Lamahang was then convicted of
attempted robbery.
Held: The crime committed was only attempted
trespass to dwelling. Attempt should have logical
relation to a particular and concrete offense which
would lead directly to consummation. It is necessary
to establish an unavoidable connection & logical &
natural relation of cause and effect. It’s also
important to show clear intent to commit crime. In
the case at bar, we can only infer that his intent was
to enter by force, other inferences are not justified by
facts. Groizard: infer only from nature of acts
executed. Acts susceptible of double interpretation
can’t furnish ground for themselves. The mind
should not directly infer intent.
CONTINUING CRIMES
Definition
Single crime consisting of a series of acts arising from
a single criminal resolution or intent not susceptible
of division.
Real or material
Continuing crime
plurality
There is a series of acts performed by the offender.
Each act performed The different acts
constitutes a separate constitute only one crime
crime because each act is because all of the acts
generated by a criminal performed arise from one
impulse criminal resolution.
Requisites
1.   Plurality of acts;
2.   Unity of penal provision infringed upon; and
3.   Unity of criminal intent and purpose.
Two or more violations of the same penal
provision are united in one and the same intent
leading to the perpetration of the same criminal
purpose or aim [Gamboa v. CA, G.R. No. L-41054
(1975)]
Transitory Crime
Criminal action may be instituted and tried in the
court of the municipality, city or province wherein any
of the essential ingredients thereof took place
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The necessary elements of the crime
may separately take place in different
territorial jurisdictions until the crime itself
is consummated.
Old Jurisprudence
To make Article 48 applicable to continuing crimes,
there must be singularity of criminal act;
singularity of criminal impulse is not written into the
law. [Gamboa v. CA, supra] For example, the act of
taking the two roosters, in response to the unity of
thought in the criminal purpose on one occasion,
constitutes a single crime of theft.
Gamboa v. CA, supra.: There is plurality of crimes or
"concurso de delitos" when the actor commits various
delictual acts of the same or different kind. "Ideal
plurality" or "concurso ideal" occurs when a single
act gives rise to various infractions of law. This is
illustrated by the very article under consideration: (a)
when a single act constitutes two or more grave or
less grave felonies (described as "delito compuesto"
or compound crime); and (b) when an offense is a
necessary means for committing another offense
(described as "delito complejo" or complex proper).
"Real plurality" or "concurso real", on the other hand,
arises when the accused performs an act or different
acts with distinct purposes and resulting in different
crimes which are juridically independent. Unlike
"ideal plurality", this "real plurality" is not governed
by Article 48.
Apart and isolated from this plurality of crimes (ideal
or real) is what is known as "delito continuado" or
"continuous crime". This is a single crime consisting
of a series of acts arising from a single criminal
resolution or intent not susceptible of division.
Recent Jurisprudence
Crimes committed by means of separate acts were
held to be complex on the theory that they were the
product of a single criminal impulse or intent [People
v. Pincalin, G.R. No. L-38755 (1981)]
One Larceny Doctrine
The current prosecution of theft cases is more in line
with the Gamboa understanding of delito continuado.
The trend is to follow the single larceny doctrine:
1.   taking of several things,
2.   whether belonging to the same or different
owners,
3.   at the same time and place, constitutes one
larceny only.
As long as single criminal impulse. The Supreme
Court has extended this class of complex crime to
those cases when the offender performed not a single
Page 15 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
act but a series of acts as long as it is the product of a
single criminal impulse.
People v. Garcia, G.R. No. L401-06 (1980):
The accused were convicts who were members of a
certain gang and they conspired to kill the other
gang. Some of the accused killed their victims in one
place within the same penitentiary, some killed the
others in another place within the same penitentiary.
Held:
This case is covered by the rule that when for the
attainment of a single purpose, which constitutes an
offense, various acts are executed, such acts must be
considered as only one offense, a continuing one.
In other words, when a conspiracy animates several
persons with a single purpose, their individual acts in
pursuance of that purpose are treated as a single act,
the act of execution, which gives rise to a complex
offense. The felonious agreement produces a sole
and solidary liability
How Applied
Whenever the Supreme Court concludes that the
criminals should be punished only once, because they
acted in conspiracy or under the same criminal
impulse:
1.   It is necessary to embody these crimes under one
single information.
2.   It is necessary to consider them as complex
crimes even if the essence of the crime does not
fit the definition of Art 48, because there is no
other provision in the RPC.
People v. Sabbun, G.R. No. L-18150 (1964):
There was illegal charging of fees for service
rendered by a lawyer every time he collected
veteran’s benefits on behalf of a client who agreed
that attorney’s fees shall be paid out of such benefits.
The collections of legal fees were impelled by the
same motive, that of collecting fees for services
rendered, and all acts of collection were made under
the same criminal impulse.
Application to special laws
The concept of delito continuado has been applied to
crimes under special laws since in Art. 10, the RPC
shall be supplementary to special laws, unless the
latter provides the contrary.
ACCORDING TO MANNER OF COMMISSION
Art. 3. Definitions – Acts and omissions punishable
by law are felonies (delitos).
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit Criminal Intent

(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful
act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight, or lack of skill.
1.   Intentional felonies. Those committed with
deliberate intent; and
2.   Culpable felonies. Those resulting from
negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of
foresight or lack of skill; performed without
malice.
Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea.
An act does not make a defendant guilty without a
guilty mind.
Mens rea – a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful
purpose or criminal intent, and essential for criminal
liability. [People v Valenzuela, G.R. No. 160188 (2007)]
The criminal statute must also provide for the overt
acts that constitute the crime. For a crime to exist in
our legal law, it is not enough that mens rea be
shown; there must also be an actus reus.

Intentional v. culpable felonies, distinguished. Note When presumed (General Rule)

that both felonies are done with freedom and
intelligence. Freedom is voluntariness, while
intelligence is the capacity to know and understand
the consequences of an act or omission. The act or
omission which is done must bre freely done and
must not have been forced by an external force.
Their difference is that intentional felonies are
committed wth criminal intent, while culpable
felonies are committed through negligence or
imprudence.
1.   If an act is proven to be unlawful, then intent will
be presumed prima facie. [U.S. v. Apostol]
2.   Such presumption arises from the proof of
commission of an unlawful act.
When not presumed (Exception)
1.   In some crimes, intent cannot be presumed as an
integral element thereof; so it has to be proven.
2.   In frustrated homicide, specific intent to kill is not
presumed but must be proven; otherwise it is
merely physical injuries.

Intentional Culpable Degree of proof

In these cases when intent has to be proven, the law
Act is malicious. Not malicious.
requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of the
With deliberate Injury caused is unintentional,
existence of malicious intent or dolus malus before an
intent. being just an incident of another
accused can be adjudged liable for committing an
act performed without malice.
intentional felony. [Villareal v. People, G.R. No. 151258
Has intention to Wrongful act results from (2012)]
cause an injury. imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight, or lack of skill.
General Criminal Intent Specific Criminal Intent
The intention to do The intention to commit a
FELONIES BY DOLO
something wrong. definite act.
Presumed from the mere Existence is not
Requisites
doing of a wrong act. presumed.
If any of the elements is absent, there is no dolo. If
there is no dolo, there could be no intentional felony. The burden is upon the Since the specific intent is
[Visbal v. Buban, AM MTJ-03-1471 (2003)] wrongdoer to prove that an element of the crime,
1.   Freedom. Voluntariness on the part of the he acted without such the burden is upon the
person who commits the act or omission. criminal intent. prosecution to establish
2.   Intelligence. Capacity to know and understand its existence.
the consequences of one’s act.
3.   Dolo. Deliberate intent otherwise referred to as Must be alleged in Information
criminal intent. It is the purpose to use a Where the specific intent of the malefactor is
particular means to effect a result. determinative of the crime charged, such specific
a.   Intent which is a mental process intent must be alleged in the information and proved
presupposes the exercise of freedom and the by the prosecution. The specific intent of the
use of intelligence. malefactors as disclosed in the information or
b.   Such intent is not a requisite in: criminal complaint is determinative of what crime the
i.   Culpable felonies accused is charged with. [People v. Delim, G.R. No.
ii.   Crimes mala prohibita 142773 (2003)]

Page 16 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
How proven
Specific intent may be proved by direct evidence or by
circumstantial evidence. It may be inferred from the
circumstances of the actions of the accused as
established by the evidence on record. [People v.
Delim, supra.]
Intent to commit the crime v. intent to perpetrate
the act
When the statute plainly forbids an act to be done
(mala prohibita), and it is done by some person, the
law conclusively implies the guilty intent, despite the
honest mistake of the offender as to the meaning of
the law he violates. x x x Care must be exercised in
distinguishing the difference between the intent to
commit the crime and the intent to perpetrate the
act. The accused did not consciously intend to
commit a crime; but he did intend to commit an act,
and that act is, by the very nature of things, the crime
itself—intent and all. The wording of the law is such
that the intent and the act are inseparable. The act is
the crime. The accused intended to put the device in
his window. Nothing more is required to commit the
crime. [U.S. v. Go Chico, G.R. No. 4963 (1909)]
CULPABLE FELONIES
Culpa
1.   Injury caused being simply the incident of
another act performed without malice
2.   Criminal intent is replaced by negligence or
imprudence
Reason
1.   A man must use his common sense and exercise
reflection in all his acts
2.   It is one’s duty to be cautious, careful and
prudent, and not to expose other people’s lives
and property at risk of injury or damage
3.   The law penalizes thus the negligent or careless
act, not the result thereof. (Ivler v. Modesto-San
Pedro, G.R. No. 172716 (2010)]
Requisites
1.   Freedom
2.   Intelligence
3.   Negligence or Imprudence
a.   Negligence – Defiiciency of perception
i.   Failure to pay proper attention and
to use diligence in foreseeing the
injury or damage impending to be
caused
ii.   Lack of foresight
b.   Imprudence – Deficiency of action
i.   Failure to take the necessary
precaution to avoid injury to person or
damage to property
Page 17 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
ii.   Lack of skill
Resulting harm or injury
Unless the negligent or imprudent act results in harm
or injury to another, there is no criminal liability.
No matter how reckless one drives his car, he does
not incur criminal liability for culpa if no one is killed
or injured, or property is damaged.
Doctrines on culpable crimes
1.   Emergency Rule. A person who is confronted
with a sudden emergency may be left no time for
thought so he must make a speedy decision
based largely upon impulse or instinct [Gan v.
CA, G.R. No. L-44264 (1988)].
Importance
Said person cannot be held to the same conduct
as one who has had an opportunity to reflect,
even though it later appears that he made the
wrong decision.
2.   Doctrine of “Last Clear Chance.” Clear Chance
is a defense by the defendant in a damage suit
against liability by transferring it to the plaintiff.
Exceptions
a.   The contributory negligence of the party
injured will NOT defeat the action if it be
shown that the accused might, by the
exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the
negligence of the injured party.
b.   The doctrine is not applicable in criminal
cases because the liability is penal in nature
and thus liability cannot be transferred to
the other party. [Anuran v. Buno, G.R. Nos. L-
21353-54 (1966)]
c.   It is not a case between two parties involved
in an incident but rather between an
individual and the State.
3.   Rule of Negative Ingredient. This rule states
that:
a.   The prosecution must first identify what the
accused failed to do.
b.   Once this is done, the burden of evidence
shifts to the accused.
c.   The accused must show that the failure did
not set in motion the chain of events leading
to the injury [Carillo v. People, G.R. No.
86890 (1994)].
When results are not identifiable
This is related to the doctrine of proximate cause and
applicable when certain causes leading to the result
are not identifiable.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

AS TO PLURALITY OF CRIMES 4.   Crimes requiring the intervention of two

persons to commit them are consummated by
Plurality mere agreement
Actor commits various delictual acts.
In bribery, the manner of committing the crime
Real or material plurality requires the meeting of the minds between the
Different crimes in law as well as in the conscience of giver and the receiver.
the offender.
In betting in sports contests and corruption of
Offender shall be punished for each and every offense public officer (Art. 197 and Art. 212), the manner
that he committed. of committing the crime requires the meeting of
the minds between the giver and the receiver.
Three groups:
1.   Complex Crimes in Art. 48 When the giver delivers the money to the
2.   Special Complex Crimes supposed receiver, but there is no meeting of the
3.   Continuous Crimes minds, the only act done by the giver is an
attempt.
AS TO NATURE 5.   Material Crimes – have three stages of
execution
1.   Mala in se
•   Wrong from its very nature Thus, in determining the stage of some crimes,
•   Criminal Intent is an element the manner of execution becomes pivotal in
2.   Mala prohibita determining the end of the subjective phase, i.e.
•   Wrong because it is prohibited by law once the offender performs the act in the manner
•   Criminal Intent is immaterial provided for in the law, he is already deemed to
have performed every act for its execution.
b.   Factors in Determining Stage ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME
of Execution of a Felony
Along with the manner of execution, there are crimes
These three factors are helpful in trying to pinpoint wherein the existence of certain elements becomes
whether the crime is still in its attempted, frustrated the factor in determining its consummation.
or consummated stage.
Examples:
MANNER OF COMMITTING THE CRIME 1.   Estafa – damage is essential before
consummated
1.   Formal Crimes - consummated in one instant, 2.   Theft – on the other hand, damage or intent to
no attempt cause damage is not necessary; only intent to
gain.
Example: Slander and false testimony 3.   Abduction – taking away with lewd designs is
the crucial element
There can be no attempt, because between the
thought and the deed, there is no chain of acts NATURE OF CRIME ITSELF
that can be severed.
2.   Crimes consummated by mere attempt or Crimes involving the taking of human life
proposal by overt act Indispensible that the victim be mortally wounded to
reach the objective phase
Example:. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121) and
corruption of minors (Art. 340) A fatal injury must be inflicted, because only then
3.   Felony by omission that death will follow

There can be no attempted stage when the Robbery v. Theft

felony is by omission, because the offender does Both crimes are committed by taking personal
not execute acts, rather he omits to perform an property with intent to gain. But in robbery, there is
act which the law requires him to do. use of force or violence

Page 18 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Rape
Consummated by mere penetration, no matter how
slight
Mistake of Fact v. Mistake of Law
1.   Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Mistake of
Law)
In civil actions, a difficult question of law may
sometimes be considered a defense. This is
because knowledge of a legal provision does not
necessarily mean knowledge of its true meaning
and scope, or of the interpretation which the
courts may place upon it. [Kasilag v. Rodriguez,
G.R. No. 46623 (1939)]
In criminal actions, ignorance of the law excuses
no one. Nevertheless, the lack of or a low degree
of education may be appreciated as mitigating
circumstance in some instances. See Art. 15, RPC.
2.   Ignorantia facti excusat (Mistake of Fact)
A mistake of fact is a misapprehension of a fact
which, if true, would have justified the act or
omission which is the subject of the prosecution.
It may be a defense even if the offense charged
requires proof of only general intent. [Yapyuco v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 120744-46 (2012); U.S.
v. Ah Chong, G.R. No. L-5272 (1910)]
Application
An honest mistake of fact destroys the
presumption of criminal intent which arises from
the commission of a felonious act. [People v.
Oanis, G.R. No. L-47722 (1943)]. This defense
does not avail, however, when there is no intent
to consider, such as in culpable felonies and
crimes mala prohibita.
Requisites
a.   Act done would have been lawful, had the
facts been as the accused believed them to
be
b.   Intention of the accused in performing the
act is lawful
c.   Mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused
i.   The accused had believed that his
roommate was somebody else and
that he had no alternative but to kill
said roommate, hence his act of killing
is justified [US v. Ah Chong, supra.]
ii.   When the accused is negligent, such
as when the police shot the victim
without ascertaining first whether or
not he was the fugitive, mistake of fact
is not a defense. [People v. Oanis,
supra.]
Page 19 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Yapyuco v. Sandiganbayan, supra.: The inquiry is
into the mistaken belief of the defendant, and it does
not look at all to the belief or state of mind of any
other person. A proper invocation of this defense
requires (a) that the mistake be honest and
reasonable; (b) that it be a matter of fact; and (c) that
it negate the culpability required to commit the crime
or the existence of the mental state which the statute
prescribes with respect to an element of the offense.
Motive
Moving power which impels one to action to achieve a
definite result (Reyes, 2008)
Difference with Specific Intent. [People v Delim,
supra.]
Specific Intent
Particular purpose or specific intention in doing the
prohibited act.
Must be alleged in the Information and proved by the
state in a prosecution for a crime requiring specific
intent.
Examples where specific intent are necessary:
Kidnapping and murder
Motive
Reason which prompts the accused to engage in a
particular criminal activity.
Not an essential element of a crime and hence the
prosecution need not prove the same.
General Rule: Proof of motive for the commission of
the offense charged does not show guilt and absence
of proof of such motive does not establish the
innocence of accused for the crime charged such as
murder.
When motive should be proven
1.   When the act brings about variant crimes (e.g.
kidnapping v. robbery [People v. Puno, G.R. No.
97471 (1993)]
2.   When there is doubt as to the identity of the
assailant. [People v. Hassan, G.R. No. L-68969
(1988)]
3.   When there is the need to ascertain the truth
between two antagonistic versions of the crime.
[People v. De Los Santos, G.R. No. 131588 (2001)]
4.   When the identification of the accused proceeds
from an unreliable source and the testimony is
inconclusive and not free from doubt.
5.   When there are no eyewitnesses to the crime,
and when suspicion is likely to fall upon a
number of persons.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
6.   When the evidence on the commission of the
crime is purely circumstantial.
7.   When the act is alleged to be committed in
defense of a stranger because it must not be
induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive.
How motive is proven
Generally, the motive is established by the testimony
of witnesses on the acts or statements of the accused
before or immediately after the commission of the
offense, deeds, or words that may express it or from
which his motive or reason for committing it may be
inferred. [Barrioquinto v. Fernandez (1949)]
c.   Criminal Liability and
Impossible Crimes
Art. 4. Criminal Liability – Criminal liability shall be
incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would be
an offense against persons or property, were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an
account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.
WRONGFUL ACT DIFFERENT FROM THAT
INTENDED
Rationale – El que es causa de la causa es cause del
mal causado.
“He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused.” The presumption is that a person
intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary
act. [People v. Toling, G.R. No. L-27097 (1975)]
One who commits an intentional felony is responsible
for all the consequences which may naturally and
logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or
intended or not.
Requisites
1.   An intentional felony has been committed.
a.   Felony is one committed by means of dolo
(malice)
b.   No intentional felony when:
i.   Act or omission is not punishable by
RPC
ii.   Act is covered by a justifying
circumstance in Article 11
Page 20 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   The wrong done to the aggrieved party be the
direct, natural and logical consequence of the
felony committed by the offender.
a.   Proximate Cause – Cauuse which, in a
natural and continuous sequence, unbroken
by any efficient intervening cause, produces
the injury without which the result would not
have occurred.
b.   Relation of cause and effect must be shown:
i.   Unlawful act is the efficient cause
ii.   Accelerating cause
c.   Not the proximate cause when:
i.   There is an active force between the
felony and resulting injury
ii.   Resulting injury is due to the
intentional act of victim
d.   Efficient intervening cause – cause which
interrupts the natural flow of events leading
to one’s death
May relieve offender from liability
KINDS
1.   Error in Personae
Mistaken identity. A felony is intended, but there
is a mistake in the identity of the victim; injuring
one person mistaken for another.
Mistake in killing of man instead of another, with
proof of acting maliciously and willfully, does not
relieve him of criminal responsibility. (People v
Gona, G.R No. L-32066 (1930)]
2.   Abberratio Ictus
Mistake in blow. When offender intending to do
an injury to one person actually inflicts it on
another.
Treachery can apply in a case of aberration ictus,
applying the Flora doctrine [People v Samson,
G.R. No. 205228 (2015)]
3.   Praeter intentionem
Mitigating circumstance of did not intend to
commit a grave so wrong
The fact that he did not intend to cause so great
an injury does not relieve him from the
consequences of his unlawful act—it is merely a
mitigating circumstance. (People v Cagoco)
Penalty to be imposed
There is still criminal liability.
1.   Error in Personae – Penalty for lesser crime in its
maximum period (Art. 49)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
2.   Abberratio Ictus – Penalty for graver offense in
its maximum period (Art. 48 on complex crimes)
3.   Praeter intentionem – Mitigating circumstance of
not intending to commit a grave so wrong (Art.
13)
Examples of when not criminally liable
1.   If A, in attempting a suicide, jumped out the
window to kill himself, but when he dropped to
the ground he fell on an old woman who died as
a consequence, A is not criminally liable for
intentional homicide. A was not committing a
felony when he attempted a suicide.
2.   If B, who was being fired at with a gun by C to kill
him, fired a pistol at the latter in self-defense,
but missed him and instead hit and killed D, a
bystander, B is not criminally liable for the death
of D. One acting in self-defense is not
committing a felony. [Reyes]
Wrongful act done different from that intended, but
not praeter intentionem
People v. Sales, G.R. No. 177218(2011):
In order that a person may be criminally liable for a
felony different from that which he intended to
commit, it is indispensable (a) that a felony was
committed and (b) that the wrong done to the
aggrieved person be the direct consequence of the
crime committed by the perpetrator. Here, there is no
doubt appellant in beating his son Noemar and
inflicting upon him physical injuries, committed a
felony. As a direct consequence of the beating
suffered by the child, he expired. Appellant’s criminal
liability for the death of his son, Noemar, is thus
clear. Appellant is guilty of parricide.
However, there was error when the trial court
appreciated the mitigating circumstance of lack of
intention to commit so grave a wrong. Appellant
adopted means to ensure the success of the savage
battering of his sons. He tied their wrists to a coconut
tree to prevent their escape while they were battered
with a stick to inflict as much pain as possible.
Noemar suffered injuries in his face, head and legs
that immediately caused his death. The mitigating
circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a
wrong as that actually perpetrated cannot be
appreciated where the acts employed by the accused
were reasonably sufficient to produce and did
actually produce the death of the victim.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Purpose
To suppress criminal propensity or criminal
tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not
committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.
Page 21 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites
1.   That the act performed would be an offense
against persons or property.
2.   That the act was done with evil intent.
3.   That its accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is either
inadequate or ineffectual.
4.   That the act performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the RPC.
Inadequate
Insufficient (e.g. small quantity of poison).
Ineffectual
Means employed did not produce the result expected
(e.g. pressed the trigger of the gun not knowing that
it is empty).
Inherent Impossibility
1.   Legal impossibility. – where the intended acts,
even if completed, do not amount to a crime
[Intod v CA, G.R. No. 103119 (1992)]
a.   Killing a person who is already dead
b.   Stealing property that belongs to himself
[Carreon v Flores]
2.   Physical or factual impossibility. –Extraneous
circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond
his control prevent the consummation of the
intended crime. Impossibility of accomplishing
the criminal intent is not a defense but an act
penalized in itself.
No attempted or frustrated impossible crime
Since the offender in an impossible crime has already
performed the acts for the execution of the same,
there could be no attempted impossible crime.
There is no frustrated impossible crime either,
because the acts performed by the offender are
considered as constituting a consummated offense.
Jacinto v. People , G.R. No. 162540 (2009):
Appellant was a former collector for her employer-
corporation. After her resignation, she managed to
collect postdated checks from her employer’s clients
and appropriated these for herself. However, the
checks were dishonored by the banks. The issue is
whether or not appellant should be charged with
qualified theft for the theft of worthless checks.
Held: As may be gleaned from the art. 308 of the
RPC, in rel. to art. 310, the personal property subject
of the theft must have some value, as the intention of
the accused is to gain from the thing stolen. This is
further bolstered by Article 309, where the law
provides that the penalty to be imposed on the
accused is dependent on the value of the thing stolen.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
In this case, petitioner unlawfully took the postdated
check belonging to Mega Foam, but the same was
apparently without value, as it was subsequently
dishonored.
In Intod, the Court went on to give an example of an
offense that involved factual impossibility, i.e., a man
puts his hand in the coat pocket of another with the
intention to steal the latter's wallet, but gets nothing
since the pocket is empty.
Herein petitioner's case is closely akin to the above
example of factual impossibility given in Intod. In this
case, petitioner performed all the acts to
consummate the crime of qualified theft, which is a
crime against property. Petitioner's evil intent cannot
be denied, as the mere act of unlawfully taking the
check meant for Mega Foam showed her intent to
gain or be unjustly enriched. Were it not for the fact
that the check bounced, she would have received the
face value thereof, which was not rightfully
hers. Therefore, it was only due to the extraneous
circumstance of the check being unfunded, a fact
unknown to petitioner at the time, that prevented the
crime from being produced. As such, she should be
charged for impossible crime, and not with
consummated qualified theft.
d.   Complex Crimes
Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes – When a single
act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for
committing the other, the penalty for the most
serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be
applied in its maximum period.
Ideal plurality (complex crime). A single act gives
rise to various infractions of law.
1.   Compound crime (delito compuesto) – a single
act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies (Art. 48).
2.   Complex crime proper (delito complejo) – an
offense is a necessary means to commit another
offense (Art. 48).
3.   Special complex crime (delito especial
complejo) – the law fixes one penalty for two or
more crimes committed.
Why only one penalty is imposed. They constitute
only one crime in the eyes of the law, and in the
conscience of the offender. Hence, there is only one
penalty imposed for the commission of a complex
crime.
COMPOUND CRIME
Page 22 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites
1.   That only a single act is performed by the
offender
2.   That the single acts produces:
a.   2 or more grave felonies, or
b.   1 or more grave and 1 or more less grave
felonies, or
c.   2 or more less grave felonies
Single Act Several Acts
Throwing a hand Submachine gun – because of
grenade the number of bullets released
A single bullet Firing of the revolver twice in
killing two person succession
Light felonies
Light felonies produced by the same act should be
treated and punished as separate offenses or may be
absorbed by the grave felony.
Examples of compound crime
The victim was killed while discharging his duty as
barangay captain to protect life and property and
enforce law and order in his barrio. The crime is a
complex crime of homicide with assault upon a
person in authority.
When in obedience to an order several accused
simultaneously shot many persons, without evidence
how many each killed, there is only a single offense,
there being a single criminal impulse.
No complex crime of criminal negligence.
Article 48 does not apply to acts penalized under
Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code. Article 48 is a
procedural device allowing single prosecution of
multiple felonies falling under either compound
crimes or complex crime proper. The legislature
crafted this procedural tool to benefit the accused
who, in lieu of serving multiple penalties, will only
serve the maximum of the penalty for the most
serious crime.
In contrast, Article 365 is a substantive rule
penalizing not an act defined as a felony but "the
mental attitude behind the act, the dangerous
recklessness, lack of care or foresight, a single mental
attitude regardless of the resulting consequences.
Thus, Article 365 was crafted as one quasi-crime
resulting in one or more consequences. [Ivler v.
Modesto-San Pedro, supra.]
COMPLEX CRIME PROPER
Requisites
1.   That at least two offenses are committed
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

2.   That one or some of the offenses must be
necessary to commit the other
•   Does not need to be “indispensable means”
3.   That both or all the offenses must be punished
under the same statute.
When no complex crime proper
1.   Subsequent acts of intercourse, after forcible
abduction with rape, are separate acts of rape.
2.   Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is a
direct means to commit a grave offense.
3.   No complex crime, when one offense is
committed to conceal the other.
4.   When the offender already had in his possession
the funds which he misappropriated, the
subsequent falsification of a public or official
document involving said offense is a separate
offense.
5.   Where one of the offenses is penalized by a
special law.
6.   There is no complex crime of rebellion with
murder, arson, robbery, or other common crimes
[People v. Hernandez, G.R. Nos. L-6025-26
(1956); Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 (1990)]
7.   In case of continuous crimes.
8.   When the other crime is an indispensable
element of the other offense.
General rules in complexing crimes
1.   When two crimes produced by a single act are
respectively within the exclusive jurisdiction of
two courts of different jurisdiction, the court of
higher jurisdiction shall try the complex crime.
2.   The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for
the most serious crime, to be applied in its
maximum period.
3.   When two felonies constituting a complex crime
are punishable by imprisonment and fine
respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment
should be imposed.
4.   Art. 48 applies only to cases where the Code
does not provide a definite specific penalty for a
complex crime.
5.   One information should be filed when a complex
crime is committed.
6.   When a complex crime is charged and one
offense is not proven, the accused can be
convicted of the other.
slander of deed, since this is punished under
Article 265 par. 2, as the single crime of less
serious physical injuries with ignominy;
4.   In special complex crimes or composite crimes.
e.   Special Complex Crimes
In substance, there is more than one crime; but
from in the eyes of the law, there is only one. The
law treats it as a single crime for which it prescribes a
single penalty. It is also called a composite crime.
A special complex crime in the eyes of the law:
1.   A single indivisible offense.
2.   Acts constituting a single crime
Common special complex crimes.
1.   Robbery with Homicide (Art. 294 (1))
2.   Robbery with Rape (Art. 294 (2))
3.   Robbery with Arson
4.   Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art.
267 (3))
5.   Kidnapping with rape
6.   Rape with Homicide (Art. 335)
7.   Arson with homicide
When crimes involved cannot be legally complexed.
1.   Malicious obtention or abusive service of search
warrant (Art. 129) with perjury;
2.   Bribery (Art. 210) with infidelity in the custody of
prisoners;
3.   Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235) with serious
physical injuries;
4.   Usurpation of real rights (Art. 312) with serious
physical injuries; and
5.   Abandonment of persons in danger (Art. 275)
and crimes against minors (Art. 276 to 278) with
any other felony.

When rules in Article 48 are NOT applicable.

1.   When the crimes subject of the case have
common elements;
2.   When the crimes involved are subject to the rule
of absorption of one crime by the other;
3.   Where the two offenses resulting from a single
act are specifically punished as a single crime,
such as less serious physical injuries with serious

Page 23 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Elements of
criminal Impossible crime Attempted Frustrated Consummated
liability
Intervention other than
Actus Reus ü own desistance; some but ü ü
not all acts of execution
Mens Rea ü ü ü ü
Concurrence ü ü ü ü
ûLacking due to:
inherent
û Not produced by reason of
impossibility or
Result û causes independent of the ü
employment of
will of the perpetrator
inadequate
means
Causation û û û ü

2.  C ircumstances Affecting Increased or

Decreased
Alternative
Criminal Liability Criminal
Liability
Imputability
The quality by which an act may be ascribed to a a.   Justifying Circumstances [Art.
person as its author or owner. It implies that the act
committed has been freely and consciously done and 11]
may, therefore, be put down to the doer as his very
own. Justifying circumstances
Where the act of the person is said to be in
Responsibility accordance with the law, so that such person is
The obligation of suffering the penal and civil deemed not to have transgressed the law. Lack of
consequences of crime. dolo is basis.

Imputability distinguished from responsibility Criminal and civil liability

While imputability implies that a deed may be There is NO crime committed, the act being justified.
imputed to a person, responsibility implies that the Thus, such persons cannot be considered criminals.
person must take the consequences of such a deed. There is no civil liability EXCEPT in par. 4, Art. 11
(avoidance of greater evil), where the civil liability is
Guilt borne by the persons benefited by the act in
Is an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be proportion to the benefit they may have received (Art.
made to answer for the consequences of a crime 101).
unless he is guilty. [Reyes]
No Civil Burden of proof
No Liability, The burden of proof rests on the accused, who must
Justifying prove the circumstance by clear and convincing
Wrong Except Par.
No Criminal 4 evidence.
Liability With Civil
There Justifying and exempting circumstances,
Liability,
Exempting Is A distinguished
Except Par.
Wrong JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING
4&7
Decreased It affects the act, not the It affects the actor, not
Mitigating Criminal actor. the act.
There The act is considered to
Liability With Civil The act complained of is
Is a have been done within
Increased Liability actually wrongful, but
Felony the bounds of law;
Aggravating Criminal the actor is not liable.
Liability hence, legitimate and

Page 24 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
lawful in the eyes of the
law.
Since the act complained
of is actually wrong,
Since the act is there is a crime but since
considered lawful, there the actor acted without
is no liability. voluntariness or
negligence, there is no
dolo or culpa.
There is a crime, but
there is no criminal
There is no criminal or liability. Civil liability
civil liability. exists (EXCEPT:
accident; insuperable
cause).
REQUISITES OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE (D AFS)
3 2. The order is for some
Justifying circumstance Requisites
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of means employed to
Defense of person, right, prevent or repel it;
property, or honor (URL) 3. Lack of sufficient
provocation on the part of
the person defending
himself.
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of means employed to
prevent or repel it;
Defense of relatives 3. Lack of sufficient
(URL) provocation on part of
relative, or, in case of
provocation, the one
making the defense had
no part therein.
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of the means employed to
Defense of strangers prevent or repel it;
(URN) 3. The person defending
was not induced by
revenge, resentment or
other evil motive.
1. Evil sought to be
avoided actually exists.
2. The evil or injury
sought to be avoided
must not have been
Avoidance of greater evil produced by the one
(ENIM) invoking the justifying
circumstances.
3. Injury feared be greater
than that done to avoid it.
4. There is no other
practical and less
Page 25 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
harmful means of
preventing it.
1. Offender acted in
performance of duty or in
the lawful exercise of a
right or office;
Fulfillment of duty or 2. That the injury caused
lawful exercise of right or the offense committed
(PN) be the necessary
consequence of the due
performance of duty or
the lawful exercise of
such right or office.
1. Order must have been
issued by a superior;
Obedience to superior
lawful purpose;
order (OPM)
3. The means used to
carry it out must be
lawful.
DEFENSE OF PERSON, RIGHTS, PROPERTY, AND
HONOR (SELF-DEFENSE)
Why self-defense is lawful.
1.   Impulse of self-preservation;
2.   State cannot provide protection for each of its
constituents.
REQUISITES
1.   Unlawful Aggression
When peril to one’s life, limb, or right is
•   Actual and
•   Imminent
Presupposes actual, sudden, and unexpected
attack or imminent danger thereof, not merely
threatening or intimidating attitude [People v
Colinares, G.R. No. 182748 (2011)]
To consider the existence of unlawful aggression:
•   Physical & objective circumstance (E.g.
Wound receive by deceased)
•   Lack of motive of person defending himself
•   Conduct of accused immediately after the
incident
The single indispensable element in self-
defense, defense of relatives, and defense of
strangers is unlawful aggression.
When in retaliation
When the killing of the deceased by the accused
was after the attack made by the former, the
accused must have no time nor occasion for
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
deliberation and cool thinking. When unlawful
aggression ceases, the defender has no longer
any right to kill or wound the former aggressor,
otherwise, retaliation and not self-defense is
committed. [People v. Bates, G.R. No. 139907
(2003)].
Continuing unlawful aggression
Unlawful aggression must be a continuing
circumstance or must have been existing at the
time the defense is made. Once the unlawful
aggression is found to have ceased, the one
making the defense would likewise cease to have
any justification for killing, or even just
wounding, the former aggressor. [People v. Dijan,
G.R. No. 142682 (2002)]
But when the aggressor retreats to obtain a more
advantageous position to ensure the success of
the initial attack, unlawful aggression is deemed
to continue.
Picking up a weapon
Picking up a weapon is sufficient unlawful
aggression if preceded by circumstances
indicating the intention of the deceased to use it
in attacking the defendant.
2.   Reasonable necessity of means employed
Nacnac v. People, G.R. No. 191913 (2012):
The Supreme Court acquitted the accused-police
officer for shooting on the head another police officer.
Accused was supposed to use the patrol tricycle to go
the police station but the victim prevented him,
saying he needed the tricycle to settle an issue with
the local bar. (The victim has a history of drunkenness
and violence.) When the accused insisted on using
the tricycle, the victim insulted the accused and
touched his gun. The accused fired a warning shot,
but the victim drew out his gun. Here the accused the
victim, who died on the spot.
Held: Jurisprudence distinguishes between the act of
drawing one’s gun and the act of pointing one’s gun
at a target. GENERALLY, the latter is the one
considered as unlawful aggression. The former does
not put in real peril the life or personal safety of
another.
HOWEVER, in the case at bar, the aggressor is a
police officer. A policeman IS PRESUMED to be quick
in firing. Hence, the drawing of the gun is considered
unlawful aggression as an exemption to the general
rule.
Mistake of fact
Mere belief of an impending attack is not
sufficient. BUT in relation to “mistake of fact,”
Page 26 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the belief of the accused may be considered in
determining the existence of unlawful
aggression.
Lawful aggression
a.   Fulfillment of a duty
b.   Exercise of a right in a more or less violent
manner
The law does not require a person to retreat
where he has a right to be and his assailant is
rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly
weapon. [US v. Domen, G.R. No. L-12964 (1917)]
Agreement to fight
a.   General Rule: No unlawful aggression when
there was an agreement to fight and the
challenge to fight was accepted
b.   Exception: Aggression which is ahead of an
agreed time or place is unlawful aggression.
Paramour kills the offended husband
Paramour surprised in the act of adultery cannot
invoke self-defense if he killed the offended
husband who was assaulting him because the
husband’s aggression was lawful (Art. 247).
Two elements:
•   Necessity for the course of action
•   Necessity of the means employed
Does not depend on harm done, but the
imminent danger of such injury
Doctrine of rational equivalence
Rational equivalence presupposes the
consideration not only of the nature and quality
of the weapons used by the defender and the
assailant, but of the totality of circumstances
surrounding the defense vis-à-vis the unlawful
aggression.
It considers:
a.   The emergency
b.   The imminent danger to which the person
attacked is exposed
c.   The instinct, more than the reason, that
moves or impels the defense
d.   The proportionate-ness of the defense does
not depend upon the harm done, but rests
upon the imminent danger of such injury.
[Espinosa v. People, G.R. No. 181701 (2010)]
Perfect equality between the weapon used by the
one defending himself and that of the aggressor
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
is not required, nor is the material
commensurability between the means of attack
and defense. Rational equivalence is enough.
Test of reasonableness
The reasonableness depends upon:
a.   Nature and quality of the weapon used by
the aggressor
b.   Aggressor’s physical condition, character,
size, and other circumstances
c.   And those of the person defending himself
d.   The place and occasion of the assault
When contestants are in the open
It is undoubtedly well established in
jurisprudence that a man is not, as a rule,
justified in taking the life of one who assaults him
with his fist only, without the use of a dangerous
weapon. The person assaulted must, in such
case, either resist with the arms that nature gave
him or with other means of defense at his
disposal, short of taking life.
But that rule contemplates the situation where
the contestants are in the open and the person
assaulted can exercise the option of running
away. It can have no binding force in the case
where the person assaulted has retreated to the
wall, as the saying is, and uses in a defensive way
the only weapon at his disposal.
One is not required, when hard pressed, to draw
fine distinctions as to the extent of the injury
which a reckless and infuriated assailant might
probably inflict upon him. [People v. Sumicad,
G.R. No. 35524 (1932)]
When the attacker has been disarmed
If the attacker is already disarmed, there is no
need to further use violence. If the attacker was
disarmed but struggled to re-obtain the weapon,
violence may be justified.
Further, in repelling/preventing unlawful
aggression, the one defending must aim at the
defendant, and not indiscriminately fire his
deadly weapon.
In favor of the law-abiding citizen
This element should be interpreted liberally in
favor of the law-abiding citizen.
3.   Lack of sufficient provocation
The accused who claims self-defense must not
have provoked the aggression of the victim
Page 27 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Provocation is sufficient when it is proportionate
to the aggression [People v. Boholst-Caballero,
G.R. No. L-23249 (1974)]
Not enough that the provocative act be
unreasonable or annoying to be provocation
considered
This requisite is present when:
•   No provocation at all was given
•   Even if provocation was given, it was not
sufficient
•   Even if the provocation was sufficient, it was
not given by the person defending himself
•   Even if the provocation was given by the
person defending himself, it was not
proximate and immediate to the act of
aggression. [Cano v. People (2003)]
Insults
a.   General Rule: Verbal argument is not
considered sufficient provocation
b.   Exception: Insults in vulgar language are
People v. Toledo, G.R. No. L-28655 (2004):
The appellant claims that he should not be convicted
because of accidental self-defense. He said that he
accidentally hit the victim with a bolo, eventually
killing the latter.
Held: There is no such defense as accidental self-
defense in the realm of criminal law. Self-defense
under Article 11, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal
Code necessarily implies a deliberate and positive
overt act of the accused to prevent or repel an
unlawful aggression of another with the use of
reasonable means. The accused has freedom of
action. He is aware of the consequences of his
deliberate acts. The defense is based on necessity
which is the supreme and irresistible master of men
of all human affairs, and of the law. From necessity,
and limited by it, proceeds the right of self-defense.
The right begins when necessity does, and ends
where it ends. Although the accused, in fact, injures
or kills the victim, however, his act is in accordance
with law so much so that the accused is deemed not
to have transgressed the law and is free from both
criminal and civil liabilities.
How can the prosecution attack this justifying
circumstance?
a.   The number of wounds of the victim.
b.   If the accused surrendered to the policemen,
he declined to give any statement, i.e.,
protestation of innocence or justification.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
c.   When unlawful aggressor runs away, but the
accused runs after him him nonetheless
(EXCEPT when retreat is taken to get a more
advantageous position).
d.   Flight of the accused.
People v. Alconga, G.R. No. L-162 (1947):
Barion went to the guardhouse where accused
Alconga was doing his duties as “home guard.” While
the accused was seated, the deceased swung at him
with his pingahan (piece of bamboo). The accused
was able to avoid the blow however, by falling to the
ground under the bench. The accused was able to go
out of the guardhouse by crawling, and when the
deceased was delivering the third blow, the accused
(still in his crawling position), fired at the deceased
with his revolver. The deceased got up and drew his
dagger this time, while the accused used his bolo and
hand-to-hand fight commenced.
The deceased obtained several wounds and ran away,
only to be followed by the accused, and another fight
happened. The deceased sustained more injuries
including the mortal bolo blow, and he fell to the
ground.
Held: In the initial stage of the fight, the accused was
acting in self-defense. However, when he chose to
run after the deceased, he was no longer acting in
self-defense for there was no more aggression to
defend against and he could have chosen to stay
where he was. The unlawful aggression had already
ceased and therefore, his right to self-defense had
ceased as well.
SUBJECTS OF SELF-DEFENSE
1.   Defense of person
2.   Defense of rights
3.   Defense of property
The defense of property rights can be invoked if
there is an attack upon the property although it is
not coupled with an attack upon the person of
the owner of the premises. All the elements for
justification must however be present. [People v.
Narvaez, G.R. No. L-33466-67 (1983)]
People v. Narvaez, supra.:
Narvaez was taking his rest inside his house when he
heard that the wall of his house was being chiseled.
He saw that Fleischer and Rubia, were fencing the
land of the father of the deceased Fleischer. He asked
the group to stop but they refused. The accused got
mad so he got his shotgun and shot Fleischer. Rubia
ran towards the jeep and knowing there is a gun on
the jeep, the accused fired at Rubia as well. Narvaez
claimed he acted in defense of his person and rights.
Page 28 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Held: There was aggression by the deceased not on
the person of the accused but on his property rights
when Fleischer angrily ordered the continuance of the
fencing. The third element of self-defense is also
present because there was no sufficient provocation
on the part of Narvaez since he was sleeping when
the deceased where fencing.
However, the second element was lacking. Shooting
the victims from the window of his house is
disproportionate to the physical aggression by the
victims. Thus, there is incomplete self-defense.
Accused is entitled to mitigating circumstance of
incomplete self-defense, because one can defend
oneself, but cannot immediately kill.
Defense of home
Violent entry to another’s house at nighttime; by a
person who is armed with a bolo; and forcing his way
into the house, shows he was ready and looking for
trouble.
Defense of honor and reputation
Placing of hand by a man on the woman’s upper
thigh is unlawful aggression.
Slap on the face
A slap on the face is considered as unlawful
aggression since the face represents a person and his
dignity. [Rugas v. People]
Attempt to rape
A woman-accused who stabbed someone who
attempted to rape her is afforded the exemption from
criminal liability. The killing cannot be considered a
crime from the moment it became the only means
left for her to protect her honor from so great an
outrage. [People v Luage, G.R. No. L-43588 (1935)]
It is also justified for a woman to stab a man who
followed her when she was on her way home one
night, kissed and embraced her, and touched per
private parts. There was no other means of self-
defense. [People v Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-41674 (1935)]
No imminent danger to warrant self-defense
People v. Jaurigue, supra.:
Amado (deceased) has been courting the accused
Avelina in vain. On the day of the crime, Avelina and
Amado were in Church. Amado sat beside Avelina
and placed his hand on her thigh. Thereafter, Avelina
took out her knife and stabbed Amado in the neck,
causing the death of Amado.
Held: Although the defense of one’s honor exempts
one from criminal liability, it must be proved that
there is actual danger of being raped. In this case, 1)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
the church was well-lit, 2) there were several people
in the church, including the father of the accused and
other town officials. In light of these circumstances,
accused could not have possibly been raped. The
means employed in defense of her honor was
evidently excessive.
Stand your ground principle
In certain jurisdictions in the United States, most
notably in Florida, a person is justified in the use of
deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he
reasonably believes that such force is necessary to
prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to
himself or herself.
ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR
CHILDREN ACT OF 2004 (RA NO. 9262)
People v. Genosa doctrine [G.R. No. 135981 (2004)]
The battered woman syndrome (BWS) is
characterized by a “cycle of violence”, which is made
up of three phases. For the BWS to be available as a
defense, it must be proven that there has been more
than one cycle.
Battered woman syndrome
Scientifically defined pattern of psychological and
behavioral symptoms found in women living in
battering relationships as a result of cumulative
abuse.
Battery
Any act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman
or her child resulting in physical and psychological or
emotional distress.
Battered woman
Woman “who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful
physical or psychological behavior by a man in order
to coerce her to do something he wants her to do
without concern for her rights.”
First Phase: Tension Building Phase
•   Where minor battering occurs, it could be a
verbal or slight physical abuse or another form of
hostile behavior.
•   The woman tries to pacify the batterer through a
show of kind, nurturing behavior, or by simply
staying out of the way.
•   But this proves to be unsuccessful as it only gives
the batterer the notion that he has the right to
abuse her.
Second Phase: Acute Battering Incident
•   Characterized by brutality, destructiveness, and
sometimes death.
Page 29 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
•   The battered woman has no control; only the
batterer can stop the violence.
•   The battered woman realizes that she cannot
reason with him and resistance would only
worsen her condition.
Third Phase: Tranquil Period
•   Characterized by guilt on the part of the batterer
and forgiveness on the part of the woman.
•   The batterer may show a tender and nurturing
behavior towards his partner and the woman
also tries to convince herself that the battery will
never happen again and that her partner will
change for the better.
Characteristics of BWS
The BWS has four characteristics:
1.   The woman believes that the violence was her
fault;
2.   She has an inability to place the responsibility for
the violence elsewhere;
3.   She fears for her life and/or her children’s life
4.   She has an irrational belief that the abuser is
omnipresent and omniscient.
RA 9262
The Genosa ruling states that BWS is valid as a
defense when all the requisites of self-defense are
present. Sec. 26 abandons the precedent set by
Genosa case.
Sec. 26, RA 9262. Battered Woman Syndrome as a
Defense. – Victim-survivors who are found by the
courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability
notwithstanding the absence of any of the elements
for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the
Revised Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the
woman who was suffering from battered woman
syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime,
the courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/
psychologists.
DEFENSE OF RELATIVES
Requisites
1.   Unlawful Aggression
2.   Reasonable necessity of means employed
3.   In case there was provocation by the person
being defended, the one making the defense had
no part in such
Although the provocation prejudices the person
who gave it, its effects do not reach the defender
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
who took no part therein, because the latter was
prompted by some noble or generous sentiment
in protecting and saving a relative.
Basis
The law acknowledges the possibility that a relative,
by virtue of blood, will instinctively come to the aid of
their relatives.
This justifying circumstance is found not only upon a
humanitarian sentiment, but also upon the impulse
of blood which impels men to rush, on the occasion of
great perils, to the rescue of those close to them by
ties of blood.
Relatives for self-defense (SAD-SiR)
1.   Spouse
2.   Ascendants
3.   Descendants
4.   Legitimate, natural, or adopted Siblings, or
relatives by affinity in the same degrees (parents-
in-laws, children-in-law, siblings-in-law)
th
5.   Relatives by consanguinity within 4 civil degree
US v. Esmedia, G.R. No. L-5740 (1910):
The two accused are exempt from criminal
responsibility for having caused the death of
Santiago Abando because it was shown that they
inflicted wounds upon him in defense of their father
who was fatally wounded at the time of their attack.
They honestly believed, and had good grounds upon
which to found their belief, that Santiago would
continue his attack upon their father.
They are, however, guilty of having caused the death
of the old man, Ciriaco Abando [the father of
Santiago]. When they attacked and killed him the
other trouble had terminated and they were not in
danger of bodily harm from him. Ciriaco was merely
near the scene.
DEFENSE OF STRANGERS
Stranger
Any person not included in the enumeration of
relatives under [par. 2 of Art. 11]
Requisites
1.   Unlawful Aggression
2.   Reasonable necessity of means employed
3.   Person defending was not induced by revenge,
resentment or other evil motive
§   Motive is relevant only in this kind of defense
Basis
What one may do in his defense, another may do for
him. The ordinary man would not stand idly by and
Page 30 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
see his companion killed without attempting to save
his life
STATE OF NECESSITY (AVOIDANCE OF A GREATER
EVIL)
Requisites
1.   Evil to be avoided actually exists
2.   Evil or injury sought to be avoided is not
produced by the one invoking the justifying
circumstance
3.   Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it
4.   No other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it
With Civil Liability
It is only in this paragraph that the person accused
incurs civil liability despite the justifying
circumstance. Said liability is borne by the person
benefitted by the act.
People v. Retubado, G.R. No. 1203058 (2003):
Art. 11(4) provides “in order to avoid evil or injury” but
the official Spanish text actually provides el estado de
necessidad (state of necessity). There is state of
necessity when the situation is of grave peril, actual
or imminent. It is indispensable that the state of
necessity is NOT brought about by intentional
provocation on the part of the party invoking the
same.
Kind of evil
The evil contemplated includes injurty to persons and
damage to property. This greater evil must not be
brought about by the negligence or imprudence of
the accused.
Ty v. People, G.R. No. 149275 (2004):
Ty’s mother and sister were confined at the Manila
Doctors’ Hospital. Ty signed the “Acknowledgment of
Responsibility for Payment” in the Contract of
Admission. The total hospital bills of the two patients
amounted to P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a
promissory note wherein she assumed payment of
the obligation in installments. To assure payment of
the obligation, she drew 7 postdated checks against
Metrobank payable to the hospital which were all
dishonored by the drawee bank due to insufficiency of
funds. As defense, Ty claimed that she issued the
checks because of “an uncontrollable fear of a
greater injury.” She averred that she was forced to
issue the checks to obtain release for her mother who
was being inhumanely treated by the hospital. She
alleged that her mother has contemplated suicide if
she would not be discharged from the hospital. Ty
was found guilty by the lower courts of 7 counts of
violation of BP22.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Held: The court sustained the findings of the lower
courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely
expected or anticipated. So the defense of “an
uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” is not
applicable. By her own admission, she had the choice
to give jewelry or other forms of security instead of
postdated checks to secure her obligation.
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity to be
availing, the greater injury feared should not have
been brought about by the negligence or
imprudence, more so, the willful inaction of the actor.
In this case, the issuance of the bounced checks was
brought about by Ty’s own failure to pay her mother’s
hospital bills.
FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF
RIGHT OR OFFICE
Requisites
1.   The accused acted in the performance of a duty
or oin the lawful exercise of a right or office
•   The law does not clothe police officers with
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to
kill, but must be within reasonable limits
[People v Ulep, G.R. No. 132547 (2000)]
•   A policeman who shot an escaping prisoner
was done in performance of duty and was
justified to use extreme means (People v
Delima)
•   But shooting a thief who refused to be
arrested is not justified
2.   The injury caused or offense committed be the
necessary consequence of the due performance
of duty or the lawful exercise of such right or
office
Mamangun v. People, G.R. No. 149152 (2007):
A policeman in pursuit of a snatcher accidentally shot
one of the bystanders who were actually helping him
chase the snatcher.
Held: To be sure, acts in the fulfillment of a duty,
without more, do not completely justify the
petitioner’s firing the fatal gunshot at the victim.
True, petitioner was performing his duty as a police
officer as well as when he was trying to effect the
arrest of the suspected robber and in the process,
fatally shoot said suspect, albeit the wrong man.
However, in the absence of the equally necessary
justifying circumstance that the injury or offense
committed be the necessary consequence if the due
performance of such duty, there can only be
incomplete justification, a privilege mitigating
Page 31 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
circumstance under Art. 13 and 69 of the RPC. There
can be no quibbling that there was no rational
necessity for the killing of Contreras. Petitioner could
have first fired a warning shot before pulling the
trigger against Contreras who was one of the
residents chasing the suspected robber.
People v. Cabanlig, G.R. No. 148431 (2005):
The victim was with certain police officers inside a
patrol jeep which was crossing a bridge around 7 PM.
The victim suddenly grabbed an M16 from one of the
police officers and ran away. The accused fired one
shot, and when the victim turned around and face the
jeep, the accused fired four shots which killed the
victim.
Held: The Supreme Court declared the accused as
conducting himself in the lawful exercise of a right. In
People v. Delima, the police officer was running after
a fugitive with a bamboo lance. The police man shot
and killed the fugitive, but the SC acquitted the police
from any charge. At the case at bar, M16 is deadlier
than a bamboo lance.
Further, in Pomoy v. People, the Court held that the
petitioner exercised his duty as law enforcer when he
tried to defend his possession of the weapon when
the victim suddenly tried to remove it from his
holster.
Although the accused here did not issue a warning
shot, the said directive to issue a warning
contemplates a situation where several options are
available to the officers. Here the threat to the life of
the law enforcer is imminent, and there is no other
option but to use force.
OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME
LAWFUL PURPOSE
Requisites
1.   An order has been issued by a superior
2.   Such order must be for some lawful purpose
A subordinate is not liable for carrying out an
illegal order of his superior if he is not aware of
the illegality of the order and he is not
negligent.
3.   The means used by the subordinate to carry
out said order is lawful
People v. Beronilla, G.R. L-4445 (1955):
Held: Where the accused acted upon orders of
superior officers that they, as military subordinates,
could not question, and obeyed in good faith, without
being aware of their illegality, without any fault or
negligence on their part, the act is not accompanied
by criminal intent. A crime is not committed if the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

mind of the person performing the act be innocent. 1. Threat is

greater than or
b.   Exempting Circumstances equal to the act
Uncontrollable required to Absence of
[Art. 12] fear commit. freedom
2. Gravity and
Exempting circumstances imminence of
Grounds for exemption from punishment because the evil.
agent of the crime is wanting any of the conditions 1. That an act is
which make the act voluntary or negligent. required by law
to be done;
The reason for the exemption lies on the complete 2. That a person
absence of intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, fails to perform
or on the absence of negligence on the part of the such act;
accused. Insuperable or
3. That his Lack of intent
lawful cause
failure to
REQUISITES OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE perform such
((IM-DAI-UI) act was due to
Exempting some lawful or
Requisites Basis
circumstance insuperable
An imbecile or cause
Insanity or insane who did Absence of
imbecility not act during intelligence INSANITY OR IMBECILITY
lucid interval
a. Accused is 15 Imbecile
years old and One who, while advanced in age, has a mental
below development comparable to that of a child between 2
Minority; b. Accused is and 7 years of age. Exempt in all cases from criminal
Absence of
Without between 15 and liability
intelligence
Discernment 18 years old,
and he acted Feeblemindedness is not imbecility, hence not
without exempting. It is necessary that there is a complete
discernment deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. It
1. A person is may, however, be considered mitigating. [People v.
performing a Formigones (1950)]
lawful act;
2. With due Insanity
care; A complete deprivation of intelligence in committing
Lack of
3. He causes an the act, but capable of having lucid intervals. Mere
Accident negligence and
injury to another abnormality of mental faculties is not enough
intent
by mere especially if the offender has not lost consciousness
accident; of his acts.
4. Without fault
or intention of During a lucid interval, the insane acts with
causing it. intelligence and thus, is not exempt from criminal
1. That the liability.
compulsion is
by means of Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and
physical force; avoidance and must be proved beyond reasonable
2. That the doubt.
Irresistible physical force Absence of
force must be freedom In remission of symptoms, not lucid interval
irresistible; People v. Antonio, Jr., G.R. No. 144266 (2002):
3. That the Dr. Cosca explained that a person suffering from
physical force psychosis may have varying degrees of symptoms
must come from within a specified period. Hence it was possible that
a third person. his active symptoms of psychosis, e.g., auditory

Page 32 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
hallucinations or persecutory delusions, may be
present for the period that he did not take his
medication and drank alcohol. She asserted that in
psychiatry, they did not use the phrase “lucid interval”
but what they called “in remission of symptoms,”
meaning, there was no active phase of the symptoms
of psychosis.
Presumption
The presumption is always in favor of sanity and the
burden of proof of insanity is on the defense. [People
v. Aquino, G.R. No. 87084 (1990)]
When should be insane
It has long been settled that the period to which the
inquiry into the mental state of the accused should be
directed is that transpiring immediately before
and/or at the very moment of the act or acts under
prosecution. [People v. Aquino, supra]
Insanity subsequent to commission of crime is not
exempting.
How proven
People v. Madarang, G.R. No. 132319 (2000):
In the Philippines, the courts have established a more
stringent criterion for insanity to be exempting as it is
required that there must be a complete deprivation
of intelligence in committing the act, i.e., the
accused is deprived of reason; acted without the least
discernment because there is a complete absence of
the power to discern, or that there is a total
deprivation of the will. Mere abnormality of the
mental faculties will not exclude imputability.
The issue of insanity is a question of fact for insanity
is a condition of the mind, not susceptible of the
usual means of proof. As no man can know what is
going on in the mind of another, the state or
condition of a person’s mind can only be measured
and judged by his behavior.
Establishing the insanity of an accused requires
opinion testimony which may be given by a witness
who is intimately acquainted with the accused, by a
witness who has rational basis to conclude that the
accused was insane based on the witness’ own
perception of the accused, or by a witness who is
qualified as an expert, such as a psychiatrist. The
testimony or proof of the accused’s insanity must
relate to the time preceding or coetaneous with the
commission of the offense with which he is
charged.
Two tests
Page 33 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
1.   The test of COGNITION, or whether the accused
acted with complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing the said crime;
2.   The test of VOLITION, or whether the accused
acted in total deprivation of freedom of will.
[People v. Rafanan, G.R. No. L-54135 (1991)]
Both cognition and volition tests are applied. There
must be complete deprivation of the intellect or will
or freedom.
People v. Tabugoca, G.R. No. 125334 (1998):
Accused-appellant has utterly failed to overthrow the
presumption of sanity. The defense did not present
any expert witness, any psychiatric evaluation report,
or any psychological findings or evidence regarding
his mental condition at the time of the commission of
the offenses. Accused-appellant’s charade of
amnesia is evidently a desperate gambit for
exculpation.
Yet, amnesia, in and of itself, is no defense to a
criminal charge unless it is shown by competent
proof that the accused did not know the nature and
quality of his action and that it was wrong. Failure to
remember is no proof of the mental condition of the
accused when the crime was performed.
Mental illnesses covered
Cases covered under this article: (MaKE P SleD)
1.   Malignant malaria: which affects the nervous
system [People v. Lacena, G.R. No. 46836 (1940)]
2.   Kleptomania with irresistible impulse; exempting
when it only diminishes will-power
3.   Epilepsy
4.   Psychosis or schizophrenia, except when in
remission of symptoms [People v. Antonio, Jr.]
5.   Somnambulism: Sleep-walking [People v. Taneo,
G.R. No. L-37673 (1933)]
6.   Dementia praecox [People v. Bonoan, G.R. No. L-
45130 (1937)]
Note: Cited in old cases, but is a term no longer
used by mental health practitioners
Juridical effects of insanity
1.   If present at the time of the commission of the
crime – EXEMPT from liability.
2.   If present during trial – proceedings will be
SUSPENDED and accused is committed to a
hospital.
3.   After judgment or while serving sentence –
Execution of judgment is SUSPENDED, the
accused is committed to a hospital. The period of
confinement in the hospital is counted for the
purpose of the prescription of the penalty.
MINORITY
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 12, as well as art. 80 of
the RPC, have been amended/repealed by PD 603,
as amended, and RA 9344.
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT OF 2006
(RA 9344)
Child
A person under 18 years.
Child in conflict with the law
A child who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as,
having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
[Sec. 4(e), RA 9344]
Juvenile Justice and Welfare System
Refers to a system dealing with children at risk and
children in conflict with the law, which provides child-
appropriate proceedings including programs and
services for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, re-
integration and aftercare to ensure their normal
growth and development. [Title V: Juvenile Justice and
Welfare System of RA 9344]
Does not include civil liability
The exemption from criminal liability herein
established does not include exemption from civil
liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with
existing laws. [Sec. 6, RA 9344]
Development of a comprehensive juvenile
intervention program per LGU
1.   A comprehensive juvenile intervention program
covering at least a 3-year period shall be
instituted in LGUs from the barangay to the
provincial level.
2.   The LGUs shall set aside an amount necessary to
implement their respective juvenile intervention
programs in their annual budget.
3.   The LGUs, in coordination with the LCPC, shall
call on all sectors concerned to participate in the
planning process and implementation of juvenile
intervention programs. The implementation of
the comprehensive juvenile intervention program
shall be reviewed and assessed annually by the
LGUs in coordination with the LCPC. Results of
the assessment shall be submitted by the
provincial and city governments to the JJWC not
later than March 30 of every year. [Sec. 18,
RA9344]
Community-based programs on juvenile justice and
welfare
Community-based programs on juvenile justice and
welfare shall be instituted by the LGUs through the
Page 34 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
LCPC, school, youth organizations and other
concerned agencies.
The LGUs shall provide community –based services
which respond to the special needs, problems,
interests and concerns of children and which offer
appropriate counselling and guidance to them and
their families.
These programs shall consist of three levels
1.   Primary intervention includes general measures
to promote social justice and equal opportunity,
which tackle perceived root causes of offending;
2.   Secondary intervention includes measures to
assist children at risk; and
3.   Tertiary intervention includes measures to avoid
unnecessary contact with the formal justice
system and other measures to prevent re-
offending. [Sec. 19, RA 9344]
Diversion
Refers to an alternative, child-appropriate process of
determining the responsibility and treatment of a
child in conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
social, cultural, economic, psychological, or
educational background without resulting to formal
court proceedings.
Diversion program
Refers to the program that the child in conflict with
the law is required to undergo after he/she is found
responsible for an offense without resorting to formal
court proceedings. [Sec. 4(j), RA 9344]
System of diversion [Sec. 23, RA 9344]
Children in conflict with the law shall undergo
diversion programs without undergoing court
proceedings subject to the conditions herein
provided:
1.   Where the imposable penalty for the crime
committed is not more than six (6) years
imprisonment
•   The law enforcement officer or Punong
Barangay, with the assistance of the local
social welfare and development officer or
other members of the LCPC, shall conduct
mediation, family conferencing and
conciliation
•   Where appropriate, indigenous modes of
conflict resolution are adopted in accordance
with the best interest of the child with a view
to accomplishing the objectives of restorative
justice and the formulation of a diversion
program.
•   The child and his/her family shall be present
in these activities.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
2.   In victimless crimes where the imposable penalty
is not more than six (6) years imprisonment
The local social welfare and development officer
shall meet with the child and his/her parents or
guardians for the development of the
appropriate diversion and rehabilitation
program, in coordination with the BCPC;
3.   Where the imposable penalty for the crime
committed exceeds six (6) years imprisonment
Diversion measures may be resorted to only by
the court.
Treatment of child below age of responsibility [Sec.
20, RA 9344]
If it has been determined that the child taken into
custody is fifteen (15) years old or below, the authority
which will have an initial contact with the child has
the duty to:
1.   Immediately release the child to the custody of
his/her parents or guardian, or in the absence
thereof, the child’s nearest relative.
2.   Shall give notice to the local social welfare and
development officer who will determine the
appropriate programs in consultation with the
child and to the person having custody over the
child.
3.   If the parents, guardians or nearest relatives
cannot be located, or if they refuse to take
custody, the child may be released to any of the
following:
a.   a duly registered nongovernmental or
religious organization;
b.   a barangay official or a member of the
Barangay Council for the Protection of
Children (BCPC);
c.   a local social welfare and development
officer; or when and where appropriate, the
DSWD.
If the child referred to herein has been found by the
Local Social Welfare and Development Office to be
abandoned, neglected or abused by his parents, or in
the event that the parents will not comply with the
prevention program, the proper petition for
involuntary commitment shall be filed by the DSWD
or the Local Social Welfare and Development Office
pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 603.
Determination of Age [Sec. 7, RA 9344]
Presumption
There is a presumption of minority. S/he shall enjoy
all the rights of a child in conflict with the law until
s/he is proven to be 18 years old or older.
Page 35 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
People v. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641 (2009):
When accused appellant testified on March 14, 2002,
he admitted that he was 24 years old, which means
that in 1996, he was 18 years of age. As found by the
trial court, the rape incident could have taken place
“in any month and date in the year 1996.” Since the
prosecution was not able to prove the exact date and
time when the rape was committed, it is not certain
that the crime of rape was committed on or after he
reached 18 years of age in 1996.
In assessing the attendance of the mitigating
circumstance of minority, all doubts should be resolved
in favor of the accused, it being more beneficial to the
latter. In fact, in several cases, this Court has
appreciated this circumstance on the basis of a lone
declaration of the accused regarding his age.
Proof
The age of the child shall be determined according to
the rules established by Section 5 of RA 9344:
1.   Best evidence is an original or certified true copy
of certificate of live birth
2.   In its absence, similar authentic documents such
as baptismal certificates and school records
showing the date of birth may be used
3.   In the absence of documents under 1 and 2 due
to loss, destruction or unavailability, the
testimony of the child, a member of the family
related by affinity or consanguinity, of other
persons, the physical appearance of the child, or
other relevant evidence shall suffice.
The person alleging the age of the child in conflict
with the law has the burden to prove such age. In all
cases involving a child, the court shall make a
categorical finding as to the age of the child. [Section
6]
Offenses not applicable to children under Sec. 58 of
RA 9344
Persons below eighteen (18) years of age shall be
exempt from prosecution for the crime of:
1.   vagrancy and prostitution under Section 202 of
the Revised Penal Code,
2.   mendicancy under Presidential Decree No. 1563,
and
3.   sniffing of rugby under Presidential Decree No.
1619,
Such prosecution being inconsistent with the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
However, said persons shall undergo appropriate
counseling and treatment program.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

PD 603, AS AMENDED, AND RA 9344, the government, or duly

DISTINGUISHED. licensed agencies or any
other responsible person,
1.   Minimum age of criminal responsibility until he shall have
reached 21 years of age
PD 603 RA 9344 or, for a shorter period as
Sec. 189. EXEMPT the court may deem
Child 15 years of age or
from criminal liability: proper. [Secs. 189 and
under shall be exempt from
1. Child 9 years of age 192]
criminal liability, regardless
or under at time of
of whether or not s/he
commission of offense 3.   Suspension of sentence
acted with discernment
2. 9 ≤ Age of child at PD 603 RA 9344
time of commission of No automatic suspension Suspension of sentence
(HOWEVER: child is
offense ≤ 15 (UNLESS of sentence. The youthful is automatic.
subject to intervention
s/he acted with offender should apply for
program)
discernment) a suspended sentence Once the child under 18
and it is discretionary on is found guilty of the
2.   Discernment the court to approve the offense charged, the
application. The order of court shall determine
Discernment the court denying an and ascertain any civil
Mental capacity to understand the difference application for liability.
between right and wrong as determined by the child’s suspension of sentence
appearance, attitude, comportment and behavior not shall not be appealable. However, instead of
only before and during the commission of the offense (Sec. pronouncing the
but also after and during the trial. It is manifested 193) judgment of conviction,
through: the court shall place the
a.   Manner of committing crime child in conflict with law
b.   Conduct of the offender under suspended
sentence, without need
Discernment and intent, distinguished of application.
Intent is design, or determination to do certain
things. Discernment is mental capacity to understand Suspension of sentence
the difference between right and wrong. shall be applied even if
the juvenile is already 18
Hence a person may not intend to shoot another but years of age or more at
may be aware of the consequences of his negligent the time of the
act which may cause injury to the same person in pronouncement of
negligently handling an air rifle. [Guevarra v. his/her guilt. (Sec. 38,
Almodovar, G.R. No. 75256 (1989] RA 9344)
PD 603 RA 9344
Child over 9 years and The suspension of
under 15 years of age who sentence lasts only until
acted w/ discernment – the child in conflict with
court shall determine law reaches the
imposable penalty, maximum age of 21.
including any civil liability Child above 15 years but
chargeable against him. below 18 years of age Upon suspension of
who acted with sentence and after
discernment shall be considering the various
However, instead of subjected to the
pronouncing judgment of appropriate proceedings circumstances of the
conviction, the court may in accordance with the child, the court shall
suspend all further impose the appropriate
Act. disposition measures as
proceedings and shall
commit such minor to the provided in the Supreme
custody or care of the Court Rule on Juveniles
DSWD or to any training in Conflict with the Law.
institution operated by (Sec. 38)

Page 36 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
If the accused is already beyond 21 at the time of
his conviction
Suspension of sentence no longer avails when the
age of the accused is more than 21 years old by the
time of the pronouncement of his guilt. The court
must render judgment. He nonetheless may avail of
sec. 51 of RA 9344. [People v Gambao, G.R. No.
172705 (2013)]
Discharge of the Child in Conflict with the Law [sec.
39, RA 9344]
Upon the recommendation of the social worker who
has custody of the child, the court shall dismiss the
case against the child whose sentence has been
suspended and against whom disposition measures
have been issued, and shall order the final discharge
of the child if it finds that the objective of the
disposition measures have been fulfilled.
The discharge of the child in conflict with the law
shall not affect the civil liability resulting from the
commission of the offense, which shall be enforced in
accordance with law.
Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court
[sec. 40, RA 9344]
If the court finds that the objective of the disposition
measures imposed upon the child in conflict with the
law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in conflict
with the law has willfully failed to comply with the
conditions of his/her disposition or rehabilitation
program, the child in conflict with the law shall be
brought before the court for execution of judgment.
Agricultural Camps and other Training Facilities
[Sec. 51, RA 9344]
A child in conflict with the law may, after conviction
and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal
institution, in an agricultural camp and other training
facilities that may be established, maintained,
supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in
coordination with the DSWD.
People v. Gamboa, supra.: As regards the appellant’s
possible confinement in an agricultural camp or other
training facility in accordance with Section 51 of R.A.
9344, this Court held in People v. Jacinto that the age
of the child in conflict with the law at the time of
the promulgation of the judgment is not material.
What matters is that the offender committed the
offense when he/she was still of tender age.
ACCIDENT
Definition
Something that happens outside the sway of our will
and, although coming about through some act of our
Page 37 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences.
Requisites
1.   A person is performing a lawful act
The act of firing a shotgun at another is not a
lawful act. [People v. Agliday, G.R. No. 140794
(2001)]
2.   Done with due care
It is uniformly held that if life is taken by
misfortune or accident while in the performance
of a lawful act executed with due care and
without intention of doing harm, there is no
criminal liability. [US v. Tanedo, G.R. No. L-5418
(1910)]
3.   He causes injury by mere accident
4.   Without fault or intention of causing it
Burden of proof
Well settled is the rule in criminal cases, that the
prosecution has the burden of proof to establish the
guilt of the accused. However, once the defendant
admits the commission of the offense charged, but
raises an exempting circumstance as a defense, the
burden of proof is shifted to him. [People v.
Concepcion, G.R. No. 148919 (2002)]
Comparison with Article 11(4)
Article 11(4) is a justifying circumstance because the
offender deliberately caused damage, whereas in
Article 12(4), the offender accidentally caused
damage.
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
Definition
The duress, force, fear or intimidation must be
present, imminent and impending, and of such
nature as to induce a well-grounded apprehension of
death or serious bodily harm if the act is not done.
Requisites
1.   Compulsion is by means of physical force
2.   Physical force must be irresistible
The person invoking this circumstance must
show that the force exerted was such that it
reduced him to a mere instrument who acted not
only without his will but against it [People v.
Lising, G.R. No. 106210-11 (1998)]
3.   Physical force comes from a third person
No opportunity for escape or self-defense
A threat of future injury is not enough. The
compulsion must be of such a character as to leave
no opportunity for the accused for escape or self-
defense in equal combat. [People v. Del Rosario, G.R.
No. 127755 (1999)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
Requisites
Requisites 1.   An act is required by law to be done
1.   Threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater 2.   The person fails to perform such act
than, or at least equal to, that which he is 3.   His failure to perform such act was due to some
required to commit lawful or insuperable cause
2.   Threat promises an evil of such gravity and
imminence that the ordinary man would have People v. Bandian, G.R. No. 45186 (1936):
succumbed to A woman cannot be held liable for infanticide when
she left her newborn child in the bushes without
Actus me invite factus non est meus actus. An act being aware that she had given birth at all. Severe
done by me against my will is not my act. dizziness and extreme debility made it physically
impossible for Bandian to take home the child plus
Not uncontrollable fear when it is speculative, the assertion that she didn’t know that she had given
fanciful, or remote fear. Such compulsion must leave birth.
no opportunity to the accused for escape or self-
defense in equal combat. c.   Mitigating Circumstances [Art.
In treason 13]
The only possible defense here is fear of death.
[Reyes] If present in the commission of the crime, these
circumstances do not entirely free the actor from
Uncontrollable fear and irresistible force, criminal liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty.
distinguished
Irresistible Force Uncontrollable Fear Ordinary v. privileged mitigating circumstance,
Uncontrollable fear may distinguished
Irresistible force must be generated by a Privileged
Ordinary MC
operate directly upon the threatened act directly to MC
person of the accused a third person such as May be offset by
Cannot be
and the injury feared may the wife of the accused, As to offset any aggravating
offset
be a lesser degree than but the evil feared must circumstance
the damage caused by be greater or at least If not offset by
the accused. equal to the damage aggravating Reduces the
caused to avoid it. circumstance, penalty by
Offender uses physical Offender employs reduces the one to two
force or violence to intimidation or threat in As to effect penalty provided degrees than
compel another person compelling another to by law to its min that provided
to commit a crime. commit a crime. period provided by law for the
the penalty is crime.
INSUPERABLE OR LAWFUL CAUSE divisible.
Insuperable means insurmountable. A cause which
has lawfully, morally or physically prevented a person
to do what the law commands.

REQUISITES OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE (ICN-SIP-VDIA)

Mitigating circumstance
Incomplete justification/
exemption
Conditional minority
No intention to commit so grave
a wrong
Sufficient provocation or threat
Elements (when possible) Basis
A majority, but not all, elements of justifying and
exempting circumstances are present
Diminution of intelligence
Diminution of intent
1.   Provocation must be sufficient
2.   Must originate from the offended party Diminution of intelligence
3.   That the provocation must be personal and and intent
directed to the accused

Page 38 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

4.   That the provocation must be immediate to the

act, i.e., to the commission of the crime by the
person who is provoked
1.   That there be a grave offense done to the one
committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within
the same degree.
Immediate vindication of a Diminution of
2.   That the felony is committed in vindication of
grave offense voluntariness
such grave offense. A lapse of time is allowed
between the vindication and the doing of the
grave offense.
3.   The vindication need not be done by the person
upon whom the grave offense was committed
1.   The accused acted upon an impulse.
2.   The impulse must be so powerful that it
naturally produces passion or obfuscation in
him.
3.   That there be an act, both unlawful and
sufficient to produce such condition of mind; Diminution of intelligence
Passion or obfuscation
and and intent
4.   That said act which produced the obfuscation
was not far removed from the commission of
the crime by a considerable length of time,
during which the perpetrator might recover his
normal equanimity.
1.   Offender had not been actually arrested.
2.   Offender surrendered himself to a person in
authority or to the latter’s agent.
3.   Surrender was voluntary.
Voluntary surrender or Plea of Lesser perversity of the
1.   Offender spontaneously confessed his guilt.
Guilt offender
2.   Confession of guilt was made in open court, that
is, before the competent court that is to try the
case; and
3.   Confession of guilt was made prior to the
presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
Diminution of
Physical defects
voluntariness
1.   Illness of the offender must diminish the
exercise of his will-power. Diminution of intelligence
Illness
2.   Illness should not deprive the offender of and intent
consciousness of his acts.
Analogous mitigating
circumstances

INCOMPLETE JUSTIFICATION OR EXEMPTION
Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime
committed is not wholly excusable. – A penalty lower
by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law
shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable
by 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, provided that the majority of such
conditions be present. The courts shall impose the
penalty in the period which may be deemed proper, in
view of the number and nature of the conditions of
exemption present or lacking.
For this mitigating circumstance, the courts have the
discretion of imposing the penalty lower by one or
two degrees than that prescribed by law.

Page 39 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Coverage
Not all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to
exempt from criminal liability under articles 11 and 12
are attendant.
In cases when the justifying or exempting
circumstance has only two requisites, the presence of
one element makes art. 69 applicable.
People v. Ulep, supra.: Incomplete justification is a
special or privileged mitigating circumstance, which,
not only cannot be offset by aggravating
circumstances but also reduces the penalty by one or
two degrees than that prescribed by law.
Incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives and
strangers
Unlawful aggression should always be present to be
appreciated as mitigating. It is an ordinary mitigating
circumstance if only unlawful aggression is present.
When two of the three requisites are present, it is a
privileged mitigating circumstance.
Accident
If the “accident” is attended with fault (cf. fourth
element of accident) and without due care (second
element), then the act becomes punishable under art.
365.
If the “accident” is intended (cf. fourth element) and
unlawful (first element), then the act is covered by
art. 4, par. 1 of the RPC – intentional felony.
UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OLD (CONDITIONAL
MINORITY)
Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under
eighteen years of age. – When the offender is a minor
under eighteen years and his case is one coming
under the provisions of the paragraphs next to the
last of Article 80 of this Code, the following rules
shall be observed:
1.   Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years
of age, who is not exempted from liability by
reason of the court having declared that he acted
with discernment, a discretionary penalty shall
be imposed, but always lower by two degrees at
least than that prescribed by law for the crime
which he committed.
2.   Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen
years of age the penalty next lower than that
prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in
the proper period.
People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239 (2011):
Under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code, when the
offender is a minor under 18 years, the penalty next
Page 40 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed,
but always in the proper period.
The age of the offender at the time of the commission
of the crime is considered in lowering the penalty.
As for suspending the sentence, it is the age of the
offender at the time the sentence is to be
promulgated.
15 and below
Considered as an exempting circumstance.
Above 15 but under 18
Exempting, unless acted with discernment. If acted
with discernment, it is a mitigating circumstance,
lowering the penalty by one degree.
The sentence is also suspended until reaching 21
years old.
When over 70
Appreciated as mitigating circumstance.
NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG
(PRAETER INTENTIONEM)
Only applicable to offense resulting in death, physical
injuries, or material harm (including property
damage). It is not applicable to defamation or
slander.
When not applicable
1.   Crime results from criminal negligence or culpa
2.   The offender employed brute force
3.   The victim does not die as a result of the assault
in cases of crimes against persons
4.   Murder qualified by treachery
People v. Sales, G.R. No. 177218 (2011):
The mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to
commit so grave a wrong as that actually perpetrated
cannot be appreciated where the acts employed by
the accused were reasonably sufficient to produce
and did actually produce the death of the victim.
There must be a notable disproportion between the
means employed to execute the criminal act and its
consequences. [People v. Amit, G.R. No. L-29066
(1970)]
The intention, as an internal act, is judged not only by
the proportion of the means employed by him to the
evil produced by his act, but also by:
1.   The weapon used
2.   The part of the body injured
3.   The injury inflicted
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
4.   The manner it is inflicted.
Intention can also be inferred from the subsequent
acts of the accused immediately after committing the
offense, such as when the accused helped his victim
to secure medical treatment.
People v. Ural, G.R. No. L-30801 (1974):
The intention, as an internal act, is judged not only
by the proportion of the means employed by him to
the evil produced by his act, but also by the fact
that the blow was or was not aimed at a vital part
of the body.
Thus, it may be deduced from the proven facts that
the accused had no intent to kill the victim, his
design being only to maltreat him, such that when
he realized the fearful consequences of his felo-
nious act, he allowed the victim to secure medical
treatment at the municipal dispensary.
SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT
Provocation
Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended
party capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating
anyone.
Threat
Threat must not be offensive and positively strong,
otherwise may result to unlawful aggression
justifying self-defense. See discussion on self-defense.
Requisites
1.   Provocation must be sufficient
•   “Sufficient” means adequate to excite a
person to commit a wrong and must
accordingly be proportionate to its gravity.
[People v. Nabora, G.R. No. L-48101 (1941)]
•   Depends upon:
a.   Social standing of person provoked
b.   Act constituting provocation
c.   Time and place where the provocation
is made
2.   It must originate from the offended party
3.   The provocation is immediate to the act, or the
commission of the crime
•   When there is an interval of time between
the provocation and the commission of the
crime, the perpetrator has time to regain
his reason [People v Pagal, G.R. No. L-
32040 (1977)]
Sufficient provocation Provocation as a
as a requisite of mitigating circumstance
Page 41 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
incomplete self-defense
It pertains to its absence
on the part of the person It pertains to its presence
defending himself. on the part of the
[People v. CA, G.R. No. offended party.
103613 (2001)]
BAR TIP. The common set-up given in a bar problem
is that of provocation given by somebody against
whom the person provoked cannot retaliate; thus the
person provoked retaliated on a younger brother or
on the father. Although in fact, there is sufficient
provocation, it is not mitigating because the one who
gave the provocation is not the one against whom the
crime was committed.
Look at two criteria
1.   If from the element of time,
a.   material lapse of time stated in the problem
and
b.   there is nothing stated in the problem that
the effect of the threat of provocation had
prolonged and affected the offender at the
time he committed the crime then you use
the criterion based on the time element.
2.   If there is that time element and at the same
time, facts are given indicating that at the time
the offender committed the crime, he is still
suffering from outrage of the threat or
provocation done to him, then he will still get the
benefit of this mitigating circumstance.
Provocation and passion/obfuscation, considered
together
Romera v. People, G.R. No. 151978 (2004):
Provocation and passion or obfuscation are not two
separate mitigating circumstances. It is well-settled
that if these two circumstances are based on the
same facts, they should be treated together as one
mitigating circumstance. It is clear that both
circumstances arose from the same set of facts.
Hence, they should not be treated as two separate
mitigating circumstances.
IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
Requisites
1.   There be a grave offense done to the one
commiting the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within
the same degree
2.   Felony is committed in vindication of such grave
offense
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

•   A lapse of time is allowed between PASSION OR OBFUSCATION (ARREBATO Y

vindication and the doing of a grave OBCECACION)
offense
Requisites
The Spanish text uses “proxima.” Although the grave 1.   That there be an act, both unlawful and
offense which engendered the perturbation of mind sufficient, to produce such condition of mind
was not so immediate, it was held that the influence •   Circumstance is not applicable when the act
thereof, by reason of its gravity, lasted until the is committed in a spirit of:
moment the crime was committed. [People v. Parana, 1.   Lawlessness
G.R. No. L-45373 (1937)] 2.   Revenge
•   If the cause of loss of self-control is trivial
However, this circumstance cannot be considered and slight, obfuscation is not mitigating.
where sufficient time has elapsed for the accused to 2.   The said act was not far removed from the
regain his composure. [People v Ventura, G.R. No. commission of the crime by a considerable
148145-46 (2004)] length of time
•   The perpetrator must not have been able to
Gravity of personal offense recover his normal equanimity
The question whether or not a certain personal 3.   Act causing obfuscation was committed by the
offense is grave must be decided by the court, having victim himself
in mind: [TimPlaS]
1.   the Time when the insult was made; People v. Bates, G.R. No. 139907 (2003):
2.   the Place; and To consider passion and obfuscation as a mitigating
3.   the Social standing of the person. circumstance, such must arise from lawful
sentiments and not from a spirit of lawlessness or
Vindication and passion/obfuscation, considered revenge or from anger and resentment.
together
Vindication of a grave offense and passion or In the present case, clearly, Marcelo was infuriated
obfuscation cannot be counted separately and upon seeing his brother, Carlito, shot by Jose.
independently. However, a distinction must be made between the
first time that Marcelo hacked Jose and the second
People v. Torpio, G.R. No. 138984 (2004): time that the former hacked the latter. When Marcelo
The mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation hacked Jose right after seeing the latter shoot at
cannot be considered apart from the circumstance of Carlito, and if appellant refrained from doing
vindication of a grave offense. These two anything else after that, he could have validly invoked
circumstances arose from one and the same incident, the mitigating circumstance of passion and
i.e., the attack on the appellant by the accused, so obfuscation. But when, upon seeing his brother
that they should be considered as only one mitigating Carlito dead, Marcelo went back to Jose, who by then
circumstance. was already prostrate on the ground and hardly
moving, hacking Jose again was a clear case of
Vindication and provocation, distinguished someone acting out of anger in the spirit of revenge.
Provocation Vindication
The grave offense may be Cannot coexist with treachery
It is made directly only to
committed against the Passion cannot co-exist with treachery because in
the person committing
offender’s relatives passion, the offender loses his control and reason
the felony.
mentioned by law. while in treachery the means employed are
The offended party must consciously adopted. One who loses his reason and
The offense need not be have done a grave self-control could not deliberately employ a
a grave offense. offense to the offender or particular means, method or form of attack in the
his relatives. execution of the crime. [People v. Germina, G.R. No.
The provocation or threat The grave offense may be 120881 (1998)]
must immediately proximate, which admits
precede the act. of an interval of time Passion/obfuscation v. irresistible force,
It is a mere spite against distinguished
It concerns the honor of
the one giving the Passion/Obfuscation Irresistible force
the person.
provocation or threat. Mitigating Circumstance Exempting circumstance
Cannot give rise to Physical force is a

Page 42 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

physical force because it condition sine qua non. policeman then and there. [People v. Parana,
does not involves G.R. No. L-45373 (1937)]
physical force. b.   Where the arrest of the offender was after
Passion/obfuscation his voluntary surrender or after his doing an
Irresistible force comes act amounting to a voluntary surrender to
comes from the offender
from a third person. the agent of a person in authority. [People v.
himself.
Must arise from lawful Babiera, G.R. No. 28871 (1928); People v.
Irresistible force is Parana, supra.]
sentiments to be
unlawful.
mitigating.
2.   Offender surrendered himself to a person in
Passion/obfuscation v. provocation, distinguished authority or to the latter’s agent
Passion/Obfuscation Provocation
Passion/obfuscation is Person in authority – one directly vested with
produced by an impulse Provocation comes from jurisdiction. [Art. 152]
which may be caused by the injured party.
provocation. Agent of person in authority – person, who, by
The offense which direct provision of law, or by election or by
engenders the competent authority, is charged with the
perturbation of mind maintenance of public order and the protection
Must immediately and security of life and property and any person
need not be immediate.
precede the commission who comes to the aid of persons in authority.
It is only required that
of the crime. [Art. 152]
the influence thereof
lasts until the moment
the crime is committed. 3.   The surrender was voluntary
In both, the effect is the loss of reason and self-
control on the part of the offender. If the only reason for the supposed surrender is
to ensure the safety of the accused whose arrest
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND PLEA OF GUILT is inevitable, the surrender is not spontaneous
and hence not voluntary. [People v. Pinca, G.R.
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER No. 129256 (1999)]

Surrender is voluntary if spontaneous showing the The surrender must be unconditional

interest of the accused to surrender unconditionally
to the authorities, either because (1) he acknowledges
his guilt or (2) wishes to save them the trouble and
expenses that would be necessarily incurred in his
search and capture. [Andrada v. People, G.R. No.
135222 (2005)].
If none of these two reasons impelled the accused to
surrender, the surrender is not spontaneous and
therefore not voluntary. [People v. Laurel, G.R. No.
120353 (1998)].
The accused must actually surrender his own person
to the authorities, admitting complicity of the crime.
Requisites
1.   Offender has not been actually arrested
Exceptions:
a.   Where a person, after committing the
offense and having opportunity to escape,
voluntarily waited for the agents of the
authorities and voluntarily gave up, he is
entitled to the benefit of the circumstance,
even if he was placed under arrest by a
Merely requesting a policeman to accompany the
accused to the police headquarters is not
voluntary surrender. [People v. Flores, G.R. No.
137497 (1994)]
People v. Pinca, supra.:
Appellant’s actions after the incident are not marks of
voluntary surrender. Denying to the police any
personal knowledge of the crime, he even tried to
distance himself from the place of the incident by
going to Tagbilaran City.
It was only when he learned that he had become a
suspect and that the police were looking for him even
in Tagbilaran that he finally went to the police
station, but only “to clear his name.” Such acts do not
show any intent to surrender unconditionally to the
authorities.
Whether or not a warrant of arrest had been issued is
immaterial and irrelevant. The RPC does not
distinguish among the various moments when the
surrender may occur. [Reyes].

Page 43 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The fact that a warrant of arrest had already been
issued is no bar to the consideration of that
circumstance because the law does not require that
the surrender be prior the arrest. [People v. Yecla, G.R.
Nos. 46526-27(1939)]. What is important is that the
surrender be spontaneous.
People v. Dulos, G.R. No. 107328 (1994):
In order that voluntary surrender may be appreciated,
it is necessary that “it must be spontaneous and
made in such manner that it shows the intent of the
accused to surrender unconditionally to the
authorities, either because he acknowledges his guilt
or because he wishes to save them the trouble and
expenses necessarily incurred in his search and
capture.”
PLEA OF GUILT
Requisites
1.   Offender spontaneously confessed his guilt
2.   Confession was made in open court, that is,
before the competent court that is to try the case
3.   Made prior to the presentation of evidence for
the prosecution
4.   Confession of guilt was to the offense charged in
the information
Legal effects
While the plea of guilty is mitigating, it is also
considered an admission of all material facts alleged
in the information, including aggravating
circumstances. The admission covers both the crime
and its attendant circumstances qualifying and/or
aggravating. [People v Jose, G.R. No. L-28232 (1971)]
However, t is also an established rule that a plea of
guilty cannot be held to include treachery and
evident premeditation where the evidence adduced
does not adequately disclose its existence. [People v
Gravino, G.R. No. L-31327-29 (1983)]
Extrajudicial confession
The extrajudicial confession made by the accused is
not voluntary confession because it was made
outside the court. [People v. Pardo, G.R. No. L-562
(1947)]
When still mitigating
The change of plea should be made at the first
opportunity when his arraignment was first set.
1.   Withdrawal of plea of not guilty before
presentation of evidence by prosecution is still
mitigating. All that the law requires is voluntary
plea of guilty prior to the presentation of the
evidence by the prosecution.
Page 44 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   A plea of guilty on an amended information will
be considered as an attenuating circumstance if
no evidence was presented in connection with
the charges made therein. [People v. Ortiz]
When no longer mitigating
1.   A conditional plea of guilty is not mitigating.
2.   Plea of guilt on appeal is not mitigating.
Plea to a lesser offense
Sec. 2, Rule 116, ROC – At arraignment, the accused,
with the consent of the offended party and
prosecutor, may be allowed by the trial court to plead
guilty to a lesser offense which is necessarily included
in the offense charged. After arraignment but before
trial, the accused may still be allowed to plead guilty
to said lesser offense after withdrawing his plea of
not guilty. No amendment of the complaint or
information is necessary.
PHYSICAL DEFECTS
The physical defect must have a relation to the
commission of the crime. Such defect restricts or
limits his means to act, defend himself, or
communicate with others. Here, there is no
distinction between educated and uneducated deaf-
mute or blind persons.
Estafa
Where the offender is deaf and dumb and he
misappropriated property entrusted to him, the crime
committed was estafa. The fact that he was deaf and
dumb is not mitigating since that does not bear any
relation to the crime committed.
Physical injuries
If a person is deaf and dumb and has been slandered,
he cannot talk so instead he got a piece of wood and
struck the fellow on the head. The crime committed
was physical injuries. The Supreme Court held that
being a deaf and dumb is mitigating because the only
way is to use his force because he cannot strike back
in any other way.
People v. Doepante, G.R. No. 102772 (1996):
The appellant was convicted of murder. He claims
that the mitigating circumstance of physical defect
should be appreciated in his case because he has no
left arm.
Held: The fact that appellant suffers from a physical
defect, a severed left hand, does not mean that he
should automatically be credited with the mitigating
circumstance. In order for this condition to be
appreciated, it must be shown that such physical
defect limited him to such an extent that he did not
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
have complete freedom of action, consequently
resulting in diminution of the element of
voluntariness.
Such cannot be appreciated in the case at bar where
the appellant’s physical condition clearly did not limit
his means of action, defense or communication, nor
affect his free will. In fact, despite his handicap,
appellant nevertheless managed to attack, overcome
and fatally stab his victim.
ILLNESS
Requisites
1.   The illness of the offender must diminish the
exercise of willpower
2.   Such illness should not deprive the offender of
consciousness of his acts
It is said that this paragraph refers only to diseases of
pathological state that trouble the conscience or will. If
a psychological disease does not lead someone to
experience insanity (i.e., complete deprivation of
intelligence) during the commission of a crime, it may
be appreciated as mitigating provided there is
diminution of will power.
ANALOGOUS MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Any other circumstance of similar nature and
analogous to the nine mitigating circumstances
enumerated in art. 13 may be mitigating.
1.   Offender leading the law enforcers to the place
where he buried the instrument of the crime has
been considered as equivalent to voluntary
surrender
2.   Stealing driven to do so out of extreme poverty is
considered as analogous to incomplete state of
necessity
3.   Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to
over 70 years of age mentioned in par. 2. [People
v. Reantillo, G.R. No L-45685 (1938)]
4.   Voluntary restitution of stolen goods similar to
voluntary surrender [People v. Luntao, 50 O.G.
1182]
5.   Impulse of jealous feelings, similar to passion
and obfuscation. [People v. Libria, G.R. No. L-
6585 (1954)]
6.   Extreme poverty and necessity, similar to
incomplete justification based on state of
necessity. [People v. Macbul, G.R. No. L-48976
(1943)]
7.   Testifying for the prosecution, without previous
discharge, analogous to a plea of guilty. [People
v. Navasca, G.R. No. L-29107 (1977)]
Page 45 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Canta v. People, G.R. No. 140937 (2001):
Canta stole a cow but alleges that he mistook the
cow for his missing cow. He made a calf suckle the
cow he found and when it did, Canta thought that the
cow he found was really his. However, he falsified a
document describing the said cow’s cowlicks and
markings. After getting caught, he surrendered the
cow to the custody of the authorities in the municipal
hall.
Held: Canta’s act of voluntarily taking the cow to the
municipal hall to place it in the custody of authorities
(to save them the time and effort of having to recover
the cow) was an analogous circumstance to voluntary
surrender.
There is no similar provision (analogous
circumstances) in Art. 14 for aggravating
circumstances.
d.   Aggravating Circumstances
[Art. 14]
BASIC PRINCIPLES
Raises the penalty for a crime to its maximum period
provided by law for that crime, but never beyond such
maximum period. The list in this Article is EXCLUSIVE
– there are no analogous aggravating circumstances.
Degree of proof
The aggravating circumstances must be established
with moral certainty, with the same degree of proof
required to establish the crime itself.
Must be alleged in Information
BOTH generic and qualifying aggravating
circumstances must be alleged in the Information in
order to be considered by the Court in imposing the
sentence. [Rule 110, Sec. 9, Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure]. This new rule took effect on December 1,
2000, but applies retroactively to pending cases
since it is favorable to the accused.
Even if not alleged in the information, aggravating
circumstances may still be considered as bases for
the award of exemplary damages. [People v. Esugon,
G.R. No. 195244 (2015)]
U.P. LAW BOC
BASIS AND REQUISITES
Aggravating circumstance
Taking advantage of public
office
In contempt of or with insult to
public authorities
With insult or lack of regard due
to offended party by reason of
rank, age, or sex
Dwelling
Abuse of confidence
Obvious ungratefulness
In the palace of the Chief
Executive or in his presence, or
where public authorities are
engaged in the discharge of
their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
Paragraph
Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
The public officer must:
Personal circumstance 1.   Use the influence, prestige or
of the offender and the ascendancy which his office
1
means to secure the gives him
commission of the crime 2.   As means by which he realizes
his purpose.
1.   That the public authority is
engaged in the exercise of his
functions.
2.   That the public authority is not
the person against whom the
Lack of respect for the
2 crime is committed.
public authorities
3.   The offender knows him to be a
public authority.
4.   His presence has not prevented
the offender from committing
the criminal act.
Rank: Difference between social
condition or position between
offender and offended party
Personal circumstances
3
of the offended party Age: Either old age or tender age of
the victim
Sex: Female
1.   Building or structure, exclusively
Place of the commission used for rest and comfort.
3
of the crime 2.   The offended party must not
give provocation.
1.   That the offended party had
trusted the offender.
2.   That the offender abused such
Means and ways
trust by committing a crime
4 employed in commission
against the offended party.
of the crime
3.   That the abuse of confidence
facilitated the commission of
the crime.
1.   That the offended party had
trusted the offender;
2.   That the offender abused such
trust by committing a crime
Means and ways against the offended party;
4 employed in commission 3.   That the act be committed with
of the crime obvious ungratefulness.
The ungratefulness must be
obvious: (1) manifest and (2)
clear.
Committed:
1.   In the palace of the Chief
Place of the commission Executive, or
5
of the crime 2.   In his presence, or
3.   Where public authorities are
engaged in the discharge of
Page 46 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC
Nighttime
Uninhabited place
Cuadrilla or with a band
On occasion of a calamity
Aid of armed men or means to
ensure impunity
Recidivism
Reiteracion or habituality
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
their duties, or
4.   In a place dedicated to religious
worship
1.   It is specially sought by the
offender
Time and place of the 2.   The offender purposely took
6
commission of the crime advantage of nighttime; or
3.   It facilitated the commission of
the offense.
The offenders must choose the place
as an aid either:
1.   to an easy and uninterrupted
accomplishment of their
Time and place of the criminal designs, or
6
commission of the crime 2.   to insure concealment of the
offense, that he might thereby
be better secured against
detection and punishment. [U.S.
v. Vitug, G.R. No.5430 (1910) ]
There should:
1.   Be at least be four persons.
Means and ways
2.   At least 4 of them should be
6 employed in commission
armed;
of the crime
3.   And are principals by direct
participation.
Time and place of the The offender must take advantage of
7
commission of the crime the calamity or misfortune
1.   That the armed men or persons
took part in the commission of
Means and ways the crime, directly or indirectly.
8 employed in commission 2.   That the accused availed
of the crime himself of their aid or relied
upon them when the crime was
committed.
1.   That the offender is on trial for
an offense;
2.   That he was previously
convicted by final judgment of
Inclination to commit another crime;
9
crime 3.   That both the first and the
second offenses are embraced
in the same title of the Code;
4.   That the offender is convicted of
the new offense.
1.   That the accused is on trial for
an offense;
2.   That he previously served
sentence for another offense to
which the law attaches:
a.   an equal or
Inclination to commit
10 b.   greater penalty, or
crime
c.   for 2 or more crimes to
which it attaches lighter
penalty than that for the
new offense; and
3.   That he is convicted of the new
offense.
Page 47 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC
Price, reward, or promise
Inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, etc.
Evident premeditation
Craft, fraud, or disguise
Superior strength or means to
weaken defense
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
There must be two or more
principals:
1.   The one who gives or offers the
price or promise; and
2.   The one who accepts it.
Both of whom are principals to the
former, because he directly induces
the latter to commit the crime, and
the latter because he commits it.
11 Motivating power
The price, reward or promise need
not:
1.   Consist of or refer to material
things; or
2.   That the same were actually
delivered, it being sufficient that
the offer made by the principal
by inducement was accepted by
the principal by direct
participation before the
commission of the offense.
Means and ways The wasteful means were used by the
12 employed in commission offender to accomplish a criminal
of the crime purpose
1.   The time when the offender
determined to commit the
crime;
2.   An act manifestly indicating
that the culprit has clung to his
Means and ways determination; and
13 employed in commission 3.   A sufficient lapse of time
of the crime between the determination and
execution, to allow him to
reflect upon the consequences
of his act and to allow his
conscience to overcome the
resolution of his will.
Craft: intellectual trickery and
cunning on the part of the accused
Fraud: insidious words or
Means and ways machinations used to induce the
14 employed in commission victim to act in a manner which
of the crime would enable the offender to carry
out his design
Disguise: any device to conceal
identity
To TAKE ADVANTAGE of superior
strength means to use purposely
excessive force out of proportion to
Means and ways
the means of defense available to the
15 employed in commission
person attacked.
of the crime
Superiority may arise from:
1.   Aggressor’s sex, build, weapon
Page 48 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC
Alevosia (treachery)
Ignominy
Unlawful entry
Breaking wall, floor, roof
With aid of persons under 15
By motor vehicles, airships, or
other similar means
Ensañamiento (cruelty)
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
or number
2.   As compared to that of the
victim (e.g. accused attacked an
unarmed girl with a knife; 3 men
stabbed to death the female
victim).
For the means employed to weaken
defense: The means used must NOT
totally eliminate possible defense of
the victim, otherwise it will fall
under treachery.
1.   The employment of means of
execution that gave the person
attacked no opportunity to
Means and ways
defend himself or retaliate; and
16 employed in commission
2.   That the offender consciously
of the crime
adopted the particular means,
method or form of attack
employed by him
The means employed or the
Means and ways circumstances brought about must
17 employed in commission tend to make the effects of the crime
of the crime MORE HUMILIATING or TO PUT THE
OFFENDED PARTY TO SHAME
1.   There is unlawful entry when an
entrance is effected by a way
Means and ways
NOT intended for the purpose.
18 employed in commission
2.   Unlawful entry must be a means
of the crime
to effect entrance and NOT for
escape.
1.   Breaking the wall, floor, roof,
etc., is a means to the
Means and ways
commission of the crime.
19 employed in commission
2.   Breaking the wall, floor, roof,
of the crime
etc., must be a means to effect
entrance and NOT for escape.
1.   Means and ways
employed in
commission of the
crime The commission of the crime is
20 2.   Repress practice of committed with the aid of children
criminals to avail of under 15 years of age
minors and take
advantage of their
irresponsibility
1.   Means and ways
employed in 1.   The use of motor vehicle is a
commission of the means to the commission of the
crime crime, and not merely to
2.   To counteract the facilitate escape
20
great facilities found 2.   Must be (a) motorized vehicles
by modern criminals or (b) other efficient means of
as means to commit transportation similar to
crime, and flee and automobile or airplane [Reyes]
abscond
21 Means and ways 1.   That the injury caused be
Page 49 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

employed in commission deliberately increased by

of the crime causing other wrong;
2.   That the other wrong be
unnecessary for the execution of
the purpose of the offender.

Absorbed by the
Aggravating
Specific to Inherent element of aggravating
circumstance
circumstance of
1.   Accessories under Art. 19, par. 3
(harboring, concealing or
assisting in the escape of the
principal of the crime);
Taking
2.   Title VII of Book Two of the RPC
advantage of
[Crimes committed by public
public office
officers
3.   Malversation under Art. 217
4.   Falsification of document by
public officers under Art. 171
With insult or
PARaS
lack of regard
1.   Parricide
due to offended Crime against persons or
2.   Abduction
party by reason honor
3.   Rape
of rank, age, or
4.   Seduction
sex
Dwelling Robbery with force upon things
STEM
1.   Qualified seduction under Art.
337
Abuse of
2.   Qualified theft under Art. 310
confidence
3.   Estafa by conversion or
misappropriation under Art. 315
4.   Malversation under Art. 217
Treachery [People v.
Nighttime Kintuan, G.R. No. 74100
(1987)]
Uninhabited
Treachery
place
Pro-TIP:
1.   Crimes against
PROperty
2.   Treason [People v.
Manayao, G.R. No. L- Treachery [People v.
Cuadrilla or with
322 (1947)] Brigandage Ampo-an, G.R. No.
a band
3.   Illegal detention [US v. 75366 (1990)]
Santiago, G.R. No.
1000 (1903)]
4.   Crimes against
Persons
Aid of armed With a band; treachery
men or means to [People v. Ferrera, G.R.
ensure impunity No. 145727 (2002)]
1.   Fire: arson
Inundation, fire,
2.   Explosion: destruction under Art.
poison,
324
explosion, etc.
3.   By means of derailment of

Page 50 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC
Evident
premeditation
Craft, fraud, or
disguise
For means employed to
weaken defense:
1.   specific to crimes
Superior strength against persons;
or means to 2.   and sometimes against
weaken defense person and property
[e.g., robbery with
physical injuries, or
homicide]
Alevosia
Crimes against persons
(treachery)
C MaRia ClaRa:
1.   Coercion (light or
grave)
2.   Murder
Ignominy 3.   “Wanton Robbery for
personal gain” [People
v. Racaza, supra.]
4.   Crimes against chastity
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
locomotive: damages and
obstruction to means of
communication under Art. 330
Robbery with violence against
persons; treason [People v. Racaza
G.R. No. L-365 (1949)]; adultery,
estafa, and falsification. However, it
may be aggravating in robbery with
homicide if the premeditation included
the killing of the victim. [People v.
Valeriano, G.R. Nos. 103604-05 (1993)]
Craft: Qualified theft [People v.
Tiongson, 59 O.G. 4521]
Fraud:
1.   Preventing the meeting of
Congress and similar bodies [Art.
143]
2.   Violation of parliamentary
immunity [Art. 145]
Craft and fraud:
3.   Crimes against public interest
Absorbed by treachery
under Chapt. 3
[People v. Malig, G.R.
4.   Crimes committed by public
No. L-2083 (1949)]
officers under Chapt. 3
5.   Execution of deeds by means of
violence or intimidation [Art.
298]
6.   Crimes against property under
Chapts. 5 and 6
7.   Marriage contracted against
provisions of the law [Art. 350]
8.   Rape through fraudulent
machination
For superior strength:
Absorbed by cuadrilla or
by a band [People v.
Escabarte, G.R. No. L-
42964]; treachery
For use of superior strength: inherent
in treason [People v. Racaza, supra.]
For means employed to
weaken defense:
absorbed by treachery
[People v. Siatong, G.R.
No. L-9242 (1957)]
Murder by poisoning [People v. Caliso,
G.R. No. 131475-76 (2002)]; treason
[People v. Racaza, supra.]
Page 51 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

5.   Less serious physical

injuries
6.   Rape
Rape; Murder; Robbery Trespass to dwelling under Art. 280;
Unlawful entry with violence against or Robbery with force upon things under
intimidation of persons Art. 299(a) and Art. 302
Breaking wall, Robbery with force upon things under
floor, roof Art. 299(a) and Art. 302
(Excludes crimes which
By motor cannot be committed by
vehicles, airships, means of motor vehicle,
or other similar such as estafa [People v.
means Bagtas, CA-G.R. No. 10823
(1955)])
Rape; wanton robbery for
personal gain; crimes
where par. 17 also apply
Ensañamiento [People v. Racaza, supra.];
(cruelty) robbery with homicide
[People v. Basca, G.R. No.
L-11485 (1958)]; other
crimes against persons

KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES imposed but the crime offender shall be liable for
1.   GENERIC. Those that can generally apply to all remains the same a more serious crime. The
crimes. Nos. 1, 2, 3 (dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 18, circumstance is actually
19, and 20 except “by means of motor vehicles”. an ingredient of the crime
A generic aggravating circumstance may be Being an ingredient of the
offset by a generic mitigating circumstance. The circumstance can
crime, it cannot be offset
be offset by an ordinary
by any mitigating
2.   SPECIFIC. Those that apply only to particular mitigating circumstance
circumstance
crimes. Nos. 3 (except dwelling), 15, 16, 17 and 21.
People v. Lab-eo, G.R. No. 133438 (2002):
3.   QUALIFYING. Those that change the nature of The fact that the circumstances were described as
the crime (i.e. Art. 248 enumerate the qualifying aggravating instead of qualifying does not take the
AC which qualifies the killing of person to Information out of the purview of Article 248 of the
murder). If two or more possible qualifying Revised Penal Code. Article 248 does not use the
circumstances were alleged and proven, only one word qualifying or aggravating in enumerating the
would qualify the offense and the others would circumstances that raise a killing to the category of
be generic aggravating. murder. Article 248 merely refers to the enumerated
circumstances as the attendant circumstances.
Generic aggravating Qualifying aggravating
circumstances circumstances In the instant case, the Information specifically
Does not only give the alleges that evident premeditation, treachery, and
crime its proper and abuse of superior strength attended the commission
Increases the penalty
exclusive name but also of the offense. This is more than sufficient to comply
which should be
places the author thereof with the requirements of Article 248.
imposed upon the
in such a situation as to
accused to the
deserve no other penalty 4.   INHERENT. Those that must accompany the
MAXIMUM PERIOD.
than that specially commission of the crime and is therefore not
prescribed by law for said considered in increasing the penalty to be
crime. imposed such as evident premeditation in theft,
It is not an ingredient of The circumstance affects robbery, estafa, adultery and concubinage.
the crime. It only affects the nature of the crime
the penalty to be itself such that the

Page 52 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
5.   SPECIAL. Those which arise under special
conditions to increase the penalty of the offense
and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstances
such as:
a.   quasi-recidivism [Art. 160]
b.   complex crimes [Art. 48]
c.   error in personae [Art. 49]
d.   taking advantage of public position and
membership in an organized/syndicated
crime group [Art. 62]
e.   sec. 4, PD 1613
Aggravating circumstances which do not increase
the penalty:
a.   Aggravating circumstances which in themselves
constitute a crime especially punishable by law.
b.   Aggravating circumstances which are included by
the law in defining a crime and prescribing the
penalty. [Art. 62, par. 1].
c.   The same rule shall apply with respect to any
aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to
such a degree that it must of necessity
accompany the commission thereof. [Art. 62, par.
2].
Aggravating circumstances which are personal to
the offenders
Aggravating circumstances which arise from (1) moral
attributes of offender (evident premeditation); (2)
from his private relations with offended party
(consanguinity and affinity); and (3) from any other
personal cause (recidivism), shall only serve to
aggravate the liability of the principals, accomplices,
and accessories as to whom such circumstances. [Art.
62, par. 3].
Aggravating circumstances which depend for their
application upon the knowledge of offenders
Circumstances which consists (1) in the material
execution of the act; (2) in the means employed to
accomplish it (nighttime), shall serve to aggravate the
liability of only the persons who had knowledge of
them at the time of the execution of the act or their
cooperation therein. [Art. 62, par. 4]
LIST OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
“THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER
OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION.”
This is applicable only when the offender is a public
officer. To realize his purpose, the offender must use:
a.   Influence
b.   Prestige or
c.   Ascendency
Page 53 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
The essence of the matter is presented in the inquiry,
“did the accused abuse his office in order to commit the
crime?” [U.S. v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-3774 (1907)] If
the accused could have perpetrated the crime even
without occupying his position, there is no abuse of
public position. [People v. Villamor, G.R. Nos. 140407-
08 (2002)]
When a public officer commits a common crime
independent of his official functions and does acts
that are not connected with the duties of his office, he
should be punished as a private individual without
this aggravating circumstance.
When in the commission of the crime, advantage was
taken by the offender of his public position, the
penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum
regardless of mitigating circumstances. [RA 7659]
People v. Gapasin, G.R. No. 73489 (1994):
The defendant was issued a mission order to
investigate the alleged presence of unidentified
armed men in a certain barrio in Isabela. The
defendant claimed that he acted in self-defense when
he killed the victim, who the former said was one of
the men who illegally possessed firearms in the area.
Held: The aggravating circumstance of taking
advantage of public position was appreciated. The
defendant, a member of the Philippine Constabulary,
committed the crime with an armalite which was
issued to him when he received the mission order.
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONTEMPT
OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES.”
Requisites.
a.   The public authority is engaged in the exercise
of his functions
b.   The public authority is not the person against
whom the crime is committed
If the crime is committed against the public
authority while in the performance of his duty, the
offender commits direct assault instead.
c.   Offender knows him to be a public authority
Lack of such knowledge indicates lack of
intention to insult public authority
d.   His presence has not prevented the offender
from committing the criminal act.
Failure to allege knowledge in Information
Failure to expressly allege in the information that the
accused had the knowledge that the person attacked
was a person in authority does not render the
information defective so long as there are facts
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
therein from which it can be implied that the accused
knew that the person attacked was a person in
authority [People v. Balbar, G.R. Nos. L-20216-17
(1967)]
“THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH INSULT OR IN
DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE THE OFFENDED
PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF HIS RANK, AGE, OR SEX,
OR THAT IS BE COMMITTED IN THE DWELLING OF
THE OFFENDED PARTY, IF THE LATTER HAS NOT
GIVEN PROVOCATION.”
Four circumstances are enumerated in this
paragraph, which can be considered singly or
together. If all the four circumstances are present,
they have the weight of one aggravating circumstance
only.
a.   Insult or disregard on account of
1.   Rank – designation or title used to fix the
relative position of the offended party in
reference to others.
•   There must be a difference in the social
condition of the offender and offended
party
2.   Age
•   May refer to old age or tender age of the
victim
3.   Sex
•   Refers to the female sex
b.   Act committed in dwelling of offended party, if
latter has not given provocation
1.   Dwelling
•   Building or structure, exclusively used
for rest and comfort
•   A market stall where the victim is
sleeping is not a dwelling [People v
Magnaye, G.R. No. L-3510 (1951)]
•   Dwelling need not be owned by the
offended party. It is enough that he
used the place for his peace of mind,
rest, comfort and privacy.
2.   Provocation is understood as
•   Given by offended party
•   Sufficient
•   Immediate to the commission of the
crime
INSULT OR DISREGARD
Deliberately intended
There must be evidence that in the commission of the
crime, the accused deliberately intended to offend or
insult the sex or age of the offended party. [People v.
Mangsat, G.R. No. L-34675]
Page 54 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
People v. Nismal, G.R. No. L-51257 (1982):
The accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
robbery with homicide as alleged in the information.
The accused being the security guard of the bank
while the victim was the former’s superior. Indeed, it
was his duty precisely to defend the victim from any
aggressor. But in disregard of the respect he owed to
the victim, on account of superior rank to him, he
assaulted the latter. Such disregard of respect is an
aggravating circumstance.
Guidelines to prove age
The Court established the guidelines in appreciating
age, either as an element of the crime or as a
qualifying circumstance, as follows:
1.   The best evidence to prove the age of the
offended party is an original or certified true copy
of the certificate of live birth of such party.
2.   In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar
authentic documents such as baptismal
certificate and school records which show the
date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove
age.
3.   If the certificate of live birth or authentic
document is shown to have been lost or
destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the
testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's
mother or a member of the family either by
affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify
on matters respecting pedigree such as the exact
age or date of birth of the offended party
pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on
Evidence shall be sufficient under the following
circumstances:
1.   If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of
age and what is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 7 years old;
b.   If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of
age and what is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 12 years old;
c.   If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years of
age and what is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 18 years old.
4.   In the absence of a certificate of live birth,
authentic document, or the testimony of the
victim's mother or relatives concerning the
victim's age, the complainant's testimony will
suffice provided that it is expressly and clearly
admitted by the accused.
5.   It is the prosecution that has the burden of
proving the age of the offended party. The failure
of the accused to object to the testimonial
evidence regarding age shall not be taken against
him. [People v. Arpon, G.R. No. 183563 (2011)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The aggravating circumstance is NOT to be
considered in the following cases:
1.   When the offender acted with passion and
obfuscation. [People v. Ibañez, G.R. No. 197813]
2.   When there exists a relationship between the
offended party and the offender. [People v.
Valencia, G.R. No. L-39864 (1993)]
3.   When the condition of being a woman is
indispensable in the commission of the crime.
Thus, in rape, abduction, or seduction, sex is not
aggravating.
In crimes against persons or honor only
This aggravating circumstance may be taken into
account only in crimes against persons or honor,
when in the commission of the crime there is some
insult or disrespect shown to rank, age, or sex. lt is not
proper to consider this aggravating circumstance in
crimes against property. [People v. Pagal, G.R. No. L-
32040 (1977)]
Dwelling
It is not necessary that the victim owns where she lives
or dwells. A lessee, boarder, or bedspacer can
consider such place as his home, the sanctity of which
the law seeks to uphold. [People v Daniel, G.R. No. L-
40330 (1978)]
People v. Tao, G.R. No. 133872 (2000):
Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance in this case because the rape was
committed in the ground floor of a two-story
structure, the lower floor being used as a video
rental store and not as a private place of abode or
residence.
This is considered an AC because in certain cases,
there is an abuse of confidence which the offended
party reposed in the offender by opening the door to
him.
Not domicile
Dwelling should not be understood in the concept of a
domicile: A person has more than one dwelling.
So, if a man has so many wives and he gave them
places of their own, each one is his own dwelling. If he
is killed there, dwelling will be aggravating, provided
that he also stays there once in a while.
If a crime of adultery was committed, dwelling is
considered aggravating on the part of the paramour.
However, if the paramour was also residing in the
same dwelling, it will not be aggravating.
Page 55 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Even without entry to dwelling
It is not necessary that the accused entered the
dwelling of the victim to commit the offense: it is
enough that the victim was attacked inside his own
house. [People v. Ompaid, G.R. No. L-23513 (1969)]
When killing outside the dwelling
Dwelling is till aggravating if the commission of the
crime began inside the dwelling.
Includes dependencies
The word dwelling includes every dependency of the
house that forms an integral part thereof and
therefore it includes the staircase of the house and
much more, its terrace. [People v. Rios, G.R. No.
132632 (2000)]
People v. Arizobal, G.R. Nos. 135051-52 (2000):
Generally, dwelling is considered inherent in the
crimes which can only be committed in the abode of
the victim, such as trespass to dwelling and robbery in
an inhabited place.
However, in robbery with homicide the authors
thereof can commit the heinous crime without
transgressing the sanctity of the victim's domicile. In
the case at bar, the robbers demonstrated an
impudent disregard of the inviolability of the victims'
abode when they forced their way in, looted their
houses, intimidated and coerced their inhabitants into
submission, disabled Laurencio and Jimmy by tying
their hands before dragging them out of the house to
be killed.
Dwelling is not aggravating in the following cases:
1.   When both offender and offended party are
occupants of the same house [U.S. v. Rodriguez,
supra.], and this is true even if offender is a
servant of the house. [People v. Caliso, supra.]
2.   When the robbery is committed by the use of
force upon things, dwelling is not aggravating
because it is inherent. But dwelling is aggravating
in robbery with violence or intimidation of
persons because this class or robbery can be
committed without the necessity of trespassing
the sanctity of the offended party’s house. [People
v. Cabato, G.R. No. L-37300 (1988)]
3.   In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent
or included by law in defining the crime.
4.   When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient
and immediate provocation. [Art. 14 par. 3]
The presence of the aggravating circumstance of
dwelling warrants the imposition of exemplary
damages against the appellant. [People v. Rios,
supra.]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

“THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH ABUSE OF applies even if he is not engaged in the discharge of
CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS.” his duties in the place where the crime was
committed.
Par. 4 provides two aggravating circumstances –
abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness. If Offender must have intended
both are present in the same case, they must be Offender must have the intention to commit a crime
independently appreciated. when he entered the place. [People v. Jaurigue, C.A.
No. 384 (1946)]
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE (ABUSO DE CONFIANZA)
Par. 5
Requisites Where public authorities Par. 2
1.   Offended party trusted the offender are engaged in the Contempt or insult to
•   The confidence between the offender and the discharge of their public authorities
offended party must be immediate and duties.
personal. If two persons just met for the first Public authorities are engaged in the performance of
time, there can be no personal or immediate their duties.
relationship upon which confidence might Public duty is performed Public duty is performed
rest between them. [People v. Mandolado, in their office outside of their office
G.R. No. L-51304-05 (1983)] The offended party may The public authority
2.   Offender abused such trust or may not be the public should not be the
3.   Abuse of confidence facilitated the commission authority offended party
of the crime
•   The confidence must be a means of As regards the place where the public authorities are
facilitating the commission of the crime, the engaged in the discharge of their duties, there must
culprit taking advantage of the offended be some performance of public functions.
party's belief that the former would not
abuse said confidence. [People v Arrojado, “THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (1) IN THE NIGHT
G.R. No. 130492 (2001)] TIME, OR (2) IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE, OR (3) BY
A BAND, WHENEVER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES MAY
OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS FACILITATE THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE.”

Requisites When considered separately

1.   Offended party trusted the offender
2.   Offender abused such trust
3.   Act committed with obvous ungratefulness
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE PALACE
OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OR IN HIS PRESENCE, OR
WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN
THE DISCHARGE OF THEIR DUTIES, OR IN A PLACE
DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP.”
If it is the Malacañang Palace or a church it is
aggravating regardless of whether State or official or
religious functions are being held. The President need
not be in the palace.
Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious
worship.
An electoral precinct during election day is a place
“where public authorities are engaged in their official
duties.”
Presence alone of the Chief Executive
His presence alone in any place where the crime is
committed is enough to constitute the AC. It also
If they concur in the commission of the crime, they are
considered as one aggravating circumstance. These
three may be considered separately:
1.   when their elements are distinctly perceived and
2.   can subsist independently.
3.   revealing a greater degree of perversity.
General requisites
1.   When it facilitated the commission of the crime;
or
2.   When especially sought for by the offender to
insure the commission of the crime or for the
purpose of impunity; or
3.   When the offender took advantage thereof for the
purpose of impunity.
Nighttime (Nocturnidad)
The commission of the crime must begin and be
accomplished in the nighttime (after sunset and before
sunrise, cf. Art. 13, Civil Code).
Well-lighted place
When the place is illuminated by light, nighttime is
not aggravating.

Page 56 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Two tests for nocturnity “Or other calamity or misfortune.” Refers to other
In determining nocturnity, two tests are employed in conditions of distress similar to “conflagration,
the alternative: shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic.”
1.   the objective test, under which nighttime is
aggravating because the darkness facilitated the “THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID
commission of the offense; and OF ARMED MEN OR PERSONS WHO INSURE OR
2.   the subjective test, under which nighttime is AFFORD IMPUNITY.”
aggravating because the darkness was purposely
sought by the offender. [People v. Ventura, supra.] Armed men.
Also covers armed women. [People v. Licop, G.R. No.
Nighttime and treachery L06061 (1954)]
General Rule: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery
Exception: Where both the treacherous mode of Requisites.
attack and nocturnity were deliberately chosen upon 1.   That the armed men or persons took part in the
the same case. Both may be perceived distinct from commission of the crime, directly or indirectly
one another. [People v Berdida, G.R. No. L-20183 2.   The accused availed himself of their aid or
(1966)] relied upon them while the crime was
committed
Uninhabited place
It is determined not by the distance of the nearest Not applicable
house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in 1.   When both the attacking party and the party
the place of the commission of the offense, there was attacked were equally armed.
a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some 2.   When the accused as well as those who
help. [People v. Desalisa, G,R No. 95262 (1994)] cooperated with him in the commission of the
crime acted under the same plan and for the
Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal same purpose.
purpose. [People v. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 33843 (1931)] 3.   Casual presence, or when the offender did not
avail himself of their aid nor knowingly count
When place of crime could be seen and the voice of upon their assistance in the commission of the
the victim could be heard from a nearby house, the crime.
place of the crime is not “uninhabited.”
Par. 6 Par. 8
Band By a band With aid of armed men
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall Requires more than 3
have acted together in the commission of an offense, At least two armed men
armed malefactors
it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. Requires that more than
All four persons must be principals by direct This circumstance is
three armed malefactors
participation. present even if one of the
shall have acted
offenders merely relied on
together in the
Abuse of superior strength and use of firearms are their aid, for actual aid is
commission of an
absorbed by the aggravating circumstance of by a not necessary
offense
band. [People v. Escabarte, G.R. No. L-42964 (1988)] Band members are all Armed men are mere
principals accomplices
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE
OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION, SHIPWRECK, “THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST.”
EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC OR OTHER CALAMITY OR
MISFORTUNE.” See Recidivism under Multiple Offenders.

The rationale for this AC is the debased form of
criminality of one who, in the midst of a great
calamity, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds
to their suffering by taking advantage of their
misfortune and despoiling them.
“THAT THE OFFENDER HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
PUNISHED BY AN OFFENSE TO WHICH THE LAW
ATTACHES AN EQUAL OR GREATER PENALTY OR
FOR TWO OR MORE CRIMES TO WHICH IT
ATTACHES A LIGHTER PENALTY.”

The offender must take advantage of the calamity or See Reiteracion under Multiple Offenders.
misfortune.

Page 57 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN
CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD, OR
PROMISE.”
When this AC is present, it affects not only the person
who received the price or reward, but also the person
who gave it.
The evidence must show that one of the accused used
money or valuable consideration for the purpose of
inducing another to perform the deed. [U.S. v.
Gamao, supra.]
Voluntarily giving such price or reward without
previous promise, as an expression of appreciation for
the sympathy and aid, is not taken into consideration
to increase the penalty.
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED BY MEANS OF
INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON, EXPLOSION,
STRANDING OF A VESSEL OR INTERNATIONAL
DAMAGE THERETO, DERAILMENT OF A
LOCOMOTIVE, OR BY THE USE OF ANY OTHER
ARTIFICE INVOLVING GREAT WASTE AND RUIN.”
When qualifying and when generic aggravating
Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish
a criminal purpose, any of the circumstances in
paragraph 12 cannot be considered to increase the
penalty or to change the nature of the offense.
When another AC already qualifies the crime, any of
these AC’s shall be considered as generic aggravating
circumstance only.
When arson and when homicide/murder
If the intent is to kill, there is murder even if the house
is burned in the process. If the intent is to destroy
property, the crime is arson even if someone dies as a
consequence.
“THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH EVIDENCE
PREMEDITATION.”
Evident premeditation implies:
1.   a deliberate planning of the act
2.   before executing it.
Essence of premeditation
1.   An opportunity to coolly and serenely think and
deliberate
a.   on the meaning and
b.   consequences of what he planned to do.
2.   An interval long enough for his conscience and
better judgment to overcome his evil desire and
scheme. [People v. Durante, G.R. No. L-31101
(1929)]
Page 58 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Degree of proof
Evident premeditation must be proven as convincingly
as the crime itself. [People v. Bibat, G.R. No. 124319
(1998)]
For the circumstance of evident premeditation to be
appreciated, the prosecution must present clear and
positive evidence of the planning and preparation
undertaken by the offender prior to the commission of
the crime. [People v. Mondijar, G.R. No. 141914 (2002)]
Anger or grudge
There is no evident premeditation when the fracas
was the result, not of a deliberate plan but of rising
tempers, or when the attack was made in the heat of
anger. [People v. Torpio (2004)] The mere existence of
ill-feeling or grudge between the parties is not
sufficient to establish premeditated killing.There
must be an outward act showing or manifesting
criminal intent. [People v. Bernal, G.R. No. 113685
(2002)]
People v. Biso, G.R. No. 111098-99 (2003):
Dario, a black belt in karate, entered an eatery, seated
himself beside Teresita and made sexual advances to
her in the presence of her brother, Eduardo. Eduardo
contacted his cousin, Biso, an ex-convict and a known
toughie in the area, and related to him what Dario
had done to Teresita. Eduardo, Pio, and 2 others
decided to confront Dario. They positioned
themselves in the alley near the house of Dario. When
Dario arrived on board a taxicab, the four assaulted
Dario. Eduardo held, with his right hand, the wrist of
Dario and covered the mouth of Dario with his left
hand. The 2 others held Dario's right hand and hair.
Pio then stabbed Dario near the breast with a fan
knife. Eduardo stabbed Dario and fled with his three
companions from the scene.
Held: There was no evident premeditation. The
prosecution failed to prove that the four intended to
kill Dario and if they did intend to kill him, the
prosecution failed to prove how the malefactors
intended to consummate the crime. Except for the
fact that the appellant and his three companions
waited in an alley for Dario to return to his house, the
prosecution failed to prove any overt acts on the part
of the appellant and his cohorts showing that that
they had clung to any plan to kill the victim.
Other notes on evident premeditation
1.   The premeditation must be based upon external
facts, and must be evident, not merely suspected
indicating deliberate planning.
2.   The date and time when the offender determined
to commit the crime is essential, because the
lapse of time for the purpose of the third requisite
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
is computed from that date and time. It may not
be appreciated absent any proof as to how and
when the plan to kill was hatched, OR what time
elapsed before it was carried out.
3.   After the offenders had determined to commit the
crime, there must be a manifest indication that
they clung to their determination. Premeditation
occurs when crime is deliberately planned and
PERSISTENTLY and CONTINUOUSLY followed
the plan.
4.   Where conspiracy is directly established, with
proof of the attendant deliberation and selection
of the method, time and means of executing the
crime, the existence of evident premeditation can
be taken for granted. [U.S. v. Cornejo, G.R. No.
9773 (1914)] Conspiracy presupposes
premeditation, EXCEPT, when conspiracy is
merely IMPLIED.
5.   In order that premeditation may exist, it is not
necessary that the accused premeditated the
killing of a particular individual. If the offender
premeditated on the killing of any person
(general attack), it is proper to consider against
the offender the aggravating circumstance of
evident premeditation, because whoever is killed
by him is contemplated in the premeditation. [US
v. Manalinde, G.R. No. L-5292 (1909)]
6.   Mere threats without the second element does
not show evident premeditation.
“THAT THE CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE BE
EMPLOYED.”
Craft. It is employed as a scheme in the execution of
the crime.
People v. Labuguen, G.R. No. 127849 (2000):
Craft involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the
part of the offender. When there is a direct
inducement by insidious words or machinations, fraud
is present. By saying that he would accompany the
victim to see the cows which the latter intended to
buy, appellant was able to lure the victim to go with
him.
Distinguished from fraud
Craft Fraud
Done for DIRECT
Done in order to NOT
INDUCEMENT by insidious
AROUSE SUSPICION
words and machinations
Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery if they
have been deliberately adopted as the means,
methods or forms for the treacherous strategy.
Otherwise, they may co-exist independently where
they are adopted for a different purpose in the
commission of the crime. [People v. Lab-eo, supra.]
Page 59 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Disguise
Resorting to any device to conceal identity.
Test
The test of disguise is whether the device or
contrivance resorted to by the offender was intended
to or did make identification more difficult, such as
the use of a mask, false hair or beard.
When still recognized
But if in spite of the use of handkerchief to cover their
faces, the culprits were recognized by the victim,
disguise is not considered aggravating.
People v. Empacis, G.R. No. 95756 (1993):
The appellants were convicted of robbery with
homicide, which the Supreme Court affirmed. The
appellants pretended to be bona fide customers of the
victim's store and on his pretext gained entry into the
latter's store and later, into another part of his
dwelling. This Court has held stratagems and ruses of
this sort to constitute the aggravating circumstance of
fraud or craft, e.g: where the accused —
1.   pretended to be constabulary soldiers and by that
ploy gained entry into the residence of their prey
whom they thereafter robbed and killed;
2.   pretended to be needful of medical treatment,
and through this artifice, entered the house of the
victim whom they thereupon robbed and killed;
3.   pretended to be wayfarers who had lost their way
and by this means gained entry into a house, in
which they then perpetrated the crime of robbery
with homicide;
4.   pretended to be customer wanting to buy a bottle
of wine;
5.   pretended to be co-passengers of the victim in a
public utility vehicle;
6.   posed as customers wishing to buy cigarettes;
and as being thirsty, asking for drink of water.
“THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF SUPERIOR
STRENGTH, OR MEANS BE EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN
THE DEFENSE.”
Superior strength
The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior
strength depends on the age, size and strength of the
parties.
It is considered whenever there is a notorious
inequality of forces between the victim and the
aggressor, assessing a superiority of strength
notoriously advantageous for the aggressor which is
selected or taken advantage of by him in the
commission of the crime. [People v. Barcelon, G.R. No.
144308 (2002)].
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Abuse of superior strength is present when the
offender uses a powerful weapon which is out of
proportion to the defense available to the offended
party. [People v. Padilla, G.R. No. G.R. No. 126124
(1999)]
When offended party was able to self-defend
If the offended party was able to put up a defense,
even only a token one, there is no treachery. Instead,
some other aggravating circumstance may be present
but it is no longer treachery.

More in number The treacherous character of the means employed in

Mere superiority in number would not necessarily
indicate the attendance of abuse of superior strength.
The prosecution should still prove that the assailants
purposely used excessive force out of proportion to
the means of defense available to the persons
attacked. [People v. Sansaet, G.R. No. 139330 (2002)].
There must be a deliberate intent on the part of the
malefactors to take advantage of their greater
number. The prosecution must clearly show the
offenders' deliberate intent to do so. [People v.
Lobrigas, G.R. No. 147649 (2002)]
the aggression does not depend upon the result
thereof but upon the means itself. Thus, frustrated
murder could be aggravated by treachery.
People v. Escote Jr., G.R. No. 140756 (2003):
Art. 14, par. 16 of the RPC is a reproduction of the
1850 Penal Code of Spain and the Codigo Penal
Reformado de 1870 with a slight difference. In the
latter law, the words los delitos contra las personas
(the persons) are used, whereas in Article 14,
paragraph 6, of the Revised Penal Code, the words
“crimes against the person” are used.

No advantage of superior strength
1.   one who attacks is overcome with passion and
obfuscation
2.   when quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal
blow was struck while victim and accused were
struggling.
Going by the letter of the law, treachery is applicable
only to crimes against persons as enumerated in Title
Eight, Chapters One and Two, Book II of the Revised
Penal Code. However, the Supreme Court of Spain
has consistently applied treachery to robbery with
homicide, classified as a crime against property.

By a band
When the offense is
committed by more than
3 armed malefactors
regardless of the
comparative strength of
the victim.
Abuse of superior
strength
The gravamen of abuse
of superiority is the
taking advantage by the
culprits of their collective
strength to overpower
their weaker victims.
In its Sentencia dated March 14, 1877, the Supreme
Court of Spain declared that treachery is a generic
aggravating circumstance not only in crimes against
persons but also in robbery with homicide. This is so,
the high tribunal ruled, because when robbery is
coupled with crimes committed against persons, the
crime is not only an assault (ataca) on the property of
the victims but also of the victims themselves (ofende).

Weaken defense In fine, in the application of treachery as a generic

An example is when the accused intentionally
intoxicated the victim.
“THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH TREACHERY
(ALEVOSIA).”
Treachery
When the offender commits any of the crimes against
the person, employing means, methods, or forms in
the execution thereof which tend directly and
specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself
arising from the defense which the offended party
might make.
The essence of treachery is that by virtue of the
means, method or form employed by the offender, the
offended party was not able to put up any defense.
aggravating circumstance to robbery with homicide,
the law looks at the constituent crime of homicide
which is a crime against persons and not at the
constituent crime of robbery which is a crime against
property. Treachery is applied to the constituent crime
of homicide and not to the constituent crime of
robbery of the special complex crime of robbery with
homicide.
The crime of robbery with homicide does not lose its
classification as a crime against property or as a
special complex and single and indivisible crime
simply because treachery is appreciated as a generic
aggravating circumstance. Treachery merely
increases the penalty for the crime conformably with
Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code absent any
generic mitigating circumstance.

Page 60 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Preparation versus sudden attack
The mode of attack must be consciously adopted. The
accused must make some preparation to kill the
deceased in such manner as to insure the execution of
the crime or to make it impossible or hard for the
person attacked to defend himself or retaliate. [People
v. Tumaob, G.R. Mo. 125690 (1998)]
However, a sudden attack by the assailant, whether
frontally or from behind, is treachery if he deliberately
adopted such mode of attack with the purpose of
depriving the victim of a chance to either fight or
retreat. [People v. Lab-eo, supra.]
Examples of attacks showing intention to eliminate
risk
1.   Victim asleep
2.   Victim half-awake or just awakened
3.   Victim grappling or being held.
4.   Attacked from behind
Use of guns
There is treachery when the victim is shot, albeit
frontally, with his hands raised to show that he would
not fight, or because of fright, or to try to ward off the
shots that were to come. This circumstance
constitutes treachery because the victim was clearly in
a defenseless position. [People v. Dulos, G.R. No.
107328 (1994)]
Once a gun is drawn against a person, the means
methods and forms employed for its execution is
already conceived. And once it is tended directly and
specifically to insure its execution, it consequently
produces the conscious and deliberate intention.
Finally if all the acts of execution had been effectively
done without risk on the part of the offender arising
from any defense coming from the offended party,
treachery results. [People v. Gonzales, Jr., G.R. No.
139542 (2001)]
Continuous and non-continuous aggression
1.   When the aggression is CONTINUOUS, treachery
must be present in the BEGINNING of the assault.
2.   When the assault WAS NOT CONTINUOUS, in
that there was an interruption, it is sufficient that
treachery was present AT THE MOMENT THE
FATAL BLOW WAS GIVEN.
People v. Malejana, G.R. No. 145002 (2006):
Treachery may still be appreciated even when the
victim was forewarned of danger to his person. What
is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it
impossible for the victim to defend himself or to
retaliate. Thus, even a frontal attack could be
treacherous when unexpected and on an unarmed
victim who would be in no position to repel the attack
or avoid it.
Page 61 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Degree of proof
Treachery cannot be presumed. The suddenness of
the attack does not, of itself, suffice to support a
finding of alevosia, even if the purpose was to kill, so
long as the decision was made all of a sudden and the
victim’s helpless position was accidental. [People v.
Lubreo, G.R. No. 74146 (1991)]. It must be proved by
clear and convincing evidence. [People v. Santos, G.R.
No. 122935 (2000)].
People v. Oandasan, Jr., G.R. No. 194605 (2016):
Treachery as an aggravating or attendant
circumstance must be established beyond reasonable
doubt. This quantum is hardly achieved if there is no
testimony showing how the accused actually
commenced the assault against the victim. But to
absolutely require such testimony in all cases would
cause some murders committed without eyewitnesses
to go unpunished by the law.
To avoid that most undesirable situation, the Rules of
Court permits a resort not only to direct evidence but
also to circumstantial evidence.
Conspiracy
When there is conspiracy in the commission of a
crime, treachery can be appreciated against all
conspirators. [People v. Ong, G.R. No. L-34497 (1975)]
There is murder even if there is no intent to kill if the
homicide is accompanied by treachery.
People v. Cagoco, G.R. No. L-38511 (1933):
The appellant boxed the victim’s head from behind
and ran away. The blow caused the victim to fall and
his head to hit the asphalt road. The victim died after.
The Supreme Court ruled that even if there was no
intent to kill, the appellant remains liable for the
death of the victim as a direct consequence of the
appellant’s fist-blow against the victim’s head.
Since the accused struck the deceased from behind
and without warning, he acted with treachery. This
then qualifies the crime to murder.
When not aggravating.
1.   When meeting is incidental.
2.   When no other witness in the offense.
3.   Witness could not provide full details of the
attack.
4.   When attack is frontal.
EXCEPT: When victims was tied.
5.   When a child is attacked.
6.   When victim was already defending himself.
7.   When victim had a chance to prepare.
8.   When attack preceded by a warning.
9.   When attack was preceded by heated discussion.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
“THAT MEANS BE EMPLOYED OR CIRCUMSTANCES
BROUGHT ABOUT WHICH ADD IGNOMINY TO THE
NATURAL EFFECTS OF THE ACT.” (IGNOMINY)
It is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order,
which adds disgrace to the material injury caused by
the crime.
Raping a woman from behind is ignominous because
that is not the normal form of intercourse, it is
something which offends the morals of the offended
woman. This is how animals do it. [People v. Siao, G.R.
No. 126021 (2000)]
People v. Cachola, G.R. No. 135047 (2004):
For ignominy to be appreciated, it is required that the
offense be committed in a manner that tends to make
its effect more humiliating, thus adding to the victim's
moral suffering.
Where the victim was already dead when his body or a
part thereof was dismembered, ignominy cannot be
taken against the accused.
In this case, the information states that Victorino's
sexual organ was severed after he was shot and there
is no allegation that it was done to add ignominy to
the natural effects of the act. We cannot, therefore,
consider ignominy as an aggravating circumstance.
People v. Bumidang, G.R. No. 130630 (2000):
The aggravating circumstance of ignominy shall be
taken into account if means are employed or
circumstances brought about which add ignominy to
the natural effects of the offense; or if the crime was
committed in a manner that tends to make its effects
more humiliating to the victim, that is, add to her
moral suffering.
It was established that Baliwang used the flashlight
and examined the genital of Gloria before he ravished
her. He committed his bestial deed in the presence of
Gloria's old father. These facts clearly show that
Baliwang deliberately wanted to further humiliate
Gloria, thereby aggravating and compounding her
moral sufferings.
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER AN
UNLAWFUL ENTRY.”
There is no unlawful entry when the door was already
broken and thereafter the accused made an entry thru
the broken door. The breaking of the door is covered
by paragraph 19.
Page 62 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
“THAT AS A MEANS TO THE COMMISSION OF THE
CRIME, A WALL, ROOF, FLOOR, DOOR, OR WINDOW
BE BROKEN.”
For entrance, not escape/exit
This circumstance is aggravating only when the
offender resorted to any means in order to enter the
place.
Unlawful entry and breaking of wall, roof, etc.,
distinguished.
Breaking of
Unlawful entry
wall, roof, etc.
There must be a
breaking of the No Yes
entrance
Entrance actually
Yes No
happened
Must be a means
to the
No Yes
commission of
the crime
When breaking of door or window is lawful
Sec. 11, Rule. 113. Right of officer to break into
building or enclosure – Right of officer to break into
building or enclosure. — An officer, in order to make an
arrest either by virtue of a warrant, or without a
warrant as provided in section 5, may break into any
building or enclosure where the person to be arrested
is or is reasonably believed to be, if he is refused
admittance thereto, after announcing his authority
and purpose.
Sec. 7, Rule 126. Right to break door or window to
effect search – The officer, if refused admittance to
the place of directed search after giving notice of his
purpose and authority, may break open any outer or
inner door or window of a house or any part of a house
or anything therein to execute the warrant or liberate
himself or any person lawfully aiding him when
unlawfully detained therein.
“THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED (A) WITH THE
AID OF PERSONS UNDER FIFTEEN YEARS OF AGE
OR (B) BY MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLES,
MOTORIZED WATERCRAFT, AIRSHIPS, OR OTHER
SIMILAR MEANS.”
With the aid of persons under 15 years of age; basis
To repress, so far as possible, the frequent practice
resorted to by professional criminals of availing
themselves of minors taking advantage of their lack of
criminal responsibility (remember that minors are
given leniency when they commit a crime)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
By means of a motor vehicle; basis
To counteract the great facilities found by modern
criminals in said means to commit crime and flee and
abscond once the same is committed. This
circumstance is aggravating only when used in the
commission of the offense.
Motor vehicles in escape
If motor vehicles are used only in the escape of the
offender, it is not aggravating. It must have been used
to facilitate the commission of the crime to be
aggravating.
“THAT THE WRONG DONE IN THE COMMISSION OF
THE CRIME BE DELIBERATELY AUGMENTED BY
CAUSING OTHER WRONG NOT NECESSARY FOR ITS
COMMISSIONS.” (CRUELTY)
Requisites
1.   That the injury caused be deliberately increased
by causing the other wrong
2.   The other wrong be unnecessary for the execution
of the purpose of the offender
For it to exist, it must be shown that the accused
enjoyed and delighted in making his victim suffer.
Not cruelty, but outraging the corpse
If the victim was already dead when the acts of
mutilation were being performed, this would also
qualify the killing to murder due to outraging of his
corpse.
There must be proof that the wounds inflicted on the
victim were done while he was still alive in order to be
considered cruelty.
Ignominy Cruelty
Shocks the moral
Physical
conscience of man
Refers to the moral effect
of a crime and it pertains Refers to the physical
to the moral order, suffering of the victim so
whether or not the victim he has to be alive
is dead or alive
People v. Catian, G.R. No. 139693 (2002):
Catian repeatedly struck Willy with a "chako" on the
head, causing Willy to fall on his knees. Calunod
seconded by striking the victim with a piece of wood
on the face. When Willy finally collapsed, Sumalpong
picked him up, carried him over his shoulder, and
carried Willy to a place where they burned Willy.
Held: The circumstance of cruelty may not be
considered as there is no showing that the victim was
burned while he was still alive. For cruelty to exist
Page 63 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
there must be proof showing that the accused
delighted in making their victim suffer slowly and
gradually, causing him unnecessary physical and
moral pain in the consummation of the criminal act.
No proof was presented that would show that
accused appellants deliberately and wantonly
augmented the suffering of their victim.
Special aggravating and qualifying circumstances
Art. 62 of RPC has been revised by RA 7659 to include
the following:
Art. 62. – The maximum penalty shall be imposed if
the offense was committed by any group who belongs
to an organized/syndicated crime group.
An organized/syndicated crime group means a group
of two or more persons collaborating, confederating
or mutually helping one another for purposes of gain
in the commission of any crime.
Hence, an organized or syndicated crime group
committing a crime is also another aggravating
circumstance.
Murder
Article 248. Murder – Any person who, not falling
within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill another,
shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by
reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death, if
committed with any of the following attendant
circumstances:
1.   With treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense or of
means or persons to insure or afford impunity.
2.   In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
3.   By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an
airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the
use of any other means involving great waste and
ruin.
4.   On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated
in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone,
epidemic or other public calamity.
5.   With evident premeditation.
2.   6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging
or scoffing at his person or corpse.
In order to qualify a killing into murder, the crime
must be attended by the enumerated qualifying
circumstances of Article 248. If it is not, the killing is
homicide.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Rape
Art. 266-B. Penalty – Rape under paragraph 1 of the
next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion
perpetua.
xxx
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime
of rape is committed with any of the following
aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
1.   When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of
age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-
parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or
affinity within the third civil degree, or the
common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
[See alternative circumstance]
2.   When the victim is under the custody of the police
or military authorities or any law enforcement or
penal institution;
3.   When the rape is committed in full view of the
spouse, parent, any of the children or other
relatives within the third civil degree of
consanguinity; [See ignominy]
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 the commission of the
crime;
5.   When the victim is a child below seven (7) years
old;
6.   When the offender knows that he is afflicted with
the Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus
(HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease
and the virus or disease is transmitted to the
victim;
7.   When committed by any member of the Armed
Forces of the Philippines or para-military units
thereof or the Philippine National Police or any
law enforcement agency or penal institution,
when the offender took advantage of his position
to facilitate the commission of the crime; [See
taking advantage of public position]
8.   When by reason or on the occasion of the rape,
the victim has suffered permanent physical
mutilation or disability;
9.   When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the
offended party at the time of the commission of
the crime; and
10.   When the offender knew of the mental disability,
emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of
the offended party at the time of the commission
of the crime.
The ten qualifying circumstances of rape aggravates
the crime of rape, and increases its penalty death.
Page 64 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Other felonies in the RPC
The following are other felonies in the Revised Penal
Code with qualifying and/or special aggravating
circumstances. [GRo VIDS]
1.   Grave threats [Art. 282]
2.   Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an
uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use
of firearm on a street, road or alley [Art. 295]
3.   Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band
[Art. 300 in rel. to Art. 299]
4.   Violation of domicile [Art. 128, par. 2]
5.   Interruption of religious worship [Art. 132, par. 2]
6.   Direct assault [Art. 148]
7.   Slavery [Art. 272, par. 2]
Other special aggravating and qualifying
circumstances
Use of explosives
Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal/ Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or
Disposition, of Firearms, Ammunition or Explosives
[P.D. 1866, as amended by R.A. No. 8294] as an
aggravating circumstance. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of
Section 3 state:
Sec. 3. Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition,
disposition or possession of explosives. – The penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion
temporal and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand
pesos (P50,000) shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully manufacture, assemble, deal in,
acquire, dispose or possess hand grenade(s), rifle
grenade(s), and other explosives, including but not
limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire
bombs,' or other incendiary devices capable of
producing destructive effect on contiguous objects
or causing injury or death to any person.
When a person commits any of the crimes defined in
the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the use
of the aforementioned explosives, detonation agents
or incendiary devices, which results in the death of
any person or persons, the use of such explosives,
detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
Use of “loose firearms.”
RA 10591 or the Comprehensive Firearms and
Ammunition Regulation Act (2013) expressly repealed
Sec. 1 of PD 1866 as amended:
(v) Loose firearm refers to an unregistered firearm, an
obliterated or altered firearm, firearm which has
been lost or stolen, illegally manufactured firearms,
registered firearms in the possession of an
individual other than the licensee and those with
revoked licenses in accordance with the rules and
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
regulations. [Sec. 3(v), RA 10591]
(Note: Loose firearms are UP SOLAR: Unregistered;
Possessed by non-licensee; Stolen; Obliterated; Lost;
Altered; with Revoked license)
Sec. 29, RA 10591. Use of Loose Firearm in the
Commission of a Crime – The use of a loose firearm,
when inherent in the commission of a crime
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other
special laws, shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance: Provided, That if the crime committed
with the use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law
with a maximum penalty which is lower than that
prescribed in the preceding section for illegal
possession of firearm, the penalty for illegal
possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of the
penalty for the crime charged: Provided, further, That
if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm
is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty
which is equal to that imposed under the preceding
section for illegal possession of firearms, the penalty
of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be
imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other
special laws of which he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat,
such violation shall be absorbed as an element of the
crime of rebellion or insurrection, or attempted coup
d’ etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without using
the loose firearm, the violation of this Act shall be
considered as a distinct and separate offense.
RA 8294 does not specify whether or not the use of an
unlicensed firearm in murder or homicide is generic or
special aggravating. It merely states that the use of
the unlicensed firearm is appreciated as
“aggravating.”
In Palaganas v. People, G.R. No. 165483 (2006), the
Court interpreted this as making the use of unlicensed
firearm in murder or homicide as SPECIAL
aggravating. Applying the logic of Palaganas by
analogy, Section 29 in RA 10591 should be interpreted
as assigning the use of loose firearm as SPECIAL
aggravating as well.
Use of dangerous drugs
Cf. The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002
[R.A. No. 9165]:
Sec. 25 Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances in the
Page 65 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Commission of a Crime by an Offender Under the
Influence of Dangerous Drugs. – Notwithstanding the
provisions of any law to the contrary, a positive finding
for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying
aggravating circumstance in the commission of a
crime by an offender, and the application of the
penalty provided for in the Revised Penal Code shall
be applicable.
Arson under PD 1613 [BAHaGS: Benefit of Another;
Hatred towards owner/occupant; intent to Gain;
Syndicate]
Sec. 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson –
The penalty in any case of arson shall be imposed in
its maximum period;
1.   If committed with intent to gain;
2.   If committed for the benefit of another;
3.   If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred
towards the owner or occupant of the property
burned;
4.   If committed by a syndicate.
The offense is committed by a syndicate if it is
planned or carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons.
Under art. 62 of RPC, a syndicate needs at least TWO
persons. Under PD 1613, a syndicate needs at least
THREE persons.
e.   Alternative Circumstances
[Art. 15]
Alternative Circumstances
Are circumstances which must be taken in
consideration as aggravating or mitigating according
to the nature and effects of the crime.
Types under art. 15. (RIE)
1.   Relationship
2.   Intoxication
3.   Degree of Education/instruction
RELATIONSHIP
Covers: (SAD SiR)
1.   Spouse
2.   Ascendant
3.   Descendant
4.   Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister
(Siblings)
5.   Relative by affinity in the same degree of the
offender [People v Marco, G.R. No. 132392 (2001)]
When exempting
1.   When accessory
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
•   An accessory who is related to the principal
within the relationship prescribed in Art. 20
except if accessory falls within Par. 1 of Art.
19;
2.   Death under exceptional circumstance
•   A legally married person who having surprised
his spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person who shall
inflict upon them physical injuries of any
other kind (i.e. less serious and slight
physical injuries). [Art. 247, RPC]
3.   Select crime against relatives
•   For crimes of theft, malicious mischief or
swindling (estafa) but there is civil liability.
[Art. 332, RPC]
When mitigating
1.   In crimes against property
•   Robbery (Arts. 294-302)
•   Usurpation (Art. 312)
•   Fraudulent insolvency (Art. 314)
•   Arson (Arts. 321-322, 325-326).
2.   When the crime is less serious or slight physical
injuries
•   If the offended party is a relative of a lower
degree than the offender.
When aggravating
1.   In crimes against persons
•   Where the offended party is a relative of a
higher degree than the offender (grandson
kills grandfather), or
•   When the offender and the offended party are
relatives of the same level, as killing a
brother, a brother-in law, a half-brother or
adopted brother
2.   When the crime is Serious Physical Injuries [Art.
263]
•   Aggravating even if the offended party is a
descendant of the offender
3.   When the crime is Less Serious Physical Injuries or
Slight Serious Physical Injuries
•   If the offended party is a relative of a higher
degree than the offender
4.   When the crime is Homicide OR Murder
•   Relationship is aggravating regardless of
degree
5.   In Crimes Against Chastity
•   Relationship is always aggravating. [People v
Orilla, G.R. Nos. 148949-40 (2004)]
6.   When the crime is Rape
•   Relationship is always aggravating in rape.
[People v Delen, G.R. No. 194446 (2014)]
When not appreciated
1.   When relationship is an element of the offense
Page 66 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
•   Parricide
•   Adultery
•   Concubinage
2.   For persons attached by common-law relations
•   The law cannot be stretched to include such
relations. [People v Atop, G.R. Nos. 124303-
05 (1998)]
People v. Atop, supra.:
11-year-old Regina lives with her grandmother. Atop is
the common-law husband of her grandmother. Atop
was found guilty of 4 counts of rape which was
committed in 1993 (2x), 1994 and 1995. The lower
court took into account the Aggravating Circumstance
of relationship.
Held: In this case, there is no blood relationship or
legal bond that links Atop to his victim.
INTOXICATION
People v. Bernal, G.R. No. 132791 (2002):
It is only the circumstance of intoxication which: (a) if
not mitigating, (b) is automatically aggravating.
Appellant’s intoxication cannot be considered
mitigating because accused-appellant failed to show
that his intoxication impaired his will power or his
capacity to understand the wrongful nature of his
acts. The person pleading intoxication must prove
that he took such quantity of alcoholic beverage,
prior to the commission of the crime, as would blur
his reason. This the accused-appellant failed to
do. No proof was presented by accused-appellant
that the amount of liquor he had taken was of such
quantity as to affect his mental faculties. The mere
claim of intoxication does not entitle him to the
mitigating circumstance of intoxication.
When mitigating
a.   There must be an indication that:
•   because of the alcoholic intake of the
offender,
•   he is suffering from diminished self-control.
•   It is not the quantity of alcoholic drink.
•   Rather it is the effect of the alcohol upon
the offender which shall be the basis of the
mitigating circumstance.
b.   That offender is
•   not a habitual drinker and
•   did not take alcoholic drink with the intention
to reinforce his resolve to commit crime.
When aggravating
1.   If intoxication is habitual
2.   If it is intentional to embolden offender to commit
crime
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
DEGREE OF EDUCATION OR INSTRUCTION
Low Degree of Education
Refers to the lack of sufficient intelligence of and
knowledge of the full significance of one’s act.
General Rule
•   Low degree of education is mitigating.
•   To be considered mitigating, degree of instruction
must have some reasonable connection to the
offense.
Exceptions
•   If the crime committed is one which one
inherently understands as wrong (e.g. parricide).
•   Lack of education is not mitigating in murder or
homicide; crimes against property; and crimes
against chastity.
High degree of education
May be appreciated as aggravating when offender
availed himself or took advantage of it in committing
the crime.
For instance, a doctor who took advantage of his
knowledge to make a poison to kill his victim in such a
way as to avoid suspicion. [Reyes]
f.   Absolutory Causes
Absolutory causes
Those where the act committed is a crime but for
reasons of public policy and sentiment there is no
penalty imposed. [People v. Talisic, G.R. No. 97961
(1997)]
Types
There are FOUR TYPES of absolutory circumstances:
[IPON]
1.   Instigation
2.   Pardon by the offended party
3.   Other absolutory causes
4.   Acts Not covered by law and in case of excessive
punishment. [Art. 5]
INSTIGATION
When a lawbreaker has been induced into committing
the crime, he or she is not imposed a penalty.
Instigation
The involvement of a law officer in the crime itself in
the following manner:
1.   He induces a person to commit a crime for
personal gain.
Page 67 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   He doesn’t take the necessary steps to seize the
instrument of the crime & to arrest the offenders
before he obtained the profits in mind.
3.   He obtained the profits in mind even though
afterwards does take the necessary steps to seize
the instrument of the crime and to arrest the
offenders.
Example: A, leader of an anti-narcotics team,
approached and persuaded B to act as a buyer of
shabu and transact with C, a suspected pusher. B was
given marked money to pay C for a sachet of shabu.
After the sale was consummated, the cops closed in
and arrested both B and C.
Entrapment
Trapping persons into crime for the purpose of
instituting criminal prosecutions. It is a scheme or
technique ensuring the apprehension of the criminals
by being in the actual crime scene.
The law officers shall not be guilty to the crime if they
have done the following:
1.   He does not induce a person to commit a crime
for personal gain or is not involved in the
planning of the crime.
2.   Does take the necessary steps to seize the
instrument of the crime and to arrest the
offenders before he obtained the profits in mind.
Example: A, a government anti-narcotics agent, acted
as a poseur buyer of shabu and negotiated with B, a
suspected drug pusher who is unaware that A is a
police officer. A then paid B in marked money and the
latter handed over a sachet of shabu. Upon signal, the
cops closed in on B.
People v. Pacis, G.R. No. 146309 (2002):
Yap, an NBI agent, received information that a Pacis
was offering to sell ½ kg of "shabu." A buy-bust
operation was approved. The informant introduced
Yap to Pacis as an interested buyer. They negotiated
the sale of ½ kg of shabu. Pacis handed to Yap a
paper bag with the markings "Yellow Cab". While
examining it, Pacis asked for the payment. Yap gave
the "boodle money" to Pacis. Upon Pacis's receipt of
the payment, the officers identified themselves as NBI
agents and arrested him.
Held: The operation that led to the arrest of appellant
was an entrapment, not instigation. In entrapment,
ways and means are resorted to for the purpose of
trapping and capturing lawbreakers in the execution
of their criminal plan. In instigation, instigators
practically induce the would-be defendant into the
commission of the offense and become co-principals
themselves. Entrapment is sanctioned by law as a
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

legitimate method of apprehending criminal 5.   Spontaneous desistance [Art. 6]

elements engaged in the sale and distribution of 6.   Ways on how criminal liability is extinguished
illegal drugs. under Art 89
7.   Accessories exempt under Art. 20
US v. Phelps, G.R. No. L-5728 (1910): 8.   Under Article 332, exemptions from criminal
Phelps was charged and found guilty for violating the liability for cases of theft, swindling and malicious
Opium Law (Act No. 1761). Phelps was induced by mischief. It limits the responsibility of the
Smith, an employee of the Bureau of Internal offender to civil liability and frees him from
Revenue, into procuring opium, providing for a venue criminal liability by virtue of his Relationship to
and making arrangements for the two of them to the offended party. [Intestate estate of Gonzales
smoke opium. Vda. De Carungcong v. People, G.R. No. 181409
(2010)]
Held: Smith not only suggested the commission of the 9.   Trespass to dwelling to prevent serious harm to
crime but also expressed his desire to commit the self [Art. 280]
offense in paying the amount required for the 10.   Discovering secrets through Seizure of
arrangements. Such acts done by employees of correspondence of the ward by their guardian
government in encouraging or inducing persons to [Art. 219]
commit a crime in order to prosecute them are most
reprehensible. ACTS NOT COVERED BY LAW AND IN CASE OF
EXCESSIVE PUNISHMENT
Entrapment Instigation
Ways and means are The instigator practically Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which
resorted to for the induces the would-be should be repressed but which are not covered by the
purpose of trapping and accused into the law, and in cases of excessive penalties. –
capturing the lawbreaker commission of the 1.   Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which
in the execution of his offense and himself it may deem proper to repress and which is not
criminal plan becomes a co-principal. punishable by law, it shall render the proper
The law enforcer decision, and shall report to the Chief Executive,
conceives the through the Department of Justice, the reasons
The means originate from commission of the crime which induce the court to believe that said act
the mind of the criminal. and suggests to the should be made the subject of legislation.
accused who carries it 2.   In the same way, the court shall submit to the
into execution. Chief Executive, through the Department of
A public officer or a Justice, such statement as may be deemed
A person has planned or proper, without suspending the execution of the
private detective induces
is about to commit a sentence, when a strict enforcement of the
an innocent person to
crime and ways and provisions of this Code would result in the
commit a crime and
means are resorted to by imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking
would arrest him upon or
a public officer to trap into consideration the degree of malice and the
after the commission of
and catch the criminal. injury caused by the offense.
the crime by the latter.
Not a bar to the The accused must be
prosecution and acquitted because the Coverage
conviction of the offender simply acts as a 1.   Where the court cannot convict the accused
lawbreaker. tool of the law enforcers because the act he committed is not punishable
under the law, but the court deems it proper to
PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY repress such act.
•   The proper judgment is acquittal. The judge
See discussion on Art. 344. must report to the Chief Executive that said
act be made subject of penal legislation and
OTHER ABSOLUTORY CAUSES the reasons therefore.
(DALE’S 89 ARTS) 2.   Where the court after trial finds the accused
1.   Death under exceptional circumstances [Art. 247] guilty, and the penalty prescribed for the crime
2.   Accessories in light felonies appears too harsh considering the conditions
3.   Light felonies not consummated surrounding the commission of the crime
4.   Exemption from criminal liability in crimes •   The judge should impose the law (not
against property suspend the execution of the sentence).

Page 68 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
•   The most that he could do is recommend to
the Chief Executive to grant executive
clemency.
People v. Veneracion, G.R. Nos. 119987-88 (1995)
Held: The law plainly and unequivocally provides that
“when by reason or on the occasion of rape, a
homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
Courts are not concerned with wisdom, efficacy or
morality of law. The discomfort faced by those forced
by law to impose death penalty is an ancient one, but
it is a matter upon which judges have no choice. The
Rules of Court mandates that after an adjudication of
guilt, the judges should impose the proper penalty
and civil liability provided for by the law on the
accused.
3.  Persons Liable and Degree
of Participation
a.   Conspiracy and Proposal
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. –
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
punishable only in the cases in which the law specially
provides a penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come
to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has decided to
commit a felony proposes its execution to some other
person or persons.
CONSPIRACY
Exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it. (Art. 8, RPC).
Agreement may be oral or written, express or implied.
Requisites of conspiracy.
1.   Two or more persons come to an agreement.
2.   Agreement presupposes meeting of the minds of
two or more persons
3.   The agreement pertains to a commission of a
felony.
4.   Agreement to effect what has been conceived
and determined.
5.   The execution of the felony was decided upon.
Page 69 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
There must be participation in the criminal resolution
because simple knowledge thereof by a person may
only make him liable as an accomplice.
Rationale: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a
crime are only preparatory acts and the law regards
them as innocent or at least permissible except in
exceptional cases.
Rules
1.   Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are
not punishable.
•   Exception: They are punishable only in the
cases in which the law specially provides a
penalty therefore.
2.   When the conspiracy is established, all who
participated therein, irrespective of the quantity
or quality of his participation is liable equally,
whether conspiracy is pre-planned or
instantaneous.
•   Exception – Unless one or some of the
conspirators committed some other crime
which is not part of the intended crime.
•   Exception to the Exception – When the act
constitutes a “single indivisible offense.”
Mere presence of a person at the scene of the crime
does not make him a conspirator for conspiracy
transcends companionship. [People v. Comadre, G.R.
No. 153559 (2004)]
On malversation
By reason of conspiracy, the feloneious act of the
accountable public officer is also imputable to his co-
conspirators, although the latter were not similarly
situated with the former in relation to the object of the
crime. [People v Peralta, G.R. No. L-19069 (1968)]
Conspiracy can make accountable those who
conspired and aided the public officer envisioned by
the Article.
On robbery with a band
Conspiracy need not be proved if the existence of the
band is clearly established. The law presumes the
attendance of conspiracy so much so that "any
member of a band who is present at the commission
of a robbery by the band, shall be punished as
principal of any of the assaults committed by the
band, unless it be shown that he attempted to
prevent the same." [People v. Peralta, supra.]
On homicide or rape “on occasion” of robbery
People v. Pecato, G.R. No. L-41008 (1987):
Four people engaged in a robbery, killing victim Felix
Larong in the process. Only one of the robbers
actually fired the gun, but all of the arrested accused
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
(one robber evaded arrest) were sentenced as
principals.
Held: Whenever a homicide has been committed as a
consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery, ALL
those who took part as principals in the commission
of the crime are also guilty as principals in the special
complex crime of robbery with homicide although
they did NOT actually take part in the homicide unless
it clearly appeared that they endeavored to prevent
the homicide.
People v. Evangelio, G.R. No. 181902 (2011):
Once conspiracy is established between several
accused in the commission of the crime of robbery,
they would ALL be equally culpable for the rape
committed by ANYONE of them on the occasion of the
robbery, unless anyone of them proves that he
endeavored to prevent the others from committing
rape.
The above jurisprudence abandons the old rule,
where a conspirator in robbery is liable only for such
other crimes which could be foreseen and which are
the natural and logical consequences of the
conspiracy.
Conspiracy as a felony, distinguished from
conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal
liability
Conspiracy punishable by law refers to the mere
agreement to commit the said acts and NOT the
actual execution thereof.
While the rule is that a mere conspiracy to commit a
crime without doing any overt act is not punishable,
the exception is when such is specifically penalized by
law. [People v. Fabro (2000)]
Examples of felonious conspiracy [METRICS
DATA]:
1.   Monopolies and combinations in restraint of
trade (Art. 186)
2.   Espionage (Sec. 3, C.A. 616)
3.   Treason (Art. 115)
4.   Rebellion (Art. 136)
5.   Insurrection (Art. 136)
6.   Coup d’état, (Art. 136)
7.   Sedition (Art. 141)
8.   Selected acts under the Dangerous Drugs Act
(Sec. 26, R.A. 9165)
9.   Arson (P.D. 1613, Sec. 7)
10.   Terrorism (R.A. 9372, Sec. 4)
11.   Access device fraud (R.A. 8484, sec. 11)
Page 70 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Degree of proof
Conspiracy must be established by positive and
conclusive evidence, not by conjectures or
speculations. [People v. Laurio, G.R. No. 181539 (1991)]
To establish conspiracy, evidence of actual
cooperation rather than mere cognizance or approval
of an illegal act is required. It must be shown to exist
as clearly and convincingly as the commission of the
crime itself. [People v. Escober, G.R. No. L-69564
(1988)]
Circumstantial evidence may be used
While it is mandatory to prove conspiracy by
competent evidence, direct proof is not essential to
show it – it may be deduced from the mode, method,
and manner by which the offense was perpetrated, or
inferred from the acts of the accused themselves
when such acts point to a joint purpose and design,
concerted action and community of interest. [People v.
Cenahono, G.R. No. 169962 (2007)]
It may be established through the collective acts of
the accused before, during and after the commission
of a felony that all the accused aimed at the same
object, one performing one part and the other
performing another for the attainment of the same
objective; and that their acts, though apparently
independent, were in fact concerted and cooperative,
indicating closeness of personal association,
concerted action and concurrence of sentiments.
[People v. Talaogan, G.R. No. 178198 (2008)]
Spontaneity does not preclude conspiracy
Spontaneity alone does not preclude the
establishment of conspiracy, which after all, can be
consummated in a moment’s notice — through a
single word of assent to a proposal or an
unambiguous handshake. Yet it is more difficult to
presume conspiracy in extemporaneous outbursts of
violence; hence, the demand that it be established by
positive evidence. [Li v. People, G.R. No. 127962
(2004)]
For conspiracy to exist, it does not require an
agreement for an appreciable period prior to the
occurrence. From the legal standpoint, conspiracy
exists if, at the time of the commission of the offense,
the accused had the same purpose and were united in
its execution. [People v. Listerio, supra.]
Doctrine of implied conspiracy
Conspiracy may be inferred from the conduct of the
parties, their joint purpose, community of interest and
in the mode and manner of commission of the
offense. [People v. Pangilinan, G.R. Nos. 134823-25
(2003)].
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
In determining whether there is an implied
conspiracy, it must be based on:
1.   Overt acts done before, during, or after the
commission of the crime;
2.   Words, remarks or language used before, during
or after the commission of the crime
•   They must be distinct from each other,
independent or separate.
•   They must be closely associated, closely
related, closed linked, and coordinated.
•   They must be for the common criminal
design, joint criminal interest, unity of
criminal purpose, or concerted action, geared
towards the attainment of the felony.
People v. Ramos, G.R. No. 118570 (2004):
In determining the existence of conspiracy, it is not
necessary to show that all the conspirators actually
hit and killed the victim. The presence of conspiracy
among the accused can be proven by their conduct
before, during or after the commission of the crime
showing that they acted in unison with each other,
evincing a common purpose or design.
There must be a showing that appellant cooperated
in the commission of the offense, either morally,
through advice, encouragement or agreement or
materially through external acts indicating a manifest
intent of supplying aid in the perpetration of the crime
in an efficacious way.
In such case, the act of one becomes the act of all,
and each of the accused will thereby be deemed
equally guilty of the crime committed.
Proposals punishable by law [ReCIT]:
1.   Rebellion (Art. 136)
2.   Coup d’ etat (Art. 136)
3.   Inducement not to answer summons, appear or
be sworn in Congress, etc. (Art. 150)
4.   Treason (Art. 115)
Legal effects of implied conspiracy
1.   Not all those present at the crime scene will be
considered conspirators;
2.   Mere acquiescence to or approval of the
commission of the crime, without any act of
criminal participation, shall not render one
criminally liable as co-conspirator.
3.   In the absence of any previous plan or agreement
to commit a crime, the criminal responsibility
arising from different acts directed against one
and the same person is individual and not
collective, and that each of the participants is
liable only for his own acts. [People v. Bagano,
G.R. No. 139531 (2002)]
Page 71 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
One who desisted is not criminally liable
Desistance is true only in the attempted stage. Before
this stage, there is only a preparatory stage.
Conspiracy is only in the preparatory stage.
Exceptions: Having community of design with the
principal does not prevent a malefactor from being
regarded as an accomplice if his role in the
perpetration of the homicide or murder was, relatively
speaking, of a minor character. [People v. Nierra, G.R.
No. L-32624 (1980)]
Wheel or circle conspiracy v. chain conspiracy
In a wheel or circle conspiracy, there is a single person
or group (the hub) dealing individually with two or
more other persons or groups (the spokes). In a chain
conspiracy, there is successive communication and
cooperation in much the same way as with legitimate
business operaitons between manufacturer and
wholesaler, then wholesaler and retailer, and then
retailer and consumer. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 148965 (2002)]
PROPOSAL
When the person who has decided to commit a felony
proposes its execution to some other person or
persons.
Requisites
1.   That a person has decided to commit a felony;
and
2.   That he proposes its execution to some other
person or persons.
No criminal proposal when:
1.   The person who proposes is not determined to
commit the felony;
2.   There is no decided, concrete and formal
proposal;
3.   It is not the execution of the felony that is
proposed.
It is not necessary that the person to whom the
proposal is made agrees to commit treason or
rebellion
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Two Concepts of
Stage How incurred Legal requirements
Conspiracy
The RPC must specifically
punish the act of conspiring
(and proposing)
The act must not be
accomplished, else the
AS A FELONY IN Mere conspiracy is absorbed and
Preparatory acts
ITSELF agreement the act itself is punished.
Quantum of proof:
Conspiracy as a crime must
be established beyond
reasonable doubt
Participants acted in concert
or simultaneously or in any
way which is indicative of a
meeting of the minds
towards a common criminal
goal or criminal objective.
The act of meeting together
is not necessary as long as a
common objective can be
discerned from the overt
acts.
The act must be
AS A BASIS FOR Commission of
Executory acts accomplished, if there is
LIABILITY overt act
only conspiracy or proposal,
there is no crime to be
punished.
Quantum of proof:
Reasonably inferred from
the acts of the offenders
when such acts disclose or
show a common pursuit of
the criminal objective.
[People v. Pinto, G.R. No.
39519 (1991)]
Page 72 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Illustration
A, B, C and D came to an
agreement to commit
rebellion. Their
agreement was to bring
about the rebellion on a
certain date.
Even if none of them has
performed the act of
rebellion, there is already
criminal liability arising
from the conspiracy to
commit the rebellion.
But if anyone of them has
committed the overt act
of rebellion, the crime of
all is no longer
conspiracy but rebellion
itself.
This is true even though
the other co-conspirators
do not know that one of
them had already
performed an act of
rebellion.
Three persons plan to
rob a bank. For as long
as the conspirators
merely entered the bank
there is no crime yet. But
when one of them draws
a gun and disarms the
security guard, all of
them shall be held liable,
unless a co-conspirator
was absent from the
scene of the crime or he
showed up, but he tried
to prevent the
commission of the crime.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b.   Persons Criminally Liable execution by acts which directly

tended to the same end.
Under the Revised Penal Code, when more than one 1.   That the inducement be made
person participated in the commission of the crime, directly with the intention of
the law looks into their participation because in procuring the commission of the
punishing offenders, the Revised Penal Code crime;
classifies them as: Principal by 2.   That such inducement be the
inducement determining cause of the
1.   Principal commission of the crime by the
2.   Accomplice material executor. [People v.
3.   Accessory Yanson-Dumancas, G.R. No.
133527-28 (1999)]
This classification is true only under the RPC and is 1.   Participating in the criminal
not applied under special laws, because the penalties resolution, that is, there is either
under the latter are never graduated. anterior conspiracy or unity of
criminal purpose and intention
Do not use the term “principal” when the crime immediately before the
Principal by
committed is a violation of special law (use the term commission of the crime
indispensable
“offender/s, culprit/s, accused). charged; and
cooperation
2.   Cooperation in the commission
Grave and less felonies v. light felonies of the offense by performing
1.   When the felony is grave, or less grave, all another act without which it
participants are criminally liable. would not have been
2.   When the felony is only light, only the principal accomplished.
and the accomplice are liable. 1.   That there be community of
design; that is, knowing the
In the commission of light felonies, the social criminal design of the principal
wrong as well as the individual prejudice is so by direct participation, he
small that penal sanction is deemed not concurs with the latter in his
necessary. purpose;
2.   That he cooperates in the
Who are liable execution of the offense by
Only natural persons can be held criminally liable previous or simultaneous acts,
Accomplice
because only natural persons are capable of acting by with the intention of supplying
means of deceit (dolo) or fault (culpa) and only material or moral aid in the
natural persons can commit crime with personal execution of the crime in an
malice and negligence. efficacious way; and
3.   That there be a relation
Also, only natural persons can suffer imprisonment or between the acts done by the
deprivation of liberty as a form of punishment. principal and those attributed to
[Amurao (2013)] the person charged as
accomplice.
Officers of corporation are liable Those who
Only officers of corporations acting in their official 1.   having knowledge of the
duties can be punishable. He answers for his acts, for commission of the crime and
a juridical person cannot be prosecuted criminally. 2.   Without having participated
EXCEPT: in special laws where corporations are therein, either as principals or
Accessories
expressly penalized for their violations. accomplices,
3.   take part subsequent to its
Persons commission in any of the
criminally Requisites manners provided by the Art. 19,
liable RPC.
1.   That they participated in the 1.   The accessory is a public officer.
Principal by Public officer
criminal resolution; and 2.   He conceals, harbors, or assists
direct as accessory
2.   That they carried out their plan (CHA) in the principal's escape.
participation under Art.
and personally took part in its 3.   The public officer acts with
19(3)
abuse of his public functions.

Page 73 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

4.   The crime committed by the Inducer must have: [PET]

principal is not a light felony. 1.   Most positive resolution
1.   The accessory is a private 2.   Most persistent effort to secure the commission
person of the crime,
2.   He conceals, harbors, or assists 3.   Presentation to the induced the very strongest
(CHA) in the escape of the kind of temptation.
author of the crime
Private When not by inducement
3.   The crime committed by the
person as 1.   Thoughtless expression, without any expectation
principal is either (PM's HAT):
accessory or intention it would produce a result.
a.   Parricide
under art. 2.   When the principal by direct participation had
b.   Murder
19(3) personal reason to commit the crime without
c.   Principal is Habitually
guilty of some other crime inducement of another.
d.   Attempt against the 3.   When a price is given to principal by direct
President's life participation AFTER the crime but was not
e.   Treason promise BEFORE the commission of the crime.

PRINCIPALS Two ways of inducement; by force

Art. 17. Principals – The following are considered
principals:
1.   Those who take a direct part in the execution of
the act;
2.   Those who directly force or induce others to
commit it;
3.   Those who cooperate in the commission of the
offense by another act without which it would not
have been accomplished.
Crime through negligence
There is no conspiracy when offense is through
negligence
Exception: Under special laws that expressly provide
how failure to prevent an act makes one co-principal.
BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
1.   Using irresistible force. Such physical force as
would produce an effect upon the individual that
despite all his resistance, it reduces him to a
mere instrument.
2.   Causing uncontrollable fear. Such fear that must
be grave, actual, serious and of such kind that
majority of men would succumb to such moral
compulsion. The fear must be both grave and
imminent and not speculative, fanciful or remote.
Criminal liability pertains to both the inducer and the
induced.
People v. Agapinay, supra.:
The one who uttered “kill him, we will bury him”
while the felonious aggression was taking place
cannot be held liable as principal by inducement.
Utterance was said in the excitement of the hour, not
a command to be obeyed.

Those who are liable (participated in the criminal
resolution): [MAP]
1.   Materially execute the crime;
2.   Appear at the scene of the crime;
3.   Perform acts necessary in the commission of the
offense.
Why one who does not appear at the scene of the
crime is not liable:
1.   His non-appearance is deemed desistance which
is favored and encouraged.
2.   Conspiracy is generally not a crime unless the
law specifically provides a penalty therefore.
3.   There is no basis for criminal liability because
there is no criminal participation.
BY INDUCEMENT
By giving of price, or offering of reward or promise
The one giving the price or offering the reward or
promise is a principal by inducement while the one
committing the crime in consideration thereof is a
principal by direct participation.
Using words of command
The person who used the words of command is a
principal by inducement while the person who
committed the crime because of the words command
is a principal by direct participation.
Other characteristics
1.   That the one uttering the words of command
must have the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime;
2.   That the one who made the command must have
an ascendancy or influence over the person who
acted;

Page 74 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
3.   That the words used must be so direct, so
efficacious, so powerful as to amount to physical
or moral coercion;
4.   That the words of command must be uttered
prior to the commission of the crime; and
5.   The material executor of the crime has no
personal reason to commit the crime.
People v. Balderama, G.R. Nos. 89587-98 (1993):
Ernesto shouted to his younger brother Oscar,
“Birahin mo na, birahin mo na!” Oscar stabbed the
victim. Considering that Ernesto had great moral
ascendancy and influence over Oscar, being much
older (35 years old) than the latter, who was 18 years
old, and it was Ernesto who provided his allowance,
clothing as well as food and shelter, Ernesto is
principal by inducement.
Principal by inducement, in relation to principal by
direct participation
When principal by inducement is liable
1.   When the principal by direct participation
committed the act induced.
2.   The inducement must precede the act induced
and must be so influential in producing the
criminal act that without it, the act would not
have been performed.
When principal by direct participation is acquitted
Conspiracy is negated by acquittal of co-defendant.
Exception: when principal actor is acquitted because
he acted WITHOUT malice or criminal intent, his
acquittal is not ground for acquittal of principal by
inducement.
BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION
Requisites
1.   Anterior conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose
and intention immediately before the
commission of the crime charged.
a.   Requires participation in the criminal
resolution.
b.   There must be conspiracy.
c.   Concurrence is sufficient.
2.   Cooperation in the commission of the offense
by performing another act, without which it
would not have been accomplished.
a.   Cooperation must be indispensable
b.   If dispensable, accused is only an accomplice
c.   If cooperation is necessary in the execution
of the offense, accused is considered as a
principal by direct participation.
Page 75 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
People v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 139179 (2002):
A certain Tolentino attacked Hernan Sagario. The
assault was carried out without the participation of
appellant, who did not personally hit or stab the
victim, but only subsequently helped carry the latter
from the house to the nearby creek.
It must be emphasized that Tolentino’s plan to kill
the victim was concocted in the absence of appellant.
In fact, appellant, showing clearly his lack of support
for the criminal intent of Tolentino, even tried to
prevent the latter from hacking the victim, according
to the eyewitness.
In his testimony, appellant stated that because he
was afraid his co-accused would hurt him if he
refused, he agreed to assist the latter in carrying the
victim towards the river. Verily, he adequately
explained his conduct prior to the stabbing incident
as one born of fear for his own life.
Held: Because of the lack of a united purpose,
appellant cannot be considered a principal by
indispensable cooperation. Absent a conspiracy, his
responsibility, as well as that of his co-accused, is
individual -- not collective -- and each is to be
punished only for his own separate acts.
People v. Fronda, G.R. Nos. 102361-62 (1993):
Appellant was convicted as principal by
indispensable cooperation for the murders of two
farmers. Records show that appellant's participation
in the commission of the crime consisted of: (1)
leading the members of the NPA to the house where
the victims were found; (2) tying the victims' hands
and (3) digging the grave where the victims were
buried.
Held: We note that the prosecution failed to present
any evidence tending to establish appellant's
conspiracy with the evil designs of the members of
the armed group. Neither was it established that
appellant's acts were of such importance that the
crime would not have been committed without him or
that he participated in the actual killing.
However, appellant's act of joining the armed men in
going to the mountains, and his failure to object to
their unlawful orders, or show any reluctance in
obeying the same, may be considered as
circumstances evincing his concurrence with the
objectives of the malefactors and had effectively
supplied them with material and moral aid, thereby
making him as an accomplice.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Principal by indispensable cooperation v. co-
principal by direct participation
For the former, act done is different from the felony
intended by the principal by direct participation. In
the latter, the act done by the person is necessary in
the execution of the crime committed.
For instance, the person who held the hands of the
victim while another stabbed the victim is principal by
direct participation. (There are instances where SC
nevertheless held that the person who held the hand
is principal by indispensable cooperation.)
ACCOMPLICES
Persons who, not acting as principals, cooperate in
the execution of the offense by previous and
simultaneous acts, which are not indispensable to the
commission of the crime.
They are mere instruments that perform acts not
essential to the perpetration of the offense.
However, she chose to remain quiet; and to add to
that, she even spent the night at the cottage.
It must be noted that her presence and company
were not indispensable for the commission of the
crime. Also, the Court stressed that where there is
doubt as to the participation of the offender to the
crime, he/she shall be considered as an accomplice
rather than a principal to the crime.
Accomplice do not decide the crime
Accomplices come to know about the criminal
resolution of the principal by direct participation after
the principal has reached the decision to commit the
felony and only then does the accomplice agree to
cooperate in its execution.
Accomplices do not decide whether the crime should
be committed; they merely assent to the plan of the
principal by direct participation and cooperate in its
accomplishment. [People v. PIlola, G.R. No. 121828
(2003)]

An accomplice cooperates in the execution of the Accomplice and conspirator, distinguished

offense by previous or simultaneous acts, provided he Conspirator Accomplice
has no direct participation in its execution or does not They know of and join in
force or induce others to commit it, or his cooperation They know and agree with
the criminal
is not indispensable to its accomplishment. [People v. the criminal design
design
Mandolado, supra.] Conspirators know the Accomplices come to know
criminal intention about it after the
Accomplice even without knowledge of actual because principals have reached
crime they themselves have the decision and only
One can be an accomplice even if he did not know of decided upon such then do they agree to
the actual crime intended by the principal provided course of action cooperate in its execution
he was aware that it was an illicit act. [People v. Conspirators decide Accomplices merely assent
Doctolero, G.R. No. 34386 (1991)] that a crime should be to the plan and cooperate
committed in its accomplishment
Where the accomplices therein consented to help in Accomplices are merely
the commission of forcible abduction, they were instruments who perform
responsible for the resulting homicide even if the Conspirators are the acts that are useful for, but
purpose of the principal to commit homicide was authors of a crime not essential to, the
unknown to the accomplices. [US v. De Jesus, G.R. perpetration of the
No. 5003 (1909)] offense.
People v. Gambao, supra.: Accomplice and principal by direct participation,
In this case of kidnapping for ransom, appellant avers distinguished
that she cannot be held as a principal to the crime Principal by direct Accomplice
given that she had no knowledge that a crime was participation
being committed. She claims that she thought that Cooperation is not
she merely attended a swimming party. Given that Cooperation is indispensable to the
she had no knowledge of the crime, should have no indispensable in the commission of the act
criminal liability imputed to her. commission of the crime [Garces v. People, G.R.
No. 173858 (2007)]
Held: The Court is not persuaded that she did not
acquire knowledge of the criminal design of the
Accomplice in bigamy
principals. A rational person would have sensed that
something was wrong and reported it to the police.

Page 76 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
A person, whether man or woman, who knowingly
consents or agrees to be married to another already
bound in lawful wedlock is guilty as an accomplice in
the crime of bigamy. [Santiago v. People (2015)]
ACCESSORIES
When one becomes an accessory
Participation of all accessories is AFTER the
commission of the crime.
Art. 19. Accessories – Accessories are those who,
having knowledge of the commission of the crime,
and without having participated therein, either as
principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its
commission in any of the following manners:
1.   By profiting themselves or assisting the offender
to profit by the effects of the crime.
2.   By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery.
3.   By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
escape of the principals of the crime, provided
the accessory acts with abuse of his public
functions or whenever the author of the crime is
guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an
attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or
is known to be habitually guilty of some other
crime.
Examples:
1.   In kidnapping with ransom, couriers or runners in
obtaining ransom money.
2.   In homicide or murder, those who assist in burial
of the victim. Mere act of carrying the cadaver of
one unlawfully killed, when it was buried to
prevent discovery of the crime, is SUFFICIENT to
make him accessory.
3.   Those who make it appear that deceased was
armed, and that it was necessary to kill him on
account of his resistance; making it appear that
the deceased who had been arrested ran away.
4.   Refusal of mayor to prosecute the crime of
homicide and made it possible for principal to
escape. He refused to make an investigation of
the serious occurrence, of which complaint was
made to him. Mayor is guilty as accessory.
5.   If a person reported to the police false
information, after witnessing a crime by another
whom he knew.
Concealing or destroying the corpus delicti
1.   Do not overlook the purpose which must be to
prevent discovery of the crime.
2.   The corpus delicti is not the body of the person
who is killed.
Page 77 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
3.   Even if the corpse is not recovered, as long as
that killing is established beyond reasonable
doubt, criminal liability will arise.
4.   If there is someone who destroys the corpus
delicti to prevent discovery, he becomes an
accessory.
When accessories are not criminally liable
1.   When crime is light felony.
2.   Exemption under art. 20.
The exemption provided in this article is based
on the ties of blood and the preservation of the
cleanliness of one’s name, which compels one to
conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as
those mentioned in this article.
Even if only two of the principals guilty of murder are
the brothers of the accessory and the others are not
related to him, such accessory is exempt from
criminal liability.
When accessory is not exempted from criminal
liability
1.   Profited by the effects of the crime, or
2.   Assisted the offender to profit by the effect of the
crime.
3.   The punishable acts in PD 1829, compared to
RPC Art. 20 are prompted by a detestable greed,
not by affection. The benefits of the exception in
Art. 20 do not apply to PD 1829.
COLLECTIVE VERSUS INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL
RESPONSIBILITY.
Collective criminal responsibility
This is present when the offenders are criminally
liable in the same manner and to the same extent.
The penalty to be imposed must be the same for all.
The same penalty is imposed for the following
combination of principals:
1.   All principals by direct participation
2.   Principal by direct participation + Principal by
induction (except those who directly forced
another to commit a crime)
3.   Principal by direct participation + principal by
indispensable cooperation
Individual criminal responsibility
In the absence of any previous conspiracy, unity of
criminal purpose and intention immediately before
the commission of the crime, or community of
criminal design, the criminal responsibility arising
from different acts directed against one and the same
person is individual and not collective, and each of
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
the participants is liable only for the act committed
by him.
When principal v. when accomplice
The basis is the importance of the cooperation to the
consummation of the crime.
1.   If the crime could hardly be committed without
such cooperation, then such cooperator would be
a principal.
2.   If the cooperation merely facilitated or hastened
the consummation of the crime, the cooperator is
merely an accomplice.
In case of doubt, favor the lesser penalty or liability.
Apply the doctrine of pro reo.
People v. Dela Cerna, G.R. No. L-29811 (1967):
Several individuals were convicted for the murder of
father Rafael and son Casiano. One of the appellants
shot the Rafael and abandoned him. Rafael was
saved and brought to his hut for treatment of the
wounds. The shooter, together with several others,
went to Rafael’s house armed with firearms, bolos,
and canes. They stoned the house and trust their
bolos thru the bamboo walls and flooring. The
shooter then climbed the house and shot Rafael,
finally killing him. Someone from the group saw
Rafael’s son, Casiano, running away from the hut; the
former gunned down the latter.
Held: The rule has always been that co-conspirators
are liable only for acts done pursuant to the
conspiracy. For other acts done outside the
contemplation of the co-conspirators or which are not
the necessary and logical consequence of the
intended crime, only the actual perpetrators are
liable.
Rafael’s shooter cannot be held liable for the death of
Casiano, even though the latter’s killer acted in
conspiracy with the former. The conspiracy was to kill
Rafael only and no one else. Nothing was said or
agreed upon about the members of Rafael's family.
Their target was solely Rafael.
IN OTHER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1612 [ANTI- FENCING
LAW].
One who knowingly profits or assists the principal to
profit by the effects of robbery or theft (i.e. a fence) is
not just an accessory to the crime, but principally
liable for fencing. PD 1612 has, therefore, modified
Art. 19 of the RPC.
Page 78 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Mere possession
Mere possession of any article of value which has
been the subject of robbery or theft brings about the
presumption of “fencing”.
Penalty
The penalty is higher than that of a mere accessory to
the crime of robbery or theft.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 532 [ANTIPIRACY AND
HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF 1974].
Section 4 of PD 532 provides that any person who
knowingly and in any manner acquires or receives
property taken by such pirates or brigands or in any
manner derives benefit therefrom, shall be
considered as an accomplice of the principal
offenders, not just as an accessory, in accordance
with the Rules prescribed by the Revised Penal Code.
Presumption of knowledge
It shall be presumed that any person who does any
acts provided in this section has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.
HUMAN SECURITY ACT [R.A. NO. 9372].
Sec. 4. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism – Persons
who conspire to commit the crime of terrorism shall
suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons come
to an agreement concerning the commission of the
crime of terrorism as defined in Section 3 hereof and
decide to commit the same.
Sec. 5. Accomplice – Any person who, not being a
principal under Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code
or a conspirator as defined in Section 4 hereof,
cooperates in the execution of either the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by
previous or simultaneous acts shall suffer the penalty
of from seventeen (17) years, four months one day to
twenty (20) years of imprisonment.
Sec. 6. Accessory - Any person who, having
knowledge of the commission of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, and
without having participated therein, either as
principal or accomplice under Articles 17 and 18 of the
Revised Penal Code, takes part subsequent to its
commission in any of the following manner: (a) by
profiting himself or assisting the offender to profit by
the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or
destroying the body of the crime, or the effects, or
instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery;
(c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime, falsity and with intent to affect the course or
shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day outcome of the investigation of, or official
to twelve (12) years of imprisonment. proceedings in criminal cases;
7.   Soliciting, accepting, or agreeing to accept any
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties benefit in consideration of abstaining from,
prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon discontinuing, or impeding the prosecution of a
those who are such with respect to their spouses, criminal offender;
ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and 8.   Threatening directly or indirectly another with
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity the infliction of any wrong upon his person,
within the same degrees, with the single exception of honor or property or that of any immediate
accessories falling within the provisions of member or members of his family in order to
subparagraph (a). prevent such person from appearing in the
investigation of, or official proceedings in,
DECREE PENALIZING OBSTRUCTION OF criminal cases, or imposing a condition, whether
APPREHENSION AND PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a person
OFFENDERS [P.D. 1829] from appearing in the investigation of, or in
official proceedings in criminal cases;
What is imposed 9.   Giving a false or fabricated information to
Upon any person who knowingly or willfully mislead or prevent the law enforcement agencies
obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the from apprehending the offender or from
apprehension of suspects and the investigation and protecting the life or property of the victim; or
prosecution of criminal cases. fabricating information from the data gathered
1.   Prision correccional in its maximum period, or in confidence by investigating authorities for
2.   Fine ranging from PhP 1,000 – 6,000, or purposes of background information and not for
3.   Both publication and publishing or disseminating the
same to mislead the investigator or the court.
Punishable acts [Section 1]
1.   Preventing witnesses from testifying in any Accessory under RPC and principal by obstruction
criminal proceeding or from reporting the of justice, distinguished
commission of any offense or the identity of any
offender/s by means of bribery, Law Penalizing
misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or Revised Penal Code “Obstruction of Justice”
threats; (PD 1829)
2.   Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing No specification of the
Specifies the crimes that
any paper, record, document, or object with crime to be committed by
should be committed in
intent to impair its veracity, authenticity, the offender in order that
case a civilian aids in the
legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence criminal liability be
escape
in any investigation of or official proceedings in incurred
criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation The offender is the The offender need not
of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases; principal or must be even be the principal or
3.   Harboring or concealing, or facilitating the convicted of the crime need not be convicted of
escape of, any persons he knows, or has charged the crime charged
reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has An offender of any crime
committed any offense under existing penal The one who harbored is no longer an accessory
laws in order to prevent his arrest, prosecution or concealed an but is simply an offender
and conviction; offender is still an without regard to the
4.   Publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of accessory crime of the person
concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the assisted to escape
execution of a judgment, or concealing his true
name and other personal circumstances for the c.   Multiple offenders
same purpose or purposes; The four forms of repetition:
5.   Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by 1.   recidivism (par. 9, Art. 14)
obstructing the service of process or court orders 2.   reiteracion (par. 10, Art. 14)
or disturbing proceedings in the fiscals’ offices, in 3.   multi-recidivism/habitual delinquency (par. 5,
Tanodbayan, or in the courts; Art. 62)
6.   Making, presenting or using any record, 4.   quasi-recidivism (Art. 160)
document, paper or object with knowledge of its

Page 79 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

5.   Kinds of aggravating circumstance.

The first two are generic aggravating circumstances.
The third one is extraordinary aggravating; the fourth
one; special aggravating.

The special aggravating circumstance of quasi-

recidivism cannot be offset by any ordinary mitigating
circumstance.

Recidivism/ Quasi- Habitual

Habituality/Reiteracion/
Reincindencia; Recidivism; Delinquency;
Repetition; Art. 14 (10)
Art. 14 (9) Art. 160 Art. 62 (5)
Crimes Sufficient at the tme of Necessary that the offender Before serving Specified felonies:
committed the trial that the offender shall have served out his or while serving less serious or serious
has been previously sentence for the first sentence, the physical injuries
convicted by final offense offender robbery
judgment for another commits a theft
crime embraced in the felony (NOT a estafa
same title of the Code on crime) falsification
the date of his trial
Period of time No period of time Before serving Within 10 years from
the crimes are or while serving his last release or
committed sentence conviction
Number of The second conviction for The previous and Offender Guilty the third time or
crimes an offense embraced in subsequent offenses must commits a oftener
committed the same title of RPC NOT be embraced in the felony
same title of the RPC
Their effects If not offset by any Not always an aggravating Imposes the An additional penalty
mitigating circumstance, circumstance maximum of shall be imposed
increase the penalty only the penalty for
to the maximum the new
offense, and
cannot be offset
by any
mitigating
circumstance

Page 80 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
RECIDIVISM
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances –The following
are aggravating circumstances:
xxx
9. That the accused is a recidivist.
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one
crime, shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the same
title of this Code.
Requisites
1.   Offender is on trial for a felony
2.   He was previously convicted by final judgment of
another crime
a.   Both the first and second felonies are
embraced in the same title of the RPC
b.   Offender is convicted of the new offense
Offender is on trial for an offense
What is controlling is the time of trial, not the time of
commission of the crime. [Reyes]
Coverage
It is meant to include everything that is done in the
course of the trial, from arraignment until after
sentence is announced by the judge in open court.
He was previously convicted
It is sufficient that the succeeding offense be
committed after the commission of the preceding
offense provided that at the time of his trial for the
second offense, the accused had already been
convicted of the first offense.
Judgments handed on the same day
If both offenses were committed on the same date,
they shall be considered as only one, hence, they
cannot be separately counted in order to constitute
recidivism. Also, judgments of conviction handed
down on the same day shall be considered as only
one conviction.
Proof
To prove recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same
in the information and to attach thereto certified copy
of the sentences rendered against the accused.
People v. Molina, G.R. Nos. 14777-78 (2000)
Held: To prove recidivism, it is necessary to allege
the same in the information and to attach thereto
certified copies of the sentences rendered against
the accused. Nonetheless, the trial court may still
give such AC credence if the accused does not object
to the presentation.
People v. Dacillo, G.R. No. 149368 (2004)
Page 81 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Held: The Court finds that the trial court erred in
imposing the death penalty on the ground that
appellant admitted during re-cross examination that
he had a prior conviction for the death of his former
live-in partner. The aggravating circumstance of
recidivism was not alleged in the information and
therefore cannot be appreciated against appellant.
When final judgment
1.   After lapse of period for perfecting appeal;
2.   When sentence has been partially or totally
served;
3.   Accused waived in writing his right to appeal;
4.   Accused has applied for probation.
Effect of pardon on first felony
Even if the accused was granted a pardon for the first
offense, but he commits another felony embraced in
the same title of the Code, the first conviction is still
counted to make him a recidivist, since pardon does
not obliterate the fact of his prior conviction.
Effect of amnesty on first felony
However, if a person was granted an amnesty, and
thereafter he is convicted of another crime of the
same class as the former crimes, his former
conviction would not be aggravating. According to
Art. 89, amnesty extinguishes not only the penalty
but also its effects.
No prescription
No matter how long ago the offender was convicted,
if he is subsequently convicted of a crime embraced
in the same title of the Revised Penal Code, it is taken
into account as aggravating in imposing the penalty.
Should be felonies
In recidivism, the crimes committed should be
felonies. There is no recidivism if the crime committed
is a violation of a special law.
HABITUALITY (REITERACION)
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. –The following
are aggravating circumstances:
xxx
10. That the offender has been previously punished by
an offense to which the law attaches an equal or
greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.
Requisites
1.   Accused is on trial for an offense
2.   He previously served sentence
a.   for another offense to which the law attaches
an equal or greater penalty, OR for two or
more crimes to which it attaches lighter
penalty than that for the new offense
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b.   He is convicted of the new offense character that led them to commit the previous
crime.
For another offense with equal or greater penalty
attached Habitual delinquency applies at any stage of the
Penalty attached to offense, not the one actually execution (attempt, frustration, or consummation)
imposed. because subjectively, the offender reveals the same
degree of depravity or perversity as the one who
Convicted of new offense commits a consummated crime.
If the second offense or crime is punishable under a
special law, it cannot be considered under reiteracion Purpose
because Articles 13, 14, and 15 of the RPC are not To render more effective social defense and the
applicable to special law crimes. reformation of habitual delinquents [Reyes, quoting
People v. Abuyen (G.R. No. L-30664, 1929)]. The
Par. 9 Recidivism Par. 10 Reiteracion imposition of such additional penalties is mandatory
It is enough that a final It is necessary that the and is not discretionary.
judgment has been offender shall have
rendered in the first served out his sentence Not ex post facto law
offense. for the first offense. The imposition of the additional penalty on habitual
The previous and delinquents are CONSTITUTIONAL because such law
Requires that the is neither an EX POST FACTO LAW nor an additional
subsequent offenses
offenses be included in punishment for future crimes. It is simply a
must not be embraced in
the same title of the punishment on future crimes on account of the
the same title of the
Code criminal propensities of the accused.
Code
Always to be taken into
consideration in fixing Not always an Art. 62 par. 5 Habitual
Art. 14, Par. 9 Recidivism
the penalty to be aggravating Delinquency
imposed upon the circumstance Two convictions are At least three
accused enough convictions are required
Rationale is the proven Rationale is the proven The crimes are limited
tendency to commit a resistance to and specified to:
similar offense rehabilitation a. serious physical
The crimes are not injuries,
If the same set of facts constitutes recidivism and specified; it is enough that b. less serious physical
reiteracion, the liability of the accused should be they may be embraced injuries,
aggravated by recidivism which can be easily proven. under the same title of the c. robbery,
Revised Penal Code d. theft,
MULTI-RECIDIVISM/HABITUAL DELIQUENCY e. estafa or swindling
and
Requisites f. falsification
1.   Offender had been convicted of any of the crimes There is a time limit of
of [T-FIRE]: theft; falsification; serious or less not more than 10 years
serious physical injuries; robbery; estafa. between every
2.   After that conviction or after serving his There is no time limit conviction computed
sentence, he again committed, and, within 10 between the first from the first conviction
years from his release or first conviction, he was conviction and the or release from
again convicted of any of the said crimes for the subsequent conviction. punishment thereof to
second time Recidivism is conviction computed
3.   After his conviction of, or after serving sentence imprescriptible. from the second
for, the second offense, he again committed, conviction or release
and, within 10 years from his last release or last therefrom to the third
conviction, he was again convicted of any of said conviction and so on
offenses, the third time or oftener. [Art. 62, RPC]
Recidivism inherent in habitual delinquency
Coverage A habitual delinquent is necessarily a recidivist, and
It applies to all participants (principals, accomplices, in imposing the principal penalty upon him the
accessories) because it reveals persistence in them of aggravating circumstance of recidivism has to be
the inclination to wrongdoing and of the perversity of taken into account. However, for the purpose of fixing
the additional penalty, recidivism cannot be taken as

Page 82 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

an aggravating circumstance for the reason that it is

inherent in habitual delinquency. [People v. Tolentino, QUASI-RECIDIVISM
G.R. No. L-48740 (1942)]
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during service
Computation to check whether within “10 years.” of penalty imposed for another offense; Penalty. –
The starting date is either the conviction OR release Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62, any
of the accused in his previous crime; the end date is person who shall commit a felony after having been
his conviction in the subsequent crime. convicted by final judgment, before beginning to
serve such sentence, or while serving the same, shall
Must be after previous conviction be punished by the maximum period of the penalty
Subsequent crime must be committed AFTER prescribed by law for the new felony.
CONVICTION of former crime.
Requisites
How to count the convictions [Reyes] 1.   That the offender was already convicted by final
1.   Convictions on the same day are counted as one. judgment of one offense.
2.   Crimes committed on the same date, although 2.   That he committed a new felony before
convictions are on different dates, are counted as beginning to serve such sentence or while
one. serving the same.
3.   Crime committed during the minority of the
offender is not considered. Offender was already convicted by final judgment
4.   Commission of any of the crime need not be of one offense
consummated. The second crime must be a felony (punished by the
RPC and not by special law/s) but the first crime for
Information which the offender is serving sentence need not be a
Must contain dates for: (1) commission of previous felony. [Reyes]
crimes; (2) last conviction or release; (3) other
previous convictions or releases. Reiteracion and quasi-recidivism, not possible to
be simultaneous
Plea of guilty Since reiteracion provides that the accused has duly
Plea of guilty which fails to allege the DATES of the served the sentence for previous conviction/s, or is
commission of previous offences, convictions, and of legally considered to have done so, quasi-recidivism
releases is not an admission of habitual delinquency, cannot at the same time constitute reiteracion, hence
but recidivism. the latter cannot apply to a quasi-recidivist.
Failure to object Proof
Failure to object admission of decision showing dates Quasi-recidivism, like recidivism and reiteracion,
of previous convictions cures the failure to allege said necessitates the presentation of a certified copy of
dates in the information. the sentence convicting an accused. The fact that
appellant was an inmate of a penal colony does not
Penalties prove that final judgment had been rendered against
Nth Conviction Penalty Plus him. [People v. Gaorana, G.r. Nos. 109138-39 (1998)]
prision
correccional in its
3rd medium and
maximum
periods
prision mayor in
Prescribed
4th its minimum and
penalty on the
medium periods
last crime
prision mayor in
its maximum
5th and period to
succeeding reclusion
temporal in its
minimum period
Not exceed 30 years. In no case shall the total of the
2 penalties imposed upon the offender exceed 30
years.

Page 83 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
  PENALTIES
Penalty
The suffering that is inflicted by the State for the
transgression of a law.
Juridical condition
1.   Must be PRODUCTIVE OF SUFFERING, without
affecting the integrity of the human personality.
2.   Must be COMMENSURATE to the offense –
different crimes must be punished with different
penalties.
3.   Must be PERSONAL – no one should be punished
for the crime of another.
4.   Must be LEGAL – it is the consequence of a
judgment according to law.
5.   Must be CERTAIN – no one may escape its
effects.
6.   Must be EQUAL for all.
7.   Must be CORRECTIONAL.
Must be personal and definite. Penalties must be
individual, i.e., not shared, and definite, e.g.,
imprisonment, fine, imprisonment and fine,
imprisonment or fine; but not imprisonment and/or
fine.
1.   Principles
a.   Threefold Purpose
1.   RETRIBUTION OR EXPIATION. The penalty is
commensurate with the gravity of the offense. It
permits society to exact proportionate revenge,
and the offender to atone for his wrongs.
2.   CORRECTION OR REFORMATION. As shown by
the rules which regulate the execution of the
penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty.
3.   SOCIAL DEFENSE. As shown by its inflexible
severity to recidivist and habitual delinquents.
The State has an existence of its own to maintain, a
conscience to assert, and moral principles to be
vindicated. Penal justice must therefore be exercised
by the State in the service and satisfaction of a duty,
and rests primarily on the moral rightfulness of the
punishment inflicted.
b.   Capital Punishment and Death
Penalty
Some pertinent RPC provisions on death penalty.
See also Arts. 81-85, RPC.
Page 84 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 40. Death; Its accessory penalties – The death
penalty, when it is not executed by reason of
commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil
interdiction during thirty years following the date
sentence, unless such accessory penalties have been
expressly remitted in the pardon.
Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not be
imposed – The death penalty shall be imposed in all
cases in which it must be imposed under existing
laws, except in the following cases:
1.   When the guilty person be more than seventy
years of age.
2.   When upon appeal or revision of the case by the
Supreme court, all the members thereof are not
unanimous in their voting as to the propriety of
the imposition of the death penalty. For the
imposition of said penalty or for the confirmation
of a judgment of the inferior court imposing the
death sentence, the Supreme Court shall render
its decision per curiam, which shall be signed by
all justices of said court, unless some member or
members thereof shall have been disqualified
from taking part in the consideration of the case,
in which even the unanimous vote and signature
of only the remaining justices shall be required.
Is death penalty a cruel, degrading, and inhumane
punishment?
People v. Echegaray, G.R. No. 117472 (1997):
Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a
lingering death, but the punishment of death is not
cruel, within the meaning of that word as used in the
constitution. It implies there something inhuman
and barbarous, something more than the mere
extinguishment of life.
Abolition of death penalty
The first two sections of RA 9346 provide:
Sec. 1. – The imposition of the penalty of death is
hereby prohibited. Accordingly, Republic Act No.
Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven (R.A.
No. 8177), otherwise known as the Act Designating
Death by Lethal Injection is hereby repealed.
Republic Act No. Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty-
Nine (R.A. No. 7659), otherwise known as the Death
Penalty Law, and all other laws, executive orders and
decrees, insofar as they impose the death penalty are
hereby repealed or amended accordingly.
Sec. 2. – In lieu of the death penalty, the following
shall be imposed.
a.   the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law
violated makes use of the nomenclature of the
penalties of the Revised Penal Code; or
b.   the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
violated does not make use of the nomenclature
of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code.
Distinguished from the constitutional prohibition
In the constitutional prohibition on death penalty, the
latter is placed in a “suspensive condition” or in a
“state of hibernation.” It is included in the
computation of penalty but not imposed. Unlike the
Constitution, Rep. Act No. 9346 does expressly
stipulate the amendment of all extant laws insofar as
they called for the imposition of the penalty of death.
Henceforth, "death," as utilized in Article 71 of the
Revised Penal Code, shall no longer form part of the
equation in the graduation of penalties. For example,
in the case of appellant, the determination of his
penalty for attempted rape shall be reckoned not
from two degrees lower than death, but two degrees
lower than reclusion perpetua. [People v. Bon, G.R.
No. 166401 (2006)]
Note that the death penalty remains in the Revised
Penal Code. R.A. No. 9346 merely prohibits the
imposition of the death penalty.
Heinous crimes remain “heinous.”
It should be understood that the debarring of the
death penalty through Rep. Act No. 9346 did not
correspondingly declassify those crimes previously
catalogued as "heinous" (in RA 7659). The
amendatory effects of Rep. Act No. 9346 extend only
to the application of the death penalty but not to the
definition or classification of crimes. Accordingly,
Rep. Act No. 9346 does not serve as basis for the
reduction of civil indemnity and other damages that
adhere to heinous crimes. [People v. Bon, supra.]
But see computation of penalty for privileged
mitigating circumstance of minority, under minority as
exempting circumstance.
2.  C lassification
a.   Major Classification
1.   PRINCIPAL PENALTIES. Those expressly
imposed by the court in the judgment of
conviction.
2.   ACCESSORY PENALTIES. Those that are
deemed included in the imposition of the
principal penalties.
3.   SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES. Those imposed in lieu
of principal penalties, i.e., imprisonment in case
of inability to pay the fine.
Principal and accessory penalty, distinguished
Page 85 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
A principal penalty is expressly imposed by the court,
while an accessory penalty is deemed included in the
imposition of the principal penalty.
Either principal or accessory
1.   Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
2.   Perpetual or temporary special disqualification
(e.g., Arts. 226-228, RPC)
3.   Suspension (e.g., Art. 236, RPC)
These may be principal or accessory penalties,
because they are formed in the two general classes.
Art. 58. Additional penalty to be imposed upon
certain accessories –Those accessories falling within
the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of this Code
who should act with abuse of their public functions,
shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute
perpetual disqualification if the principal offender
shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of absolute
temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a
less grave felony.
b.   Other Classifications of
Penalties
1.   According to divisibility
Divisible. (a) Those that have fixed duration. (b)
Those that can be divided into three periods.
Indivisible. Those that have no fixed duration
(e.g., Reclusion perpetua; perpetual absolute or
special disqualification; public censure)
2.   According to subject-matter
Corporal. Death.
Deprivation of freedom. Reclusion, prision,
arresto.
Restriction of freedom. Destierro.
Deprivation of rights. Disqualification,
suspension.
Pecuniary. Fine.
3.   According to gravity
Capital; afflictive; correctional; light. See Arts.
25 and 26.
3.  Duration and Effects
SCALE OF PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
1.   Capital Punishment: Death
2.   Afflictive Penalties (RP, RT, PAD, TAD, PSD,
TSD, PM)
a.   Reclusion perpetua,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b.   Reclusion temporal, a.   Fine

c.   Perpetual or temporary absolute b.   Bond to keep the peace.
disqualification,
d.   Perpetual or temporary special SCALE OF ACCESSORY PENALTIES (PAD, TAD,
disqualification, PSD, TSD, S, CI, I, F, Pay)
e.   Prision mayor. 1.   Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
3.   Correctional Penalties (PC, AM, S, Des) 2.   Perpetual or temporary special disqualification
a.   Prision correccional 3.   Suspension from public office, the right to vote
b.   Arresto mayor and be voted for, the profession or calling
c.   Suspension 4.   Civil interdiction,
d.   Destierro 5.   Indemnification,
4.   Light Penalties (Am,Pc) 6.   Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and
a.   Arresto menor proceeds of the offense,
b.   Public censure 7.   Payment of costs
5.   Penalties Common to the Three Preceding
Classes (F, Bond)

Penalty Duration Effects Accessories

Death (REPEALED) Indivisible
1.   Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case may
Death, when not
be
executed due to
2.   Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
pardon or
which the offender shall suffer even
commutation
though pardoned as to the principal
(REPEALED)
penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon
1.   Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case may
be
20 years & 1
2.   Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
Reclusion perpetua day to 40 years Deprivation of freedom
which the offender shall suffer even
(Indivisible)
though pardoned as to the principal
penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon
1.   Deprivation of public
office, even if by
election
2.   Deprivation of right to
Perpetual absolute
For life vote & be voted for
disqualification (PAD)
3.   Disqualification from
public office held
4.   Loss of retirement
rights
1.   Deprivation of office,
employment,
profession, or calling
Perpetual special
For life affected
disqualification (PSD)
2.   Disqualification from
similar offices or
employments
1.   Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case may
be.
12 years & 1 day
Reclusion temporal Deprivation of freedom 2.   Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
to 20 years
which the offender shall suffer even
though pardoned as to the principal
penalty, unless the same shall have

Page 86 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

been expressly remitted in the pardon.

1.   Temporary Absolute Disqualification
2.   Perpetual Special Disqualification
from the right to suffrage which the
6 years & 1 day
Prision mayor Deprivation of freedom offender shall suffer although
to 12 years
pardoned as to the principal penalty
unless the same shall have been
expressly remitted in the pardon.
1.   Deprivation of public
office, even if by
election
2.   Deprivation of right to
vote & be voted for
Temporary absolute 6 years & 1 day
during sentence
disqualification (TAD) to 12 years
3.   Disqualification from
public office held
during sentence
4.   Loss of retirement
rights
1.   Deprivation of office,
employment,
profession, or calling
Temporary special 6 years & 1 day
affected
disqualification (TSD) to 12 years
2.   Disqualification from
similar offices or
employment
1.   Suspension from public office
2.   Suspension from the right to follow a
profession or calling
6 months & 1
Prision correccional Deprivation of freedom 3.   Perpetual Special Disqualification for
day to 6 years
the right of suffrage, if the duration of
the imprisonment shall exceed 18
months
1.   Public office
6 months & 1
Suspension 2.   Profession or calling
day to 6 years
3.   Suffrage
Prohibition to enter w/in
6 months & 1
Destierro 25-250 km radius from the
day to 6 years
designated place
1.   Suspension of right to hold office
1 month & 1 day
Arresto mayor Deprivation of freedom 2.   Suspension of the right of suffrage
to 6 months
during the term of the sentence
1.   Suspension of right to hold office
1 day to 30
Arresto menor Deprivation of freedom 2.   Suspension of the right of suffrage
days
during the term of the sentence
Public censure
Fine Pecuniary
Bond to keep peace Not imposable. Violates Art. 21, RPC.

Page 87 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
a.   Capital Punishment
See discussion on death penalty.
b.   Afflictive Penalties
1.   RECLUSION PERPETUA
Indivisibility. Reclusion perpetua remains an
indivisible penalty despite the duration provided for
it.
People v. Gatward, G.R. Nos. 119772-73 (1997): In
RA 7659, the penalty of reclusion perpetua is now
accorded a defined duration ranging from twenty
(20) years and one (1) day to forty (40) years, through
the amendment introduced by it to Article 27 of the
Revised Penal Code. This led the trial court to
believe that reclusion perpetua has become a
divisible penalty.
Held: Article 70 of RPC provides that the maximum
period in regard to service of the sentence shall not
exceed 40 years. Under these accepted propositions,
the Court ruled in the motion for clarification in
the Lucas case that Republic Act No. 7659 had
simply restated existing jurisprudence when it
specified the duration of reclusion perpetua at 20
years and 1 day to 40 years.
No need to specify length of imprisonment. In
imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua, it is
unnecessary for the court to specify the length of
imprisonment.
People v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 138261 (2001):
Reclusion perpetua is imprisonment for life but the
person sentenced to suffer it shall be pardoned after
undergoing the penalty for thirty (30) years, unless
by reason of his conduct or some other serious
cause, he shall be considered by the Chief Executive
as unworthy of pardon (Art. 27).
Reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment,
distinguished. [People v. Ballabare, G.R. No. 108871
(1996)]
Cadena perpetua (Life
Reclusion perpetua
imprisonment)
Imposed for serious
Prescribed under the
offenses penalized by
RPC
special laws
No accessory penalties With accessory penalties
Entails imprisonment for
Does not appear to have
at least 30 years after
any definite extent or
which the convict
duration
becomes eligible for
Page 88 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
pardon although the
maximum period shall in
no case exceed 40 years
AM No. 15-08-02-SC, in rel. to sec. 3 of RA No.
9346.
Sec. 3. Persons convicted of offenses punished with
reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be
reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this Act,
shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4103,
otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
as amended.
(1) In cases where the death penalty is not warranted,
there is no need to use the phrase "without eligibility
for parole" to qualify the penalty of reclusion
perpetua; it is understood that convicted persons
penalized with an indivisible penalty are not
eligible for parole; and
(2) When circumstances are present warranting the
imposition of the death penalty, but this penalty is
not imposed because of R.A. 9346, the qualification
of "without eligibility for parole" shall be used to
qualify reclusion perpetua in order to emphasize that
the accused should have been sentenced to suffer the
death penalty had it not been for R.A. No. 9346.
People v. Buca, G.R. No. 209587 (2015): The CA, in
the dispositive portion of its Decision, sentenced
accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, without the benefit of parole. A.M. No. 15-
08-02-SC31 is instructive on the matter of using the
phrase without eligibility for parole to qualify
indivisible penalties. In the instant case, since the
accused-appellant committed simple rape, a crime
penalized by reclusion perpetua only, the dispositive
portion of this decision should plainly state that he is
sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua without any qualification.
2.   RECLUSION TEMPORAL
3.   PRISION MAYOR
c.   Correctional Penalties
1.   PRISION CORRECTIONAL
Article 39. Subsidiary Penalty –If the convict has no
property with which to meet the fine mentioned in
paragraph 3 of the next preceding article, he shall be
subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of
one day for each amount equivalent to the highest
minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at
the time of the rendition of judgment of conviction by
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
the trial court, subject to the following rules:
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision
correctional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under
confinement until his fine referred in the preceding
paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term
of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for
more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day
shall be counted against the prisoner.
2.   ARRESTO MAYOR
See Art. 39(1).
3.   DESTIERRO
Destierro applies [Reyes] (F, ICE)
a.   In case of Failure to give bond for good behavior
(Art. 284)
b.   Serious physical Injuries
c.   Penalty of Concubine in concubinage (Art. 334)
d.   Death under Exceptional circumstances (Art.
247)
e.   In cases where after reducing the penalty by one
or more degrees, destierro is the proper penalty
d.   Light Penalties
1.   ARRESTO MENOR
See Art. 39(1).
2.   PUBLIC CENSURE
e.   Penalties Common to
Afflictive, Correctional, and
Light Penalties
1.   FINE
Article 26—Classification of PENALTIES
Afflictive More than 6,000
Correctional 200 to 6,000
Light Below 200
Classification of penalty, not felony
This article merely classifies fine and has nothing to
do with the definition of light felony.
What to consider
The court can fix any amount of the fine within the
limits established by law. It must consider (1) the
mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and more
Page 89 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
particularly, (2) the wealth or means of the culprit.
[Art. 66]
When the law does not fix the minimum of the fine,
the determination of the amount of the fine to be
imposed upon the culprit is left to the sound
discretion of the court, provided it shall not exceed
the maximum authorized by law.
Not divisible
Fines are not divided into three equal portions.
2.   BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE
Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. – No felony
shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by
law prior to its commission.
Cannot be imposed
This bond is not provided as a penalty for any felony
and therefore cannot be imposed by the court.
Not bail bond
Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bond
which is posted for the provisional release of a
person arrested for or accused of a crime.
f.   Measures Not Considered
Penalties
Art. 24
Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are
nor considered penalties. – The following shall not be
considered as penalties:
1.   The arrest and temporary detention of accused
persons, as well as their detention by reason of
insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their
confinement in a hospital.
2.   The commitment of a minor to any of the
institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for the
purposes specified therein.
3.   Suspension from the employment of public office
during the trial or in order to institute
proceedings.
4.   Fines and other corrective measures which, in the
exercise of their administrative disciplinary
powers, superior officials may impose upon their
subordinates.
5.   Deprivation of rights and the reparations which
the civil laws may establish in penal form.
Number 2 is not a penalty because the court does not
impose it in a judgment of conviction. Numbers 3 and
4 are preventive measures. The rest are not penalties
because they are not imposed as a result of judicial
proceedings.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Art. 229, Family Code
Article 229, Family Code. – Unless subsequently
revived by a final judgment, parental authority also
terminates: xxx
(3)   Upon judicial declaration of abandonment of
the child in a case filed for the purpose;
(4)   Upon final judgment of a competent court
divesting the party concerned of parental authority;
xxx
g.   When the Duration of Penalty
Begins
Penalty begins (Art. 28)
1.   (Rule 1) When the offender is in prison—the
duration of temporary penalties is from the day
on which the judgment of conviction becomes
final.
2.   (Rule 2) When the offender is not in prison—the
duration of penalty consisting in deprivation of
liberty, is from the day that the offender is placed
at the disposal of judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty.
3.   (Rule 3) The duration of other penalties—the
duration is from the day on which the offender
commences to serve his sentence.
Rules in cases of temporary penalties
If offender is under detention, as when he is
undergoing preventive imprisonment, Rule No. 1
applies.
If not under detention, because the offender has been
released on bail, Rule No. 3 applies.
Examples of temporary penalties
1.   Temporary absolute disqualification
2.   Temporary special disqualification
3.   Suspension
Rules in cases of deprivation of liberty
When the offender is not in prison, Rule No. 2
applies.
If the offender is undergoing preventive
imprisonment, Rule No. 3 applies but the offender is
entitled to a deduction of full time or 4/5 of the time
of his detention.
Examples of penalties consisting in deprivation of
liberty:
1.   Imprisonment
2.   Destierro
Page 90 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Rules in preventive imprisonment
Art. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted
from term of imprisonment. – Offenders who have
undergone preventive imprisonment shall be credited
in the service of their sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which
they have undergone preventive imprisonment, if the
detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to
abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
1.   When they are recidivists or have been convicted
previously twice or more times of any crime; and
2.   When upon being summoned for the execution of
their sentence they have failed to surrender
voluntarily.
If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by
the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted
prisoners, he shall be credited in the service of his
sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he
has undergone preventive imprisonment. (As
amended by Republic Act 6127, June 17, 1970).
Whenever an accused has undergone preventive
imprisonment for a period equal to or more than the
possible maximum imprisonment of the offense
charged to which he may be sentenced and his case
is not yet terminated, he shall be released
immediately without prejudice to the continuation of
the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the
same is under review. In case the maximum penalty
to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro,
he shall be released after thirty (30) days of
preventive imprisonment. (As amended by E.O. No.
214, July 10, 1988).
When preventive imprisonment applies
The accused undergoes preventive imprisonment
when the offense charged is nonbailable, or even if
bailable, he cannot furnish the required bail.
Immediate release
The convict is to be released immediately if the
penalty imposed after trial is less than the full time
or four-fifths of the time of the preventive
imprisonment.
Look at maximum possible penalty
The accused shall be released immediately
whenever he has undergone preventive
imprisonment for a period equal to or more than the
possible maximum imprisonment for the offense
charged.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

4.  A pplication An initial penalty

as a general
prescription for
a.   Indeterminate Sentence Law For homicide:
Prescribed the felonies
reclusión
(RA 4103, as Amended) penalty defined therein
temporal
which consists of
Purpose a range of period
To uplift and redeem valuable human material and of time.
prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of For homicide
liberty and economic usefulness. with one
ordinary
The law is intended to favor the defendant, Penalty after the aggravating
particularly to shorten his term of imprisonment, attending or circumstance
depending upon his behavior and his physical, Imposable modifying and no
mental and moral record as a prisoner, to be penalty circumstances mitigating
determined by the Board of Indeterminate Sentence. have been circumstances:
appreciated reclusion
It is necessary to consider the criminal first as an temporal penalty
individual, and second as a member of the society. in its maximum
period
Excluded from coverage A single fixed
17 years, 4
The following are excluded from coverage: (PH Penalty penalty (also
months and 1
LENDS TRES TV) actually called a straight
day of reclusión
1.   Those convicted of piracy [P] imposed penalty) chosen
temporal
2.   Those who are habitual delinquents (but by the court
applies to recidivists) [H]
3.   Those convicted of offenses punished with death Maximum and minimum terms. [People v.
penalty or life imprisonment [L] Temporada, supra]
4.   Those who shall have escaped from 1.   The maximum penalty is the penalty actually
confinement or evaded service of sentence [E] imposed
5.   Those whose maximum term of imprisonment 2.   The minimum penalty is the penalty next lower
does not exceed one year [N] than the prescribed penalty
6.   Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or
suspension [DS] People v. Saley, G.R. No. 121179 (1998): The fact
7.   Those convicted of misprision of treason, that the amounts involved in the instant case of
rebellion, sedition or espionage [TRES] estafa exceed P22,000.00 should not be considered
8.   Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or in the initial determination of the indeterminate
proposal to commit treason [T] penalty; instead, the matter should be so taken as
9.   Those who violated the terms of conditional analogous to modifying circumstances in the
pardon granted to them by the Chief Executive imposition of the maximum term of the full
[V] indeterminate sentence. This interpretation of the
10.   Those who, upon the approval of the law, had law accords with the rule that penal laws should be
been sentenced by final judgment construed in favor of the accused. Since the penalty
prescribed by law for the estafa charge against
On those who escaped confinement accused-appellant is prision correccional maximum
A minor who escaped from confinement in the to prision mayor minimum, the penalty next lower
reformatory is entitled to the benefits of the ISL would then be prision correccional minimum to
because his confinement is not considered medium. Thus, the minimum term of the
imprisonment. indeterminate sentence should be anywhere within
six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and
See reclusion perpetua and A.M. No. 15-08-02-SC two (2) months.

APPLICATION OF ISL Why “indeterminate sentence”

After serving the minimum, the convict may be
Some definitions [People v. Temporada, G.R. No. released on parole, OR if he is not fitted for release,
173473 (2008)] he shall continue serving his sentence until the end
of the maximum.

Page 91 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
For special laws
If the crime is a violation of a special law, ISL merely
requires that the maximum term thereof shall not
exceed the maximum fixed by the special law while
the minimum shall not be less than the minimum
prescribed therein.
However, where the penalty in the special law
adopts the technical nomenclature and signification
of the penalties under the Revised Penal Code
(RPC), such as “prision mayor”, “prision correccional
maximum”, etc., the ascertainment of the
indeterminate sentence will be based on the rule
intended for those crimes punishable under the
RPC.
Imbo v. People, G.R. No. 206513 (2015)
Held: For an offense punished by the Code, the
minimum shall be within the range of the penalty
next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the
offense. If the offense is punished by any other law,
the minimum shall not be less than the minimum
specified by said law. The correct application of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law has long been clarified
in People v. Simon which ruled that the underscored
portion of Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law, i.e. the "offense is punished by any other law,"
indubitably refers to an offense under a special law
where the penalty imposed was not taken from
and is without reference to the RPC.
CONDITIONS FOR PAROLE
Sec. 6, RA 4103. Every prisoner released from
confinement on parole by virtue of this Act shall, at
such times and in such manner as may be required by
the conditions of his parole, as may be designated by
the said Board for such purpose, report personally to
such government officials or other parole officers
hereafter appointed by the Board of Indeterminate
Sentence for a period of surveillance equivalent to
the remaining portion of the maximum sentence
imposed upon him or until final release and
discharge by the Board of Indeterminate Sentence as
herein provided. The officials so designated shall
keep such records and make such reports and
perform such other duties hereunder as may be
required by said Board. The limits of residence of
such paroled prisoner during his parole may be fixed
and from time to time changed by the said Board in
its discretion. If during the period of surveillance such
paroled prisoner shall show himself to be a law-
abiding citizen and shall not violate any of the laws of
the Philippine Islands, the Board of Indeterminate
Sentence may issue a final certificate of release in his
favor, which shall entitle him to final release and
discharge.
Page 92 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Sec. 8, RA 4103. Whenever any prisoner released on
parole by virtue of this Act shall, during the period of
surveillance, violate any of the conditions of his
parole, the Board of Indeterminate Sentence 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 prisoner so re-arrested shall
serve the remaining unexpired portion of the
maximum sentence for which he was originally
committed to prison, unless the Board of
Indeterminate Sentence shall, in its discretion, grant
a new parole to the said prisoner.
b.   Three-Fold Rule
Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. – When the
culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall
serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following rules
shall be observed:
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their
respective severity shall be followed so that they may
be executed successively or as nearly as may be
possible, should a pardon have been granted as to
the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should they
have been served out.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next
preceding paragraph the respective severity of the
penalties shall be determined in accordance with the
following scale:
1. Death,
2. Reclusion perpetua,
3. Reclusion temporal,
4. Prision mayor,
5. Prision correccional,
6. Arresto mayor,
7. Arresto menor,
8. Destierro,
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
10 Temporal absolute disqualification.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a
profession or calling, and
12. Public censure.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next
preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's
sentence shall not be more than three-fold the
length of time corresponding to the most severe of
the penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty
to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the
sum total of those imposed equals the same
maximum period.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty
years.
In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of
perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be
computed at thirty years.
Simultaneous service
1.   When the culprit has to serve 2 or more
penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if
the nature of the penalties will so permit.
2.   Otherwise, the order of their respective severity
shall be followed.
What can be simultaneously served with one
another [Ka-DDS Bond Fine in CCP]
1.   Perpetual absolute Disqualification
2.   Perpetual special Disqualification
3.   Temporary absolute Disqualification
4.   Temporary special Disqualification
5.   Destierro
6.   Suspension
7.   Bond to keep the peace and Fine
8.   Civil interdiction
9.   Confiscation and payment of costs
10.   Public censure
Simultaneous with imprisonment
All of the above can be served simultaneously with
imprisonment, except destierro.
Deprivation of liberty
Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty cannot
be served simultaneously by reason of the nature of
such penalties. [In re: Pete Lagran, G.R. No. 14770
(2001)]
“The most severe of penalties”
The phrase “the most severe of the penalties”
includes equal penalties.
Not “imposition of penalty,” but “service”
Court must impose all the penalties for all the crimes
of which the accused is found guilty, but in the service
of the same, they shall not exceed three times the
most severe and shall not exceed 40 years. [Mejorada
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-51065-72 (1987)
c.   Subsidiary Imprisonment
Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment – In
case the property of the offender should not be
sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities, the
same shall be met in the following order:
1. The reparation of the damage caused.
Page 93 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings.
Art. 39. Subsidiary Penalty. – If the convict has no
property with which to meet the fine mentioned in
paragraph 3 of the next preceding article, he shall be
subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of
one day for each amount equivalent to the highest
minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at
the time of the rendition of judgment of conviction by
the trial court, subject to the following rules:
1.   If the principal penalty imposed be prision
correctional or arresto and fine, he shall remain
under confinement until his fine referred in the
preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-
third of the term of the sentence, and in no case
shall it continue for more than one year, and no
fraction or part of a day shall be counted against
the prisoner.
2.   When the principal penalty imposed be only a
fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been
prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and
shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a fight felony.
3.   When the principal penalty imposed is higher
than prision correctional, no subsidiary
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit.
4.   If the principal penalty imposed is not to be
executed by confinement in a penal institution,
but such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict,
during the period of time established in the
preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same
deprivations as those of which the principal
penalty consists.
5.   The subsidiary personal liability which the
convict may have suffered by reason of his
insolvency shall not relieve him from the fine in
case his financial circumstances should
improve."
Subsidiary penalty
It is personal liability to be suffered by the convict
who has no property with which to meet the fine at
the rate of one day for each amount equivalent to the
highest minimum wage rate prevailing in the
Philippines at the time of the rendition of judgment of
conviction by the trial court, subject to the rules
provided for in Article 39.
When not in judgment of conviction
An accused cannot be made to undergo subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency to pay the fine
imposed upon him when the subsidiary imprisonment
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

is not imposed in the judgment of conviction. [Ramos The DIVISIBLE PENALTIES are:
v. Gonong, G.R. No. L-42010 (1976)] a.   Reclusion temporal
b.   Prision mayor
Not alternative c.   Prision correccional
A convict—who has property (a) not exempt from d.   Arresto mayor
execution and (b) sufficient enough to meet the fine— e.   Destierro
cannot choose to serve the subsidiary penalty. f.   Arresto menor

NOT included in COMPUTATION of the threefold How affected

rule Graduation of penalties by periods considers the
In cases where pecuniary liabilities are applied, follow ordinary aggravating circumstances alleged in the
these steps: Information and the attendant ordinary mitigating
1.   Multiply the highest principal penalty by three. circumstances.
2.   If the result of Step 1 EXCEEDS 6 years, there can
be no subsidiary imprisonment despite the Arts. 50-57, summarized
nonsatisfaction of pecuniary liabilities. Consummated Frustrated Attempted
3.   If the result of Step 1 is 6 years and below, the Principal 0 1 2
culprit has to: Accomplice 1 2 3
a.   Serve the aggregate principal penalties until Accessory 2 3 4
he reaches the ceiling imposed by the
threefold rule. “0” represents the penalty prescribed by law in
b.   Serve the subsidiary imprisonment if he defining a crime, which is to be imposed on the
becomes insolvent. [Bagtas v. Director of PRINCIPAL in a CONSUMMATED OFFENSE, in
Prisons, G.R. No. L-3215 (1949)] accordance with the provisions of Art. 46.

Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in

5.  G raduation of Penalties general. . – The penalty prescribed by law for the
commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the
DEGREES AND PENALTIES, DISTINGUISHED principals in the commission of such felony.
Degree Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony
The whole of the penalty prescribed by the law, the is general terms, it shall be understood as
“next lower” as computed through art. 61, or one unit applicable to the consummated felony.
of the penalties enumerated in the graduated scales
provided for in Art. 71.
The other figures represent the degrees to which the
penalty must be lowered, according to the stage of
How affected
execution and extent of participation of the accused.
Graduation of penalties by degrees considers the
following:
Exceptions: Arts. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases
a.   Stages of execution (consummated, frustrated,
where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for
attempted)
frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed
b.   Extent of participation (principal, accomplice,
upon accomplices or accessories. (Art. 60)
accessory)
c.   Privileged mitigating circumstances alleged in
Penalty imposed upon an accomplice.
the Information
a.   The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers
d.   Qualifying circumstances alleged in the
and any person who, by abuse of authority or
Information
confidential relationship, shall cooperate as
accomplices in the crimes of rape, acts of
Period
lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of minors,
The one-third portion of a divisible penalty, called
white slave trade or abduction (Art. 346)
either minimum, medium, or maximum.
b.   One who furnished the place for the perpetration
of the crime of slight illegal detention (Art. 268)
Indivisible and divisible penalties
The INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES are:
Penalty imposed upon an accessory.
a.   Death
a.   When accessory is punished as principal:
b.   Reclusion perpetua
c.   Public censure •   Knowingly concealing certain evil practices
enumerated in Art. 142

Page 94 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

•   Obstruction of justice — See discussion under felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and
accomplices. upon accomplices and accessories.
b.   When accessories are punished with a penalty
one degree lower: Paragraphs 1 to 3.
•   Knowingly using counterfeited seal or forged The next lower
signature or stamp of the President (Art. Scenario
degree is
162). The penalty that
When the penalty
•   Illegal possession and use of a false treasury follows the single
or bank note (Art. 168). Art. 61(1) is single and
and indivisible
indivisible
•   Using falsified document (Art. 173 par.3) penalty in art. 71
•   Using falsified dispatch (Art. 173 par. 2) e.g.
reclusion
reclusion temporal
perpetua
Defining “next lower” by Art. 61 When the penalty
The penalty that
Art. 61. Rules for graduating penalties. – For the is composed of
Art. 61(2) follows the lesser of
purpose of graduating the penalties which, according two indivisible
the two in art. 71
to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this penalties
Code, are to be imposed upon persons guilty as reclusion
principals of any frustrated or attempted felony, or as e.g. perpetua to reclusion temporal
accomplices or accessories, the following rules shall death
be observed: When the penalty
The penalty
1.   When the penalty prescribed for the felony is is composed of
immediately
single and indivisible, the penalty next lower in one or more
Art. 61(2) following the
degrees shall be that immediately following that divisible penalties
lesser of the divisible
indivisible penalty in the respective graduated to be imposed to
penalties in art. 71
scale prescribed in Article 71 of this Code. their full extent
2.   When the penalty prescribed for the crime is prision
composed of two indivisible penalties, or of one e.g. correccional to arresto mayor
or more divisible penalties to be impose to their prision mayor
full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall The MEDIUM and
When the penalty
be that immediately following the lesser of the MINIMUM period of
is composed of
penalties prescribed in the respective graduated the
two indivisible
scale. divisible penalty and
Art. 61(3) penalties and the
3.   When the penalty prescribed for the crime is the MAXIMUM of
maximum period
composed of one or two indivisible penalties and that
of a divisible
the maximum period of another divisible penalty, immediately
penalty
the penalty next lower in degree shall be following penalty
composed of the medium and minimum periods reclusion prision mayor in its
of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum temporal in its maximum to
periods of the proper divisible penalty and the e.g.
MAXIMUM period reclusion temporal
maximum period of that immediately following to death in its medium
in said respective graduated scale. The MEDIUM and
4.   when the penalty prescribed for the crime is When the penalty
MINIMUM period of
composed of several periods, corresponding to is composed of
the
different divisible penalties, the penalty next one indivisible
divisible penalty and
lower in degree shall be composed of the period Art. 61(3) penalty and the
the MAXIMUM of
immediately following the minimum prescribed maximum period
that
and of the two next following, which shall be of a divisible
immediately
taken from the penalty prescribed, if possible; penalty
following penalty
otherwise from the penalty immediately reclusion
following in the above mentioned respective prision mayor in its
temporal in its
graduated scale. maximum to
e.g. MAXIMUM period
5.   When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in reclusion temporal
to reclusion
some manner not especially provided for in the in its medium
perpetua
four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by
analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties
upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated

Page 95 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Pars. 4 and 5 may vote in that exercise, subject to the provisions of

The rules prescribed in pars. 4 and 5 of Art. 61 may be
simplified as follows:
a.   If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
3 periods, corresponding to different divisible
penalties, the penalty next lower in degree is the
penalty consisting in the 3 periods down in the
scale.
b.   If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
2 periods, the penalty next lower in degree is the
penalty consisting in 2 periods down in the scale.
c.   If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
only 1 period, the penalty next lower in degree is
the next period down in the scale.
Minimum of ISL
The rules provided for in Art. 61 should also apply in
determining the MINIMUM of the indeterminate
penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The
MINIMUM of the indeterminate penalty is within the
range of the penalty next lower than that prescribed
by the RPC for the offense.
Privileged mitigating circumstance
Those rules also apply in lowering the penalty by one
or two degrees by reason of the presence of privileged
mitigating circumstance (Arts. 68 and 69), or when
the penalty is divisible and there are two or more
mitigating circumstances (generic) and no
aggravating circumstance (Art. 64).
6.  A ccessory Penalties
a.   Perpetual or Temporary
Absolute Disqualification
Effects
1.   Deprivation of any public office or employment of
offender;
2.   Deprivation of the right to vote in any election or
to be voted upon;
3.   Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension.
pertinent election laws at the time.
b.   Perpetual or Temporary
Special Disqualification
EFFECTS
For public office, profession or calling
1.   Deprivation of the office, employment, profession
or calling affected;
2.   Disqualification for holding similar offices or
employments during the period of
disqualification.
For the exercise of right to suffrage
1.   Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in
an office;
2.   Cannot hold any public office during the period
of disqualification. (Art. 31).
Notes:
1.   The penalty for disqualification if imposed as an
accessory penalty is imposed for PROTECTION
and NOT for the withholding of a privilege.
2.   If temporary disqualification or suspension is
imposed as an accessory penalty, the duration is
the same as that of the principal penalty.
c.   Suspension from Public Office,
the Right to Vote and be Voted
for, the Right to Practice a
Profession or Calling
Effects
1.   Disqualification from holding such office or the
exercise of such profession or right of suffrage
during the term of the sentence;
2.   Cannot hold another office having similar
functions during the period of suspension. (Art.
32).

Duration d.   Civil Interdiction

1.   Perpetual absolute disqualification is effective
during the lifetime of the convict and even after
the service of the sentence.
2.   Temporary absolute disqualification lasts during
the term of the sentence except (1) deprivation of
the public office or employment; and (2) loss of
all rights to retirement pay or other pension for
any office formerly held. (See Art. 30, par. 3).
Exclusion
A plebiscite is not mentioned or contemplated in the
deprivation of the right to vote; hence, the offender
EFFECTS
Deprivation of the following rights:
1.   Parental authority
2.   Guardianship over the ward
3.   Marital authority
4.   Right to manage property and to dispose of the
same by acts inter vivos. (Note: The convict can
still dispose his property mortis causa).

Page 96 of 296
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
From the New Civil Code
Art. 1323, CC. – An offer becomes ineffective upon
the death, civil interdiction, insanity, or insolvency of
either party before acceptance is conveyed.
Art. 1830, CC. – Dissolution [of partnership] is
caused:
Xxx (7) By the civil interdiction of any partner; xxx
Art. 1860, CC. – The retirement, death, insolvency,
insanity or civil interdiction of a general partner
dissolves the partnership, unless the business is
continued by the remaining general partners:
1.   Under a right so to do stated in the certificate, or
2.   With the consent of all members.
Art. 1919, CC.. – Agency is extinguished:
Xxx (3) By the death, civil interdiction, insanity or
insolvency of the principal or of the agent; xxx
Note: Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty to the
following principal penalties:
1.   Death if commuted to life imprisonment;
2.   Reclusion perpetua
3.   Reclusion temporal
e.   Indemnification or
Confiscation of Instruments or
Proceeds of the Offense
Effects
Forfeiture in favor of the Government of the proceeds
of the crime and the instruments or tools with which
it was committed.
Notes:
1.   This is included in every penalty for the
commission of the crime. The confiscation is in
favor of the government.
2.   Property of a third person not liable for the
offense is not subject to confiscation.
3.   If the trial court did not order any confiscation of
the proceeds of the crime, the government
cannot appeal from the confiscation as that
would increase the penalty already imposed.
RA 1379—An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of
the State Any Property Found To Have Been
Unlawfully Acquired By Any Public Officer or
Employee and Providing for the Proceedings
Therefor.
Sec. 1. Definitions. – xxx
(b) "Other legitimately acquired property" means any
real or personal property, money or securities which
Page 97 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the respondent has at any time acquired by
inheritance and the income thereof, or by gift inter
vivos before his becoming a public officer or
employee, or any property (or income thereof) already
pertaining to him when he qualified for public office
or employment, or the fruits and income of the
exclusive property of the respondent's spouse. It shall
not include:
1.   Property unlawfully acquired by the respondent,
but its ownership is concealed by its being
recorded in the name of, or held by, the
respondent's spouse, ascendants, descendants,
relatives, or any other person.
2.   Property unlawfully acquired by the respondent,
but transferred by him to another person or
persons on or after the effectivity of this Act.
3.   Property donated to the respondent during his
incumbency, unless he can prove to the
satisfaction of the court that the donation is
lawful.
Sec. 6. Judgment. If the respondent is unable to show
to the satisfaction of the court that he has lawfully
acquired the property in question, then the court
shall declare such property, forfeited in favor of the
State, and by virtue of such judgment the property
aforesaid shall become property of the
State: Provided, That no judgment shall be rendered
within six months before any general election or
within three months before any special election. The
Court may, in addition, refer this case to the
corresponding Executive Department for
administrative or criminal action, or both.
RA 7080 or the Plunder Law
Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder; Penalties.
– Any public officer who, by himself or in connivance
with members of his family, relatives by affinity or
consanguinity, business associates, subordinates or
other persons, amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-
gotten wealth through a combination or series of
overt or criminal acts as described in Section 1(d)
hereof, in the aggregate amount or total value of at
least Seventy-five million pesos (P75,000,000.00),
shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be
punished by life imprisonment with perpetual
absolute disqualification from holding any public
office. Any person who participated with said public
officer in the commission of plunder shall likewise be
punished. In the imposition of penalties, the degree
of participation and the attendance of mitigating and
extenuating circumstances shall be considered by the
court. The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten
wealth and their interests and other incomes and
assets including the properties and shares of stock
derived from the deposit or investment thereof
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
forfeited in favor of the State. (As amended by RA
7659, approved Dec. 13, 1993.)
Private person cannot be charged with plunder
without public officer
Plunder is defined as a crime committed by a public
officer by himself or in connivance with others.
RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
Sec. 9. Penalties for violations. – (a) Any public
officer or private person committing any of the
unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in Sections 3,
4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished with
imprisonment for not less than six years and one
month nor more than fifteen years, perpetual
disqualification from public office, and confiscation or
forfeiture in favor of the Government of any
prohibited interest and unexplained wealth
manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other
lawful income.
Any complaining party at whose complaint the
criminal prosecution was initiated shall, in case of
conviction of the accused, be entitled to recover in the
criminal action with priority over the forfeiture in
favor of the Government, the amount of money or the
thing he may have given to the accused, or the fair
value of such thing.
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as
amended
Sec. 20. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the Proceeds
or Instruments of the Unlawful Act, Including the
Properties or Proceeds Derived from the Illegal
Trafficking of Dangerous Drugs and/or Precursors
and Essential Chemicals.. – Every penalty imposed
for the unlawful importation, sale, trading,
administration, dispensation, delivery, distribution,
transportation or manufacture of any dangerous drug
and/or controlled precursor and essential chemical,
the cultivation or culture of plants which are sources
of dangerous drugs, and the possession of any
equipment, instrument, apparatus and other
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs including other
laboratory equipment, shall carry with it the
confiscation and forfeiture, in favor of the
government, of all the proceeds and properties
derived from the unlawful act, including, but not
limited to, money and other assets obtained thereby,
and the instruments or tools with which the particular
unlawful act was committed, unless they are the
property of a third person not liable for the unlawful
act, but those which are not of lawful commerce shall
be ordered destroyed without delay pursuant to the
provisions of Section 21 of this Act.
Page 98 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
After conviction in the Regional Trial Court in the
appropriate criminal case filed, the Court shall
immediately schedule a hearing for the confiscation
and forfeiture of all the proceeds of the offense and
all the assets and properties of the accused either
owned or held by him or in the name of some other
persons if the same shall be found to be manifestly
out of proportion to his/her lawful income: Provided,
however, That if the forfeited property is a vehicle, the
same shall be auctioned off not later than five (5)
days upon order of confiscation or forfeiture.
During the pendency of the case in the Regional Trial
Court, no property, or income derived therefrom,
which may be confiscated and forfeited, shall be
disposed, alienated or transferred and the same shall
be in custodia legis and no bond shall be admitted for
the release of the same.
The proceeds of any sale or disposition of any
property confiscated or forfeited under this Section
shall be used to pay all proper expenses incurred in
the proceedings for the confiscation, forfeiture,
custody and maintenance of the property pending
disposition, as well as expenses for publication and
court costs. The proceeds in excess of the above
expenses shall accrue to the Board to be used in its
campaign against illegal drugs.
Sec. 84. Powers and Duties of the PDEA. – The
PDEA shall:
xxx (g) Recommend to the DOJ the forfeiture of
properties and other assets of persons and/or
corporations found to be violating the provisions of
this Act and in accordance with the pertinent
provisions of the Anti-Money-Laundering Act of 2001;
xxx
2016 Revised Implementing Rules and Regulations
of RA No. 9160, or the Anti-Money Laundering Act,
as amended.
B. Asset Forfeiture in Money Laundering Cases. -
Where there is conviction for money laundering, the
court shall issue a judgment of forfeiture in favor of
the Government of the Philippines with respect to the
monetary instrument or property found to be
proceeds of an unlawful activity.
C. Claim on Forfeited Assets. - Where the court has
issued an order of forfeiture of the monetary
instrument or property in a criminal prosecution for
any money laundering offense, the offender or any
other person claiming an interest therein may apply,
by verified petition, for a declaration that the same
legitimately belongs to him and for segregation or
exclusion of the monetary instrument or property
corresponding thereto. The verified petition shall be
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
filed with the court which rendered the judgment of
forfeiture, within fifteen (15) days from the date of the
finality of the order of forfeiture, in default of which
the said order shall become final and executory. This
provision shall also apply in civil forfeiture.
D. Payment in Lieu of Forfeiture. - Where the court
has issued an order of forfeiture of the monetary
instrument or property subject of a money laundering
offense, and said order cannot be enforced because
any particular monetary instrument or property
cannot, with due diligence, be located, or it has been
substantially altered, destroyed, diminished in value
or otherwise rendered worthless by any act or
omission, directly or indirectly, attributable to the
offender, or it has been concealed, removed,
converted, or otherwise transferred to prevent the
same from being found or to avoid forfeiture thereof,
or it is located outside the Philippines or has been
placed or brought outside the jurisdiction of the
court, or it has been commingled with other
monetary instruments or property belonging to either
the offender himself or a third person or entity,
thereby rendering the same difficult to identify or be
segregated for purposes of forfeiture, the court may,
instead of enforcing the order of forfeiture of the
monetary instrument or property or part thereof or
interest therein, accordingly order the convicted
offender to pay an amount equal to the value of said
monetary instrument or property. This provision shall
apply in both civil and criminal forfeiture.
f.   Payment of Costs
Effects
1.   If the accused be convicted, the costs may be
charged against him.
2.   If he be acquitted, costs are de officio, i.e., each
party will bear his/her own expense.
Coverage
1.   Fees, and
2.   Indemnities, in the course of judicial proceedings.
Expenses of litigation
Costs or costs of suit are the expenses of litigation
allowed and regulated by the Rules of Court to be
assessed against or to be recovered by a party in
litigation.
Fixed or otherwise
Costs may be fixed amounts already determined by
law or regulations or amounts subject to a schedule.
Page 99 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Exclusion
Not allowed against the Republic of the Philippines.
(Rule 142, Sec. 1).
7.  Computation of Penalties
a.   Mitigating and Aggravating
Circumstances
Sec. 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or
aggravating circumstances and of habitual
delinquency. – Mitigating or aggravating
circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be
taken into account for the purpose of diminishing or
increasing the penalty in conformity with the
following rules:
1.   Aggravating circumstances which in themselves
constitute a crime specially punishable by law or
which are included by the law in defining a crime
and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be
taken into account for the purpose of increasing
the penalty.
2.   The same rule shall apply with respect to any
aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime
to such a degree that it must of necessity
accompany the commission thereof.
3.   Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which
arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or
from his private relations with the offended
party, or from any other personal cause, shall
only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of
the principals, accomplices and accessories as to
whom such circumstances are attendant.
4.   The circumstances which consist in the material
execution of the act, or in the means employed to
accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or
mitigate the liability of those persons only who
had knowledge of them at the time of the
execution of the act or their cooperation therein.
When attendant circumstances are not appreciated
in computing the penalty. (Fine SIN)
1.   fines
2.   penalties prescribed by special laws that do not
follow the RPC nomenclature
3.   indivisible penalties
4.   crimes committed by negligence
When prescribed penalty is single and indivisible
Apply the prescribed penalty regardless of attendant
circumstances.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

When prescribed penalty is made of two indivisible Maximu 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓   𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓
penalties m period 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦
1.   At least one aggravating circumstance is +2𝑋 −1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
present—apply HIGHER penalty +3𝑋
2.   No aggravating is present—apply LOWER
penalty Using the example of prision mayor, with X = 2 years
3.   BOTH aggravating and mitigating are present— as computed in Step 1, and applying these numbers
•   Aggravating exceeds mitigating—apply to the formulae in the above table, we have:
HIGHER penalty
•   Mitigating exceeds aggravating—apply Minimum Maximum
LOWER penalty Minimum 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑   6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
period 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 −1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
When prescribed penalty is made of divisible +  2  𝑦𝑒𝑎 𝑠
penalties Medium 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑   6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
1.   NO aggravating and mitigating—apply MEDIUM period 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 −1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
period +(2  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠) +  2(2  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)
2.   Aggravating circumstances, regardless of Maximum 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑   6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
number—apply MAXIMUM period period 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 −1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
3.   One mitigating—apply MINIMUM period +2(2  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠) +  3(2  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)
4.   Two or more mitigating—one DEGREE LOWER
5.   BOTH aggravating and mitigating are present—
Which can be simplified as:
OFFSET each other
Minimum Maximum
When prescribed penalty is not made of three
Minimum 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 8  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
periods
1.   Let X be Medium 8  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 10  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
 𝑋   =     (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 − Maximum 10  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 12  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
(𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎 𝑡𝑦 − 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦))/3
3. To check if the computation is correct, the
Suppose the prescribed penalty for a felony is prision
maximum of the maximum period (as computed in
mayor, which ranges from 6 years (minimum of
Step 2) should be equal to the maximum of the
prescribed penalty) and 1 day to 12 years (maximum
prescribed penalty.
of the prescribed penalty). Then:
Maximum of the maximum period in Step 2 = 12 years
𝑋
Maximum of prision mayor = 12 years
=     (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦
− (𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 − 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦))/3
See prescribed penalty and imposable penalty,
12  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 − 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠  𝑎𝑛𝑑  1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 − 1  𝑑𝑎𝑦
= distinguished.
3
12𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 − 6  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 See special aggravating and qualifying circumstances.
=
3
𝑋 = 2  𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 Ladines v. People, G.R. No. 167333 (2016)
Held: Homicide is punished with reclusion
temporal. Taking the absence of any modifying
2.   For the minima and maxima of the minimum, circumstances into consideration, the RTC fixed the
medium, and maximum periods, use the indeterminate penalty of 10 years and one day
following formulae: of prision mayor, as minimum, to 17 years and four
months of the medium period of reclusion
Minimum Maximum temporal, as maximum. The CA affirmed the penalty
Minimu 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓
fixed by the RTC.
m period  𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦
+𝑋
Medium 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓   𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚  𝑜𝑓   We declare that the lower courts could not impose 17
period 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒 𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑  𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 years and four months of the medium period
+𝑋 −1  𝑑𝑎𝑦 of reclusion temporal, which was the ceiling of the
+2𝑋 medium period of reclusion temporal, as the

Page 100 of 296

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
maximum of the indeterminate penalty without
specifying the justification for so imposing. They
thereby ignored that although Article 64 of
the Revised Penal Code, which has set the rules "for
the application of penalties which contain three
periods," requires under its first rule that the courts
should impose the penalty prescribed by law in the
medium period should there be neither aggravating
nor mitigating circumstances, its seventh rule
expressly demands that "[w]ithin the limits of each
period, the courts shall determine the extent of the
penalty according to the number and nature of the
aggravating and mitigating circumstances and. the
greater or lesser extent of the evil produced by the
crime." By not specifying the justification for
imposing the ceiling of the period of the imposable
penalty, the fixing of the indeterminate sentence
became arbitrary, or whimsical, or capricious. In
the absence of the specification, the maximum of
the indeterminate sentence for the petitioner
should be the lowest of the medium period
of reclusion temporal, which is 14 years, eight months
and one day of reclusion temporal.
No “incomplete” accident
Art. 67 is impossible to impose. See discussion on
incomplete justification and exemption.
Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all the
requisites of exemption of the fourth circumstance of
Article 12 are present. . – When all the conditions
required in circumstances Number 4 of Article 12 of
this Code to exempt from criminal liability are not
present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon the culprit if he shall have
been guilty of a grave felony, and arresto mayor in its
minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave
felony
8.  S pecial Rules
a.   Complex Crime and
Continuing Crimes
See earlier discussion.
b.   Absorption Doctrine
Rebellion and other crimes
Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 (1990)
JPE was arrested on an information charging him
with the crime of rebellion and murder and multiple
frustrated murder.
Page 101 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Held: Hernandez remains binding doctrine operating
to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with any
other offense committed on the occasion thereof,
either as a means necessary to its commission or as
an unintended effect of an activity that constitutes
rebellion.
RA 10591, or the Comprehensive Firearms and
Ammunition Act of 2013
Sec. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a
Crime. – If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of,
or incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’
etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element
of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
attempted coup d’ etat.
See crimes against public order.
c.   Impossible Crimes
Art. 59. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to
commit the crime because the means employed or
the aims sought are impossible. . – When the person
intending to commit an offense has already
performed the acts for the execution of the same but
nevertheless the crime was not produced by reason of
the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of
impossible accomplishment or because the means
employed by such person are essentially inadequate
to produce the result desired by him, the court,
having in mind the social danger and the degree of
criminality shown by the offender, shall impose upon
him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to
500 pesos.
d.   Crime Different from that
Intended
See discussion on art. 4(1) and on the mitigating
circumstance of no intention to commit so grave a
wrong.
e.   When Offender is Below 18
See minority as exempting circumstance and as
privileged mitigating circumstance.
9.  E xecution and Service of
Penalties
a.   Execution of Penalties
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Art. 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. –
No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a
final judgment.
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form
than that prescribed by law, nor with any other
circumstances or incidents than those expressly
authorized thereby.
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special
regulations prescribed for the government of the
institutions in which the penalties are to be suffered
shall be observed with regard to the character of the
work to be performed, the time of its performance,
and other incidents connected therewith, the
relations of the convicts among themselves and other
persons, the relief which they may receive, and their
diet.
The regulations shall make provision for the
separation of the sexes in different institutions, or at
least into different departments and also for the
correction and reform of the convicts.
Art. 78; must be final
The judgment must be final before it can be
executed, because the accused may still appeal
within 15 days from its promulgation.
May be waived
But if the defendant has expressly waived in writing
his right to appeal, the judgment becomes final and
executory.
Art. 86. Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal,
prision mayor, prision correccional and arresto
mayor. – The penalties of reclusion perpetua,
reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision
correccional and arresto mayor, shall be executed and
served in the places and penal establishments
provided by the Administrative Code in force or which
may be provided by law in the future.
Art. 87. Destierro. – Any person sentenced to
destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or
places designated in the sentence, nor within the
radius therein specified, which shall be not more than
250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place
designated.
Destierro, distinguished from permanent
protection order
Sec. 8, RA 9262. Protection Orders. – A protection
order is an order issued under this act for the purpose
of preventing further acts of violence against a
woman or her child specified in Sec. 5 of this Act and
Page 102 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
granting other necessary relief. The relief granted
under a protection order serve the purpose of
safeguarding the victim from further harm,
minimizing any disruption in the victim's daily life,
and facilitating the opportunity and ability of the
victim to independently regain control over her life.
The provisions of the protection order shall be
enforced by law enforcement agencies. The
protection orders that may be issued under this Act
are the barangay protection order (BPO), temporary
protection order (TPO) and permanent protection
order (PPO). The protection orders that may be
issued under this Act shall include any, some or all of
the following reliefs:
xxx
(d) Directing the respondent to stay away from
petitioner and designated family or household
member at a distance specified by the court, and to
stay away from the residence, school, place of
employment, or any specified place frequented by the
petitioner and any designated family or household
member
Sec. 16, RA 9262. Permanent Protection Orders. –
Permanent Protection Order (PPO) refers to
protection order issued by the court after notice and
hearing.
Respondents non-appearance despite proper notice,
or his lack of a lawyer, or the non-availability of his
lawyer shall not be a ground for rescheduling or
postponing the hearing on the merits of the issuance
of a PPO. If the respondents appears without counsel
on the date of the hearing on the PPO, the court shall
appoint a lawyer for the respondent and immediately
proceed with the hearing. In case the respondent fails
to appear despite proper notice, the court shall allow
ex parte presentation of the evidence by the applicant
and render judgment on the basis of the evidence
presented. The court shall allow the introduction of
any history of abusive conduct of a respondent even if
the same was not directed against the applicant or
the person for whom the applicant is made.
The court shall, to the extent possible, conduct the
hearing on the merits of the issuance of a PPO in one
(1) day. Where the court is unable to conduct the
hearing within one (1) day and the TPO issued is due
to expire, the court shall continuously extend or
renew the TPO for a period of thirty (30) days at each
particular time until final judgment is issued. The
extended or renewed TPO may be modified by the
court as may be necessary or applicable to address
the needs of the applicant.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The court may grant any, some or all of the reliefs
specified in Sec. 8 hereof in a PPO. A PPO shall be
effective until revoked by a court upon application of
the person in whose favor the order was issued. The
court shall ensure immediate personal service of the
PPO on respondent.
The court shall not deny the issuance of protection
order on the basis of the lapse of time between the
act of violence and the filing of the application.
Regardless of the conviction or acquittal of the
respondent, the Court must determine whether or not
the PPO shall become final. Even in a dismissal, a
PPO shall be granted as long as there is no clear
showing that the act from which the order might arise
did not exist.
Art. 88. Arresto menor. – The penalty of arresto
menor shall be served in the municipal jail, or in the
house of the defendant himself under the
surveillance of an officer of the law, when the court so
provides in its decision, taking into consideration the
health of the offender and other reasons which may
seem satisfactory to it.
b.   Effects of Probation Law [PD
986, as amended by RA
10707]
Llamado v. CA, G.R. No. 99032 (1989):
Turning to petitioner's invocation of "liberal
interpretation" of penal statutes, we note at the
outset that the Probation Law is not a penal
statute. We, however, understand petitioner's
argument to be really that any statutory language
that appears to favor the accused in a criminal case
should be given a "liberal interpretation." Courts,
however, have no authority to invoke "liberal
interpretation' or "the spirit of the law" where the
words of the statute themselves, and as illuminated
by the history of that statute, leave no room for doubt
or interpretation.
DEFINITION OF TERMS [SEC. 3]
Probation
A disposition under which a defendant, after
conviction and sentence, is released subject to
conditions imposed by the court and to the
supervision of a probation officer.
Probationer
A person placed on probation
Page 103 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Probation officer
One who investigates for the court a referral for
probation or supervises a probationer or both.
PURPOSE [SEC 2.]
1.   Promote the correction and rehabilitation of an
offender by providing him with individualized
treatment
2.   Provide an opportunity for the reformation of a
penitent offender which might be less probable if
he were to serve a prison sentence
3.   Prevent the commission of offenses
Office of the Court Administrator v. Librado, AM P-
94-1089 (1996): Unlike pardon, probation does not
obliterate the crime of which the person under
probation has been convicted.
Note: Probation does not extinguish civil liability.
GRANT, MANNER, AND CONDITIONS [SEC. 4]
Sec. 4. Grant of Probation. – Subject to the
provisions of this Decree, the trial court may, after it
shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant for a
probationable penalty and upon application by said
defendant within the period for perfecting an appeal,
suspend the execution of the sentence and place the
defendant on probation for such period and upon
such terms and conditions as it may deem best. No
application for probation shall be entertained or
granted if the defendant has perfected the appeal
from the judgment of conviction: Provided, That
when a judgment of conviction imposing a non-
probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed, and
such judgment is modified through the imposition
of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be
allowed to apply for probation based on the
modified decision before such decision becomes
final. The application for probation based on the
modified decision shall be filed in the trial court
where the judgment of conviction imposing a non-
probationable penalty was rendered, or in the trial
court where such case has since been re-raffled. In
a case involving several defendants where some have
taken further appeal, the other defendants may apply
for probation by submitting a written application and
attaching thereto a certified true copy of the
judgment of conviction.
The trial court shall, upon receipt of the application
filed, suspend the execution of the sentence imposed
in the judgment.
This notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the
benefit of probation should he seek a review of the
modified decision which already imposes a
probationable penalty.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Probation may be granted whether the sentence
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. The
filing of the application shall be deemed a waiver of
the right to appeal.
An order granting or denying probation shall not be
appealable.
The Dimakuta doctrine. Note that the Dimakuta
decision was issued on October 2015, but RA10707—
which amended the Probation Law—was signed into
law on November 2015.
Dimakuta v. People, G.R. No. 206513 (2015)
Held: It must be categorically stated that such appeal
must be limited to the following grounds:
1.   When the appeal is merely intended for
the correction of the penalty imposed by the
lower court, which when corrected would entitle
the accused to apply for probation; and
2.   When the appeal is merely intended to review the
crime for which the accused was convicted and
that the accused should only be liable to the
lesser offense which is necessarily included in
the crime for which he was originally convicted
and the proper penalty imposable is within the
probationable period.
In addition, before an appeal is filed based on the
grounds enumerated above, the accused should first
file a motion for reconsideration of the decision of the
trial court anchored on the above-stated grounds and
manifest his intent to apply for probation if the
motion is granted. The motion for reconsideration
will give the trial court an opportunity to review and
rectify any errors in its judgment, while the
manifestation of the accused will immediately show
that he is agreeable to the judgment of conviction
and does not intend to appeal from it, but he only
seeks a review of the crime and/or penalty imposed,
so that in the event that the penalty will be modified
within the probationable limit, he will immediately
apply for probation. Without such motion for
reconsideration, the notice of appeal should be
denied outright.
The notice of appeal should contain the following
averments:
1.   that an earlier motion for reconsideration was
filed but was denied by the trial court;
2.   that the appeal is only for reviewing the penalty
imposed by the lower court or the conviction
should only be for a lesser crime necessarily
included in the crime charged in the information;
and
3.   that the accused-appellant is not seeking
Page 104 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
acquittal of the conviction.
On the other hand, probation should not be granted
to the accused in the following instances:
1.   When the accused is convicted by the trial court
of a crime where the penalty imposed is within the
probationable period or a fine, and the accused
files a notice of appeal; and
2.   When the accused files a notice of appeal
which puts the merits of his conviction in
issue, even if there is an alternative prayer for the
correction of the penalty imposed by the trial
court or for a conviction to a lesser crime, which
is necessarily included in the crime in which he
was convicted where the penalty is within the
probationable period.
Conditions
Sec. 10 lists conditions of the probation. The two
conditions quoted below are mandatory conditions;
the rest in sec. 10 are discretionary conditions. The
conditions enumerated under Sec. 10 of the
Probation Law are not exhaustive. Courts are allowed
to impose practically any term it chooses, the only
limitation being that it does not jeopardize the
constitutional rights of the accused. After all, Sec. 4
states that “the trial court may… place the defendant
on probation for such period and upon such terms
and conditions as it may deem best.” [Salgado v. CA,
G.R. No. 89606 (1990)]
Sec. 10. Conditions of Probation. – Every probation
order issued by the court shall contain conditions
requiring that the probationer shall:
a.   present himself to the probation officer
designated to undertake his supervision at such
place as may be specified in the order within
seventy-two hours from receipt of said order;
b.   report to the probation officer at least once a
month at such time and place as specified by
said officer.
CRITERIA FOR PLACING OFFENDER UNDER
PROBATION [SEC. 8]
Criteria
The following should be considered in deciding to
place an offender under probation: [AM CHEAP]
1.   Available institutional and community resources
2.   Mental condition of the offender
3.   Character,
4.   Antecedents,
5.   Environment,
6.   Physical condition of the offender
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
May be extended to children in conflict with the law
Sec. 42. Probation as an Alternative to
Imprisonment. - The court may, after it shall have
convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the
law, and upon application at any time, place the child
on probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence
taking into account the best interest of the child. For
this purpose, Section 4 of Presidential Decree No.
968, otherwise known as the "Probation Law of
1976", is hereby amended accordingly.
Reasons for denying probation
Sec. 8 – xxxx
a.   the offender is in need of correctional treatment
that can be provided most effectively by his
commitment to an institution; or
b.   there is undue risk that during the period of
probation the offender will commit another
crime; or
c.   probation will depreciate the seriousness of the
offense committed.
THOSE DISQUALIFIED FROM PROBATION
Sec. 9. Disqualified Offenders. — The benefits of this
Decree shall not be extended to those:
a.   sentenced to serve a maximum term of
imprisonment of more than six (6) years;
b.   convicted of any crime against the national
security;
c.   who have previously been convicted by final
judgment of an offense punished by
imprisonment of more than six (6) months and
one (1) day and/or a fine of more than one
thousand pesos (P1,000.00);
d.   who have been once on probation under the
provisions of this Decree; and
e.   who are already serving sentence at the time the
substantive provisions of this Decree became
applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof.
[Probation Law, as amended by RA 10707]
Sec. 24. Non-Applicability of the Probation Law for
Drug Traffickers and Pushers. – Any person convicted
for drug trafficking or pushing under this Act,
regardless of the penalty imposed by the Court,
cannot avail of the privilege granted by the Probation
Law or Presidential Decree No. 968, as amended.
[Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002]
PERIOD OF PROBATION [SEC. 14]
When sentenced to Probation shall not
imprisonment of not exceed 2 years
more than 1 year
When sentenced to more Shall not exceed 6 years
than 1 year
When sentenced to a fine Shall be twice the total
Page 105 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
and made to suffer days of subsidiary
subsidiary imprisonment imprisonment
ARREST OF PROBATION [SEC. 15]
Sec. 15. Arrest of Probationer; Subsequent
Disposition.- At any time during probation, the court
may issue a warrant for the arrest of a probationer for
any serious violation of the conditions of the pardon.
The probationer, once arrested and detained, shall
immediately be brought before the court for a
hearing of the violation charged. The defendant may
be admitted to bail pending such hearing. In such
case, the provisions regarding release on bail of
persons charged with a crime shall be applicable to
probationers arrested under this provision.
In the hearing, which shall be summary in nature,
the probationer shall have the right to be informed of
the violation charged and to adduce evidence in his
favor. The court shall not be bound by the technical
rules of evidence but may inform itself of all facts
which are material and relevant to ascertain the
veracity of the charge. The State shall be
represented by a prosecuting officer in any contested
hearing. If the violation is established, the court may
revoke or continue his probation and modify the
conditions thereof. If revoked, the court shall order
the probationer to serve the sentence originally
imposed. An order revoking the grant of probation or
modifying the terms and conditions thereof shall not
be appealable.
TERMINATION OF PROBATION [SEC. 16]
Sec. 16. Termination of Probation. — After the period
of probation and upon consideration of the report
and recommendation of the probation officer, the
court may order the final discharge of the probationer
upon finding that he has fulfilled the terms and
conditions of his probation and thereupon the case is
deemed terminated.
The final discharge of the probationer shall operate
to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a
result of his conviction and to totally extinguish his
criminal liability as to the offense for which probation
was granted.
The probationer and the probation officer shall each
be furnished with a copy of such order.
Termination of period not the same as expiration of
probation period
Probation is not coterminous with its period. There
must first be issued by the court, an order of final
discharge based on the report and recommendation
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

of the probation officer. Only from such issuance can Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.
the case of the probationer be deemed terminated. Sec. 66. Suspension of Sentence of a First-Time
[Bala v. Martinez (1990)] Minor Offender. – An accused who is over fifteen (15)
years of age at the time of the commission of the
10.  Suspension in Case of offense mentioned in Section 11 of this Act, but not
more than eighteen (18) years of age at the time
Insanity or Minority when judgment should have been promulgated after
having been found guilty of said offense, may be
a.   Insane given the benefits of a suspended sentence, subject
to the following conditions:
a.   He/she has not been previously convicted of
Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and service of violating any provision of this Act, or of the
the penalties in case of insanity. - When a convict Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as amended; or of
shall become insane or an imbecile after final the Revised Penal Code; or of any special penal
sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said laws;
sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the b.   He/she has not been previously committed to a
personal penalty, the provisions of the second Center or to the care of a DOH-accredited
paragraph of circumstance number 1 of Article 12 physician; and
being observed in the corresponding cases. c.   The Board favorably recommends that his/her
sentence be suspended.
If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his
sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall While under suspended sentence, he/she shall be
have prescribed in accordance with the provisions of under the supervision and rehabilitative surveillance
this Code. of the Board, under such conditions that the court
The respective provisions of this section shall also be may impose for a period ranging from six (6) months
observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the to eighteen (18) months.
convict is serving his sentence.
Upon recommendation of the Board, the court may
When an accused becomes insane commit the accused under suspended sentence to a
At the time of the He is exempt from Center, or to the care of a DOH-accredited physician
commission of the crime criminal liability. for at least six (6) months, with after-care and follow-
At the time of the trial The Court shall suspend up program for not more than eighteen (18) months.
the proceedings and
order his confinement in In the case of minors under fifteen (15) years of age at
a hospital until he the time of the commission of any offense penalized
recovers his reason. under this Act, Article 192 of Presidential Decree No.
At the time of final Execution is suspended 603, otherwise known as the Child and Youth Welfare
judgment or while with regard to the Code, as amended by Presidential Decree No. 1179
serving sentence personal penalty only. If shall apply, without prejudice to the application of
he recovers his reason, the provisions of this Section.
his sentence shall be
executed, unless the Sec. 67. Discharge After Compliance with Conditions
penalty has prescribed. of Suspended Sentence of a First-Time Minor
Offender. – If the accused first time minor offender
under suspended sentence complies with the
Payment of his civil or applicable rules and regulations of the Board,
pecuniary liabilities including confinement in a Center, the court, upon a
shall not be suspended. favorable recommendation of the Board for the final
discharge of the accused, shall discharge the accused
b.   Minors and dismiss all proceedings.

See minority as exempting circumstance and as
privileged mitigating circumstance. Take note of the
definition of “diversion.”
Upon the dismissal of the proceedings against the
accused, the court shall enter an order to expunge all
official records, other than the confidential record to
be retained by the DOJ relating to the case. Such an
order, which shall be kept confidential, shall restore

Page 106 of 296

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

the accused to his/her status prior to the case.
He/she shall not be held thereafter to be guilty of
perjury or of concealment or misrepresentation by
reason of his/her failure to acknowledge the case or
recite any fact related thereto in response to any
inquiry made of him for any purpose.
Sec. 68. Privilege of Suspended Sentence to be
Availed of Only Once by a First-Time Minor Offender.
– The privilege of suspended sentence shall be
availed of only once by an accused drug dependent
who is a first-time offender over fifteen (15) years of
age at the time of the commission of the violation of
Section 15 of this Act but not more than eighteen (18)
years of age at the time when judgment should have
been promulgated.
Sec. 69. Promulgation of Sentence for First-Time
Minor Offender. – If the accused first-time minor
offender violates any of the conditions of his/her
suspended sentence, the applicable rules and
regulations of the Board exercising supervision and
rehabilitative surveillance over him, including the
rules and regulations of the Center should
confinement be required, the court shall pronounce
judgment of conviction and he/she shall serve
sentence as any other convicted person.
service or order a final discharge.
In both cases, the judicial records shall be covered by
the provisions of Sections 60 and 64 of this Act.
If the sentence promulgated by the court requires
imprisonment, the period spent in the Center by the
accused during the suspended sentence period shall
be deducted from the sentence to be served.
Sec. 71. Records to be kept by the Department of
Justice. – The DOJ shall keep a confidential record of
the proceedings on suspension of sentence and shall
not be used for any purpose other than to determine
whether or not a person accused under this Act is a
first-time minor offender
Sec. 98. Limited Applicability of the Revised Penal
Code. – Notwithstanding any law, rule or regulation
to the contrary, the provisions of the Revised Penal
Code (Act No. 3814), as amended, shall not apply to
the provisions of this Act, except in the case of minor
offenders. Where the offender is a minor, the penalty
for acts punishable by life imprisonment to death
provided herein shall be reclusion perpetua to death.

Sec. 70. Probation or Community Service for a First-

Time Minor Offender in Lieu of Imprisonment. –
Upon promulgation of the sentence, the court may, in
its discretion, place the accused under probation,
even if the sentence provided under this Act is higher
than that provided under existing law on probation,
or impose community service in lieu of imprisonment.
In case of probation, the supervision and
rehabilitative surveillance shall be undertaken by the
Board through the DOH in coordination with the
Board of Pardons and Parole and the Probation
Administration. Upon compliance with the conditions
of the probation, the Board shall submit a written
report to the court recommending termination of
probation and a final discharge of the probationer,
whereupon the court shall issue such an order.

The community service shall be complied with under

conditions, time and place as may be determined by
the court in its discretion and upon the
recommendation of the Board and shall apply only to
violators of Section 15 of this Act. The completion of
the community service shall be under the supervision
and rehabilitative surveillance of the Board during
the period required by the court. Thereafter, the
Board shall render a report on the manner of
compliance of said community service. The court in
its discretion may require extension of the community

Page 107 of 296

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
  Criminal and Civil
Liabilities
1.   Extinction of Criminal
Liabilities
a.   Total Extinction
BY PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME
Definition
The forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to
prosecute the offender, after the lapse of a certain
period of time.
General Rule: Prescription of the crime begins on the
day the crime was committed.
Exception: The "blameless ignorance" doctrine,
incorporated in Section 2 of Act No. 3326, under
which "the statute of limitations runs only upon
discovery of the fact of the invasion of a right which
will support a cause of action. The courts would
decline to apply the statute of limitations where the
plaintiff does not know or has no reasonable means
of knowing the existence of a cause of action." xxx
Thus, we held in a catena of cases, that if the
violation of the special law was not known at the time
of its commission, the prescription begins to run only
from the discovery thereof, i.e., discovery of the
unlawful nature of the constitutive act or acts.
[Presidential Ad-Hoc Fact Finding Committee on
Behest Loans v. Ombudsman Desierto, G. R. No.
130140 (2011)]
Recebido v. People, G.R. No. 141931 (2000): While
the defense of prescription of the crime was raised
only during the motion for reconsideration of the
decision of the Court of Appeals, there was no waiver
of the defense. Under the Rules of Court, the failure
of the accused to assert the ground of extinction of
the offense, inter alia, in a motion to quash shall not
be deemed a waiver of such ground. The reason is
that by prescription, the State or the People loses the
right to prosecute the crime or to demand the service
of the penalty imposed. Accordingly, prescription,
although not invoked in the trial, may, as in this case,
be invoked on appeal. Hence, the failure to raise this
defense in the motion to quash the information does
not give rise to the waiver of the petitioner-accused to
raise the same anytime thereafter including during
appeal.
Page 108 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Prescription of crimes
Art. 90. Prescription of crime. - Crimes punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal
shall prescribe in twenty years.
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall
prescribe in fifteen years.
Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall
prescribe in ten years; with the exception of those
punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in
five years.
The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall
prescribe in one year.
The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed
shall prescribe in six months.
Light offenses prescribe in two months.
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one,
the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
application of the rules contained in the first, second
and third paragraphs of this article. (As amended by
RA 4661, approved June 19, 1966).
Crime punishable by fines
Fine is afflictive 15 years
Fine is correctional 10 years
Fine is light 2 months
Notes:
1.   Subsidiary penalty for nonpayment not
considered in determining the period
2.   When fine is an alternative penalty higher than
the other penalty which is by imprisonment,
prescription of the crime is based on the fine.
Prescription for special laws and municipal
ordinances
1.   12 years = offenses punished by imprisonment for
six years and more
2.   8 years = offenses punished by imprisonment of
two years and more, but less than 6 years
3.   5 years = offenses under International Revenue
Law
4.   4 years = offenses punished by imprisonment for
more than one month, but less than two years
5.   1 year = offenses punished by a fine OR
imprisonment of not more than 1 month
6.   2 months = violations of municipal ordinances
7.   2 months = violations f regulations or conditions
of certificate of convenience by the Public Service
Commission
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Note: Not applicable where the special law provides
for its own prescriptive period.
Computation of prescription of offenses (Art. 91)
1.   Commences to run from the day on which the
crime is discovered by the offended party, the
authorities or their agents.
2.   Interrupted by the filing of complaint or
information
3.   It shall commence to run again when such
proceedings terminate without the accused
being convicted or acquitted, or unjustifiably
stopped for any reason not imputable to the
accused.
4.   (Note: Termination must be FINAL as to amount
to a jeopardy that would bar a subsequent
prosecution.)
5.   The term of prescription shall not run when the
offender is absent from the Philippine archipelago.
6.   For continuing crimes, prescriptive period cannot
begin to run because the crime does not end.
•   BY PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY
Definition
The loss or forfeiture of the right of the government
to execute the final sentence after the lapse of a
certain period of time.
Distinguished from prescription of crime
Prescription of crime is the forfeiture to prosecute a
crime; prescription of penalty is the forfeiture to
execute a sentence.
Prescriptive periods
Death and reclusion
20 years
perpetua
Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Correctional penalties 10 years
Note: If arresto mayor 5 years
Light penalties 1 year
Computation of prescription. [Art. 93]
1.   Penalty is imposed by final judgment
2.   Convict evaded service of sentence by escaping
during the term of his sentence
3.   The convict who has escaped from prison has not
given himself up, or been captured, or gone to a
foreign country with which we have no
extradition treaty, or committed another crime
4.   The penalty has prescribed because of the lapse
of time from the date of the evasion of service of
the sentence by the convict.
Del Castillo v. Torrecampo, G.R. No. 139033 (2002):
"Escape" in legal parlance and for purposes of
Page 109 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Articles 93 and 157 of the RPC means unlawful
departure of prisoner from the limits of his custody.
Clearly, one who has not been committed to prison
cannot be said to have escaped therefrom.
When commenced
Period commences to run from the date when the
culprit evaded the service of sentence.
When interrupted
1.   The convict gives himself up.
2.   The convict is captured.
3.   The convict goes to a foreign country with which
the Philippines has no extradition treaty.
4.   The convict commits any crime before the
expiration of the period of prescription.
Question: What happens in cases where our
government has extradition treaty with another
country but the crime is not included in the treaty?
Answer: It would interrupt the running of the
prescriptive period.
Question: What is the effect of the acceptance of the
convict of a conditional pardon?
Answer: It would interrupt the running of the
prescriptive period.
Question: What happens if the culprit is captured but
he evades again the service of his sentence?
Answer: The period of prescription that ran during
the evasion is not forfeited. The period of prescription
that has run in his favor should be taken into account.
•   BY THE DEATH OF THE CONVICT
Death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as
the civil liability based solely thereon. However, the
claim of civil liability survives notwithstanding the
death of the accused, if the same may also be
predicated on a source of obligation other than delict,
such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-
delicts. [People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007 (1994)]
•   BY SERVICE OF SENTENCE
•   BY AMNESTY
An act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or
general pardon for a past offense. Erases not only the
conviction but the crime itself.
It is granted to classes of persons or communities
who may be guilty of political offenses, generally
before or after the institution of the criminal
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

prosecution and sometimes after conviction. [People Monsanto v. Factoran, G.R. No. 78239 (1989):
v. Casido , G.R. No. 116512 (1997)] 1. Absolute pardon does not ipso facto entitle the
convict to reinstatement to the public office forfeited
Amnesty and absolute pardon, distinguished by reason of his conviction.
Amnesty Absolute pardon 2. Although pardon restores his eligibility for
Blanket pardon to appointment to that office, the pardoned convict
Includes any crime and is
classes of persons guilty must reapply for a new appointment.
exercised individually
of political offenses
May still be exercised Effects of pardon
The person is already
before trial or Art. 36. Pardon; its effect. - A pardon shall not work
convicted
investigation the restoration of the right to hold public office, or the
Looks forward. He is right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly
relieved from the restored by the terms of the pardon.
Looks backward. It is as consequences of the
if he has committed no offense, but rights are not A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the
offense. restored unless explicitly payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by
provided by the terms of the sentence.
the pardon.
Private act of the Limitations on pardoning power
Public act which the
President and must be 1.   That the power can be exercised only after
court shall take judicial
pleaded and proved by conviction.
notice of
the person pardoned Thus in applying for pardon, the convict must not
Valid if given either appeal the judgment of conviction or the appeal
Valid only when there is
before or after final must be abandoned.
final judgment
judgment 2.   That such power does not extend to cases of
impeachment. [Cristobal v. Labrador, G.R. No.
Recidivism 47941 (1940)]
An offender who was convicted of rebellion, given an
amnesty, and who subsequently rebelled and was Legislature cannot limit pardoning power
convicted again is not a recidivist. He is not a The pardoning power of the President cannot be
recidivist because the amnesty granted to him erased limited by legislative action. Article 36-41 only
not only the conviction but also the effects of the operates as a procedural proscription. [Risos-Vidal v.
conviction itself. COMELEC, G.R. No. 206666 (2015)]

Suppose, instead of amnesty, what was given was •   BY THE MARRIAGE OF THE OFFENDED
absolute pardon, then years later, the offender was WOMAN AND THE OFFENDER IN THE CRIMES
again captured and charged for rebellion, he was OF RAPE, ABDUCTION, SEDUCTION AND ACTS
convicted, is he a recidivist? OF LASCIVIOUSNESS (ART. 344)

Generally, yes. Pardon, although absolute, does not People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 185843 (2010): In
erase the effects of conviction. Pardon only excuses relation to Article 266-C of the RPC, Article 89 of the
the convict from serving the sentence. same Code reads:

The exception is when the pardon was granted after ART. 89. How criminal liability is
the convict had already served the sentence such that totally extinguished. Criminal liability
there is no more service of sentence to be executed. is totally extinguished:
The pardon then shall be understood as intended xxxx
to erase the effects of the conviction. 7. By the marriage of the offended
woman, as provided in Article 344 of
•   BY ABSOLUTE PARDON this Code.

It is an act of grace, proceeding from the power
entrusted with the execution of the laws. It exempts
the individual from the penalty of the crime he has
committed.
Article 344 of the same Code also provides
ART. 344. Prosecution of the crimes
of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
abduction, rape, and acts of
lasciviousness. x x x.

Page 110 of 296

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
In cases of seduction, abduction,
acts of lasciviousness, and rape, the
marriage of the offender with the
offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or remit the penalty
already imposed upon him. x x x.
On several occasions, we applied these provisions to
marriages contracted between the offender and the
offended party in the crime of rape, as well as in the
crime of abuse of chastity, to totally extinguish the
criminal liability of and the corresponding penalty
that may have been imposed upon those found guilty
of the felony. Parenthetically, we would like to
mention here that prior to the case at bar, the last
case bearing similar circumstances was decided by
this Court in 1974, or around 36 years ago.
Based on the documents, including copies of
pictures taken after the ceremony and attached to
the motion, we find the marriage between appellant
and private complainant to have been contracted
validly, legally, and in good faith, as an expression of
their mutual love for each other and their desire to
establish a family of their own. Given public policy
considerations of respect for the sanctity of marriage
and the highest regard for the solidarity of the family,
we must accord appellant the full benefits of Article
89, in relation to Article 344 and Article 266-C of the
RPC.
Pardon of offended party in offenses other than
those in art. 344
Only civil liability is extinguished. A crime committed
is an offense against the State. Only the Chief
Executive can pardon the offenders.
Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. - A
pardon of the offended party does not extinguish
criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of
this Code; but civil liability with regard to the interest
of the injured party is extinguished by his express
waiver.
b.   Partial Extinction
•   BY CONDITIONAL PARDON (ART. 95)
Conditions
If delivered and accepted, it is a contract between the
executive and the convict that the former will release
the latter upon compliance with the condition. One
usual condition is “not again violate any of the penal
laws of the country”.
Page 111 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Where are conditions stipulated
Pardon itself must explicitly impose. A “whereas” in
the preamble of the pardon stating that “Joseph
Ejercito Estrada has publicly committed to no longer
seek any elective position or office” does not make
the pardon conditional. [Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC,
supra.]
Art. 95. Obligation incurred by person granted
conditional pardon. - Any person who has been
granted conditional pardon shall incur the obligation
of complying strictly with the conditions imposed
therein otherwise, his non-compliance with any of the
conditions specified shall result in the revocation of
the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall be
applied to him.
•   BY COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE (ART. 96)
Art. 96. Effect of commutation of sentence. - The
commutation of the original sentence for another of a
different length and nature shall have the legal effect
of substituting the latter in the place of the former.
•   FOR GOOD CONDUCT, ALLOWANCES WHICH
THE CULPRIT MAY EARN WHILE HE IS SERVING
SENTENCE (ART. 97)
Art. 97. Allowance for good conduct. - The good
conduct of any prisoner in any penal institution shall
entitle him to the following deductions from the
period of his sentence:
1.   During the first two years of his imprisonment, he
shall be allowed a deduction of five days for each
month of good behavior;
2.   During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of
eight days for each month of good behavior;
3.   During the following years until the tenth year,
inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be
allowed a deduction of ten days for each month
of good behavior; and
4.   During the eleventh and successive years of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of
fifteen days for each month of good behaviour.
•   SPECIAL TIME ALLOWANCE (ARTS. 98-99)
Article 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. - A
deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence
shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded
the service of his sentence under the circumstances
mentioned in Article 58 of this Code, gives himself up
to the authorities within 48 hours following the
issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing
away of the calamity or catastrophe to in said article.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Article 99. Who grants time allowances. - Whenever
lawfully justified, the Director of Prisons shall grant
allowances for good conduct. Such allowances once
granted shall not be revoked.
•   BY PAROLE
•   BY PROBATION
c.   Compromise and Affidavit of
Desistance
Trinidad v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 166038 (2007):
Petitioner is charged for violating the Anti-Graft and
Corrupt Practices Act for knowingly granting a
license, permit, privilege, or benefit to an unqualified
person. Petitioner contends that AEDC is barred from
filing a criminal case against him due to the dismissal
previously by the RTC of a civil case filed by AEDC.
The case was dismissed upon the parties’ joint
motion with a mutual quitclaim and waiver.
Held: It is a firmly recognized rule that criminal
liability cannot be the subject of a compromise. For a
criminal case is committed against the People, and
the offended party may not waive or extinguish the
criminal liability the law imposes for its commission.
Compromise therefore is not one of the grounds
prescribed by the RPC for the extinction of criminal
liability.
People v. Orje, G.R. No. 189579 (2011): AAA was the
daughter of the accused. During trial, AAA presented
that she earlier executed an affidavit of desistance in
which she expressed desire to desist from pursuing
the sham case against her father. She claims that her
aunt compelled her to falsely accuse her father of
rape.
Held: Courts look with disfavor at affidavits of
desistance and/or retraction. Those can be easily
secured from poor or ignorant witnesses, usually for
monetary considerations or threats of violence. There
must be other circumstances which, when coupled
with the retraction or desistance, creates doubts as to
the truth of the testimony of the plaintiff. In this case,
there was overwhelming proof that the father did in
fact rape AAA on multiple occasions.
d.   Re-Election of Public Officer
Ombudsman v. CA and Binay, Jr., G.R. Nos. 217126-
27 (2015): The SC abandoned the condonation
doctrine. The doctrine is bereft of legal basis based
Page 112 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
on the 1987 Constitution and the Local Government
Code. Public office is a public trust, and the corollary
requirement of accountability to the people at all
times is inconsistent with the idea that his past sins
can be wiped away by reelection.
2.  C ivil Liabilities in Criminal
Cases
a.   General Rule
Relevant RPC provision
Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. -
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable.
Basis
Chua v. CA, G.R. No. 150793 (2004)
Held: Generally, the basis of civil liability arising from
crime is the fundamental postulate that every man
criminally liable is also civilly liable. When a person
commits a crime he offends two entities namely (1)
the society in which he lives in or the political entity
called the State whose law he has violated; and (2)
the individual member of the society whose person,
right, honor, chastity or property has been actually or
directly injured or damaged by the same punishable
act or omission. An act or omission is felonious
because it is punishable by law, it gives rise to civil
liability not so much because it is a crime but
because it caused damage to another. Additionally,
what gives rise to the civil liability is really the
obligation and the moral duty of everyone to repair
or make whole the damage caused to another by
reason of his own act or omission, whether done
intentionally or negligently. The indemnity which a
person is sentenced to pay forms an integral part of
the penalty imposed by law for the commission of the
crime. The civil action involves the civil liability arising
from the offense charged which includes restitution,
reparation of the damage caused, and
indemnification for consequential damages.
Effect of acquittal in criminal action
The court may acquit an accused on reasonable
doubt and still order payment of civil damages
already proved in the same case without need for a
separate civil action. The reason for this is that the
accused has already been accorded due process.
Exception:
1.   When the defendant did not act with negligence;
2.   facts from which the civil action might arise do
not exist (e.g., the defendant was acquitted
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
because he was not the perpetrator of the
felony). [Tolentino]
Test of negligence
People v. De Los Santos, G.R. No. 131588 (2001):
The test for determining whether a person is
negligent in doing an act whereby injury or damage
results to the person or property of another is this:
Could a prudent man, in the position of the person to
whom negligence is attributed, foresee harm to the
person injured as a reasonable consequence of the
course actually pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty
on the actor to refrain from that course or to take
precautions to guard against its mischievous results,
and the failure to do so constitutes
negligence. Reasonable foresight of harm, followed
by the ignoring of the admonition born of this
prevision, is always necessary before negligence can
be held to exist.
Relevant Civil Code provisions
Art. 20, CC. Every person who, contrary to law,
wilfully or negligently causes damage to another,
shall indemnify the latter for the same.
Art. 1161, CC. Civil obligations arising from criminal
offenses shall be governed by the penal laws, subject
to the provisions of article 2177, and of the pertinent
provisions of Chapter 2, Preliminary Title, on Human
Relations, and of Title XVIII of this Book, regulating
damages.
Art. 2176, CC. Whoever by act or omission causes
damage to another, there being fault or negligence,
is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or
negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict
and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
Art. 2177, CC. Responsibility for fault or negligence
under the preceding article is entirely separate and
distinct from the civil liability arising from negligence
under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot
recover damages twice for the same act or omission
of the defendant.
Also see: Rule 111, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Determination of civil liability, general rule and
exception
Civil liability arises from the commission of the felony.
It is determined in the criminal action except:
1.   the offended party waives his right to file a civil
action
2.   the offended party reserves his right to institute it
separately, or
Page 113 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
3.   the offended party institutes the civil action prior
to the criminal action.
Quinto v. Andres, G.R. No. 155791 (2005): When a
criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the
recovery of civil liability arising from the offense
charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal
action unless the offended party waives the civil
action, reserves the right to institute it separately or
institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
With the implied institution of the civil action in the
criminal action, the two actions are merged into one
composite proceeding, with the criminal action
predominating the civil.
Reservation of the right to file
A reservation of the right to file a separate civil action
only gives the party aggrieved the right to choose
under which body of laws he must bring the civil
action, either under the:
1.   RPC – where the recovery may be defeated by
proof that the acts on which the action is based
do not exist, or
2.   New Civil Code – where the same proof is
required to preclude recovery, or proof of
diligence in the selection and employment of the
employee.
No independent civil action
Commencement of criminal action is not a condition
precedent to the filing of civil action arising from a
crime. However, the civil action arising from crime
cannot be instituted when: (a) the criminal action has
already commenced, in which case the separate civil
action arising therefrom cannot be instituted until
final judgment of the criminal case; or (b) if the
criminal action is filed after the civil action, in which
case the latter shall be suspended at whatever stage
before judgment on the merits.
The rule is that when the criminal action is instituted,
a separate civil action cannot be instituted or if
already instituted, it is to be suspended. Said rule
applies only when the plaintiff in the civil action is the
offended party in the criminal action and both cases
arise from the same offense.
Exceptions
Independent civil actions may be filed for
1.   Violations of fundamental rights (Art. 32)
2.   Defamation, fraud and physical injuries (Art. 33)
3.   Failure or refusal of a member of the police force
to render aid or protection to any person in case
of danger to life or property (Art. 34)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
b.   Special Cases
•   INSANITY, IMBECILITY, AND THOSE OVER 9
AND BELOW 15
General Rule: Exemption from criminal liability does
not include exemption from civil liability.
Exception: The only exceptions to this rule are: (a)
when the injury caused was by mere accident as
provided for in Art 12, paragraph 2; and (b) when the
civil liability was caused by the failure to perform an
act required by law when prevented by some lawful
or insuperable cause.
Civil liability of parents
A minor over 15 years of age who acts with
discernment is not exempt from criminal liability that
is why the RPC is silent as to the subsidiary liability of
his parents. The particular law that governs is Art.
2180 of the Civil Code which provides, “the father
and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother is
responsible for damages caused by the minor
children who live in their company.”
Civil liability of guardians
The persons having the insane or minor under their
legal authority or control are primarily liable to pay
the civil liability. If it is proven that there was no fault
or negligence on their part, those exempted from the
crime shall respond with their own property not
exempt from execution.
•   STATE OF NECESSITY
There is no civil liability in justifying circumstances
except in par. 4 of Art. 11 wherein the person who was
benefited by the act which causes damage to another
is the one civilly liable.
•   IRRESISTIBLE FORCE AND UNCONTROLLABLE
FEAR
The persons using violence or causing the fear are
primarily liable. If there be no such persons, those
doing the act shall be liable secondarily.
INNKEEPERS AND SIMILAR PERSONS
Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers,
tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. - In
default of the persons criminally liable, innkeepers,
tavernkeepers, and any other persons or corporations
shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their
establishments, in all cases where a violation of
municipal ordinances or some general or special
Page 114 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
police regulation shall have been committed by them
or their employees.
Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within
their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the
payment of the value thereof, provided that such
guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper
himself, or the person representing him, of the
deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall
furthermore have followed the directions which such
innkeeper or his representative may have given them
with respect to the care and vigilance over such
goods. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with
violence against or intimidation of persons unless
committed by the innkeeper's employees.
Elements under Paragraph 1
1.   That the innkeeper, tavernkeeper, or proprietor of
establishment or his employee committed a
violation of municipal ordinance or some general
or special police regulation.
2.   That a crime is committed in such inn, tavern or
establishment.
3.   That the person criminally liable is insolvent.
4.   When all the above elements are present, the
innkeeper, tavernkeeper or any other person or
corporation is civilly liable for the crime
committed in his establishment.
Elements under Paragraph 2
1.   The guests notified in advance the innkeeper or
the person representing him of the deposit of
their goods within the inn or house.
2.   The guest followed the directions of the
innkeeper or his representative with respect to
the care of the vigilance over such goods.
3.   Such goods of the guests lodging therein were
taken by robbery with force upon things or theft
committed within the inn or house.
When robbers are not the employees
The statement “No liability shall attach in case of
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons unless committed by the innkeeper's
employees” should be read together with art. 2001,
NCC. If there is robbery, the management should
prove that first that the robbery was done (a) with the
use of arms or (b) through irresistible force before the
establishment be exempted from civil liability.
Art. 2001, CC. The act of a thief or robber, who has
entered the hotel is not deemed force majeure,
unless it is done with the use of arms or through an
irresistible force.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF OTHER PERSONS
Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. -
The subsidiary liability established in the next
preceding article shall also apply to employers,
teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any
kind of industry for felonies committed by their
servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or employees
in the discharge of their duties.
Elements
1.   The employer, teacher, person or corporation is
engaged in any kind of industry.
2.   Any of their servants, pupils, workmen,
apprentices or employees commits a felony while
in the discharge of his duties.
3.   The said employee is insolvent and has not
satisfied his civil liability.
Subsidiary liability
Only arises after conviction of employee in the
criminal action. This can be enforced only upon a
motion for subsidiary writ of execution against the
employer and upon proof that the employee is
insolvent.
Proceeding for enforcement of subsidiary liability
and criminal action, considered together.
Vda. De Paman v. Señeris, G.R. No. L-37632 (1982)
Held: Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court
provides, however, that "when a criminal action is
instituted, the civil action for recovery of civil liability
arising from the offense charged is impliedly
instituted with the criminal action, unless the
offended party expressly waives the civil action or
reserves his right to institute it separately." That
means as if two actions are joined in one as twins,
each one complete with the same completeness as
any of the two normal persons composing the twins.
It means that the civil action may be tried and
prosecuted, with all the ancillary processes provided
by law. Said provision will be rendered meaningless if
the subsidiary civil liability is not allowed to be
enforced in the same proceeding.
In the case at bar, the apparent drawback in the
enforcement of the subsidiary liability in the same
criminal proceeding is the lack of due process to the
alleged employer. Not being a party to the case, he is
not heard as to whether he is indeed the employer. To
remedy the situation and thereby afford due process
to the alleged employer, this Court directed the
court a quo in Pajarito v. Señeris (supra) to hear and
decide in the same proceeding the subsidiary liability
of the alleged owner and operator of the passenger
bus. It was explained therein that the proceeding for
Page 115 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the enforcement of the subsidiary liability may be
considered as part of the proceeding for the
execution of the judgment. A case in which an
execution has been issued is regarded as still
pending so that all proceedings on the execution are
proceedings in the suit.
Philippine Rabbit v. People, G.R. No. 147703 (2004)
Held: Only the civil liability of the accused arising
from the crime charged is deemed impliedly
instituted in a criminal action, that is, unless the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the
right to institute it separately, or institutes it prior to
the criminal action. Hence, the subsidiary civil
liability of the employer under Article 103 of the
Revised Penal Code may be enforced by execution
on the basis of the judgment of conviction meted
out to the employee.
What is deemed instituted in every criminal
prosecution is the civil liability arising from the crime
or delict per se (civil liability ex delicto), but not those
liabilities arising from quasi-delicts, contracts or
quasi-contracts. In fact, even if a civil action is filed
separately, the ex delicto civil liability in the criminal
prosecution remains, and the offended party may --
subject to the control of the prosecutor -- still
intervene in the criminal action, in order to protect
the remaining civil interest therein.
The cases dealing with the subsidiary liability of
employers uniformly declare that, strictly speaking,
they are not parties to the criminal cases instituted
against their employees. Although in substance and
in effect, they have an interest therein, this fact
should be viewed in the light of their subsidiary
liability. While they may assist their employees to
the extent of supplying the latter’s lawyers, as in
the present case, the former cannot act
independently on their own behalf, but can only
defend the accused.
Industry
Any department or branch of art, occupation or
business; especially, one which employs so much
labor and capital and is a distinct branch of trade.
[Telleria v. Garcia]
Other notes
1.   Private persons without business or industry are
not subsidiarily liable, but may be primarily liable
under culpa aquiliana.
2.   Employer has the right to take part in the
defense of his employee.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
c.   What Civil Liability Includes
Art. 104. What is included in civil liability. - The civil
liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103
of this Code includes:
1.   Restitution;
2.   Reparation of the damage caused;
3.   Indemnification for consequential damages.
Art. 105. Restitution; How made. - The restitution of
the thing itself must be made whenever possible,
with allowance for any deterioration, or diminution of
value as determined by the court.
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be
found in the possession of a third person who has
acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his
action against the proper person, who may be liable
to him.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the
thing has been acquired by the third person in the
manner and under the requirements which, by law,
bar an action for its recovery.
Art. 106. Reparation; How made. - The court shall
determine the amount of damage, taking into
consideration the price of the thing, whenever
possible, and its special sentimental value to the
injured party, and reparation shall be made
accordingly.
Art. 107. Indemnification; What is included. -
Indemnification for consequential damages shall
include not only those caused the injured party, but
also those suffered by his family or by a third person
by reason of the crime.
Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation
for damages, or indemnification for consequential
damages and actions to demand the same; Upon
whom it devolves. - The obligation to make
restoration or reparation for damages and
indemnification for consequential damages devolves
upon the heirs of the person liable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and
indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the
person injured.
Art. 104 and Art. 38, distinguished
Pecuniary liabilities
Civil liabilities (Art. 104)
(Art. 38)
Reparation, Reparation,
indemnification indemnification
Page 116 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Restition NONE
Fine, costs of
NONE
proceedings
Restitution
Return of the VERY THING TAKEN. Further, if taken
thing is damaged, the court may order the offender to
pay amount representing deterioration.
Restitution should apply when OFFENSE is proven
even if accused is ACQUITTED.
If the possessor of lost property acquired it in good
faith in a PUBLIC SALE
The said property cannot be given to the offended
party/original owner without reimbursement to the
good-faith possessor.
Exceptions
1.   Innocent purchaser for value of property covered
by a Torrens title
2.   When a sale is authorized by the original owner
of the property.
3.   When liability to return a thing arises from a
contract, not from a criminal act, the court
cannot order its return in the criminal case.
Reparations
Applies when restitution is not possible.
Computation
REPARATION = actual value of lost item which
cannot be recovered + sentimental value to original
owner
Indemnity distinguished from restitution
Restitution is crime against property; indemnity,
crime against persons.
When injuries are sustained
Actual damage from injuries = whatever he spent to
treat wounds + doctor’s fees + medicine +
salary/wages unearned because of inability to work +
damages due to loss of limb/etc.
Lost earnings
People v. Wahiman, G.R. No. 200942 (2015):
Wahiman was convicted for murder. RTC imposed
upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua and
directed him to pay the heirs the sum of Php75,000
as moral damages, P75,000 as civil indemnity, and
actual damages as follows: Php59-million as lost
earning capacity, Php25,000 actual damages,
Php1,500 appearance fee, and Php50,000 attorney’s
fee.
Held: Regarding the award for lost earnings, the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
general rule is that there must be documentary proof
to support the indemnity for loss of earning capacity.
Admittedly, there are exceptions to this rule: (1) when
the deceased is self-employed and earning less than
minimum wage or (2) deceased was employed as a
daily wage worker earning less than minimum wage.
Notably, this case does not fall under these
exceptions. Nevertheless, the Court is inclined to
award lost earnings to the widow because she
testified that deceased was the manager of Stanfilco-
Dole and was receiving a monthly salary of
Php95,000. This was not objected to by the
appellant during cross-examination or appeal.
J. Leonen’s concurring opinion: The formula for lost
earnings is:
Net Earning Capacity = Life Expectancy ×
[Gross Annual Income – Reasonable and
Necessary Living Expenses]
The necessary living expense is often estimated at
50% of gross annual income.
The Regional Trial Court used a simplified formula to
compute for loss of earning capacity citing People v.
Reanzares.
Loss of Earning Capacity = [2/3 x (80 – age
of the deceased)] x 1/2 annual gross
income
The simplification of the formula is correct. However,
the trial court’s computation was erroneous.
This is a step-by-step guide to compute an award for
loss of earning capacity.
1.   Subtract the age of the deceased from 80.
2.   Multiply the answer in (1) by 2, and divide it by
3 (these operations are interchangeable).
3.   Multiply 50% to the annual gross income of the
deceased.
4.   Multiply the answer in (2) by the answer in (3).
This is the loss of earning capacity to be
awarded.
Temperate damages
Given when pecuniary losses were suffered but
amount cannot be proven with certainty. Also, when
income of victim is not sufficiently proven.
Moral damages
May be recovered in the following:
1.   crime resulting to physical injuries
2.   seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious
acts
3.   adultery/concubinage
Page 117 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
4.   illegal/arbitrary detention/arrest
5.   illegal search
6.   libel, slander, or any other form of defamation
7.   malicious prosecution
For rape, moral damages may additionally be
awarded without need for pleading or proof of the
basis thereof.
Exemplary damages
Corrective damages are deterrent to serious
wrongdoings, and vindication of undue sufferings.
This is attendant with at LEAST ONE aggravating
circumstance. Or when crime is extremely
reprehensible or outrageous.
How to obtain
Plaintiff must first show he is entitled to moral,
temperate, or compensatory damages before
exemplary damages are awarded.
Attorney’s fees
When defendant’s act or omission has compelled the
plaintiff to litigate with third persosn or incur
expenses to protect his interest.
Interest
6% per annum.
Heirs of Raymundo Castro v. Bustos, G.R. No. L-
25913 (1969):
When death occurs as a result of a crime, the heirs of
the deceased are entitled to the following items of
damages:
1.   As indemnity for the death of the victim of the
offense — P12,000.00, without the need of any
evidence or proof of damages, and even though
there may have been mitigating circumstances
attending the commission of the offense.
2.   As indemnity for loss of earning capacity of the
deceased — an amount to be fixed by the Court
according to the circumstances of the deceased
related to his actual income at the time of death
and his probable life expectancy, the said
indemnity to be assessed and awarded by the
court as a matter of duty, unless the deceased
had no earning capacity at said time on account
of permanent disability not caused by the
accused. If the deceased was obliged to give
support, under Art. 291, Civil Code, the recipient
who is not an heir, may demand support from the
accused for not more than five years, the exact
duration to be fixed by the court.
3.   As moral damages for mental anguish, — an
amount to be fixed by the court. This may be
recovered even by the illegitimate descendants
and ascendants of the deceased.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
4.   As exemplary damages, when the crime is
attended by one or more aggravating
circumstances, — an amount to be fixed in the
discretion of the court, the same to be considered
separate from fines.
5.   As attorney's fees and expresses of litigation, —
the actual amount thereof, (but only when a
separate civil action to recover civil liability has
been filed or when exemplary damages are
awarded).
6.   Interests in the proper cases.
It must be emphasized that the indemnities for loss
of earning capacity of the deceased and for moral
damages are recoverable separately from and in
addition to the fixed sum of P12,000.00
corresponding to the indemnity for the sole fact of
death, and that these damages may, however, be
respectively increased or lessened according to the
mitigating or aggravating circumstances, except
items 1 and 4 above, for obvious reasons.
People v. Oandasan, G.R. No. 194605
(2016): Following People v. Jugueta, in the case of
murder where the appropriate penalty is reclusion
perpetna, the Court has thereby fixed P75,000.00 for
moral damages, P75,000.00 for exemplary
damages, and P75,000.00 for civil indemnity as the
essential civil liabilities,- in addition to others as the
records of each case will substantiate. Incidentally,
the civil indemnity for homicide remained pegged at
P50,000.00 for almost two decades.
Also in accordance with People v. Jugueta, supra,
temperate damages of P50,000.00 should further be
granted to the heirs of the victims considering that
they were presumed to have spent for the interment
of each of the deceased.
d.   Persons Civilly Liable
Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation
for damages, or indemnification for consequential
damages and actions to demand the same; Upon
whom it devolves. - The obligation to make
restoration or reparation for damages and
indemnification for consequential damages devolves
upon the heirs of the person liable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and
indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of the
person injured.
Art. 109. Share of each person civilly liable. - If there
are two or more persons civilly liable for a felony, the
courts shall determine the amount for which each
Page 118 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
must respond.
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of principals,
accomplices and accessories of a felony; Preference
in payment. - Notwithstanding the provisions of the
next preceding article, the principals, accomplices,
and accessories, each within their respective class,
shall be liable severally (in solidum) among
themselves for their quotas, and subsidiaries for
those of the other persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against
the property of the principals; next, against that of
the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of the
accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary
liability has been enforced, the person by whom
payment has been made shall have a right of action
against the others for the amount of their respective
shares.
Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain
cases. - Any person who has participated gratuitously
in the proceeds of a felony shall be bound to make
restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of
such participation.
Notes on RPC art. 108
1.   The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if
restoration is not possible and the deceased left
no property.
2.   Civil liability is possible only when the offender
dies after final judgment.
3.   The action to demand restoration, reparation
and indemnification descends to the heirs of the
person injured.
e.   Extinction of Civil Liability
Pertinent RPC provisions
Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. - Civil liability
established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this
Code shall be extinguished in the same manner as
obligations, in accordance with the provisions of the
Civil Law.
Art. 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. - Except in
case of extinction of his civil liability as provided in
the next preceding article the offender shall continue
to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from
the crime committed by him, notwithstanding the
fact that he has served his sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not been
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

required to serve the same by reason of amnesty,

pardon, commutation of sentence or any other
reason.

Art. 1231, CC. Obligations are extinguished:

1.   By payment or performance;
2.   By the loss of the thing due;
3.   By the condonation or remission of the debt;
4.   By the confusion or merger of the rights of
creditor and debtor;
5.   By compensation;
6.   By novation.

Loss of the thing due

Loss of the thing due does not extinguish civil liability
because if the offender cannot make restitution, he is
obliged to make reparation.

When not extinguished

Indemnity for damages as a judgment in a criminal
case is purely civil in nature and is independent of the
penalty imposed. Unless extinguished, civil liability
subsists even if the offender has served sentence
consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights or
has served the same, due to amnesty, pardon,
commutation of sentence or any other reason.

Even if subsidiarily imprisoned

Under the law as amended, even if the subsidiary
imprisonment is served for non-payment of fine, this
pecuniary liability of the defendant is not
extinguished.

Fixed or otherwise
Costs may be fixed amounts already determined by
law or regulations or amounts subject to a schedule.

Exclusion
Not allowed against the Republic of the Philippines.
(Rule 142, Sec. 1).

Page 119 of 296

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

CRIMINAL LAW II
Criminal Law

Page 120 of 296

 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
II.   REVISED PENAL
CODE (BOOK II)
  Title I. Crimes against
National Security and the
Law of Nations
Crimes against National Security:
1.   Art. 114: Treason
2.   Art. 115: Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit
Treason
3.   Art. 116: Misprision of Treason
4.   Art. 117: Espionage
Crimes against the Law of Nations
1.   Art. 118: Inciting to War or Giving Motives for
Reprisals
2.   Art. 119: Violation of Neutrality
3.   Art. 120: Correspondence with Hostile Country
4.   Art. 121: Flight to Enemy’s Country
5.   Art. 122: Piracy in General and Mutiny on the
High Seas or in Philippine Waters
6.   Art. 123: Qualified Piracy
The crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if
the criminal act or acts were committed outside of
Philippine territorial jurisdiction.
This is one of the instances where the RPC may be
given extraterritorial application under Article 2 (5)
thereof. However, prosecution can proceed only if the
offender is:
1.   within Philippine territory, or
2.   brought to the Philippines pursuant to an
extradition treaty.
Crimes against national security can be tried only in
the Philippines, as there is a need to bring the
offender here before he can be made to suffer the
consequences of the law.
In the case of crimes against the law of nations, the
offender can be prosecuted wherever he may be
found because the crimes are regarded as committed
against humanity in general.
The acts against national security may be committed
abroad and still be punishable under our law.
General rule: Almost all of these are crimes
committed only in times of war.
Page 121 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Exceptions: The following can be committed in times
of peace:
1.   Espionage [Art 117] – This is also covered by
Commonwealth Act No. 616 which punishes
conspiracy to commit espionage.
2.   Inciting to War or Giving Motives for Reprisals
[Art 118] – This can be committed even if the
Philippines is not a participant.
3.   Violation of Neutrality [Art. 119] – The Philippines
is not a party to an on-going war.
1.   Crimes against National
Security
a.   Art. 114-Treason
Mode 1: Levying War
Elements:
1.   Offender is a Filipino or resident alien
2.   There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
3.   The offender levies war against the government
Mode 2: Adherence to the Enemy and Giving of Aid
or Comfort
Elements:
1.   Offender is a Filipino or resident alien
2.   There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
3.   That the offender adheres to the enemies, giving
them aid or comfort
Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government,
committed by a person who owes allegiance to it. It
cannot be committed in times of peace. There are two
ways of committing treason:
1.   By levying war against the Government; and
2.   By adhering to the enemies of the Philippines,
giving them aid or comfort. [Reyes]
Allegiance
This is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which
the individuals owe to the government under which
they live or to their sovereign, in return for the
protection they receive. [Reyes, citing 52 Am. Jur. 797]
It can be either permanent or temporary. Permanent
allegiance consists in the obligation of fidelity and
obedience which a citizen or subject owes to his
government or sovereign. Temporary allegiance is the
obligation of fidelity and obedience which a residen
alien owes to his government. [Laurel v. Misa, G.R.
No. L-409 (1947)]
Extent of Aid or Comfort
To be treasonous, the extent of aid and comfort given
to the enemies must be to render assistance to them
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
as enemies and not as individuals, in the furtherance
of the enemies’ hostile designs. [People v. Perez, G.R.
No. L-856 (1949)]
Intent of disloyalty is a vital ingredient in the crime of
treason, which in the absence of admission may be
gathered from the nature and circumstances of each
particular case. [People v. Perez, supra.]
Mode 1: Levying War
There must be an actual assembling of men. The
mere acceptance of the commission from the
secretary of war of the Katipunan by the accused,
nothing else having been done, was not an overt act
of treason within the meaning of the law. [U.S. v. De
los Reyes, G.R. No. 1434 (1904)]
The levying of war must be directed against the
government. It must be with intent to overthrow the
government as such, not merely to resist a particular
statute or to repel a particular officer. [Reyes, citing 3
th
Wharton’s Criminal Law, 12 Ed.]
The levying of war must be in collaboration with a
foreign enemy. If the levying of war is merely a civil
uprising, without any intention of helping an external
enemy, the crime is not treason. The offenders maybe
held liable for rebellion under Article 135 in relation
to Article 134 of the RPC. [Reyes]
Mode 2: Adherence to the Enemy
Adherence and giving aid or comfort to the enemy
must concur. Adherence to the enemy means an
intent to betray. There is adherence to the enemy
when a citizen intellectually or emotionally favors the
enemy and harbors sympathies or convictions
disloyal to his own country’s policy or interest. Aid or
comfort means an act which strengthens or tends to
strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war against
the traitor’s country and an act which weakens or
tends to weaken the power of the traitor’s country to
resist or to attack the enemy. [Cramer v. US, 65 Sup.
Ct. 918 (1945)]
When there is no adherence to the enemy, the act
which may do aid or comfort to the enemy does not
amount to treason. [Reyes]
The aid and comfort must be given to the enemy by
some kind of action. It must be a deed or physical
activity, not merely a mental operation. What aid and
comfort constitute treason must depend upon their
nature, degree, and purpose. It is not essential that
the effort to aid be successful, provided that over acts
Page 122 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
are done, which, if successful, would advance the
interest of the enemy. [Reyes]
Examples of Specific Acts of Aid or Comfort
Constituting Treason
1.   Serving as informer and active member of the
Japanese Military Police, arresting guerilla
suspects to suppress the underground
movement [People v. Fernando, G.R. No. L-1138
(1947)]
2.   Serving in the Japanese Army as agent or spy
and participating in the raid of guerrilla hideout
[People v. Muñoz, G.R. L-880 (1947)]
3.   Acting as “finger woman” when a barrio was
“zonified” by the Japanese, pointing out to the
Japanese several men whom she accused as
guerrillas [People v. Nuñez, G.R. No. L-2321
(1950)]
4.   Taking active part in the mass killing of civilians
by the Japanese soldiers by personally tying the
hands of the victims [People v. Canibas, G.R. No.
L-2193 (1950)]
5.   Mere fact of having joined a Makapili
organization is evidence of both adherence to the
enemy and giving him aid and comfort. Unless
forced upon one against his will, membership in
the Makapili organization imports treasonable
intent, considering the purpose for which the
organization was created [People v. Adriano, G.R.
No. L-477 (1947)]
Acts not constituting treason
1.   “Commandeering" of women to satisfy the lust of
Japanese officers or men or to enliven the
entertainments held in their honor, even though
the women and the entertainments helped to
make life more pleasant for the enemies and
boost their spirit. Sexual and social relations with
the Japanese did not directly and materially tend
to improve their war efforts or to weaken the
power of the US. [People v. Perez, supra.]
2.   Acceptance of public office and discharge of
official duties under the enemy [People v. Sison,
P.C. 42 O.G. 748]
The overt act of aid and comfort to the enemy must
be intentional, as distinguished from merely
negligent or undesigned ones. [Cramer v. US, supra.]
General Rule: When the killings and other common
crimes are charged as overt acts of treason, they
cannot be regarded: (a) as separate crimes, or (b) as
complexed with treason.
Exception: But this rule would not preclude the
punishment of murder or other common crimes as
such, if the prosecution should elect to prosecute the
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
culprit specifically for these crimes, instead of relying
on them as an element of treason. [People v. Prieto,
G.R. No. L-399 (1948)]
Treason by a Filipino citizen can be committed
outside of the Philippines.
Treason by an alien must be committed in the
Philippines.
The crime of treason is of such a nature that it may be
committed by one single act, by a series of acts, or by
several series thereof, not only in a single time, but in
different times, it being a continuous crime. [People v.
Victoria, G.R. No. L-369 (1947)]
There is no treason through negligence. The overt act
of aid and comfort to the enemy must be intentional.
[Cramer v. US, supra.]
Two Ways of Proving Treason
1.   Testimony of at least two witnesses to the same
overt act; or
2.   Confession of accused in open court. [Art. 114,
par.2, RPC]
The Two-Witness Rule
The testimony of two witnesses is required to prove
the overt act of giving aid or comfort, but it is not
necessary to prove adherence. Each of the witnesses
must testify to the whole overt act; or if it is
separable, there must be two witnesses to each part
of the overt act. [People v. Escleto, G.R. No. L-1006
(1949)]
Membership as a Makapili, as an overt act, must be
established by the deposition of two witnesses.
Where two or more witnesses give oaths to an overt
act and only one of them is believed by the court or
jury, the defendant is entitled to discharge. [People v.
Adriano, supra.]
Adherence may be proved:
1.   By one witness;
2.   From the nature of the act itself; or
3.   From the circumstances surrounding the act.
Adherence need not be proven by two witness
testimonies. It may be inferred from one witness, or
from the nature of the act itself or other
circumstances. [People v. Adriano, supra]
Aggravating Circumstance in treason
ü Cruelty and ignominy
û Evident premeditation – since adherence and
the giving of aid and comfort to the enemy is
usually a long continued process requiring
Page 123 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
reflective and persistent determination and
planning [People v. Racaza, supra.]
û Superior strength & treachery – since they are
inherent in treason [People v. Adlawan, G.R. No.
L-456 (1949)]
û Treachery, aid of armed persons to insure or
afford impunity, and deliberately augmenting
the crimes by causing other wrongs not
necessary in the commission thereof – since they
are inherent in the crime of treason [People v.
Victoria, supra.]
Suspended Allegiance and Change of Sovereignty
These defenses are not accepted because:
1.   A citizen owes an absolute and permanent
allegiance to his Government;
2.   The sovereignty of the Government is not
transferred to the enemy by mere occupation;
3.   The subsistence of the sovereignty of the
legitimate Government in a territory occupied by
the military forces of the enemy during the war is
one of the rules of International Law; and
4.   What is suspended is the exercise of the rights of
sovereignty. [Laurel v. Misa, supra.]
In addition to the defense of duress or uncontrollable
fear, lawful obedience to a de facto Government is a
good defense in treason. The Philippine Executive
Commission, as well as the Republic established by
the Japanese occupation army in the Philippines, had
all the characteristics of a de facto Government. [Go
Kim Cham v. Valdez, G.R. No. L-5 (1945)]
Defense of loss of citizenship by joining the army of
the enemy is not valid. The accused cannot divest
himself of his Philippine citizenship by the simple
expedient of accepting a commission in the military,
naval or air service of such country. If his contention is
sustained, his very crime would be the shield that
would protect him from punishment. [People v.
Manayao, G.R. No. L-322 (1947)]
b.   Article 115 – Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Treason
Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:
1.   There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
2.   At least two persons come to an agreement to
a.   Levy war against the government; or
b.   Adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort
3.   They decide to commit it
Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason
1.   There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
2.   At least one person decides to –
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
a.   Levy war against the government; or
b.   Adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort
3.   That person proposes its execution to other
persons
General rule: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a
felony is not punishable under Article 8.
Exception: Under Article 115, mere conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason is punishable. This is
because, in treason, the very existence of the state is
endangered. [Reyes]
The two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason because this is a
separate and distinct offense from that of treason.
[US v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-2189 (1906)]
c.   Article 116 – Misprision of
Treason
Elements:
1.   Offender owes allegiance to the government,
and is not a foreigner
2.   He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit
treason against the government
3.   He conceals or does not disclose and make
known the same as soon as possible to the
governor or fiscal of the province in which he
resides, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which
he resides
This is a crime that may be committed only by
citizens of the Philippines. It cannot be committed by
a resident alien.
Essence: There are persons who conspire to commit
treason and the offender knew this and failed to
make the necessary report to the government within
the earliest possible time.
Article 116 does not apply when the crime of treason
is already committed by someone and the accused
does not report its commission to the proper
authority. The provision only speaks of “knowledge of
any conspiracy against” the Government of the
Philippines, not knowledge of treason actually
committed by another. In the latter case, the
implication is that the government is already aware
of it.
The offender in misprision of treason is punished as
an accessory to treason. Note that Article 116 does
not provide for a penalty. However, the offender is a
principal in the crime of misprision of treason.
Page 124 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Blood relationship is always subservient to national
security. Article 20 of the RPC regarding accessories
who are exempt from criminal liability does not apply
in this case because persons found liable for this
crime are not considered accessories, but as
principals.
Article 116 is an exception to the rule that mere
silence does not make a person criminally liable. [US
v. Caballeros, G.R. No. 1352 (1905)]
d.   Article 117 – Espionage
Mode 1: By entering, without authority therefor, a
warship, fort, or naval or military establishment or
reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs, or other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines
Elements:
1.   Offender enters a warship, fort, or naval or
military establishment or reservation;
2.   He has no authority therefor;
3.   His purpose is to obtain information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential
nature relative to the defense of the Philippines.
Mode 2: Disclosing by public officer of confidential
information to a foreign representative
Elements:
1.   That the offender is a public officer;
2.   That he has in his possession the articles, data or
information of a confidential nature relative to
the defense of the Philippines, by reason of the
public office he holds;
3.   That he discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
Under paragraph 1, the offender may be any person,
but under paragraph 2, the offender must be a public
officer who has in his possession the information by
reason of the public office he holds.
To be liable under paragraph 1, the offender must
have the intention to obtain information relative to
the defense of the Philippines. It is not necessary that
the information is obtained. It is sufficient that the
offender has the purpose to obtain such.
Espionage Treason
Not conditioned on the Not conditioned on the
citizenship of the citizenship of the
offender offender
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
May be committed both
Committed only in times
in times of war and in
of war
times of peace
Limited only to two ways
of committing the crime:
May be committed in
levying of war and
many ways
adhering to the enemy
giving him aid or comfort
COMMONWEALTH ACT NO. 616
An Act to Punish Espionage and Other Offenses
against the National Security
[Note: Not in 2018 Bar Syllabus]
Punishable Acts
Sec. 1. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be
obtained information affecting national defense. —
(a)  going upon, entering, flying over, or otherwise
obtaining information concerning any vessel,
aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval
station, submarine base, coaling station, fort,
battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal,
railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph,
telephone, wireless, or signal station, building,
office, or other place connected with the national
defense, xxx or any place in which any vessel,
aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or
instruments for the use in time of war are being
made, prepared, repaired, or stored, for the
purposes of obtaining information respecting the
national defense with intent or reason to believe
that the information to be obtained is to be used
to the injury of the Philippines or of the United
States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation
(b)  copying, taking, making, or obtaining, or
attempting, or inducing or aiding another to
copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch,
photograph, photographic negative, blue print,
plan, map, model, instrument, appliance,
document, writing, or note of anything connected
with the national defense for the same purpose
and with like intent as in paragraph (a)
(c)  receiving or obtaining or agreeing or attempting
or inducing or aiding another to receive or
obtain from any person, or from any source
whatever, any document, writing, code book,
signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic
negative, blue print, plan, map, model,
instrument, appliance, or note of anything
connected with the national defense, knowing or
having reason to believe, at the time he receives
or obtains, or agrees or attempts or induces or
aids another to receive or obtain it, that it has
been or will be obtained, taken, made, or
disposed of by any person contrary to the
provisions of this Act; or
Page 125 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
(d)  wilfully communicating or transmitting or
attempting to communicate or transmit any
document, writing, code book, signal book,
sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue
print, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance,
or note relating to the national defense to any
person not entitled to receive it, or wilfully
retaining the same and fails to deliver it on
demand to the officer or employee of the
Philippines or of the United States entitled to
receive it; the offender having lawful or unlawful
possession of, access to, control over, or being
intrusted with the same; or
(e)  permitting, through gross negligence, to be
removed from its proper place of custody or
delivered to anyone in violation of this trust or to
be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed any
document, writing, code book, signal book,
sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue
print, plan, map, model, note or information,
relating to the national defense, the offender
being intrusted with or having lawful possession
or control of the same
Sec. 2. Unlawful disclosing information affecting
national defense. —
(a)  communicating, delivering, or transmitting, or
attempting to, or aiding or inducing another to,
communicate, deliver, or transmit to any foreign
government, or any faction or party or military or
naval force within a foreign country, whether
recognized or unrecognized by the Philippines, or
to any representative, officer, agent, employee,
subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or
indirectly, any document, writing, code book,
signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic
negative, blue print, plan, map, model,
instrument, appliance, or information relating to
the national defense, with the intent or reason to
believe that it is to be used to the injury of the
Philippines or to the advantage of a foreign
nation
*Punishable by death or imprisonment for
not more than 30 years, if committed in time of
war.
(b)  in time of war, by collecting, recording,
publishing, or communicating, or attempting to
elicit any information with respect to the
movement, number, description, condition, or
disposition of any of the armed forces, ships,
aircraft, or war materials of the Philippines, or
with respect to the plans or conduct, or supposed
plans or conduct of any military, naval, or air
operations, or with respect to any works or
measures undertaken for or connected with, or
intended for the fortification or defense of any
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
place, or any other information relating to the
public defense which might be useful to the
enemy
Sec. 3. Disloyal acts or works in time of peace. — It
shall be unlawful for any person, with intent to
interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty, morale,
or discipline of the military, naval, or air forces of the
Philippines
(a)  advising, counseling, urging, or in any manner
causinginsubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or
refusal of duty by any member of the military,
naval, or air forces of the Philippines or of the
United States; or
(b)  distributing any written or printed matter which
advises, counsels, or urges insubordination,
disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty by any
member of the military, naval, or air forces of the
Philippines.
Sec. 4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war. —
wilfully making or conveying false reports or false
statements with the intent to interfere with the
operation or success of the military, naval, or air
forces of the Philippines, or
To promote the success of its enemies, by wilfully
causing or attempting to cause insubordination,
disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military,
naval, or air forces of the Philippines, or
Willfully obstructing the recruiting or enlistment
service of the Philippines to the injury of the service of
the Philippines
Sec. 5. Conspiracy to violate preceding sections. — (1)
two or more persons conspire to violate the provisions
of sections 1, 2, 3, or 4 of this Act, (2) one or more of
such persons does any act to effect the object of the
conspiracy
Each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be
punished for the doing of the act the accomplishment
of which is the object of such conspiracy.
Section 6. Harboring or concealing violators of the
law. — harboring or concealing any person who he
knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or
suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an
offense under this Act.
Other Acts
(a)   Making any photograph, sketch, picture,
drawing, map, or graphical representation of
vital military, naval, and air installations or
equipment of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines without first obtaining permission of
the commanding officer[Sec. 8]
(b)   Using or permitting or procuring the use of an
Page 126 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
aircraft for the purpose of making a photograph,
sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical
representation of vital military, naval or air
installations or equipment, in violation of Sec. 8
[Sec. 9]
(c)   Reproducing, publishing, selling, etc.,
uncensored copies any photograph, sketch,
picture, drawing, map or graphical
representation of the vital military, naval, or air
installations or equipment so defined, without
first obtaining permission of the commanding
officer [Sec. 10]
(d)   Destroying or injuring or attempting to injure or
destroy war material in time of war [Sec. 11]
(e)   Making or causing war material to be made in
defective manner when the Philippines is at war
[Sec. 12]
(f)   Injuring or destroying national defense material,
premises, or utilities [Sec. 13]
(g)   Making or causing to be made in a defective
manner, or attempting to make or cause to be
made in a defective manner, national defense
material [Sec. 14]
2.  C rimes against the Law of
Nations
a.   Article 118 – Inciting to War or
Giving Motives for Reprisals
Elements:
1.   Offender performs unlawful or unauthorized acts
2.   The acts provoke or give occasion for
a.   A war involving or liable to involve the
Philippines; or
b.   Exposure of Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property
This crime is committed in times of peace.
The intention of the offender is immaterial. The law
considers the effects produced by the acts of the
accused. [Reyes]
Examples: The public destruction of the flag or seal
of a foreign state or the public manifestations of
hostility to the head or ambassador of another state.
b.   Article 119 – Violation of
Neutrality
Elements
1.   There is a war in which the Philippines is not
involved
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   There is a regulation issued by a competent
authority to enforce neutrality
3.   Offender violates the regulation
Neutrality
This is defined as a nation or power which takes no
part in a contest of arms going on between other
countries.
c.   Article 120 – Correspondence
with Hostile Country
Elements:
1.   It is a time of war in which the Philippines is
involved
2.   Offender makes correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops
3.   The correspondence is either –
a.   Prohibited by the government, or
b.   Carried on in ciphers or conventional signs,
or
c.   Containing notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy.
Correspondence
This is communication by means of letters which pass
between those who have friendly or business
relations.
Even if the correspondence contains innocent
matters, if the correspondence has been prohibited
by the Government, it is punishable.
Prohibition by the Government is not essential in
instances (b) and (c).
Qualifying Circumstances under Instance (c)
The following must concur:
1.   That the notice or information might be useful to
the enemy, and
2.   That the offender intended to aid the enemy.
If the offender intended to aid the enemy by giving
such notice or information, the crime amounts to
treason; hence, the penalty is the same as that for
treason. [Reyes]
d.   Article 121 – Flight to Enemy's
Country
Elements:
1.   There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
2.   Offender must be owing allegiance to the
government
3.   Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country
Page 127 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
4.   Going to the enemy country is prohibited by
competent authority
An alien resident may be guilty of flight to enemy
country. The law does not say “not being a foreigner.”
Hence, the allegiance contemplated in this article is
either natural or temporary allegiance. [Reyes]
Mere attempt to flee or to go to enemy country when
prohibited by competent authority consummates the
felony. [Reyes]
e.   Article 122 – Piracy in General
and Mutiny on the High Seas
or in Philippine Waters
Elements:
1.   The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine
waters
2.   Offenders are neither members of its
complement nor passengers of the vessel
3.   Offenders either –
a.   Attack or seize that vessel; or
b.   Seize the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its
complement or passengers
4.   There is intent to gain
High Seas
This term refers to the parts of the seas that are not
included in the exclusive economic zone, in the
territorial seas, or in the internal waters of a state, or
in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic state.
[Convention on the Law of the Sea]
Piracy
This is robbery or forcible depredation on the high
seas, without lawful authority and done with animo
furandi and in the spirit and intention of universal
hostility. [People v. Lol-lo and Saraw, G.R. No. 17958
(1922)]
Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes has
no territorial limits. Pirates are in law hostes humani
generis. Piracy is a crime not against any particular
State but against all mankind. It may be punished in
the competent tribunal of any country where the
offender may be found or into which he may be
carried. [People v. Lol-lo and Saraw, supra.]
Mutiny
This is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer, or
the raising of commotions and disturbances on board
a ship against the authority of its commander.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Mutiny is usually committed by the other members of
the complement and may be committed by the
passengers of the vessel.
Piracy Mutiny
Persons who attack the Persons who attack the
vessel or seize its cargo vessel or seize its cargo
are strangers to said are members of the crew
vessels or passengers
Intent to gain is not
essential. The offenders
may only intend to ignore
Intent to gain is essential
the ship’s officers or they
may be prompted by a
desire to commit plunder.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 532
Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974
Abetting Piracy
In Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 532, the act of
aiding pirates or abetting piracy is penalized as a
crime distinct from piracy.
Said section penalizes any person who knowingly and
in any manner aids or protects pirates, such as giving
them information about the movement of the police
or other peace officers of the government, or acquires
or receives property taken by such pirates, or in any
manner derives any benefit therefrom; or who directly
or indirectly abets the commission of piracy.
Also, the offender shall be considered as an
accomplice of the principal offenders and punished in
accordance with the Revised Penal Code.
This provision of PD No. 532 with respect to piracy in
Philippine waters has not been incorporated into the
RPC. Neither may it be considered repealed by RA
7659 (An Act to Impose the Death Penalty on Certain
Heinous Crimes) since there is nothing in the
amendatory lawwhich is inconsistent with said
section.
REPUBLIC ACT 9372
An Act to Secure the State and Protect Our People
from Terrorism (Human Security Act of 2007)
A person who commits an act punishable as piracy
and mutiny under Article 122 thereby sowing and
creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary
fear and panic among the populace, in order to
coerce the government to give in to an unlawful
demand shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism.
Page 128 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
f.   Article 123 – Qualified Piracy
Elements:
1.   The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine
waters
2.   Offenders are neither members of its
complement, or passengers of the vessel
3.   Offenders either –
a.   Attack or seize the vessel; or
b.   Seize the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment, or personal belongings of its
crew or passengers
4.   The preceding were committed under any of the
following circumstances:
a.   Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same;
b.   Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
victims without means of saving themselves; or
c.   Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries or rape
Paragraph 2 (Item 2 in letter D) specifically mentions
“pirates” thereby excluding mutineers from said
paragraph. It would seem, however, that it should be
in paragraph 1 (Item 1 in letter D) where the word
“pirates” should be specifically mentioned and not in
paragraph 2, because in paragraph 1, the mutineers,
being already in the vessel, cannot seize the vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same. [Reyes]
Murder, rape, homicide, physical injuries are mere
circumstances qualifying piracy and cannot be
punished as separate crimes, nor can they be
complexed with piracy.
PD NO. 532: ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY
ROBBERY LAW OF 1974
Punishable Acts
1.   Piracy
Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the taking
away of the whole or part thereof or its cargo,
equipment, or the personal belongings of its
complement or passengers, irrespective of the value
thereof, by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons or force upon things, committed by any
person, including a passenger or member of the
complement of said vessel, in Philippine waters. [Sec
2(d), PD 532]
Philippine Waters
All bodies of water, such as but not limited to, seas,
gulfs, bays around, between and connecting each of
the Islands of the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective
of its depth, breadth, length or dimension, and all
other waters belonging to the Philippines by historic
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
or legal title, including territorial sea, the sea-bed,
the insular shelves, and other submarine areas over
which the Philippines has sovereignty or
jurisdiction[Sec 2(a), PD 532]
Vessel
Any vessel or watercraft used for transport of
passengers and cargo from one place to another
through Philippine Waters. It shall include all kinds
and types of vessels or boats used in fishing [Sec 2(b),
PD 532]
Penalty
  Reclusion temporal in its medium and
maximum periods
  Reclusion perpetua – if physical injuries or
other crimes are committed as a result or on the
occasion thereof
  Death – if rape, murder or homicide is
committed as a result or on the occasion of piracy,
or when the offenders abandoned the victims
without means of saving themselves, or when the
seizure is accomplished by firing upon or boarding
a vessel [Sec 3(a), PD 532]
2.   Highway Robbery/Brigandage
The seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or
other unlawful purposes, or the taking away of the
property of another by means of violence against or
intimidation of person or force upon things of other
unlawful means, committed by any person on any
Philippine Highway. [Sec 2 (e),PD 532]
Philippine Highway
Any road, street, passage, highway and bridges or
other parts thereof, or railway or railroad within the
Philippines used by persons, or vehicles, or
locomotives or trains for the movement or circulation
of persons or transportation of goods, articles, or
property or both [Sec 2 (c),PD 532]
Penalty
  Reclusion temporal in its minimum period
  Reclusion temporal in its medium and
maximum periods — If physical injuries or other
crimes are committed during or on the occasion of
the commission of robbery or brigandage
  Death — If kidnapping for ransom or
extortion, or murder or homicide, or rape is
committed as a result or on the occasion thereof
[Sec 3(b), PD 532]
3.   Aiding pirates or highway robbers/brigands or
abetting piracy or highway
robbery/brigandage
Page 129 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
a.   Any person who knowingly and in any manner
aids or protects pirates or highway
robbers/brigands, such as giving them
information about the movement of police or
other peace officers of the government, or
b.   Acquires or receives property taken by such
pirates or brigands or in any manner derives any
benefit therefrom; or
c.   Any person who directly or indirectly abets the
commission of piracy or highway robbery or
brigandage
They shall be considered as an accomplice of the
principal offenders.
It shall be presumed that any person who does any of
the acts provided in this Section has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.[Sec 4,PD
532]
RA 6235: AN ACT PROHIBITING CERTAIN ACTS
INIMICAL TO CIVIL AVIATION, AND OTHER
PURPOSES (ANTI-HIJACKING LAW)
Punishable Acts
1.   To compel a change in the course or
destination of an aircraft of Philippine registry
or to seize or usurp the control thereof, while it
is in flight.
An aircraft is in flight from the moment all its
external doors are closed following embarkation
until any of such doors is opened for
disembarkation. [Sec 1, RA 6235]
2.   To compel an aircraft of foreign registry to land
in Philippine territory or to seize or usurp the
control thereof while it is within the said
territory. [Sec 1, RA 6235]
3.   To ship, load or carry in any passenger aircraft
operating as a public utility within the
Philippines, an explosive, flammable, corrosive
or poisonous substance or material. [Sec 3,
RA 6235]
The offender may be a natural or juridical person.
The shipping, loading or carrying of any
substance or material mentioned in the
preceding section in any cargo aircraft operating
as a public utility within the Philippines shall be
in accordance with regulations issued by the Civil
Aeronautics Administration. [Sec 4, RA 6235]
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Penalty
Imprisonment of not less than 12 years but not more
than 20 years, or by a fine of not less than 20,000
pesos but not more than 40,000 pesos[Sec 2,
RA 6235]
The penalty of imprisonment of 15 years to death, or a
fine of not less than 25,000 pesos but not more than
50,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person
committing such violation under any of the following
circumstances:
1.   Whenever he has fired upon the pilot, member of
the crew or passenger of the aircraft;
2.   Whenever he has exploded or attempted to
explode any bomb or explosive to destroy the
aircraft; or
3.   Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, serious physical injuries or rape.[Sec
2,RA 6235]
RA 9372: An Act to Secure the State and Protect
Our People from Terrorism (Human Security Act of
2007)
Terrorism
[Note: Acts of terrorism under RA 9372 were
specifically mentioned in the 2018 Bar Syllabus.]
Elements
  Offender commits an act punishable under any
of the following provisions of the Revised Penal
Code:
a.   Art. 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the
High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
b.   Art.134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
c.   Art. 134-a (Coup d’état), including acts
committed by private persons;
d.   Art. 248 (Murder);
e.   Art. 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
f.   Art. 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction),
or under
a.   P.D. No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
b.   R.A. No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of
1990);
c.   R.A. No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory
and Liability Act of 1968);
d.   R.A. No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
e.   Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and
Anti-highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
f.   P.D. No. 1866, as amended (Decree
Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms,
Ammunitions or Explosives)
Page 130 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
  Thereby sowing and creating a condition of
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace
  In order to coerce the government to give in to an
unlawful demand[Sec 3, RA 9372]
Penalty
Forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit
of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103,
otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
as amended [Sec 3, RA 9372]
Who Are Liable
1.   Conspirator – Persons who conspire to commit
the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of
forty (40) years of imprisonment.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the
commission of the crime of terrorism as defined
in Section 3 hereof and decide to commit the
same.[Sec 4, RA 9372]
2.   Accomplice – Any person who, not being a
principal under Art. 17 of the Revised Penal Code
or a conspirator as defined in Section 4 hereof,
cooperates in the execution of either the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by
previous or simultaneous acts shall suffer the
penalty of from seventeen (17) years, four (4)
months one day to twenty (20) years of
imprisonment. [Sec 5, RA 9372]
3.   Accessory – Any person who, having knowledge
of the commission of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, and without
having participated therein, either as principal or
accomplice under Art.17 and 18 of the RPC takes
part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manner:
a.   by profiting himself or assisting the offender
to profit by the effects of the crime;
b.   by concealing or destroying the body of the
crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof,
in order to prevent its discovery;
c.   by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
escape of the principal or conspirator of the
crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment. [Sec 6, RA 9372]
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties
prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon
those who are such with respect to their spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
within the same degrees, with the single exception of
accessories falling within the provisions of
subparagraph (a). [Sec 6, RA 9372]
Double Jeopardy
When a person has been prosecuted under a
provision of this Act, upon a valid complaint or
information or other formal charge sufficient in form
and substance to sustain a conviction and after the
accused had pleaded to the charge, the acquittal of
the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar
to another prosecution for any offense or felony which
is necessarily included in the offense charged under
this Act. [Sec 49, RA 9372]
Page 131 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
  Title II. Crimes against
Fundamental Laws of the
State
1.   Art. 124: Arbitrary Detention
2.   Art. 125: Delay in the Delivery Of Detained
Persons to the Proper Judicial Authorities
3.   Art. 126: Delaying Release
4.   Art. 127: Expulsion
5.   Art. 128: Violation of Domicile
6.   Art.129: Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained
and Abuse in the Service of those Legally
Obtained
7.   Art. 130: Searching Domicile Without Witnesses
8.   Art. 131: Prohibition, Interruption and Dissolution
of Peaceful Meetings
9.   Art. 132: Interruption of Religious Worship
10.   Art. 133: Offending the Religious Feelings
Crimes under this title are those that violate certain
provisions of the Bill of Rights.
All offenses under this title can only be committed by
public officers; except offending the religious feelings
under Article 133, which can also be committed by a
private person.
A private person may be liable under these articles
only when he:
1.   Conspires with a public officer; or
2.   He becomes an accomplice or accessory to said
crimes.
1.   Article 124 – Arbitrary
Detention
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He detains a person
c.   Detention is without a legal ground
The crime of Arbitrary Detention assumes several
forms:
a.   Detaining a person without legal grounds [Article
124];
b.   Having arrested the offended party for legal
grounds but without warrant of arrest, and the
public officer does not deliver the arrested
person to the proper judicial authority within the
period of 12, 18, or 36 hours, as the case may be
[Article 125]; or
c.   Delaying release by competent authority with the
same period mentioned in number 2 [Article 126].
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Detention If the offender falsely imputes a crime against a

This refers to the actual confinement of a person in person to be able to arrest him and appear not
an enclosure, or in any manner detaining and determined to file a charge against him, the crime is
depriving him of his liberty. arbitrary detention through unlawful arrest. [Boado]

The detention of a person is without legal ground:
a.   when he has not committed any crime or, at
least, there is no reasonable ground for suspicion
that he has committed a crime, or
b.   when he is not suffering from violent insanity or
any other ailment requiring compulsory
confinement in a hospital.
A public officer is deemed such when he is acting
within the bounds of his official authority or function.
A police officer who employs force in excess of what is
necessary is acting outside the bounds of his duties
and is considered acting in his private capacity.
[Boado]
Although the offender must be a public officer in the
crime of arbitrary detention, not all public officers can
commit it. Only those public officers whose official
duties carry with it the authority to make an arrest
and detain persons can be guilty of this crime.
In a case decided by the Supreme Court, a Barangay
Chairman who unlawfully detains another was held
to be guilty of the crime of arbitrary detention. This is
because he is a person in authority vested with
jurisdiction to maintain peace and order within his
barangay. [Milo v. Salanga, G.R. No L-37007 (1987)]
There must be an actual restraint of liberty of the
offended party.
The crime committed is only grave or light threats if
the offended party may still go to the place where he
wants to go, even though there have been warnings.
In a case where a DENR team was invited to a
mayor’s house from 5:30pm to 2:30am for dinner and
drinks, the mayor was absolved of the charges of
Arbitrary Detention. The determinative factor in
Arbitrary Detention, in the absence of actual physical
restraint, is fear. No record on evidence showed that
the mayor instilled fear into the minds of the DENR
team while they were in the Mayor’s house. [Astorga
v. People, G.R. No. 154130 (2004)]
Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of arbitrary
detention.
Sec. 5, Rule 113. Arrest without warrant; when
lawful. — A peace officer or a private person may,
without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested
has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and he
has probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person
to be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who
has escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily
confined while his case is pending, or has escaped
while being transferred from one confinement to
another.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above,
the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail
and shall be proceeded against in accordance with
section 7 of Rule 112.

Difference between Arbitrary Detention, Illegal Detention and Unlawful Arrest

Arbitrary Detention Illegal Detention Unlawful Arrest
1.   Private person; or
Public officer who has authority to 2.   Public officer who is acting in
Offender Any person
make arrests and detain persons a private capacity or beyond
the scope of his official duty
Accuse the offended party of a
Violate the offended party’s crime he did not commit, deliver
Criminal Deprive the offended party of his
constitutional freedom against him to the proper authority, and
Intent personal liberty
warrantless arrest file the necessary charges to
incriminate him

 
Page 132 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.  A rticle 125 – Delay in the
Delivery of Detained
Persons to the Proper
Judicial Authorities
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He detains a person for some legal ground
c.   He fails to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities within –
1.   12 hours for light penalties
2.   18 hours for correctional penalties
3.   36 hours for afflictive or capitalpenalties
This is applicable only when the arrest is without a
warrant, but the arrest must be lawful.
At the beginning, the detention is legal since it is in
the pursuance of a lawful arrest. Detention becomes
arbitrary when the:
a.   Applicable period lapses
b.   Without the arresting officer filing a formal
charge with the proper court.
The periods stated are counted only when the
prosecutor’s office is ready to receive the complaint or
information. Nighttime is not included in the period.
Delivery
This means the filing of correct information with the
proper court. It may also mean constructive delivery
or the turning over the person arrested to the
jurisdiction of the court. The purpose is to determine
whether the offense is bailable or not. Upon delivery,
the court acquires jurisdiction to issue an order of
release or of commitment of prisoner. [Sayo v. Chief of
Police, G.R. No. L-2128 (1948)]
The elements of custodial investigation are:
a.   The suspect is deprived of liberty in any
significant manner;
b.   The interrogation is initiated by law enforcement
authorities;
c.   The interrogation is inculpatory in character.
[People v. Tan, G.R. No. 117321 (1998)]
Where the invitation comes from a powerful group
composed predominantly of ranking military officers
and the designated interrogation site is a military
camp, the same can be easily taken not as a strictly
voluntary invitation. It is an authoritative command
that one can only defy at one’s peril. [Sanchez v.
Demetriou, G.R. Nos. 111771-77 (1993)]
Page 133 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Where a judge is not available, the arresting officer is
duty-bound to release a detained person, if the
maximum hours for detention provided under Article
125 of the Revised Penal Code had already expired.
[Albior v. Auguis, A.M. No. P-01-1472 (2003)]
Waiver of the Provisions of Article 125
Before the complaint or information is filed, the
person arrested may ask for a preliminary
investigation in accordance with Rule 112 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, but he must
sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the
RPC in the presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding
the waiver, he may apply for bail and the
investigation must be terminated within fifteen days
from its inception. [par. 2, Sec. 7, Rule 112]
3.  Article 126 – Delaying
Release
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   There is a:
1.   Judicial or executive order for the release of a
prisoner or detention prisoner, or
2.   A proceeding upon a petition for the
liberation of such person
c.   Offender without good reason delays –
1.   The service of the notice of such order to the
prisoner
2.   The performance of such judicial or executive
order for the release of the prisoner; or
3.   The proceedings upon a petition for the
release of such person
Wardens and jailers are the public officers most likely
to violate Article 126.
4.  A rticle 127 – Expulsion
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He either –
1.   Expels any person from the Philippines; or
2.   Compels a person to change residence
c.   Offender is not authorized to do so by law
The city mayor of Manila committed the crime of
expulsion when he ordered certain prostitutes to be
transferred to Davao WITHOUT observing due
process since they have not been charged with any
crime. [Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L-14639
(1919)]
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
5.  A rticle 128 – Violation of
Domicile
Acts punished:
a.   Entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof
b.   Searching papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner, or
c.   Refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after
having been required to leave the same
Elements common to the three acts:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He is not authorized by judicial order –
1.   To enter the dwelling;
2.   To make a search therein for papers or other
effects; or
3.   He refuses to leave, after having
surreptitiously entered such dwelling and
having been required to leave the same.
Qualifying circumstances:
a.   Nighttime
b.   Papers or effects not constituting evidence of a
crime are not returned immediately after the
search made by the offender
Rule 113: A public officer who breaks into the
premises incurs no liability when aperson to be
arrested enters said premises and closes it thereafter,
provided that the officer first gives a notice of arrest.
According to People v. Doria [G.R. No. 125299 (1999)]
and People v. Elamparo [G.R. No. 121572 (2000)], the
following are the accepted exceptions to the warrant
requirement:
a.   Search incidental to an arrest;
b.   Search of moving vehicles;
c.   Evidence in plain view;
d.   Stop and frisk;
e.   Customs searches; and
f.   Consented warrantless search.
[M]ere suspicion or a hunch will not validate a "stop
and frisk." A genuine reason must exist, in light of the
police officer's experience and surrounding
conditions, to warrant the belief that the person
detained has weapons concealed about him.
A "stop-and-frisk" serves a two-fold interest:
a.   The general interest of effective crime prevention
and detection, which underlies the recognition
that a police officer may, under appropriate
circumstances and in an appropriate manner,
Page 134 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
approach a person for purposes of investigating
possible criminal behavior even without probable
cause; and
b.   The more pressing interest of safety and self-
preservation which permit the police officer to
take steps to assure himself that the person with
whom he deals is not armed with a deadly
weapon that could unexpectedly and fatally be
used against the police officer. [Malacat v. CA,
G.R. No. 123595 (1997)]
“Against the will” means that the offender ignored
the prohibition of the owner which may be express or
implied as when the door is closed even though not
locked. [Boado]
The offender must be a public officer or employee. If
the offender is a private individual then the crime is
trespass to dwelling under Article 280.
6.  A rticle 129 – Search
Warrants Maliciously
Obtained, and Abuse in
the Service of Those
Legally Obtained
Procuring a search warrant without just cause:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He procures a search warrant
c.   There is no just cause
Exceeding authority or using unnecessary severity
in executing a search warrant legally procured:
1.   Offender is a public officer or employee
2.   He has legally procured a search warrant
3.   He exceeds his authority or uses unnecessary
severity in executing the same
7.  Article 130 – Searching
Domicile without
Witnesses
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He is armed with search warrant legally procured
c.   He searches the domicile, papers or other
belongings of any person
d.   The owner, or any members of his family, or two
witnesses residing in the same locality are not
present
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
To “search” means to go over or look through for the
purpose of finding something; to examine. Note that
it must be done to a person’s domicile, papers, or
other belongings only. [Reyes]
Rule 126: Search and Seizure
A search warrant is an order in writing:
a.   Signed by a judge
b.   Directed to a peace officer, commanding him to
search for personal property described therein
and bring it before the court
Requisites for issuing a search warrant:
a.   Probable cause, in connection with one specific
offense, to be determined personally by the
judge after examination under oath or
affirmation of the complainant and the witness
he may produce
b.   Particular description of:
1.   Place to be searched; and
2.   Things to be seized which may be anywhere
in the Philippines
An officer may break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house or any part of a house or anything
therein when these circumstances concur:
a.   He is refused admittance to the place of directed
search;
b.   His purpose is to execute the warrant to liberate
himself or any person lawfully aiding him when
unlawfully detained therein; and
c.   He has given notice of his purpose and authority.
The warrant must direct that it be served in the
daytime. However, it can be served at any time of the
day or night when the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to be
searched.
A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from
its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
The officer seizing the property under the warrant
must give a detailed receipt for the same to the
lawful occupantof the premises in whose presence
the search and seizure were made.
In the absence of such occupant, the officer must:
a.   Leave a receipt in the place in which he found the
seized property;
b.   In the presence of at least two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality.
Page 135 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
8.  A rticle 131 – Prohibition,
Interruption and
Dissolution of Peaceful
Meetings
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   He performs any of the following acts:
1.   Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal
ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting,
or by dissolving the same
2.   Hindering any person from joining any lawful
association, or from attending any of its
meetings
3.   Prohibiting or hindering any person from
addressing, either alone or together with
others, any petition to the authorities for the
correction of abuses or redress of grievances
The government has a right to require a permit before
any gathering can be made. However, the
government only has regulatory, not prohibitory,
powers with regard to such requirement.
The permit should state the day, time, and place of
the gathering.
If the permit is denied arbitrarily, OR the officer
dictates the place where the meeting is to be held,
this article is violated.
If in the course of the assembly, which started out
peacefully, the participants committed illegal acts
like oral defamation or inciting to sedition, a public
officer or law enforcer can stop or dissolve the
meeting.
Two criteria to determine whether this article would
be violated:
a.   Dangerous tendency rule – applied during times
of national unrest such as to prevent coup d’état.
b.   Clear and present danger rule – applied during
times of peace. Stricter rule.
9.  A rticle 132 – Interruption
of Religious Worship
Elements:
a.   Offender is a public officer or employee
b.   Religious ceremonies or manifestations of any
religion are about to take place or are going on
c.   Offender prevents or disturbs the same
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Qualifying circumstance: if the crime is committed
with violence or threats.
10.  Article 133 – Offending
the Religious Feelings
Elements:
a.   Acts complained of were performed
1.   in a place devoted to religious worship, or
2.   during the celebration of any religious
ceremony
b.   The acts must be notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful
In the phrase “in a place devoted to religious
worship,” it is not necessary that there is a religious
ceremony going on when the offender performs acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
The phrase “during the celebration” is separated by
the word “or” from the phrase “place devoted to
religious worship,” which indicates that the “religious
ceremony” need not be celebrated in a place of
worship. [Reyes]
An act is notoriously offensive to the religious
feelings when a person:
a.   Ridicules or makes light of anything
constituting religious dogma
b.   Works or scoffs at anything devoted to religious
ceremonies
c.   Plays with or damages or destroys any object of
veneration of the faithful
Whether or not an act is offensive to the religious
feelings is a question of fact which must be adjudged
only according to the feelings of the Catholics and
not those of other faithful ones. [People v. Baes, G.R.
No. L-46000 (1939)]
Laurel Dissent in People v. Baes: Offense to religious
feelings should not be made to depend upon the
more or less broad or narrow conception of any given
particular religion, but should be gauged having in
view the nature of the acts committed and after
scrutiny of all the facts and circumstance which
should be viewed through the mirror of an unbiased
judicial criterion. [Note: This later became the
majority decision in People v. Tengson, (CA) 67 O.G.
1552 (1971)]
The crime is only unjust vexation when the act is not
directed at the religious belief itself and there is no
intention of causing so serious a disturbance as to
interrupt a religious ceremony. [People v. Nanoy, 69
O.G. 8043 (1975)]
Page 136 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
RA 9372: AN ACT TO SECURE THE STATE AND
PROTECT OUR PEOPLE FROM TERRORISM
(HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007)
Note: RA 9372 was specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus)
Period of Detention
Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest
The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Code to the contrary notwithstanding, any police or
law enforcement personnel, who, having been duly
authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council
has taken custody of a person charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of
conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without
incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery
of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities,
deliver said charged or suspected person to the
proper judicial authority within a period of three (3)
days counted from the moment the said charged or
suspected person has been apprehended or arrested,
detained, and taken into custody by the said police,
or law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the
arrest of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the
surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank
deposits under Section 27 of this Act.
The police or law enforcement personnel concerned
shall, before detaining the person suspected of the
crime of terrorism, present him or her before any
judge at the latter’s residence or office nearest the
place where the arrest took place at any time of the
day or night. It shall be the duty of the judge, among
other things, to ascertain the identity of the police or
law enforcement personnel and the person or
persons they have arrested and presented before him
or her, to inquire of them the reasons why they have
arrested the person and determine by questioning
and personal observation whether or not the suspect
has been subjected to any physical, moral or
psychological torture by whom and why. The judge
shall then submit a written report of what he/she had
observed when the subject was brought before him to
the proper court that has jurisdiction over the case of
the person thus arrested. the judge shall forthwith
submit his/her report within three (3) calendar days
from the time the suspect was brought to his/her
residence or office.
Immediately after taking custody of a person charged
with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law
enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the
judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension
or arrest: Provided, That where the arrest is made
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office
hours, the written notice shall be served at the
residence of the judge nearest the place where the
accused was arrested.
The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve
(12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon
the police or law enforcement personnel who fails to
notify any judge as provided in the preceding
paragraph. [Sec. 18 RA 9372]
Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual or
Imminent Terrorist Attack
In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack,
suspects may not be detained for more than three (3)
days without the written approval of a municipal, city,
provincial or regional official of a Human Rights
Commission or judge of the municipal, regional trial
court, the Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of
Appeals nearest the place of the arrest. If the arrest
is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or
after office hours, the arresting police or law
enforcement personnel shall bring the person thus
arrested to the residence of any of the officials
mentioned above that is nearest the place where
the accused was arrested. The approval in writing of
any of the said officials shall be secured by the police
or law enforcement personnel concerned within five
(5) days after the date of the detention of the persons
concerned: Provided, however, That within three (3)
days after the detention the suspects, whose
connection with the terror attack or threat is not
established, shall be released immediately. [Sec. 19
RA 9372]
RA 9745: AN ACT PENALIZING TORTURE AND
OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING
TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT AND
PRESCRIBING PUNISHMENT THEREFOR (ANTI-
TORTURE ACT)
Note: RA 9745 was specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus
Punishable Acts
Acts of Torture
For purposes of this Act, torture shall include, but not
be limited to, the following:
a.   Physical torture is a form of treatment or
punishment inflicted by a person in authority or
agent of a person in authority upon another in
his/her custody that causes severe pain,
exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
more parts of the body, such as:
1.   Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,
kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt
Page 137 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
or other similar objects, and jumping on the
stomach;
2.   Food deprivation or forcible feeding with
spoiled food, animal or human excreta and
other stuff or substances not normally eaten;
3.   Electric shock;
4.   Cigarette burning; burning by electrically
heated rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of
pepper or other chemical substances on
mucous membranes, or acids or spices
directly on the wound(s);
5.   The submersion of the head in water or
water polluted with excrement, urine, vomit
and/or blood until the brink of suffocation;
6.   Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
stressful bodily position;
7.   Rape and sexual abuse, including the
insertion of foreign objects into the sex
organ or rectum, or electrical torture of the
genitals;
8.   Mutilation or amputation of the essential
parts of the body such as the genitalia, ear,
tongue, etc.;
9.   Dental torture or the forced extraction of the
teeth;
10.   Pulling out of fingernails;
11.   Harmful exposure to the elements such as
sunlight and extreme cold;
12.   The use of plastic bag and other materials
placed over the head to the point of
asphyxiation;
i.   The administration or drugs to
induce confession and/or reduce
mental competency; or
ii.   The use of drugs to induce extreme
pain or certain symptoms of a
disease; and
13.   Other analogous acts of physical torture;
and
b.   "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts
committed by a person in authority or agent of a
person in authority which are calculated to affect
or confuse the mind and/or undermine a
person's dignity and morale, such as:
1.   Blindfolding;
2.   Threatening a person(s) or his/her relative(s)
with bodily harm, execution or other
wrongful acts;
3.   Confinement in solitary cells or secret
detention places;
4.   Prolonged interrogation;
5.   Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial",
public display or public humiliation of a
detainee or prisoner;
6.   Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
deprived of liberty from one place to
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
another, creating the belief that he/she shall
be summarily executed;
7.   Maltreating a member/s of a person's
family;
8.   Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed
by the person's family, relatives or any third
party;
9.   Denial of sleep/rest;
10.   Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places,
shaving the victim's head or putting marks
on his/her body against his/her will;
11.   Deliberately prohibiting the victim to
communicate with any member of his/her
family; and
12.   Other analogous acts of
mental/psychological torture. [Sec. 4, RA
9745]
Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or
Punishment
Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment refers to a deliberate and aggravated
treatment or punishment not enumerated under
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority
or agent of a person in authority against another
person in custody, which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation or
debasement to the latter. The assessment of the level
of severity shall depend on all the circumstances of
the case, including the duration of the treatment or
punishment, its physical and mental effects and, in
some cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health
of the victim. [Sec. 5, RA 9745]
Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
and Degrading Treatment or Punishment, An
Absolute Right
Torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment as criminal acts shall apply
to all circumstances. A state of war or a threat of war,
internal political instability, or any other public
emergency, or a document or any determination
comprising an "order of battle" shall not and can
never be invoked as a justification for torture and
other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment. [Sec. 6, RA 9745]
Prohibited Detention
Secret detention places, solitary confinement,
incommunicado or other similar forms of detention,
where torture may be carried out with impunity are
hereby prohibited.
In which case, the Philippine National Police (PNP),
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and other
law enforcement agencies concerned shall make an
Page 138 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
updated list of all detention centers and facilities
under their respective jurisdictions with the
corresponding data on the prisoners or detainees
incarcerated or detained therein such as, among
others, names, date of arrest and incarceration, and
the crime or offense committed. This list shall be
made available to the public at all times, with a copy
of the complete list available at the respective
national headquarters of the PNP and AFP. A copy of
the complete list shall likewise be submitted by the
PNP, AFP and all other law enforcement agencies to
the Commission on Human Rights (CHR), such list to
be periodically updated, by the same agencies, within
the first five (5) days of every month at the minimum.
Every regional office of the PNP, AFP and other law
enforcement agencies shall also maintain a similar
list far all detainees and detention facilities within
their respective areas, and shall make the same
available to the public at all times at their respective
regional headquarters, and submit a copy, updated in
the same manner provided above, to the respective
regional offices of the CHR. [Sec. 7, RA 9745]
Who are Criminally Liable
Any person who actually participated or induced
another in the commission of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or
who cooperated in the execution of the act of torture
or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal.
Any superior military, police or law enforcement
officer or senior government official who issued an
order to any lower ranking personnel to commit
torture for whatever purpose shall be held equally
liable as principals.
The immediate commanding officer of the unit
concerned of the AFP or the immediate senior public
official of the PNP and other law enforcement
agencies shall be held liable as a principalto the
crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment for any act or
omission, or negligence committed by him/her that
shall have led, assisted, abetted or allowed, whether
directly or indirectly, the commission thereof by
his/her subordinates. If he/she has knowledge of or,
owing to the circumstances at the time, should have
known that acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment or punishment shall be
committed, is being committed, or has been
committed by his/her subordinates or by others
within his/her area of responsibility and, despite such
knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective
action either before, during or immediately after its
commission, when he/she has the authority to
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
prevent or investigate allegations of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or investigate
allegations of such act, whether deliberately or due to
negligence shall also be liable as principals.
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or
other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment is being committed and without having
participated therein, either as principal or
accomplice, takes part subsequent to its commission
in any of the following manner:
a.   By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
b.   By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment and/or destroying the effects or
instruments thereof in order to prevent its
discovery; or (c) By harboring, concealing or
assisting the escape of the principal/s in the act
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment: Provided, That the
accessory acts are done with the abuse of the
official's public functions. [Sec. 13, RA 9745]
Page 139 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
  Title III. Crimes against
Public Order
The following are Crimes Against Public Order:
1.   Article 134: Rebellion or Insurrection
2.   Article 134-A: Coup d’État
3.   Article 136: Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit
Coup d’État, Rebellion or Insurrection
4.   Article 137: Disloyalty of Public Officers or
Employees
5.   Article 138: Inciting to Rebellion or Insurrection
6.   Article 139: Sedition
7.   Article 141: Conspiracy to Commit Sedition
8.   Article 142: Inciting to Sedition
9.   Article 143: Acts Tending to Prevent the Meeting
of the Congress of the Philippines and Similar
Bodies
10.   Article 144: Disturbance of Proceedings
11.   Article 145: Violation of Parliamentary Immunity
12.   Article 146: Illegal Assemblies
13.   Article 147: Illegal Associations
14.   Article 148: Direct Assault
15.   Article 149: Indirect Assault
16.   Article 150: Disobedience to Summons Issued by
Congress, Its Committees or Subcommittees, by
the Constitutional Commissions, Its Committees,
Subcommittees or Divisions
17.   Article 151: Resistance and Disobedience to a
Person in Authority or the Agents of Such
Persons
18.   Article 153: Tumults and Other Disturbances of
Public Order
19.   Article 154: Unlawful Use of Means of Publication
and Unlawful Utterances
20.   Article 155: Alarms and Scandals
21.   Article 156: Delivering Persons from Jail
22.   Article 157: Evasion of Service of Sentence
23.   Article 158: Evasion of Service of Sentence on the
Occasion of Disorders, Conflagrations,
Earthquakes, or Other Calamities
24.   Article 159: Other Cases of Evasion of Service of
Sentence
25.   Article 160: Quasi-Recidivism
1.   Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup
d’etat, Sedition and
Disloyalty
a.   Article 134 – Rebellion or
Insurrection
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Elements: Rebellion v. Treason

1.   There is a public uprising and taking arms Rebellion Treason
against the government;
2.   The purpose of the uprising or movement is: The levying of war
a.   To remove from the allegiance to the against the government
The levying of war
government or its laws the Philippine would constitute treason
against the government
territory or any part thereof, or any body of when performed to aid
during peace time for any
land, naval, or other armed forces; or the enemy; it would also
purpose mentioned in
b.   To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, constitute adherence to
Art. 134
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or the enemy, giving him aid
prerogatives. and comfort
Always involves taking up Mere adherence to the
Rule on Complexing of Rebellion: Rebellion cannot arms against the enemy giving him aid and
be complexed with, but absorbs other crimes government. comfort
committed in furtherance of rebellion. There is no
complex crime of rebellion with murder and other Note: There is no crime of misprision of rebellion.
common crimes.
Rebellion v. Sedition
The doctrine laid down in People v. Hernandez [G.R.
No. 6025 (1964)] remains good law. This prohibits Rebellion Sedition
the complexing of rebellion with any other offense There must be taking up It is sufficient that the
committed in the occasion thereof, either as a means of arms against the public uprising be
to its commission or as an unintended effect of an government. tumultuous.
activity that constitutes rebellion. [Enrile v. Salazar, The purpose is always The purpose may be
G.R. No. 92163 (1990)] political. political or social.
All crimes, whether punishable under special or
general law, which are mere components or Note: When any of the objectives of rebellion is
ingredients, or committed in furtherance thereof, pursued but there is no public uprising in the legal
become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and sense, the crime is direct assault of the first form.
cannot be isolated and charged as separate crimes
themselves. [Enrile v. Amin, G.R. No. 93335 (1990)] b.   Article 134-A – Coup d’État
Both motive and overt acts are essential components Elements:
of the crime of rebellion. If the political motive of a 1.   Offender is a person or persons belonging to the
supposedly rebellious act cannot be sufficiently military or police or holding any public office or
proven, the accused should be convicted of the employment;
common crime (e.g. murder) and not of rebellion. 2.   It is committed by means of a swift attack
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
Rebellion is not covered by Art. 2 on extraterritorial strategy or stealth;
jurisdiction. [People v. Lovedioro, G.R. No. 112235 3.   The attack is directed against the duly
(1995)] constituted authorities of the Republic of the
Philippines, or any military camp or installation,
An actual clash of arms with the forces of the communication networks, public utilities or other
Government is not absolutely necessary. It is also not facilities needed for the exercise and continued
necessary that the purpose of the rebellion be possession of power;
accomplished. [Reyes] 4.   The purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish
state power.
Rebellion v. Insurrection
Rebellion Insurrection Persons who may commit coup d’état:
A movement seeking to 1.   It may be committed singly or collectively
effect some change of 2.   It requires as a principal offender a member of
Object is to completely minor importance or to the AFP, PNP, or a public officer with or without
overthrow and supplant prevent the exercise of civilian support
the existing government governmental authority
with respect to particular
matters or subjects
 
Page 140 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Coup d’état, when considered as Terrorism Elements:

A person who commits an act punishable as coup
d’état under Article 134-A of the Revised Penal Code,
including acts committed by private persons, thereby
sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in
order to coerce the government to give in to an
unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
terrorism.
1.   Two or more persons come to an agreement to
swiftly attack or to rise publicly and take arms
against the Government for any of the purposes
of rebellion or insurrection;
2.   They decide to commit it.
Mode 2: Proposal to Commit Coup d’état, Rebellion
or Insurrection

c.   Article 135 – Penalty for Elements:

1.   A person has decided to swiftly attack or to rise
Rebellion, Insurrection or publicly and take arms against the Government
Coup d’État for any of the purposes of rebellion or
insurrection;
Persons liable for rebellion, insurrection or coup 2.   Such person proposes its execution to some
d’état other person or persons.
1.   The leaders:
a.   Any person who promotes, maintains or Conspiracy Proposal
heads a rebellion or insurrection; or When two or more When the person who
b.   Any person who leads, directs or commands persons come to an has decided to rise
others to undertake a coup d’état; agreement to rise publicly and take arms
2.   The participants: publicly and take arms against the government
a.   Any person who participates or executes the against government for for any of the purposes of
commands of others in rebellion or any of the purposes of rebellion proposes its
insurrection; rebellion and decide to execution to some other
b.   Any person in the government service who commit it person or persons
participates or executes directions or
commands of others in undertaking a coup e.   Article 137 – Disloyalty of
d’état;
c.   Any person not in the government service Public Officers or Employees
who participates, supports, finances, abets
or aids in undertaking a coup d’état. Elements:
d.   If under the command of unknown leaders, 1.   Offender is a public officer or employee;
any person who directed the others, spoke 2.   Offender commits any of the following acts:
for them, signed receipts and other a.   Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means
documents issued in their name on behalf of in their power;
the rebels shall be deemed a leader. b.   Continuing to discharge the duties of their
offices under the control of the rebels
It is not a defense in rebellion that the accused never c.   Accepting appointment to office under them.
took the oath of allegiance to, or that they never
recognized the Government. [US v. del Rosario, G.R. The crime presupposes rebellion committed by other
No. 1106 (1903)] persons. Offender must not be in conspiracy with the
rebels, otherwise, he is himself guilty of rebellion.
Mere silence or omission is not punishable in
rebellion. [US v. Ravidas, G.R. No. 1503 (1903)] f.   Article 138 – Inciting to
Rebellion or Insurrection
d.   Article 136 – Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Coup d’ Elements:
1.   Offender does not take arms or is not in open
État, Rebellion or Insurrection hostility against the government;
2.   He incites others to the execution of any of the
Mode 1: Conspiracy to Commit Coup d’état, acts of rebellion;
Rebellion or Insurrection 3.   The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end.
 
Page 141 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Note: There is no crime of inciting to treason. Under R.A. 8294 (Act Amending PD No. 1866 or the
Firearms Law), sedition absorbs the use of unlicensed
Inciting to Rebellion v. Proposal to Commit firearm as an element thereof; hence, it is not an
Rebellion aggravating circumstance, and the offender can no
Proposal to Commit longer be prosecuted for illegal possession of firearm.
Inciting to Rebellion [Boado, Comprehensive Reviewer in Criminal Law]
Rebellion
The offender induces another to commit rebellion. If the violation of RA 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms
Rebellion should not be actually committed by the and Ammunition Regulation Act) is in furtherance of,
persons to whom it is proposed or who are incited. or incident to, or in connection with the crime of
Otherwise, they become principals by inducement in rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup
the crime of rebellion. d’état, such violation shall be absorbed as an element
The person who proposes There is no need that the of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
has decided to commit offender has decided to attempted coup d’état. [Sec. 29, RA 10591]
rebellion. commit rebellion.
Sedition v. Rebellion
The person who proposes The act of inciting is done
the execution of the crime publicly. Sedition Rebellion
uses secret means. There must be a public uprising.
It is sufficient that the There must be taking up
g.   Article 139 – Sedition public uprising is of arms against the
tumultuous. government.
Elements: The purpose of the The purpose of the
1.   Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously; offenders may be offenders is always
2.   Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other political or social. political.
means outside of legal methods;
3.   Purpose is to attain any of the following objects:
a.   To prevent the promulgation or execution of Note: The distinction between sedition and rebellion
any law or the holding of any popular lies in the object at which the uprising aims, not the
election; extent of the territory covered by the uprising.
b.   To prevent the national government or any [League v. People, G.R. No. L-47357 (1941)]
provincial or municipal government or any
public officer from exercising its or his Sedition v. Coup d’état
functions, or prevent the execution of an Sedition Coup d’état
administrative order; There is no distinction as Offender belongs to the
c.   To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the to who may commit; a military or police or
person or property of any public officer or private individual may holding any public office
employee; commit the offense or employment
d.   To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private Primary purpose is to To seize or to diminish
persons or any social classes; disturb public peace state power
e.   To despoil for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the Sedition v. Treason
national government of all its property or Sedition Treason
any part thereof
It is the raising of It is the violation by a
Tumultuous commotions or subject of his allegiance
If caused by more than three persons (i.e., at least disturbances in the State. to his sovereign.
four) who are armed or provided with the means of
violence. [Art. 163] In one case, a friction between the Philippine
constabulary and the Manila police escalated and
The purpose of this crime is not the overthrowing of resulted in the deaths of 6 policemen and 2 civilians
the government but the violation of public peace. and in the serious injuries of 3 civilians. The Court
held that unlike the crime of rebellion, common
Public uprising and an object of sedition must concur. crimes committed in the occasion of sedition are to
The lack of one means there is no sedition.
 
Page 142 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
be appreciated as separate crimes. [People v. Cabrera,
G.R. No. L-17748 (1922)]
h.   Article 140 – Persons Liable
for Sedition
1.   The leader of the sedition;
2.   Other person participating in the sedition
i.   Article 141 – Conspiracy to
Commit Sedition
Elements:
1.   Two or more persons come to an agreement and
a decision to rise publicly and tumultuously to
attain any of the objects of sedition;
2.   They decide to commit it.
Note: There is no proposal to commit sedition.
j.   Article 142 – Inciting to
Sedition
Mode 1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of
any of the acts which constitute sedition by means
of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
etc.
Elements:
1.   Offender does not take direct part in the crime of
sedition;
2.   He incites others to the accomplishment of any of
the acts which constitute sedition;
3.   The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending
towards the same end.
Mode 2. Uttering seditious words or speeches
which tend to disturb the public peace;
Mode 3. Writing, publishing, or circulating
scurrilous libels against the government or any of
the duly constituted authorities thereof, which tend
to disturb the public peace.
Elements:
1.   Offender does not take any direct part in the
crime of sedition.
2.   He uttered words or speeches and writing,
publishing or circulating scurrilous libels and
that
a.   Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer
in conducting the functions of his office;
Page 143 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
b.   Tend to instigate others to cabal and meet
together for unlawful purposes;
c.   Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or
riots; or
d.   Lead or tend to stir up the people against
the lawful authorities or to disturb the peace
of the community, the safety and order of the
government
Considering that the objective of sedition is to
express protest against the government and in the
process creating hate against public officers, any act
that will generate hatred against the government or a
public officer concerned or a social class may amount
to Inciting to Sedition.
The essence of seditious libel is its immediate
tendency to stir up general discontent to the pitch of
illegal courses or to induce people to resort to illegal
methods in order to redress the evils which press
upon their minds. [Espuelas v. People, G.R. No. L-
2990 (1951)]
“Scurrilous” means low, vulgar, mean or foul.
A published writing which calls the government one
of crooks and dishonest persons ("dirty") infested
with Nazis and Fascists i.e.dictators, and which
reveals a tendency toproduce dissatisfaction or a
feeling incompatible with the disposition to remain
loyal to the government, is a scurrilous libel against
the Government.
Any citizen may criticize his government and
government officials and submit his criticism to the
"free trade of ideas." However, such criticism should
be specific and therefore constructive specifying
particular objectionable actuations of the
government; it must be reasoned or tempered, and
not a contemptuous condemnation of the entire
government setup. [Espuelas v. People, supra.]
Constitutional Tests relative to seditious words:
1.   Clear and Present Danger Rule: The words must
be of such nature that by uttering them there is a
danger of a public uprising and that such danger
should be both clear and imminent. The danger
must not only be probable but very likely
inevitable.
2.   Dangerous Tendency Rule: If the words used
tend to create a danger of public uprising, then
those words could properly be the subject of a
penal clause.
2.  C hapter II: Crimes against
Popular Representation
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
a.   Article 143 – Acts Tending to
Prevent the Meeting of the
Congress of the Philippines
and Similar Bodies
Elements:
1.   There is a projected or actual meeting of
Congress or any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional committees or
divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or
city or municipal council or board;
2.   Offender, who may be any person, prevents such
meetings by force or fraud.
Nobody has the right to dissolve by means of violence
the meeting of a municipal council, under the pretext
that said meeting is legally defective, when the defect
is not manifest, and requires an investigation before
its existence can be determined. Where a municipal
council is holding a meeting, a presumption arises
that the meeting is not legally defective [People v.
Alipit and Alemus, G.R. No. L-18853 (1922)]
b.   Article 144 – Disturbance of
Proceedings
Elements:
1.   There is a meeting of Congress or any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof,
or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board;
2.   Offender does any of the following acts:
a.   He disturbs any of such meetings;
b.   He behaves while in the presence of any such
bodies in such a manner as to interrupt its
proceedings or to impair the respect due it.
The complaint may be filed by a member of the
legislative body. One who disturbs may also be
punished for contempt by Congress. It may also be
the subject of criminal prosecution.
c.   Article 145 – Violation of
Parliamentary Immunity
Mode 1: Using force, intimidation, threats, or
frauds to prevent any member of Congress from
attending the meetings of Congress or of any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, or
from expressing his opinion or casting his vote;
Page 144 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
1.   Offender uses force, intimidation, threats or
fraud;
2.   The purpose of the offender is to prevent any
member of Congress from:
a.   Attending the meetings of the Congress or of
any of its committees or constitutional
commissions;
b.   Expressing his opinion; or
c.   Casting his vote.
Note: The offender in mode 1 may be any person.
Mode 2: Arresting or searching any member thereof
while Congress is in regular or special session,
except in case such member has committed a crime
punishable under the Code by a penalty higher
than prision mayor.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer of employee;
2.   He arrests or searches any member of Congress;
3.   Congress, at the time of arrest or search, is in
regular or special session;
4.   The member arrested or searched has not
committed a crime punishable under the Code by
a penalty higher than prision mayor.
Parliamentary immunity does not protect members of
Congress from responsibility in accordance with the
disciplinary rules of Congress itself.
Members of Congress cannot be arrested for offenses
punishable by a penalty less than prision mayor (6
years and 1 day to 12 years), while Congress is in
session. They can be prosecuted after Congress
adjourns. [Constitution]
To be consistent with the 1987 Constitution, the
phrase by “a penalty higher than prision mayor” in
Article 145 should be amended to read “by the
penalty of prision mayor or higher.” [Reyes]
3.  Chapter III: Illegal
Assemblies and
Associations
a.   Article 146 – Illegal
Assemblies
Mode 1: Any meeting attended by armed persons
for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Code.
Elements:
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
1.   There is a meeting, a gathering or group of
persons, whether in a fixed place or moving;
2.   The meeting is attended by armed persons;
3.   The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of
the crimes punishable under the Code.
Mode 2: Any meeting in which the audience,
whether armed or not, is incited to the commission
of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition, or assault upon person in authority or his
agents.
Elements:
1.   There is a meeting, a gathering or group of
persons, whether in a fixed place or moving;
2.   The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to
the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion
or insurrection, sedition or direct assault.
Persons liable for illegal assembly:
1.   The organizer or leaders of the meeting;
2.   Persons merely present at the meeting, who
must have a common intent to commit the felony
of illegal assembly.
In the first form of illegal assembly, the persons
present at the meeting must be armed. The law does
not require that all the persons present must be
armed. The unarmed persons present at the meeting
are also liable.
Presumptions if a person carried an unlicensed
firearm:
1.   The purpose of the meeting insofar as he is
concerned is to commit acts punishable under
the RPC
2.   He is considered a leader or organizer of the
meeting.
Note: Not all persons present at the meeting of the
first form of illegal assembly must be armed.
b.   Article 147 – Illegal
Associations
The following are illegal associations:
1.   Associations totally or partially organized for the
purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Code;
2.   Associations totally or partially organized for
some purpose contrary to public morals.
Persons liable:
1.   Founders, directors and president of the
association;
2.   Mere members of the association.
Page 145 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Public Morals – matters which affect the interest of
society and public convenience, not limited to good
customs
Illegal Assemblies v. Illegal Associations
Illegal Assembly Illegal Association
There must be an actual Actual meeting not
meeting or assembly necessary
What is punished is the
What is punished are the
act of forming or
meeting and the
organizing the
attendance therein
association
Persons liable:
Persons liable:
1.   organizers or leaders
1.   founders, directors,
of the meeting
president
2.   persons present at
2.   members
the meeting
BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 880/ PUBLIC ASSEMBLY
ACT OF 1985
Non-interference by law enforcement authorities
Law enforcement agencies shall not interfere with the
holding of a public assembly. However, to adequately
ensure public safety, a law enforcement contingent
under the command of a responsible police officer
may be detailed and stationed in a place at least one
hundred (100) meters away from the area of activity
ready to maintain peace and order at all times. [Sec.
9, B.P. Blg. 880]
Police assistance when requested
It shall be imperative for law enforcement agencies,
when their assistance is requested by the leaders or
organizers, to perform their duties always mindful
that their responsibility to provide proper protection
to those exercising their right peaceably to assemble
and the freedom of expression is primordial. Towards
this end, law enforcement agencies shall observe the
following guidelines:
1.   Members of the law enforcement contingent who
deal with the demonstrators shall be in complete
uniform with their nameplates and units to which
they belong displayed prominently on the front
and dorsal parts of their uniform and must
observe the policy of "maximum tolerance" as
herein defined;
2.   The members of the law enforcement contingent
shall not carry any kind of firearms but may be
equipped with baton or riot sticks, shields, crash
helmets with visor, gas masks, boots or ankle
high shoes with shin guards;
3.   Tear gas, smoke grenades, water cannons, or any
similar anti-riot device shall not be used unless
the public assembly is attended by actual
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
violence or serious threats of violence, or
deliberate destruction of property. . [Sec. 10, B.P.
Blg. 880]
Dispersal of public assembly with permit
No public assembly with a permit shall be dispersed.
However, when an assembly becomes violent, the
police may disperse such public assembly as follows:
1.   At the first sign of impending violence, the
ranking officer of the law enforcement
contingent shall call the attention of the leaders
of the public assembly and ask the latter to
prevent any possible disturbance;
2.   If actual violence starts to a point where rocks or
other harmful objects from the participants are
thrown at the police or at the non-participants,
or at any property causing damage to such
property, the ranking officer of the law
enforcement contingent shall audibly warn the
participants that if the disturbance persists, the
public assembly will be dispersed;
3.   If the violence or disturbances prevailing as
stated in the preceding subparagraph should not
stop or abate, the ranking officer of the law
enforcement contingent shall audibly issue a
warning to the participants of the public
assembly, and after allowing a reasonable period
of time to lapse, shall immediately order it to
forthwith disperse;
4.   No arrest of any leader, organizer or participant
shall also be made during the public assembly
unless he violates during the assembly a law,
statute, ordinance or any provision of this Act.
Such arrest shall be governed by Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended:
5.   Isolated acts or incidents of disorder or branch of
the peace during the public assembly shall not
constitute a group for dispersal. [Sec. 11, B.P. Blg.
880]
Dispersal of public assembly without permit
When the public assembly is held without a permit
where a permit is required, the said public assembly
may be peacefully dispersed. [Sec. 12, B.P. Blg. 880]
Prohibited acts
The following shall constitute violations of this Act:
1.   The holding of any public assembly as defined in
this Act by any leader or organizer without
having first secured that written permit where a
permit is required from the office concerned, or
the use of such permit for such purposes in any
place other than those set out in said permit:
Provided, however, That no person can be
punished or held criminally liable for
Page 146 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
participating in or attending an otherwise
peaceful assembly;
2.   Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification of
a permit in violation of the provisions of this Act
by the mayor or any other official acting in his
behalf.
3.   The unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or
acknowledge receipt of the application for a
permit by the mayor or any official acting in his
behalf;
4.   Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise
denying the exercise of the right to peaceful
assembly;
5.   The unnecessary firing of firearms by a member
of any law enforcement agency or any person to
disperse the public assembly;
6.   Acts in violation of Section 10 hereof;
7.   Acts described hereunder if committed within
one hundred (100) meters from the area of
activity of the public assembly or on the occasion
thereof:
a.   the carrying of a deadly or offensive weapon
or device such as firearm, pillbox, bomb, and
the like;
b.   the carrying of a bladed weapon and the like;
c.   the malicious burning of any object in the
streets or thoroughfares;
d.   the carrying of firearms by members of the
law enforcement unit;
e.   the interfering with or intentionally
disturbing the holding of a public assembly
by the use of a motor vehicle, its horns and
loud sound systems. [Sec. 13, B.P. Blg. 880]
4.  C hapter IV: Assault upon
and Resistance and
Disobedience to, Persons
in Authority and Their
Agents
a.   Article 148 – Direct Assault
Mode 1. Without public uprising, by employing
force or intimidation for the attainment of any of
the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of
rebellion and sedition;
Elements:
1.   Offender employs force or intimidation;
2.   The aim of the offender is to attain any of the
purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of the
objects of the crime of sedition;
3.   There is no public uprising.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Mode 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by
employing force or by seriously intimidating or by
seriously resisting any person in authority or any of
his agents, while engaged in the performance of
official duties, or on occasion of such performance.
increase the penalty by reason of the aggravating
circumstances where a person in authority is
involved, the teachers and professors are not persons
in authority. [Art. 152 RPC as amended by B.P. Blg.
873]

Elements: When the assault results in the killing of that agent or

1.   Offender makes an attack, employs force, makes
a serious intimidation, or makes a serious
resistance;
2.   The person assaulted is a person in authority or
his agent;
3.   At the time of the assault, the person in authority
or his agent is engaged in the actual
performance of official duties, or that he is
assaulted by reason of the past performance of
official duties;
4.   Offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a
person in authority or his agent in the exercise of
his duties.
5.   There is no public uprising.
of a person in authority, the offense committed is
complex crime of direct assault with murder or
homicide. The only time when it is not complexed is
when material consequence is a light felony, that is,
slight physical injury. Direct assault absorbs the
lighter felony.
The force employed need not be serious when the
offended party is a person in authority.
Intimidation or resistance must be serious whether
the offended party is a person in authority or an agent
of a person in authority. The resistance must be
active.

The first form of direct assault is tantamount to If the public officer is not a person in authority, the
rebellion or sedition, except that there is no public assault on him is an aggravating circumstance in Art.
uprising. 14, no. 3 (rank). There must be, however, intent to
disregard the victim’s rank. [Boado]
Classifications of direct assault:
1.   Simple assault Gabutero was acting in the performance of his duties
2.   Qualified assault. [as he was trying to pacify Dollantes who was causing
trouble] as barangay captain when he was stabbed to
Assault is qualified when: death. Thus, the crime committed was murder with
1.   There is a weapon employed in the attack assault upon a person in authority. [People v.
2.   The offender is a public officer Dollantes, G.R. No. 70639 (1987)]
3.   The offender lays hands on a public authority
b.   Article 152 – Persons in
A “person in authority” is any person directly vested
with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a Authority and Agents of
member of some court or governmental corporation, Persons in Authority
board, or commission, shall be deemed a person in
authority. Agents of a
Persons in
Public Officer Person in
It is not necessary that the person in authority who Authority
(Art. 203) Authority (Art.
was assaulted be actually performing official duties. (Art. 152)
152)
If the person in authority or his agent is attacked in Any person Any person who,
the performance of his official duty, the motive of the directly vested by direct
offender is immaterial. If such person is attacked with provision of law
when not in the actual performance of his official duty, Any person who jurisdiction, or by election or
evidence of motive of the offender is important. takes part in whether as an by appointment
the individual or by competent
One “directly vested with jurisdiction” has the performance of as a member authority, is
power or authority to govern and execute the laws. public functions of some court charged with the
in the or maintenance of
Teachers, professors and persons in charge with the government. governmental public order and
supervision of public or duly recognized private corporation, the protection
schools, colleges and universities shall be deemed board or and security of
persons in authority, in applying the provisions of commission. life and property.
Articles 148 and 151. For other purposes, such as to
 
Page 147 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
A person in authority includes a barangay chairman
and members of the Lupong Tagapagkasundo as
provided under the Local Government Code. [Boado]
The status as a person in authority being a matter of
law, ignorance thereof is no excuse.
Where a barangay chief tanod was a mere bystander
at the crime scene, he not acting, and had no
occasion to act, in the performance of his official
duties, the attack on him did not amount to direct
assault. [People v. Recto, supra]
c.   Article 149 – Indirect Assault
Elements:
1.   A person in authority or his agent is the victim of
any of the forms of direct assault defined in
Article 148;
2.   A person comes to the aid of such authority or his
agent;
3.   Offender makes use of force or intimidation upon
such person coming to the aid of the authority or
his agent.
Indirect assault can only be committed when a direct
assault is also committed.
Art. 152 clothes any person who comes to the aid of a
person in authority with the fiction of an agent of a
person in authority.
Any assault on him on the occasion of his aiding a
person in authority or his agent is indirect assault.
d.   Article 150 – Disobedience to
Summons Issued by Congress,
Its Committees or
Subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions,
Its Committees,
Subcommittees or Divisions
Mode 1: By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey
summons of Congress, its special or standing
committees and subcommittees, the Constitutional
Commissions and its committees, subcommittees
or divisions, or by any commission or committee
chairman or member authorized to summon
witnesses;
Mode 2: By refusing to be sworn or placed under
affirmation while being before such legislative or
constitutional body or official;
Page 148 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Mode 3: By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or
to produce any books, papers, documents, or
records in his possession, when required by them to
do so in the exercise of their functions;
Mode 4: By restraining another from attending as a
witness in such legislative or constitutional body;
Mode 5: By inducing disobedience to a summons or
refusal to be sworn by any such body or official.
The testimony of a person summoned must be upon
matters into which the legislature has jurisdiction to
inquire.
e.   Article 151 – Resistance and
Disobedience to a Person in
Authority or the Agents of
Such Persons
Mode 1: Resistance and serious disobedience
Elements:
1.   A person in authority or his agent is engaged in
the performance of official duty or gives a lawful
order to the offender;
2.   Offender resists or seriously disobeys such
person in authority or his agent;
3.   The act of the offender is not included in the
provision of Articles 148, 149 and 150.
Mode 2: Simple disobedience
Elements:
1.   An agent of a person in authority is engaged in
the performance of official duty or gives a lawful
order to the offender;
2.   Offender disobeys such agent of a person in
authority;
3.   Such disobedience is not of a serious nature.
Resistance and Serious Disobedience
The accused must have knowledge that the person
giving the order is a peace officer. [US v. Bautista,
supra.]
The disobedience contemplated consists in the
failure or refusal to obey a direct order from the
authority or his agent.
Simple Disobedience
In simple disobedience, the offended party must be
only an agent of a person in authority. The order must
be lawful. The disobedience should not be of a
serious nature.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Serious Disobedience v. Direct Assault If done with intent to commit rebellion or sedition:
Serious Disobedience Direct Assault The crime is inciting to rebellion or sedition.
Person in authority or his Tumultuous – if caused by more than 3 persons (at
agent must be engaged least four) who are armed or provided with the means
Person in authority or his in the performance of of violence
agent must be in actual official duties or he is
performance of his duties assaulted by reason of Burying with pomp the body of a person –
the past performance of ostentatious display of a burial
official duties
Committed only by
Committed in four ways b.   Article 154 – Unlawful Use of
resisting or seriously
disobeying a person in
(see Art. 148, Mode 2 Means of Publication and
above)
authority or his agent Unlawful Utterances
Use of force in resistance
There is force employed Mode 1: Publishing or causing to be published, by
is not so serious
means of printing, lithography or any other means
of publication, as news any false news which may
5.  C hapter V: Public endanger the public order, or cause damage to the
interest or credit of the State;
Disorders
Mode 2: Encouraging disobedience to the law or to
a.   Article 153 – Tumults and the constituted authorities or praising, justifying or
extolling any act punished by law, by the same
Other Disturbances of Public means or by words, utterances or speeches;
Order
Mode 3: Maliciously publishing or causing to be
Mode 1: Causing any serious disturbance in a public published any official document or resolution
place, office or establishment; without proper authority, or before they have been
published officially;
Mode 2: Interrupting or disturbing performances,
functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if Mode 4: Printing, publishing or distributing (or
the act is not included in Arts. 131 and 132; causing the same) books, pamphlets, periodicals,
or leaflets which do not bear the real
Mode 3: Making any outcry tending to incite printer’sname, or which are classified as
rebellion or sedition in any meeting, association or anonymous.
public place;
To be liable, the offender must know that the news is
Mode 4: Displaying placards or emblems which false. If he does not know that the news is false, he is
provoke a disturbance of public order in such place; not liable, there being no criminal intent.

Mode 5: Burying with pomp the body of a person
who has been legally executed.
Serious disturbance must be planned or intended.
This article applies if the disturbance is not caused by
a public officer; or, if it is committed by a public
officer, he is a participant therein.
Outcry – to shout subversive or provocative words
tending to stir up the people to obtain by means of
force or violence any of the objects of rebellion or
sedition.
Actual public disorder or actual damage to the credit
of the State is not necessary. The mere possibility of
causing such danger or damage is sufficient.
c.   Article 155 – Alarms and
Scandals
Mode 1: Discharging any firearm, rocket,
firecracker, or other explosive within any town or
public place, calculated to cause (which produces)
alarm or danger;

If done unconsciously or without intent to incite the Mode 2: Instigating or taking an active part in any
listeners to rise to sedition or rebellion, this article charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to
applies. another or prejudicial to public tranquility;
 
Page 149 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Mode 3: Disturbing the public peace while
wandering about at night or while engaged in any
other nocturnal amusements;
Mode 4: Causing any disturbances or scandal in
public places while intoxicated or otherwise,
provided Art. 153 is not applicable.
The crime “alarms and scandal” is only one crime.
Scandal here does not refer to moral scandal; that
refers to grave scandal in Article 200.
The essence of the crime is disturbance of public
tranquility and public peace. Disturbance of a serious
nature falls under Article 153, not under paragraph 4
of this article.
Any kind of disturbance of public order where the
circumstance at the time renders the act offensive to
the tranquility prevailing, the crime is committed.
Charivari – includes a medley of discordant voices, a
mock serenade of discordant noises made on kettles,
tin, horns, etc. designed to annoy or insult
Note: “Calculated to cause” should be “which
produces” alarm and danger according to the correct
translation of the RPC. Hence, the result, and not the
intent, that counts. [Reyes]
d.   Article 156 – Delivering
Prisoners from Jail
Elements:
1.   There is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment;
2.   Offender removes therefrom such person, or
helps the escape of such person.
If the prisoner who escapes is only a detention
prisoner, he does not incur liability from escaping if
he does not know of the plan to remove him from jail.
But if such prisoner knows of the plot to remove him
from jail and cooperates therein by escaping, he
himself becomes liable for delivering prisoners from
jail as a principal by indispensable cooperation.
If the prisoner removed or whose escape is made
possible by the commission of the crime of delivering
prisoner from jail is a detention prisoner, such
prisoner is not criminally liable. A prisoner is
criminally liable for leaving the penal institution only
when there is evasion of the service of his sentence
which can be committed only by a convict by final
judgment.
Page 150 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Offender is usually an outsider. The violation of
Article 156 is committed by a public officer when he is
not the custodian of the prisoner at the time the
prisoner was made to escape. If the offender is a
public officer who had the prisoner in his custody or
charge, he is liable for infidelity in the custody of a
prisoner under Article 223.
If three persons are involved – a stranger, the
custodian and the prisoner – three crimes are
committed:
1.   Infidelity in the custody of prisoners [public
officer-custodian];
2.   Delivery of the prisoner from jail [stranger]; and
3.   Evasion of service of sentence [prisoner].
Cledera, as the governor, is the jailer of the Province.
Esmeralda is the Assistant Provincial Warden. As
public officials who have the custody or charge of the
prisoner, they cannot be prosecuted under Art. 156.
Art 223 would have applied; however, there is no
sufficient evidence to warrant their prosecution for
infidelity in the custody of prisoner. It is necessary
that the public officer had consented to, or connived
in, the escape of the prisoner under his custody or
charge. [Alberto v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-31839 (1980)]
6.  C hapter VI: Evasion of
Service of Sentence
a.   Article 157 – Evasion of Service
of Sentence
Elements:
1.   Offender is a convict by final judgment;
2.   He is serving sentence which consists in the
deprivation of liberty;
3.   He evades service of his sentence by escaping
during the term of his imprisonment.
Qualifying circumstances as to penalty imposed if
such evasion or escape takes place:
1.   By means of unlawful entry (this should be “by
scaling” – Reyes);
2.   By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs
or floors;
3.   By using picklock, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence or intimidation; or
4.   Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.
Evasion of service of sentence has three forms:
1.   Article 157 - By simply leaving or escaping from
the penal establishment
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   Article 158 - By failing to return within 48 hours
after having left the penal establishment
because of a calamity, conflagration or mutiny
and such calamity, conflagration or mutiny has
been announced as already passed
3.   Article 159 - By violating one’s conditional
pardon
That the prisoner immediately returned after leaving
or escaping from jail or prison is immaterial. It may
be mitigating, but it will not absolve his criminal
liability.
Not applicable to sentence executed by deportation
because the convict was not sentenced to
imprisonment and thereafter broke jail.
Applicable to sentence of destierro - Inasmuch as the
Revised Penal Code was originally approved and
enacted in Spanish, the Spanish text governs. The
word "imprisonment" used in the English text is a
wrong or erroneous translation of the phrase
"sufriendo privacion de libertad" used in the Spanish
text. Although destierro does not constitute
imprisonment, it is a deprivation of liberty, though
partial, in the sense that as in the present case, the
appellant by his sentence of destierro was deprived of
the liberty to enter the City of Manila.
One who, sentenced to destierro by virtue of final
judgment, and prohibited from entering the City of
Manila, enters said city within the period of his
sentence, is guilty of evasion of sentence under
Article 157. [People v. Abilong, supra]
b.   Article 158 – Evasion of
Service of Sentence on the
Occasion of Disorders,
Conflagrations, Earthquakes,
or Other Calamities
Elements:
1.   Offender is a convict by final judgment, who is
confined in a penal institution;
2.   There is disorder, resulting from –
a.   conflagration;
b.   earthquake;
c.   explosion;
d.   similar catastrophe; or
e.   mutiny in which he has not participated;
3.   He evades the service of his sentence by leaving
the penal institution where he is confined, on the
occasion of such disorder or during the mutiny;
4.   He fails to give himself up to the authorities
within 48 hours following the issuance of a
Page 151 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing
the passing away of such calamity.
5.   Leaving the penal establishment is not the basis
of criminal liability. What is punished is the
failure to return within 48 hours after the
passing of the calamity, conflagration or
mutiny had been announced.
Under Article 158, those who return within 48 hours
are given credit or deduction from the remaining
period of their sentence equivalent to 1/5 of the
original term of the sentence.
If the prisoner fails to return within said 48 hours,
there will be an additional penalty of 1/5 of the time
still remaining to be served under the original
sentence. In no case shall that penalty exceed six
months.
Mutiny is one of the causes which may authorize a
convict serving sentence in the penitentiary to leave
the jail provided he has not taken part in the mutiny.
c.   Article 159 – Other Cases of
Evasion of Service of Sentence
Elements:
1.   Offender was a convict;
2.   He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive;
3.   He violated any of the conditions of such pardon.
A conditional pardon is a contract between the Chief
Executive, who grants the pardon, and the convict,
who accepts it. Since it is a contract, the pardoned
convict is bound to fulfill its conditions and accept all
its consequences according to its strict terms. [People
v. Pontillas, G.R. No. L-45267 (1938)]
Violation of conditional pardon is a distinct crime. In
violation of conditional pardon, as a rule, the
violation will amount to this crime only if the
condition is violated during the remaining period of
the sentence.
Offender must be found guilty of subsequent offense
before he can be prosecuted under Article 159. [Torres
v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872 (1987)]
If the condition of the pardon is violated when the
remaining unserved portion of the sentence has
already lapsed, there will be no more criminal liability
for the violation. However, the convict maybe
required to serve the unserved portion of the
sentence, that is, continue serving original penalty.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Violation of Conditional Pardon v. Evasion of new felony before served out the sentence
Service of Sentence by Escaping beginning to serve such for the prior offense
Violation of Conditional Evasion of Service of sentence or while serving
Pardon Sentence the same
Does not cause harm or An attempt at least to PD 1866 (AS AMENDED BY RA 8294): ILLEGAL
injury to the right of evade the penalty POSSESSION OF FIREARMS
another person nor does inflicted by the courts
it disturb the public upon criminals and thus
Sec. 1. Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition,
order; merely an defeat the purpose of the
disposition or possession of firearms or ammunition or
infringement of the law of either reforming or
instruments used or intended to be used in the
stipulated terms in punishing them for
manufacture of firearms or ammunition.— The penalty
conditional pardon having disturbed the
of prision correccional in its maximum period and a
public order.
fine of not less than Fifteen thousand pesos
(P15,000) shall be imposed upon any person who
7.  Chapter VII: Commission shall unlawfully manufacture, deal in, acquire,
dispose, or possess any low powered firearm, such as
of Another Crime during rimfire handgun, .380 or .32 and other firearm of
Service of Penalty similar firepower, part of firearm, ammunition, or
machinery, tool or instrument used or intended to be
Imposed for Another used in the manufacture of any firearm or
ammunition: Provided, That no other crime was
Previous Offense committed.

a.   Article 160 – Quasi-Recidivism The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period
and a fine of Thirty thousand pesos (P30,000) shall
Elements: be imposed if the firearm is classified as high
1.   Offender was already convicted by final powered firearm which includes those with bores
judgment of one offense; bigger in diameter than .38 caliber and 9 millimeter
2.   He committed a new felony before beginning to such as caliber .40, .41, .44, .45 and also lesser
serve such sentence or while serving the same. calibered firearms but considered powerful such as
caliber .357 and caliber .22 center-fire magnum and
Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating other firearms with firing capability of full automatic
circumstance where a person, after having been and by burst of two or three: Provided, however, That
convicted by final judgment, shall commit a new no other crime was committed by the person
felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or arrested.
while serving the same. He shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an
the new felony. unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
The first crime for which the offender is serving
sentence need not be a felony. [People v. Peralta, G.R. If the violation of this section is in furtherance of or
No. L-19069 (1968)] incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or attempted coup
The word “another” does not mean that the new d’état, such violation shall be absorbed as an element
felony be different from the one for which the of the crime of rebellion, or insurrection, sedition, or
offender is serving sentence [People v. Yabut, 58 Phil. attempted coup d’état.
499 (1933)]
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the owner,
Quasi-Recidivism Recidivism president, manager, director or other responsible
The 2 offenses need not The 2 offenses must be officer of any public or private firm, company,
be embraced in the same embraced in the same corporation or entity, who shall willfully or knowingly
title of the Code title of the Code allow any of the firearms owned by such firm,
company, corporation or entity to be used by any
Quasi-Recidivism Reiteracion person or persons found guilty of violating the
Offender committed a Offender must have provisions of the preceding paragraphs or willfully or
knowingly allow any of them to use unlicensed
 
Page 152 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
firearms or firearms without any legal authority to be
carried outside of their residence in the course of their
employment.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon
any person who shall carry any licensed firearm
outside his residence without legal authority therefor.
(Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 2. Presumption of Illegal Manufacture of Firearms
or Ammunition.— The possession of any machinery,
tool or instrument used directly in the manufacture of
firearms or ammunition, by any person whose
business or employment does not lawfully deal with
the manufacture of firearms or ammunition, shall be
prima facie evidence that such article is intended to
be used in the unlawful/illegal manufacture of
firearms or ammunition. (Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 3. Unlawful manufacture, sale, acquisition,
disposition or possession of explosives. — The penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion
temporal and a fine of not less than Fifty thousand
pesos (P50,000) shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully manufacture, assemble, deal in,
acquire, dispose or possess hand grenade(s), rifle
grenade(s), and other explosives, including but not
limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire
bombs,' or other incendiary devices capable of
producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or
causing injury or death to any person.
When a person commits any of the crimes defined in
the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the use
of the aforementioned explosives, detonation agents
or incendiary devices, which results in the death of
any person or persons, the use of such explosives,
detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
If the violation of this Sec. is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion, insurrection, sedition or attempted coup
d'etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an
element of the crimes of rebellion, insurrection,
sedition or attempted coup d'etat.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the owner,
president, manager, director or other responsible
officer of any public or private firm, company,
corporation or entity, who shall willfully or knowingly
allow any of the explosives owned by such firm,
company, corporation or entity, to be used by any
person or persons found guilty of violating the
provisions of the preceding paragraphs
Sec. 3-A. Unlawful Manufacture, Sales, Acquisition,
Page 153 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Disposition, Importation or Possession of a Part,
Ingredient, Machinery, Tool or Instrument Used or
Intended to be Used for the Manufacture, Construction,
Assembly, Delivery or Detonation.— The penalty of
reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person
who shall willfully and unlawfully manufacture,
assemble, deal in, acquire, dispose, import or possess
any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument of
any explosive or incendiary device, whether chemical,
mechanical, electronic, electrical or otherwise, used
or intended to be used by that person for its
manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery or
detonation, where the explosive or incendiary device
is capable or is intended to be made capable of
producing destructive effect on contiguous objects or
causing injury or death to any person.
Provided, That the mere possession of any part,
ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument directly
used in the manufacture, construction, assembly,
delivery or detonation of any explosive or incendiary
device, by any person whose business activity, or
employment does not lawfully deal with the
possession of such article shall be prima facie
evidence that such article is intended to be used by
that person in the unlawful/illegal manufacture,
construction, assembly, delivery or detonation of an
explosive or incendiary device.
Provided, however, That a temporary incidental,
casual, harmless or transient possession or control of
any part, machinery, tool or instrument directly used
in the manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery
or detonation of any explosive or incendiary device,
without the knowledge of its existence or character as
part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument
directly used in the manufacture, construction,
assembly, delivery or detonation of any explosive or
incendiary device, shall not be a violation of this
Section.
Provided, further, That the temporary, incidental,
casual, harmless, or transient possession or control of
any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument
directly used in the manufacture, construction,
assembly, delivery or detonation of any explosive or
incendiary device for the sole purpose of surrendering
it to the proper authorities shall not be a violation of
this Section.
Provided, finally, That in addition to the instances
provided in the two (2) immediately preceding
paragraphs, the court may determine the absence of
the intent to possess, otherwise referred to as
“animus possidendi”, in accordance with the facts and
circumstances of each case and the application of
other pertinent laws, among other things, Articles 11
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
and 12 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
Sec. 3-B. Penalty for the Owner, President, Manager,
Director or Other Responsible Officer of Any Public or
Private Firm, Company, Corporation or Entity.— The
penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon
the owner, president, manager, director or other
responsible officer of any public or private firm,
company, corporation or entity, who shall willfully or
knowingly allow any explosive or incendiary device or
parts thereof owned or controlled by such firm,
company, corporation or entity to be used by any
person or persons found guilty of violating the
provisions of the preceding paragraphs.
Sec. 3-C. Relationship of Other Crimes with a Violation
of this Decree and the Penalty Therefor.— When a
violation of Section 3, 3-A or 3-B of this Decree is a
necessary means for committing any of the crimes
defined in the Revised Penal Code or special laws, or
is in furtherance of, incident to, in connection with, by
reason of, or on occasion of any of the crimes defined
in the Revised Penal Code or special laws, the penalty
of reclusion perpetua and a fine ranging from One
hundred Thousand pesos (P100,000.00) to One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed.
Sec. 3-D. Former Conviction or Acquittal; Double
Jeopardy.— Subject to the provisions of the Rules of
Court on double jeopardy, if the application thereof is
more favorable to the accused, the conviction or
acquittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case
for violation of this Decree shall be a bar to another
prosecution of the same accused for any offense
where the violation of this Decree was a necessary
means for committing the offense or in furtherance of
which, incident to which, in connection with which, by
reason of which, or on occasion of which, the violation
of this Decree was committed, and vice versa.
Sec. 4. Responsibility and liability of Law Enforcement
Agencies and Other Government Officials and
Employees in Testifying as Prosecution Witnesses.—
Any member of law enforcement agencies or any
other government official and employee who, after
due notice, fails or refuses, intentionally or
negligently, to appear as a witness for the
prosecution of the defense in any proceeding,
involving violations of this Decree, without any valid
reason, shall be punished with reclusion temporal
and a fine of Five hundred Thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) in addition to the administrative
liability he/she may be meted out by his/her
immediate superior and/or appropriate body.
The immediate superior of the member of the law
enforcement agency or any other government
Page 154 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
employee mentioned in the preceding paragraph
shall be penalized with prision correccional and a fine
of not less than Ten Thousand pesos (P10,000.00)
but not more than Fifty thousand pesos
(P50,000.00) and in addition, perpetual absolute
disqualification from public office if despite due
notice to them and to the witness concerned, the
former does not exert reasonable effort to present the
latter to the court.
The member of the law enforcement agency or any
other government employee mentioned in the
preceding paragraphs shall not be transferred or
reassigned to any other government office located in
another territorial jurisdiction during the pendency of
the case in court. However, the concerned member of
the law enforcement agency or government
employee may be transferred or reassigned for
compelling reasons: Provided, That his/her
immediate superior shall notify the court where the
case is pending of the order to transfer or reassign,
within twenty-four (24) hours from its approval:
Provided, further, That his/her immediate superior
shall be penalized with prision correccional and a fine
of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00)
but not more than Fifty thousand pesos
(P50,000.00) and in addition, perpetual absolute
disqualification from public office, should he/she fail
to notify the court of such order to transfer or
reassign.
Prosecution and punishment under this Section shall
be without prejudice to any liability for violation of
any existing law.
Sec. 4-A. Criminal Liability for Planting of Evidence.—
Any person who is found guilty of “planting” any
explosive or incendiary device or any part, ingredient,
machinery, tool or instrument of any explosive or
incendiary device, whether chemical, mechanical,
electronic, electrical or otherwise, shall suffer the
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Planting of evidence shall mean the willful act by any
person of maliciously and surreptitiously inserting,
placing, adding or attaching, directly or indirectly,
through any overt or covert act, whatever quantity of
any explosive or incendiary device or any part,
ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument of any
explosive or incendiary device, whether chemical,
mechanical, electronic, electrical or otherwise in the
person, house, effects or in the immediate vicinity of
an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating,
incriminating or imputing the commission of any
violation of this Decree.
Sec. 5. Tampering of Firearm’s Serial Number.— The
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon
any person who shall unlawfully tamper, change,
deface or erase the serial number of any firearm.
(Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 6. Repacking or Altering the Composition of
Lawfully Manufactured Explosives.— The penalty of
prision correccional shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully repack, alter or modify the
composition of any lawfully manufactured explosives.
Sec. 7. Unauthorized Issuance of Authority to Carry
Firearm and/or Ammunition Outside of Residence.—
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed
upon any person, civilian or military, who shall issue
authority to carry firearm and/or ammunition outside
of residence, without authority therefor. (Repealed by
RA 10591)
RA 10591: COMPREHENSIVE FIREARMS AND
AMMUNITION REGULATION ACT
This Act repeals Sections 1, 2, 5 and 7 of Presidential
Decree No. 1866, as amended, and Section 6 of
Republic Act No. 8294 and all other laws, executive
orders, letters of instruction, issuances, circulars,
administrative orders, rules or regulations that are
inconsistent herewith (Sec. 45)
Penal Provisions
Sec. 28. Unlawful Acquisition, or Possession of
Firearms and Ammunition. – The unlawful
acquisition, possession of firearms and ammunition
shall be penalized as follows:
(a)  The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully acquire or possess a small arm;
(b)  The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed if three (3) or more
small arms or Class-A light weapons are
unlawfully acquired or possessed by any person;
(c)  The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-A
light weapon;
(d)  The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed upon any person who shall, unlawfully
acquire or possess a Class-B light weapon;
(e)  The penalty of one (1) degree higher than that
provided in paragraphs (a) to (c) in this section
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully possess any firearm under any or
combination of the following conditions:
(1)   Loaded with ammunition or inserted with a
loaded magazine;
Page 155 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
(2)   Fitted or mounted with laser or any gadget
used to guide the shooter to hit the target
such as thermal weapon sight (TWS) and the
like;
(3)   Fitted or mounted with sniper scopes,
firearm muffler or firearm silencer;
(4)   Accompanied with an extra barrel; and
(5)   Converted to be capable of firing full
automatic bursts.
(f)  The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a
small arm;
(g)  The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition
for a small arm or Class-A light weapon. If the
violation of this paragraph is committed by the
same person charged with the unlawful
acquisition or possession of a small arm, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the latter;
(h)  The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully acquire or possess a major part of a
Class-A light weapon;
(i)  The penalty of prision mayor in its medium period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition for a
Class-A light weapon. If the violation of this
paragraph is committed by the same person
charged with the unlawful acquisition or
possession of a Class-A light weapon, the former
violation shall be absorbed by the latter;
(j)  The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall unlawfully acquire or possess a major part
of a Class-B light weapon; and
(k)  The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall unlawfully acquire or possess ammunition
for a Class-B light weapon. If the violation of this
paragraph is committed by the same person
charged with the unlawful acquisition or
possession of a Class-B light weapon, the former
violation shall be absorbed by the latter.
Sec. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a
Crime. – The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in
the commission of a crime punishable under the
Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance:
Provided, That if the crime committed with the use of
a loose firearm is penalized by the law with a
maximum penalty which is lower than that prescribed
in the preceding section for illegal possession of
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
firearm, the penalty for illegal possession of firearm
shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged: Provided, further, That if the crime
committed with the use of a loose firearm is
penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which
is equal to that imposed under the preceding section
for illegal possession of firearms, the penalty
of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be
imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other
special laws of which he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup
d’etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an element
of the crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
attempted coup d’etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without using
the loose firearm, the violation of this Act shall be
considered as a distinct and separate offense.
Sec. 30. Liability of Juridical Person. – The penalty
of prision mayor in its minimum to prision mayor in its
medium period shall be imposed upon the owner,
president, manager, director or other responsible
officer of/any public or private firm, company,
corporation or entity who shall willfully or knowingly
allow any of the firearms owned by such firm,
company, corporation or entity to be used by any
person or persons found guilty of violating the
provisions of the preceding section, or willfully or
knowingly allow any of them to use unregistered
firearm or firearms without any legal authority to be
carried outside of their residence in the course of their
employment.
Sec. 31. Absence of Permit to Carry Outside of
Residence. – The penalty of prision correccional and a
fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) shall be
imposed upon any person who is licensed to own a
firearm but who shall carry the registered firearm
outside his/her residence without any legal authority
therefor.
Sec. 32. Unlawful Manufacture, Importation, Sale or
Disposition of Firearms or Ammunition or Parts
Thereof, Machinery, Tool or Instrument Used or
Intended to be Used in the Manufacture of Firearms,
Ammunition or Parts Thereof. – The penalty
of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully
engage in the manufacture, importation, sale or
disposition of a firearm or ammunition, or a major
part of a firearm or ammunition, or machinery, tool or
instrument used or intended to be used by the same
Page 156 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
person in the manufacture of a firearm, ammunition,
or a major part thereof.
The possession of any machinery, tool or instrument
used directly in the manufacture of firearms,
ammunition, or major parts thereof by any person
whose business, employment or activity does not
lawfully deal with the possession of such article, shall
be prima facie evidence that such article is intended
to be used in the unlawful or illegal manufacture of
firearms, ammunition or parts thereof.
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period
to prision mayor in its medium period shall be
imposed upon any laborer, worker or employee of a
licensed firearms dealer who shall unlawfully take,
sell or otherwise dispose of parts of firearms or
ammunition which the company manufactures and
sells, and other materials used by the company in the
manufacture or sale of firearms or ammunition. The
buyer or possessor of such stolen part or material,
who is aware that such part or material was stolen,
shall suffer the same penalty as the laborer, worker
or employee.
If the violation or offense is committed by a
corporation, partnership, association or other
juridical entity, the penalty provided for in this section
shall be imposed upon the directors, officers,
employees or other officials or persons therein who
knowingly and willingly participated in the unlawful
act.
Sec. 33. Arms Smuggling. – The penalty of reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who shall
engage or participate in arms smuggling as defined
in this Act.
Sec. 34. Tampering, Obliteration or Alteration of
Firearms Identification. – The penalty of prision
correccional to prision mayor in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall tamper,
obliterate or alter without authority the barrel, slide,
frame, receiver, cylinder, or bolt assembly, including
the name of the maker, model, or serial number of
any firearm, or who shall replace without authority
the barrel, slide, frame, receiver, cylinder, or bolt
assembly, including its individual or peculiar
identifying characteristics essential in forensic
examination of a firearm or light weapon.
The PNP shall place this information, including its
individual or peculiar identifying characteristics into
the database of integrated firearms identification
system of the PNP Crime Laboratory for future use
and identification of a particular firearm.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Sec. 35. Use of an Imitation Firearm. – An imitation
firearm used in the commission of a crime shall be
considered a real firearm as defined in this Act and
the person who committed the crime shall be
punished in accordance with this Act: Provided, That
injuries caused on the occasion of the conduct of
competitions, sports, games, or any recreation
activities involving imitation firearms shall not be
punishable under this Act.
Sec. 36. In Custodia Legis. – During the pendency of
any case filed in violation of this Act, seized firearm,
ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tools or
instruments shall remain in the custody of the court.
If the court decides that it has no adequate means to
safely keep the same, the court shall issue an order to
turn over to the PNP Crime Laboratory such firearm,
ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tools or
instruments in its custody during the pendency of the
case and to produce the same to the court when so
ordered. No bond shall be admitted for the release of
the firearm, ammunition or parts thereof, machinery,
tool or instrument. Any violation of this paragraph
shall be punishable by prision mayor in its minimum
period to prision mayor in its medium period.
Sec. 37. Confiscation and Forfeiture. – The imposition
of penalty for any violation of this Act shall carry with
it the accessory penalty of confiscation and forfeiture
of the firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof,
machinery, tool or instrument in favor of the
government which shall be disposed of in accordance
with law.
Sec. 38. Liability for Planting Evidence. – The penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period shall be
imposed upon any person who shall willfully and
maliciously insert; place, and/or attach, directly or
indirectly, through any overt or covert act, any
firearm, or ammunition, or parts thereof in the
person, house, effects, or in the immediate vicinity of
an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating
or incriminating the person, or imputing the
commission of any violation of the provisions of this
Act to said individual. If the person found guilty under
this paragraph is a public officer or employee, such
person shall suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Sec. 39. Grounds for Revocation, Cancellation or
Suspension of License or Permit. – The Chief of the
PNP or his/her authorized representative may revoke,
cancel or suspend a license or permit on the
following grounds:
(a)  Commission of a crime or offense involving the
Page 157 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
firearm, ammunition, of major parts thereof;
(b)  Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude or
any offense where the penalty carries an
imprisonment of more than six (6) years;
(c)  Loss of the firearm, ammunition, or any parts
thereof through negligence;
(d)  Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or major
parts thereof outside of residence or workplace
without, the proper permit to carry the same;
(e)  Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or major
parts thereof in prohibited places;
(f)  Dismissal for cause from the service in case of
government official and employee;
(g)  Commission of any of the acts penalized under
Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known as the
“Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002ʺ″;
(h)  Submission of falsified documents or
misrepresentation in the application to obtain a
license or permit;
(i)  Noncompliance of reportorial requirements; and
(j)  By virtue of a court order.
Sec. 40. Failure to Notify Lost or Stolen Firearm or
Light Weapon. – A fine of Ten thousand pesos
(P10,000.00) shall be imposed upon any licensed
firearm holder who fails to report to the FEO of the
PNP that the subject firearm has been lost or stolen
within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
discovery.
Likewise, a fine of Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00)
shall be imposed upon any person holding a valid
firearm license who changes residence or office
address other than that indicated in the license card
and fails within a period of thirty (30) days from said
transfer to notify the FEO of the PNP of such change
of address.
SEC. 41. Illegal Transfer/Registration of Firearms. – It
shall be unlawful to transfer possession of any
firearm to any person who has not yet obtained or
secured the necessary license or permit thereof.
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed
upon any person who shall violate the provision of the
preceding paragraph. In addition, he/she shall be
disqualified to apply for a license to possess other
firearms and all his/her existing firearms licenses
whether for purposes of commerce or possession,
shall be revoked. If government-issued firearms,
ammunition or major parts of firearms or light
weapons are unlawfully disposed, sold or transferred
by any law enforcement agent or public officer to
private individuals, the penalty of reclusion
temporal shall be imposed.
Any public officer or employee or any person who
shall facilitate the registration of a firearm through
 U.P. LAW BOC
fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or submission of
falsified documents shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional.
See again: RA 9372 (Human Security Act)
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
  Title IV. Crimes against
Public Interest
Acts of Counterfeiting
1.   Article 161: Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the
Government of the Philippine Islands, Forging
the Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive
2.   Article 162: Using Forged Signature or
Counterfeit Seal or Stamp
3.   Article 163: Making and Importing and Uttering
False Coins
4.   Article 164: Mutilation of Coins
5.   Article 165: Selling of False or Mutilated Coin,
Without Connivance
6.   Article 167: Counterfeiting, Importing, and
Uttering Instruments Not Payable to Bearer
7.   Article 166: Forging Treasury or Bank Notes or
Other Documents Payable to Bearer; Importing
and Uttering Such False or Forged Notes and
Documents
Acts of Forgery
1.   Article 168: Illegal Possession and Use of False
Treasury or Bank Notes and Other Instruments of
Credit
2.   Article 169: How Forgery is Committed
Acts of Falsification
1.   Article 170: Falsification of Legislative
Documents
2.   Article 171: Falsification by Public Officer,
Employee or Notary or Ecclesiastical Minister
3.   Article 172: Falsification by Private Individual and
Use of Falsified Documents
4.   Article 173: Falsification of Wireless, Cable,
Telegraph and Telephone Messages, and Use of
Said Falsified Messages
5.   Article 174: False Medical Certificates, False
Certificates of Merits or Service, etc.
6.   Article 175: Using False Certificates
7.   Article 176: Manufacturing and Possession of
Instruments or Implements for Falsification
Other Falsities
1.   Article 177: Usurpation of Authority or Official
Functions
2.   Article 178: Using Fictitious and Concealing True
Name
3.   Article 179: Illegal Use of Uniforms and Insignia
4.   Article 180: False Testimony Against a Defendant
5.   Article 181: False Testimony Favorable to the
Defendant
6.   Article 182: False Testimony in Civil Cases
7.   Article 183: False Testimony in Other Cases and
Perjury in Solemn Affirmation
Page 158 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
8.   Article 184: Offering False Testimony in Evidence
9.   Article 185: Machinations in Public Auctions
10.   Article 186: Monopolies and Combinations in
Restraint of Trade
11.   Article 187: Importation and Disposition of
Falsely Marked Articles or Merchandise Made of
Gold, Silver, or other Precious Metals or their
Alloys
The crimes in this title are in the nature of fraud or
falsity to the public. Deceit perpetrated upon the
public is the act being punished.
1.   Acts of Counterfeiting
a.   Article 161 – Counterfeiting the
Great Seal of the Government
of the Philippine Islands,
Forging the Signature or
Stamp of the Chief Executive
Acts punished: Forging the
1.   Great Seal of the Government of the Philippines;
2.   Signature of the President;
3.   Stamp of the President.
When the signature of the president is forged, the
crime committed is covered by this provision and not
falsification of public document.
Intent to use is necessary. Actual use, however, is not
required, as long as the forger intended to use it.
b.   Article 162 – Using Forged
Signature or Counterfeit Seal
or Stamp
Elements:
1.   The Great Seal of the Republic was counterfeited
or the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive
was forged by another person;
2.   Offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
3.   He used the counterfeit seal or forged signature
or stamp.
Note: Offender under this article should not be the
forger. Otherwise, he will be penalized under Article
161. The participation of the offender is in effect that
of an accessory.
Although the general rule is that he should be
punished by a penalty of two degrees lower, under
Page 159 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Article 162 he is punished by a penalty only one
degree lower.
c.   Article 163 – Making and
Importing and Uttering False
Coins
Elements:
1.   There be false or counterfeited coins;
2.   Offender either made, imported or uttered such
coins;
3.   In case of uttering such false or counterfeited
coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or
importers.
To utter is to pass counterfeited coins. It includes
delivery or the act of giving them away. A
counterfeited coin is uttered when it is paid, when the
offender is caught counting the counterfeited coins
preparatory to the act of delivering them, even
though the utterer may not obtain the gain he
intended [Decisions of the Supreme Court of Spain]
To import fake coins means to bring them into port.
The importation is complete before entry at the
Customs House. [US v. Lyman, 26 Fed. Cas. 1024]
Kinds of coins the counterfeiting of which is
punished
1.   Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the
Central Bank of the Philippines;
2.   Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines or
of the Central Bank of the Philippines;
3.   Coin of the currency of a foreign country.
The counterfeiting of foreign currency is punishable,
regardless of whether or not it is still in official
circulation. The reason behind this is not only the
harm that it may cause to the public in case it goes
into circulation again, but also the possibility that the
counterfeiter may later apply his trade to the making
of coins in actual circulation. [People v. Kong Leon,
C.A., 48 O.G. 664]
d.   Article 164 – Mutilation of
Coins
Acts punished
1.   Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the
further requirement that there be intent to
damage or to defraud another;
2.   Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with
the further requirement that there must be
connivance with the mutilator or importer in case
of uttering.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

The first acts of falsification or falsity include: Mode 1: Possession of coin, counterfeited or
1.   Counterfeiting mutilated by another person, with intent to utter
2.   Forgery the same, knowing that it is false or mutilated;
3.   Falsification
Elements:
In so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there 1.   Possession;
are two crimes that may be committed: 2.   With Intent to utter; and
1.   Counterfeiting coins 3.   Knowledge.
2.   Mutilation of coins
Mode 2: Actually uttering such false or mutilated
Requisites of Mutilation under The RPC: coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
1.   Coin mutilated is of legal tender;
2.   Offender gains from the precious metal dust Elements:
abstracted from the coin; 1.   Actually uttering; and
3.   It has to be a coin. 2.   Knowledge.

“Mutilation” means to take off part of the metal Possession prohibited in this article is not only actual
either by filling it or substituting it for another metal and physical possession, but also that of a
of inferior quality. constructive one, or the subjection of the thing to
one’s control. The possessor should not be the
Since the coins before were made of silver and/or counterfeiter, mutilator or importer of the coins.
other precious metal, shaving the metal from the
coins became a practice. Hence, the coin’s intrinsic As long as the offender has knowledge that the coin
value is diminished. is false or mutilated, there is no need for him to
connive with the counterfeiter or mutilator.
This is the only article that requires that the
mutilated coin be legal tender. f.   Article 166 – Forging Treasury
Foreign coins are not covered in this article. [Reyes] or Bank Notes or Other
Documents Payable to Bearer;
Deliberate intent arises only when the offender
collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated
Importing and Uttering Such
coin. False or Forged Notes and
Documents
Making and Importing
Mutilitating
and Uttering Acts punished
(Article 164)
(Article 163) 1.   Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes
Mutilating foreign coins or other documents payable to bearer;
Counterfeiting of foreign
is not punishable under 2.   Importation of such false or forged obligations or
currency is punishable
this article notes;
3.   Uttering of such false or forged obligations or
PD 247: PROHIBITING AND PENALIZING notes in connivance with the forgers or
DEFACEMENT, MUTILATION, TEARING, BURNING importers.
OR DESTRUCTION OF CENTRAL BANK NOTES
AND COINS “Forging” – By giving any treasury or bank note, or
It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface, any instrument payable to bearer, or to order the
mutilate, tear, burn or destroy, in any manner appearance of a true and genuine document.
whatsoever, currency notes and coins issued by the
Central Bank of the Philippines. “Falsification” – By erasing, substituting,
counterfeiting or altering by any means, the figures,
e.   Article 165 – Selling of False or letters, words, or signs contained therein.
Mutilated Coin, without The instrument is payable to bearer:
Connivance 1.   When expressed to be so payable
2.   When payable to a person named therein or
bearer

 
Page 160 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.   When payable to the order of a fictitious or non-
existing person, and such fact was known to the
person making it so payable
4.   When the name of the payee does not purport to
be the name of any person
5.   When the only or last endorsement is an
endorsement in blank.
The reason for this is that the forging tends to bring
such documents into discredit and the offense
produces a lack of confidence on the part of the
holders of said documents to the prejudice of society
and of the State.
g.   Article 167 – Counterfeiting,
Importing, and Uttering
Instruments Not Payable to
Bearer
Elements:
1.   There is an instrument payable to order or other
document of credit not payable to bearer;
2.   Offender either forged, imported or uttered such
instrument;
3.   In case of uttering, he connived with the forger or
importer.
An instrument is payable to order where it is drawn
payable to the order of a specified person or to him or
his order.
This covers instruments or other documents of credit
issued by a foreign government or bank.
Forgery of currency is punished so as to maintain
integrity of the currency and thus insure the credit
standing of the government.
Connivance is not required in uttering if the utterer is
the forger.
2.  A cts of Forgery
a.   Article 168 – Illegal Possession
and Use of False Treasury or
Bank Notes and Other
Instruments of Credit
Elements:
1.   Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other
obligation and security:
Page 161 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
a.   Payable to bearer, or any instrument payable
to order or other document of credit not
payable to bearer is
b.   Forged or falsified by another person;
2.   Offender knows that any of those instruments is
forged or falsified;
3.   He either –
a.   Uses any of such forged or falsified
instruments; or
b.   Possesses with intent to use any of such
forged or falsified instruments
The rule is that if a person had in his possession a
falsified document and he made use of it, taking
advantage of it and profiting thereby, the
presumption is that he is the material author of the
falsification. [People v. Sendaydiego, G.R. No. L-
33254 (1978)]
Possession of false treasury or bank notes alone is
not a criminal offense.
Intent to use is sufficient to consummate the crime
when the offender is in possession of false or falsified
notes or obligations.
The accused must have knowledge of the forged
character of the note.
b.   Article 169 – How Forgery is
Committed
1.   By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and
genuine document;
2.   By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or
altering by any means the figures, letters, words,
or sign contained therein.
Forgery includes falsification and counterfeiting.
For possession of false treasury or bank note to
constitute a criminal offense, it must be with intent to
use.
The essence of forgery is giving a document the
appearance of a true and genuine document.
Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or
design would amount to forgery. At most, it would
only be frustrated forgery.
Possession of genuine treasury notes of the
Philippines any of “the figures, letters, words or signs
contained” in which had been erased and/or altered,
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

with knowledge of such erasure and alteration, and any instruments payable commercial or private
with the intent to use such notes in enticing another to bearer or to order documents or wireless or
to advance funds for the avowed purpose of financing telegraph messages.
the manufacture of counterfeit treasury notes of the
Philippines, is punishable under Art. 168 in relation to
Art. 166 (1). [Del Rosario v. People, G.R. No. L-16806 b.   Article 171 – Falsification by
(1961)] Public Officer, Employee or
Forgery can be committed through the use of Notary or Ecclesiastical
genuine paper bills that have been withdrawn from Minister
circulation, by giving them the appearance of some
other true and genuine document. [People v. Galano, Elements:
C.A. 54 O.G. 5899] 1.   Offender is a Public officer, employee, or notary
public;
3.  Acts of Falsification 2.   He takes advantage of his official position;
3.   He falsifies a document by committing any of the
following acts:
a.   Article 170 – Falsification of a.   Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
Legislative Documents signature or rubric;
b.   Causing it to appear that persons have
Elements: participated in any act or proceeding when
1.   There is a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or they did not in fact so participate;
approved or pending approval by either House of c.   Attributing to persons who have participated
the Legislature or any provincial board or in an act or proceeding statements other
municipal council; than those in fact made by them;
2.   Offender alters the same; d.   Making untruthful statements in a narration
3.   He has no proper authority therefor; of facts;
4.   The alteration has changed the meaning of the e.   Altering true dates;
documents. f.   Making any alteration or intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its
The writing must be: meaning;
1.   complete in itself; and g.   Issuing in an authenticated form:
2.   either: i.   A document purporting to be a copy of
a.   capable of extinguishing an obligation or an original document
creating rights; or ii.   When no such original exists, or
b.   capable of becoming evidence of the facts iii.   Including in such a copy a statement
stated therein. contrary to, or different from, that of
the genuine original;
Five classes of falsification: h.   Intercalating any instrument or note relative
1.   Falsification of legislative documents; to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
2.   Falsification of a document by a public officer, registry, or official book.
employee or notary public; st
3.   Falsification of a public or official, or commercial 1 Element: Persons Liable under this Article
documents by a private individual; Under this article, only a public officer, employee or
4.   Falsification of a private document by any notary public, or ecclesiastical minister can be the
person; offender.
5.   Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone
messages. The ecclesiastical minister is liable with respect to
any record or document that its falsification may
Falsification v. Forgery affect the civil status of persons.
Forgery Falsification nd
2 Element: Offender Take Advantage of his
As used in Article 169, The commission of any of Official Position
forgery refers to the the 8 acts mentioned in Offender takes advantage of his official position in
falsification and Article 171 on legislative falsifying a document when:
counterfeiting of (only the act if making 1.   He has the duty to make or prepare, or intervene
treasury or bank notes or alteration) public or official, in the preparation of the document; or
 
Page 162 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   He has the official custody of the document he
falsifies.
rd
3 Element: Offender Falsifies a Document
A document is any written statement by which a right
or status is established or an obligation is
extinguished.
Par. 1: Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
signature or rubric.
2 ways of committing falsification under this
paragraph:
1.   Counterfeiting, which is imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric
a.   There should be an intent to imitate, or an
attempt to imitate
b.   Two signatures, the genuine and the forged,
should bear some resemblance.
2.   Feigning, which is simulating a signature,
handwriting or rubric out of one which does not
actually exist.
Par. 2: Causing it to appear that persons have
participated in any act or proceeding when they did
not in fact so participate.
Requisites:
1.   Offender caused it to appear in a document that
a person/s participated in an act or proceeding.
2.   Such person/s did not in fact participate.
Par. 3: Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding statements
other than those in fact made by them
Requisites:
1.   Person/s participated in an act or proceeding
2.   Such person/s made statements in that act or
proceeding
3.   Offender, in making a document, attributed to
such person/s statements other than those they
in fact made.
Par. 4: Making untruthful statements in a narration
of facts
Requisites:
1.   Offender makes in a document statements in a
narration of facts
2.   He has a legal obligation to disclose truth of
facts
3.   Facts narrated are absolutely false
4.   Perversion of truth in the narration was made
with the wrongful intent of injuring a third
person.
Page 163 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
There must be narration of facts, not conclusion of
law. There should be a legal obligation to disclose
the truth. [Beradio v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-49483-86
(1981)]
The person making the narration of facts must be
aware of the falsity of facts narrated by him. The
narration of facts must be absolutely false. If there is
some colorable truth in such statements, crime of
falsification is not deemed to have been committed.
The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third
person is immaterial in falsification of a public
document. [Siquian v. People, G.R. No. 82197 (1989)]
There can be falsification by omission. An assistant
bookkeeper is guilty of falsification by intentionally
not putting a record in his personal account of chits
and destroyed them so he could avoid paying the
same. [People v. Dizon, G.R. No. 144026 (2006)]
Par. 5: Altering true dates
1.   The date must be essential
2.   The alteration of the date must affect the veracity
of the documents or the effects thereof (such as
dates of birth, marriage, or death).
Par. 6: Making any alteration or intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its meaning
Requisites:
1.   There be an alteration (change) or intercalation
(insertion) on a document.
2.   It was made on a genuine document.
3.   Alteration or intercalation has changed the
meaning of the document.
4.   Change made the document speak something
false.
Change or insertion must affect the integrity or
effects of the document. Furthermore, the alteration
should make the document speak something false.
Otherwise, it would merely be a correction.
Par 7: Issuing in an authenticated form a document
purporting to be a copy of an original document
when no such original exists, or including in such a
copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that
of the genuine original
Falsification in this paragraph cannot be committed
by a private individual, or by a notary public, or by a
public officer, who does not take advantage of his
official position.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

This is because authentication of a document can document in the execution of which only private
only be made by the custodian or the one who individuals take part.
prepared and retained a copy of the original.
1.   Purporting to be a copy of the original when no The element of damage is not necessary because it is
such original exists. the interest of the community which is intended to be
2.   Including in a copy a statement contrary to, or guaranteed.
different from, that of the genuine original.
The character of the offender and his faithfulness to
A private person who cooperates with a public officer his duty is mainly taken into consideration.
in the falsification of a public document is guilty of
the crime and incurs the same liability and penalty. Public and Private Writings under The Rules Of
Court:
Par 1 Par 2 Par 3 Par 4 1.   Written official acts, or records, of the official acts
of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
May be a May be a May be a May be a tribunals, and public officers
genuine genuine genuine genuine 2.   Documents acknowledged before a notary public
(later (later (later (later except last will and testaments
falsified) or falsified) or falsified) or falsified) or 3.   Public records kept in the Philippines, of private
an entirely an entirely an entirely an entirely documents required by law to be entered therein.
fabricated fabricated fabricated fabricated
document document document document All other writings are private.
Par 5 Par 6 Par 7 Par 8
After an investigation, a group of public officers were
May be a
caught and convicted of falsifying cash vouchers. On
genuine
There must There must There must appeal the SC held that cash vouchers are NOT
(later
be a be a be a commercial documents because they are not
falsified) or
genuine genuine genuine documents used by merchants or businessmen to
an entirely
document document document promote or facilitate credit transactions nor are they
fabricated
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or
document
other commercial law. Rather, they are private
documents which have been defined as:
Four Kinds of Documents 1.   Deeds or instruments executed by a private
1.   Public document in the execution of which, a person
person in authority or notary public has taken 2.   Without the intervention of a public notary or of
part; other person legally authorized,
a.   A document created, executed or issued 3.   By which some disposition or agreement is
b.   By a public official proved, evidenced or set forth. [People v.
c.   In response to the exigencies of the public Batulanon, G.R. No. 13985 (2006)]
service,
d.   Or in execution of w/c public official
intervened. c.   Article 172 – Falsification by
2.   Official document in the execution of which a Private Individual and Use of
public official takes part; Falsified Documents
a.   A document issued by a public official in the
exercise of the functions of his office. It falls
Mode 1: Falsification of public, official or
within the larger class called public
commercial document by a private individual;
documents.
b.   A document required by a bureau to be filled
Elements:
by its officers for purposes of record and
1.   Offender is a Private individual OR Public officer
information is a public document.
or employee who did not take advantage of his
3.   Commercial document or any document
official position;
recognized by the Code of Commerce or any
2.   He committed any act of Falsification (Art. 171);
commercial law; and
3.   The falsification was committed in a public,
4.   A deed or instrument executed by a private
official, or commercial document or letter of
person without the intervention of a notary public
exchange.
or other persons legally authorized. - Private

 
Page 164 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Mode 2: Falsification of private document by any
person;
Elements:
1.   Offender committed any of the acts of
Falsification except Article 171(7), that is:
a.   Issuing in an authenticated form a document
purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or
b.   Including in such a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the
genuine original;
2.   Falsification was committed in any Private
document;
3.   Falsification causes Damage to a third party or at
least the falsification was committed with intent
to cause such damage.
Mode 3: Use of falsified document.
Elements in introducing in a judicial proceeding
1.   Offender Knew that the document was falsified
by another person;
2.   The False document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1 or
2);
3.   He Introduced said document in evidence in any
judicial proceeding.
Elements in use in any other transaction –
1.   Offender Knew that a document was falsified by
another person;
2.   The False document is embraced in Articles 171
or 172 (1 or 2);
3.   He Used such document;
4.   The use caused Damage to another or at least
used with intent to cause damage.
In the falsification of public or official documents, it is
not necessary that there be present the idea of gain
or the intent to cause damage. This is because the
principal thing punished is the violation of public
faith and destruction of the truth as therein solemnly
proclaimed.
The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third
person is not necessary when the falsified document
is a public document. [Siquian v. People, supra.]
Note: This statement applies as well to commercial
documents, because as to this kind of document, a
credit is sought to be protected. [Reyes]
Since damage is not an element of falsification of a
public document, it could be complexed with estafa,
theft or malversation as a necessary means to
commit the latter crimes.
Page 165 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
There is no crime of falsification of private document
through negligence or imprudence.
If the document is intended by law to be part of the
public or official record, the falsification, although it
was private at the time of falsification, it is regarded
as falsification of a public or official document.
Falsification through imprudence implies lack of such
intent, thus there is no crime of falsification of a
private document through negligence or imprudence.
The possessor of a falsified document is presumed to
be the author of the falsification. [People v.
Manansala, G.R. No. L-38948 (1933)]
The presumption also holds if the use was so closely
connected in time with the falsification and the user
had the capacity of falsifying the document. [People v.
Sendaydiego, supra]
There is no crime of estafa through falsification of a
private document. Both crimes, separately, require
the element of damage, which each of the two should
have its own.
The fraudulent gain obtained through deceit should
not be the very same damage caused by the
falsification of the private document.
In the crime of falsification of a public document, the
prescriptive period commences from the time the
offended party had constructive notice of the alleged
forgery after the document was registered with the
Register of Deeds [People v. Villalon, G.R. No. 43659
(1990)]
d.   Article 173 – Falsification of
Wireless, Cable, Telegraph
and Telephone Messages, and
Use of Said Falsified Messages
Mode 1: Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph or
telephone message;
Elements:
1.   Offender is an officer or employee of the
government or an officer or employee of a private
corporation, engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone message;
2.   He utters fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph or
telephone message.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Mode 2: Falsifying wireless, telegraph or telephone
message;
Elements:
1.   Offender is an officer or employee of the
government or an officer or employee of a private
corporation, engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone message;
2.   He falsifies wireless, cable, telegraph or
telephone message.
Mode 3: Using such falsified message.
Elements:
1.   Offender knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or
telephone message was falsified by an officer or
employee of the government or an officer or
employee of a private corporation engaged in the
service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message;
2.   He used such falsified dispatch;
3.   The use resulted in the prejudice of a third party
or at least there was intent to cause such
prejudice.
The public officer, to be liable, must be engaged in
the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable,
telegraph or telephone message.
A private individual cannot be a principal by direct
participation in falsification of telegraphic dispatches
under Article 173, unless he is an employee of a
corporation engaged in the business of sending or
receiving wireless, telegraph or telephone messages.
But a private individual can be held criminally liable
as principal by inducement.
e.   Article 174 – False Medical
Certificates, False Certifcates
of Merits of Service, Etc.
Persons liable
1.   Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the
practice of his profession, issues a false
certificate (it must refer to the illness or injury of
a person);
Note: The crime here is false medical certificate
by a physician.
2.   Public officer who issues a false certificate of
merit of service, good conduct or similar
circumstances;
Note: The crime here is false certificate of merit
or service by a public officer.
Page 166 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
3.   Private person who falsifies a certificate falling
within the classes mentioned in the two
preceding subdivisions.
Note: The crime here is false medical certificate
by a private individual or false certificate of merit
or service by a private individual.
f.   Article 175 – Using False
Certificates
Elements:
1.   The following issues a false certificate:
a.   Physician or surgeon, in connection with the
practice of his profession, issues a false
Medical certificate;
b.   Public officer issues a false certificate of
Merit of service, good conduct or similar
circumstances;
c.   Private Person falsifies a certificate falling
within the 2 preceding subdivisions.
2.   Offender knows that the certificate was false;
3.   He uses the same.
When any of the false certificates mentioned in
Article 174 is used in a judicial proceeding, Article 172
does not apply, because the use of false document in
judicial proceeding under Article 172 is limited to
those false documents embraced in Articles 171 and
172.
g.   Article 176 – Manufacturing
and Possession of Instruments
or Implements for Falsification
Acts punished:
1.   Making or introducing into the Philippines any
stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification;
2.   Possession with intent to use the instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification
made in or introduced into the Philippines by
another person.
As in Article 165, the possession contemplated here is
constructive possession. The implements confiscated
need not form a complete set.
4.  O ther Falsities
a.   Article 177 – Usurpation of
Authority or Official Functions
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Mode 1: Usurpation of authority. (no connection
with the office represented)
The mere act of knowingly and falsely representing
oneself to be an officer is sufficient. It is not necessary
that he perform an act pertaining to a public officer.
Elements:
1.   Offender knowingly and falsely Represents
himself;
2.   As an Officer, agent or representative of any
department or agency of the Philippine
government or of any foreign government.
Mode 2: Usurpation of official functions. (excess of
authority)
In usurpation of official functions, it is essential that
the offender should have performed an act pertaining
to a person in authority or public officer, in addition to
other requirements.
Elements
1.   Offender performs any act;
2.   Pertaining to any person in authority or public
officer of the Philippine government or any
foreign government, or any agency thereof;
3.   Under pretense of official position;
4.   Without being lawfully entitled to do so
The offender should have:
1.   represented himself to be an officer, agent or
representative of any agency of the government;
or
2.   performed an act pertaining to a person in
authority or public officer.
Article 177 may be violated by a public officer.
b.   Article 178 – Using Fictitious
and Concealing True Name
Mode 1: Using fictitious name
Elements:
1.   Offender uses a name other than his real name;
2.   He uses the fictitious name publicly;
3.   Purpose of use is to conceal a crime, to evade the
execution of a judgment or to cause damage [to
public interest – Reyes].
Mode 2: Concealing true name
Elements:
1.   Offender conceals his true name and other
personal circumstances;
Page 167 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   Purpose is only to conceal his identity.
Use of Fictitious Name Concealing True Name
Element of Publicity Publicity not necessary
Purpose is to conceal a
crime, evade execution of Merely to conceal identity.
judgment, cause damage)
If the purpose is for causing damage, it must be
damage to public interest.
If it is damage to private interest, the crime will be
estafa under Art 315 2(a).
c.   Article 179 – Illegal Use of
Uniforms and Insignia
Elements:
1.   Offender makes use of insignia, uniforms or
dress;
2.   The insignia, uniforms or dress pertains to an
office not held by such person or a class of
persons of which he is not a member;
3.   Said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly
and improperly.
Exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary; a
colorable resemblance calculated to deceive the
common run of people is sufficient.
d.   Article 180 – False Testimony
Against a Defendant
Elements:
1.   There is a criminal proceeding;
2.   Offender testifies falsely under oath against the
defendant therein;
3.   Offender who gives false testimony Knows that it
is false.
4.   Defendant against whom the false testimony is
given is either acquitted or convicted in a final
judgment.
The witness who gave the false testimony is liable
even if his testimony was not considered by the court.
False Testimony – committed by a person who,
being under oath and required to testify as to the
truth of a certain matter at a hearing before a
competent authority, shall deny the truth or say
something contrary to it.
False testimony is punished because of its tendency
to prejudice defendant.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Three forms of false testimony:
1.   False testimony in criminal cases under Article
180 and 181;
2.   False testimony in civil case under Article 182;
3.   False testimony in other cases under Article 183.
Articles 180-184 punish the acts of making false
testimonies because such acts seriously expose
society to miscarriage of justice.
e.   Article 181 – False Testimony
Favorable to the Defendant
Elements:
1.   A person gives false testimony;
2.   In favor of the defendant;
3.   In a criminal case.
The testimony need not in fact be beneficial to the
defendant. It is not necessary that the testimony
should directly influence the decision of acquittal, it
being sufficient that it was given with the intent to
favor the accused.
Conviction or acquittal of defendant in the principal
case is not necessary.
Rectification made spontaneously after realizing the
mistake is not false testimony.
Penalty for false testimony against the accused is
based on the sentence imposed or if accused is
acquitted; that for testimony favorable to the accused
is based on the imposable penalty. The rationale for
the difference is the measure of the wrong
occasioned by the injustice in each case, i.e. the
undeserved sentence and the imposable penalty
avoided, respectively.
f.   Article 182 – False Testimony
in Civil Cases
Elements:
1.   Testimony given in a civil case;
2.   Testimony relates to the issues presented in said
case;
3.   Testimony is false;
4.   Offender knows that testimony is false;
5.   Testimony is malicious
6.   And given with an intent to affect the issues
presented in said case.
Falsity of testimony must first be established.
Page 168 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 182 does not apply in special proceedings. These
are covered by Art. 183 under “other cases”.
Pending the determination of the falsity of the
subject testimonies in the civil case, the criminal
action for false testimony must perforce be
suspended.
g.   Article 183 – False Testimony
in Other Cases and Perjury in
Solemn Affirmation
Acts Punished
1.   By falsely Testifying under oath;
2.   By Making a false affidavit.
Note: The false testimony should not be in a judicial
proceeding. [Diaz v. People, G.R. No. L-65006 (1990)]
Elements of perjury:
1.   Offender Makes a statement under oath or
executes an affidavit upon a material matter;
2.   The statement or affidavit is made Before a
competent officer, authorized to receive and
administer oaths;
3.   Offender makes a Willful and deliberate
assertion of a falsehood in the statement or
affidavit;
4.   The sworn statement or affidavit containing the
falsity is Required by law, that is, it is made for a
legal purpose.
The statement should be outside the coverage of Art
180-181.
Oath – any form of attestation by which a person
signifies that he is bound by conscience to perform an
act faithfully and truthfully.
Affidavit – sworn statement in writing; declaration in
writing, made upon oath before an authorized
magistrate or officer.
There could be no perjury through negligence or
imprudence. This is because of the requirement that
the assertion of a falsehood be made willfully and
deliberately. Hence, good faith or lack of malice is a
defense in perjury.
It is not necessary that there be a law requiring the
statement to be made under oath, as long as it is
made for a legal purpose.
Perjury is a crime other than false testimony in
criminal cases or false testimony in civil cases, which
are perversions of truth in judicial proceedings.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Perjury is an offense which covers false oaths other Mode 2: Attempting to cause bidders to stay away
than those taken in the course of judicial from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or any
proceedings. [US v. Estraña, G.R. No. 5751 (1910)] other artifice.

Subornation of perjury is committed by a person who Elements:

knowingly and willfully procures another to swear 1.   There is a public auction;
falsely and the witness suborned does testify under 2.   Offender attempts to cause the bidders to stay
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury. [US v. away from that public auction;
Ballena, 18 Phil. 382] Subornation of perjury is not 3.   It is done by threats, gifts, promises or any other
expressly penalized in the RPC; but the direct artifice;
induction of a person by another to commit perjury 4.   Offender had the Intent to cause the reduction of
may be punished under Article 183 in relation to the price of the thing auctioned
Article 17.
The crime is consummated by:
Material Relevant Pertinent 1.   Mere solicitation of gift or promise as
consideration for not bidding, or
Tends in any 2.   By mere attempt to cause prospective bidders to
Concerns
reasonable stay away from an auction.
collateral
Directed to degree to
matters which
prove a fact in establish
issue probability or
make more or j.   Article 186 – Monopolies and
less probable
improbability
the proposition
Combinations in Restraint of
of a fact in
issue
at issue Trade
Note: This article has been repealed by the Philippine
h.   Article 184 – Offering False Competition Act, which was signed into law on July
Testimony in Evidence 21, 2015.

Mode 1: Combination to prevent free competition in

Elements:
the market
1.   Offender fffers in evidence a false witness or
testimony;
Elements:
2.   He knows that the witness or the testimony was
1.   Entering into any contract or agreement; or
false;
taking part in any conspiracy or combination in
3.   The offer is made in any judicial or official
the form of a trust or otherwise;
proceeding.
2.   In restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent by
artificial means free competition in the market
Offer of evidence begins at the moment a witness is
called to the stand and interrogated by counsel. The
Mode 2: Monopoly to restrain free competition in
witness must testify.
the market

i.   Article 185 – Machinations in Elements:

Public Auctions
Mode 1: Soliciting any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking part in any
public auction;
Elements:
1.   There is a Public auction;
2.   Offender Solicits any gift or a promise from any
of the bidders;
3.   Such gift or promise is the Consideration for his
refraining from taking part in that public auction;
4.   Offender has the Intent to cause the reduction of
the price of the thing auctioned.
1.   Monopolizing any merchandise or object of trade
or commerce; or
2.   Combining with any other person or persons to
monopolize said merchandise or object in order
to alter the prices thereof by spreading false
rumors or making use of any other artifice to
restrain free competition in the market
Mode 3: Manufacturer, producer, or processor or
importer combining, conspiring or agreeing with
any person to make transactions prejudicial to
lawful commerce or to increase the market price of
merchandise

 
Page 169 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Elements:
1.   Person liable: (1) manufacturer, (2) producer, (3)
processor, or (4) importer of any merchandise or
object of commerce
2.   Crime committed by: (1) combining, (2)
conspiring, or (3) agreeing with any person
3.   Purpose: (1) to make transactions prejudicial to
lawful commerce, or (2) to increase the market
price of any merchandise or object of commerce
manufactured, produced, processed, assembled,
or imported into the Philippines
Theory of the law: Competition, not combination,
should be the law of trade
Mere conspiracy or combination is punished.
If the offense affects any food substance or other
article of prime necessity, it is sufficient that initial
steps are taken.
When offense is committed by a corporation or
association, the president and directors or managers
are liable.
k.   Article 187 – Importation and
Disposition of Falsely Marked
Articles or Merchandise Made
of Gold, Silver, or other
Precious Metals or their Alloys
Elements:
1.   Offender imports, sells or disposes of any of
those articles or merchandise (i.e. gold, silver,
other precious metals or their alloys)
2.   The stamps, brands, or marks of those articles of
merchandise fail to indicate the actual fineness
or quality of said metals or alloys
3.   Offender knows that the stamps, brands, or
marks fail to indicate the actual fineness or
quality of the metals or alloys
Selling the misbranded articles is not necessary.
Article 187 does not apply to manufacturer of
misbranded articles – he would be liable for estafa
under Art. 315(2)(b).
RA 10175: An Act Defining Cybercrime, Providing
for the Prevention, Investigation, Suppression and
the Imposition of Penalties Tehrefor and for Other
Purposes (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012)
Note: RA 10175 is specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus
Page 170 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Punishable acts
1.   Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity
and availability of computer data and systems:
a.   Illegal Access. – The access to the whole or
any part of a computer system without right.
Access refers to the instruction,
communication with, storing data in,
retrieving data from, or otherwise making
use of any resources of a computer system or
communication network. [Sec. 3(a), R.A.
10145]
Without right refers to either: (i) conduct
undertaken without or in excess of authority;
or (ii) conduct not covered by established
legal defenses, excuses, court orders,
justifications, or relevant principles under
the law. [Sec. 3(h), R.A. 10145]
b.   Illegal Interception. – The interception made
by technical means without right of any non-
public transmission of computer data to,
from, or within a computer system including
electromagnetic emissions from a computer
system carrying such computer data.
Interception refers to listening to, recording,
monitoring or surveillance of the content of
communications, including procuring of the
content of data, either directly, through access
and use of a computer system or indirectly,
through the use of electronic eavesdropping or
tapping devices, at the same time that the
communication is occurring. [Sec. 3(m), R.A.
10145]
c.   Data Interference. — The intentional or
reckless alteration, damaging, deletion or
deterioration of computer data, electronic
document, or electronic data message,
without right, including the introduction or
transmission of viruses.
d.   System Interference. — The intentional
alteration or reckless hindering or
interference with the functioning of a
computer or computer network by inputting,
transmitting, damaging, deleting,
deteriorating, altering or suppressing
computer data or program, electronic
document, or electronic data message,
without right or authority, including the
introduction or transmission of viruses.
e.   Misuse of Devices.
i.   The use, production, sale,
procurement, importation,
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
distribution, or otherwise making
available, without right, of:
•   A device, including a computer
program, designed or adapted
primarily for the purpose of
committing any of the offenses
under this Act; or
•   A computer password, access
code, or similar data by which
the whole or any part of a
computer system is capable of
being accessed with intent that
it be used for the purpose of
committing any of the offenses
under this Act.
ii.   The possession of an item referred
to in paragraphs 5(i)(aa) or (bb)
above with intent to use said
devices for the purpose of
committing any of the offenses
under this section.
f.   Cyber-squatting. – The acquisition of a
domain name over the internet in bad faith
to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and
deprive others from registering the same, if
such a domain name is:
i.   Similar, identical, or confusingly
similar to an existing trademark
registered with the appropriate
government agency at the time of
the domain name registration:
ii.   Identical or in any way similar with
the name of a person other than the
registrant, in case of a personal
name; and
iii.   Acquired without right or with
intellectual property interests in it.
2.   Computer-related Offenses:
Computer refers to an electronic, magnetic,
optical, electrochemical, or other data
processing or communications device, or
grouping of such devices, capable of performing
logical, arithmetic, routing, or storage functions
and which includes any storage facility or
equipment or communications facility or
equipment directly related to or operating in
conjunction with such device. It covers any type
of computer device including devices with data
processing capabilities like mobile phones, smart
phones, computer networks and other devices
connected to the internet. [Sec. 3(d), R.A. 10145]
a.   Computer-related Forgery. —
i.   The input, alteration, or deletion of
any computer data without right
resulting in inauthentic data with
Page 171 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the intent that it be considered or
acted upon for legal purposes as if it
were authentic, regardless whether
or not the data is directly readable
and intelligible;
Alteration refers to the modification
or change, in form or substance, of
an existing computer data or
program. [Sec. 3(b), R.A. 10145]
ii.   The act of knowingly using
computer data which is the product
of computer-related forgery as
defined herein, for the purpose of
perpetuating a fraudulent or
dishonest design.
b.   Computer-related Fraud. — The
unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of
computer data or program or interference in
the functioning of a computer system,
causing damage thereby with fraudulent
intent: Provided, That if no damage has yet
been caused, the penalty imposable shall be
one (1) degree lower.
c.   Computer-related Identity Theft. – The
intentional acquisition, use, misuse, transfer,
possession, alteration or deletion of
identifying information belonging to
another, whether natural or juridical, without
right: Provided, That if no damage has yet
been caused, the penalty imposable shall be
one (1) degree lower.
3.   Content-related Offenses:
a.   Cybersex. — The willful engagement,
maintenance, control, or operation, directly
or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of
sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid
of a computer system, for favor or
consideration.
b.   Child Pornography. — The unlawful or
prohibited acts defined and punishable
by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child
Pornography Act of 2009, committed
through a computer system: Provided, That
the penalty to be imposed shall be (1) one
degree higher than that provided for in
Republic Act No. 9775.
c.   Unsolicited Commercial Communications. —
The transmission of commercial electronic
communication with the use of computer
system which seek to advertise, sell, or offer
for sale products and services are prohibited
unless:
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
i.   There is prior affirmative consent
from the recipient; or
ii.   The primary intent of the
communication is for service and/or
administrative announcements
from the sender to its existing users,
subscribers or customers; or
iii.   The following conditions are
present:
•   The commercial electronic
communication contains a
simple, valid, and reliable way
for the recipient to reject.
receipt of further commercial
electronic messages (opt-out)
from the same source;
•   The commercial electronic
communication does not
purposely disguise the source
of the electronic message; and
•   The commercial electronic
communication does not
purposely include misleading
information in any part of the
message in order to induce the
recipients to read the
message.
d.   Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of
libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, committed
through a computer system or any other
similar means which may be devised in the
future. [Sec. 4, R.A. 10145]
Other Offenses
1.   Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of
Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or
aids in the commission of any of the offenses
enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
2.   Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime. — Any
person who willfully attempts to commit any of
the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be held
liable. [Sec. 5 R.A. 10145]
Coverage of the law; aggravating circumstance
All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, as
amended, and special laws, if committed by, through
and with the use of information and communications
technologies shall be covered by the relevant
provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to
be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that
provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
and special laws, as the case may be. [Sec. 6 R.A.
10145]
Page 172 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Double jeopardy
A prosecution under this Act shall be without
prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision
of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special
laws. [Sec. 7 R.A. 10145]
Disclosure of Computer Data
Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a court
warrant, shall issue an order requiring any person or
service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s
information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its
possession or control within seventy-two (72) hours
from receipt of the order in relation to a valid
complaint officially docketed and assigned for
investigation and the disclosure is necessary and
relevant for the purpose of investigation. [Sec. 14,
R.A. 10145]
Search, Seizure and Examination of Computer Data
Where a search and seizure warrant is properly
issued, the law enforcement authorities shall likewise
have the following powers and duties. [Sec. 15, R.A.
10145]
Within the time period specified in the warrant, to
conduct interception, as defined in this Act, and:
1.   To secure a computer system or a computer data
storage medium;
2.   To make and retain a copy of those computer
data secured;
3.   To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored
computer data;
4.   To conduct forensic analysis or examination of
the computer data storage medium; and
5.   To render inaccessible or remove those computer
data in the accessed computer or computer and
communications network.
Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities
may order any person who has knowledge about the
functioning of the computer system and the
measures to protect and preserve the computer data
therein to provide, as is reasonable, the necessary
information, to enable the undertaking of the search,
seizure and examination.
Law enforcement authorities may request for an
extension of time to complete the examination of the
computer data storage medium and to make a return
thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty
(30) days from date of approval by the court. [Sec. 15,
R.A. 10145]
Custody of Computer Data
All computer data, including content and traffic data,
examined under a proper warrant shall, within forty-
eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
fixed therein, be deposited with the court in a sealed
package, and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of
the law enforcement authority executing it stating
the dates and times covered by the examination, and
the law enforcement authority who may access the
deposit, among other relevant data. The law
enforcement authority shall also certify that no
duplicates or copies of the whole or any part thereof
have been made, or if made, that all such duplicates
or copies are included in the package deposited with
the court. The package so deposited shall not be
opened, or the recordings replayed, or used in
evidence, or then contents revealed, except upon
order of the court, which shall not be granted except
upon motion, with due notice and opportunity to be
heard to the person or persons whose conversation or
communications have been recorded. [Sec. 16, R.A.
10145]
Destruction of Computer Data
Upon expiration of the periods as provided in
Sections 13 and 15, service providers and law
enforcement authorities, as the case may be, shall
immediately and completely destroy the computer
data subject of a preservation and examination. [Sec.
17, R.A. 10145]
Exclusionary Rule
Any evidence procured without a valid warrant or
beyond the authority of the same shall be
inadmissible for any proceeding before any court or
tribunal. [Sec. 18, R.A. 10145]
Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data
When a computer data is prima facie found to be in
violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ shall
issue an order to restrict or block access to such
computer data. . [Sec. 19, R.A. 10145]
Liability under P.D. 1829
Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV
(Sec. 10-19) hereof specifically the orders from law
enforcement authorities shall be punished as a
violation of Presidential Decree No. 1829 with
imprisonment of prision correctional in its maximum
period or a fine of One hundred thousand pesos
(Php100,000.00) or both, for each and every
noncompliance with an order issued by law
enforcement authorities. [Sec. 20, R.A. 10145]
Page 173 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
  Title V. Crimes Relative to
Opium and Other
Prohibited Drugs
Note: Arts. 190-194 were repealed by R.A. 6425,
known as the “Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972.” R.A.
No. 9165, known as the “Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002” in turn repealed RA No. 6425.
DEFINITION OF IMPORTANT TERMS
Dangerous drugs – those listed in:
a.   The Schedules annexed to the 1961 Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended by
the 1972 Protocol, and
b.   The Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single
Convention on Psychotropic Substances as
enumerated in the attached annex which is an
integral part of this Act. [Sec. 3(j), RA 9165]
Chemical Diversion – The sale, distribution, supply
or transport of legitimately imported, in-transit,
manufactured or procured controlled precursors and
essential chemicals, in diluted, mixtures, or in
concentrated form, to any person or entity engaged in
the manufactured of any dangerous drugs, and shall
include packaging, labelling, or concealment of such
transaction.
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals –
Include those listed in Tables I and II of the 188 UN
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances.
ACTS PUNISHED
a.   Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemical
[Sec. 4]
b.   Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation,
Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of
Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors
and Essential Chemicals [Sec. 5]
Elements of sale
What determines if there was, indeed, a sale of
dangerous drugs is proof of the concurrence of
all the elements of the offense, to wit:
1.   the identity of the buyer and the seller, the
object, and the consideration; and
2.   the delivery of the thing sold and the
payment therefor. [People v. Partoza, G.R.
No. 182418 (2009)]
There must be proof that the transaction or sale
actually took place and that the corpus delicti be
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
presented in court as evidence. [People v. Musa,
G.R. No. 96177 (1993)]
c.   Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort. [Sec. 6]
d.   Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive or Resort
[Sec. 7]
e.   Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals
[Sec. 8]
f.   Illegal Chemical Diversion of Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals. [Sec. 9]
g.   Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus, and Other
Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals.
[Sec. 10]
h.   Possession of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 11]
Elements of possession
For an accused to be convicted of illegal
possession of prohibited or regulated drugs, the
following elements must concur:
1.   the accused is in possession of an item or
object which is identified to be a prohibited
drug;
2.   such possession is not authorized by law;
and
3.   the accused freely and consciously possesses
the said drug.[People v. Partoza, supra]
i.   Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 12]
j.   Possession of Dangerous Drugs During Parties,
Social Gatherings or Meetings [Sec. 13]
1.   the accused was in possession of the
dangerous drug,
2.   such possession is not authorized by law
3.   the accused freely and consciously
possessed the dangerous drug
4.   the possession of the dangerous drug must
have occurred during a party, or at a social
gathering or meeting, or in the proximate
company of at least two (2) persons [People
v. Martinez, G.R. No. 191366 (2010)]
k.   Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs During Parties, Social
Gatherings or Meetings [Sec. 14]
l.   Use of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 15]
m.   Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as
Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof. [Sec.
16]
n.   Maintenance and Keeping of Original Records
of Transactions on Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals
[Sec. 17]
o.   Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous Drugs
[Sec. 18]
Page 174 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
p.   Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs
[Sec. 19]
PENALTIES FOR UNLAWFUL ACTS
a.   The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a
fine ranging from P500,000 to P10,000,000 -
Those acts which include or involve any
dangerous drugs [Secs. 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 16 and 19]
b.   The penalty of 12 years and 1 day to 20 years of
imprisonment and a fine ranging from
P100,000.00 to P500,000
1.   Those acts which involve any controlled
precursor and essential chemical [Secs. 4, 5,
6, 8, 9 and 10]
2.   Anyone who acts as a "protector/ coddler" of
any violator of the provisions under sections
4, 5, 6, 8 and 16
3.   Sections 7, 10, 16, 17.
c.   The maximum penalty provided for under
sections 4, 5, 6, 8 and 16 shall be imposed upon
any person, who organizes, manages or acts as a
"financier" of any of the illegal activities
prescribed in those sections.
d.   Any person charged under any provision of this
Act regardless of the imposable penalty shall not
be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-
bargaining. [Sec. 23, Art. II, RA 9165]
Any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing
under this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed by
the Court, cannot avail of the privilege granted by the
Probation Law or Presidential Decree No. 968, as
amended. [Sec. 24, Art. II, RA 9165]
Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the
contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous
drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance
in the commission of a crime by an offender, and the
application of the penalty provided for in the Revised
Penal Code shall be applicable. [Sec. 25, Art. II, RA
9165]
Any attempt or conspiracy to commit the following
unlawful acts shall be penalized by the same penalty
prescribed for the commission of the same as
provided under this Act [Sec. 26, Art. II, RA 9165]:
a.   Importation of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical;
b.   Sale, trading, administration, dispensation,
delivery, distribution and transportation of any
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical;
c.   Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where any
dangerous drug is used in any form;
d.   Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
e.   Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources
of dangerous drugs.
The maximum penalties of the unlawful acts
provided for in this Act shall be imposed, in addition
to absolute perpetual disqualification from any public
office, if those found guilty of such unlawful acts are
government officials and employees. [Sec. 28, Art. II,
RA 9165]
Any person who is found guilty of "planting" any
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical, regardless of quantity and purity,
shall suffer the penalty of death. [Sec. 29, Art. II, RA
9165]
In case any violation of this Act is committed by a
partnership, corporation, association or any juridical
entity, the partner, president, director, manager,
trustee, estate administrator, or officer who consents
to or knowingly tolerates such violation shall be held
criminally liable as a co-principal. [Sec. 30, Art. II, RA
9165]
In addition to the penalties prescribed in the unlawful
act committed, any alien who violates such provisions
of this Act shall, after service of sentence, be
deported immediately without further proceedings,
unless the penalty is death. [Sec. 31, Art. II, RA 9165]
Accessory Penalties: A person convicted under this
Act shall be disqualified to exercise his/her civil rights
such as but not limited to:
a.   the rights of parental authority or guardianship,
either as to the person or property of any ward;
b.   the rights to dispose of such property by any act
or any conveyance inter vivos, and
c.   political rights such as but not limited to the
right to vote and be voted for.
Such rights shall also be suspended during the
pendency of an appeal from such conviction. [Sec. 35,
Art. II, RA 9165]
Possession of marijuana is absorbed in the sale
thereof, except where the seller is further
apprehended in possession of another quantity of the
prohibited drugs not covered by or included in the
sale and which are probably intended for some future
dealings or use by the seller.[People v. Lacerna, G.R.
No. 109250 (1997)]
The crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs
necessarily includes the crime of illegal possession of
dangerous drugs. The same ruling may also be
applied to the other acts penalized under Article II,
Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165 because for the
Page 175 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
accused to be able to trade, administer, dispense,
deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in
transit, or transport any dangerous drug, he must
necessarily be in possession of said drugs. [People v.
Maongco, G.R. No. 196966 (2013)]
IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION AND
PUNISHMENT
Requisites:
a.   Any person who has violated Sections 7, 11, 12, 14,
15, and 19, Article II of this Act;
b.   Who voluntarily gives information about any
violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, and 16,
Article II of this Act as well as any violation of the
offenses mentioned if committed by a drug
syndicate, or any information leading to the
whereabouts, identities and arrest of all or any of
the members thereof;
c.   Who willingly testifies against such persons as
described above, shall be exempted from
prosecution or punishment for the offense with
reference to which his/her information of
testimony were given, and may plead or prove
the giving of such information and testimony in
bar of such prosecution: Provided the following
conditions concur:
1.   The information and testimony are necessary
for the conviction of the persons described
above;
2.   Such information and testimony are not yet
in the possession of the State;
3.   Such information and testimony can be
corroborated on its material points;
4.   The informant or witness has not been
previously convicted of a crime involving
moral turpitude, except when there is no
other direct evidence available for the State
other than the information and testimony of
said informant or witness;
5.   The informant or witness shall strictly and
faithfully comply without delay, any
condition or undertaking, reduced into
writing, lawfully imposed by the State as
further consideration for the grant of
immunity from prosecution and punishment.
Provided, further, That this immunity may be
enjoyed by such informant or witness who does
not appear to be most guilty for the offense with
reference to which the information or testimony
were given: Provided, finally, That there is no
direct evidence available for the State except for
the information and testimony of said informant
or witness. [Sec. 33, Art. II, RA 9165]
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Termination of Grant of Immunity [Sec. 34, Art. II, RA
9165]:
a.   The immunity granted to the informant or
witness, as prescribed in Section 33 of this Act,
shall not attach should it turn out subsequently
that the information and/or testimony is false,
malicious or made only for the purpose of
harassing, molesting or in any way prejudicing
the persons described in the preceding Section
against whom such information or testimony is
directed. In such case, the informant or witness
shall be subject to prosecution and the
enjoyment of all rights and benefits previously
accorded him under this Act or any other law,
decree or order shall be deemed terminated.
b.   In case an informant or witness under this Act
fails or refuses to testify without just cause, and
when lawfully obliged to do so, or violate any
condition accompanying such immunity as
provided above, his/her immunity shall be
removed and he/she shall likewise be subject to
contempt and/or criminal prosecution, as the
case may be, and the enjoyment of all rights and
benefits previously accorded him under this Act
or in any other law, decree or order shall be
deemed terminated.
Custody and Disposition of Seized Substances
The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs,
controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as
well as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
equipment so confiscated, seized and/or
surrendered, for proper disposition in the following
manner [Sec. 21, Art. II, RA 9165]:
a.   The apprehending team shall physically
inventory and photograph the same in the
presence of the accused, his representative or
counsel, a representative from the media and the
DOJ, and any elected public official who shall be
required to sign the copies of the inventory and
be given a copy thereof;
b.   Within 24 hours upon confiscation/seizure of
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
drugs, controlled precursors and essential
chemicals, as well as paraphernalia and/or
laboratory equipment, the same shall be
submitted to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for a
qualitative and quantitative examination;
c.   A certification of the results, done under oath by
the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued
within 24 hours after receipt of the subject items.
When the volume of the subject does not allow
the completion of testing within 24 hours, a
partial report shall be issued stating therein the
quantity of dangerous drugs still to be examined
Page 176 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
by the forensic laboratory; and a final
certification shall be issued on the completed
forensic laboratory examination on the same
within the next 24 hours;
d.   Filing of the criminal case in court.
e.   The Court shall, within 72 hours, conduct an
ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized
and/or surrendered items, including the
instruments and/or laboratory equipment;
f.   The PDEA shall then within 24 hours proceed
with the destruction or burning of the same, in
the presence of the accused, his his/her
representative or counsel, a representative from
the media and the DOJ, civil society groups and
any elected public official.
g.   The Board shall then issue a sworn certification
to the fact of destruction or burning of the
subject items which, together with the
representative samples in the custody of the
PDEA, shall be submitted to the court having
jurisdiction over the case. In all instances, the
representative sample/s shall be kept to a
minimum quantity as determined by the Board;
h.   After the promulgation and judgment in the
criminal case wherein the representative
sample/s was presented as evidence in court, the
trial prosecutor shall inform the Board of the
final termination of the case and, in turn, shall
request the court for leave to turn over the said
representative sample/s to the PDEA for proper
disposition and destruction within 24 hours from
receipt of the same.
Chain of Custody – the duly recorded authorized
movements and custody of subject items at each
stage, from the time of seizure to presentation to the
court for destruction. Such record of movements and
custody of seized items shall include the identity and
signature of the person who held temporary custody
of the seized items, the date and time when such
transfer of custody was made in the course of
safekeeping and use in court as evidence, and the
final disposition. [Sec. 1b, DDB Resolution No. 1, Series
of 2002, implementing RA 9165]
Non-compliance with these requirements under
justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly
preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall
not render void and invalid such seizures of and
custody over said items. [Sec. 21(a), IRR of RA 9165]
Any person apprehended or arrested for violating the
provisions of the Act shall be subjected to screening
laboratory examination or test within 24 hours, if the
apprehending or arresting officer has reasonable
ground to believe that the person apprehended or
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
arrested, on account of physical signs or symptoms or
other visible or outward manifestation, is under the
influence of dangerous drugs. If found to be positive,
the results of the screening laboratory examination or
test shall be challenged within 15 days after receipt of
the result through a confirmatory test conducted in
any accredited analytical laboratory equipped with a
gas chromatograph/mass spectrometry equipment
or some such modern and accepted method, and if
confirmed, the same shall be prima facie evidence
that such person has used dangerous drugs, which is
without prejudice for the prosecution for other
violations of the provisions of the Act: Provided, that
a positive screening laboratory test must be
confirmed for it to be valid in court of law. [Sec. 38,
IRR of RA 9165]
Non-presentation of the forensic chemist in illegal
drug cases is an insufficient cause for acquittal. The
corpus delicti (the body of the crime) in dangerous
drugs cases constitutes the dangerous drug itself.
[People v. Quebral, G.R. NO. 185379 (2009)]
The presumption of regularity of official acts does not
apply when police officers have failed to comply with
the standard of procedure set by law in a way that
compromises the integrity and evidentiary value of
the thing seized. In such case, the indispensable
element of corpus delicti would not be proven.
[Fajardo v. People, G.R. No. 185460 (2012)]
OTHER IMPORTANT POINTS
Authorized Drug Testing
The following shall be subjected to undergo drug
testing: [Sec. 36, Art. III, RA 9165]
a.   Applicants for driver’s license
b.   Applicants for firearm’s license and permit to
carry firearms outside of residence.
All persons who by the nature of their profession
carry firearms shall undergo drug testing.
c.   Students of secondary or tertiary schools.
d.   Officers and employees of public and private
offices, whether domestic or overseas, as
contained in the company’s work rules and
regulations. Any officer or employee found
positive for use of dangerous drugs shall be dealt
with administratively which shall be a ground for
suspension or termination, subject to the
provisions of Article 282 of the Labor Code and
pertinent provisions of the Civil Service Law.
e.   Officers and members of the military, police and
other law enforcement agencies
f.   All persons charged before the prosecutor's
office with a criminal offense having an
imposable penalty of imprisonment of not less
Page 177 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
than six (6) years and one (1) day shall have to
undergo a mandatory drug test.*
g.   All candidates for public office whether
appointed or elected both in the national or local
government shall undergo a mandatory drug
test.
The testing requirement as to national officials whose
qualification requirements have been set forth in the
Constitution is unconstitutional. Where the
Constitution has expressly set out the qualifications,
these are exclusive and may not be broadened or
circumscribed by legislative fiat. [SJS v. DDB and
PDEA, G.R. No. 157870 (2008)]
The operative concepts in the mandatory drug testing
are “randomness” and “suspicionlessness.” In the
case of persons charged with a crime before the
prosecutor’s office, a mandatory drug testing can
never be random or suspicionless. It violates their
right to privacy and self-incrimination, and is thus
unconstitutional. [SJS v. DDB and PDEA, supra.]
May a drug dependent who is found guilty of the
use of dangerous drugs voluntarily submit himself
for treatment and rehabilitation?
Yes. The drug dependent may, by himself/herself or
through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative
within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity,
apply to the Board or its duly recognized
representative, for treatment and rehabilitation of the
drug dependency.
Upon such application, the Board shall bring forth
the matter to the Court which shall order that the
applicant be examined for drug dependency. [Sec. 54,
Art. VIII, RA 9165]
Is there also compulsory confinement?
Yes. Notwithstanding any law, rule and regulation to
the contrary, any person determined and found to be
dependent on dangerous drugs shall, upon petition
by the Board or any of its authorized representative,
be confined for treatment and rehabilitation in any
Center duly designated or accredited for the purpose.
A petition for the confinement of a person alleged to
be dependent on dangerous drugs to a Center may
be filed by any person authorized by the Board with
the Regional Trial Court of the province or city where
such person is found. [Sec. 61, Art. VIII, RA 9165]
Any parent, spouse or guardian who, without valid
reason, refuses to cooperate with the Board or any
concerned agency in the treatment and rehabilitation
of a drug dependent who is a minor, or in any
manner, prevents or delays the after-care, follow-up
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

or other programs for the welfare of the accused drug precursor and essential chemical as provided in this
dependent, whether under voluntary submission Act. [Sec. 82, Art. IX, RA 9165]
program or compulsory submission program, may be
cited for contempt by the court. [Sec. 73, Art. VIII, RA
9165]

How long will the drug dependent be confined for

treatment and rehabilitation?
Confinement in a Center for treatment and
rehabilitation shall not exceed one (1) year, after
which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall be
apprised by the head of the treatment and
rehabilitation center of the status of said drug
dependent and determine whether further
confinement will be for the welfare of the drug
dependent and his/her family or the community.
[Sec. 54, Art. VIII, RA 9165]

How will a drug dependent who is under the

voluntary submission program and is finally
discharged from confinement in the Center be
exempt from criminal liability?
a.   He/she has complied with the rules and
regulations of the center, the applicable rules
and regulations of the Board, including the after-
care and follow-up program for at least eighteen
(18) months following temporary discharge from
confinement in the Center
b.   He/she has never been charged or convicted of
any offense punishable under this Act, the
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 or Republic Act No.
6425, as amended; the Revised Penal Code, as
amended; or any special penal laws
c.   He/she has no record of escape from a Center
d.   He/she poses no serious danger to
himself/herself, his/her family or the community
by his/her exemption from criminal liability [Sec.
55, Art. VIII, RA 9165]

What are the functions of the Dangerous Drugs

Board?
a.   Be the policy-making and strategy-formulating
body in the planning and formulation of policies
and programs on drug prevention and control.
b.   Develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated,
unified and balanced national drug abuse
prevention and control strategy.
c.   Be under the Office of the President. [Sec. 77, Art.
IX, RA 9165]

What is the PDEA?

The PDEA is the Philippine Drug Enforcement
Agency. It serves as the implementing arm of the
Dangerous Drugs Board. It shall be responsible for
the efficient and effective law enforcement of all the
provisions on any dangerous drug and/or controlled

 
Page 178 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
  Title VI. Crimes against
Public Morals
CHAPTER I: GAMBLING AND BETTING
1.   Art. 195: Gambling
2.   Art. 196: Importation, sale and possession of
lottery tickets or advertisements
3.   Art. 197: Betting in sports contests
4.   Art. 198: Illegal betting on horse races
5.   Art. 199: Illegal cockfighting
Note: these laws were repealed by PD 1602
CHAPTER II: OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY AND
GOOD CUSTOMS
1.   Art. 200: Grave Scandal
2.   Art. 201: Immoral doctrines, obscene
publications and exhibitions
3.   Art. 202: Vagrancy and prostitution
1.   Chapter I: Gambling and
Betting
Gambling – any game or scheme, whether upon
chance or skill, wherein wagers consisting of money,
articles of value or representative of value are at
stake or made.
Note: The following special laws were not listed in the
2018 Bar Syllabus.
PD 1602: PRESCRIBING STIFFER PENALTIES ON
ILLEGAL GAMBLING (ANTI-GAMBLING ACT)
PD 1602, which repealed Articles 195-199 insofar as
they are inconsistent with said Act, punishes:
a.   Any person who, in any manner, shall directly or
indirectly take part in any illegal or unauthorized
activities or games of—
1.   Cockfighting, jueteng, jai alai or horse racing
to include bookie operations and game
fixing, numbers, bingo and other forms of
lotteries;
2.   Cara y cruz, pompiang and the like;
3.   7-11 and any game using dice;
4.   Black jack, lucky nine, poker and its
derivatives, monte, baccarat, cuajo,
pangguigue and other card games;
5.   Paik que, high and low, mahjong, domino
and other games using plastic tiles and the
like;
6.   Slot machines, roulette, pinball and other
mechanical contraptions and devices;
7.   Dog racing, boat racing, car racing and other
forms of races;
Page 179 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
8.   Basketball, boxing, volleyball, bowling,
pingpong and other forms of individual or
team contests to include game fixing, point
shaving and other machinations;
9.   Banking or percentage game, or any other
game scheme, whether upon chance or skill,
wherein wagers consisting of money, articles
of value or representative of value are at
stake or made;
b.   Any person who shall knowingly permit any form
of gambling referred to in the preceding
subparagraph to be carried on in an inhabited
place or in any building, vessel or other means of
transportation owned or controlled by him.
c.   Any person who shall knowingly permit any form
of gambling to be carried on in a place which has
a reputation of a gambling place or that
prohibited gambling is frequently carried on
therein, or the place is a public or government
building or barangay hall;
d.   The maintainer or conductor of the above
gambling schemes.
1.   Maintainer: a person who sets up and
furnishes the means with which to carry on
the gambling game or scheme.
2.   Conductor: a person who manages or carries
on the gambling game or scheme.
e.   A government official who is a maintainer,
conductor or banker of said gambling schemes,
or the player, promoter, referee, umpire, judge or
coach in case of game fixing, point shaving and
machination.
f.   Any person who shall, knowingly and without
lawful purpose in any hour of any day, possess
any lottery list, paper or other matter containing
letters, figures, signs or symbols pertaining to or
in any manner used in the games of jueteng, jai-
alai or horse racing bookies, and similar games
of lotteries and numbers which have taken place
or about to take place.
g.   Any barangay official who, with knowledge of the
existence of a gambling house or place in his
jurisdiction fails to abate the same or take action
in connection therewith.
h.   Any security officer, security guard, watchman,
private or house detective of hotels, villages,
buildings, enclosures and the like which have the
reputation of a gambling place or where
gambling activities are being held.
Any person who shall disclose information that will
lead to the arrest and final conviction of the
malefactor shall be rewarded twenty percent of the
cash money or articles of value confiscated or
forfeited in favor of the government. (Section 3)
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
RA 9287: INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR
ILLEGAL NUMBERS GAMES
Illegal Numbers Game – any form of illegal
gambling activity which uses numbers or
combinations thereof as factors in giving out
jackpots.
The law punishes any person who participates in any
illegal numbers game: (Section 3)
a.   If such person acts as a bettor;
b.   If such person acts as a personnel or staff of an
illegal numbers game operation;
c.   If such person allows his vehicle, house, building
or land to be used in the operation of the illegal
numbers games;
d.   If such person acts as a collector or agent;
e.   If such person acts as a coordinator, controller or
supervisor;
f.   If such person acts as a maintainer, manager or
operator;
g.   If such person acts as a financier or capitalist;
h.   If such person acts as protector or coddler.
The possession of any gambling paraphernalia and
other materials used in the illegal numbers game
operation shall be deemed prima facie evidence of
any offense covered by this Act. (Section 4)
LETTER OF INSTRUCTION NO. 816
The games of domino, bingo, poker when not played
with five cards stud, cuajo, pangguingue and
mahjong, provided that they are played as parlor
games or for home entertainment, and provided
further, that they are not played in places habitually
used for gambling and the betting is not disguised to
defeat the intent of Presidential Decree No. 1602, are
hereby exempted.
Lottery is a scheme for the distribution of prices by
chance among persons who have paid, or agreed to
pay, a valuable consideration for the chance to obtain
a prize. It has 3 elements: 1) Consideration, 2)
Chance, 3) Prize or some advantage or inequality in
amount or value which is in the nature of a prize [U.S.
v Filart, G.R. No. L-10263 (1915)]
PD 449: COCKFIGHTING LAW OF 1974
Section 4. Definition of Terms. As used in this law, the
following terms shall be understood, applied and
construed as follows:
(a)   Cockfighting shall embrace and mean the
commonly known game or term "cockfighting
derby, pintakasi or tupada", or its equivalent
terms in different Philippine localities.
Page 180 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
(b)   Zoning Law or Ordinance. Either both national or
local city or municipal legislation which logically
arranges, prescribes, defines and apportions a
given political subdivision into specific land uses
as present and future projection of needs
warrant.
(c)   Bet Taker of Promoter. A person who calls and
takes care of bets from owners of both
gamecocks and those of other bettors before he
orders commencement of the cockfight and
thereafter distributes won bets to the winners
after deducting a certain commission.
(d)   Gaffer (Taga Tari). A person knowledgeable in
the art of arming fighting cocks with gaff or
gaffs on either or both legs.
(e)   Referee (Sentenciador). A person who watches
and oversees the proper gaffing of fighting
cocks, determines the physical condition of
fighting cocks while cockfighting is in progress,
the injuries sustained by the cocks and their
capability to continue fighting and decides and
make known his decision by work or gestures
and result of the cockfight by announcing the
winner or declaring a tie or no contest game.
(f)   Bettor.A person who participates in cockfights
and with the use of money or other things of
value, bets with other bettors or through the bet
taker or promoter and wins or loses his bet
depending upon the result of the cockfight as
announced by the Referee or Sentenciador. He
may be the owner of fighting cock.
Section 5. Cockpits and Cockfighting: In General:
(1)   Ownership, Operation and Management of
Cockpits. Only Filipino citizens not otherwise
inhibited by existing laws shall be allowed to
own, manage and operate cockpits. Cooperative
capitalization is encouraged.
(2)   Establishment of Cockpits. Only one cockpit shall
be allowed in each city or municipality, except
that in cities or municipalities with a population
of over one hundred thousand, two cockpits may
be established, maintained and operated.
(3)   Cockpits Site and Construction. Cockpits shall be
constructed and operated within the
appropriate areas as prescribed in Zoning Law
or Ordinance. In the absence of such law or
ordinance, the local executives shall see to it
that no cockpits are constructed within or near
existing residential or commercial areas,
hospitals, school buildings, churches or other
public buildings. Owners, lessees, or operators
of cockpits which are now in existence and do
not conform to this requirement are given three
years from the date of effectivity of this Decree
to comply herewith. Approval or issuance of
building permits for the construction of cockpits
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
shall be made by the city or provincial engineer
in accordance with their respective building
codes, ordinances or engineering laws and
practices.
(4)   Holding of Cockfights. Except as provided in this
Decree, cockfighting shall be allowed only in
licensed cockpits during Sundays and legal
holidays and during local fiestas for not more
than three days. It may also be held during
provincial, city or municipal, agricultural,
commercial or industrial fair, carnival or
exposition for a similar period of three days
upon resolution of the province, city or
municipality where such fair, carnival or
exposition is to be held, subject to the approval
of the Chief of Constabulary or his authorized
representative: Provided, that, no cockfighting
on the occasion of such fair, carnival or
exposition shall be allowed within the month of
a local fiesta or for more than two occasions a
year in the same city or municipality: Provided,
further, that no cockfighting shall be held on
December 30 (Rizal Day), June 12 (Philippine
Independence Day) November 30 (National
Heroes Day), Holy Thursday, Good Friday,
Election or Referendum Day and during
Registration Days for such election or
referendum.
(5)   Cockfighting for Entertainment of Tourists or for
Charitable Purposes. Subject to the preceding
subsection hereof, the Chief Constabulary or his
authorized representative may also allow the
holding of cockfighting for the entertainment of
foreign dignitaries or for tourists, or for
returning Filipinos, commonly known as
"Balikbayan", or for the support of national
fund-raising campaigns for charitable purposes
as may be authorized by the Office of the
President, upon resolution of a provincial board,
city or municipal council, in licensed cockpits or
in playgrounds or parks: Provided, that this
privilege shall be extended for only one time, for
a period not exceeding three days, within a year
to a province, city, or municipality.
(6)   Other games during cockfights prescribed. No
gambling of any kind shall be permitted on the
premises of the cockpit or place of cockfighting
during cockfights. The owner, manager or lessee
off such cockpit and the violators of this
injunction shall be criminally liable under
Section 8 hereof.
Section 6. Licensing of Cockpits. City and municipal
mayors are authorized to issue licenses for the
operation and maintenance of cockpits subject to the
approval of the Chief of Constabulary or his
authorized representatives. For this purpose,
Page 181 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
ordinances may be promulgated for the imposition
and collection of taxes and fees not exceeding the
rates fixed under Section 13, paragraphs (a) and (b);
and 19; paragraph (g) 16 of Presidential Decree No.
231, dated June 28, 1973, otherwise known as the
Local Tax Code, as amended.
Section 7. Cockfighting Officials. Gaffers, referees or
bet takers or promoters shall not act as such in any
cockfight herein authorized, without first securing a
license renewable every year on their birthmonth
from the city or municipality where such cockfighting
is held. Cities and municipalities may charge a tax of
not more than twenty pesos. Only licensed gaffers,
referees, bet takers or promoters shall officiate in all
kinds of cockfighting authorized in this Decree.
Section 8. Penal Provisions. Any violation of the
provisions of this Decree and of the rules and
regulations promulgated by the Chief of
Constabulary pursuant thereto shall be punished as
follows:
(a)  By prision correccional in its maximum period and
a fine of two thousand pesos, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, when the
offender is the financer, owner, manger or
operator of cockpit, or the gaffer, referee or bet
taker in cockfights; or the offender is guilty of
allowing, promoting or participating in any
other kind of gambling in the premises of
cockfights during cockfights.
(b)  By prision correccional or a fine of not less than
six hundred pesos nor more than two thousand
pesos or both, such imprisonment and fine at
the discretion of the court, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, in case of
any other offender.
2.  C hapter II: Offenses
against Decency and Good
Customs
a.   Article 200 – Grave Scandal
Elements:
1.   Offender performs an act or acts;
2.   Such act or acts be highly scandalous as
offending against decency or good customs;
3.   The highly scandalous conduct is not expressly
falling within any other article of this Code; and
4.   The act or acts complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or
view.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Decency – means proprietary of conduct; proper
observance of the requirements of modesty, good
taste, etc.
Customs – established usage, social conventions
carried on by tradition and enforced by social
disapproval of any violation thereof.
Grave Scandal – consists of acts which are offensive
to decency and good customs which, having been
committed publicly, have given rise to public scandal
to persons who have accidentally witnessed the
same.
The acts must be performed in a public place or
within the public knowledge or view. If it is committed
in a private place, the crime of grave scandal is not
committed.
In conducts involving lasciviousness, it is grave
scandal only where there is mutual consent. (Boado)
Any act which is notoriously offensive to decency may
bring about criminal liability for the crime of grave
scandal, Provided such act does not constitute some
other crime under the Revised Penal Code.
Grave scandal is a crime of last resort.
b.   Article 201 – Immoral
Doctrines, Obscene
Publications and Exhibitions
and Indecent Shows
Acts punished (as amended by PD 960 and PD 969)
1.   Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim
doctrines openly contrary to public morals;
2.   The authors of obscene literature, published with
their knowledge in any form, the editors
publishing such literature; the owners/operators
of the establishment selling the same;
3.   Those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, or
any other place, exhibit indecent or immoral
plays, scenes, acts, or shows, it being understood
that the obscene literature or indecent or
immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether
live or in film, which are proscribed by virtue
hereof, shall include those which:
a.   glorify criminals or condone crimes;
b.   serve no other purpose but to satisfy the
market for violence, lust or pornography;
c.   offend any race, or religion;
d.   tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited
drugs; and
Page 182 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
e.   are contrary to law, public order, morals,
good customs, established policies, lawful
orders, decrees and edicts;
4.   Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films,
prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which
are offensive to morals.
Morals – imply conformity with the generally
accepted standards of goodness or rightness in
conduct or character, sometimes, specifically, to
sexual conduct.
Offense in any of the forms mentioned in the article is
committed only when there is publicity
The test of obscenity:
1.   The test is objective.
2.   It is more on the effect upon the viewer and not
alone on the conduct of the performer.
3.   If the material has the tendency to deprave and
corrupt the mind of the viewer then the same is
obscene and where such obscenity is made
publicly, criminal liability arises.
4.   As long as the pornographic matter or exhibition
is made privately, there is no crime committed
under the Revised Penal Code because what is
protected is the morality of the public in general.
Postcards of Philippine inhabitants in native attire
were not obscene because the aggregate judgment
of the community, and the moral sense of the people
were not shocked by those pictures. They were not
offensive to chastity but merely depicted persons as
they actually lived. [People v. Kottinger, G.R. No. L-
20569 (1923)]
The reaction of the public during the performance of
a dance by one who had nothing to cover herself with,
except nylon patches over her breasts and too
abbreviated pair of nylon panties to interrupt her
stark nakedness should be made the gauge in the
determination of whether the dance or exhibition was
indecent or immoral. [People v. Aparici, C.A. 52 O.G.
249 (1955)]
An actual exhibition of the sexual act can have no
redeeming feature—no room for art. Therefore, it is a
clear and unmitigated obscenity. [People v. Padan,
G.R. No. L-7295 (1957)]
Miller Test of Obscenity:
[From Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) – adopted
in Fernando v. CA, G.R. No. 159751 (2006)]
1.   Whether the average person, applying
contemporary standards, would find the work,
taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   Whether the work depicts, in a patently offensive
way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the
applicable state law;
3.   Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks
serious literary, artistic, political or scientific
value.
Mere possession of obscene materials, without intent
to sell, exhibit or distribute, is not punishable under
Article 201. The offense is committed only where
there is publicity. So long as the materials are
offered for sale, displayed, or exhibited to the public,
one may be liable. [Fernando v. CA, supra.]
c.   Article 202 – Prostitution
(Amended by R.A. 10158)
Elements:
1.   The offender is a woman;
2.   She habitually indulges in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct;
3.   Such indulgence is for money or profit
The term prostitution is applicable to a woman who
for profit or money habitually engages in sexual or
lascivious conduct. A man who engages in the same
conduct – sex for money – is not a prostitute, but a
vagrant.
In law, the mere indulging in lascivious conduct
habitually because of money or gain would amount
to prostitution, even if there is no sexual intercourse.
Virginity is not a defense.
Habituality is the controlling factor; it has to be more
than one time.
There cannot be prostitution by conspiracy. One who
conspires with a woman in the prostitution business
like pimps, taxi drivers or solicitors of clients are
guilty of the crime under Article 341 for white slavery.
Before RA 10158, which decriminalized vagrancy, the
following were liable under Article 202:
1.   Any person, having no apparent means of
subsistence, who has the physical ability to work
and who neglects to apply himself to some
lawful calling;
2.   Any person found loitering about public or
semipublic buildings or places or tramping or
wandering about the country or the streets
without visible means of support;
3.   Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in
houses of ill-fame, ruffians or pimps and those
who habitually associate with prostitutes;
Page 183 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
4.   Any person who, not being included in the
provisions of other articles in this Code, shall be
found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited
place belonging to another without any lawful or
justifiable purpose;
5.   Prostitutes.
All pending cases under the provisions of Article 202
of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy prior to its
amendment by this Act shall be dismissed upon
effectivity of this Act. [Section 2, RA 10158]
All persons serving sentence for violation of the
provisions of Article 202 on Vagrancy prior to its
amendment by this Act shall be immediately
released upon effectivity of this Act: Provided, That
they are not serving sentence or detained for any
other offense or felony. (Section 3, RA 10158)
Under the Mendicancy Law of 1978 (PD 1563), the
following persons are liable:
1.   The mendicant himself—one who has no visible
and legal means of support, or lawful
employment, and who is physically able to work
but neglects to apply himself to some lawful
calling and instead uses begging as a means of
living.
2.   Any person who abets mendicancy by giving
alms directly to mendicants, exploited infants
and minors on public roads, sidewalks, parks and
bridges shall be punished by a fine.
RA 9208: AN ACT TO INSTITUTE POLICIES TO
ELIMINATE TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
ESPECIALLY WOMEN AND CHILDREN,
ESTABLISHING THE NECESSARY INSTITUTIONAL
MECHANISMS FOR THE PROTECTION AND
SUPPORT OF TRAFFICKED PERSONS, PROVIDING
PENALTIES FOR ITS VIOLATIONS (ANTI-
TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT)
Note: RA 9208 is specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus
Trafficking in Persons – recruitment, transportation,
transfer or harboring, or receipt of persons with or
without the victim's consent or knowledge, within or
across national borders by means of threat or use of
force, or other forms of coercion, abduction, fraud,
deception, abuse of power or of position, taking
advantage of the vulnerability of the person, or, the
giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve
the consent of a person having control over another
person for the purpose of exploitation which includes
at a minimum, the exploitation or the prostitution of
others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced
labor or services, slavery, servitude or the removal or
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
sale of organs. The recruitment, transportation,
transfer, harboring or receipt of a child for the
purpose of exploitation shall also be considered as
"trafficking in persons" even if it does not involve any
of the aforementioned means.
Acts of Trafficking in Persons
It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
juridical, to commit any of the following acts (Section
4, RA 9208):
1.   To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those
done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
2.   To introduce or match for money, profit, or
material, economic or other consideration, any
person or, as provided for under Republic Act No.
6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign national,
for marriage for the purpose of acquiring, buying,
offering, selling or trading him/her to engage in
prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation,
forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or
debt bondage;
3.   To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated,
for the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering,
selling, or trading them to engage in prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor or
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
4.   To undertake or organize tours and travel plans
consisting of tourism packages or activities for
the purpose of utilizing and offering persons for
prostitution, pornography or sexual exploitation;
5.   To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
6.   To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
7.   To recruit, hire, adopt, transport or abduct a
person, by means of threat or use of force, fraud,
deceit, violence, coercion, or intimidation for the
purpose of removal or sale of organs of said
person; and
8.   To recruit, transport or adopt a child to engage in
armed activities in the Philippines or abroad.
RA 10364: THE EXPANDED ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN
PERSONS ACT OF 2012
This amended Sec. 4 of RA 9208 as follows:
Acts of Trafficking in Persons
It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
juridical, to commit any of the following acts:
Page 184 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
1.   To adopt persons by any form of consideration
for exploitative purposes or to facilitate the same
for purposes of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
2.   To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
3.   To recruit, hire, adopt, transport, transfer, obtain,
harbor, maintain, provide, offer, receive or
abduct a person, by means of threat or use of
force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or
intimidation for the purpose of removal or sale of
organs of said person;
4.   To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor,
maintain, offer, hire, provide, receive or adopt a
child to engage in armed activities in the
Philippines or abroad;
5.   To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain,
maintain, offer, hire, provide or receive a person
by means defined in Section 3 of this Act for
purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
and involuntary servitude, including a scheme,
plan, or pattern intended to cause the person
either:
a.   To believe that if the person did not perform
such labor or services, he or she or another
person would suffer serious harm or physical
restraint; or
b.   To abuse or threaten the use of law or the
legal processes; and
6.   To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain,
maintain, offer, hire, provide or receive a person
by means defined in Section 3 of this Act for
purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
and involuntary servitude, including a scheme,
plan, or pattern intended to cause the person
either:
a.   To believe that if the person did not perform
such labor or services, he or she or another
person would suffer serious harm or physical
restraint; or
b.   To abuse or threaten the use of law or the
legal processes; and
7.   To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, transfer,
maintain, hire, offer, provide, adopt or receive a
child for purposes of exploitation or trading
them, including but not limited to, the act of
baring and/or selling a child for any
consideration or for barter for purposes of
exploitation. Trafficking for purposes of
exploitation of children shall include:
a.   All forms of slavery or practices similar to
slavery, involuntary servitude, debt bondage
and forced labor, including recruitment of
children for use in armed conflict;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
b.   The use, procuring or offering of a child for
prostitution, for the production of
pornography, or for pornographic
performances;
c.   The use, procuring or offering of a child for
the production and trafficking of drugs; and
d.   The use, procuring or offering of a child for
illegal activities or work which, by its nature
or the circumstances in which it is carried
out, is likely to harm their health, safety or
morals; and
8.   To organize or direct other persons to commit the
offenses defined as acts of trafficking under this
Act."
Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons
The following acts which promote or facilitate
trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful (Section 5, RA
9208):
1.   To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to
be used any house, building or establishment for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
2.   To produce, print and issue or distribute
unissued, tampered or fake counseling
certificates, registration stickers and certificates
of any government agency which issues these
certificates and stickers as proof of compliance
with government regulatory and pre-departure
requirements for the purpose of promoting
trafficking in persons;
3.   To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or
distribute, or cause the advertisement,
publication, printing, broadcasting or
distribution by any means, including the use of
information technology and the internet, of any
brochure, flyer, or any propaganda material that
promotes trafficking in persons;
4.   To assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud for purposes of facilitating the acquisition
of clearances and necessary exit documents from
government agencies that are mandated to
provide pre-departure registration and services
for departing persons for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
5.   To facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of
persons from/to the country at international and
local airports, territorial boundaries and seaports
who are in possession of unissued, tampered or
fraudulent travel documents for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
6.   To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport,
travel documents, or personal documents or
belongings of trafficked persons in furtherance of
trafficking or to prevent them from leaving the
country or seeking redress from the government
or appropriate agencies;
Page 185 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
7.   To knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise,
or make use of, the labor or services of a person
held to a condition of involuntary servitude,
forced labor, or slavery.
8.   To tamper with, destroy, or cause the destruction
of evidence, or to influence or attempt to
influence witnesses, in an investigation or
prosecution of a case under this Act;
9.   To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or
possess, or attempt to destroy, conceal, remove,
confiscate or possess, any actual or purported
passport or other travel, immigration or working
permit or document, or any other actual or
purported government identification, of any
person in order to prevent or restrict, or attempt
to prevent or restrict, without lawful authority,
the person’s liberty to move or travel in order to
maintain the labor or services of that person; or
10.   To utilize his or her office to impede the
investigation, prosecution or execution of lawful
orders in a case under this Act."
Qualified Trafficking in Persons (Section 6, RA 9208,
as amended by RA 10364):
1.   When the trafficked person is a child;
2.   When the adoption is effected through RA 8043,
otherwise known as the "Inter-Country Adoption
Act of 1995" and said adoption is for the purpose
of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation,
forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or
debt bondage;
3.   When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or
in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed
by a syndicate if carried out by a group of 3 or
more persons conspiring or confederating with
one another. It is deemed committed in large
scale if committed against 3 or more persons,
individually or as a group;
4.   When the offender is a spouse, an ascendant,
parent, sibling, guardian or a person who
exercises authority over the trafficked person or
when the offense is committed by a public officer
or employee;
5.   When the trafficked person is recruited to engage
in prostitution with any member of the military or
law enforcement agencies;
6.   When the offender is a member of the military or
law enforcement agencies;
7.   When by reason or on occasion of the act of
trafficking in persons, the offended party dies,
becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is afflicted
with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or the
Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS);
8.   When the offender commits one or more
violations of Section 4 over a period of sixty (60)
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
or more days, whether those days are continuous
or not; and
9.   When the offender directs or through another
manages the trafficking victim in carrying out the
exploitative purpose of trafficking.
Any person who buys or engages the services of
trafficked persons for prostitution shall be
penalized as follows (Section 11, RA 9208):
1.   First offense - 6 months of community service as
may be determined by the court and a fine of
P50,000;
2.   Second and subsequent offenses - imprisonment
of 1 year and a fine of P100,000.
Use of Trafficked Persons (Sec. 11, RA 9208, as
amended by RA 10364) – Any person who buys or
engages the services of a trafficked person for
prostitution shall be penalized with the
following: Provided, That the Probation Law
(Presidential Decree No. 968) shall not apply:
1.   Prision Correccional in its maximum period
to prision mayor or six (6) years to twelve (12)
years imprisonment and a fine of not less than
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) but not more
than One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000.00): Provided, however, That the
following acts shall be exempted thereto:
a.   If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with
a child, the penalty shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period to reclusion
perpetua or seventeen (17) years to forty (40)
years imprisonment and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) but not more than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00);
b.   If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
carnal knowledge of, or sexual intercourse
with, a male or female trafficking victim and
also involves the use of force or intimidation,
to a victim deprived of reason or to an
unconscious victim, or a victim under twelve
(12) years of age, instead of the penalty
prescribed in the subparagraph above the
penalty shall be a fine of not less than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more
than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00)
and imprisonment of reclusion perpetua or
forty (40) years imprisonment with no
possibility of parole; except that if a person
violating paragraph (a) of this section knows
the person that provided prostitution
services is in fact a victim of trafficking, the
offender shall not be likewise penalized
under this section but under Section 10 as a
Page 186 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
person violating Section 4; and if in
committing such an offense, the offender
also knows a qualifying circumstance for
trafficking, the offender shall be penalized
under Section 10 for qualified trafficking. If in
violating this section the offender also
violates Section 4, the offender shall be
penalized under Section 10 and, if
applicable, for qualified trafficking instead of
under this section;
2.   Deportation. – If a foreigner commits any offense
described by paragraph (1) or (2) of this section or
violates any pertinent provision of this Act as an
accomplice or accessory to, or by attempting any
such offense, he or she shall be immediately
deported after serving his or her sentence and be
barred permanently from entering the country;
and
3.   Public Official. – If the offender is a public official,
he or she shall be dismissed from service and
shall suffer perpetual absolute disqualification to
hold public, office, in addition to any
imprisonment or fine received pursuant to any
other provision of this Act."
Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims of
the act or acts of trafficking and as such shall not be
penalized for crimes directly related to the acts of
trafficking enumerated in this Act or in obedience to
the order made by the trafficker in relation thereto. In
this regard, the consent of a trafficked person to the
intended exploitation set forth in this Act shall be
irrelevant. (Section 17, RA 9208)
Note on Section 17: Persons trafficked (including
prostitutes) are exempt from criminal liability.
Note also: Under RA 9208, persons who hire
trafficked persons are criminally liable (Section 11).
Not so in Art 202 RPC.
Under RA 10364, it is provided that victims of
trafficking for purposes of prostitution as defined
under Section 4 of this Act are not covered by Article
202 of the Revised Penal Code and as such, shall not
be prosecuted, fined, or otherwise penalized under
the said law. Prostitution is definedas any act,
transaction, scheme or design involving the use of a
person by another, for sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct in exchange for money, profit or any other
consideration.
RA 10364 also added new sections on attempted
trafficking of persons (Sec. 4-A), accomplice liability
(Sec. 4-B) and accessories (Sec. 4-C).
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Attempted Trafficking in Persons. – Where there are
acts to initiate the commission of a trafficking offense
but the offender failed to or did not execute all the
elements of the crime, by accident or by reason of
some cause other than voluntary desistance, such
overt acts shall be deemed as an attempt to commit
an act of trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt
to commit any of the offenses enumerated in Section
4 of this Act shall constitute attempted trafficking in
persons.
In cases where the victim is a child, any of the
following acts shall also be deemed as attempted
trafficking in persons:
1.   Facilitating the travel of a child who travels alone
to a foreign country or territory without valid
reason therefor and without the required
clearance or permit from the Department of
Social Welfare and Development, or a written
permit or justification from the child’s parent or
legal guardian;
2.   Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit of
consent or a written consent for adoption;
3.   Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the
purpose of selling the child;
4.   Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling the
child; and
5.   Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody
thereof through any means from among
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers,
refugee or evacuation centers, and low-income
families, for the purpose of selling the child.
Accomplice – knowingly aids, abets, cooperates in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
acts defined in this Act
Accessories – Whoever has the knowledge of the
commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principal or as
accomplices, take part in its commission in any of the
following manners:
1.   By profiting themselves or assisting the offender
to profit by the effects of the crime;
2.   By concealing or destroying the body of the crime
or effects or instruments thereof, in order to
prevent its discovery;
3.   By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime, provided the
accessory acts with abuse of his or her public
functions or is known to be habitually guilty of
some other crime.
Page 187 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
  Title VII. Crimes
Committed by Public
Officers
CHAPTER I: PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
1.   Art. 203: Who Are Public Officers
CHAPTER II: MALFEASANCE AND MISFEASANCE IN
OFFICE
1.   Art. 204: Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment
2.   Art. 205: Judgment Rendered Through
Negligence
3.   Art. 206: Unjust Interlocutory Order
4.   Art. 207: Malicious Delay in the Administration of
Justice
5.   Art. 208: Prosecution of Offenses; Negligence
and Tolerance
6.   Art. 209: Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney or a
Solicitor - Revelation of Secrets
7.   Art. 210: Direct Bribery
8.   Art. 211: Indirect Bribery
9.   Art. 211-A: Qualified Bribery
10.   Art. 212: Corruption of Public Officials
11.   Art. 214: Other Frauds
CHAPTER III: FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS
AND TRANSACTIONS
1.   Art. 213: Fraud against the Public Treasury and
Similar Offenses
2.   Art. 215: Prohibited Transactions
3.   Art. 216: Possession of Prohibited Interest by a
Public Officer
CHAPTER IV: MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS
AND PROPERTIES
1.   Art. 217: Malversation of Public Funds or
Property - Presumption of Malversation
2.   Art. 218: Failure of Accountable Officer to
Render Accounts
3.   Art. 219: Failure of a Responsible Public Officer
to Render Accounts Before Leaving the Country
4.   Art. 220: Illegal Use of Public Funds or Property
5.   Art. 221: Failure to Make Delivery of Public
Funds or Property
6.   Art. 222: Officers Included in the Preceding
Provisions
CHAPTER V: INFIDELITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
1.   Art. 223: Conniving With or Consenting to
Evasion
2.   Art. 224: Evasion through Negligence
3.   Art. 225: Escape of Prisoner under the Custody of
a Person Not a Public Officer
4.   Art. 226: Removal, Concealment, or Destruction
of Documents
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
5.   Art. 227: Officer Breaking Seal
6.   Art. 228: Opening of Closed Documents
7.   Art. 229: Revelation of Secrets by an Officer
8.   Art. 230: Public Officers Revealing Secrets of
Private Individuals
CHAPTER VI: OTHER OFFENSES AND
IRREGULARITIES BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
1.   Art. 231: Open Disobedience
2.   Art. 232: Disobedience to the Order of Superior
Officer When Said Order Was Suspended by
Inferior Officer
3.   Art. 233 - Refusal of Assistance
4.   Art. 234: Refusal to Discharge Elective Office
5.   Art. 235: Maltreatment of Prisoners
6.   Art. 236: Anticipation of Duties of a Public Officer
7.   Art. 237: Prolonging Performance of Duties and
Powers
8.   Art. 238: Abandonment of Office or Position
9.   Art. 239: Usurpation of Legislative Powers
10.   Art. 240: Usurpation of Executive Functions
11.   Art. 241: Usurpation of Judicial Functions
12.   Art. 242: Disobeying Request for Disqualification
13.   Art. 243: Orders or Request by Executive Officer
to Any Judicial Authority
14.   Art. 244: Unlawful Appointments
15.   Art. 245: Abuses against Chastity
Note: This is one of the instances where the Revised
Penal Code may be given extra-territorial
application under Article 2 (5) thereof.
Crimes under this title can be committed by public
officers or a non-public officer, when the latter
becomes a conspirator with a public officer, or an
accomplice, or accessory to the crime. The public
officer has to be the principal.
1.   Chapter I: Preliminary
Provisions
a.   Art. 203 – Who Are Public
Officers
Requisites:
1.   Taking part in the performance of public
functions in the government;
2.   Performing in said government or in any of its
branches public duties as an employee, agent or
subordinate official, of any rank or class;
3.   His authority to take part in the performance of
public functions or to perform public duties must
be –
a.   By direct provision of the law;
b.   By popular election; or
Page 188 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
c.   By appointment by competent authority
“Public official” includes elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in career or non-career service, including
military and police personnel, whether or not they
receive compensation, regardless of amount. (Sec.
3(b), RA 6713)
"Public officer" includes elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt
service receiving compensation, even nominal, from
the government. (Sec. 2(c), RA 3019)
The term “public officers” embraces every public
servant from the highest to lowest.
Dacumos v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 95000 (1991)]
expanded the meaning of “official duties”. It included
those which may be in one’s capacity to perform by
reason of his office.
Officers and employees of government owned and
controlled corporations included but not those of a
sequestered corporation.
The better rule is that GOCCs created by law are
covered while GOCCs registered with the SEC
(including sequestered companies) are not. [Macalino
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 140199-200 (2002)]
The more recent case of People v. Sandiganbayan
[G.R. No. 167304 (2009)] held that, based on RA
8249, presidents, directors, trustees, and managers
of all GOCCs, regardless of type, are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan when they are
involved in graft and corruption.
2.  C hapter II: Malfeasance
and Misfeasance in Office
Malfeasance The performance of an act
(Direct Bribery and which ought not to be done
Indirect Bribery)
Misfeasance Improper performance of
(see Arts 204-207: some act which might
acts by a judge) lawfully be done
Nonfeasance Omission of some act which
(Prosecution) ought to be performed
a.   Article 204 – Knowingly
Rendering Unjust Judgment
Elements:
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
1.   Offender is a judge;
2.   He renders a judgment in a case submitted to
him for decision;
3.   Judgment is unjust;
4.   The judge knows that his judgment is unjust.
Judgment – the final consideration and
determination of a court of competent jurisdiction
upon matters submitted to it, in an action or
proceeding.
An unjust judgment is one which is contrary to law or
is not supported by the evidence, or both.
Defense: Mere error in good faith.
There must be positive evidence imputing an unjust
judgment; presumption will not suffice.
The source of an unjust judgment may be either a)
error, b) ill will or revenge, or c) bribery.
The offense refers only to a judgment of an individual
judge in his court, and not to the judgment rendered
in a collegial court by the members thereof. [In Re:
Wenceslao Laureta, G.R. No. L-68635 (1987)]
Before a criminal action against a judge for violation
of Articles 204 and 205 can be entertained, there
must be a trial or authoritative judicial declaration
that his decision or order is really unjust which may
result from either an action of certiorari or prohibition
in a higher court. [De Vera v. Pelayo, G.R. No. 137354
(2000)]
Malice or bad faith on the part of the judge in
rendering an unjust decision must still be proved and
failure on the part of the complainant to prove the
same warrants the dismissal of the administrative
complaint [Alforte v. Santos, A.M. No. MTJ-94-914
(1995)]
b.   Article 205 – Judgment
Rendered Through Negligence
Elements:
1.   Offender is a judge;
2.   He renders a judgment in a case submitted to
him for decision;
3.   The judgment is manifestly unjust;
4.   It is due to his inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.
A manifestly unjust judgment is one which is so
manifestly contrary to law that even a person having
basic knowledge of the law cannot doubt the
Page 189 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
injustice. Abuse of discretion or mere error of
judgment, not punishable.
The Supreme Court held that a judgment is said to be
unjust when it is contrary to the standards of conduct
prescribed by law.
The test to determine whether an order or judgment
is unjust may be inferred from the circumstances that
it is contrary to law or is not supported by evidence.
[Louis Vuitton S.A. v. Judge Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-
92-643 (1992)]
c.   Article 206 – Unjust
Interlocutory Order
Elements:
1.   Offender is a judge;
2.   He performs any of the following acts:
a.   Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory
order or decree; or
b.   Rendering a manifestly unjust interlocutory
order or decree through inexcusable
negligence or ignorance.
If the order leaves something to be done in the trial
court with respect to the merits of the case, it is
interlocutory. If it does not, it is final.
The unjust interlocutory order must have been issued
by the judge with deliberate intent to cause damage
to the party concerned.
d.   Article 207 – Malicious Delay
in the Administration of
Justice
Elements:
1.   Offender is a judge;
2.   There is a proceeding in his court;
3.   He delays in the administration of justice;
4.   The delay is malicious, that is, with deliberate
intent to inflict damage on either party in the
case.
Malice must be proven. Malice is present where the
delay is sought to favor one party to the prejudice of
the other.
Mere delay without malice is not a felony under this
provision.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
e.   Article 208 – Prosecution of
Offenses; Negligence and
Tolerance
Modes
1.   Maliciously refraining from instituting
prosecution against violators of the law;
2.   Maliciously tolerating the commission of
offenses.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer or officer of the law
who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, or to
prosecute, offenses;
2.   There is a dereliction of the duties of his office,
that is, knowing the commission of the crime, he
does not cause the prosecution of the criminal, or
knowing that a crime is about to be committed,
he tolerates its commission;
3.   Offender acts with malice and deliberate intent
to favor the violator of the law.
Public officer – officers of the prosecution
department, whose duty is to institute criminal
proceedings for felonies upon being informed of their
perpetration, i.e. city attorney, fiscal
Officer of the law – those who, by reason of the
position held by them, are duty-bound to cause
prosecution and punishment of offenders, i.e. chief of
police, barrio captain
Also known as prevaricacion.
“Negligence” in the title must be construed to mean
neglect of the duties of his office by maliciously
failing to move the prosecution and punishment of
the delinquent. The crime committed by the law
violator must be proved first. [US v. Mendoza, G.R.
No. 7540 (1912)]
Liability of the public officer who, having the duty of
prosecuting the offender, harbored, concealed, or
assisted in the escape of the latter, is that of a
principal in the crime of dereliction of duty in the
prosecution of the offense.
f.   Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust
by an Attorney or a Solicitor –
Revelation of Secrets
Elements:
1.   Causing damage to his client, either—
a.   By any malicious breach of professional duty;
b.   By inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
Page 190 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned
by him in his professional capacity (damage is
not necessary);
3.   Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in
the same case, without the consent of his first
client,
a.   after having undertaken the defense of said
first client, or
b.   after having received confidential
information from said client.
When the attorney acts with malicious abuse of his
employment or inexcusable negligence or ignorance,
there must be damage to his client.
Communications made with prospective clients to a
lawyer with a view to engaging his professional
services are already privileged even though the
client-lawyer relationship did not eventually
materialize.
The confidential matters or information must be
confided to the lawyer in the latter’s professional
capacity.
Mere malicious breach without damage is not a
violation of Article 209; at most he will be liable
administratively as a lawyer, e.g., suspension or
disbarment under the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Modes of Commission:
1.   Maliciously causing damage to his client through
a breach of his professional duty.
Note: The breach of professional duty must be
malicious. If it is just incidental, it would not give
rise to criminal liability, although it may be the
subject of administrative discipline;
2.   Through gross ignorance, causing damage to the
client;
3.   Inexcusable negligence;
4.   Revelation of secrets learned in his professional
capacity;
5.   Undertaking the defense of the opposite party in
a case without the consent of the first client
whose defense has already been undertaken.
The Supreme Court held that not all information
received by counsel from the client is classified as
privileged.
A distinction must be made between confidential
communications relating to past crimes already
committed, and future crimes intended to be
committed by the client. The attorney-client privilege
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
only covers past crimes. [People v. Sandiganbayan,
supra.]
g.   Article 210 – Direct Bribery
Modes
1.   Agreeing to perform, or performing, in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
present; an act constituting a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official
duties;
2.   Accepting a gift in consideration of the execution
of an act which does not constitute a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official
duty;
3.   Agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing
something which is his official duty to do, in
consideration of gift or promise.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer within the scope of
Article 203;
2.   Offender accepts an offer or a promise or
receives a gift or present by himself or through
another;
3.   Such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or
present received by the public officer –
a.   With a view to committing some crime; or
b.   In consideration of the execution of an act
which does not constitute a crime, but the
act must be unjust; or
c.   To refrain from doing something which it is
his official duty to do.
4.   The act which offender agrees to perform or
which he executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
The crime of bribery has no frustrated stage. If one
party does not concur, then there is no agreement
and not all the acts necessary to commit the crime
were present.
Temporary performance of public functions is
sufficient to constitute a person a public officer.
Bribery exists when the gift is:
1.   voluntarily offered by a private person;
2.   solicited by the public officer and voluntarily
delivered by the private person;
3.   solicited by the public officer but the private
person delivers it out of fear of the consequences
should the public officer perform his functions
(here the crime by the giver does not fall under
corruption of public officials due to the
involuntariness of the act).
Page 191 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
In the FIRST MODE of bribery, actual receipt of the
gift is not necessary.
An accepted offer or promise of a gift is sufficient.
However, if the offer is not accepted, only the person
offering the gift is liable for attempted corruption of a
public officer.
In the SECOND MODE of bribery, the gift must be
accepted by the public officer.
The GIFT must have a value or capable of pecuniary
estimation. It could be in the form of money, property
or services. It cannot consist of a mere offer or
promise of a gift.
If the act required of the public officer amounts to a
crime and he commits it, he shall be liable for the
penalty corresponding to the crime.
The THIRD MODE of bribery and prevaricacion (Art
208) are similar offenses, both consisting of omission
of an act required to be performed.
In direct bribery however, a gift or promise is given in
consideration of the omission. This is not necessary in
prevaricacion.
Direct bribery does not absorb Art. 208 (dereliction of
duty). See Qualified Bribery (211-A)
Police Sergeant Malfrosque asked and accepted
money in exchange for the recovery of the reported
stolen gas tanks to the owners. This made him liable
under the 2nd mode of Art 210 since the act of
returning the gas tanks to the owners does not
constitute a crime; he demanded money and said act
was in connection with the performance of his duty as
a policeman. [Marifosque v. People, G.R. No. 156685
(2004)]
Distinguished from Sec 3(b) of RA 3019
Whereas the mere request or demand of a gift,
present, share, percentage or benefit is enough to
constitute a violation of Section 3(b) of RA 3019,
acceptance of a promise or offer or receipt of a gift or
present is required in direct bribery. Moreover, the
ambit of Section 3(b) of RA 3019 is specific. It is
limited only to contracts or transactions involving
monetary consideration where the public officer has
the authority to intervene under the law. Direct
bribery, on the other hand, has a wider and more
general scope: (a) performance of an act constituting
a crime; (b) execution of an unjust act which does not
constitute a crime and (c) agreeing to refrain or
refraining from doing an act which is his official duty
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
to do. [Merencillo v. People, G.R. No. 142369-70,
(2007)]
h.   Article 211 – Indirect Bribery
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He accepts gifts;
3.   The gifts are offered to him by reason of his
office.
The principal distinction between direct and
indirect bribery is that in the former, the officer
agrees to perform or refrain from doing an act in
consideration of the gift or promise. In the latter case,
it is not necessary that the officer do any act. It is
sufficient that he accepts the gift offered by reason of
his office.
If after receiving the gift, the officer does any act in
favor of the giver which is unfair to the others, the
crime continues to be indirect bribery.
Precisely the evil of indirect bribery is in its tendency
to produce future, unspecified, and unwarranted
favors from the official.
This is always in the consummated stage. There is no
attempted much less frustrated stage in indirect
bribery.
There must be clear intention on the part of the
public officer:
1.   to take the gift offered; and
2.   consider the property as his own for that
moment.
Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any other
sign, circumstance or act to show such acceptance is
not sufficient to convict the officer.
“Gift" refers to a thing or a right to dispose of
gratuitously, or any act or liberality, in favor of
another who accepts it, and shall include a simulated
sale or an ostensibly onerous disposition thereof. It
shall not include an unsolicited gift of nominal or
insignificant value not given in anticipation of, or in
exchange for, a favor from a public official or
employee. [Sec. 3(c), RA 6713]
“Receiving any gift" includes the act of accepting
directly or indirectly a gift from a person other than a
member of the public officer's immediate family, in
behalf of himself or of any member of his family or
relative within the fourth civil degree, either by
consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a
family celebration or national festivity like Christmas,
Page 192 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
if the value of the gift is under the circumstances
manifestly excessive. [Section 2(c), RA 3019]
i.   Article 211-A – Qualified
Bribery
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer entrusted with law
enforcement;
2.   He refrains from arresting or prosecuting an
offender who has committed a crime punishable
by reclusion perpetua and/or death;
3.   Offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or
present.
The crime of qualified bribery may be committed only
by public officers “entrusted with enforcement”
(those whose official duties authorize them to arrest
or prosecute offenders).
The penalty is qualified if the public officer is the one
who asks or demands such present.
If the penalty imposed is lower than reclusion
perpetua and/or death had the offender been
arrested or the crime prosecuted, the crime is direct
bribery.
The dereliction of the duty punished under Article
208 of the Revised Penal Code is absorbed in
Qualified Bribery.
j.   Article 212 – Corruption of
Public Officials
Elements:
1.   Offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts
or presents to a public officer;
2.   The offers or promises are made or the gifts or
presents given to a public officer, under
circumstances that will make the public officer
liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery.
The offender is the giver of the gift or the offeror of
the promise.
The act may or may not be accomplished.
Whenever any public officer or employee has
acquired during his incumbency an amount of
property which is manifestly out of proportion to his
salary as such public officer or employee and to his
other lawful income and the income from legitimately
acquired property, said property shall be presumed
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired. If the
respondent is unable to show to the satisfaction of
the court that he has lawfully acquired the property in
question, then the court shall declare such property,
forfeited in favor of the State. [R.A. 1379]
The following shall be exempt from prosecution or
punishment for the offense with reference to which
his information and testimony was given:
1.   Any person who voluntarily gives information
about any violation of
a.   Articles 210, 211, and 212 of the RPC;
b.   R.A. 3019, as amended;
c.   Section 345 of the Internal Revenue Code
and Section 3604 of the Tariff and Customs
Code and other provisions of the said Codes
penalizing abuse or dishonesty on the part of
the public officials concerned;
d.   Other laws, rules and regulations punishing
acts of graft, corruption and other forms of
official abuse;
2.   Any person who willingly testifies against any
public official or employee for such violation.
(Section 1, PD 749)
RA 3019: ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES
ACT
CORRUPT PRACTICES OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
Sec. 3(a)
Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of
rules and regulations duly promulgated by
competent authority or an offense in connection with
the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to
be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
Sec. 3(b)
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or
for any other person, in connection with any contract
or transaction between the Government and any
other party, wherein the public officer in his official
capacity has to intervene under the law.
Elements:
1.   the offender is a public officer;
2.   who requested or received a gift, a present, a
share, a percentage, or benefit;
3.   on behalf of the offender or any other person;
4.   in connection with a contract or transaction with
the government;
5.   in which the public officer, in an official capacity
under the law, has the right to intervene.
Page 193 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
[Cadiao-Palacios v. People, G.R. No. 168544
(2009)]
Bar question: May a public officer charged under
Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 ["directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present,
share, percentage or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or
transaction between the government and any other
party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity
has to intervene under the law"] also be
simultaneously or successively charged with direct
bribery under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code?
Suggested answer: Violation of Section (b) of RA 3019
(Graft) and Article 210 of RPC do not preclude each
other and may be simultaneously or successively
charged
Whether or not the public officer demanded for gifts
or benefits is immaterial, for the Act uses the words
“requesting or receiving”.
This section refers to a public officer whose official
intervention is required by law in a contract or
transaction. [Jaravata v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-
56170 (1984)]
Sec. 3(c)
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for
himself or for another, from any person for whom the
public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured
or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government
permit or license, in consideration for the help given
or to be given.
Elements:
1.   the offender is a public officer;
2.   he has secured or obtained, or would secure or
obtain, for a person any government permit or
license;
3.   he directly or indirectly requested or received
from said person any gift, present or other
pecuniary or material benefit for himself or for
another; and
4.   he requested or received the gift, present or other
pecuniary or material benefit in consideration for
help given or to be given
Sec. 3(d)
Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has
pending official business with him during the
pendency thereof or within one year after its
termination.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Sec. 3(e)
Causing any undue injury to any party, including the
Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad
faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision
shall apply to officers and employees of offices or
government corporations charged with the grant of
licenses or permits or other concessions.
Elements:
1.   The accused is a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial or official functions;
2.   he must have acted with manifest partiality,
evident bad faith, or inexcusable negligence; and
3.   his action has caused any undue injury to any
party, including the Government, or has given
any party unwarranted benefit, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his functions.
[Fonacier v. Sandiganbayan G.R. No. L-50691
(1994)]
Manifest Partiality
"Partiality" is synonymous with "bias" which "excites
a disposition to see and report matters as they are
wished for rather than as they are."
Evident Bad Faith
"Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or
negligence; it imputes a dishonest purpose or some
moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong; a
breach of sworn duty through some motive or intent
or ill will; it partakes of the nature of fraud."
Inexcusable Negligence
“Gross negligence has been so defined as
negligence characterized by the want of even slight
care, acting or omitting to act in a situation where
there is a duty to act, not inadvertently but wilfully
and intentionally with a conscious indifference to
consequences in so far as other persons may be
affected. It is the omission of that care which even
inattentive and thoughtless men never fail to take on
their own property."
These definitions prove all too well that the three
modes are distinct and different from each other.
Proof of the existence of any of these modes in
connection with the prohibited acts under Section
3(e) should suffice to warrant conviction. [Fonacier v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-50691 (1994)]
The fact that the damage was caused when the
accused was no longer in the discharge his official
functions will not remove his classification as a public
officer. It is precisely the taking advantage of his
Page 194 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
official position which showed evident bad faith and
caused undue injury.
The last sentence of paragraph (e) is intended to
make clear the inclusion of officers and employees of
offices or government corporations which, under the
ordinary concept of “public officers” may not come
within the term. It is a strained construction of the
provision to read it as applying exclusively to public
officers charged with the duty of granting licenses or
permits or other concessions [Mejorada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-51065-72 (1987)]
Sec. 3(f)
Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,
without sufficient justification, to act within a
reasonable time on any matter pending before him
for the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly,
from any person interested in the matter some
pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or for the
purpose of favoring his own interest or giving undue
advantage in favor of or discriminating against any
other interested party.
Sec. 3(g)
Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby.
Sec. 3(h)
Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in
his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the
Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
A mayor who has divested himself of shares in a
corporation which had a contract with the
government before his assumption to office, even if
the divestment was to a relative, is not liable under 3
(h). What the law wants to prevent is actual
intervention in a transaction in which the public
official has financial or pecuniary interest. [Trieste v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 70332-43 (1986)]
Sec. 3(i)
Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, or having a material interest in any
transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member, and which
exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes
against the same or does not participate in the action
of the board, committee, panel or group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against
those public officers responsible for the approval of
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular
transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to
which they belong.
Sec. 3(j)
Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not
qualified for or not legally entitled to such license,
permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere
representative or dummy of one who is not so
qualified or entitled.
Sec. 3(k)
Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account
of his official position to unauthorized persons, or
releasing such information in advance of its
authorized release date.
Prohibition on private individuals (Sec. 4)
1.   Taking advantage of family or close personal
relation with any public official, by directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any present or
pecuniary advantage from any person having
some business, transaction, application, request
or contract with the government, in which such
public official has to intervene.
Family relation: includes the spouse or relatives
by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil
degree.
Close personal relation: includes close personal
friendship, social and fraternal connections, and
professional employment all giving rise to
intimacy which assures free access to such public
officer.
2.   Knowingly inducing or causing any public official
to commit any of the offenses defined in Sec. 3.
Prohibition on certain relatives (Sec. 5)
The spouse or any relative, by consanguinity or
affinity, within the third civil degree, of the President,
Vice-President, President of the Senate, or Speaker of
the House of Representatives is prohibited from
intervening directly or indirectly, in any business,
transaction, contract or application with the
Government.
Exceptions:
1.   Any person who, prior to the assumption of office
of those officials to whom he is related, has been
already dealing with the Government along the
same line of business, nor to any transaction,
contract or application already existing or
Page 195 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
pending at the time of such assumption of public
office.
2.   Any application filed by him the approval of
which is not discretionary on the part of the
official or officials concerned but depends upon
compliance with requisites provided by law, or
rules or regulations issued pursuant to law;
3.   Any act lawfully performed in an official capacity
or in the exercise of a profession.
Prohibition on Members of Congress (Sec. 6)
1.   A member of Congress during the term for which
he has been elected, to acquire or receive any
personal pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be directly and
particularly favored or benefited by any law or
resolution authored by him previously approved
or adopted by Congress during the same term.
2.   Any other public officer who recommended the
initiation in Congress of the enactment or
adoption of any law or resolution, and acquires
or receives any such interest during his
incumbency.
3.   A member of Congress or other public officer,
who, having such interest prior to the approval of
such law or resolution authored or recommended
by him, continues for thirty days after such
approval to retain such interest.
Exception
Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant
value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of
gratitude or friendship according to local customs or
usage, shall be excepted from the provisions of this
Act. [Sec. 14 RA 3019]
RA 7080: AN ACT DEFINING AND PENALIZING
THE CRIME OF PLUNDER (ANTI-PLUNDER ACT)
Definition of Terms
1.   Public Officer – any person holding any public
office in the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines by virtue of an appointment, election
or contract.
2.   Government – includes the National
Government, and any of its subdivisions,
agencies or instrumentalities, including GOCCs
and their subsidiaries.
3.   Person – includes any natural or juridical person,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
4.   Ill-gotten wealth – any asset, property, business
enterprise or material possession of any person
within the purview of Section 2 (Plunder),
acquired by him directly or indirectly through
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates
and/or business associates by any combination
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
or series of the following means or similar
schemes:
a.   Through misappropriation, conversion,
misuse, or malversation of public funds or
raids on the public treasury;
b.   By receiving, directly or indirectly, any
commission, gift, share, percentage,
kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary
benefit from any person and/or entity in
connection with any government contract or
project or by reason of the office or position
of the public officer concerned;
c.   By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or
disposition of assets belonging to the
National Government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries;
d.   By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly
or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or
any other form of interest or participation
including promise of future employment in
any business enterprise or undertaking;
e.   By establishing agricultural, industrial or
commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation of
decrees and orders intended to benefit
particular persons or special interests; or
f.   By taking undue advantage of official
position, authority, relationship, connection
or influence to unjustly enrich himself or
themselves at the expense and to the
damage and prejudice of the Filipino people
and the Republic of the Philippines. [Sec. 1,
RA 7080]
RA 7659 (The Death Penalty Law) amended Section 2
of RA 7080, and lowered the amount to fifty million
pesos and increased the imposable penalty to death.
Rule of Evidence
For purposes of establishing the crime of plunder, it
shall not be necessary to prove each and every
criminal act done by the accused in furtherance of the
scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or
acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to
establish beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt
or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful
scheme or conspiracy. [Sec. 4, RA 7080]
Combination – refers to at least 2 acts falling under
different categories of enumeration in Sec. 1 (d) i.e.
raids on the public treasury under subpar. 1 and
fraudulent conveyance of assets belonging to the
National Government under subpar. 3. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Page 196 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Series – refers to at least 2 or more overt or criminal
acts falling under the same category of enumeration
in Sec. 1 (d) i.e. misappropriation, malversation and
raids on the public treasury under subparagraph 1.
[Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Pattern – consists of at least a combination or series
of overt or criminal acts enumerated in subsections
(1) to (6) of Section 1(d). It is a general plan of action
or method which the principal accused and the public
officer and others conniving with him follow to
achieve the unlawful scheme or conspiracy to achieve
a common goal. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Plunder is a crime malum in se, and the element of
mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for
plunder. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Difference between wheel conspiracy and chain
conspiracy
In the American jurisdiction, the presence of several
accused in multiple conspiracies commonly involves
two structures: (1) the so-called wheel or circle
conspiracy, in which there is a single person or group
(the hub) dealing individually with two or more other
persons or groups (the spokes); and (2) the chain
conspiracy, usually involving the distribution of
narcotics or other contraband, in which there is
successive communication and cooperation in much
the same way as with legitimate business operations
between manufacturer and wholesaler, then
wholesaler and retailer, and then retailer and
consumer. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
PD 46 : MAKING IT PUNISHABLE FOR PUBLIC
OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES TO RECEIVE, AND
FOR PRIVATE PERSONS TO GIVE, GIFTS ON ANY
OCCASION, INCLUDING CHRISTMAS
It is punishable for any public official or employee,
whether of the national or local governments, to
receive, directly or indirectly, and for private persons
to give, or offer to give, any gift, present or other
valuable thing on any occasion, including Christmas,
when such gift, present or other valuable thing is
given by reason of his official position, regardless of
whether or not the same is for past favor or favors or
the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or better
treatment in the future from the public official or
employee concerned in the discharge of his official
functions. Included within the prohibition is the
throwing of parties or entertainments in honor of the
official or employee or his immediate relatives.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.  Chapter III: Frauds and
Illegal Exactions and
Transactions
a.   Article 213 – Fraud against the
Public Treasury and Similar
Offenses
Modes:
1.   Entering into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or making use of any other
scheme, to defraud the government, in dealing
with any person with regard to furnishing
supplies, the making of contracts, or the
adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to
public property or funds;
2.   Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those
authorized by law, in collection of taxes, licenses,
fees, and other imposts;
3.   Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially, in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees
and other imposts;
4.   Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of
a nature different from that provided by law, in
the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other
imposts.
Elements of Fraud against Public Treasury (par.1):
1.   Offender is a public officer
2.   He should have taken advantage of his public
office, that is, he intervened in the transaction in
his official capacity
3.   He entered into an agreement with any
interested party or speculator or made use of any
other scheme with regard to:
4.   Furnishing supplies
5.   The making of contracts
6.   The adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds
7.   Accused had intent to defraud the Government.
Consummated by merely entering into agreement
with any interested party or speculator or by merely
making use of other scheme to defraud the
government.
It is not necessary that the Government is actually
defrauded by the reason of the transaction
Page 197 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements of Illegal Exactions (par.2.):
1.   That the offender is a public officer entrusted
with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and
other imposts;
2.   He is guilty of the following acts or omissions:
a.   Demanding directly or indirectly, the
payment of sums different from or larger
than those authorized by law;
b.   Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt as
provided by law, for any sum of money
collected by him officially; or
c.   Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly,
by way of payment or otherwise, things or
object of a nature different from that
provided by law
This can only be committed principally by a public
officer whose official duty is to collect taxes, license
fees, import duties and other dues payable to the
government.
Mere demand of a larger or different amount is
sufficient to consummate the crime. The essence is
the improper collection (damage to government is
not required).
The act of receiving payment due the government
without issuing a receipt will give rise to illegal
exaction even though a provisional receipt has been
issued. What the law requires is a receipt in the form
prescribed by law, which means official receipt.
If sums are received without demanding the same, a
felony under this article is not committed. However,
if the sum is given as a sort of gift or gratification, the
crime is indirect bribery.
When there is deceit in demanding a greater fee than
those prescribed by law, the crime committed is
estafa and not illegal exaction.
Illegal exaction may be complexed with malversation
if illegal exaction was committed as a necessary
means to commit malversation.
Officers and employees of the BIR or Customs are not
covered by the article. The NIRC or the Revised
Administrative Code is the applicable law.
b.   Article 214 – Other Frauds
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He takes advantage of his official position;
3.   He commits any of the frauds or deceits
enumerated in Article 315 to 318 (estafa, other
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
forms of swindling, swindling a minor, other
deceits).
Additional penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual
special disqualification, apart from the penalties
imposed in Arts 315-318.
c.   Art. 215 – Prohibited
Transactions
Elements:
1.   Offender is an appointive public officer;
2.   He becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in
any transaction of exchange or speculation;
3.   The transaction takes place within the territory
subject to his jurisdiction;
4.   He becomes interested in the transaction during
his incumbency.
Examples of transactions of exchange or speculation
are: buying and selling stocks, commodities, land etc
wherein one hopes to take advantage of an expected
rise or fall in price.
Purchasing of stocks or shares in a company is simple
investment and not a violation of the article.
However, regularly buying securities for resale is
speculation.
The offender may also be held liable under RA 3019
Sec 3(i).
d.   Article 216 – Possession of
Prohibited Interest by a Public
Officer
Persons liable:
1.   Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became
interested in any contract or business in which it
was his official duty to intervene;
2.   Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants
who, in like manner, took part in any contract or
transaction connected with the estate or property
in the appraisal, distribution or adjudication of
which they had acted;
3.   Guardians and executors with respect to the
property belonging to their wards or the estate.
Fraud is not necessary. Intervention must be by virtue
of the public office held.
The basis here is the possibility that fraud may be
committed or that the officer may place his own
Page 198 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
interest above that of the government or party he
represents.
4.  C hapter IV: Malversation
of Public Funds or
Property
a.   Article 217 – Malversation of
Public Funds or Property -
Presumption of Malversation
Modes:
1.   Appropriating public funds or property;
2.   Taking or misappropriating the same;
3.   Consenting, or through abandonment or
negligence, permitting any other person to take
such public funds or property; and
4.   Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.
Elements common to all modes:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He had the custody or control of funds or
property by reason of the duties of his office;
3.   Those funds or property were public funds or
property for which he was accountable;
4.   He appropriated, took, misappropriated or
consented or, through abandonment or
negligence, permitted another person to take
them.
Malversation is also called embezzlement.
Appropriation – Every attempt to dispose of public
funds or property without a right to do so.
The public officer must have official custody or the
duty to collect or receive funds due the government,
or the obligation to account for them, because this
provision presupposes abuse of office.
The nature of the duties of the public officer, not the
name of the office, is controlling. Thus, a clerk who
receives money or property belonging to the
government, in the course of his employment, for
which he is bound to account, may be liable under
Article 217.
If the public officer is not accountable for the funds or
property but someone else is, the crime committed is
theft or qualified theft if there is an abuse of
confidence.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

It is not necessary that the offender profited for as

long as the accountable officer was remiss in his duty Technical malversation (Article 220) is not included
of safekeeping public funds or property. He is liable in the crime of malversation.
for malversation if such funds were lost or otherwise
misappropriated by another. Presumption of Misappropriation
When a demand is made upon an accountable officer
Negligence – the omission of reasonable care and and he cannot produce the fund or property involved,
caution which an ordinary prudent person would have there is a prima facie presumption that he had
used in the same situation. The measure of converted the same to his own use. There must be
negligence is the standard of care commensurate indubitable proof that thing unaccounted for exists.
with the occasion.
Audit should be made to determine if there was
It can be committed either with malice or through shortage. Audit must be complete and trustworthy. If
negligence or imprudence. This is one crime in the there is doubt, presumption does not arise.
Revised Penal Code where the penalty is the same
whether committed with dolo or through culpa. The accused incurred shortage (P1.74) mainly
because the auditor disallowed certain cash advances
The funds or property must be received in an official the accused granted to employees. But on the same
capacity. Otherwise, the crime committed is estafa. date that the audit was made, the partly reimbursed
the amount and paid it in full three days later. The
Returning the malversed funds is not exempting, it is Supreme Court considered the circumstances as
only mitigating. negative of criminal intent. The cash advances were
made in good faith and out of good will to co-
A person whose negligence made possible the employees which was a practice tolerated in the
commission of malversation by another can be held office. There was no negligence, malice, nor intent to
liable as a principal by indispensable cooperation. defraud. [Quizo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 77120
(1987)]
Demand as well as damage to the government are
not necessary elements. Demand merely raises a Estafa with Abuse
prima facie presumption that missing funds have Malversation
of Confidence (Art.
been put to personal use. Damage to the government (Art. 217)
315)
is immaterial because the penalty is based on the
amount involved. Funds/property are
Funds or property usually public
always private
An accountable public officer may be convicted of Offender is a
malversation even in the absence of direct evidence private individual or
of personal misappropriation, where he has not been Offender is usually a public even a public officer
able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the public officer who is accountable for who is not
funds involved. [Estepa v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. the public funds/property accountable for
59670 (1990)] public
funds/property
A private person may also commit malversation
Crime is committed
under the following situations: Crime is committed by
by
1.   Conspiracy with a public officer in committing appropriating, taking, or
misappropriating,
malversation; misappropriating/consenting or
converting, or
2.   When he has become an accomplice or accessory through abandonment or
denying having
to a public officer who commits malversation; negligence, permitting any
received money,
3.   When the private person is made the custodian in other person to take the public
goods or other
whatever capacity of public funds or property, funds/property
personal property
whether belonging to national or local
government, and he misappropriates the same No element of damage. There is damage.
(Article 222); There is a need for
4.   When he is constituted as the depositary or Demand not necessary.
prior demand.
administrator of funds or property seized or
attached by public authority even though said
funds or property belong to a private individual A routine government audit was conducted in Wa-
(Article 222). Acon’s office and it was discovered that the sacks of

 
Page 199 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

rice entrusted to him for safekeeping were missing.

Art 217 no longer requires proof by the State that the The act of leaving the country must be unauthorized
accused actually appropriated, took, or or not permitted by law.
misappropriated public funds or property; instead, a
presumption, though disputable and rebuttable, was The purpose of the law is to discourage responsible
installed upon demand by any duly authorized or accountable officers from leaving without first
officer, the failure of a public officer to have duly liquidating their accountability. It is not necessary
forthcoming any public funds or property which said that they really misappropriated public funds.
officer is accountable for should be prima facie
evidence that he had put such missing funds or d.   Article 220 – Illegal Use of
properties to personal use. [People v. Wa-Acon, G.R.
No. 164575 (2006)] Public Funds or Property
When estafa not malversation Elements:
If petitioner, being a public officer, embezzled public 1.   Offender is a public officer;
funds for which he is accountable, his crime would be 2.   There are public funds or property under his
malversation through falsification. But since he administration;
misappropriated public funds for which he is not 3.   Such fund or property were appropriated by law
accountable, his crime is estafa through falsification. or ordinance;
[Ilumin v. Sandiganbayan, 241 SCRA 586 (1995)] 4.   He applies such public fund or property to any
public use other than for which it was
appropriated for.
b.   Article 218 – Failure of
Accountable Officer to Render Illegal use of public funds or property is also known
Accounts as technical malversation. The term technical
malversation is used because in this crime, the fund
Elements: or property involved is already appropriated or
1.   Offender is public officer, whether in the service earmarked for a certain public purpose. Despite the
or separated therefrom by resignation or any public purpose, the act is punished because it
other cause; remains a violation of the appropriations law.
2.   He is an accountable officer for public funds or
property; Regardless of damage or embarrassment to the
3.   He is required by law or regulation to render public service.
account to the Commission on Audit, or to a
provincial auditor; Malversation Technical malversation
4.   He fails to do so for a period of two months after (Art. 217) (Art. 220)
such accounts should be rendered. The offender The public officer applies
misappropriates public the public funds or
Demand for accounting is not necessary. It is also not funds or property for his property under his
essential that there be misappropriation because if own personal use, or administration to another
present, the crime would be malversation. allows any other person to public use different from
take such funds or that for which the public
c.   Article 219 – Failure of a property for the latter’s fund was appropriated by
own personal use. law or ordinance.
Responsible Public Officer to
Render Accounts Before
e.   Article 221 - Failure to Make
Leaving the Country
Delivery of Public Funds or
Elements: Property
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He is an accountable officer for public funds or Modes
property; 1.   Failing to make payment by a public officer who
3.   He unlawfully leaves or attempts to leave the is under obligation to make such payment from
Philippine Islands without securing a certificate government funds in his possession;
from the Commission on Audit showing that his 2.   Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who
accounts have been finally settled. has been ordered by competent authority to
 
Page 200 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
deliver any property in his custody or under his
administration.
Elements:
1.   Public officer has government funds in his
possession;
2.   He is under obligation to either:
a.   make payment from such funds;
b.   to deliver any property in his custody or
under his administration
3.   He maliciously fails to make the payment or
refuses to make delivery.
f.   Article 222 – Officers Included
in the Preceding Provisions
These officers are include any:
1.   Private individual who, in any capacity, have
charge of any national, provincial or municipal
funds, revenue, or property
2.   Administrator or depositary of funds or property
that has been attached, seized or deposited by
public authority, even if owned by a private
individual.
Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term
“administrator.” A judicial administrator in charge of
settling the estate of the deceased is not covered by
the article. Conversion of effects in his trust makes
him liable for estafa.
Private property is included, provided it is (1)
attached, (2) seized or (3) deposited by public
authority.
5.  C hapter V: Infidelity of
Public Officers
Section One – Infidelity in the Custody
of Prisoners
a.   Article 223 – Conniving With
or Consenting to Evasion
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He had in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
3.   Such prisoner escaped from his custody;
4.   He was in connivance with the prisoner in the
latter’s escape. (“shall consent to the escape”)
Page 201 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Classes of prisoners involved
1.   Those who have been sentenced by final
judgment to any penalty;
2.   Detention prisoners who are temporarily held in
legal custody, arrested for and charged with
violation of some law or municipal ordinance.
Leniency, laxity, and release of a detention prisoner
who could not be delivered to judicial authorities
within the time fixed by law is not infidelity in the
custody of a prisoner.
But there is real actual evasion of service of a
sentence when the custodian permits the prisoner to
obtain a relaxation in his imprisonment and to escape
the punishment of being deprived of his liberty, thus
making the penalty ineffectual, although the convict
may not have fled. This includes allowing prisoners to
sleep and eat in the officer’s house or utilizes the
prisoner’s services for domestic chores.
b.   Article 224 – Evasion through
Negligence
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He is charged with the conveyance or custody of
a detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment;
3.   Such prisoner escapes through negligence
This covers only positive carelessness and definite
laxity which amounts to deliberate non-performance
of duties.
The fact that the public officer recaptured the
prisoner who had escaped from his custody does not
afford complete exculpation.
The liability of an escaping prisoner:
1.   If he is a prisoner by final judgment, he is liable
for evasion of service (Art. 157)
2.   If he is a detention prisoner, he does not incur
criminal liability (unless cooperating with the
offender).
Policeman Rodillas escorted detained prisoner Sacris
to the court. After the court adjourned he let her eat
lunch with her family, permitted her to go to the
ladies washroom unescorted and after her escape,
did not report it immediately to his superiors, instead
he went around looking for her. SC held that he is
guilty of the crime in Art 224 for being negligent in
the performance of his duties which made the escape
of Sacris possible. [Rodillas v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. L-58652 (1988)]
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

c.   Article 225 – Escape of The document must be complete and one by which a
right could be established or an obligation could be
Prisoner under the Custody of extinguished.
a Person Not a Public Officer
If the writings are mere forms, there is no crime.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a private person; Damage to public interest is necessary. However,
2.   The conveyance or custody of a prisoner or material damage is not necessary.
person under arrest is confided to him;
3.   The prisoner or person under arrest escapes; Removal is consummated upon taking or secreting
4.   Offender consents to the escape, or that the away of the document from its usual place. It is
escape takes place through his negligence. immaterial whether or not the illicit purpose of the
offender has been accomplished.
If the offender who aided or consented to the
prisoner’s escaping from confinement, whether the This could cover failure on the part of the post office
prisoner is a convict or a detention prisoner, is not the to forward the letters to their destination.
custodian, the crime is delivering prisoners from jail
under Article 156. Damage in this article may consist in mere alarm to
the public or in the alienation of its confidence in any
The party who is not the custodian but who conspired branch of the government service.
with the custodian in allowing the prisoner to escape
does not commit infidelity in the custody of the e.   Article 227 – Officer Breaking
prisoner.
Seal
Art. 225 is not applicable if a private person was the
one who made the arrest and he consented to the Elements:
escape of the person he arrested. 1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He is charged with the custody of papers or
property;
Section Two – Infidelity in the 3.   These papers or property are sealed by proper
Custody of Documents authority;
4.   He breaks the seal or permits them to be broken.
d.   Article 226 – Removal, In "breaking of seal", the word "breaking" should not
Concealment, or Destruction be given a literal meaning. The custodian is liable
of Documents even if the seal was not actually broken because the
custodian managed to open the parcel without
Elements: breaking the seal.
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He abstracts, destroys or conceals a document or The element of damage is not required.
papers;
3.   Said document or papers should have been Removal,
entrusted to such public officer by reason of his Revelation Of Secrets Concealment or
office; By An Officer Destruction of
4.   Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party (Art. 229) Documents (Art.
or to the public interest has been caused. 226)
The papers contain secrets and
Can only be committed by the public officer who is therefore should not be The papers do not
made the custodian of the document in his official published, and the public contain secrets but
capacity. If the offender is a private individual, estafa officer having charge thereof their removal is for
is committed; if there is no damage, malicious removes and delivers them an illicit purpose.
mischief. wrongfully to a third person.
If the officer was placed in possession of the
document but it is not his duty to be the custodian
thereof, this crime is not committed.

 
Page 202 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
f.   Article 228 – Opening of
Closed Documents
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   Any closed papers, documents, or objects are
entrusted to his custody;
3.   He opens or permits to be opened said closed
papers, documents or objects;
4.   He does not have proper authority.
The act should not fall under Art 227. Damage is also
not necessary.
g.   Article 229 – Revelation of
Secrets by an Officer
Mode 1: Revealing any secrets known to the
offending public officer by reason of his official
capacity;
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He knows of a secret by reason of his official
capacity;
3.   He reveals such secret without authority or
justifiable reasons;
4.   Damage, great or small, is caused to the public
interest.
Mode 2: Wrongfully delivering papers or copies of
papers of which he may have charge and which
should not be published.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He has charge of papers;
3.   Those papers should not be published;
4.   He delivers those papers or copies thereof to a
third person;
5.   The delivery is wrongful;
6.   Damage is caused to public interest.
Espionage is not contemplated in this article since
revelation of secrets of the State to a belligerent
nation is already defined in Art 117 and CA 616.
Secrets must affect public interest. Secrets of private
persons are not included.
“Charge” - means custody or control. If he is merely
entrusted with the papers and not with the custody
thereof, he is not liable under this article.
Page 203 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
If the papers contain secrets which should not be
published, and the public officer having charge
thereof removes and delivers them wrongfully to a
third person, the crime is revelation of secrets.
On the other hand, if the papers do not contain
secrets, their removal for an illicit purpose is infidelity
in the custody of documents.
Damage is essential to the act committed.
h.   Article 230 – Public Officers
Revealing Secrets of Private
Individuals
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He knows of the secrets of a private individual by
reason of his office;
3.   He reveals such secrets without authority or
justifiable reason.
Revelation to one person is sufficient.
When the offender is a public attorney or a solicitor,
the act of revealing the secret should not be covered
by Art 209 (Betrayal of Trust).
Damage to private individual is not necessary.
The reason for this provision is to uphold faith and
trust in public service.
6.  C hapter VI: Other Offenses
or Irregularities by Public
Officers
Section One – Disobedience,
Refusal of Assistance, And
Maltreatment of Prisoners
a.   Article 231 – Open
Disobedience
Elements:
1.   Officer is a judicial or executive officer;
2.   There is a judgment, decision or order of a
superior authority;
3.   Such judgment, decision or order was made
within the scope of the jurisdiction of the superior
authority and issued with all the legal
formalities;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
4.   He, without any legal justification, openly refuses
to execute the said judgment, decision or order,
which he is duty bound to obey.
b.   Article 232 – Disobedience to
the Order of Superior Officer
When Said Order Was
Suspended by Inferior Officer
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   An order is issued by his superior for execution;
3.   He has for any reason suspended the execution
of such order;
4.   His superior disapproves the suspension of the
execution of the order;
5.   Offender disobeys his superior despite the
disapproval of the suspension.
This does not apply if the order of the superior is
illegal.
c.   Article 233 – Refusal of
Assistance
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   A competent authority demands from the
offender that he lend his cooperation towards
the administration of justice or other public
service;
3.   Offender maliciously fails to do so.
The request must come from one public officer to
another. If he receives consideration therefore,
bribery is committed.
But mere demand will fall under the prohibition
under the provision of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
Applies whether or not serious damage to the public
interest was committed.
If the offender is a private individual, he may be held
liable for contempt.
d.   Article 234 – Refusal to
Discharge Elective Office
Elements:
1.   Offender is elected by popular election to a
public office;
Page 204 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the
duties of said office;
3.   There is no legal motive for such refusal to be
sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
Once an individual is elected to an office by the will of
the people, discharge of duties becomes a matter of
duty, not only a right. This only applies for elective,
not appointive officers.
e.   Article 235 – Maltreatment of
Prisoners
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer or employee;
2.   He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
prisoner;
3.   He maltreats such prisoner in either of the
following manners:
a.   By overdoing himself in the correction or
handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner
under his charge either
b.   By the imposition of punishment not
authorized by the regulations;
c.   By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel and humiliating
manner;
d.   By maltreating such prisoners to extort a
confession or to obtain some information
from the prisoner.
This is committed only by such public officer charged
with direct custody of the prisoner.
Offender may also be held liable for physical injuries
or damage caused.
If the public officer is not the custodian of the
prisoner, and he manhandles the latter, the crime is
physical injuries.
The offended party can either be a convict by final
judgment or a detention prisoner. To be considered a
detention prisoner, the person arrested must be
placed in jail even for just a short while.
The maltreatment does not really require physical
injuries. Any kind of punishment not authorized or
although authorized if executed in excess of the
prescribed degree is covered.
If the maltreatment was done in order to extort
confession, the penalty is qualified to the next higher
degree.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If the acts of maltreatment constitute torture, there is
a separate criminal liability from the crime under the
RPC. Torturous acts are not absorbed in, nor do they
absorb other crimes. [Section 15, RA 9745]
RA 9372: HUMAN SECURITY ACT
Failure to Deliver Suspect to the Proper Judicial
Authority within Three Days (Section 20):
1.   The offender is a police or law enforcement
personnel who has apprehended or arrested,
detained and taken custody of a person;
2.   The person detained is charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
to commit terrorism;
3.   The offender fails to deliver such charged or
suspected person to the proper judicial authority
within the period of 3 days.
Exception (Section 19):
In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack,
suspects may be detained for more than 3 days upon
the written approval of:
1.   Municipal, city, provincial or regional official of
the Human Rights Commission;
2.   Judge of the MTC, RTC, or Sandiganbayan; or
3.   Justice of the CA nearest the place of arrest.
The written approval must be procured within 5 days
after the date of detention.
Provided that within 3 days after detention, suspects
whose connection with the terror attack or threat is
not established, shall be released immediately.
If the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays,
holidays or after office hours, the arresting police or
law enforcement personnel shall bring the person
thus arrested to the residence of any of the officials
mentioned above that is nearest the place where the
accused was arrested
Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons
(Section 44):
1.   The offender is any public officer who has direct
custody of a detained person liable under the
provisions of this Act;
2.   The offender causes or allows the escape of such
detained person by his deliberate act,
misconduct, or inexcusable negligence;
The offender shall suffer the penalty of:
1.   12 years and 1 day to 20 years of imprisonment, if
the detained person has already been convicted
and sentenced in a final judgment of a
competent court;
Page 205 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   6 years and 1 day to 12 years of imprisonment, if
the detained person has not been convicted and
sentenced in a final judgment of a competent
court.
The public officer is punished under the Human
Security Act and not under infidelity in the custody of
prisoners in the RPC (Articles 223-224), if the
detained person is charged with or suspected of the
crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.
False Prosecution (Section 50):
Upon acquittal, any person who is accused of
terrorism shall be entitled to the payment of
damages in the amount of P500,000 for every day
that he/she has been detained or deprived of liberty
or arrested without a warrant as a result of such an
accusation.
The amount of damages shall be automatically
charged against the appropriations of the police
agency or the Anti-Terrorism Council that brought or
sanctioned the filing of the charges against the
accused. It shall also be released within 15 days from
the date of the acquittal of the accused.
The award of damages mentioned above shall be
without prejudice to the right of the acquitted
accused to file criminal or administrative charges
against those responsible for charging him with the
case of terrorism.
Any officer, employee, personnel, or person who
delays the release or refuses to release the amounts
awarded to the individual acquitted of the crime of
terrorism as directed in the paragraph immediately
preceding shall suffer the penalty of 6 months of
imprisonment.
Section Two – Anticipation,
Prolongation, and Abandonment of
the Duties and Powers of Public Office
f.   Article 236 – Anticipation of
Duties of a Public Officer
Elements:
1.   Offender is entitled to hold a public office or
employment, either by election or appointment;
2.   The law requires that he should first be sworn in
and/or should first give a bond;
3.   He assumes the performance of the duties and
powers of such office;
4.   He has not taken his oath of office and/or given
the bond required by law.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

g.   Article 237 – Prolonging Elements:

Performance of Duties and
Powers
Elements:
1.   Offender is holding a public office;
2.   The period provided by law, regulations or
special provision for holding such office, has
already expired;
3.   He continues to exercise the duties and powers of
such office.
The offenders here can be those suspended,
separated, declared over-aged, or dismissed.
h.   Article 238 – Abandonment of
Office or Position
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He formally resigns from his position;
3.   His resignation has not yet been accepted;
4.   He abandons his office to the detriment of the
public service.
For the resignation to be formal, it has to be in
written form.
1.   Offender is an executive or judicial officer;
2.   He:
a.   makes general rules or regulations beyond
the scope of his authority; or
b.   attempts to repeal a law; or
c.   suspends the execution thereof.
Arts. 239-241 punish interference by public officers of
the executive or judiciary with the functions of
another department of government to keep them
within legitimate confines of their respective
jurisdictions.
Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of
powers. The remedy is to file a petition for prohibition
or injunction.
j.   Article 240 – Usurpation of
Executive Functions
Elements:
1.   Offender is a judge;
2.   That he:
a.   assumes a power pertaining to the executive
authorities, or
b.   obstructs the executive authorities in the
lawful exercise of their powers.

The offense is qualified when the purpose of the Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of
abandonment is to evade the discharge of duties of powers
preventing, prosecuting, or punishing any of the
crimes falling within Title One and Chapter One of k.   Article 241 – Usurpation of
Title Three of book two of the RPC.
Judicial Functions
Abandonment of Office Elements:
Dereliction of Duty
or Position 1.   Offender is an officer of the executive branch of
(Art. 208)
(Art. 238) the government;
Committed only by public 2.   That he:
officers who have the duty a.   assumes judicial powers, or
Committed by any
to institute prosecution for b.   obstructs the execution of any order or
public officer
the punishment of decision rendered by any judge within his
violations of the law jurisdiction.
There is actual Public officer does not
abandonment through abandon his office but l.   Article 242 – Disobeying
resignation to evade the merely fails to prosecute a Request for Disqualification
discharge of duties violation of the law.
Elements:
Section Three – Usurpation of Powers 1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   A proceeding is pending before such public
and Unlawful Appointments officer;
3.   There is a question brought before the proper
i.   Article 239 – Usurpation of authority regarding his jurisdiction, which is not
Legislative Powers yet decided;

 
Page 206 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
4.   He has been lawfully required to refrain from
continuing the proceeding;
5.   He continues the proceeding.
The disobedient officer is liable even if the
jurisdictional question is resolved in his favor.
m.  Article 243 – Orders or
Request by Executive Officer
to Any Judicial Authority
Elements:
1.   Offender is an executive officer;
2.   He addresses any order or suggestion to any
judicial authority;
3.   The order or suggestion relates to any case or
business coming within the exclusive jurisdiction
of the courts of justice.
The purpose is to maintain the independence of the
judiciary from executive dictations.
n.   Article 244 – Unlawful
Appointments
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He nominates or appoints a person to a public
office;
3.   Such person lacks the legal qualifications
therefore;
4.   Offender knows that his nominee or appointee
lacks the qualification at the time he made the
nomination or appointment.
This can also be covered by RA 3019.
Recommending, knowing that the person
recommended is not qualified is not a crime.
There must be a law providing for the qualifications
of a person to be nominated or appointed to a public
office.
o.   Article 245 – Abuses against
Chastity
Modes:
1.   Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to a woman interested in matters
pending before the offending officer for decision,
or with respect to which he is required to submit
a report to or consult with a superior officer;
Page 207 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to a woman under the offender’s
custody;
3.   Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to the wife, daughter, sister or relative
within the same degree by affinity of any person
in the custody of the offending warden or officer.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a public officer;
2.   He solicits or makes immoral or indecent
advances to a woman;
3.   Such woman is –
a.   interested in matters pending before the
offender for decision, or with respect to
which he is required to submit a report to or
consult with a superior officer; or
b.   under the custody of the offender who is a
warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest; or
c.   the wife, daughter, sister or relative within
the same degree by affinity of the person in
the custody of the offender.
The crime is consummated by mere proposal.
The mother of the person in the custody of the public
officer is not included. If the offender were not the
custodian, then crime would fall under Republic Act
No. 3019.
Solicit – to propose earnestly and persistently
something unchaste and immoral to a woman. The
advances must be immoral or indecent. Proof of
solicitation is not necessary when there is sexual
intercourse.
Abuse against chastity is not absorbed in rape
because the basis of penalizing the acts is different
from each other
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

  Title VIII. Crimes against c.   legitimate/illegitimate child (should not be

less than 3 days old, otherwise crime is
Persons infanticide)
d.   other legitimate ascendant
e.   other legitimate descendant
CHAPTER I: DESTRUCTION OF LIFE f.   legitimate spouse
1.   Article 246: Parricide
2.   Article 247: Death or Physical Injuries Under Relationship
Exceptional Circumstances This is the essential element of this crime –
3.   Article 248: Murder relationship of offender with the victim; except for
4.   Article 249: Homicide spouses, only relatives by blood and in direct line.
5.   Article 250: Penalty for Frustrated Parricide, Hence, adopted children are not included. [Reyes]
Murder or Homicide
6.   Article 251: Death Caused in Tumultuous Affray It must be alleged in the information. Wife of victim
7.   Article 252: Physical Injuries Caused in cannot be convicted of parricide if charged only with
Tumultuous Affray murder. However, relationship must be considered
8.   Article 253: Giving Assistance to Suicide aggravating even if not alleged. [People v. Jumawan,
9.   Article 254: Discharge of Firearms G.R. No. 187495 (2014)]
10.   Article 255: Infanticide
11.   Article 256: Intentional Abortion Spouse must be legitimate. Muslim husbands with
12.   Article 257: Unintentional Abortion several wives can be convicted of parricide only in
13.   Article 258: Abortion Practiced by the Woman case the first wife is killed. [People v. Subano, G.R.
Herself or by Parents No. L-20338 (1967)]
14.   Article 259: Abortion by a Physician or Midwife
and Dispensing of Abortives A stranger who cooperates and takes part in the
15.   Article 260: Responsibility of Participants in a commission of the crime of parricide is not guilty of
Duel parricide but only homicide or murder, as the case
16.   Article 261: Challenging to a Duel may be. [People v. Patricio, G.R. No. L-20651 (1923);
People v. Echaluce, G.R. No. L-29776 (1975)]
CHAPTER II: PHYSICAL INJURIES
1.   Article 262: Mutilation The law does not require knowledge of relationship
2.   Article 263: Serious Physical Injuries between offender and victim. [Reyes]
3.   Article 264: Administering Injurious Substances
or Beverages Parricide shall not be punished by reclusion perpetua
4.   Article 265: Less Serious Physical Injuries to death in the following cases:
5.   Article 266: Slight Physical Injuries and 1.   Reckless or simple imprudence [Art. 365]
Maltreatment 2.   Parricide by mistake [Art. 49]
6.   Article 266-A: Rape (amended by RA 8353) 3.   Parricide under exceptional circumstances [Art.
247]
About this Title: The essence of crimes involves the
taking of human life, destruction of the fetus, or
inflicting injuries. b.   Article 247 – Death or Physical
Injuries Under Exceptional
1.   Chapter I: Destruction of Circumstances
Life Elements:
1.   A legally married person, or a parent, surprises
a.   Article 246 – Parricide his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18
years of age and living with him in the act of
Elements: sexual intercourse with another person;
1.   Person is killed; 2.   He or she kills any or both of them, or inflicts
2.   Deceased is killed by the accused; upon any or both of them any serious physical
3.   Deceased is the accused's injury in the act or immediately thereafter;
a.   legitimate/illegitimate father 3.   He has not promoted or facilitated the
b.   legitimate/illegitimate mother prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or
she has not consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse.
 
Page 208 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Not a Felony
This article does not define a felony, rather it serves
as a defense for a person charged with parricide,
homicide or serious physical injuries. If all the
requisites have been met, the defendant will be
sentenced to destierro instead of the severe penalty
for the aforementioned crimes. If less serious or slight
physical injuries are inflicted, there is no criminal
liability. [Reyes]
Spouse
The wife is also entitled to the benefits of this article.
The phrase “any legally married person” and the
word “spouse” include the wife.
This does not apply if the accused is a common-law
spouse.
Parents
Parents need not be legitimate.
“Living with parent(s)” – understood to be in their
own dwelling. If done in a motel, article does not
apply.
Purpose
This means “to come upon suddenly and
unexpectedly.”
If the accused did not surprise the supposed
offenders in the very act of committing adultery but
thereafter, he cannot invoke the privilege of Art. 247.
[People v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 46310 (1939)]
Justice Laurel’s Dissent: Must the offended husband
look on in the meantime and wait until the very
physical act of coition take place? This interpretation
is far from being rational and certainly does violence
to the reason and purpose of the law.
Immediately Thereafter
There is no set time as jurisprudence has held 1 hour
or even 4 hours as “immediately thereafter”.
However, the act done must be a direct result of the
outrage of the cuckolded spouse, and a continuous
act from the moment of the surprising.
Article does not apply:
1.   If the surprising took place before any actual
sexual intercourse could be done.
2.   If the daughter is married. Although the article
does not use the word “unmarried,” this article
applies only when the daughter is single because
while under 18 and single, she is still under
parental authority. If she is married, her husband
alone can claim the benefits of this article.
Page 209 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Evidence of the victim’s promiscuity is
inconsequential to the killing. The offender must
prove that he actually surprised his wife and [her
paramour] in flagrante delicto, and that he killed the
man during or immediately thereafter. [People v.
Puedan, G.R. No. 139576 (2002)]
LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL INJURIES SUFFERED BY
THIRD PERSONS
In one case, two other persons suffered physical
injuries as they were caught in the crossfire when the
accused shot the victim. A complex crime of double
frustrated murder was not committed as the accused
did not have the intent to kill the two victims. Here,
the accused did not commit murder when he fired at
the paramour of his wife. No aberratio ictus because
he was acting lawfully. Inflicting death under
exceptional circumstances is not murder. [People v.
Abarca, G.R. No. 74433 (1987)]
c.   Article 248 – Murder
Elements:
1.   Person was killed;
2.   Accused killed him;
3.   Killing attended by any of the following
qualifying circumstances
a.   with treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or
of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity;
b.   in consideration of a price, reward or
promise;
c.   by means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin;
d.   on occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or
of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other
public calamity;
e.   with evident premeditation;
f.   with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.
4.   The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Murder – The unlawful killing of any person which is
not parricide or infanticide with any of the
circumstance mentioned in Art. 248.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
One attendant qualifying circumstance is enough. If
there are more than one alleged in the information
for murder, only one will qualify the killing to murder
and the other circumstances will be taken as generic
aggravating circumstance.
Any of the qualifying circumstances enumerated in
Art. 248 must be alleged in the information. When
the other circumstances are absorbed or included in
one qualifying circumstance, they cannot be
considered as generic aggravating.
TREACHERY
Treachery absorbs the aggravating circumstance of
abuse of superior strength and aid of armed men.
[People v. Sespeñe, G.R. No. L-9346 (1957)]
The essence of treachery is that the offended party
was denied the chance to defend himself because of
the means, methods, or forms of attack deliberately
adopted by the offender were not merely incidental to
the killing.
Killing of a person with treachery is murder even if
there was no intent to kill. [People v. Cagoco, G.R. No.
L-38511 (1933)]
Killing of a child of tender age is qualified by
treachery. [People v. Valerio, G.R. No. L-4116 (1982)]
INTENT TO KILL
When the victim is already dead, intent to kill
becomes irrelevant. It is important only if the victim
did not die to determine if the felony is physical injury
or attempted or frustrated homicide.
“Employing means or persons to insure or afford
impunity” – means are employed by the accused to
prevent his being recognized or to secure himself
against detection and punishment
PRICE, REWARD, OR PROMISE
The person who received the price or reward or who
accepted a promise of price or rewards and would not
have killed the victim were it not for that price,
reward, or promise is a principal by direct
participation.
The person who gave the price or reward or who
made the promise is a principal by induction.
FIRE
When a person is killed by fire, the primordial
criminal intent of the offender is considered. If the
primordial criminal intent of the offender is to kill and
fire was only used as a means to do so, the crime is
Page 210 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
only murder. If the primordial criminal intent of the
offender is to destroy property with the use of
pyrotechnics and incidentally, somebody within the
premises is killed, the crime is arson with homicide, a
single indivisible crime penalized under Art. 326,
which is death as a consequence of arson.
Intent to kill must be present for the use of fire to be
appreciated as a qualifying circumstance. [People v.
Pugay, G.R. No. L-74324 (1988)]
POISON
Treachery and evident premeditation are inherent in
murder by poison only if the offender has the intent
to kill the victim by use of poison.
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
Act of the offender manifestly indicating that he
clung to his determination to kill his victim.
It is absorbed in price, reward or promise, if without
the premeditation the inductor would not have
induced the other to commit the act but not as
regards the one induced.
The prosecution must prove (1) the time when the
offender determined (conceived) to kill his victim; (2)
an act of the offender manifestly indicating that he
clung to his determination to kill his victim; and (3) a
sufficient lapse of time between the determination
and the execution of the killing.
CRUELTY
Under Article 14, the generic aggravating
circumstance of cruelty requires that the victim be
alive, when the cruel wounds were inflicted and,
therefore, there must be evidence to that effect.
Injuries or wounds, not necessary for the killing of the
victim, must be inflicted deliberately by the offender.
Yet, in murder, aside from cruelty, any act that would
amount to scoffing or decrying the corpse of the
victim will qualify the killing to murder.
Outraging – to commit an extremely vicious or
deeply insulting act
Scoffing – to jeer; implies a showing of irreverence
d.   Article 249 – Homicide
Elements:
1.   Person was killed;
2.   Offender killed him without any justifying
circumstances;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.   Offender had the intention to kill, which is
presumed;
4.   Killing was not attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide
or infanticide
Corpus delicti – means the actual commission of the
crime charged
In all crimes against persons in which the death of
the victim is an element of the offense, there must be
satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of death and (2)
the identity of the victim
INTENT TO KILL
Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death
resulted. Evidence of intent to kill is important only in
attempted or frustrated homicide.
In attempted or frustrated homicide, there is intent to
kill. In physical injuries, there is none. However, if as a
result of the physical injuries inflicted, the victim died,
the crime will be homicide because the law presumes
intent to kill and punishes the result, and not the
intent of the act. The accused will, however, be
entitled to the mitigating circumstance of lack of
intent to commit so grave a wrong.
No offense of frustrated homicide through
imprudence.
The element of intent to kill in frustrated homicide is
incompatible with negligence or imprudence. [People
v. Castillo, C.A. No. 227 (1946)]
OTHER NOTES:
Physical injuries sufficient to cause death are one of
the essential elements of frustrated homicide.
In accidental homicide wherein death of a person is
brought about by a lawful act performed with proper
care and skill and without homicidal intent, there is
no liability.
Use of unlicensed firearm is an aggravating
circumstance in homicide.
e.   Article 250 - Penalty for
Frustrated Parricide, Murder
or Homicide
Courts may impose a penalty:
1.   2 degrees lower for frustrated parricide, murder,
or homicide
2.   3 degrees lower for attempted parricide, murder,
or homicide.
Page 211 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
For frustrated parricide, homicide or murder, the
courts, in view of the facts of the case, may impose a
penalty lower by one degree than that imposed under
Art. 50.
Art. 50 provides that the penalty next lower in degree
than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon a principal in a
frustrated felony. Thus, under Art. 50, the court can
impose a penalty of TWO DEGREES LOWER for
frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide.
For attempted parricide, homicide, or murder, the
courts, in view of the facts of the case may impose a
penalty by one degree than that imposed under Art.
51.
Art. 51 provides that the penalty lower by two degrees
than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principal in an
attempted felony. Thus, under Art. 250, the court can
impose a penalty of THREE DEGREES LOWER for
attempted parricide, murder, or homicide.
Note: Any attempt on, or conspiracy against, the life
of the Chief Executive of the Philippines or that of any
member of his family, or against the life of any
member of his cabinet or that of any member of the
latter’s family, shall suffer the penalty of death.
f.   Article 251 - Death Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
Elements:
1.   There are several persons;
2.   They do not compose groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking
each other reciprocally;
3.   These several persons quarreled and assaulted
one another in a confused and tumultuous
manner;
4.   Someone was killed in the course of the affray;
5.   It cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased;
6.   The person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.
Tumultuous affray – is a commotion in a confused
manner to an extent that it would not be possible to
identify who the killer is if death results, or who
inflicted the serious physical injury, but the person or
persons who used violence are known. It exists when
at least four persons took part [Reyes].
•   The groups must not be organized to mutually
assault or fight each other, otherwise the
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
hostilities would not be considered as a
tumultuous affray. [People v. Abiog, G.R. No. L-
12747 (1917)]
Who are liable?
1.   The person or persons who inflicted the serious
physical injuries
2.   If it is not known who inflicted the serious
physical injuries on the deceased, all persons
who used violence upon the person of the victim
are liable.
If there is conspiracy, this crime is not committed. The
crime would be murder or homicide.
The crimes committed might be disturbance of public
order, or if participants are armed, it could be
tumultuous disturbance, or if property was destroyed,
it could be malicious mischief.
g.   Article 252 - Physical Injuries
Caused in Tumultuous Affray
Elements:
1.   There is a tumultuous affray;
2.   A participant or some participants thereof
suffered serious physical injuries or physical
injuries of a less serious nature only;
3.   The person responsible thereof cannot be
identified;
4.   All those who appear to have used violence upon
the person of the offended party are known.
Unlike in Article 251, the injured party in this article
must be one or some of the participants in the affray.
All those who appear to have used violence shall
suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that
provided for the serious physical injuries inflicted. For
less serious physical injuries, the penalty is arresto
mayor from five to fifteen days.
Physical injury should be serious or less serious.
No crime of physical injuries resulting from a
tumultuous affray if the physical injury is only slight
because slight physical injury is considered as
inherent in a tumultuous affray.
h.   Article 253 - Giving Assistance
to Suicide
Modes:
1.   Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not;
Page 212 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   Lending his assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself.
Giving assistance to suicide means giving means
(arms, poison, etc.) or whatever manner of positive
and direct cooperation (intellectual aid, suggestions
regarding the mode of committing suicide, etc.).
If the person does the killing himself, the penalty is
similar to that of homicide, which is reclusion
temporal.
The relation of the offender to the person committing
suicide is not material. The law does not distinguish.
Hence, penalty would be the same if the offender is
the father, mother or child.
There can be no qualifying circumstance because the
determination to die must come from the victim.
The person attempting suicide is not liable. Reason:
He should be pitied, not punished.
A pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide by
means of poison, but instead of dying, the fetus in her
womb was expelled, is not liable for abortion. In
order to incur criminal liability for the result not
intended, one must be committing a felony [Art. 4;
Reyes].
Euthanasia – commonly known as mercy-killing; the
practice of painlessly putting to death a person
suffering from some incurable disease.
•   This article does not contemplate euthanasia
where the crime is murder (if without consent;
with consent, covered by Article 253). Euthanasia
is not lending assistance to suicide. In
euthanasia, the victim is not in a position to
commit suicide.
•   A doctor who resorts to euthanasia of his patient
may be liable for murder. But if the patient
himself asks to be killed by his doctor, this Article
applies. [Reyes]
i.   Article 254 - Discharge of
Firearms
Elements:
1.   Offender discharges a firearm against or at
another person.
2.   Offender has no intention to kill that person.
No crime if firearm is not discharged. It is essential for
prosecution to prove that the discharge of firearm
was directed precisely against the offended party.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The crime is the discharge of firearm, even if the gun
was not pointed at the offended party when it fired,
as long as it was initially aimed by the accused at or
against the offended party
If there is intention to kill, it may be classified as
attempted parricide, murder, or homicide.
No presumed intent to kill if the distance is 200
meters.
Intent to kill or animus inteficendi cannot be
automatically drawn from the mere fact that the use
of firearms is dangerous to life.Animus interficendi
must be established with the same degree of
certainty as is required of the other elements of the
crime. The inference of intent to kill should not be
drawn in the absence of circumstances sufficient to
prove such intent beyond reasonable doubt. [Dado v.
People G.R. No. 131421(2002)]
There is a special complex crime of illegal discharge
of firearm with serious or less serious physical
injuries.
j.   Article 255 – Infanticide
Elements:
1.   A child was killed by the accused;
2.   The deceased child was less than 3 days old (72
hours).
Infanticide – the killing of any child less than three
days of age, whether the killer is the parent or
grandparent, any other relative of the child, or a
stranger.
If the offender is the parent and the victim is less than
three days old, the crime is infanticide and not
parricide.
A stranger who cooperates in the perpetration of
infanticide committed by the mother or grandparent
on the mother’s side, is liable for infanticide, but he
must suffer the penalty prescribed for murder.
It is necessary that the child be born alive and viable
(capable of independent existence). [US v. Vedra, G.R.
No. 4779 (1908)] There is no infanticide when the
child was born dead, or although born alive, it could
not sustain an independent life when it was killed.
Only the mother and maternal grandparents of the
child are entitled to the mitigating circumstance of
concealing the dishonor. Concealment of dishonor is
not an element of infanticide, it merely lowers the
penalty.
Page 213 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
If the child is abandoned without any intent to kill
and death results as a consequence, the crime
committed is not infanticide but abandonment under
Article 276.
k.   Article 256 - Intentional
Abortion
Elements:
1.   There is a pregnant woman;
2.   Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
administered, or that the accused otherwise acts
upon such pregnant woman;
3.   As a result of the use of violence or drugs or
beverages upon her, or any other act of the
accused, the fetus dies, either in the womb or
after having been expelled therefrom;
4.   The abortion is intended.
Abortion – the willful killing of the foetus in the
uterus or the violent expulsion of the foetus from the
maternal womb which results in the death of the
foetus. [Reyes citing Guevarra]
Ways of committing intentional abortion
•   Using any violence upon the person of the
pregnant woman;
•   Acting, but without using violence, without the
consent of the woman. (By administering drugs
or beverages upon such pregnant woman
without her consent.)
•   Acting (by administering drugs or beverages),
with the consent of the pregnant woman.
Abortion v. Infanticide
Abortion Infanticide
Fetus could sustain an
Fetus could not sustain
independent life after
independent life. No
separation from the
legal viability.
mother’s womb.
If the mother as a consequence of abortion suffers
death or physical injuries, there is a complex crime of
murder or physical injuries and abortion.
In intentional abortion, the offender must know of the
pregnancy because the particular criminal intent is to
cause an abortion.
If the woman turns out not to be pregnant and
someone performs an abortion upon her, he is liable
for an impossible crime if the woman suffers no
physical injury.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If she dies or suffers injuries, the crime will be
homicide, serious physical injuries, etc.
FRUSTRATED ABORTION
committed if the fetus that is expelled is viable and,
therefore, not dead as abortion did not result despite
the employment of adequate and sufficient means to
make the pregnant woman abort.
l.   Article 257 - Unintentional
Abortion
Elements:
1.   There is a pregnant woman;
2.   Violence is used upon such pregnant woman
without intending an abortion;
3.   The violence is intentionally exerted;
4.   Result of violence – fetus dies, either in the
womb or expelled therefrom
Unintentional abortion requires physical violence
inflicted deliberately and voluntarily by a third person
upon the pregnant woman, without intention to
cause the abortion.
If the pregnant woman was killed by violence by her
husband, the crime committed is the complex crime
of parricide with unintentional abortion.
Unintentional abortion may be committed through
negligence as it is enough that the use of violence be
voluntary. In one case, the accused was declared
guilty of the crime of unintentional abortion through
reckless imprudence for having bumped a calesa
which resulted in a pregnant woman bumping her
abdomen against the wall of the calesa and
eventually led to an abortion. [Reyes citing a Decision
of the Supreme Court of Spain]
If the act of violence is not felonious, that is, act of
self-defense, and there is no knowledge of the
woman’s pregnancy, there is no liability.
Mere boxing of the stomach taken together with the
immediate strangling of the victim in a fight, is not
sufficient proof to show an intent to cause abortion.
[People v. Salufrania, G.R. No. L-50884 (1988)]
For the crime of abortion, even unintentional, to be
held committed, the accused must have known of the
pregnancy. [People v. Carnaso, CA, 61 O.G. 3420]
m.  Article 258 - Abortion
Practiced by the Woman
Herself or by Parents
Page 214 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
1.   There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an
abortion;
2.   Abortion is intended;
3.   Abortion is caused by –
a.   The pregnant woman herself;
b.   Any other person, with her consent; or
c.   Any of her parents, with her consent for the
purpose of concealing her dishonour.
If the purpose of abortion is to conceal dishonor,
mitigation applies only to pregnant woman and not
to parents of pregnant woman, unlike in infanticide.
If the purpose of parents is not to conceal dishonor,
the crime is intentional abortion.
n.   Article 259 - Abortion by a
Physician or Midwife and
Dispensing of Abortives
Elements:
1.   There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an
abortion;
2.   The abortion is intended;
3.   Offender, who must be a physician or midwife,
caused or assisted in causing the abortion;
4.   Said physician or midwife took advantage of his
or her scientific knowledge or skill.
The penalties provided for intentional abortion shall
be imposed in the maximum period for physicians
and midwives violating this article. Reason: heavier
guilt in making use of their knowledge for the
destruction of human life, when it should be used
only for its preservation. [Reyes citing Albert]
If the abortion is produced by a physician to save the
life of the mother, there is no liability.
Elements (for pharmacists):
1.   The offender is a pharmacist;
2.   There is no proper prescription from a physician;
3.   The offender dispenses any abortive.
This article punishes a pharmacist who merely
dispenses with an abortive without the proper
prescription of a physician.
It is not necessary that the pharmacist knows that the
abortive would be used to cause an abortion. What is
punished is the dispensing of the abortive without the
proper prescription. It is not necessary that the
abortive be actually used either.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If pharmacist knew that the abortive would be used
for abortion, he would be liable as an accomplice in
the crime of abortion.
o.   Article 260 - Responsibility of
Participants in a Duel
Modes:
1.   Killing one’s adversary in a duel;
2.   Inflicting upon such adversary physical injuries;
3.   Making a combat although no physical injuries
have been inflicted.
Persons liable
1.   The person who killed or inflicted physical
injuries upon his adversary, or both combatants
in any other case, as principals.
2.   The seconds, as accomplices.
Duel – a formal or regular combat previously
consented to by two parties in the presence of two or
more seconds of lawful age on each side, who make
the selection of arms and fix all the other conditions
of the fight to settle some antecedent quarrel.
If these are not the conditions of the fight, it is not a
duel in the sense contemplated in the RPC. It will be
a quarrel and anyone who killed the other will be
liable for homicide or murder, as the case may be.
There is no such crime nowadays because people hit
each other even without entering into any pre-
conceived agreement. This is an obsolete provision.
p.   Article 261 - Challenging to a
Duel
Modes:
1.   Challenging another to a duel;
2.   Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a
duel;
3.   Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for
having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.
Persons Responsible:
1.   Challenger
2.   Instigators
If one challenges another to a duel by shouting
“Come down, Olympia, let us measure your prowess.
We will see whose intestines will come out. You are a
coward if you do not come down”, the crime of
challenging to a duel is not committed. What is
committed is the crime of light threats under Article
Page 215 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
285, paragraph 1. [People v. Tacomoy, G.R. No. L-
4798 (1951)]
2.  C hapter II: Physical
Injuries
a.   Article 262 – Mutilation
FIRST MODE - Mutilation
Intentionally mutilating another by depriving him,
either totally or partially, of some essential organ for
reproduction; (Mutilation)
Elements:
1.   There be a castration, that is, mutilation of
organs necessary for generation, such as the
penis or ovarium;
2.   The mutilation is caused purposely and
deliberately
SECOND MODE - Mayhem
Intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by
lopping or clipping off any part of the body of the
offended party, other than the essential organ for
reproduction, to deprive him of that part of his body.
The offender must have the intention to deprive the
offended party of a part of his body. If there is no such
intention, the crime will be serious physical injuries.
Mutilation – the lopping or clipping off of some part
of the body
Castration – intentionally mutilating another by
depriving him, either totally or partially, of some
essential organ for reproduction
Mayhem – Basically, other intentional mutilation. It
is intentionally making mutilation other than some
essential organ for reproduction and to deprive him
of that part of the body
b.   Article 263 - Serious Physical
Injuries
Modes of Commission:
1.   By wounding;
2.   By beating;
3.   By assaulting; or
4.   By administering injurious substance. (Art. 264)
What are serious physical injuries?
They are when the injured person, in consequence of
the physical injuries inflicted—
1.   becomes insane, imbecilic, impotent or blind
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   (a) loses the use of speech or the power to hear
or to smell, or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm, or a leg, or
(b) loses the use of any such member; or
(c) becomes incapacitated for the work in which
he was theretofore habitually engaged, in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted;
3.   (a) becomes deformed; or
(b) loses any other member of his body; or
(c) loses the use thereof; or
(d) becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he was
habitually engaged for more than 90 days;
4.   becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more
than 30 days (but must not be more than 90
days).
In physical injuries, there must no be intent to kill,
otherwise the crime is frustrated/attempted murder
or homicide as the case may be.
Physical Injuries v. Attempted or Frustrated
Homicide
Attempted or Frustrated
Physical Injuries
Homicide
May be committed even if no
No intent to kill
physical injuries are inflicted
offended party
Offender has intent to kill party
UNDER THE FIRST TYPE
1.   Impotence means an inability to copulate. It
includes sterility.
2.   Penalty is one degree higher when the victim is
under 12 years of age.
3.   Blindness under this type must be of two eyes
while blindness under the second type requires
the loss of an eye only. Mere weakness of vision is
not contemplated.
UNDER THE SECOND TYPE
1.   Loss of power to hear must be of both ears. If
hearing in only one ear is lost, it falls under the
third type.
2.   Loss of the use of hand or incapacity for work
must be permanent.
3.   All the body parts mentioned are principal
members of the body (eye, hand, foot etc.)
UNDER THE THIRD TYPE
1.   It covers any other part of the body which is not a
principal member of the body.
2.   Fingers of the hand are not principal members
and the loss of such fall under the third type.
However, if it is proven that the loss of the fingers
resulted in the loss of the use of the hand itself, it
Page 216 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
would fall under the second type. [US v.
Punsalan, G.R. No. 7539 (1912)]
Deformity – physical ugliness, permanent and
definite abnormality. It must be conspicuous and
visible.
Elements of deformity:
1.   physical ugliness,
2.   permanent and definite abnormality, and
3.   it must be conspicuous and visible.
All these elements must concur.
Illustrations:
1.   Loss of molar tooth – This is not deformity as it is
not visible.
2.   Loss of permanent front tooth – This is deformity
as it is visible and permanent.
3.   Loss of milk front tooth – This is not deformity as
it is visible but will be naturally replaced.
Deformity by loss of teeth refers to injury which
cannot be repaired by the action of nature. Loss of
both outer ears is a deformity. Loss of the lobule of
the ear is a deformity. Loss of index and middle
fingers only is either deformity or loss of a member,
not a principal one, of his body or use of the same.
Loss of power to hear of right ear only is loss of use of
other part of body.
UNDER THE FOURTH TYPE
Illness – when the wound inflicted did not heal with a
certain period of time.
Note that under serious physical injuries of the fourth
type, illness or incapacity is required, NOT medical
attendance.
Paragraphs 2 and 3 refers to the “work in which he
was theretofore habitually engaged”
Must the injured party have a vocation at the time
of the injury?
YES, insofar as these two paragraphs are concerned.
Incapacity therefore must relate to a certain kind of
work only.
However, in paragraph 4, incapacity for any kind of
work is acceptable, because the phrase “incapacity
for labor” is used.
Injury requiring hospitalization for more than thirty
days is serious physical injuries under paragraph 4.
When the category of the offense of serious physical
injuries depends on the period of illness or incapacity
for labor, there must be evidence of the length of that
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
period; otherwise, the offense is only slight physical
injuries.
Lessening of efficiency due to injury is NOT
incapacity.
Distinguished from mutilation: In mutilation, the
body parts should have been purposely and
deliberately lopped or clipped off. This intention is
not present in serious physical injuries.
No attempted or frustrated crime of physical
injuries
This felony is defined by the gravity of the injury. It is
a crime of result. As long as there is no injury, there
can be no attempted or frustrated stage thereof.
Classification of physical injuries:
1.   Between less serious physical injuries and serious
physical injuries, do not consider the period of
medical treatment. Only consider the period
when the offended party is rendered
incapacitated for labor.
2.   When the injury created a deformity upon the
offended party, disregard the healing duration or
the period of medical treatment involved. At
once, it is considered serious physical injuries.
Serious physical injuries is punished with higher
penalties in the following cases:
1.   If it is committed against any of the persons
referred to in the crime of parricide under Article
246;
2.   If any of the circumstances qualifying murder
attended its commission.
c.   Article 264 - Administering
Injurious Substances or
Beverages
Elements:
1.   Offender inflicted upon another any serious
physical injury;
2.   It was done by knowingly administering to him
any injurious substance or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity;
3.   No intent to kill.
If the accused did not know of the injurious nature of
the substances administered, he is not liable under
this article.
d.   Article 265 - Less Serious
Physical Injuries
Page 217 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
1.   Offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10
days or more (but not more than 30 days), or
needs medical attendance for the same period of
time;
2.   The physical injuries must not be those described
in the preceding articles.
Qualified as to penalty
1.   A fine not exceeding P 500.00, in addition to
arresto mayor, when
a.   There is a manifest intent to insult or offend
the injured person; or
b.   There are circumstances adding ignominy to
the offense.
2.   A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is
either –
a.   The offender’s parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers; or
b.   Persons of rank or person in authority,
provided the crime is not direct assault.
e.   Article 266 - Slight Physical
Injuries and Maltreatment
Modes
1.   Physical injuries incapacitated the offended party
for labor from 1-9 days, OR required medical
attendance during the same period;
2.   Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual work
or which did not require medical attendance;
3.   Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury.
This involves even ill-treatment where there is no sign
of injury requiring medical treatment.
Slapping the offended party is a form of ill-treatment
which is a form of slight physical injuries.
But if the slapping is done to cast dishonor upon the
person slapped, or to humiliate or embarrass the
offended party out of a quarrel or anger, the crime is
slander by deed.
Between slight physical injuries and less serious
physical injuries, not only the healing duration of the
injury will be considered but also the medical
attendance required to treat the injury.
So the healing duration may be one to nine days, but
if the medical treatment continues beyond nine days,
the physical injuries would already qualify as less
serious physical injuries.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

The medical treatment may have lasted for nine days, b.   Offender is always a man.
but if the offended party is still incapacitated for 2.   Sexual assault
labor beyond nine days, the physical injuries are a.   Rape can now be committed by a man or a
already considered less serious physical injuries. woman, that is, if a woman or a man uses an
instrument on anal orifice of male, she or he
Where there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only can be liable for rape.
slight physical injuries. b.   Inserting a finger inside the genital of a
woman is rape through sexual assault within
In the absence of proof as to the period of the the context of ‘object’.
offended party’s incapacity for labor or of the
required medical attendance, the crime committed is AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
slight physical injuries. 1.   If the victim:
a.   Is under 18 yrs. old, & the offender is a
f.   Article 266-A – Rape (as parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity w/in the
amended by TA 8353) rd
3 civil degree, or the common law spouse of
the parent of the victim
First Mode – Rape by Sexual Intercourse b.   Is under the custody of the police / military
Rape through sexual intercourse without consent of authorities / law enforcement agency
the woman c.   Is a religious and such legitimate vocation is
known by the offender before or at the time
Elements: of rape
1.   Offender is a man; d.   is a child below 7 yrs. old;
2.   Offender had carnal knowledge of a woman; e.   suffered permanent or physical mutilation or
3.   Such act is accomplished under any of the disability by reason or on the occasion of
following circumstances: rape
a.   By using force, threat or intimidation; 2.   If the offender:
b.   When the woman is deprived of reason or is a.   is afflicted with a sexually transmissible
otherwise unconscious; disease & the virus / disease is transmitted
c.   By means of fraudulent machination or to the victim;
grave abuse of authority; b.   is a member of the AFP / PNP / any law
d.   When the woman is under 12 years of age enforcement agency / penal institution, &
(Statutory Rape) or is demented. took advantage of his position;
c.   knew of the pregnancy of the offended party
Second Mode: Rape Through Sexual Assault at the time of the commission of rape;
d.   knew of the mental disability, emotional
Elements: disorder, & / or physical handicap of the
1.   Offender commits an act of sexual assault; offended party at the time of the commission
2.   The act of sexual assault is committed by any of of rape
the following means: 3.   If Rape is committed in full view of the spouse,
a.   By inserting his penis into another person's parent, any of the children, or other relatives
mouth or anal orifice; or rd
w/in the 3 civil degree of consanguinity
b.   By inserting any instrument or object into the
genital or anal orifice of another person; Old Anti-Rape Law v. RA 8353
3.   The act of sexual assault is accomplished under Old Anti-Rape Law RA 8553
any of the following circumstances:
a.   By using force or intimidation; or Crime against chastity Crime against persons
b.   When the woman is deprived of reason or nd
Under the 2 type, sexual
otherwise unconscious; or May be committed by a
assault may be committed
c.   By means of fraudulent machination or grave man against a woman
by any person against any
abuse of authority; or only
person
d.   When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented. PRIVATE CRIME
Complaint must be filed May be prosecuted even if
CLASSIFICATIONS OF RAPE by the woman or her the woman does not file a
1.   Rape by sexual intercourse parents, grandparents complaint
a.   Offended party is always a woman or guardian if the

 
Page 218 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
woman was a minor or
incapacitated
Marriage extinguishes the
Marriage of the victim
penal action only as to the
w/ one of the offenders
principal (the person who
benefits not only the
married the victim), and
principal but also the
cannot be extended to co-
accomplices and
principals in case of
accessories
MULTIPLE RAPE
Marital rape NOT
Marital rape recognized
recognized
Complete penetration is NOT necessary. The slightest
penetration—contact with the labia—will
consummate the rape. There is NO crime of
FRUSTRATED RAPE because in rape, from the
moment the offender has carnal knowledge of the
victim, he actually attains his purpose, all the
essential elements of the offense have been
accomplished. [People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724
(1990)]
Rape must have specific intent or lewd design. For
rape to be consummated, a slight brush or scrape of
the penis on the external layer of the vagina will not
suffice. Mere touching of the external layer of the
vagina without the intent to enter the same cannot
be construed as slight penetration. Accused is only
liable for ATTEMPTED RAPE.
Conviction does not require a medico-legal finding of
any penetration on the part of the woman.
FORCE, THREAT, OR INTIMIDATION
Force employed against the victim of the rape need
not be of such character as could be resisted. When
the offender has an ascendancy or influence over the
girl, it is not necessary that she put up a determined
resistance. A rape victim does not have the burden of
proving resistance. [People v. Metin, G.R. No. 140781
(2003)]
It is not necessary that the force employed against
the complaining woman in rape to be so great or of
such a character as could not be resisted. It is
sufficient that the force used is sufficient to
consummate the culprit’s purpose of copulating with
the offended woman. [People v. Savellano, G.R. No. L-
31227 (1974)]
Intimidation must be viewed in light of the victim’s
perception and judgment at the time of rape and not
by any hard and fast rule. It is enough that it
produces fear – fear that if the victim does not yield
to the bestial demands of the accused, something
would happen to her at the moment or thereafter, as
Page 219 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
when she is threatened with death if she reports the
incident. [People v. Metin, supra.]
The Supreme Court has ruled that the moral
ascendancy or influence exercised by the accused
over the victim substitutes for the element of physical
force or intimidation such as those committed by:
(a)   Fathers against their daughters [People v.
Bayona, G.R. No. 133343 (2000)]
(b)   Stepfathers against their stepdaughters [People
v. Vitor, G.R. No. 113690 (1995)]
(c)   A godfather against his goddaughter [People v.
Casil, G.R. No. 110836 (1995)]
(d)   Uncles against their nieces [People v. Betonio,
G.R. No. 119165 (1997)]
(e)   The first cousin of the victim’s mother [People v.
Perez, G.R. No. 129213 (1999)]
WHEN THE OFFENDED PARTY IS DEPRIVED OF
REASON OR IS OTHERWISE UNCONSCIOUS
In one case, this was ruled to cover the rape of a 16-
year old mental retardate with the intellectual
capacity of a 9-year-old, notwithstanding the victim’s
actual age.
“Deprived of reason or unconscious” means that the
victim has no will to give consent intelligently and
freely. The inquiry should likewise determine whether
the victim was fully informed of all considerations so
as to make a free and informed decision regarding
the grant of consent.
Whether the complaint stated that the victim was
fast asleep or half-asleep or drowsy or semi-
conscious is not determinative of the crime of rape.
For he who lies with a woman while the latter is in a
state of being drowsy is guilty of rape. Drowsiness is
defined as the state of being drowsy, i.e., ready to fall
asleep or half-asleep. [People v. Siarza, G.R. No. L-
111682 (1997)]
BY MEANS OF FRAUDULENT MACHINATION OR
GRAVE ABUSE OF AUTHORITY
Rape by means of fraudulent machinations and grave
abuse of authority absorbs the crime of qualified and
simple seduction.
STATUTORY RAPE
1.   Statutory rape is the rape of a woman who is
below 12 years of age. Here, the victim is
conclusively presumed incapable of giving
consent to sexual intercourse with another.
[People v. Negosa, G.R. Nos. 142856-7 (2003)]
2.   This is consummated when the victim is below 12
yrs. old. Victim’s consent is immaterial, and so is
the offender’s knowledge of the victim’s age.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.   Carnal knowledge of a child below 12 yrs. old
even if she is engaged in prostitution is still
considered statutory rape.
Special qualifying circumstances have to be alleged
in the information for it to be appreciated. [People v.
Gallo] In this case, Gallo was found guilty of the crime
of qualified rape with the penalty of death. The
information filed against him does not allege his
relationship with the victim, his daughter, thus, it
CANNOT be considered as a qualifying circumstance.
The case was reopened and the judgment is modified
from death to reclusion perpetua.
Since relationship qualifies the crime of rape, there
must be clear proof of relationship. In People v.
Berana, G.R. No. 123544 (1999), a 14-year old was
raped by her brother-in-law. To effectively prosecute
the accused for the crime of rape committed by a
rd
relative by affinity w/in the 3 civil degree, it must be
established that:
•   the accused is legally married to the victim’s
sister; and
•   the victim and the accused’s wife are full or half-
blood siblings.
In this case, relationship was not adequately
substantiated.
RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL ASSAULT
The insertion of fingers constitutes consummated
rape through sexual assault under RA 8353. The
contact of the male’s penis with the woman’s vagina
is referred to as ‘rape with sexual intercourse”, while
the sexual abuse under par.2 of Art.266-A, RPC is
categorized as “rape through sexual assault”.
Insertion of penis into the mouth of a 10-year old boy
is “Rape by Sexual Assault” punished under par.2,
Article 266-A, RPC. [Ordinario v. People, G.R. No.
155415 (2004)]
Evidence which may be accepted in the prosecution
of rape:
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against
the act of rape in any degree from the offended party;
or
Where the offended party is so situated as to render
him/her incapable of giving his consent
Rape shield rule - means that the character of the
offended woman is immaterial in rape.
An accused may be convicted of rape on the sole
testimony of the offended woman.
When several persons conspired to rape a single
victim, each shall be liable for the rape committed
Page 220 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
personally by him, as well as those committed by the
others.
What Determines the Number of Times the Victim
was Raped?
In one case, the accused ejaculated twice during the
time that he consummated the rape. He did not
withdraw his penis to insert it again into the vagina or
to touch the labia majora and the labia minora when
he ejaculated the second time. It is not the number of
times that appellant ejaculated but the penetration
or ‘touching’ that determines the consummation of
the sexual act. Thus appellant committed only one
count of rape. [People v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 142662
(2001); People v. Orilla, G.R. Nos. 148939-40 (2004)]
Effect of Pardon
1.   Subsequent valid marriage between the offender
and the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed but only
as to the husband
2.   When the legal husband is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty, provided that their
marriage is NOT VOID ab initio.
Rape with homicide is a special complex crime if it is
committed by reason or on the occasion of the rape.
Rape may, likewise, be committed in a room adjacent
to where the victim's family is sleeping, or even in a
room shared with other people. There is no rule that
rape can only be committed in seclusion. [People v.
Glivano, G.R. No. 177565 (2008)]
The force, violence or intimidation in rape is a relative
term, depending not only on the age, size, and
strength of the parties but also on their relationship
with each other. [People v. Tuazon, G.R. No. 168650
(2007)]
Attempted Rape with Homicide and Rape with
Homicide
Art 266-B defines and sets forth the composite
crimes of attempted rape with homicide and rape
with homicide. In both composite crimes, the
homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion
of rape. As can be noted, each of said composite
crimes is punished with a single penalty.
The phrase by reason of the rape obviously conveys
the notion that the killing is due to the rape, the
offense the offender originally designed to commit.
The victim of the rape is also the victim of the killing.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
To understand what homicide may be covered by the
phrase on the occasion of the rape, a resort to the
meaning the framers of the law intended to convey
thereby is helpful. The legislative intent on the import
of the phrase on the occasion of the rape to refer to a
killing that occurs immediately before or after, or
during the commission itself of the attempted or
consummated rape, where the victim of the homicide
may be a person other than the rape victim herself for
as long as the killing is linked to the rape, became
evident. [People v. Villaflores, G.R. No. 184926 (2012)]
g.   Special Laws
RA 9262: ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004
Violence against women and their children – refers
to any act or series of acts committed by any person
against a women who is wife, former wife, or against
a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual
or dating relationship, or with whom he has a
common child, or against her child whether
legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family
abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical,
sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or economic
abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault,
coercion, harrasment or arbitrary deprivation of
liberty.
Punishable Acts:
Sec. 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their
Children - The crime of violence against women and
their children is committed through any of the
following acts:
(a)   Causing physical harm to the woman or her
child;
(b)   Threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(c)   Attempting to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(d)   Placing the woman or her child in fear of
imminent physical harm;
(e)   Attempting to compel or compelling the woman
or her child to engage in conduct which the
woman or her child has the right to desist from or
desist from conduct which the woman or her
child has the right to engage in, or attempting to
restrict or restricting the woman's or her child's
freedom of movement or conduct by force or
threat of force, physical or other harm or threat
of physical or other harm, or intimidation
directed against the woman or child. This shall
include, but not limited to, the following acts
committed with the purpose or effect of
controlling or restricting the woman's or her
child's movement or conduct:
Page 221 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
(1)   Threatening to deprive or actually depriving
the woman or her child of custody to her/his
family;
(2)   Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her children of financial support
legally due her or her family, or deliberately
providing the woman's children insufficient
financial support;
(3)   Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her child of a legal right;
(4)   Preventing the woman in engaging in any
legitimate profession, occupation, business
or activity or controlling the victim's own
money or properties, or solely controlling the
conjugal or common money, or properties;
(f)   Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm
on oneself for the purpose of controlling her
actions or decisions;
(g)   Causing or attempting to cause the woman or
her child to engage in any sexual activity which
does not constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through intimidation
directed against the woman or her child or
her/his immediate family;
(h)   Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless
conduct, personally or through another, that
alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child.
This shall include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
(1)   Stalking or following the woman or her child
in public or private places;
(2)   Peering in the window or lingering outside
the residence of the woman or her child;
(3)   Entering or remaining in the dwelling or on
the property of the woman or her child
against her/his will;
(4)   Destroying the property and personal
belongings or inflicting harm to animals or
pets of the woman or her child; and
(5)   Engaging in any form of harassment or
violence;
(i)   Causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her
child, including, but not limited to, repeated
verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of
financial support or custody of minor children of
access to the woman's child/children.
RA 9775: ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT OF
2009
Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. -
(a)   "Child" refers to a person below eighteen (18)
years of age or over, but is unable to fully take
care of himself/herself from abuse, neglect,
cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
a physical or mental disability or condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also
refer to:
(1)   a person regardless of age who is presented,
depicted or portrayed as a child as defined
herein; and
(2)  computer-generated, digitally or manually
crafted images or graphics of a person who
is represented or who is made to appear to
be a child as defined herein.
(b)   "Child pornography" refers to any
representation, whether visual, audio, or written
combination thereof, by electronic, mechanical,
digital, optical, magnetic or any other means, of
child engaged or involved in real or simulated
explicit sexual activities.
(c)   "Explicit Sexual Activity" includes actual or
simulated –
(1)   As to form:
(i)   sexual intercourse or lascivious act
including, but not limited to, contact
involving genital to genital, oral to
genital, anal to genital, or oral to anal,
whether between persons of the same or
opposite sex;
(2)   bestiality;
(3)   masturbation;
(4)   sadistic or masochistic abuse;
(5)   lascivious exhibition of the genitals,
buttocks, breasts, pubic area and/or anus;
or
(6)   use of any object or instrument for
lascivious acts
(d)   "Internet address" refers to a website, bulletin
board service, internet chat room or news group,
or any other internet or shared network protocol
address.
(e)   "Internet cafe or kiosk" refers to an
establishment that offers or proposes to offer
services to the public for the use of its
computer/s or computer system for the purpose
of accessing the internet, computer games or
related services.
(f)   "Internet content host" refers to a person who
hosts or who proposes to host internet content in
the Philippines.
(g)   "Internet service provider (ISP)" refers to a
person or entity that supplies or proposes to
supply, an internet carriage service to the public.
(h)   "Grooming" refers to the act of preparing a child
or someone who the offender believes to be a
child for sexual activity or sexual relationship by
communicating any form of child pornography. It
includes online enticement or enticement
through any other means.
(i)   "Luring" refers to the act of communicating, by
Page 222 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
means of a computer system, with a child or
someone who the offender believes to be a child
for the purpose of facilitating the commission of
sexual activity or production of any form of child
pornography.
(j)   "Pandering" refers to the act of offering,
advertising, promoting, representing or
distributing through any means any material or
purported material that is intended to cause
another to believe that the material or purported
material contains any form of child pornography,
regardless of the actual content of the material
or purported material.
(k)   "Person" refers to any natural or juridical entity.
Unlawful or Prohibited Acts
It shall be unlawful for any person:
1.   To hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce
a child to perform in the creation or production of
any form of child pornography;
2.   To produce, direct, manufacture or create any
form of child pornography;
3.   To publish offer, transmit, sell, distribute,
broadcast, advertise, promote, export or import
any form of child pornography;
4.   To possess any form of child pornography with
the intent to sell, distribute, publish, or
broadcast: Provided, That possession of three (3)
or more articles of child pornography of the same
form shall be prima facie evidence of the intent
to sell, distribute, publish or broadcast;
5.   To knowingly, willfully and intentionally provide
a venue for the commission of prohibited acts as,
but not limited to, dens, private rooms, cubicles,
cinemas, houses or in establishments purporting
to be a legitimate business;
6.   For film distributors, theaters and
telecommunication companies, by themselves or
in cooperation with other entities, to distribute
any form of child pornography;
7.   For a parent, legal guardian or person having
custody or control of a child to knowingly permit
the child to engage, participate or assist in any
form of child pornography;
8.   To engage in the luring or grooming of a child;
9.   To engage in pandering of any form of child
pornography;
10.   To willfully access any form of child pornography;
11.   To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts
stated in this section. Conspiracy to commit any
form of child pornography shall be committed
when two (2) or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of any of
the said prohibited acts and decide to commit it;
and
12.   To possess any form of child pornography.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Syndicated Child Pornography - The crime of child
pornography is deemed committed by a syndicate if
carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons
conspiring or confederating with one another
Who May File a Complaint.
1.   Offended party;
2.   Parents or guardians;
3.   Ascendant or collateral relative within the third
degree of consanguinity;
4.   Officer, social worker or representative of a
licensed child-caring institution;
5.   Officer or social worker of the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD);
6.   Local social welfare development officer;
7.   Barangay chairman;
8.   Any law enforcement officer;
9.   At least three (3) concerned responsible citizens
residing in the place where the violation
occurred; or
10.   Any person who has personal knowledge of the
circumstances of the commission of any offense
under this Act.
RA 8049: ANTI-HAZING LAW
Hazing; definition
Hazing, is an initiation rite or practice as a
prerequisite for admission into membership in a
fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the
recruit, neophyte or applicant in some embarrassing
or humiliating situations such as forcing him to do
menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or
activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or
psychological suffering or injury. [Sec. 1 RA 8049]
The term "organization" shall include any club or the
Armed Forces of the Philippines, Philippine National
Police, Philippine Military Academy, or officer and
cadet corp of the Citizen's Military Training and
Citizen's Army Training. The physical, mental and
psychological testing and training procedure and
practices to determine and enhance the physical,
mental and psychological fitness of prospective
regular members of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines and the Philippine National Police as
approved by the Secretary of National Defense and
the National Police Commission duly recommended
by the Chief of Staff, Armed Forces of the Philippines
and the Director General of the Philippine National
Police shall not be considered as hazing for the
purposes of this Act. [Sec. 1 RA 8049]
Allowed Initiation Rites
No hazing or initiation rites in any form or manner by
a fraternity, sorority or organization shall be allowed
without prior written notice to the school authorities
Page 223 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
or head of organization seven (7) days before the
conduct of such initiation. The written notice shall
indicate the period of the initiation activities which
shall not exceed three (3) days, shall include the
names of those to be subjected to such activities, and
shall further contain an undertaking that no physical
violence be employed by anybody during such
initiation rites. [Sec. 2 RA 8049]
The head of the school or organization or their
representatives must assign at least two (2)
representatives of the school or organization, as the
case may be, to be present during the initiation. It is
the duty of such representative to see to it that no
physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a
recruit, neophyte or applicant. [Sec. 3 RA 8049]
Who Are Liable / Punishable Acts
If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of
initiation rites suffers any physical injury or dies as a
result thereof, the officers and members of the
fraternity, sorority or organization who actually
participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be
liable as principals. The person or persons who
participated in the hazing shall suffer the penalty of:
•   reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) if death,
rape, sodomy or mutilation results therefrom.
•   reclusion temporal in its maximum period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall
become insane, imbecile, impotent or blind.
•   reclusion temporal in its medium period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall have
lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to
smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such
member shall have become incapacitated for the
activity or work in which he was habitually
engaged.
•   reclusion temporal in its minimum period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall
become deformed or shall have lost any other
part of his body, or shall have lost the use
thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for
the performance on the activity or work in which
he was habitually engaged for a period of more
than ninety (90) days.
•   prision mayor in its maximum period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall have
been ill or incapacitated for the performance on
the activity or work in which he was habitually
engaged for a period of more than thirty (30)
days.
•   prision mayor in its medium period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall have
been ill or incapacitated for the performance on
the activity or work in which he was habitually
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
engaged for a period of ten (10) days or more, or
that the injury sustained shall require medical
assistance for the same period.
•   prision mayor in its minimum period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim shall have
been ill or incapacitated for the performance on
the activity or work in which he was habitually
engaged from one (1) to nine (9) days, or that the
injury sustained shall require medical assistance
for the same period.
•   prision correccional in its maximum period if in
consequence of the hazing the victim sustained
physical injuries which do not prevent him from
engaging in his habitual activity or work nor
require medical attendance. [Sec. 4 RA 8049]
The responsible officials of the school or of the police,
military or citizen's army training organization, may
impose the appropriate administrative sanctions on
the person or the persons charged under this
provision even before their conviction. The maximum
penalty herein provided shall be imposed in any of
the following instances:
1.   recruitment is accompanied by force, violence,
threat, intimidation or deceit on the person of the
recruit who refuses to join;
2.   recruit, neophyte or applicant initially consents
to join but upon learning that hazing will be
committed on his person, is prevented from
quitting;
3.   recruit, neophyte or applicant having undergone
hazing is prevented from reporting the unlawful
act to his parents or guardians, to the proper
school authorities, or to the police authorities,
through force, violence, threat or intimidation;
4.   hazing is committed outside of the school or
institution; or
5.   victim is below twelve (12) years of age at the
time of the hazing.
The owner of the place where hazing is conducted
shall be liable as an accomplice, when he has actual
knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but
failed to take any action to prevent the same from
occurring. If the hazing is held in the home of one of
the officers or members of the fraternity, group, or
organization, the parents shall be held liable as
principals when they have actual knowledge of the
hazing conducted therein but failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring.
The school authorities including faculty members
who consent to the hazing or who have actual
knowledge thereof, but failed to take any action to
prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as
accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by the
perpetrators.
Page 224 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
The officers, former officers, or alumni of the
organization, group, fraternity or sorority who
actually planned the hazing although not present
when the acts constituting the hazing were
committed shall be liable as principals. A fraternity
or sorority's adviser who is present when the acts
constituting the hazing were committed and failed to
take action to prevent the same from occurring shall
be liable as principal.
The presence of any person during the hazing is
prima facie evidence of participation therein as
principal unless he prevented the commission of the
acts punishable herein.
Any person charged under this provision shall not be
entitled to the mitigating circumstance that there
was no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
This section shall apply to the president, manager,
director or other responsible officer of a corporation
engaged in hazing as a requirement for employment
in the manner provided herein. [Sec. 1 RA 8049]
RA 7610: SPECIAL PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
AGAINST CHILD ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND
DISCRIMINATION ACT
Coverage
"Children" - person below 18 years of age or those
over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or
protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or
mental disability or condition.
Child Prostitution/Punishable Acts
Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual
Abuse. – Children, whether male or female, who for
money, profit, or any other consideration or due to
the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or
group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse.
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon
the following:
(a)   Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are
not limited to, the following:
(1)   Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;
(2)   Inducing a person to be a client of a child
prostitute by means of written or oral
advertisements or other similar means;
(3)   Taking advantage of influence or
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
relationship to procure a child as prostitute;
(4)   Threatening or using violence towards a
child to engage him as a prostitute; or
(5)   Giving monetary consideration goods or
other pecuniary benefit to a child with intent
to engage such child in prostitution.
(b)   Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse
of lascivious conduct with a child exploited in
prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse;
Provided, That when the victims is under twelve
(12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be
prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as
amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or
lascivious conduct, as the case may be:
Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct
when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age
shall be reclusion temporal in its medium
period; and
(c)   Those who derive profit or advantage therefrom,
whether as manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes
place, or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a
cover or which engages in prostitution in
addition to the activity for which the license has
been issued to said establishment.
The elements of sexual abuse under Section 5, Article
III of R.A. No. 7610 are:
1.   The accused commits the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct;
2.   The said act is performed with a child exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse; and
3.   The child, whether male or female, is below 18
years of age.[Imbo v. People, G.R. No. 197712
(2015)]
If the victim of sexual intercourse is below 12 years of
age, the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual
abuse but for statutory rape under Article 266-A(1)(d)
of the RPC. On the other hand, if the victim is 12 years
or older, the offender should be charged with either
sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of RA 7610 or rape
under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of the
RPC. However, the offender cannot be accused of
both crimes for the same act because his right
against double jeopardy will be prejudiced. [People v.
Matias, G.R. No. 186469 (2012)]
Section 6. Attempt To Commit Child Prostitution. –
There is an attempt to commit child prostitution
under Section 5, paragraph (a) hereof when any
person who, not being a relative of a child, is found
alone with the said child inside the room or cubicle of
a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension house,
Page 225 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
apartelle or other similar establishments, vessel,
vehicle or any other hidden or secluded area under
circumstances which would lead a reasonable person
to believe that the child is about to be exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse.
There is also an attempt to commit child prostitution,
under paragraph (b) of Section 5 hereof when any
person is receiving services from a child in a sauna
parlor or bath, massage clinic, health club and other
similar establishments. A penalty lower by two (2)
degrees than that prescribed for the consummated
felony under Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon
the principals of the attempt to commit the crime of
child prostitution under this Act, or, in the proper
case, under the Revised Penal Code.
Child Trafficking/Punishable Acts
Section 7. Child Trafficking.– Any person who shall
engage in trading and dealing with children
including, but not limited to, the act of buying and
selling of a child for money, or for any other
consideration, or barter, shall suffer the penalty of
reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua. The penalty
shall be imposed in its maximum period when the
victim is under twelve (12) years of age.
Section 8. Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking.–
There is an attempt to commit child trafficking under
Section 7 of this Act:
(a)   When a child travels alone to a foreign country
without valid reason therefor and without
clearance issued by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development or written permit or
justification from the child's parents or legal
guardian;
(b)   When a person, agency, establishment or child-
caring institution recruits women or couples to
bear children for the purpose of child trafficking;
(c)   When a doctor, hospital or clinic official or
employee, nurse, midwife, local civil registrar or
any other person simulates birth for the purpose
of child trafficking; or
(d)   When a person engages in the act of finding
children among low-income families, hospitals,
clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, or other
child-caring institutions who can be offered for
the purpose of child trafficking.
A penalty lower two (2) degrees than that prescribed
for the consummated felony under Section 7 hereof
shall be imposed upon the principals of the attempt
to commit child trafficking.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
RA 9344: JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT
(AS FURTHER AMENDED BY THE RA 10630/ THE
ACT STRENGTHENING THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES)
"Child in Conflict with the Law" - a child who is
alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as, having
committed an offense under Philippine laws.
"Juvenile Justice and Welfare System” – refers to a
system dealing with children at risk and children in
conflict with the law, which provides child-
appropriate proceedings, including programs and
services for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation, re-
integration and aftercare to ensure their normal
growth and development.
Punishable Acts
Sec. 60. Prohibition Against Labeling and Shaming.
- In the conduct of the proceedings beginning from
the initial contact with the child, the competent
authorities must refrain from branding or labeling
children as young criminals, juvenile delinquents,
prostitutes or attaching to them in any manner any
other derogatory names. Likewise, no discriminatory
remarks and practices shall be allowed particularly
with respect to the child's class or ethnic origin.
Sec. 61. Other Prohibited Acts. - The following and
any other similar acts shall be considered prejudicial
and detrimental to the psychological, emotional,
social, spiritual, moral and physical health and well-
being of the child in conflict with the law and
therefore, prohibited:
(a)   Employment of threats of whatever kind and
nature;
(b)   Employment of abusive, coercive and punitive
measures such as cursing, beating, stripping,
and solitary confinement;
(c)   Employment of degrading, inhuman end cruel
forms of punishment such as shaving the heads,
pouring irritating, corrosive or harmful
substances over the body of the child in conflict
with the law, or forcing him/her to walk around
the community wearing signs which embarrass,
humiliate, and degrade his/her personality and
dignity; and
(d)   Compelling the child to perform involuntary
servitude in any and all forms under any and all
instances.
Sec. 62. Violation of the Provisions of this Act or
Rules or Regulations in General. - Any person who
violates any provision of this Act or any rule or
regulation promulgated in accordance thereof shall,
upon conviction for each act or omission, be punished
by a fine of not less than P20,000 but not more than
Page 226 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
P50,000 or suffer imprisonment of 8-10 years, or
both such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of
the court, unless a higher penalty is provided for in
the RPC or special laws. If the offender is a public
officer or employee, he/she shall, in addition to such
fine and/or imprisonment, be held administratively
liable and shall suffer the penalty of perpetual
absolute disqualification.
PD 603: CHILD AND YOUTH WELFARE CODE
Punishable Acts
Article 59. Crimes. - Criminal liability shall attach to
any parent who:
(1)   Conceals or abandons the child with intent to
make such child lose his civil status.
(2)   Abandons the child under such circumstances as
to deprive him of the love, care and protection he
needs.
(3)   Sells or abandons the child to another person for
valuable consideration.
(4)   Neglects the child by not giving him the
education which the family's station in life and
financial conditions permit.
(5)   Fails or refuses, without justifiable grounds, to
enroll the child as required by Article 72.
(6)   Causes, abates, or permits the truancy of the
child from the school where he is enrolled.
"Truancy" as here used means absence without
cause for more than 20 schooldays, not
necessarily consecutive.
(7)   It shall be the duty of the teacher in charge to
report to the parents the absences of the child
the moment these exceed 5 schooldays.
(8)   Improperly exploits the child by using him,
directly or indirectly, such as for purposes of
begging and other acts which are inimical to his
interest and welfare.
(9)   Inflicts cruel and unusual punishment upon the
child or deliberately subjects him to indignation
and other excessive chastisement that embarrass
or humiliate him.
(10)  Causes or encourages the child to lead an
immoral or dissolute life.
(11)   Permits the child to possess, handle or carry a
deadly weapon, regardless of its ownership.
(12)  Allows or requires the child to drive without a
license or with a license which the parent knows
to have been illegally procured. If the vehicle
driven by the child belongs to the parent, it shall
be presumed that he permitted or ordered the
child to drive.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

"Parents" as here used shall include the guardian crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and
and the head of the institution or foster home which one day to twelve years of imprisonment.
has custody of the child.
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties
RA 9372: HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007 prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon
those who are such with respect to their spouses,
Punishable Acts of Terrorism/Who are Liable ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural and
Sec. 3 Terrorism – Any person who commits an act adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
punishable under any of the following provisions of within the same degree, with the single exception of
the RPC: accessories falling within the provisions of
(1)   Art. 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High subparagraph (a).
Seas or in Philippine Waters);
(2)   Art. 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
(3)   Art. 143-A (Coup d’ Etat), including acts
committed by private persons;
(4)   Art. 248 (Murder);
(5)   Art. 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
(6)   Art. 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction);

or under these special laws:

(1)   PD 1613 (The Law on Arson);
(2)   RA 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and
Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
(3)   RA 5207 (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability
Act of 1968);
(4)   RA 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
(5)   PD 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery
Law of 1974) and,
(6)   PD 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the
Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession,
Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or
Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or
Explosives)

thereby sowing and creating a condition of

widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among
the populace, in order to coerce the government to
give in to an unlawful demand, shall be guilty of the
crime of terrorism and shall suffer the penalty of forty
(40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit of
parole as provided for under Act No. 4103, otherwise
known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as
amended.

Sec. 6 Accessory – Any person who, having knowledge

of the commission of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, and without having
participated therein, either as principal or accomplice
under Articles 17 and 18 of the RPC, takes part
subsequent to its commission in any of the following
manner: (a) by profiting himself or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by
concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the
effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent
discovery; (c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in
the escape of the principal or conspirator of the
 
Page 227 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
  Title IX. Crimes against
Personal Liberty and
Security
Chapter I: Crimes against Liberty
1.   Article 267 - Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
2.   Article 268 - Slight Illegal Detention
3.   Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest
4.   Article 270 - Kidnapping and Failure to Return a
Minor
5.   Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to Abandon His
Home
6.   Article 272 – Slavery
7.   Article 273 - Exploitation of Child Labor
8.   Article 274 - Services Rendered Under
Compulsion in Payment of Debt
Chapter II: Crimes against Security
1.   Article 275 - Abandonment of Persons in Danger
and Abandonment of Own Victim
2.   Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor
3.   Article 277 - Abandonment of Minor by Person
Entrusted With Custody; Indifference of Parents
4.   Article 278 - Exploitation of Minors
5.   Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to Dwelling
6.   Article 281 - Other Forms of Trespass
7.   Article 282 - Grave Threats
8.   Article 283 - Light Threats
9.   Article 284 - Bond for Good Behavior
10.   Article 285 - Other Light Threats
11.   Article 286 - Grave Coercions
12.   Article 287 - Light Coercions
13.   Article 288 - Other Similar Coercions
14.   Article 289 - Formation, Maintenance, and
Prohibition of Combination of Capital or Labor
through Violence or Threats
Chapter III: Discovery and Revelation of Secrets
1.   Article 290 - Discovering Secrets through Seizure
of Correspondence
2.   Article 291 - Revealing Secrets with Abuse of
Office
3.   Article 292 - Revelation of Industrial Secrets
1.   Chapter I: Crimes against
Liberty
a.   Article 267 - Kidnapping and
Serious Illegal Detention
Page 228 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
1.   Offender is a private individual;
2.   He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
3.   The act of detention or kidnapping must be
illegal;
4.   In the commission of the offense, any of the
following circumstances is present:
a.   The kidnapping lasts for more than 3 days;
b.   It is committed simulating public authority;
c.   Any serious physical injuries are inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained or
threats to kill him are made; or
d.   The person kidnapped or detained is a
minor, female, or a public officer.
The essential element of kidnapping is the
deprivation of the offended party’s liberty under any
of the four instances enumerated. But when the
kidnapping was committed for the purpose of
extorting ransom, it is not necessary that one or any
of circumstances enumerated be present.
If kidnapping be committed under element d (2), (3),
or (4), it is not necessary that the kidnapping last for
more than 3 days.
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
1.   Purpose is to extort ransom.
2.   When the victim is killed or dies as a
consequence of the detention.
3.   When the victim is raped.
4.   When victim is subjected to torture or
dehumanizing acts.
PENALTY: Death
The offenders here are private individuals or public
officers acting in their private capacity. If they are
public officers, they are covered by the crimes under
Title 2.
When a public officer conspires with a private person
in the commission of any of the crimes under Title IX,
the crime is also one committed under this title and
not under Title II.
The purpose is immaterial when any of the
circumstances in the first paragraph of Art. 267 is
present.
Ransom
Means money, price or consideration paid or
demanded for the redemption of a captured person
that would release him from captivity. No specific
form of ransom is required to consummate the felony
as long as the ransom was intended as a bargaining
chip in exchange for the victim’s freedom. Whether or
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
not ransom is actually paid to or received by the
perpetrator is of no moment. [People v. Jatulan, G.R.
No. 171563 (2007)]
Actual demand for ransom is not necessary, as long
as it can be proven that the kidnapping was done for
the purpose of extorting money.
It is essential that there be actual confinement or
restriction of the person of the offended party. It is
not necessary that the victim be placed in an
enclosure, as long as he is deprived, in any manner,
of his liberty.
It suffices that there be actual or manifest restraint
on the person or liberty of the victim. Accused were
guilty of kidnapping although the victim was found,
at the time of her rescue, outside of the house where
she was brought, talking to the house owner who was
the uncle of the accused. Her failure to attempt to
escape was explained by her to be due to her fear and
threats of the accused to kill her should she do so. In
kidnapping, it is not necessary that the offended
party be kept within an enclosure to restrict her
freedom of locomotion. [People v. Cortez, et al., G.R.
Nos. 131619-20 (2000)]
The victim’s lack of consent is also a fundamental
element of kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
The involuntariness of the seizure and detention is
the very essence of the crime. Although the victim
may have initially consented to go with the offender
to a place, but the victim is thereafter prevented, with
the use of force, from leaving the place where he was
brought to with his consent and is detained against
his will, the offender is still guilty of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention. [People v. Pickrell, G.R. No.
120409 (2003)]
When detention is illegal
It is not ordered by competent authority nor
permitted by law.
Special complex crime of Kidnapping with Murder
When the victim dies or is killed as a consequence of
the detention, which is covered by the last paragraph
of Art. 267 as amended.
Forcible abduction
If a woman is transported from one place to another
by virtue of restraining her of her liberty, and that act
is coupled with lewd designs.
Serious illegal detention
If a woman is transported just to restrain her of her
liberty. There is no lewd design or lewd intent.
Page 229 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Grave coercion
If a woman is carried away just to break her will, to
compel her to agree to the demand or request by the
offender.
Illegal Detention Arbitrary Detention
Committed by a private Committed by public
individual who officer or employee who
unlawfully deprives a detains a person without
person of his liberty legal ground
Crime against the
Crime against personal
fundamental laws of the
liberty
State
Where the evident purpose of taking the victim was to
kill him, and from the acts of the accused it cannot be
inferred that the latter’s purpose was to actually
detain or deprive the victim of his liberty, the
subsequent killing of the victim did not constitute the
crime of kidnapping. The demand for ransom did not
convert the crime into kidnapping, since no
deprivation of liberty was involved. [People v Padica,
G.R. No. 102645 (1993)]
The essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of
the victim’s liberty coupled with the intent of the
accused to effect it. [People v Luartes, G.R. No. 127452
(1999)]
Physical detention is not necessary. It is enough that
the victim is under the complete control of the
perpetrators as in this case when the Japanese victim
had to rely on his abductors for survival after he was
tricked into believing that the police was after him. It
was also held in this case that keeping a person as
collateral for payment of an obligation is kidnapping.
[People v. Tomio, G.R. No. 74630 (1990)]
Leaving a child in a place from which he did not know
the way home, even if he had the freedom to roam
around the place of detention, would still amount to
deprivation of liberty, for under such a situation, the
child’s freedom remains at the mercy and control of
the abductor. [People v Baluya,G.R. No. 181822 (2011)]
The elements of kidnapping for ransom under
Article 267 of the RPC as amended by RA 7659
warranting the imposition of the death penalty are
as follows:
1.   intent on the part of the accused to deprive the
victim of his liberty;
2.   actual deprivation of the victim of his liberty; and
3.   motive of the accused, which is extorting ransom
for the release of the victim.
Neither actual demand for nor payment of ransom is
necessary for the consummation of the felony. It is
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
sufficient that the deprivation of liberty was for
extorting ransom even if none of the four
circumstances mentioned in Article 267 were present
in its perpetration. [People v. Cenahonon, G.R. 169962
(2007)]
Article 267 has been modified by RA 7659 (an act to
impose the death penalty on certain heinous crimes,
amending for that purpose the revised penal laws, as
amended, other special penal laws, and for other
purposes) in the following respects:
1.   Illegal detention becomes serious when it shall
have lasted for more than three days, instead of
five days as originally provided;
2.   In paragraph 4, if the person kidnapped or
detained was a minor and the offender was
anyone of the parents, the latter has been
expressly excluded from the provision. The
liability of the parent is provided for in the last
paragraph of Article 271;
3.   A paragraph was added to Article 267, which
states: When the victim is killed or dies as a
consequence of the detention or is raped, or is
subjected to torture, or dehumanizing acts, the
maximum penalty shall be imposed.
4.   The amendment introduced in our criminal
statutes the concept of "special complex crime"
of kidnapping with murder or homicide.
5.   It eliminated the distinction drawn by the courts
between those cases where the killing of the
kidnapped victim was purposely sought by the
accused, and those where the killing of the victim
was not deliberately resorted to but was merely
an afterthought.
6.   Although the victim was raped 27 times, there is
only one crime of kidnapping with rape, not
kidnapping with rape and 26 separate counts of
rape. In a way, R.A. 7659 depreciated the
seriousness of rape because no matter how many
times the victim was raped, like in the present
case, there is only one crime committed – the
special complex crime of kidnapping with rape.
[People v. Mirandilla, G.R. No. 186217 (2011)]
Forcible Abduction with
Kidnapping with Rape
Rape
Lewd design came after
At the outset, there is
the intent to kidnap the
already lewd design
victim
It is a complex crime
under RPC 48 since
It is a special complex forcible abduction is a
crime. necessary means of
committing the crime of
rape.
It there is an attempted If there is an attempted
rape, it shall be rape, the crime
Page 230 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
considered as a separate committed is only
crime. forcible abduction, the
former being an
expression of a lewd
design.
If there are multiple
If there are multiple rapes, only one is
rapes, there is only one complexed with forcible
special complex crime of abduction and the rest
Kidnapping with Rape. shall be considered as
separate crimes.
b.   Article 268 - Slight Illegal
Detention
Elements:
1.   Offender is a private individual;
2.   He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives him of his liberty.
3.   The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal;
4.   The crime is committed without the attendance
of any of the circumstances enumerated in
Article 267.
This felony is committed if any of the five
circumstances in the commission of kidnapping or
detention enumerated in Article 267 is not present.
Privileged mitigating circumstances
The penalty is lowered if:
1.   The offended party is voluntarily released within
three days from the start of illegal detention;
2.   Without attaining the intended purpose; AND
3.   Before the institution of the criminal action.
The prevailing rule now is Asistio v. Hon. San Diego
[G.R. No. L-21991 (1964)], which provides that
voluntary release will only mitigate criminal liability if
crime was slight illegal detention. If serious, it has no
effect.
The liability of one who furnishes the place where the
offended party is being held captive is that of a
principal and not of an accomplice.
c.   Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest
Elements
1.   Offender arrests or detains another person;
2.   The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to
the proper authorities;
3.   The arrest or detention is not authorized by law
or there is no reasonable ground therefor.
This felony consists in making an arrest or detention
without legal or reasonable ground for the purpose of
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

delivering the offended party to the proper The essential element which qualifies the crime of
authorities. kidnapping a minor under Art. 270 is that the
offender is entrusted with the custody of the minor.
Generally, this crime is committed by incriminating
innocent persons by the offender’s planting evidence If the accused is any of the parents, Article 267 does
to justify the arrest – a complex crime results, that is, not apply; Articles 270 and 271 will then apply.
unlawful arrest through incriminatory machinations
under Article 363. If the taking is with the consent of the parents, the
crime in Article 270 is committed.
If the arrest is made without a warrant and under
circumstances not allowing a warrantless arrest, the What is punished is the deliberate failure of the
crime would be unlawful arrest. custodian of the minor to restore the latter to his
parents or guardians.
If the person arrested is not delivered to the
authorities, the private individual making the arrest The deliberate failure to return a minor under one’s
incurs criminal liability for illegal detention under custody constitutes deprivation of liberty. Kidnapping
Article 267 or 268. and failure to return a minor is necessarily included in
kidnapping and serious illegal detention of a minor
If the offender is a public officer, the crime is arbitrary under Article 267(4). [People v. Generosa, G.R. No. L-
detention under Article 124. 69236 (1986)]

If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground, but the Where a minor child was taken by the accused
public officer delays delivery of the person arrested to without the knowledge and consent of his parents,
the proper judicial authorities, then Article 125 will the crime is kidnapping and serious illegal detention
apply. under Article 267, not kidnapping and failure to
return a minor under Article 270. [People v. Mendoza,
Note: This felony may also be committed by public G.R. No. 180501 (2008)]
officers.
Art. 270 distinguished from Art. 267
Unlawful Arrest v. Delay in the Delivery of Detained Art. 270 Art. 267
Persons Offender is entrusted The offender is not
Delay in the delivery of with the custody of the entrusted with the
Unlawful Arrest (Art.
detained persons (Art. minor custody of the minor.
269)
125) What is punished is the
Detention is for some Detention is not deliberate failure of the
What is punished is the
legal ground. authorized by law. offender having custody
illegal detaining or
Crime is committed by of the minor to restore
kidnapping of the minor
failing to deliver such Committed by making an him to his parents or
person to the proper arrest not authorized by guardians
judicial authority within a law
certain period. e.   Article 271 - Inducing a Minor
d.   Article 270 - Kidnapping and to Abandon His Home
Failure to Return a Minor Elements:
1.   A minor (whether over or under seven years of
Elements: age) is living in the home of his parents or
1.   Offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor guardians or the person entrusted with his
person (whether over or under seven years but custody;
less than 18 years of age) 2.   Offender induces said minor to abandon such
2.   He deliberately fails to restore the said minor to home.
his parents or guardians
Inducement must be (a) actual, and (b) committed
If any of the foregoing elements is absent, the with criminal intent.
kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Article
267. The minor should not leave his home of his own free
will. What constitutes the crime is the act of inducing
 
Page 231 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

a minor to abandon the home of his guardian, and it 3.   It is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a
is not necessary that the minor actually abandons the debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or
home. person entrusted with the custody of such minor.

Father or mother may commit the crimes in Art. 170 The existence of indebtedness constitutes no legal
and 171 where they are living separately and the justification for holding a person and depriving him of
custody of the minor children is given to one of them. his freedom to live where he wills.

The law is intended to discourage and prevent h.   Article 274 - Services

disruption of filial relationships and undue
interference with the parents’ right and duty to the Rendered Under Compulsion
custody of their minor children and to rear them. in Payment of Debt
f.   Article 272 – Slavery Elements:
1.   Offender compels a debtor to work for him, either
Elements: as a household servant or farm laborer;
1.   Offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a 2.   It is against the debtor’s will;
human being; 3.   The purpose is to require or enforce the payment
2.   The purpose of the offender is to enslave such of a debt.
human being.
Service under Compulsion distinguished from
This is committed if anyone shall purchase, kidnap, or Exploitation of Child Labor
detain a human being for the purpose of enslaving Service under Exploitation of Child
him. Compulstion Labor
Does not distinguish
The penalty is increased if the purpose of the offender whether or not the victim Victim must be a minor
is to assign the offended party to some immoral is a minor
traffic. The minor is compelled
The debtor himself is the
to render services for the
one compelled to work
If the purpose of the kidnapping or detention is to supposed debt of his
for the offender
enslave the offended party, slavery is committed. parents or guardian
Limited to household
Service is not limited
The crime is slavery if the offender is not engaged in work or farm labor
the business of prostitution. If he is, the crime is white
slave trade under Article 341.
2.  C hapter II: Crimes against
The employment or custody of a minor with the Security
consent of the parent or guardian, although against
the child’s own will, cannot be considered involuntary
servitude.
a.   Article 275 - Abandonment of
Persons in Danger and
But where it is proven that the defendant was obliged Abandonment of Own Victim
to render service in plaintiff’s house as a servant
without remuneration whatever and to remain there Mode 1: W/O detriment to self
so long as she has not paid her debt, there is slavery. Failing to render assistance to any person whom the
offender finds in an uninhabited place, wounded or in
See Special Law: RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking of Person danger of dying when he can render such assistance
Act of 2003) without detriment to himself, unless such omission
shall constitute a more serious offense.
g.   Article 273 - Exploitation of
Child Labor Elements:
1.   The place is not inhabited;
Elements: 2.   Accused found there a person wounded or in
1.   Offender retains a minor in his services; danger of dying;
2.   It is against the will of the minor; 3.   Accused can render assistance without detriment
to himself;
 
Page 232 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
4.   Accused fails to render assistance.
MODE 2: accidentally wound another
Failing to help or render assistance to another whom
the offender has accidentally wounded or injured;
MODE 3: abandoning a child < 7
By failing to deliver a child, under seven years of age,
whom the offender has found abandoned, to the
authorities or to his family, or by failing to deliver him
to a safe place.
Does not apply: When a person intentionally wounds
another and leaves him in an uninhabited place.
Immaterial: That the offender did not know that the
child is under seven years.
The child under seven years of age must be found by
the accused in an unsafe place.
b.   Article 276 - Abandoning a
Minor
Elements:
1.   Offender has the custody of a child;
2.   The child is under seven years of age;
3.   He abandons such child;
4.   He has no intent to kill the child when the latter
is abandoned.
Circumstances qualifying the offense:
1.   When the death of the minor resulted from such
abandonment; or
2.   If the life of the minor was in danger because of
the abandonment.
The purpose in abandoning the minor under his
custody is to avoid the obligation of taking care of
said minor.
A permanent, conscious and deliberate
abandonment is required in this article. There must
be an interruption of the care and protection the
minor needs by reason of his age.
Intent to kill cannot be presumed from the death of
the child. When there is intent to kill, this article does
not apply.
The ruling that the intent to kill is presumed from the
death of the victim of the crime is applicable only to
crimes against persons, and not to crimes against
security, particularly the crime of abandoning a minor
under Art. 276.
Page 233 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
If the offender is the parent of the minor who is
abandoned, he shall be deprived of parental
authority. (Art. 332, Civil Code)
c.   Article 277 - Abandonment of
Minor by Person Entrusted
With Custody; Indifference of
Parents
MODE 1: WITHOUT consent of guardian
Delivering a minor to a public institution or other
persons without the consent of the one who
entrusted such minor to the care of the offender or, in
the absence of that one, without the consent of the
proper authorities;
Elements:
1.   Offender has charge of the rearing or education
of a minor;
2.   He delivers said minor to a public institution or
other persons;
3.   The one who entrusted such child to the offender
has not consented to such act; or if the one who
entrusted such child to the offender is absent,
the proper authorities have not consented to it.
MODE 2: neglecting education
Neglecting his (offender’s) children by not giving
them the education which their station in life requires
and financial condition permits.
Elements:
1.   Offender is a parent;
2.   He neglects his children by not giving them
education;
3.   His station in life requires such education and his
financial condition permits it.
Obligation to educate children terminates if the
mother and children refuse without good reason to
live with the accused.
Failure to give education must be due to deliberate
desire to evade such obligation. If the parents cannot
give education because they had no means to do so,
then they will not be liable under this article.
d.   Article 278 - Exploitation of
Minors
Mode 1: Physical strength/contortion
Causing any boy or girl under 16 years of age to
perform any dangerous feat of balancing, physical
strength or contortion, the offender being any person;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Mode 2: Exhibition/acrobat/circus
Employing children under 16 years of age who are not If the minor so employed would suffer some injuries
the children or descendants of the offender in as a result of a violation of Article 278, Article 279
exhibitions of acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, diver, provides that there would be additional criminal
or wild-animal tamer, the offender being an acrobat, liability for the resulting felony.
etc., or circus manager or engaged in a similar
calling; Inducing a Minor to
Exploitation of Minors
Abandon His Home (Art.
(Art. 278, par. 5)
Mode 3: Descendant employed like mode 2 271)
Employing any descendant under 12 years of age in Purpose of inducing the
dangerous exhibitions enumerated in the next minor to abandon his
preceding paragraph, the offender being engaged in home is to follow any No such purpose
any of the said callings; person engaged in any of
the callings mentioned
Mode 4: Delivering child under 16 to be employed Victim is under 16 years Victim is a minor (below
like mode 2 of age 18 years of age)
Delivering a child under 16 years of age gratuitously
to any person following any of the callings
enumerated in mode 2, or to any habitual vagrant or
e.   Article 280 - Qualified
beggar, the offender being an ascendant, guardian, Trespass to Dwelling
teacher or person entrusted in any capacity with the
care of such child; Elements
1.   Offender is a private person;
Mode 5: Inducing child under 16 to abandon home 2.   He enters the dwelling of another;
to be employed like mode 2 3.   Such entrance is against the latter’s will.
Inducing any child under 16 years of age to abandon
the home of its ascendants, guardians, curators or Qualifying circumstance:
teachers to follow any person engaged in any of the The offense is committed by means of violence or
callings mentioned in paragraph 2 or to accompany intimidation.
any habitual vagrantor beggar, the offender being
any person. DWELLING – This is the place that a person inhabits.
It includes the dependencies which have interior
Circumstances qualifying the offense: communication with the house.
1.   If the delivery of the child to any person following
any of the calling of acrobat, gymnast, rope- It is not necessary that it be the permanent dwelling
walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus of the person; hence, a person’s room in a hotel may
manager or to any habitual vagrant or beggar is be considered a dwelling. It also includes a room
made in consideration of any price, where one resides as a boarder.
compensation or promise.
2.   The offender is engaged in a kind of business If the purpose in entering the dwelling is not shown,
that would place the life or limb of the minor in trespass is committed. If the purpose is shown, it may
danger, even though working for him is not be absorbed in the crime as in robbery with force
against the will of the minor. upon things, the trespass yielding to the more serious
crime.
Nature of the Business: this involves circuses which
generally attract children so they themselves may If the purpose is not shown and while inside the
enjoy working there unaware of the danger to their dwelling he was found by the occupants, one whom
own lives and limbs. he subsequently injured if there was a struggle, the
crime committed will be trespass to dwelling and
Age: Must be below 16 years. Article 278 has no frustrated homicide or physical injuries, or if there
application if minor is 16 years old and above was no injury, unjust vexation.

Note: if minor is 16 years old and above the If the entry is made by a way not intended for entry, it
exploitation will be dealt with by RA 7610. is presumed to be against the will of the occupant
(example, entry through a window).
If the employer is an ascendant, the crime is not
committed, unless the minor is less than 12 years old. It is not necessary that there be a breaking.
 
Page 234 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

“Against the will” – This means that the entrance is,
either expressly or impliedly, prohibited or the
prohibition is presumed.
It is a well-settled rule that whoever enters the
dwelling of another at late hour of the night after the
inmates have retired and closed their doors does so
against their will. Prohibition is presumed. [US v
Mesina, G.R. No. 6717 (1911); US v Panes, G.R. 7987
(1913)]
•   If there was no intent to kill when he entered –
separate crimes of homicide or murder qualified
by trespass to dwelling
•   If there was intent to kill when he entered – the
crime of homicide/murder with dwelling as an
aggravating circumstance
Trespass may be committed by the owner of a
dwelling (i.e. lessor enters the house leased to
another against the latter’s will).

Prohibition must be in existence prior to or at the Cases to which the provision of this article is NOT
time of entrance, but prohibition is not necessary applicable:
when violence or intimidation is employed by the 1.   If the entrance to another’s dwelling is made for
offender (qualified trespass). the purpose of preventing some serious harm to
himself, the occupants of the dwelling, or a third
Fraudulent entrance may constitute trespass. The person.
prohibition to enter may be made at any time and not 2.   If the purpose is to render some service to
necessarily at the time of the entrance. humanity or justice.
3.   If the place where entrance is made is a café,
To prove that an entry is against the will of the tavern, inn, and other public house, while the
occupant, it is not necessary that the entry should be same are open.
preceded by an express prohibition, provided that the
opposition of the occupant is clearly established by Note: A person who believes that a crime has been
the circumstances under which the entry is made, committed against him has every right to go after the
such as the existence of enmity or strained relations culprit and arrest him without any warrant even if in
between the accused and the occupant. the process he enters the house of another against
the latter’s will. [Sec. 6, Rule 113, Rules of Court]
If the offender is public officer, the crime is violation
of domicile.
f.   Article 281 - Other Forms of
Examples of trespass by means of violence: Trespass
1.   Pushing the door violently and maltreating the
occupants after entering. Elements:
2.   Cutting of a ribbon or string with which the door 1.   Offender enters the closed premises or the
latch of a closed room was fastened. The cutting fenced estate of another;
of the fastenings of the door was an act of 2.   The entrance is made while either of them is
violence. uninhabited;
3.   Wounding by means of a bolo, the owner of the 3.   The prohibition to enter is manifest;
house immediately after entrance 4.   The trespasser has not secured the permission of
the owner or the caretaker thereof.
Examples of trespass by means of intimidation:
1.   Firing a revolver in the air by persons attempting Premises – signifies distinct and definite locality. It
to force their way into a house. may mean a room, shop, building or definite area, but
2.   The flourishing of a bolo against inmates of the in either case, locality is fixed.
house upon gaining an entrance
Qualified Trespass v. Other Forms of Trespass
In the prosecution for trespass, the material fact or Qualified Trespass to Other Forms of Trespass
circumstance to be considered is the occurrence of Dwelling (Art. 280) (Art. 281)
the trespass. The gravamen of the crime is violation Offender is a private The offender is any
of possession or the fact of having caused injury to person person
the right of the possession. [Marzalado v. People, G.R. Offender enters closed
No. 152997 (2004)] Offender enters a
premises or fenced
dwelling
estate
If a person was killed after trespass by the offender, Place entered is Place entered is
the following crimes are committed: inhabited uninhabited
Act constituting the It is the entering the
 
Page 235 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

crime is entering the closed premises or the were made. It is sufficient that the threats came to
dwelling against the will fenced estate without the knowledge of the offended party.
of the owner securing the permission
of the owner or caretaker When consummated: As soon as the threats came to
thereof the knowledge of the offended party.
Prohibition to enter is Prohibition to enter must
express or implied be manifest Threats made in connection with the commission of
other crimes are absorbed by the latter.
g.   Article 282 - Grave Threats The offender in grave threats does not demand the
delivery on the spot of the money or other personal
Mode 1: Threatening, even not unlawful
property demanded by him. When threats are made
Threatening another with the infliction upon his
and money is taken on the spot, the crime may be
person, honor or property or that of this family of any
robbery with intimidation.
wrong amounting to a crime and demanding money
or imposing any other condition, even though not
The penalties for the first two types of grave threats
unlawful, and the offender attained his purpose;
depend upon the penalties for the crimes threatened
to be committed. One degree lower if the purpose is
Elements:
attained, and two degrees lower if the purpose is not
1.   Offender threatens another person with the
attained.
infliction upon the latter’s person, honor or
property, or upon that of the latter’s family, of
If the threat is not subject to a condition, the penalty
any wrong.
is fixed at arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500
2.   Such wrong amounts to a crime.
pesos.
3.   There is a demand for money or that any other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful.
In the first two types, if the threat is made in writing
4.   Offender attains his purpose.
or through a middleman, the penalty is to be
imposed in its maximum period.
Mode 2: Threat w/o attaining purpose
Making such threat without the offender attaining his
The third type of grave threats must be serious and
purpose;
deliberate; the offender must persist in the idea
involved in his threats. The threat should not be
Mode 3: Threat of crime
made in the heat of anger, because such is punished
Threatening another with the infliction upon his
under Article 285. If the condition is not proved, it is
person, honor or property or that of his family of any
grave threats of the third type.
wrong amounting to a crime, the threat not being
subject to a condition.
h.   Article 283 - Light Threats
Elements:
1.   Offender threatens another person with the Elements:
infliction upon the latter’s person, honor or 1.   Offender makes a threat to commit a wrong;
property, or upon that of the latter’s family, of 2.   The wrong does not constitute a crime;
any wrong. 3.   There is a demand for money or that other
2.   Such wrong amounts to a crime. condition is imposed, even though not unlawful;
3.   Threat is not subject to a condition. 4.   Offender has attained his purpose or, that he has
not attained his purpose.
Qualifying Circumstance:
If threat was made The harm threatened must not be in the nature of
1.   in writing OR crime and there is a demand for money or any other
2.   through a middleman. condition is imposed, even though lawful.

It is essential that there be intimidation. Blackmailing may be punished under this article.

As the crime consists in threatening another with Grave Threats Light Threats
some future harm, it is not necessary that the Act threatened amount Act threatened do not
offended party was present at the time the threats to a crime amount to a crime

 
Page 236 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

i.   Article 284 - Bond for Good Other Light Threats

Grave Threats and Light
Threats
Behavior No demand for money In certain cases, demand
for money is material
When a person is required to give bail bond: No condition imposed In certain cases, imposed
1.   When he threatens another under the condition is material.
circumstances mentioned in Art. 282 (Grave
Threats). Threat is not deliberate Threat is deliberate
2.   When he threatens another under the
circumstances mentioned in Art. 283 (Light
Threats). k.   Article 286 - Grave Coercions
Bond for Good Behavior v. Bond to Keep the Peace Mode 1: Preventing w/ violence, something not
Bond for Good Behavior Bond to Keep the Peace prohibited by law
Applicable only to grave Not application to any Preventing another, by means of violence, threats or
threats and light threats particular case intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by
If the offender fails to law;
give bond, he shall be
detained for a period not Mode 2: Compelling another to do something v. will
If offender fails to give Compelling another, by means of violence, threats or
exceeding 6 months (if
bail, he shall be intimidation, to do something against his will,
prosecuted for grave/less
sentenced to destierro whether it be right or wrong.
grave felony) or not
exceeding 30 days (light
felony) Elements:
Not a distinct penalty A distinct penalty 1.   A person prevented another from doing
something not prohibited by law, or that he
compelled him to do something against his will;
j.   Article 285 – Other Light be it right or wrong;
Threats 2.   The prevention or compulsion be effected by
violence, threats or intimidation; and
Mode 1: Threat w/weapon in a quarrel 3.   The person that restrained the will and liberty of
Threatening another with a weapon, or by drawing another had not the authority of law or the right
such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self- to do so, or in other words, that the restraint
defense; shall not be made under authority of law or in the
exercise of any lawful right.
Mode 2: Oral threat of crime, in anger
Orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, with Two ways of committing Grave Coercion:
some harm constituting a crime, without persisting in 1.   Preventive – Preventing another, by means of
the idea involved in his threat; violence, threats, or intimidation, from doing
something not prohibited by law
Mode 3: Oral threat = not felony 2.   Compulsive – Compelling another, by means of
Orally threatening to do another any harm not violence, threats, or intimidation, to do
constituting a felony. something against his will, whether it be right or
wrong
Under the first type, the subsequent acts of the
offender must show that he did not persist in the idea Purpose of the Law:
involved in the threat. To enforce the principle that no person may take the
law into his hands, and that our government is one of
Threats which are ordinarily grave threats, if made in law, not of men.
the heat of anger, may be other light threats.
Arises only if the act which the offender prevented
If the threats are directed to a person who is absent another to do is not prohibited by law or ordinance.
and uttered in a temporary fit of anger, the offense is
only other light threats. If a person prohibits another to do an act because the
act is a crime, even though some sort of violence or
intimidation is employed, it would not give rise to

 
Page 237 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
grave coercion. It may only give rise to threat or
physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted.
In case of grave coercion where the offended party is
being compelled to do something against his will,
whether it be wrong or not, the crime of grave
coercion is committed if violence or intimidation is
employed in order to compel him to do the act.
A public officer who shall prevent by means of
violence or threats the ceremonies or manifestations
of any religion is guilty of interruption of religious
worship (Art. 132).
Any person who, by force, prevents the meeting of a
legislative body is liable under Art. 143.
Any person who shall use force or intimidation to
prevent any member of Congress from attending the
meetings thereof, expressing his opinions, or casting
his vote is liable under Art. 145.
The crime is not grave coercion when the violence is
employed to seize anything belonging to the debtor
of the offender. It is light coercion under Art. 287.
Coercion is consummated even if the offended party
did not accede to the purpose of coercion.
The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the
interference of another with the same, if the
interference is necessary to avert an imminent danger
and the threatened damage, compared to the
damage arising to the owner from the interference, is
much greater. (Art. 432, Civil Code)
Neither the crime of threats nor coercion is
committed although the accused, a branch manager
of a bank made the complainant sign a withdrawal
slip for the amount needed to pay the spurious dollar
check she had encashed, and also made her execute
an affidavit regarding the return of the amount
against her better sense and judgment. The
complainant may have acted reluctantly and with
hesitation, but still, it was voluntary. [Lee v. CA, G.R.
No. 90423 (1991)]
l.   Article 287 - Light Coercions
Elements:
1.   Offender must be a creditor;
2.   He seizes anything belonging to his debtor:
3.   The seizure of the thing be accomplished by
means of violence or a display of material force
producing intimidation;
4.   The purpose of the offender is to apply the same
to the payment of the debt.
Page 238 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Deals with light coercions wherein violence is
employed by the offender who is a creditor in seizing
anything belonging to his debtor for the purpose of
applying the same to the payment of the debt.
Bar Question: A was caught peeping through a small
hole in the bathroom door while a young 16-year-old
was taking a bath. A liable for: Light Coercion.
Reason: Unjust vexation is defined as any act
committed without violence, but which unjustifiably
annoys or vexes an innocent person amounts to light
coercion. It should include any human conduct which,
although not productive of some physical or material
harm would, however, unjustifiably annoy or vex an
innocent person.
Unjust Vexation
Any act committed without violence, but which
unjustifiably annoys or vexes an innocent person
amounts to light coercion. It should include any
human conduct which, although not productive of
some physical or material harm would, however,
unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person.
Unjust Vexation is distinguished from grave coercion
by the absence of violence.
Threats Coercion
Intimidation or violence
Intimidation is essential is the essence of the
crime
Force or violence must be
Intimidation is future and
imminent, actual, and
conditional
immediate
Intimidation is directed
Intimidation is directed
against the victim or his
against the victim only
family
m.  Article 288 - Other Similar
Coercions
Mode 1: Force/compel to buy commodities from
him
Forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or
knowingly permitting the forcing or compelling of the
laborer or employee of the offender to purchase
merchandise of commodities of any kind from him;
Elements:
1.   Offender is any person, agent or officer of any
association or corporation;
2.   He or such firm or corporation has employed
laborers or employees;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.   He forces or compels, directly or indirectly, or
knowingly permits to be forced or compelled, any
of his or its laborers or employees to purchase
merchandise or commodities of any kind from
him or from said firm or corporation.
Mode 2: Wages paid by token or object
Paying the wages due his laborer or employee by
means of tokens or object other than the legal tender
currency of the Philippines, unless expressly
requested by such laborer or employee.
Elements:
1.   Offender pays the wages due a laborer or
employee employed by him by means of tokens
or object;
2.   Those tokens or objects are other than the legal
tender currency of the Philippines;
3.   Such employee or laborer does not expressly
request that he be paid by means of tokens or
objects.
General rule: wages shall be paid in legal tender and
the use of tokens, promissory notes, vouchers,
coupons or any other forms alleged to represent legal
tender is absolutely prohibited even when expressly
requested by the employee. (Section 1, Rule VIII, Book
III, Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code)
No employer shall limit or otherwise interfere with
the freedom of any employee to dispose of his wages.
He shall not in any manner force, compel, oblige his
employees to purchase merchandise, commodities or
other property from the employer or from any other
person. (Art. 112, Labor Code.)
n.   Article 289 - Formation,
Maintenance, and Prohibition
of Combination of Capital or
Labor through Violence or
Threats
Elements:
1.   Offender employs violence or threats, in such a
degree as to compel or force the laborers or
employers in the free and legal exercise of their
industry or work;
2.   The purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent
coalitions of capital or labor, strike of laborers or
lockout of employers.
Note: Repealed by the Labor Code.
Page 239 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
3.  Chapter III: Discovery and
Revelation of Secrets
a.   Article 290 - Discovering
Secrets through Seizure of
Correspondence
Elements:
1.   Offender is a private individual or even a public
officer not in the exercise of his official function;
2.   He seizes the papers or letters of another;
3.   The purpose is to discover the secrets of such
another person;
4.   Offender is informed of the contents of the
papers or letters seized.
This is a crime against the security of one’s papers
and effects. The purpose must be to discover its
effects. The act violates the privacy of
communication.
According to Dean Ortega, it is not necessary that the
offender should actually discover the contents of the
letter. Reyes, citing People v. Singh, CA, 40 OG,
Suppl. 5, 35, believes otherwise.
The last paragraph of Article 290 expressly makes
the provision of the first and second paragraph
thereof inapplicable to parents, guardians, or persons
entrusted with the custody of minors placed under
their care or custody, and to the spouses with respect
to the papers or letters of either of them.
The teachers or other persons entrusted with the care
and education of minors are included in the
exceptions.
Distinction from estafa, damage to property, and
unjust vexation:
1.   If the act had been executed with intent to gain, it
would be estafa;
2.   If, on the other hand, the purpose was not to
defraud, but only to cause damage to another, it
would merit the qualification of damage to
property;
3.   If the intention was merely to cause vexation
preventing another to do something which the
law does not prohibit or compel him to execute
what he does not want, the act should be
considered as unjust vexation.
b.   Article 291 - Revealing Secrets
with Abuse of Office
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Elements:
1.   Offender is a manager, employee or servant;
2.   He learns the secrets of his principal or master in
such capacity;
3.   He reveals such secrets.
An employee, manager, or servant who came to know
of the secret of his master or principal in such
capacity and reveals the same shall also be liable
regardless of whether or not the principal or master
suffered damages.
Essence of this crime is that the offender learned of
the secret in the course of his employment.
He is enjoying a confidential relation with the
employer or master so he should respect the privacy
of matters personal to the latter.
Reason: no one has a right to the personal privacy of
another.
c.   Article 292 - Revelation of
Industrial Secrets
Elements:
1.   Offender is a person in charge, employee or
workman of a manufacturing or industrial
establishment;
2.   The manufacturing or industrial establishment
has a secret of the industry which the offender
has learned;
3.   Offender reveals such secrets;
4.   Prejudice is caused to the owner.
Secrets must relate to manufacturing processes.
The act constituting the crime is revealing the secret
of the industry which the offender has learned.
The revelation of the secret might be made after the
employee or workman had ceased to be connected
with the establishment.
Prejudice is an element of the offense.
d.   Special Laws
RA 4200 (ANTI WIRE TAPPING ACT)
Punishable Acts
It shall be unlawful for:
1.   Any person, not being authorized by all the
parties to any private communication or spoken
word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any
other device or arrangement, to secretly
overhear, intercept, or record such
Page 240 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
communication or spoken word by using a device
commonly known as a dictaphone or dictagraph
or dictaphone or walkie-talkie or tape recorder,
or however otherwise described:
2.   Any person, be he a participant or not in the act
or acts penalized in the next preceding sentence,
to knowingly possess any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record, or
copies thereof, of any communication or spoken
word secured either before or after the effective
date of this Act in the manner prohibited by this
law; or to replay the same for any other person or
persons; or to communicate the contents thereof,
either verbally or in writing, or to furnish
transcriptions thereof, whether complete or
partial, to any other person: Provided, That the
use of such record or any copies thereof as
evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or
trial of offenses mentioned in section 3 hereof,
shall not be covered by this prohibition.
Any person who willfully or knowingly does or who
shall aid, permit, or cause to be done any of the acts
declared to be unlawful in the preceding section or
who violates the provisions of the following section or
of any order issued thereunder, or aids, permits, or
causes such violation shall, upon conviction thereof,
be punished by imprisonment for not less than six
months or more than six years and with the accessory
penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification from
public office if the offender be a public official at the
time of the commission of the offense, and, if the
offender is an alien he shall be subject to deportation
proceedings. [Sec. 2, RA 4200]
Exceptions:
Any peace officer, who is authorized by a written
order of the Court, to execute any of the acts declared
to be unlawful in the two preceding sections in cases
involving the crimes of treason, espionage,
provoking war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy,
mutiny in the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and
proposal to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion,
sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting to
sedition, kidnapping as defined by the RPC, and
violations of Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing
espionage and other offenses against national
security: Provided, That such written order shall only
be issued or granted upon written application and
the examination under oath or affirmation of the
applicant and the witnesses he may produce and a
showing:
1.   that there are reasonable grounds to believe that
any of the crimes enumerated hereinabove has
been committed or is being committed or is
about to be committed: Provided, however, That
in cases involving the offenses of rebellion,
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion,
inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to
commit sedition, and inciting to sedition, such
authority shall be granted only upon prior proof
that a rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case
may be, have actually been or are being
committed;
2.   that there are reasonable grounds to believe that
evidence will be obtained essential to the
conviction of any person for, or to the solution of,
or to the prevention of, any of such crimes; and
3.   that there are no other means readily available
for obtaining such evidence.
Note: RA 9372: Human Security Act
SEC. 7. Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and
Recording of Communications. The provisions of RA
4200 (Anti-wire Tapping Law) to the contrary
notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement official
and the members of his team may, upon a written
order of the Court of Appeals, listen to, intercept and
record, with the use of any mode, form, kind or type
of electronic or other surveillance equipment or
intercepting and tracking devices, or with the use of
any other suitable ways and means for that purpose,
any communication, message, conversation,
discussion, or spoken or written words between
members of a judicially declared and outlawed
terrorist organization, association, or group of
persons or of any person charged with or suspected
of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism.
Provided, That surveillance, interception and
recording of communications between lawyers and
clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their
sources and confidential business correspondence
shall not be authorized.
SEC. 8. Formal Application for Judicial
Authorization. - The written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals to track down, tap,
listen to, intercept, and record communications,
messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or
written words of any person suspected of the crime of
terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit
terrorism shall only be granted by the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals upon an ex parte
written application of a police or of a law
enforcement official who has been duly authorized in
writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council created in
Section 53 of this Act to file such ex parte application,
and upon examination under oath or affirmation of
the applicant and the witnesses he may produce to
establish: (a) that there is probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or
Page 241 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
circumstances that the said crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism has been committed,
or is being committed, or is about to be committed;
(b) that there is probable cause to believe based on
personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that
evidence, which is essential to the conviction of any
charged or suspected person for, or to the solution or
prevention of, any such crimes, will be obtained; and,
(c) that there is no other effective means readily
available for acquiring such evidence.
SEC. 9.Classification and Contents of the Order of the
Court. - The written order granted by the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals as well as its order, if
any, to extend or renew the same, the original
application of the applicant, including his application
to extend or renew, if any, and the written
authorizations of the Anti-Terrorism Council shall be
deemed and are hereby declared as classified
information: Provided, That the person being
surveilled or whose communications, letters, papers,
messages, conversations. Discussions, spoken or
written words and effects have been monitored,
listened to, bugged or recorded by law enforcement
authorities has the right to be informed of the acts
done by the law enforcement authorities in the
premises or to challenge, if he or she intends to do so,
the legality of the interference before the Court of
Appeals which issued the written order. The written
order of the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals shall specify the following: (a) the identity,
such as name and address, if known, of the charged
or suspected person whose communications,
messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or
written words are to be tracked down, tapped,
listened to, intercepted, and recorded and, in the
case of radio, electronic, or telephonic (whether
wireless or otherwise) communications, messages,
conversations, discussions, or spoken or written
words, the electronic transmission systems or the
telephone numbers to be tracked down, tapped,
listened to, intercepted, and recorded and their
locations or if the person suspected of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism is not
fully known, such person shall be subject to
continuous surveillance provided there is a
reasonable ground to do so; (b) the identity (name,
address, and the police or law enforcement
organization) of the police or of the law enforcement
official, including the individual identity (names,
addresses, and the police or law enforcement
organization) of the members of his team, judicially
authorized to track down, tap, listen to, intercept,
and record the communications, messages,
conversations, discussions, or spoken or written
words; (c) the offense or offenses committed, or being
committed, or sought to be prevented; and, (d) the
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
length of time within which the authorization shall be
used or carried out.
SEC. 10. Effective Period of Judicial Authorization. -
Only for the length of time specified in the written
order of the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals, which shall not exceed a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of receipt of the written order of
the authorizing division of the CA by the applicant
police or law enforcement official.
The authorizing division of the CA may extend or
renew the said authorization for another non-
extendible period, which shall not exceed 30 days
from the expiration of the original period: Provided,
That the authorizing division of the CA is satisfied
that such extension or renewal is in the public
interest: and Provided, further, That the ex parte
application for extension or renewal, which must be
filed by the original applicant, has been duly
authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council.
In case of death of the original applicant or in case he
is physically disabled to file the application for
extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the
original applicant among the members of the team
named in the original written order of the authorizing
division of the CA shall file the application for
extension or renewal: Provided, That, without
prejudice to the liability of the police or law
enforcement personnel under Section 20 hereof, the
applicant police or law enforcement official shall
have thirty (30) days after the termination of the
period granted by the Court of Appeals as provided in
the preceding paragraphs within which to file the
appropriate case before the Public Prosecutor’s
Office for any violation of this Act.
If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period, the
applicant police or law enforcement official shall
immediately notify the person subject of the
surveillance, interception and recording of the
termination of the said surveillance, interception and
recording. The penalty of ten (10) years and one day
to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed
upon the applicant police or law enforcement official
who fails to notify the person subject of the
surveillance, monitoring, interception and recording
as specified above.
SEC. 11. Custody of Intercepted and Recorded
Communications. - All tapes, discs, and recordings
made pursuant to the authorization of the
authorizing division of the CA, including all excerpts
and summaries thereof as well as all written notes or
memoranda made in connection therewith, shall,
within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of
Page 242 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the period fixed in the written order of the authorizing
division of the CA or within forty-eight (48) hours
after the expiration of any extension or renewal
granted by the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals, be deposited with the authorizing Division
of the CA in a sealed envelope or sealed package, as
the case may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint
affidavit of the applicant police or law enforcement
official and the members of his team.
In case of death of the applicant or in case he is
physically disabled to execute the required affidavit,
the one next in rank to the applicant among the
members of the team named in the written order of
the authorizing division of the CA shall execute with
the members of the team that required affidavit.
It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer or
any custodian of the tapes, discs and recording, and
their excerpts and summaries, written notes or
memoranda to copy in whatever form, to remove,
delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any
manner the items enumerated above in whole or in
part under any pretext whatsoever.
Any person who removes, deletes, expunges
incinerates, shreds or destroys the items enumerated
above shall suffer a penalty of not less than six (6)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment.
SEC. 12. Contents of Joint Affidavit. - The joint
affidavit of the police or of the law enforcement
official and the individual members of his team shall
state: (a) the number of tapes, discs, and recordings
that have been made, as well as the number of
excerpts and summaries thereof and the number of
written notes and memoranda, if any, made in
connection therewith; (b) the dates and times covered
by each of such tapes, discs, and recordings; (c) the
number of tapes, discs, and recordings, as well as the
number of excerpts and summaries thereof and the
number of written notes and memoranda made in
connection therewith that have been included in the
deposit; and (d) the date of the original written
authorization granted by the Anti-Terrorism Council
to the applicant to file the ex parte application to
conduct the tracking down, tapping, intercepting,
and recording, as well as the date of any extension or
renewal of the original written authority granted by
the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.
The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that no
duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of any of
such tapes, discs, and recordings, and that no
duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of any of
such excerpts, summaries, written notes, and
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
memoranda, have been made, or, if made, that all
such duplicates and copies are included in the sealed
envelope or sealed package, as the case may be,
deposited with the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals.
It shall be unlawful for any person, police or law
enforcement official to omit or exclude from the joint
affidavit any item or portion thereof mentioned in this
Section.
Any person, police or law enforcement officer who
violates any of the acts proscribed in the preceding
paragraph shall suffer the penalty of not less than
ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment.
SEC. 13.Disposition of Deposited Materials. - The
sealed envelope or sealed package and the contents
thereof, which are deposited with the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals, shall be deemed and
are hereby declared classified information, and the
sealed envelope or sealed package shall not be
opened and its contents (including the tapes, discs,
and recordings and all the excerpts and summaries
thereof and the notes and memoranda made in
connection therewith) shall not be divulged, revealed,
read, replayed, or used as evidence unless authorized
by written order of the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals, which written order shall be
granted only upon a written application of the
Department of Justice filed before the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals and only upon a
showing that the Department of Justice has been
duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism
Council to file the application with proper written
notice to the person whose conversation,
communication, message discussion or spoken or
written words have been the subject of surveillance,
monitoring, recording and interception to open,
reveal, divulge, and use the contents of the sealed
envelope or sealed package as evidence.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify in writing the
persons subject of the surveillance as defined above
shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one day to
eight (8) years of imprisonment.
SEC. 14.Application to Open Deposited Sealed
Envelop or Sealed Package. - The written application
with notice to the party concerned to open the
deposited sealed envelope or sealed package shall
clearly state the purpose or reason: (a) for opening
the sealed envelope or sealed package; (b) for
revealing or disclosing its classified contents; (c) for
replaying, divulging, and or reading any of the
Page 243 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
listened to, intercepted, and recorded
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words (including
any of the excerpts and summaries thereof and any of
the notes or memoranda made in connection
therewith); and, (d) for using any of said listened to,
intercepted, and recorded communications,
messages, conversations, discussions, or spoken or
written words (including any of the excerpts and
summaries thereof and any of the notes or
memoranda made in connection therewith) as
evidence.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify as defined
above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and one
day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.
SEC. 15.Evidentiary Value of Deposited Materials. -
Any listened to, intercepted, and recorded
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words, or any part or
parts thereof, or any information or fact contained
therein, including their existence, content, substance,
purport, effect, or meaning, which have been secured
in violation of the pertinent provisions of this Act,
shall absolutely not be admissible and usable as
evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-
judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation,
inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.
SEC. 16.Penalty for Unauthorized or malicious
Interceptions and/or Recordings. - Any police or law
enforcement personnel who, not being authorized to
do so by the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals, tracks down, taps, listens to, intercepts, and
records in whatever manner or form any
communication, message, conversation, discussion,
or spoken or written word of a person charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of
conspiracy to commit terrorism shall be guilty of an
offense and shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years
and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.
In addition to the liability attaching to the offender
for the commission of any other offense, the penalty
of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment and the accessory penalty of perpetual
absolute disqualification from public office shall be
imposed upon any police or law enforcement
personnel who maliciously obtained an authority
from the Court of Appeals to track down, tap, listen
to, intercept, and record in whatever manner or form
any communication, message, conversation,
discussion, or spoken or written words of a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism: Provided, That
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
notwithstanding Section 13 of this Act, the party
aggrieved by such authorization shall be allowed
access to the sealed envelope or sealed package and
the contents thereof as evidence for the prosecution
of any police or law enforcement personnel who
maliciously procured said authorization.
SEC. 26.Restriction on Travel. – In cases where
evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person
charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to
commit terrorism is entitled to bail and is granted the
same, the court, upon application by the prosecutor,
shall limit the right of travel of the accused to within
the municipality or city where he resides or where the
case is pending, in the interest of national security
and public safety, consistent with Article III, Section 6
of the Constitution. Travel outside of said
municipality or city, without the authorization of the
court, shall be deemed a violation of the terms and
conditions of his bail, which shall then be forfeited as
provided under the Rules of Court.
He or she may also be placed under house arrest by
order of the court at his or her usual place of
residence.
While under house arrest, he or she may not use
telephones, cellphones, e-mails, computers, the
internet or other means of communications with
people outside the residence until otherwise ordered
by the court.
The restrictions abovementioned shall be terminated
upon the acquittal of the accused or of the dismissal
of the case filed against him or earlier upon the
discretion of the court on motion of the prosecutor or
of the accused.
SEC. 27. Judicial Authorization Required to Examine
Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. - The
provisions of Republic Act No. 1405 as amended, to
the contrary notwithstanding, the justices of the
Court of Appeals designated as a special court to
handle anti-terrorism cases after satisfying
themselves of the existence of probable cause in a
hearing called for that purpose that (1) a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of a judicially
declared and outlawed terrorist organization,
association, or group of persons, and (3) of a member
of such judicially declared and outlawed
organization, association, or group of persons, may
authorize in writing any police or law enforcement
officer and the members of his/her team duly
authorized in writing by the anti-terrorism council to:
(a) examine, or cause the examination of, the
deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and
Page 244 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
records in a bank or financial institution; and (b)
gather or cause the gathering of any relevant
information about such deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets, and records from a bank or financial
institution. The bank or financial institution
concerned shall not refuse to allow such examination
or to provide the desired information, when so
ordered by and served with the written order of the
Court of Appeals.
SEC. 28. Application to Examine Bank Deposits,
Accounts, and Records. - The written order of the
Court of Appeals authorizing the examination of bank
deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and
records: (1) of a person charged with or suspected of
the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism, (2) of any judicially declared and outlawed
terrorist organization, association, or group of
persons, or (3) of any member of such organization,
association, or group of persons in a bank or financial
institution, and the gathering of any relevant
information about the same from said bank or
financial institution, shall only be granted by the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals upon an
ex parte application to that effect of a police or of a
law enforcement official who has been duly
authorized in writing to file such ex parte application
by the Anti-Terrorism Council created in Section 53 of
this Act to file such ex parte application, and upon
examination under oath or affirmation of the
applicant and the witnesses he may produce to
establish the facts that will justify the need and
urgency of examining and freezing the bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records: (1) of
the person charged with or suspected of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of a
judicially declared and outlawed terrorist
organization, association or group of persons, or (3)
of any member of such organization, association, or
group of persons.
SEC. 29. Classification and Contents of the Court
Order Authorizing the Examination of Bank
Deposits, Accounts, and Records. - The written order
granted by the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals as well as its order, if any, to extend or renew
the same, the original ex parte application of the
applicant, including his ex parte application to
extend or renew, if any, and the written
authorizations of the Anti Terrorism Council, shall be
deemed and are hereby declared as classified
information: Provided, That the person whose bank
deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets, and
records have been examined, frozen, sequestered
and seized by law enforcement authorities has the
right to be informed of the acts done by the law
enforcement authorities in the premises or to
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
challenge, if he or she intends to do so, the legality of
the interference. The written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals designated to handle
cases involving terrorism shall specify: (a) the identity
of the said: (1) person charged with or suspected of
the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism, (2) judicially declared and outlawed
terrorist organization, association, or group of
persons, and (3) member of such judicially declared
and outlawed organization, association, or group of
persons, as the case may be, whose deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records are
to be examined or the information to be gathered; (b)
the identity of the bank or financial institution where
such deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets,
and records are held and maintained; (c) the identity
of the persons who will conduct the said examination
and the gathering of the desired information; and, (d)
the length of time the authorization shall be carried
out.
SEC. 30. Effective Period of Court Authorization to
Examine and Obtain Information on Bank Deposits,
Accounts, and Records. - The authorization issued or
granted by the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals to examine or cause the examination of and
to freeze bank deposits, placements, trust accounts,
assets, and records, or to gather information about
the same, shall be effective for the length of time
specified in the written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals, which shall not
exceed a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
receipt of the written order of the authorizing division
of the Court of Appeals by the applicant police or law
enforcement official.
The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals may
extend or renew the said authorization for another
period, which shall not exceed thirty (30) days
renewable to another thirty (30) days from the
expiration of the original period, provided that the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals is
satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the
public interest, and provided further that the
application for extension or renewal, which must be
filed by the original applicant, has been duly
authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council.
In case of death of the original applicant or in case he
is physically disabled to file the application for
extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the
original applicant among the members of the team
named in the original written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals shall file the
application for extension or renewal: Provided, That,
without prejudice to the liability of the police or law
enforcement personnel under Section 19 hereof, the
Page 245 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
applicant police or law enforcement official shall
have thirty (30) days after the termination of the
period granted by the Court of Appeals as provided in
the preceding paragraphs within which to file the
appropriate case before the Public Prosecutor’s
Office for any violation of this Act.
If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period, the
applicant police or law enforcement official shall
immediately notify in writing the person subject of
the bank examination and freezing of bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets and records. The
penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12)
years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon the
applicant police or law enforcement official who fails
to notify in writing the person subject of the bank
examination and freezing of bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets and records.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify in writing as
defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years
and one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.
SEC. 31. Custody of Bank Data and Information
Obtained after Examination of Deposits, Placements,
Trust Accounts, Assets and Records. - All
information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes,
memoranda, working sheets, reports, and other
documents obtained from the examination of the
bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets
and records of: (1) a person charged with or suspected
of the crime of terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to
commit terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and
outlawed terrorist organization, association, or group
of persons, or (3) a member of any such organization,
association, or group of persons shall, within forty-
eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period
fixed in the written order of the authorizing division of
the Court of Appeals or within forty-eight (48) hours
after the expiration of the extension or renewal
granted by the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals, be deposited with the authorizing division of
the Court of Appeals in a sealed envelope or sealed
package, as the case may be, and shall be
accompanied by a joint affidavit of the applicant
police or law enforcement official and the persons
who actually conducted the examination of said bank
deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets and
records.
SEC. 32. Contents of Joint Affidavit. - The joint
affidavit shall state: (a) the identifying marks,
numbers, or symbols of the deposits, placements,
trust accounts, assets, and records examined; (b) the
identity and address of the bank or financial
institution where such deposits, placements, trust
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
accounts, assets, and records are held and
maintained; (c) the number of bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records
discovered, examined, and frozen; (d) the
outstanding balances of each of such deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets; (e) all
information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes,
memoranda, working sheets, reports, documents,
records examined and placed in the sealed envelope
or sealed package deposited with the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals; (f) the date of the
original written authorization granted by the Anti-
Terrorism Council to the applicant to file the ex parte
application to conduct the examination of the said
bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets
and records, as well as the date of any extension or
renewal of the original written authorization granted
by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals;
and (g) that the items enumerated were all that were
found in the bank or financial institution examined at
the time of the completion of the examination.
The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that no
duplicates or copies of the information, data,
excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working
sheets, reports, and documents acquired from the
examination of the bank deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets and records have been made, or, if
made, that all such duplicates and copies are placed
in the sealed envelope or sealed package deposited
with the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals.
It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer or
custodian of the bank data and information obtained
after examination of deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets and records to copy, to remove,
delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any
manner the items enumerated above in whole or in
part under any pretext whatsoever.
Any person who copies, removes, deletes, expunges
incinerates, shreds or destroys the items enumerated
above shall suffer a penalty of not less than six (6)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment.
SEC. 46. Penalty for Unauthorized Revelation of
Classified Materials. - The penalty of ten (10) years
and one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment
shall be imposed upon any person, police or law
enforcement agent, judicial officer or civil servant
who, not being authorized by the Court of Appeals to
do so, reveals in any manner or form any classified
information under this Act.
Page 246 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
RA 9208: ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT
OF 2003
Trafficking in Persons - refers to the recruitment,
transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of
persons with or without the victim's consent or
knowledge, within or across national borders by
means of threat or use of force, or other forms of
coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power
or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of
the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having
control over another person for the purpose of
exploitation which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring
or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation
shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons"
even if it does not involve any of the means set forth
in the preceding paragraph.
Punishable Acts
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It shall be
unlawful for any person, natural or juridical, to
commit any of the following acts:
(a)   To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those
done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
(b)   To introduce or match for money, profit, or
material, economic or other consideration, any
person or, as provided for under Republic Act No.
6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign national,
for marriage for the purpose of acquiring, buying,
offering, selling or trading him/her to engage in
prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation,
forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or
debt bondage;
(c)   To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated,
for the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering,
selling, or trading them to engage in prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor or
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(d)   To undertake or organize tours and travel plans
consisting of tourism packages or activities for
the purpose of utilizing and offering persons for
prostitution, pornography or sexual exploitation;
(e)   To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
(f)   To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary (a)   When the trafficked person is a child;
servitude or debt bondage; (b)   When the adoption is effected through Republic
(g)   To recruit, hire, adopt, transport or abduct a Act No. 8043, otherwise known as the "Inter-
person, by means of threat or use of force, fraud, Country Adoption Act of 1995" and said adoption
deceit, violence, coercion, or intimidation for the is for the purpose of prostitution, pornography,
purpose of removal or sale of organs of said sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
person; and involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(h)   To recruit, transport or adopt a child to engage in (c)   When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or
armed activities in the Philippines or abroad. in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed
by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three
Section 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons.- (3) or more persons conspiring or confederating
The following acts which promote or facilitate with one another. It is deemed committed in
trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful to: large scale if committed against three (3) or more
(a)   knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to be persons, individually or as a group;
used any house, building or establishment for (d)   When the offender is an ascendant, parent,
the purpose of promoting trafficking in persons; sibling, guardian or a person who exercises
(b)   produce, print and issue or distribute unissued, authority over the trafficked person or when the
tampered or fake counseling certificates, offense is committed by a public officer or
registration stickers and certificates of any employee;
government agency which issues these (e)   When the trafficked person is recruited to engage
certificates and stickers as proof of compliance in prostitution with any member of the military or
with government regulatory and pre-departure law enforcement agencies;
requirements for the purpose of promoting (f)   When the offender is a member of the military or
trafficking in persons; law enforcement agencies; and
(c)   advertise, publish, print, broadcast or distribute, (g)   When by reason or on occasion of the act of
or cause the advertisement, publication, printing, trafficking in persons, the offended party dies,
broadcasting or distribution by any means, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is afflicted
including the use of information technology and with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or the
the internet, of any brochure, flyer, or any Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
propaganda material that promotes trafficking in
persons;
(d)   assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud for purposes of facilitating the acquisition
of clearances and necessary exit documents from
government agencies that are mandated to
provide pre-departure registration and services
for departing persons for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
(e)   facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of
persons from/to the country at international and
local airports, territorial boundaries and seaports
who are in possession of unissued, tampered or
fraudulent travel documents for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
(f)   confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport,
travel documents, or personal documents or
belongings of trafficked persons in furtherance of
trafficking or to prevent them from leaving the
country or seeking redress from the government
or appropriate agencies; and
(g)   knowingly benefit from, financial or otherwise, or
make use of, the labor or services of a person
held to a condition of involuntary servitude,
forced labor, or slavery.

Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. - The

following are considered as qualified trafficking:
 
Page 247 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
  Title X. Crimes against
Property
Chapter I: Robbery in General
1.   Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of Robbery
2.   Article 294 - With Violence or Intimidation of
Persons
3.   Article 295 - Robbery with Physical Injuries, in an
Uninhabited Place and by a Band
4.   Article 296 - Definition of a Band and Penalty
Incurred by the Members Thereof
5.   Article 297 - Attempted and Frustrated Robbery
with Homicide
6.   Article 298 - Execution of Deeds through
Violence or Intimidation
7.   Article 299 - Robbery in an Inhabited House or
Public Building or Edifice Devoted to Worship
8.   Article 300 - Robbery in an Uninhabited Place
and by a Band
9.   Article 302 - In an Uninhabited Place or Private
Building
10.   Article 303 - Robbery of Cereals, Fruits or
Firewood in an Inhabited Place or Private
Building
11.   Article 304 - Possession of Picklock or Similar
Tools
12.   Article 305 - False Keys
Chapter II: Brigandage
1.   Article 306 - Who Are Brigands
2.   Article 307 - Aiding and Abetting a Band of
Brigands
Chapter III: Theft
1.   Article 308 - Who Are Liable for Theft
2.   Article 309 – Penalties
3.   Article 310 - Qualified Theft
4.   Article 311 - Theft of the Property of the National
Library and National Museum
Chapter IV: Usurpation
1.   Article 312 - Occupation of Real Property or
Usurpation of Real Rights in Property
2.   Article 313 - Altering Boundaries or Landmarks
Chapter V: Culpable Insolvency
1.   Article 314 - Fraudulent Insolvency
Chapter VI: Swindling
1.   Article 315 – Estafa
2.   Article 316 - Other Forms of Swindling
3.   Article 317 - Swindling of a Minor
4.   Article 318 - Other Deceits
Page 248 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Chapter VII: Chattel mortgage
1.   Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or Pledge of
Mortgaged Property
Chapter VIII: Arson and other Crimes involving
Destruction
Chapter IX: Malicious mischief
1.   Article 327 - Who Are Responsible
2.   Article 328 - Special Cases of Malicious Mischief
3.   Article 329 - Other Mischiefs
4.   Article 330 - Damage and Obstruction to Means
of Communication
5.   Article 331 - Destroying or Damaging Statues,
Public Monuments or Paintings
Chapter X: Exemption from Criminal Liability
1.   Article 332 - Exemption from Criminal Liability in
Crimes Against Property
1.   Chapter I: Robbery in
General
a.   Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of
Robbery
Elements of Robbery in General
1.   That there is personal property belonging to
another;
2.   That there is unlawful taking of that property;
3.   That the taking is with intent to gain; and
4.   That there is violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things.
The property taken must be personal, if real
property/right is usurped the crime is usurpation (Art.
312).
Prohibitive articles may be the subject of robbery,
e.g., opium
From the moment the offender gains possession of
the object, even without the chance to dispose of the
same, the unlawful taking is complete.
“Taking” – depriving the offended party of
possession of the thing taken with the character of
permanency.
Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking.
It cannot be established by direct evidence, except in
case of confession.
It is not necessary that violence or intimidation is
present from the beginning. If the violence or
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

intimidation at any time before asportation is in Art. 263, or if the offender employs
complete, the taking of property is qualified to intimidation only.
robbery.
Violence against or
Use of force upon things
When is violence committed? intimidation of person
General rule: Violence or intimidation must be present The taking is robbery
BEFORE the taking of personal property is complete. only if force is used to:
1.   enter the building
Exception: When violence results in homicide, rape, 2.   break doors,
intentional mutilation, or any of the serious physical wardrobes, chests,
injuries penalized in par. 1 and 2 of Art. 263, the or any other kind of
taking of the personal property is robbery complexed locked or sealed
with any of those crimes under Art. 294, even if the The taking is always
furniture or
taking was already complete when violence was used robbery
receptacle inside
by the offender. the building; OR
3.   force them open
b.   Article 294 – Robbery with outside after taking
the same from the
Violence against or building (Art. 299 &
Intimidation of Persons 302)
Value of the thing taken
Acts punished under Art 294: is immaterial. The
1.   When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, penalty depends on: If committed in an
Homicide is committed. (Robbery with 1.   the result of the inhabited house, public
Homicide) violence used building, or edifice
2.   When the robbery is accompanied by Rape or (homicide, rape, devoted to religious
Intentional Mutilation or Arson. (Robbery with intentional worship, the penalty is
Rape, Robbery with Intentional Mutilation, mutilation, serious based on:
Robbery with Arson) physical injuries, less 1.   the value of the
3.   When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, serious or slight thing taken and
any of the Physical Injuries resulting in insanity, physical injuries 2.   whether or not the
imbecility, impotency, or blindness is inflicted. resulted) and offenders carry arms
4.   When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of 2.   the existence of
the Physical Injuries resulting in the loss of the intimidation only
use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or
the loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg
or the loss of the use of any such member, or The crime defined in this article is a special complex
incapacity for the work in which the injured crime.
person is theretofore habitually engaged is
inflicted. “On the occasion” and “by reason” mean that
5.   If the violence or intimidation employed in the homicide or serious physical injuries must be
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree committed in the course or because of the robbery.
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the
crime. The violence must be against the person, not upon
6.   When in the course of its execution, the offender the thing taken. It must be present before the taking
shall have inflicted upon any person not of personal property is complete.
responsible for the commission of the robbery
any of the Physical Injuries in consequence of “Homicide” is used in its generic sense, as to include
which the person injured becomes deformed or parricide and murder. Hence, there is no robbery with
loses any other member of his body or loses the murder. The crime is still robbery with homicide even
use thereof or becomes ill or incapacitatedfor the if, in the course of the robbery, the person killed was
performance of the work in which he is habitually another robber or a bystander.
engaged for labor for more than 90 days or the
person injured becomes ill or incapacitated for Even if the rape was committed in another place, it is
labor for more than 30 days. still robbery with rape. When the taking of personal
7.   If the violence employed by the offender does not property of a woman is an independent act following
cause any of the serious physical injuries defined defendant’s failure to consummate the rape, there
 
Page 249 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
are two distinct crimes committed: attempted rape
and theft. Additional rape committed on the same
occasion of robbery will not increase the penalty.
Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of
personal property grave coercion if there is violence
used (Art. 286).
If both violence/intimidation of persons (294) and
force upon things (299/302) co-exist, it will be
considered as violation of Art 294 because it is more
serious than in Art 299/302.
BUT when robbery is under Art 294 par 4 & 5 the
penalty is lower than in Art 299 so the complex crime
should be imputed for the higher penalty to be
imposed without sacrificing the principle that robbery
w/ violence against persons is more severe than that
w/ force upon things. [Napolis v. CA, G.R No. L-
28865 (1972)]
When the taking of the victim’s gun was to prevent
the victim from retaliating, then the crimes
committed are theft and homicide not robbery with
homicide.
These offenses are known as SPECIAL COMPLEX
CRIMES. Crimes defined under this article are the
following:
1.   Robbery with homicide
2.   Robbery with rape
3.   Robbery with intentional mutilation
4.   Robbery with arson
5.   Robbery with serious physical injuries
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE; (Absorption Theory
applied)
Attempted homicide or attempted murder committed
during or on the occasion of the robbery, as in this
case, is absorbed in the crime of Robbery with
Homicide which is a special complex crime that
remains fundamentally the same regardless of the
number of homicides or injuries committed in
connection with the robbery. [People v. Cabbab, Jr.,
G.R. No. 173479 (2007)]
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
If the intention of the accused was to rob, but rape
was committed even before the asportation, the
crime is the special complex crime of Robbery with
Rape. So long as the intent of the accused is to rob,
rape may be committed before, during or after the
robbery. But if the primary intent of the accused was
to rape and his taking away the belongings of the
victim was only a mere afterthought, two separate
felonies are committed: Rape and Theft or Robbery
depending upon the circumstances surrounding the
Page 250 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
unlawful taking. [People v. Naag, G.R. No. 1361394
(2001)]
c.   Article 295 - Robbery with
Physical Injuries, in an
Uninhabited Place and by a
Band
Robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons is qualified when it is committed:
1.   In an Uninhabited place, or
2.   By a Band, or
3.   By Attacking a moving train, street car, motor
vehicle, or airship, or
4.   By Entering the passengers’ compartments in a
train, or in any manner taking the passengers
thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances,
or
5.   On a Street, road, highway, or alley, AND the
intimidation is made with the use of Firearms
Here, the offender shall be punished by the maximum
periods of the proper penalties in Art. 294. The
penalty cannot be offset by a generic mitigating
circumstance.
The intimidation with the use of firearm qualifies only
robbery on a street, road, highway, or alley.
Any of these qualifying circumstances must be
alleged in the information and proved during the
trial.
d.   Article 296 – Robbery by a
Band
Outline of Art. 296 (Definition of a Band and
Penalty Incurred by the Members Thereof):
1.   When at least 4 armed malefactors take part in
the commission of a robbery, it is deemed
committed by a band.
2.   When any of the arms used in the commission of
robbery is not licensed, penalty upon all the
malefactors shall be the maximum of the
corresponding penalty provided by law, without
prejudice to the criminal liability for illegal
possession of such firearms.
3.   Any member of a band who was present at the
commission of a robbery by the band, shall be
punished as principal of any of the assaults
committed by the band, unless it be shown that
he attempted to prevent the crime.
 U.P. LAW BOC
Requisites for Liability for the acts of the other
members:
1.   Member of the band.
2.   Present at the commission of the robbery.
3.   Other members committed an assault.
4.   He did not attempt to prevent assault.
Conspiracy is presumed when robbery is by band.
When the robbery was not committed by a band, the
robber who did not take part in the assault by
another is not liable for that assault.
When the robbery was not by a band and homicide
was not determined by the accused when they
plotted the crime, the one who did not participate in
the killing is liable for robbery only. It is only when the
robbery is in band that all those present in the
commission of the robbery may be punished for any
of the assaults which any of its members might
commit.
But when there is conspiracy to commit homicide and
robbery, all the conspirators, even if less than 4
armed men, are liable for the special complex crime
of robbery with homicide.
Art 296 is not applicable to principal by inducement,
who was not present at the commission of the
robbery, if the agreement was only to commit
robbery.
The article speaks of more than 3 armed malefactors
who “takes part in the commission of the robbery”
and member of a band “who is present at the
commission of a robbery by a band.” Thus, a principal
by inducement, who did not go with the band at the
place of the commission of the robbery, is not liable
for robbery with homicide, but only for robbery in
band, there being no evidence that he gave
instructions to kill the victim or intended that this
should be done.
When there was conspiracy for robbery only but
homicide was also committed on the occasion
thereof, all members of the band are liable for
robbery with homicide.
Whenever homicide is committed as a consequence
of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who took
part in the commission of the robbery are also guilty
as principals in the crime of homicide unless it
appears that they endeavored to prevent the
homicide.
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
Proof of conspiracy is not essential to hold a member
of the band liable for robbery with homicide actually
committed by the other members of the band.
There is no crime as “robbery with homicide in band”.
Band is only ordinary aggravating circumstance in
robbery w/ homicide
In order for special aggravating circumstance of
unlicensed firearm to be appreciated, it is condition
sine qua non that offense charged be robbery by a
band under Art 295.
Pursuant to Art 295, circumstance of a band is
qualifying only in robbery under par 3, 4 & 5 of Art
294.
Hence, Art. 295 does not apply to robbery with
homicide, or robbery with rape, or robbery with
serious physical injuries under par. 1 of Art. 263.
Special aggravating circumstance of unlicensed
firearm is inapplicable to robbery w/ homicide, or
robbery with rape, or robbery with physical injuries,
committed by a band. [People v. Apduhan, G.R. No. L-
19491 (1968)]
e.   Article 297 - Attempted and
Frustrated Robbery with
Homicide
Elements:
1.   There is attempted or frustrated robbery
2.   A homicide is committed on the same occasion
“Homicide” includes multiple homicides, murder,
parricide, or even infanticide.
The penalty is the same, whether robbery is
attempted or frustrated.
Robbery with homicide and attempted or frustrated
robbery with homicide are special complex crimes,
not governed by Art. 48, but by the special provisions
of Arts. 294 & 297, respectively.
There is only one crime of attempted robbery with
homicide even if slight physical injuries were inflicted
on other persons on the occasion or by reason of the
robbery.
f.   Article 298 - Execution of
Deeds through Violence or
Intimidation
Page 251 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Elements:
1.   Offender has Intent to defraud another
2.   Offender Compels him to sign, execute, or deliver
any public instrument or document
3.   Compulsion is by means of violence or
intimidation.
If the violence resulted in the death of the person to
be defrauded, crime is robbery with homicide and
shall be penalized under Art 294 par. 1.
Art. 298 applies to private or commercial document,
but it does not apply if document is void.
When the offended party is under obligation to sign,
execute or deliver the document under the law, it is
not robbery but coercion.
By Force Upon Things
Robbery by the use of force upon things is committed
only when either:
1.   Offender entered a house or building by any of
the means specified in Art. 299 or Art. 302, or
2.   Even if there was no entrance by any of those
means, he broke a wardrobe, chest, or any other
kind of locked or closed or sealed furniture or
receptacle in the house or building, or he took it
away to be broken or forced open outside.
g.   Article 299 - Robbery in an
Inhabited House or Public
Building or Edifice Devoted to
Worship
Elements of robbery with force upon things under
SUBDIVISION (A):
1.   Offender entered
a.   An inhabited house
b.   Public building
c.   Edifice devoted to religious worship
2.   Entrance was effected by any of the following
means:
a.   Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress;
b.   By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or door
or window;
c.   By using False keys, picklocks or similar
tools; or
d.   By using any Fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority.
3.   That once inside the building, the offender took
personal property belonging to another with
intent to gain.
Page 252 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
There must be evidence that accused entered the
dwelling house or building by any of the means
enumerated in subdivision (a). In entering the
building, there must be the intent to take personal
property.
“Inhabited house” – any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons even
though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily
absent when the robbery is committed.
“Public building” – every building owned by the
Government or belonging to a private person but
used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.
Any of the four means described in subdivision (a)
must be resorted to enter a house or building, not to
get out otherwise it is only theft. The whole body of
the culprit must be inside the building to constitute
entering.
Illustration: If the culprit had entered the house
through an open door, and the owner, not knowing
that the culprit was inside, closed and locked the
door from the outside and left, and the culprit, after
taking personal property in the house, went out
through the window, it is only theft, not robbery.
“Breaking” – means entering the building. The force
used must be actual, as distinguished constructive
force.
“False keys” – genuine keys stolen from the owner
or any keys other than those intended for use in the
lock forcibly opened by the offender. The genuine key
must be stolen, not taken by force or with
intimidation, from the owner.
If false key is used to open wardrobe or locked
receptacle or drawer or inside door it is only theft.
Elements of robbery with force upon things under
SUBDIVISION (B) of Art. 299:
1.   Offender is inside a dwelling house, public
building, or edifice devoted to religious worship,
regardless of the circumstances under which he
entered it.
2.   Offender takes personal property belonging to
another, with intent to gain, under any of the
following circumstances:
a.   Breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any
other kind of locked or sealed furniture or
receptacle; or
b.   Taking such furniture or objects away to be
broken or forced open outside the place of
the robbery.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Entrance into the building by any of the means
mentioned in subdivision (a) is not required in
robbery under subdivision (b)
The term “door” in par. 1, subdivision (b) of Art. 299,
refers only to “doors, lids or opening sheets” of
furniture or other portable receptacles—not to inside
doors of house or building.
“Inhabited house” – any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons even
though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily
absent when the robbery is committed.
•   Even if the occupant was absent during the
robbery, the place is still inhabited if the place
was ordinarily inhabited and intended as a
dwelling.

Breaking the keyhole of the door of a wardrobe,
which is locked, is breaking a locked furniture.
It is theft if the locked or sealed receptacle is not
forced open in the building where it is kept or taken
from to be broken outside.
The penalty depends on the value of property taken
and on whether or not offender carries arm. Arms
carried must not be used to intimidate. Liability for
carrying arms is extended to all those who
participated in the robbery, including those without
arms.
The provision punishes more severely the robbery in a
house used as a dwelling than that committed in an
uninhabited place, because of the possibility that the
inhabitants in the former might suffer bodily harm
during the robbery.
“Public building” – every building owned by the
Government or belonging to a private person but
used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.
“Dependencies” – all interior courts, corrals,
warehouses, granaries or inclosed places contiguous
to the building or edifice, having an interior entrance
connected therewith, and which form part of the
whole (Art. 301, par. 2).
Requisites:
1.   Contiguous to the building;
2.   Interior entrance connected therewith;
3.   Form part of the whole.
Orchards and lands used for cultivation or production
are not included in the term “dependencies” (Art.
301, par. 3).

h.   Article 300 – Robbery in an j.   Article 302 – Robbery In an

Uninhabited Place and by a Uninhabited Place or Private
Band Building
Robbery in an inhabited house, public building or Elements:
edifice dedicated to religious worship is qualified 1.   Offender entered an uninhabited place or a
when committed by a band and located in an building which was not a dwelling house, not a
uninhabited place. public building, or not an edifice devoted to
religious worship.
See discussion on Art. 296 for definition of “band.” 2.   That any of the following circumstances was
present:
To qualify Robbery w/ To qualify Robbery w/ a.   Entrance was effected through an opening
force upon things (Art violence against or not intended for entrance or egress;
299) intimidation of persons b.   A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window
It must be committed in It must be committed in was broken
uninhabited place and by an uninhabited place or c.   Entrance was effected through the use of
a band (Art 300) by a band (Art. 295) false keys, picklocks or other similar tools;
d.   A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or
i.   Article 301 - What is an closed furniture or receptacle was broken; or
e.   A closed or sealed receptacle was removed,
inhabited House, Public even if the same be broken open elsewhere.
Building Dedicated to f.   With intent to gain, the offender took
therefrom personal property belonging to
Religious Worship and Their another.
Dependencies

 
Page 253 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

“Building” – includes any kind of structure used for
storage or safekeeping of personal property, such as
(a) freight car and (b) warehouse.
Entrance through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress is not necessary, if there is
breaking of wardrobe, chest, or sealed or closed
furniture or receptacle, or removal thereof to be
broken open elsewhere.
m.  Article 305 - False Keys
Deemed to include the following:
1.   Tools mentioned in Article 304;
2.   Genuine keys stolen from the owner;
3.   Any key other than those intended by the owner
for use in the lock forcibly opened by the
offender.

Breaking padlock is use of force upon things. 2.  C hapter II: Brigandage

Use of fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority is not covered under this article.
A receptacle is a container, which must be “closed” or
“sealed”.
Penalty is based only on value of property taken.
k.   Article 303 - Robbery of
Cereals, Fruits or Firewood in
an Uninhabited Place or
Private Building
In cases enumerated in Arts. 299 and 302, the
penalty is one degree lower when robbery consists in
the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood.
a.   Article 306 - Who Are
Brigands
Elements of Brigandage:
1.   There be at least 4 armed persons
2.   They formed a band of robbers
3.   The purpose is any of the following:
a.   To commit robbery in the highway; or
b.   To kidnap for the purpose of extortion or to
obtain ransom; or
c.   To attain by means of force and violence any
other purpose.
Presumption of law as to brigandage: All are
presumed highway robbers or brigands, if any of
them carries unlicensed firearm. The arms carried
may be any deadly weapon.

Cereals – seedlings which are the immediate The main object of the law is to prevent the formation
product of the soil. The palay must be kept by the of band of robbers.
owner as “seedling” or taken for that purpose by the
robbers. The term “highway” includes city streets.

l.   Article 304 - Possession of The following must be proved:

Picklock or Similar Tools 1.   Organization of more than 3 armed persons
forming a band of robbers
Elements:
2.   Purpose of the band is any of those enumerated
1.   Offender has in his possession picklocks or in Art. 306.
similar tools; 3.   That they went upon the highway or roamed
2.   Such picklock or similar tools are especially upon the country for that purpose.
adopted to the commission of robbery; 4.   That the accused is a member of such band.
3.   Offender does not have lawful cause for such
possession. Brigandage Robbery in Band
Purpose 1.   Commit robbery
Possession of such tools, without lawful cause, is in a highway
punished. Actual use is not necessary. Since picking 2.   Kidnap to extort
Commit robbery,
of locks is one way to gain entrance to commit or get ransom
and not
robbery, a picklock is per se specially adapted to the 3.   Any other
necessarily in a
commission of robbery. [People v Lopez, G.R. No. L- purpose to be
highway
18766 (1965)] achieved by
means of force or
If the person who makes such tools is a locksmith, the violence
penalty is higher. Proof Mere formation of a It is necessary to
band for any of the prove that the
 
Page 254 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
above purposes is band actually
sufficient. There is no committed the
requirement that the robbery.
brigands Conspiracy to
consummate the commit robbery is
crime. not punishable.
b.   Article 307 - Aiding and
Abetting a Band of Brigands
Elements:
1.   There is a band of brigands
2.   Offender knows the band to be of brigands
3.   Offender does any of the following acts:
a.   He in any manner aids, abets or protects
such band of brigands; or
b.   He gives them information of the
movements of the police or other peace
officers; or
c.   He acquires or receives the property taken by
such brigands.
It is presumed that the person performing any of the
acts provided in this article has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.
Any person who aids or protects highway robbers or
abets the commission of highway robbery or
brigandage shall be considered as an accomplice.
3.  Chapter III: Theft
a.   Article 308 - Who Are Liable
for Theft
Elements:
1.   Taking of personal property
2.   Personal property belongs to another
3.   Taking was done with intent to gain.
4.   Taking was wiithout the consent of the owner.
5.   Accomplished without the use of violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon
things.
Persons liable:
1.   Those who, with intent to gain, without violence
against or intimidation of persons nor force upon
things, take personal property, of another
without the latter’s consent.
2.   Those who, having found lost property, fail to
deliver the same to the local authorities or to its
owner.
3.   Those who, after having maliciously damaged
the property of another, remove or make use of
Page 255 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
the fruits or object of the damage caused by
them.
4.   Those who enter an inclosed estate or field where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
and, without the consent of its owner, hunt or
fish upon the same or gather fruits, cereals, or
other forest or farm products.
The theft is consummated & taking completed once
the culprit is able to place the thing taken under his
control, and in such a situation that he could dispose
of it at once.
In accordance with the definition in Art 308, there is
no frustrated theft. The offender has either complete
control of the property (consummated) or without
(attempted). Intent to gain is presumed from the
unlawful taking of personal property belonging to
another. [Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188
(2007)]
If a person takes property of another, believing it to
be his own, presumption of intent to gain is rebutted.
Hence, he is not guilty of theft.
If one takes personal property openly and avowedly
under claim of title made in good faith, he is not
guilty of theft even though claim of ownership is later
found to be untenable.
If possession was only material or physical, the crime
is THEFT. If possession was juridical, crime is
ESTAFA.
Selling share of a partner or co-owner is not theft.
Actual or real gain is not necessary in theft.
The consent contemplated in this article refers to
consent freely given, and not mere lack of opposition
by owner of the property taken.
It is not robbery when violence is for a reason entirely
foreign to the fact of taking.
Gulinao shot Dr. Chua and left. Then he went back &
took Dr. Chua’s diamond ring. The crime was Theft
and not robbery. Circumstances show that the taking
was merely an afterthought. Violence used in killing
Dr. Chua had no bearing on the taking of the ring.
[People v. Gulinao, G.R. Nos. 82264-66 (1989)]
Properties were taken after accused has already
carried out his primary criminal intent of killing the
victim. Considering that the victim was already
heavily wounded when his properties were taken,
there was no need to employ violence against or
intimidation upon his person. Hence, accused can
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
only be held guilty of the separate offense of theft.
[People v. Basao, G.R. No. 128286 (1999)]
One in possession of part of recently stolen property
is presumed to be thief of all.
“Lost property” – embraces loss by stealing or by act
of the owner or by a person other than the owner, or
through some casual occurrence.
It is necessary to prove the following in order to
establish theft by failure to deliver or return lost
property:
1.   Time of the seizure of the thing
2.   It was a lost property belonging to another; and
3.   That the accused having had the opportunity to
return or deliver the lost property to its owner or
to the local authorities, refrained from doing so.
The law does not require knowledge of the owner of
the property.
Elements of hunting, fishing or gathering fruits,
etc., in enclosed estate:
1.   That there is an enclosed estate or a field, where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
2.   Offender enters the same
3.   Offender hunts or fishes upon the same or
gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
products in the estate or field; and
4.   That the hunting or fishing or gathering of
products is without the consent of the owner.
Corpus Delicti
To be caught in possession of the stolen property is
not an element of the corpus delicti in theft. Corpus
delicti means the “body or substance of the crime,
and, in its primary sense, refers to the fact that the
crime has been actually committed.”
In theft, corpus delicti has two elements, namely:
(1)   that the property was lost by the owner, and
(2)   that it was lost by felonious taking. [Gan v.
People, G.R. No. 165884 (2007)]
Whether snatching is robbery or theft
It depends on whether the offender employed
violence or intimidation upon persons, or force upon
things.
Acampado (the victim) herself merely testified that
Concepcion (the accused) snatched her shoulder bag
which was hanging on her left shoulder. Acampado
did not say that Concepcion used violence,
intimidation or force in snatching her shoulder bag.
Given the facts, Concepcion’s snatching of
Acampado’s shoulder bag constitutes the crime of
Page 256 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
theft, not robbery. [People v. Concepcion, G.R. No.
200922 (2012)]
b.   Article 309 – Penalties
The basis of the penalty in theft is
1.   the value of the thing stolen, or
2.   the value and nature of the property taken, or
3.   the circumstances that impelled the culprit to
commit the crime.
If there is no evidence of the value of the property
stolen, the court should impose the minimum penalty
corresponding to theft involving the value of P5.00.
The court may also take judicial notice of its value in
the proper cases.
c.   Article 310 - Qualified Theft
Theft is qualified if:
1.   Committed by a domestic servant
2.   Committed with grave abuse of confidence
3.   The property stolen is
a.   motor vehicle
b.   mail matter, or
c.   large cattle
4.   The property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of a plantation
5.   The property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond
or fishery
6.   The property is taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.
The penalty for qualified theft is 2 degrees higher.
Theft by domestic servant is always qualified. There is
no need to prove grave abuse of confidence.
The abuse of confidence must be grave. There must
be allegation in the information and proof of a
relation, by reason of dependence, guardianship or
vigilance, between the accused and the offended
party that has created a high degree of confidence
between them, which the accused abused.
Theft of any material, spare part, product or article by
employees and laborers is heavily punished under PD
133.
“Motor vehicle” - all vehicles propelled by power,
other than muscular power. Theft of motor vehicle
may now fall under the Anti-Carnapping law.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
When the purpose of taking the car is to destroy it by
burning it, the crime is arson.
If a private individual took a letter containing postal
money order, it is qualified theft. If it was the
postmaster, to whom the letter was delivered, the
crime would be infidelity in the custody of
documents.
Regarding the theft of coconuts and fish, what
matters is not the execution, but the location where it
is taken. It should be in the plantation or in the
fishpond.
PD 1612: ANTI-FENCING LAW
Fencing – The act of any person who, with intent to
gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive,
keep, acquire, conceal, sell, or dispose of, or shall buy
and sell or in any other manner deal in any article,
item, object, or anything of value which he knows, or
should be known to him, to have been derived from
the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
Elements:
1.   Robbery or theft has been committed.
2.   The accused, who is not a principal or accomplice
in the crime of robbery or theft, buys, receives,
possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or
disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner
deals in any article, item, object, or anything of
value, which has been derived from the proceeds
of the said crime.
3.   The accused knows or should have known that
the said article, item, object or anything of value
has been derived from the proceeds of the crime
of robbery or theft.
4.   There is, on the part of the accused, intent to
gain for himself or another.
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or
anything of value which has been the subject of
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing. [People v. Dizon-Pamintuan, G.R. No. 111426
(1994)]
Robbery/theft and fencing are separate and distinct
offenses.
"Fence" – includes any person, firm, association,
corporation or partnership or other organization
who/which commits the act of fencing.
Presumption of Fencing
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or
anything of value which has been the subject of
Page 257 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing.
Exception: With Clearance or Permit to Sell
Section 6. Clearance/Permit to Sell/Used Second
Hand Articles. For purposes of this Act, all stores,
establishments or entities dealing in the buy and sell
of any good, article, item, object or anything of value
obtained from an unlicensed dealer or supplier
thereof, shall before offering the same for sale to the
public, secure the necessary clearance or permit from
the station commander of the Integrated National
Police in the town or city where such store,
establishment or entity is located. The Chief of
Constabulary/Director General, Integrated National
Police shall promulgate such rules and regulations to
carry out the provisions of this section. Any person
who fails to secure the clearance or permit required
by this section or who violates any of the provisions of
the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder
shall upon conviction be punished as a fence.
RA 6539: ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT
Registration
Section 3. Registration of motor vehicle engine,
engine block and chassis. Within one year after the
approval of this Act, every owner or possessor of
unregistered motor vehicle or parts thereof in knock
down condition shall register with the Land
Transportation Commission the motor vehicle engine,
engine block and chassis in his name or in the name
of the real owner who shall be readily available to
answer any claim over the registered motor vehicle
engine, engine block or chassis. Thereafter, all motor
vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis not
registered with the Land Transportation Commission
shall be considered as untaxed importation or
coming from an illegal source or carnapped, and
shall be confiscated in favor of the Government.
All owners of motor vehicles in all cities and
municipalities are required to register their cars with
the local police without paying any charges.
Section 5. Registration of sale, transfer, conveyance,
substitution or replacement of a motor vehicle engine,
engine block or chassis. Every sale, transfer,
conveyance, substitution or replacement of a motor
vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of a motor
vehicle shall be registered with the Land
Transportation Commission. Motor vehicles
assembled and rebuilt or repaired by replacement
with motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and
chassis not registered with the Land Transportation
Commission shall not be issued certificates of
registration and shall be considered as untaxed
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
imported motor vehicles or motor vehicles carnapped
or proceeding from illegal sources.
Section 6.Original Registration of motor vehicles.
Any person seeking the original registration of a
motor vehicle, whether that motor vehicle is newly
assembled or rebuilt or acquired from a registered
owner, shall within one week after the completion of
the assembly or rebuilding job or the acquisition
thereof from the registered owner, apply to the
Philippine Constabulary for clearance of the motor
vehicle for registration with the Land Transportation
Commission. The Philippine Constabulary shall, upon
receipt of the application, verify if the motor vehicle
or its numbered parts are in the list of carnapped
motor vehicles or stolen motor vehicle parts. If the
motor vehicle or any of its numbered parts is not in
that list, the Philippine Constabulary shall forthwith
issue a certificate of clearance. Upon presentation of
the certificate of clearance from the Philippine
Constabulary and after verification of the registration
of the motor vehicle engine, engine block and chassis
in the permanent registry of motor vehicle engines,
engine blocks and chassis, the Land Transportation
Commission shall register the motor vehicle in
accordance with existing laws, rules and regulations.
Who are Liable
Duty of Collector of Customs
Section 7.Duty of Collector of Customs to report
arrival of imported motor vehicle, etc. The Collector
of Customs of a principal port of entry where an
imported motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, engine
block chassis or body is unloaded, shall, within seven
days after the arrival of the imported motor vehicle or
any of its parts enumerated herein, make a report of
the shipment to the Land Transportation
Commission, specifying the make, type and serial
numbers, if any, of the motor vehicle engine, engine
block and chassis or body, and stating the names and
addresses of the owner or consignee thereof. If the
motor vehicle engine, engine block, chassis or body
does not bear any serial number, the Collector of
Customs concerned shall hold the motor vehicle
engine, engine block, chassis or body until it is
numbered by the Land Transportation Commission.
Duty of Importers Distributors and Sellers
Section 8. Duty of importers, distributors and sellers
of motor vehicles to keep record of stocks. Any person
engaged in the importation, distribution, and buying
and selling of motor vehicles, motor vehicle engines,
engine blocks, chassis or body, shall keep a
permanent record of his stocks, stating therein their
type, make and serial numbers, and the names and
addresses of the persons from whom they were
acquired and the names and addresses of the
Page 258 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
persons to whom they were sold, and shall render an
accurate monthly report of his transactions in motor
vehicles to the Land Transportation Commission.
Clearance and Permit
Section 10. Clearance and permit required for
assembly or rebuilding of motor vehicles. Any person
who shall undertake to assemble or rebuild or cause
the assembly or rebuilding of a motor vehicle shall
first secure a certificate of clearance from the
Philippine Constabulary: Provided, That no such
permit shall be issued unless the applicant shall
present a statement under oath containing the type,
make and serial numbers of the engine, chassis and
body, if any, and the complete list of the spare parts
of the motor vehicle to be assembled or rebuilt
together with the names and addresses of the
sources thereof.
In the case of motor vehicle engines to be mounted
on motor boats, motor bancas and other light water
vessels, the applicant shall secure a permit from the
Philippine Coast Guard, which office shall in turn
furnish the Land Transportation Commission the
pertinent data concerning the motor vehicle engines
including their type, make and serial numbers.
Definition of terms/Punishable Acts
Carnapping – is the taking, with intent to gain, of a
motor vehicle belonging to another without the
latter's consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon
things.
Motor vehicle –is any vehicle propelled by any power
other than muscular power using the public
highways, but excepting road rollers, trolley cars,
street-sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers,
graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if not
used on public highways, vehicles, which run only on
rails or tracks, and tractors, trailers and traction
engines of all kinds used exclusively for agricultural
purposes. Trailers having any number of wheels,
when propelled or intended to be propelled by
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as
separate motor vehicle with no power rating.
Defacing or tampering with a serial number – is the
erasing, scratching, altering or changing of the
original factory-inscribed serial number on the motor
vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of any motor
vehicle. Whenever any motor vehicle is found to have
a serial number on its motor engine, engine block or
chassis which is different from that which is listed in
the records of the Bureau of Customs for motor
vehicles imported into the Philippines, that motor
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

vehicle shall be considered to have a defaced or
tampered with serial number.
Section 12. Defacing or tampering with serial
numbers of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and
chassis. It shall be unlawful for any person to deface
or otherwise tamper with the original or registered
serial number of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks
and chassis.
Section 13. Penal Provisions. Any person who violates
any provisions of this Act shall be punished with
imprisonment for not less than two years nor more
than six years and a fine equal in amount to the
acquisition cost of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle
engine or any other part involved in the violation:
Provided, That if the person violating any provision of
this Act is a juridical person, the penalty herein
provided shall be imposed on its president or
secretary and/or members of the board of directors
or any of its officers and employees who may have
directly participated in the violation.
Theft of property of the National Museum and
National Library has a fixed penalty (arresto mayor of
fine of P200-500 or both) regardless of the
property's value. But if it was with grave abuse of
confidence, the penalty for qualified theft shall be
imposed.
4.  C hapter IV: Usurpation
a.   Article 312 - Occupation of
Real Property or Usurpation of
Real Rights in Property
Acts punishable under Art. 312:
1.   Taking possession of any real property belonging
to another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons
2.   Usurping any real rights in property belonging to
another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons.

Any government official or employee who directly Elements:

commits the unlawful acts defined in this Act or is 1.   Offender takes possession of any real property
guilty of gross negligence of duty or connives with or OR usurps any real rights in property
permits the commission of any of the said unlawful 2.   Real property or real rights belong to another
act shall, in addition to the penalty prescribed in the 3.   Violence against or intimidation of persons is
preceding paragraph, be dismissed from the service used by the offender in occupying real property
with prejudice to his reinstatement and with or usurping real rights in property.
disqualification from voting or being voted for in any 4.   There is intent to gain.
election and from appointment to any public office.
If no violence or intimidation only civil liability exists.
Violence or intimidation must be the means used in
Penalty occupying real property or in usurping real rights.
Section 14. Penalty for Carnapping. Any person who
is found guilty of carnapping, as this term is defined Art. 312 does not apply when the violence or
in Section two of this Act, shall, irrespective of the intimidation took place subsequent to the entry into
value of motor vehicle taken, be punished by the property.
imprisonment for not less than fourteen years and
eight months and not more than seventeen years and Art. 312 does not apply to a case of open defiance of
four months, when the carnapping is committed the writ of execution issued in the forcible entry case.
without violence or intimidation of persons, or force
upon things; and by imprisonment for not less than Criminal action for usurpation of real property is not a
seventeen years and four months and not more than bar to civil action for forcible entry.
thirty years, when the carnapping is committed by
means of violence against or intimidation of any RA 947 punishes entering or occupying public
person, or force upon things; and the penalty of life agricultural land including lands granted to private
imprisonment to death shall be imposed when the individuals.
owner, driver or occupant of the carnapped motor
vehicle is killed in the commission of the carnapping. Usurpation Theft or Robbery
Act Occupation or Taking or
Usurpation asportation
d.   Article 311 - Theft of the What is Real property or Personal
Property of the National Taken real right property
Library and National Museum Intent To gain To gain

 
Page 259 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

b.   Article 313 - Altering

Boundaries or Landmarks a.   Article 315 - Estafa

Elements: Elements of Estafa in General:

1.   There are boundary marks or monuments of 1.   The accused defrauded another
towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks a.   by abuse of confidence; or
intended to designate the boundaries of the b.   by means of deceit; and
same. 2.   The damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
2.   The offender alters said boundary marks. estimation is caused to the offended party or
third person.
Provision does not require intent to gain.
WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF
The word “alter” may include: CONFIDENCE (315 PAR. 1(A) (B) (C))
1.   destruction of stone monument
2.   taking it to another place Par 1(a): Altering substance, quantity or quality of
3.   removing a fence object subject of obligation to deliver

Elements of estafa with unfaithfulness

5.  C hapter V: Culpable 1.   Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver
something of value.
Insolvency 2.   He alters its substance, quantity, or quality
3.   Damage or prejudice is caused to another
a.   Art. 314 - Fraudulent
Insolvency Deceit is NOT an essential element of estafa with
abuse of confidence.
Elements:
1.   The offender is a debtor, and he has obligations Damage or prejudice must be capable of estimation,
due and payable because it is the basis of the penalty.
2.   He absconds with his property
3.   There is prejudice to his creditors Delivery of anything of value must be “by virtue of an
onerous obligation to do so”.
Actual prejudice, not intention alone, is required.
Even if the debtor disposes of his property, unless it is It is not estafa if the thing delivered is not acceptable
shown that it has actually prejudiced his creditor, to the complainant when there is no agreement as to
conviction will not lie. its quality.

Fraudulent concealment of property is not sufficient if Estafa may arise even if thing delivered is not subject
the debtor has some property with which to satisfy his of lawful commerce, such as opium.
obligation.
Par.1(b): Misappropriation and Conversion
“Abscond” – does not require that the debtor should
depart and physically conceal his property. Real Elements of estafa with abuse of confidence
property could be the subject matter of Art. 314. 1.   Money, goods, or other personal property is
received by the offender in trust, or in
The person prejudiced must be creditor of the commission, or for administration, or under any
offender. other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of, or to return, the same;
Art. 314 Insolvency Law
2.   There is misappropriation or conversion of such
No need for insolvency Crime should be
money or property by the offender, or denial on
proceedings. committed after the
his part of such receipt;
institution of insolvency
3.   Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is
No need to be adjudged proceedings
to the prejudice of another; and
bankrupt or insolvent
4.   There is a demand made by the offended party to
the offender
6.  C hapter VI: Swindling and
Other Deceits
 
Page 260 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The 4th element is not necessary when there is
evidence of misappropriation of goods by the
defendant.
Check is included in the word “money”.
Money, goods or other personal property must be
received by the offender under certain kinds of
transaction transferring juridical possession to him.
The offender acquires both physical possession and
juridical possession when the thing is received by the
offender from the offended party
1.   in trust, or
2.   on commission, or
3.   for administration,
“Juridical possession” – means a possession which
gives the transferee a right over the thing which he
may invoke even as against the owner.
When the delivery of a chattel does not transfer
juridical possession/title, it is presumed that the
possession/title of the thing remain w/ owner.
Failure to turn over to the bank the proceeds of sale
of goods covered by trust receipts is estafa.
The phrase “or under any obligation involving the
duty to make delivery of, or to return the same”,
includes quasi-contracts and certain contracts of
bailment. The obligation to return the thing must be
contractual but without transferring to accused
ownership of the thing.
When ownership is transferred to recipient, his failure
to return it results in civil liability only.
Applicable Civil Code provisions:
1.   Art. 1477. The ownership of the thing sold shall
be transferred to the vendee upon actual or
constructive delivery thereof.
2.   Art. 1482. Whenever earnest money is given in a
contract of sale, it shall be considered as part of
the price and as proof of the perfection of the
contract.
In estafa with abuse of confidence under par. (b),
subdivision 1 of Art. 315, the thing received must be
returned if there is an obligation to return it.
If no obligation to return there is only civil liability.
No estafa when:
1.   Transaction sale fails. There is no estafa if the
accused refused to return the advance payment.
Page 261 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   The money or personal property received by
accused is not to be used for a particular purpose
or to be returned.
3.   Thing received under a contract of sale on credit
Payment by students to the school for the value of
materials broken is not mere deposit.
Novation of contract of agency to one of sale, or to
one of loan, relieves defendant from incipient
criminal liability under the first contract.
He exerted all efforts to retrieve dump truck, albeit
belatedly and to no avail. His ineptitude should not
be confused with criminal intent. Criminal intent is
required for the conviction of estafa. Earnest effort to
comply with obligation is a defense against estafa.
[Manahan, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 111656 (1996)]
3 Ways of Committing Estafa With Abuse Of
Confidence Under Art. 315 Par. (B):
1.   Misappropriating the thing received.
2.   Converting the thing received.
3.   Denying that the thing was received.
“Misappropriating” – means to own, to take
something for one's own benefit.
“Converting” – Using or disposing of another’s
property as if it were one’s own.
“Conversion” – presupposes that the thing has been
devoted to a purpose or use different from that
agreed upon.
The fact that an agent sold the thing received on
commission for a lower price than the one fixed, does
not constitute estafa [US v. Torres, 11 Phil. Rep. 606].
The law does not distinguish between temporary and
permanent misappropriations.
No estafa under Art. 315 par (b) when there is neither
misappropriation nor conversion.
Right of agent to deduct commission from amounts
1.   If agent is authorized to retain his commission
out of the amounts he collected, there is no
estafa.
2.   Otherwise he is guilty of estafa, because his
right to commission does not make the agent a
co-owner of money
3rd element of estafa with abuse of confidence is that
the conversion, or denial by offender resulted in the
prejudice of the offended party.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

“To the prejudice of another” – not necessarily of the
owner of the property.
General rule: Partners are not liable for estafa of
money or property received for the partnership when
the business commenced and profits accrued. Failure
of partner to account for partnership funds may give
rise to civil obligation only, not estafa.
Test to distinguish theft from estafa:
In theft, upon the delivery of the thing to the offender,
the owner expects a return of the thing to him.
General rule: When the owner does not expect the
immediate return of the thing he delivered to the
accused, the misappropriation of the same is estafa.

Exception: When a partner misappropriates the share Exception: When the offender received the thing from
of another partner in the profits, the act constitutes the offended party, with the obligation to deliver it to
estafa. a third person and, instead of doing so,
misappropriated it to the prejudice of the owner, the
A co-owner is not liable for estafa, but he is liable if, crime committed is qualified theft.
after the termination of the co-ownership, he
misappropriates the thing which has become the Sale of thing received to be pledged for owner is
exclusive property of the other. theft, when the intent to appropriate existed at the
time it was received.
Estafa with abuse of
Theft
confidence Estafa with abuse of
Malversation
Only with physical / confidence
With juridical possession
material possession of Entrusted with funds or
of thing misappropriated
thing misappropriated property
Offender receives the Both are continuing offenses
Offender takes the thing
thing from the victim Funds or property are
always private
But when the money or property had been received Offender is a private Offender is a public
by a partner for specific purpose and he individual or public officer accountable for
misappropriated it, there is estafa. officer not accountable public funds or property
for public funds or
Under the 4th element of estafa with abuse of property
confidence demand may be required. Committed by Committed by
misappropriating, misappropriating, or thru
In estafa by means of deceit, demand is not needed, converting or denying abandonment or
because the offender obtains the thing wrongfully having received money, negligence, letting other
from the start. In estafa with abuse of confidence, the other personal property person to take the public
offender receives the thing under a lawful funds or property
transaction. There is no estafa There can be
through negligence. malversation through
Demand is not required by law, but it may be abandonment or
necessary, because failure to account upon demand negligence.
is circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.
Presumption arises only when the explanation of the When in prosecution for malversation the public
accused is absolutely devoid of merit. officer is acquitted, the private individual in
conspiracy w/ him may be held liable for estafa,
The mere failure to return the thing received for depending on the nature of the funds.
safekeeping or under any other obligation w/ the
duty to return the same or deliver the value thereof to Misappropriation of firearms received by a police
the owner could only give rise to a civil action and 1.   ESTAFA: if it is not involved in the commission of
does not constitute the crime of estafa. a crime
2.   MALVERSATION: if it is involved in the
There is no estafa through negligence. commission of a crime.

The gravity of the crime of estafa is based on the

amount not returned before the institution of the
criminal action.

 
Page 262 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

ESTAFA THROUGH OTHER FRAUDULENT MEANS The element of damage or prejudice capable of
(315 PAR 3 (A) (B) (C)) pecuniary estimation may consist in:
1.   The offended party being deprived of his money
Par 3 (a): By inducing another, through deceit, to or property, as result of the fraud;
sign any document 2.   Disturbance in property right; or
3.   Temporary prejudice
Elements:
1.   Offender induced the offended party to sign a Payment subsequent to the commission of estafa
document. does not extinguish criminal liability or reduce the
2.   Deceit was eployed to make offended party sign penalty.
the document.
3.   Offended party personally signed the document. The crime of estafa is not obliterated by acceptance
4.   Prejudice was caused. of promissory note.

Offender must induce the offended party to sign the
document. If offended party is willing from the start
to sign the document, because the contents are
different from those which the offended told the
accused to state in the document, the crime is
falsification.
There can be no conviction for estafa in the absence
of proof that defendant made statements tending to
mislead complainant.
A private person who procures a loan by means of
deceit through a falsified public document of
mortgage, but paid loan within the period agreed
upon, is not guilty of estafa but only falsification of a
public document.
Accused cannot be convicted of estafa with abuse of
confidence if charged w/ estafa by means of deceit
P.D. 115 TRUST RECEIPTS LAW

Par.3 (b): By resorting to some fraudulent practice to Trust receipt

ensure success in a gambling game A trust receipt transaction is one where the entrustee
has the obligation to deliver to the entrustor the price
Par.3 (c): By removing, concealing or destroying any of the sale, or if the merchandise is not sold, to return
court record, office files, document or any other the merchandise to the entruster. There are,
papers therefore, two obligations in a trust receipt
transaction: the first refers to money received under
Elements: the obligation involving the duty to turn it over
1.   There are court record, office files, documents or (entregarla) to the owner of the merchandise sold,
any other papers. while the second refers to the merchandise received
2.   The offender removed, concealed or destroyed under the obligation to “return” it (devolvera) to the
any of them. owner.A violation of any of these undertakings
3.   The offender had Intent to defraud another. constitutes Estafa defined under Art. 315, par. 1(b) of
the RPC, as provided in Sec. 13 of PD 115. [Yang v.
If there is no malicious intent to defraud, the People, G.R. No. 195117 (2013)]
destruction of court record is malicious mischief.
Loan not a trust receipt transaction
Elements of deceit and abuse of confidence may co- Nonetheless, when both parties enter into an
exist. agreement knowing fully well that the return of the
goods subject of the trust receipt is not possible even
If there is neither deceit nor abuse of confidence, it is without any fault on the part of the trustee, it is not a
not estafa, even if there is damage. There is only civil trust receipt transaction as the only obligation
liability. actually agreed upon by the parties would be the
return of the proceeds of the sale transaction. This
Deceit through Infidelity in Custody of transaction becomes a mere loan. [Yang v. People,
Fraudulent Means Documents supra.]
Offender is a private
Offender is a public Who is liable
person OR a public
person entrusted with If the violation or offense is committed by a
person not entrusted w/
the documents corporation, partnership, association or other
documents
Intent to defraud is not juridical entities, the penalty provided for in this
There is intent to defraud Decree shall be imposed upon the directors, officers,
required
 
Page 263 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
employees or other officials or persons therein
responsible for the offense, without prejudice to the
civil liabilities arising from the criminal offense.[Sec
13 PD 115]
Par.1(c): Taking advantage of signature in blank
Elements:
1.   Paper with the signature of the offended party is
in blank.
2.   Offended party delivered it to the offender.
3.   Above the signature of the offended party a
document is written by the offender without
authority to do so.
4.   The document so written creates a liability of, or
causes damage to, the offended party or any
third person.
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES OR
FRAUDULENT ACTS (315 PAR. 2(A) (B) (C) (D) (E);
BP22):
Elements of estafa by means of deceit:
1.   There is a false pretense, fraudulent act or
fraudulent means.
2.   Such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent
means was made or executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud.
3.   Offended party relied on the false pretense,
fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he
was induced to part with his money or property
because of such
4.   As a result thereof, the offended party suffered
damage.
The acts must be fraudulent. Acts must be founded
on deceit, trick, or cheat, and such must be made
prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud.
In false pretenses the deceit consists in the use of
deceitful words, in fraudulent acts the deceit consists
principally in deceitful acts. The fraudulent acts must
be performed prior to or simultaneously with the
commission of the fraud.
The offender must be able to obtain something from
the offended party because of the fraudulent acts.
Knowledge of criminal intent of the principal is
essential to be convicted as an accomplice in estafa
through falsification of commercial document. There
must be knowing assistance in the execution of the
offense. [Abejuela v. People, G.R. No. 80130 (1991)]
In a tenant-landowner relationship, it was incumbent
upon the tenant to hold in trust and, eventually,
Page 264 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
account for the share in the harvest appertaining to
the landowner, failing which the tenant could be held
liable for misappropriation.
In People v. Vanzuela [G.R. No. 178266 (2008)], it was
ruled that share tenancy has been outlawed for being
contrary to public policy as early as 1963, with the
passage of R.A. 3844. What prevails today, under
R.A. 6657, is agricultural leasehold tenancy
relationship, and all instances of share tenancy have
been automatically converted into leasehold
tenancy. In such a relationship, the tenant’s
obligation is simply to pay rentals, not to deliver the
landowner’s share. Given this dispensation, the
petitioner’s allegation that the respondents
misappropriated the landowner’s share of the harvest
is untenable. Accordingly, the respondents cannot be
held liable under Article 315, paragraph 4, No. 1(b) of
the RPC.
It is well established in jurisprudence that a person
may be convicted of both illegal recruitment and
estafa. The reason, therefore, is not hard to
discern: illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum,
while estafa is malum in se. [Lapasaran v. People,
G.R. No. 179907 (2009)]
Par 2(a): Using fictitious name or false pretenses at
power, influence… or other similar deceits
Ways of committing the offense:
1.   By using fictitious name;
2.   By falsely pretending to possess:
a.   power,
b.   influence,
c.   qualifications,
d.   property,
e.   credit,
f.   agency,
g.   business or imaginary transactions;
3.   By means of other similar deceits.
For estafa under Art. 315 par. 2(a), it is indispensable
that the false statement or fraudulent representation
of the accused,
1.   be made prior to, or, at least simultaneously
with,
2.   the delivery of the thing by the complainant.
It is essential that such false statement or fraudulent
representation constitutes the cause or only motive
which induced the complainant to part with the
thing. If there be no such prior or simultaneous false
statement or fraudulent representation, any
subsequent act of the accused, however fraudulent
and suspicious it may appear, cannot serve as a basis
for prosecution for this class of estafa.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
A creditor who deceived his debtor is liable for estafa.
In estafa by means of deceit under Art. 315 2(a), there
must be evidence that the pretense of the accused is
false. Without such proof, criminal intent to deceive
cannot be inferred. Fraud must be proved with clear
and positive evidence.
Estafa through false pretenses made in writing is only
a simple crime of estafa, not a complex crime of
estafa through falsification.
Par 2(b): by altering the quality, fineness or weight of
anything pertaining to art or business
Par. 2(c): by pretending to have bribed any
government employee
Manipulation of scale is punished under the Revised
Administrative Code.
Person would ask money from another for the alleged
purpose of bribing a government employee but just
pocketed the money.
Par 2(d): By postdating a check or issuing a
bouncing check
Elements:
1.   Offender postdated a check, or issued a check in
payment of an obligation;
2.   Such postdating or issuing a check was done
when the offender had no funds in the bank, or
his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to
cover the amount of the check.
The check must be genuine, and not falsified.
The check must be postdated or for an obligation
contracted at the time of the issuance and delivery of
the check and not for pre-existing obligation.
Exception:
1.   When postdated checks are issued and intended
by the parties only as promissory notes
2.   When the check is issued by a guarantor
The accused must be able to obtain something from
the offended party by means of the check he issues
and delivers.
The mere fact that the drawer had insufficient or no
funds in the bank to cover the check at the time he
postdated or issued a check is sufficient to make him
liable for estafa.
Page 265 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
RA 4885 deleted the phrase “the offender knowing at
the time he had no funds in the bank”:
1.   The failure of the drawer to deposit the amount
needed to cover his check
2.   Within 3 days from receipt of notice of dishonor
of check for lack or insufficiency of funds
3.   Shall be prima facie evidence of deceit
constituting false pretense or fraudulent act.
Good faith is a defense in a charge of estafa by
postdating or issuing a check. One who got hold of a
check issued by another, knowing that the drawer
had no sufficient funds in the bank, and used the
same in the purchase of goods, is guilty of estafa.
[People v. Isleta, G.R. No. L-41873 (1935)]
PD 818, which increases the penalty for estafa
committed by means of bouncing checks, applies
only to estafa under par 2(d) of Art. 315, and does not
apply to other forms of estafa. [People v Villaraza,
G.R. No. L-426228 (1978)] Hence, the penalty
prescribed in PD 818, not the penalty provided for in
Art. 315, should be imposed when the estafa
committed is covered by par 2(d) of Art. 315.
Estafa by issuing a bad check is a continuing crime.
B.P. BLG. 22 BOUNCING CHECKS LAW
Sec. 1, Par. 1
Elements
1.   Making, drawing, and issuance of any check to
apply for account or for value
2.   Knowledge of the maker, drawer, or issuer that at
the time of issue he does not have sufficient
funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the
payment of the check in full upon its
presentment; and
3.   Subsequent dishonor of the check by the drawee
bank for insufficiency of funds or creditor
dishonor for the same reason had not the drawer,
without any valid cause, ordered the bank to stop
payment. [Campos v. People , G.R. No.
187401(2014)]
Sec. 1, Par. 2
Elements
1.   Making or drawing and issuing a checkhaving
sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank
2.   Failure to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a
credit to cover the full amount of the check if
presented within a period of ninety (90) days
from the date appearing thereon
3.   Check is dishonored by the drawee bank.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds
General rule: The making, drawing and issuance of a
check payment of which is refused by the drawee
because of insufficient funds in or credit with such
bank, when presented within ninety (90) days from
the date of the check, shall be prima facie evidence of
knowledge of such insufficiency of funds or credit.
Exception: Unless maker or drawer pays the holder
thereof the amount due thereon, or makes
arrangements for payment in full by the drawee of
such check within (5) banking days after receiving
notice that such check has not been paid by the
drawee.[Sec 2 B.P. Blg. 22]
Distinguished from Estafa under Art. 315 2(d)
with such drawee bank, such fact shall always be
explicitly stated in the notice of dishonor or refusal,”
a mere oral notice or demand to pay would appear to
be insufficient for conviction under the law. The Court
is convinced that both the spirit and letter of the
Bouncing Checks Law would require for the act to be
punished thereunder not only that the accused issued
a check that is dishonored, but that likewise the
accused has actually been notified in writing of the
fact of dishonor. [Cabrera v. CA, G.R. No. 150618
(2003)]
Double jeopardy does not apply because estafa in
RPC is a distinct crime from BP 22. Deceit and
damage are essential elements of RPC, which are not
required in BP 22. [Nierras vs Dacuycuy , supra.]

B.P. Blg. 22 Art. 315, par. 2 (d) b.   Article 316 - Other Forms of
Deceit and damage are Deceit and damage are
not essential elements required Swindling and Deceits
Mere issuance of a check
that is dishonored gives Par 1. By conveying, selling, encumbering, or
rise to the presumption mortgaging any real property, pretending to be the
of knowledge on the part owner of the same
No such presumption
of the drawer that he
issued the same without Elements:
sufficient funds and 1.   The thing is immovable, such as a parcel of land
hence punishable or a building.
Drawer of a dishonored 2.   Offender who is not the owner of said property
check may be convicted represents that he is the owner thereof.
Such circumstance 3.   Offender executed an act of ownership (selling,
even if he had issued the
negate criminal liability encumbering or mortgaging the real property).
same for a pre-existing
obligation 4.   The act was made to the prejudice of the owner
Crime against public or a third person.
interest as it does injury
Crime against property The thing disposed of must be real property. If it is
to the entire banking
system chattel, crime is Estafa.
Mala in se [Nierras v.
There must be existing real property.
Mala prohibita Dacuycuy, G.R. Nos. L-
59568-76(1990)]
Even if the deceit is practiced against the second
purchaser but damage is incurred by the first
Preference of imposition of fine
purchaser, there is violation of par.1 of Art. 316.
The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of sound
discretion, and taking into consideration the peculiar
Since the penalty is based on the “value of the
circumstances of each case, determine whether the
damage” there must be actual damage caused.
imposition of a fine alone would best serve the
interests of justice or whether forbearing to impose
Par. 2. By disposing of real property as free from
imprisonment would depreciate the seriousness of
encumbrance, although such encumbrance be not
the offense, work violence on the social order, or
recorded
otherwise be contrary to the imperatives of justice.
[A.C. NO. 13-2001 clarifying A.C. NO. 12-2000]
Elements:
1.   The thing disposed of is real property.
Notice of dishonor
2.   Offender knew that the real property was
While, indeed, Section 2 of B.P. Blg. 22 does not state
encumbered, whether the encumbrance is
that the notice of dishonor be in writing, taken in
recorded or not.
conjunction, however, with Section 3 of the law, i.e.,
"that where there are no sufficient funds in or credit
 
Page 266 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC
3.   There was express representation by the offender
that the real property is free from encumbrance.
4.   Act of disposing of the real property was made to
the damage of another.
Act constituting the offense is disposing of the real
property representing that it is free from
encumbrance.
“Dispose” – includes encumbering or mortgaging.
“Encumbrance” – includes every right or interest in
the land which exists in favor of third persons.
The offended party would not have granted the loan
had he known that the property was already
encumbered. When the loan had already been
granted when defendant offered the property as
security for the loan, Art. 316 par. 2 is not applicable.
Usurious loan with equitable mortgage is not an
encumbrance on the property.
If 3rd element not established, there is no crime.
There must be damage caused. It is not necessary
that act prejudice the owner of the land.
The omitted phrase “as free from encumbrance” in
par 2 of Art. 316 is the basis of the ruling that silence
as to such encumbrance does not involve a crime.
Par. 3. By wrongfully taking by the owner of his
personal property from its lawful possessor
Elements:
1.   Offender is the owner of personal property.
2.   Said property is in the lawful possession of
another.
3.   Offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful
possessor.
4.   Prejudice is thereby caused to the lawful
possessor or third person.
Offender must wrongfully take the personal property
from the lawful possessor. Wrongfully take does not
include the use of violence or intimidation.
If the thing is taken by means of violence, without
intent to gain, it is not estafa, but grave coercion.
If the owner took the personal property from its
lawful possessor without the latter’s knowledge and
later charged him with the value of the property, the
crime is theft. If there is intent to charge the bailee
with its value, the crime is robbery. [US v Albao, G.R.
No. L-9369 (1914)]
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
Par. 4. By executing any fictitious contract to the
prejudice of another
Elements:
1.   Offender executes a contract
2.   Contract is fictitious
3.   Prejudice is caused.
Illustration: A person who simulates a conveyance of
his property to another to defraud his creditors. If the
conveyance is real and not simulated, the crime is
fraudulent insolvency.
Par. 5. By accepting any compensation for services
not rendered or for labor not performed
Elements:
1.   Offender accepts any compensation for services
or labor
2.   He did not render any service or perform any
labor
There must be fraud. Otherwise, it will only be solutio
indebiti, with civil obligation to return the wrong
payment.
If the money in payment of a debt was delivered to a
wrong person, Art. 316 par 5 is not applicable.
In case the person who received it later refused or
failed to return it to the owner of the money, Art. 315
subdivision 1(b) is applicable.
Par. 6. By selling, mortgaging or encumbering real
property or properties with which the offender
guaranteed the fulfilment of his obligation as surety
Elements:
1.   Offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal
or civil action.
2.   He guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation
with his real property or properties.
3.   He sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner
encumbers said real property.
4.   That such sale, mortgage, or encumbrance is
a.   Without express authority from the court, or
b.   Made before the cancellation of his bond, or
c.   Before being relieved from the obligation
contracted by him.
There must be damage caused under Art. 316.
Page 267 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
ESTAFA UNDER PD 1689: INCREASING THE
PENALTY FOR CERTAIN FORMS OF SWINDLING
OR ESTAFA
Syndicated estafa
1.   Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined by
Art. 315 and 316 RPC was committed;
2.   The swindling is committed by a syndicate
consisting of five or more persons formed with
the intention of carrying the unlawful or illegal
act/transaction/enterprise/scheme; and
3.   The defraudation results in the misappropriation
of money contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang
nayon(s)”, or farmers association, or of funds
solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public.
Penalty: Life imprisonment to death
Large-scale Estafa
1.   Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined by
Art. 315 and 316 RPC was committed;
2.   The swindling is NOT committed by a syndicate
as defined above;
3.   The defraudation results in the misappropriation
of money contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang
nayon(s)”, or farmers association, or of funds
solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public; and
4.   Amount of fraud exceeds Php. 100,000
Penalty: Reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua
c.   Article 317 - Swindling of a
Minor
Elements:
1.   Offender takes advantage of the inexperience or
emotions or feelings of a minor.
2.   He induces such minor
a.   to Assume an obligation, or
b.   to Give release, or
c.   to Execute a transfer of any property right.
3.   That the consideration is
a.   some loan of money,
b.   Credit, or
c.   Other personal property.
4.   That the transaction is to the detriment of such
minor.
Real property is not included because only money,
credit and personal property are enumerated, and
because a minor cannot convey real property without
judicial authority.
d.   Article 318 - Other Deceits
Page 268 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Acts punished:
1.   By defrauding or damaging another by any other
deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles.
2.   By interpreting dreams, by making forecasts, by
telling fortunes, or by taking advantage of the
credulity of the public in any other manner, for
profit or gain.
Any other kind of conceivable deceit may fall under
this article. As in other cases of estafa, damage to the
offended party is required.
The deceits in this article include false pretenses and
fraudulent acts.
Chattel Mortgage
The object of the Chattel Mortgage Law is to give the
necessary sanction to the statute, so that mortgage
debtors may be deterred from violating its provisions
and mortgage creditors may be protected against
loss or inconvenience from wrongful removal or sale
of mortgaged property.
7.  Chapter VII: Chattel
Mortgage
a.   Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or
Pledge of Mortgaged Property
Acts punishable under Art. 319:
1.   By knowingly removing any personal property
mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law to
any province or city other than the one in which it
was located at the time of execution of the
mortgage, without the written consent of the
mortgagee or his executors, administrators or
assigns.
2.   By selling or pledging personal property already
pledged, or any part thereof, under the terms of
the Chattel Mortgage Law, without the consent
of the mortgagee written on the back of the
mortgage and noted on the record thereof in the
office of the register of deeds of the province
where such property is located.
Chattel mortgage must be valid and subsisting.
If chattel mortgage does not contain an affidavit of
good faith and is not registered, it is void and cannot
be prosecuted under Art 319
Elements of knowingly removing mortgaged
personal property:
1.   Personal property is mortgaged under the
Chatter Mortgage Law.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.   Offender knows that such property is so
mortgaged.
3.   He removes such mortgaged personal property
to any province or city other than the one in
which it was located at the time of the execution
of the mortgage.
4.   The removal is permanent.
5.   There is no written consent of the mortgagee or
his executors, administrators or assigns to such
removal.
A person other than the mortgagor who removed the
property to another province, knowing it to be
mortgaged, may be liable. The removal of the
mortgaged personal property must be coupled with
intent to defraud.
No felonious intent if transfer of personal property is
due to change of residence.
If the mortgagee opted to file for collection, not
foreclosure, abandoning the mortgage as basis for
relief, the removal of property to another province is
not a violation of Art 319 par1.
In estafa, the property involved is real property. In
sale of mortgaged property, it is personal property.
Elements of selling or pledging personal property
already pledged:
1.   Personal property is already pledged under the
terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law.
2.   The offender, who is the mortgagor of such
property, sells or pledges the same or any part
thereof.
3.   There is no consent of the mortgagee written on
the back of the mortgage and noted on the
record thereof in the office of the register of
deeds.
The consent of the mortgagee must be
1.   in writing,
2.   on the back of the mortgage, and
3.   noted on the record thereof in the office of the
register of deeds.
Damage is NOT essential.
Chattel mortgage may give rise to estafa by means of
deceit.
Art. 319 Art. 316 (Estafa)
In both, there is a selling of a mortgaged property
Property involved is real
Personal property
property
Committed by the mere Committed by selling
failure to obtain consent real property mortgaged
Page 269 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
of the mortgagee in as free, even though the
writing, even if offender vendor may have
should inform the obtained the consent of
purchaser that the thing the mortgagee in writing
sold is mortgaged
Purpose: to protect the Purpose: to protect the
mortgagee purchaser
8.  C hapter VIII: Arson and
Other Crimes Involving
Destruction
Articles 320-326-B have been repealed by PD 1613
(Amending the Law on Arson)
There are actually two categories of arson, namely:
Destructive Arson under Article 320 of the RPC and
Simple Arson under P.D. No. 1316. Said classification
is based on the kind, character and location of the
property burned, regardless of the value of the
damage caused.
Article 320 contemplates the malicious burning of
structures, both public and private, hotels, buildings,
edifices, trains, vessels, aircraft, factories and other
military, government or commercial establishments
by any person or group of persons. On the other
hand, P.D. No. 1316 covers houses, dwellings,
government buildings, farms, mills, plantations,
railways, bus stations, airports, wharves and other
industrial establishments.
Simple Arson
Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of
another shall be punished by Prision Mayor.
The same penalty shall be imposed when a person
sets fire to his own property under circumstances
which expose to danger the life or property of
another.[Sec. 1 P.D. No. 1613]
The penalty of Reclusion Temporal to Reclusion
Perpetua shall be imposed if the property burned is
any of the following:
a.   Any building used as offices of the government or
any of its agencies;
b.   Any inhabited house or dwelling;
c.   Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or
mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
d.   Any plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop,
grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
e.   Any rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill or mill central;
and
f.   Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf or
warehouse.[Sec. 2 P.D. No. 1613]
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Destructive Arson If as a consequence of his commission of any of the

The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum acts penalized under this Article (320), death or injury
period to death shall be imposed upon any person results, or any valuable documents, equipment,
who shall burn: machineries, apparatus, or other valuable properties
a.   One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent were burned or destroyed, the mandatory penalty of
to one single act of burning or as a result of death shall be imposed.[Art. 320]
simultaneous burnings, or committed on several
or different occasions; If by reason of or on the occasion of the arson death
b.   Any building of public or private ownership, results, the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua to death
devoted to the public in general or where people shall be imposed.[Sec. 5 P.D. No. 1613]
usually gather or congregate for a definite
purpose such as but not limited to official Arson and homicide/murder
governmental function or business, private [I]n cases where both burning and death occur, in
transaction, commerce, trade workshop, order to determine what crime/crimes was/were
meetings and conferences, or merely incidental perpetrated whether arson, murder or arson and
to a definite purpose such as but not limited to homicide/murder, it is de rigueur to ascertain the
hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public main objective of the malefactor:
conveyance or stops or terminals, regardless of Main objective Crime/s committed
whether the offender had knowledge that there Burning of the building
are persons in said building or edifice at the time or edifice, but death Arson (the resulting
it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the results by reason or on homicide is absorbed)
building is actually inhabited or not. the occasion of arson
c.   Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or To kill a particular person
airplane, devoted to transportation or who may be in a building
conveyance, or for public use, entertainment or or edifice, when fire is Murder
leisure. resorted to as the means
d.   Any building, factory, warehouse installation and to accomplish such goal
any appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to Two separate and
the service of public utilities. To kill a particular
distinct crimes are
e.   Any building the burning of which is for the person, and in fact the
committed: 1)
purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of offender has already
homicidemurder, and 2)
another violation of law, or for the purpose of done so, but fire is
arson [People v.
concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or resorted to as a means to
Baluntong, G.R. No.
to collect from insurance.[Art. 320] cover up the killing
182061 (2010)]

By two or more persons Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson

Irrespective of the application of the above
enumerated qualifying circumstances, the penalty of
death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is
perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons
or by a group of persons, regardless of whether their
purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or
the burning merely constitutes an overt act in the
commission or another violation of law.[Art. 320]
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum
period to death shall also be imposed upon any
person who shall burn:
a.   Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military
powder or fireworks factory, ordinance,
storehouse, archives or general museum of the
government.
b.   In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory
of inflammable or explosive materials.
Arson resulting in death
Page 270 of 296
The penalty in any case of arson shall be imposed in
its maximum period;
1.   If committed with intent to gain;
2.   If committed for the benefit of another;
3.   If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred
towards the owner or occupant of the property
burned;
4.   If committed by a syndicate.The offense is
committed by a syndicate if its is planned or
carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons.[Sec. 4 P.D. No. 1613]
Prima facie evidence of arson
Any of the following circumstances shall constitute
prima facie evidence of arson:
1.   If the fire started simultaneously in more than
one part of the building or establishment.
2.   If substantial amount of flammable substances
or materials are stored within the building note
necessary in the business of the offender nor for
household us.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3.   If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other
flammable or combustible substances or
materials soaked therewith or containers thereof,
or any mechanical, electrical, chemical, or
electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or
ashes or traces of any of the foregoing are found
in the ruins or premises of the burned building or
property.
4.   If the building or property is insured for
substantially more than its actual value at the
time of the issuance of the policy.
5.   If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire
insurance policy more than two fires have
occurred in the same or other premises owned or
under the control of the offender and/or insured.
6.   If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of
the effects insured and stored in a building or
property had been withdrawn from the premises
except in the ordinary course of business.
7.   If a demand for money or other valuable
consideration was made before the fire in
exchange for the desistance of the offender or for
the safety of the person or property of the
victim.[Sec. 6 P.D. No. 1613]
Conspiracy to commit Arson
Conspiracy to commit arson shall be punished by
Prision Mayor in its minimum period.[Sec. 7 P.D. No.
1613]
9.  C hapter IX: Malicious
Mischief
Malicious Mischief – It is the willful causing of
damage to another’s property for the sake of causing
damage because of hate, revenge or other evil
motive.
a.   Article 327 - Who Are
Responsible
Elements of malicious mischief:
1.   Offender deliberately caused damage to the
property of another.
2.   Such act does not constitute arson or other
crimes involving destruction
3.   The act of damaging another’s property was
committed merely for the sake of damaging it.
If there is no malice in causing damage, the
obligation to pay for the damages is only civil (Art.
2176. Civil Code)
Damage means not only loss but also diminution of
what is a man’s own. Thus, damage to another’s
Page 271 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
house includes defacing it. [People v Asido, G.R. No.
L-32529 (1978)]
b.   Article 328 - Special Cases of
Malicious Mischief
Special cases of malicious mischief: (qualified
malicious mischief)
1.   Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
public functions
2.   Using any poisonous or corrosive substance
3.   Spreading infection or contagion among cattle
4.   Causing damage to property of the National
Museum or National Library, or to any archive or
registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any
other thing used in common by the public.
c.   Article 329 - Other Mischiefs
Other mischiefs not included in Art. 328 are punished
based on value of the damage caused.
If the amount involved cannot be estimated, the
penalty of arresto menor or fine not exceeding P200
is fixed by law.
When several persons scattered coconut remnants
which contained human excrement on the stairs and
floor of the municipal building, including its interior,
the crime committed is malicious mischief under Art.
329. [People v Dumlao, G.R. No. 168918 (2009)]
d.   Article 330 - Damage and
Obstruction to Means of
Communication
Committed by damaging any railway, telegraph, or
telephone lines. If the damage shall result in any
derailment of cars, collision, or other accident, a
higher penalty shall be imposed. (Qualifying
Circumstance)
Telegraph/phone lines must pertain to railways.
Q: What is the crime when, as a result of the damage
caused to railway, certain passengers of the train are
killed?
A: It depends. Art. 330 says “without prejudice to the
criminal liability of the offender for other
consequences of his criminal act.”
If there is no intent to kill, the crime is “damages to
means of communication” with homicide because of
the first paragraph of Art. 4 and Art. 48.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

If there is intent to kill, and damaging the railways and a concubine or paramour within the term
was the means to accomplish the criminal purpose, “spouses”.
the crime is murder
Art. 332 also applies to common-law spouses. [Art.
e.   Article 331 – Destroying or 144, Civil Code; People v Constantino, CA, 60 OG
3605]
Damaging Statues, Public
Monuments or Paintings See again: RA 9372: Human Security Act on
Punishable Acts of Terrorism
Acts punished:
1.   Destroying or damaging statues or any other
useful or ornamental public monument
2.   Destroying or damaging any useful or
ornamental painting of a public nature.

The penalty is lower if the thing destroyed is a public

painting, rather than a public monument.

10.  Chapter X: Exemption

from Criminal Liability
a.   Article 332 - Exemption from
Criminal Liability in Crimes
Against Property
Crimes involved in the exemption:
1.   Theft
2.   Swindling (estafa)
3.   Malicious mischief

If the crime is robbery, exemption does not lie.

Persons exempt from criminal liability:

1.   Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or
relatives by affinity in the same line.
2.   The widowed spouse with respect to the property
which belonged to the deceased spouse before
the same passed into the possession of another.
3.   Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together.

The law recognizes the presumed co-ownership of

the property between the offender and the offended
party. There is no criminal, but only civil liability.

Art. 332 does not apply to a stranger who participates

in the commission of the crime.

Stepfather and stepmother are included as

ascendants by affinity. [People v Alvarez; People v
Adame]

Guevarra: An adopted or natural child should also be

considered as included in the term “descendants”

 
Page 272 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
  Title XI. Crimes against
Chastity
1.   Art. 333: Adultery
2.   Art. 334: Concubinage
3.   Art. 336: Acts of Lasciviousness
4.   Art. 337: Qualified Seduction
5.   Art. 338: Simple Seduction
6.   Art. 339: Acts of Lasciviousness with the consent
of the offended party
7.   Art. 340: Corruption of minors
8.   Art. 341: White Slave Trade
9.   Art. 342: Forcible Abduction
10.   Art. 343: Consented Abduction
11.   Art. 344: Prosecution of the crimes of Adultery
12.   Art. 345: Civil Liability
13.   Art. 346: Liability of ascendants, guardians,
teachers, or other persons entrusted with custody
of the offended party
1.   Article 333 – Adultery
Elements:
a.   The woman is married;
b.   She has sexual intercoursewith a man not her
husband;
c.   As regards the man with whom she has sexual
intercourse: he knows her to be married.
LEGENDS:
H – husband; W – wife; M - marriage
Offenders: Married woman and/or the man who has
carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be married,
even if the M be subsequently declared void. It is not
necessary that there be a valid M (i.e. void ab initio)
Essence of adultery: violation of the marital vow
Gist of the crime: the danger of introducing spurious
heirs into the family, where the rights of the real heirs
may be impaired and a man may be charged with the
maintenance of a family not his own. [US v. Mata.
G.R. No. L-6300 (1911)]
The offended party must be legally married to the
offender at the time of the filing of the complaint, even
if the marriage be subsequently declared void.
Each sexual intercourse constitutes a crime of
adultery.
Abandonment without justification is not exempting,
but only mitigating. Both defendants are entitled to
this mitigating circumstance.
Page 273 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
The man, to be guilty of adultery, must have
knowledge of the married status of the woman.
A married man who is not liable for adultery, because
he did not know that the woman is married, may be
held liable for concubinage.
Acquittal of one of the defendants does not operate
as a cause of acquittal of the other.
Under the law, there is no accomplice in adultery.
Direct proof of carnal knowledge is not necessary.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient. (i.e. love letters
signed by the paramour, photos showing intimate
relations, testimony of witnesses)
Pardon by the H does not exempt the adulterous W
and her paramour from criminal liability for
adulterous acts committed subsequent to such
pardon, because the pardon refers to previous and
not to subsequent adulterous acts
Effect of Pardon - applies to Concubinage as well:
a.   The pardon must come before the institution of
the criminal prosecution; and
b.   Both the offenders must be pardoned by the
offended party.Act of sexual intercourse
subsequent to adulterous conduct is considered
as an implied pardon.
c.   Pardon of the offenders by the offended party is a
bar to prosecution for adultery or concubinage.
d.   Delay in the filing of complaint, if satisfactorily
explained, does not indicate pardon.
Effect of consent:
The husband, knowing that his wife, after serving
sentence for adultery, resumed living with her co-
defendant, did nothing to interfere with their
relations or to assert his rights as husband. The
second charge of adultery should be dismissed
because of consent. [People v. Sensano and Ramos,
G.R. No. L-37720 (1933)]
Agreement to separate may be used as evidence to
show consent by the husband to the infidelity of his
wife.
Effect of death of paramour: Offending wife may still
be prosecuted. The requirement that both offenders
should be included in the complaint is absolute only
when the two offenders are alive.
Effect of death of offended party: The proceedings
may continue. Art. 353 seeks to protect the honor and
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
reputation not only of the living but of dead persons
as well.
2.  A rticle 334 – Concubinage
Elements:
a.   The man is married;
b.   He is either:
1.   keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
2.   Having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstance with a woman not his wife;
3.   Cohabiting with her in any other place;
c.   As regards the woman, she knows him to be
married.
Offenders: married man and the woman who knows
him to be married.
The woman only becomes liable if she knew him to be
married prior to the commission of the crime.
rd
In the 3 way of committing the crime, mere
cohabitation is sufficient; Proof of scandalous
circumstances not necessary. [People v. Pitoc, G.R.
No. 18513 (1922)]
A married man is not liable for concubinage for mere
sexual relations with a woman not his wife.A man
would only be guilty of concubinage if he appeared to
be guilty of any of the acts punished in Art. 334.
A married man who is not liable for adultery because
he did not know that the woman was married, may be
held liable for concubinage. If the woman knew that
the man was married, she may be held liable for
concubinage as well.
Mistress – a woman taken by the accused to live with
him in the conjugal dwelling as his
mistress/concubine.
Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling – no
positive proof of sexual intercourse is necessary
Conjugal Dwelling – the home of the husband (H)
and the wife (W)even if the wife appears to be
temporarily absent on any account.
The dwelling of the spouses was constructed from
the proceeds of the sale of their conjugal properties.
The fact that W never had a chance to reside therein
and that H used it with his mistress instead, does not
detract from its nature. [People v. Cordova, C.A., G.R.
No. 19100-R (1959)]
Page 274 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Cohabit – to dwell together as H and W for a period
of time (i.e. A week, a month, year or longer)
Scandalous circumstances – Scandal consists in any
reprehensible word or deed that offends public
conscience, redounds to the detriment of the feelings
of honest persons, and gives occasion to the
neighbors’ spiritual damage or ruin. [People v. Santos,
87 Phil. 687 (1950)]
It is only when the mistress is kept elsewhere (outside
the conjugal dwelling) that “scandalous
circumstances” become an element of the crime. [US
v. Macabagbag, G.R. No. 10564 (1915)]
Qualifying expression: Sexual act which may be
proved by circumstantial evidence
Scandal produced by the concubinage of H:
a.   H and mistress live in the same room of a house
b.   They appear together in public,
c.   Perform acts in sight of the community which
give rise to criticism and general protest among
the neighbors.
When spies are employed for the purpose of watching
the conduct of the accused and it appearing that
none of the people living in the vicinity has observed
any suspicious conduct, there is no evidence of
scandalous circumstances. [US v. Campos Rueda,
G.R. No. L-11549 (1916)]
Reason: Adultery is punished more severely than
concubinage because adultery makes possible the
introduction of another man’s offspring into the
family so that the offended H may have another
man’s son bearing H’s name and receiving support
from him.
3.  Article 336 - Acts of
Lasciviousness
Elements:
a.   The offender commits any act of lasciviousness
or lewdness;
b.   The act is committed against a person of either
sex;
c.   It is done under anyof the ff. circumstances:
1.   By using force or intimidation; or
2.   When the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious;
3.   By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority
4.   When the offended party is under 12 years of
age or is demented.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Lewd – obscene, lustful, indecent, lecherous; woman.

signifies form of immorality which has relation to Lascivious acts are the Lascivious acts are only
moral impurity or that which is carried in wanton final objective sought by the preparatory acts to
manner the offender. the commission of rape.

Motive of lascivious acts is not important because the Abuses against chastity (Art. 245) v Acts of
essence of lewdness is in the very act itself. lasciviousness (Art. 336)
Offenses against Chastity Abuses against Chastity
Example: If the kissing etc. was done inside church Committed by a private Committed by a public
(which is a public place), absence of lewd designs individual, in most cases officer only
may be proven, and the crime is unjust vexation only. Some act of Mere immoral or
But if the kissing was done in the house of a woman lasciviousness should indecent proposal made
when she was alone, the circumstances may prove have been executed by earnestly and
the accused’s lewd designs. the offender. persistently is sufficient.
rd
Absent any of the circumstances of rape under the 3
element, the crime is UNJUST VEXATION. (e.g. The accused followed the victim, held her, embraced
touching of breast) her, tore her dress, and tried to touch her breast.
When a complaint for acts of lasciviousness was filed
Lascivious intent is implied from the nature of the act against him, accused claimed that he had no
and the surrounding circumstances. intention of having sexual intercourse with her and
that he did the acts only as revenge. TC found the
Consider the act and the environment to distinguish accused guilty of FRUSTRATED ACTS OF
between Acts of Lasciviousness and Attempted Rape. LASCIVIOUSNESS. SC held that there is no frustrated
Desistance in the commission of attempted rape may crime against chastity which includes acts of
constitute acts of lasciviousness. lasciviousness, adultery, and rape. [People v.
Famularcano, G.R. No. L-17163 (1963)]
There is no attempted or frustrated act of
lasciviousness. From the moment the offender performs all the
elements necessary for the existence of the felony, he
Acts of Lasciviousness v. Grave Coercion actually attains his purpose.
Acts of Lasciviousness Grave Coercion
Compulsion or force is Compulsiom or force is Motive of revenge is of no consequence since the
included in the the very act constituting element of lewdness is in the very act itself. Example:
constructive element of the offense of grave Compelling a girl to dance naked before a man is an
force coercion act of lasciviousness, even if the dominant motive is
Must be accompanied by Moral compulsion revenge, for her failure to pay a debt.
acts of lasciviousness or amounting to
lewdness intimidation is sufficient TWO KINDS OF SEDUCTION:
a.   Qualified seduction (Art. 337)
Acts of Lasciviousness v. Attempted Rape b.   Simple seduction (Art. 338)
Acts of Lasciviousness Attempted Rape
Same means of committing the crime: “Lascivious Conduct” under RA 7610
a.   Force, threat, or intimidation is employed; or The elements of sexual abuse under Section 5 (b) of
b.   By means of fraudulent machination or grave RA 7610 that must be proven in addition to the
abuse of authority; or elements of acts of lasciviousness are as follows:
c.   The offended party is deprived of reason or a.   The accused commits the act of sexual
otherwise unconscious; or intercourse or lascivious conduct.
d.   Victim is under 12 yrs. of age or is demented b.   The said act is performed with a child exploited
Offended party is a in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
person of either sex. abuse.
The performance of acts c.   The child, whether male or female, is below 18
of lascivious character years of age. [Navarrete v. People, G.R. No. 147913
Acts performed do not Acts performed clearly (2007)]
indicate that the accused indicate that the
was to lie w/ the accused’s purpose was to “Lascivious conduct” is defined under Section 2 (h)
offended party. lie w/ the offended of the rules and regulations of RA 7610 as:
 
Page 275 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
a.   The intentional touching, either directly or
through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin,
breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, OR the
introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus
or mouth, of any person,
b.   whether of the same or opposite sex,
c.   with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass,
degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of
any person,
d.   bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of
the genitals or pubic area of a person
Comparison with Art. 366, RPC
Acts of lasciviousness is punished under RA 7610
when performed on a child below 18 years of age
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse.
See discussion above for other acts of abuse
The sweetheart theory applies in acts of
lasciviousness and rape, felonies committed against
or without the consent of the victim. It operates on
the theory that the sexual act was consensual. It
requires proof that the accused and the victim were
lovers and that she consented to the sexual relations.
For purposes of sexual intercourse and lascivious
conduct in child abuse cases under RA 7610, the
sweetheart defense is unacceptable. A child exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse
cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse with
another person. [Malto v. People, G.R. No. 164733
(2007)]
4.  A rticle 337 - Qualified
Seduction
Seduction - enticing a woman to unlawful sexual
intercourse by promise of marriage or other means of
persuasion without use of force. It applies when there
is abuse of authority (qualified seduction) or deceit
(simple seduction).
TWO CLASSES OF QUALIFIED SEDUCTION AND
THEIR ELEMENTS:
a.   Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and under 18
years of age by certain persons such as, a person
in authority, priest, teacher or any person who, in
any capacity shall be entrusted with the
education or custody of the woman seduced.
Elements:
1.   Offended party is a virgin, which is presumed
if she is unmarried and of good reputation;
Page 276 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
2.   She is over 12 and under 18 yrs. of age; (13-17
years 11 months 29 days)
3.   Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
4.   There is abuse of authority, confidence, or
relationship on the part of the offender.
b.   Seduction of a sister by her brother, or
descendant by her ascendant, regardless of her
age or reputation.
Elements
1.   Offended party need not be a virgin or she
may be over 18 years old
2.   Offender has sexual intercourse with her
3.   Offender is her brother or ascendant by
consanguinity, whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
Virgin - a woman of chaste character and of good
reputation. The offended party need not be physically
a virgin.
If there is no sexual intercourse and only acts of
lewdness are performed, the crime is acts of
lasciviousness. If any of the circumstances in the
crime of rape is present, the crime is not to be
punished under Art. 337.
The accused charged with rape cannot be convicted
of qualified seduction under the same information.
Offenders in Qualified Seduction:
a.   Those who abused their authority:
1.   Person in public authority;
2.   Guardian;
3.   Teacher;
b.   Person who, in any capacity, is entrusted with the
education or custody of the woman seduced.
1.   Those who abused confidence reposed in
them:
2.   Priest;
3.   House servant;
4.   Domestic
c.   Those who abused their relationship:
1.   Brother who seduced his sister;
2.   Ascendant who seduced his descendant.
“Domestic” - a person usually living under the same
roof, pertaining to the same house.
Not necessary that the offender be the teacher of the
offended party; it is sufficient that he is a teacher in
the same school.
Qualified seduction may also be committed by a
master to his servant, or a head of the family to any of
its members.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Qualified seduction of a sister or descendant, also
known as INCEST, is punished by a penalty next
higher in degree.
The age, reputation, or virginity of the sister or
descendant is irrelevant. The relationship need not be
legitimate.
A 15-year old virgin, who was brought by her mother
to the house of the accused and his wife to serve as a
helper, repeatedly yielded to the carnal desires of the
accused, as she was induced by his promises of
marriage and frightened by his acts of intimidation.
HELD: DECEIT, although an essential element of
ordinary or simple seduction, does not need to be
proved or established in a charge of qualified
seduction. It is replaced by ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE.
[People v. Fontanilla, G.R. No. L-25354 (1968)]
The accused, a policeman, brought a 13-year old girl
with low mentality, to the ABC Hall where he
succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her. The
complaint did not allege that the girl was a virgin.
The accused was charged with RAPE but convicted of
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION.
HELD: Though it is true that virginity is presumed if
the girl is over 12 but under 18, unmarried and of
good reputation, virginity is still an essential element
of the crime of qualified seduction and must be
alleged in the complaint. Accused is guilty of RAPE,
considering the victim’s age, mental abnormality and
deficiency. There was also intimidation with the
accused wearing his uniform. [Babanto v. Zosa, G.R.
No. L-32895 (1983)]
Perez succeeded in having sexual intercourse with
Mendoza after he promised to marry her. As he did
not make good on said promise, Mendoza filed a
complaint for Consented Abduction. Trial Court
found that the acts constituted seduction, acquitting
him on the charge of Consented Abduction. Mendoza
then filed a complaint for Qualified Seduction. Perez
moved to dismiss the case on the grounds of double
jeopardy.
HELD: There are similar elements between consented
abduction and qualified seduction, namely:
a.   the offended party is a virgin, and
b.   over 12 but under 18 yrs. of age
However, an acquittal for CONSENTED ABDUCTION
will not preclude the filing of a charge for QUALIFIED
SEDUCTION because the elements of the two crimes
are different. [Perez v. CA, G.R. No. :-80838 (1988)]
Page 277 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Note: The fact that the girl gave consent to the sexual
intercourse is not a defense.
5.  A rticle 338 - Simple
Seduction
Elements:
a.   Offended party is over 12 and under 18 years of
age;
b.   She is of good reputation, single or widow;
c.   Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
d.   It is committed by means of deceit.
Purpose of the law - To punish the seducer who by
means of promise of marriage, destroys the chastity
of an unmarried female of previous chaste character
Virginity of offended party is not essential, good
reputation is sufficient.
Virginity of offended party is not required.
Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled promise
of marriage.
Promise of marriage must be the inducement and the
woman must yield because of the promise or other
inducement.
What about unfulfilled promise of material things, as
when the woman agrees to sexual intercourse in
exchange for jewelry? This is not seduction because
she is a woman of loose morals.
Promise of marriage after sexual intercourse does not
constitute deceit. Promise of marriage by a married
man is not a deceit, if the woman knew him to be
married.
Seduction is not a continuing offense.
6.  A rticle 339 - Acts of
Lasciviousness with the
Consent of the Offended
Party
Elements:
a.   Offender commits acts of lasciviousness or
lewdness;
b.   The acts are committed upon a woman who is a
virgin or single or widow of good reputation,
under 18 yrs. of age but over 12 yrs., or a sister or
descendant, regardless of her reputation or age;
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

c.   The offender accomplishes the acts by abuse of Acts punishable:

authority, confidence, relationship, or deceit. a.   Engaging in business of prostitution
b.   Profiting by prostitution
It is necessary that it be committed under c.   Enlisting the services of women for the purpose
circumstances which would make it qualified or of prostitution.
simple seduction had there been sexual intercourse,
instead of acts of lewdness only. Habituality is not a necessary element of white slave
trade.
When the victim is under 12 yrs., the penalty shall be
one degree higher than that imposed by law. (Sec. 10 ‘Under any pretext’ – one who engaged the services
of R.A. 7610) of a woman allegedly as a maid, but in reality for
prostitution, is guilty under this article.
Males cannot be the offended party.
Victim is under 12 yrs., penalty shall be one degree
Acts of Lasciviousness Acts of Lasciviousness higher.
(Art. 336) with consent (Art. 339)
Committed under Offender need not be the owner of the house.
Committed under circumstances which,
circumstances which, had there been carnal Maintainer or manager of house of ill-repute need
had there been carnal knowledge, would not be present therein at the time of raid or arrest.
knowledge, would amount to either
amount to rape qualified or simple Corruption of Minors White Slave Trade
seduction Minority of victims
Minority is not required
Offende party is a female Offended party should essential
or male only be female Victims may be male or
Applies only to females
female
May not not necessarily
7.  Article 340 - Corruption of be for profit
Generally for profit
Minors Committeed by a single Generally committed
act habitually
Elements:
a.   Offender promotes or facilitates the prostitution TWO KINDS OF ABDUCTION:
or corruption of persons under age (minors), a.   Forcible abduction (Art. 342)
b.   Purpose is to satisfy the lust of another b.   Consented abduction (Art. 343)

Habituality or abuse of authority or confidence is not

necessary.
It is not necessary that the unchaste acts shall have
been done.
Mere proposal will consummate the offense.
The victim must be of good reputation, not a
prostitute or corrupted person.
There is a crime of Attempted Child Prostitution. (Sec.
6, RA 7610)
See again: RA 7610: Special Protection of Children
against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
8.  A rticle 341 - White Slave
Trade
9.  A rticle 342 - Forcible
Abduction
Elements:
a.   The person abducted is any woman, regardless of
her age, civil status or reputation;
b.   The abduction is against her will;
c.   The abduction is with lewd designs.
Abduction – the taking away of a woman from her
house or the place where she may be for the purpose
of carrying her to another place with the intent to
marry or to corrupt her.
Crimes against chastity where age and reputation
are immaterial:
a.   Acts of lasciviousness against the will or without
the consent of the offended party
b.   Qualified seduction of sister or descendant
c.   Forcible abduction

 
Page 278 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

The taking away of the woman must be against her Serious Illegal
Forcible Abduction
will. Detention
There is deprivation of
The taking away of the woman may be accomplished There is deprivation of
liberty and no lewd
by means of deceit first and then by means of liberty and lewd designs
designs
violence and intimidation.
Forcible Abduction with
If the female abducted is under 12, the crime is Kidnapping with Rape
Rape
forcible abduction, even if she voluntarily goes with Purpose is to effect his Purpose is to lend the
her abductor. lewd designs on the victim to illicit
victim intercourse with others
When the victim was abducted by the accused Crime against chastity Crime against liberty
without lewd designs, but for the purpose of lending
her to illicit intercourse with others, the crime is not Forcible Abduction with Rape - a complex crime
abduction but corruption of minors. under Art. 48, and not a special complex crime
Rape may absorb forcible abduction, if the main The victim was abducted by the accused and was
objective was to rape the victim. brought to a hotel where the latter succeeded in
having sexual intercourse with her.
Sexual intercourse is not necessary in forcible
abduction. HELD: The elements of both rape and forcible
abduction are proven. The presence of lewd designs
Lewd designs may be shown by the conduct of the in forcible abduction is manifested by the subsequent
accused. When there are several defendants, it is rape of the victim. [People v. Sunpongco, G.R. No. L-
enough that one of them had lewd designs. Husband 42665 (1988)]
is not liable for abduction of his wife, as lewd design
is wanting. Maggie was abducted and brought to a hotel, where
the 4 accused took turns in raping her.
Attempt to rape is absorbed in the crime of forcible
abduction, thus there is no complex crime of forcible HELD: While the first act of rape was being
abduction with attempted rape. performed, the crime of forcible abduction had
already been consummated, hence, forcible
Nature of the crime - The act of the offender is abduction can only be attached to the first act of
violative of the individual liberty of the abducted, her rape, detached from the 3 subsequent acts of rape.
honor and reputation, and public order. The effect therefore would be one count of forcible
abduction with rape and 4 counts of rape for each of
Forcible Abduction Grave Coercion the accused. [People v. Jose, G.R. No. L-28232 (1971)]
There is violence or
intimidation by the The accused and 2 other men raped the victim. The
offender victim was a jeepney passenger who was prevented
The offended part is from leaving the jeepney. She was taken to a remote
compelled to do place where she was raped.
something against her
will HELD: The accused is guilty of FORCIBLE
No lewd design, provided ABDUCTION WITH RAPE. It was proven that the
Abduction is that there is deprivation victim was taken against her will and with lewd
characterized by lewd of liberty for an design, and was subsequently forced to submit to the
design appreciable length of accused’s lust, rendering her unconscious in the
time process. [People v. Alburo, G.R. No. 85822 (1990)]

Forcible Abduction Corruption of Minors There can only be one complex crime of forcible
Purpose is to effect his Purpose is to lend the abduction with rape.
lewd designs on the victim to illicit
victim intercourse with others The victim witnessed the killing of another by the 2
accused. Upon seeing her, the accused dragged her
to a vacant lot where they took turns in raping her. TC
convicted them of rape.
 
Page 279 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
HELD: FORCIBLE ABDUCTION is absorbed in the
crime of RAPE if the main objective is to rape the
victim. Conviction of acts of lasciviousness is not a bar
to conviction of forcible abduction. [People v. Godines,
G.R. No. 93410 (1991)]
10.  Article 343 - Consented
Abduction
Elements:
a.   Offended party is a virgin;
b.   She is over 12 and under 18 yrs. of age;
c.   Offender takes her away with her consent, after
solicitation or cajolery from the offender;
d.   The taking away is with lewddesigns.
Purpose of the law - Not to punish the wrong done to
the girl because she consents to it, but to prescribe
punishment for the disgrace to her family and the
alarm caused by the disappearance of one who is, by
her age and sex, susceptible to cajolery and deceit.
If the virgin is under 12 or is deprived of reason, the
crime is forcible abduction because such is incapable
of giving a valid consent.
The taking away of the girl need not be with some
character of permanence. Offended party need not be
taken from her house.
When there was no solicitation or cajolery and no
deceit and the girl voluntarily went with the man,
there is no crime committed even if they had sexual
intercourse.
11.  Article 344 - Prosecution
of Private Offenses
a.   Adultery
b.   Concubinage
c.   Seduction
d.   Abduction
e.   Acts of lasciviousness
Nature of the complaint: The complaint must be
filed in court, not with the fiscal.In case of complex
crimes, where one of the component offenses is a
public crime, the criminal prosecution may be
instituted by the fiscal.
The court motu proprio can dismiss the case for
failure of the aggrieved party to file the proper
complaint even if the accused never raised the
question on appeal.
Page 280 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Crimes against chastity cannot be prosecuted de
oficio.
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
Who may file the complaint: Adultery and
Concubinage must be prosecuted upon complaint
signed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal
prosecution without including BOTH the guilty
parties if they are alive. Both parties must be included
in the complaint even if one of them is not guilty.
Consent and pardon bar the filing of a criminal
complaint.
The imputation of a crime of prostitution against a
woman can be prosecuted de oficio, but crimes
against chastity cannot.
Prosecution of rape may be made upon complaint by
any person.
Effect of Pardon:
a.   Effect of Pardon in Adultery applies also to
Concubinage
b.   Condonation or forgiveness of one act of adultery
or concubinage is not a bar to prosecution of
similar acts that may be committed by the
offender in the future.
Consent:
a.   May be express or implied
b.   Given before the adultery or concubinage was
committed
c.   Agreement to live separately may be evidence of
consent.
d.   Affidavit showing consent may be a basis for new
trial.
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
Seduction, abduction, or acts of lasciviousness must
be prosecuted upon complaint signed by—
a.   Offended party - When the offended party is a
minor, her parents may file the complaint.
b.   When the offended party is of age and is in
complete possession of her mental and physical
faculties, she alone can file the complaint.
c.   Parents, Grandparents or Guardian in that order
–
When the offended is a minor or incapacitated and
refuses to file the complaint, any of the persons
mentioned could file.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The term “guardian” refers to legal guardian. He
must be legally appointed by the Court.
The State may also file the complaint as parens
patriae when the offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she could file the complaint and
has no known parents, grandparents, or guardians
Effect of Pardon:
a.   Offended party cannot institute criminal
proceedings if the offender has been EXPRESSLY
pardoned by the offended party, or her parents,
grandparents or guardian.
b.   Pardon by the parent, grandparent, or guardian
must be accompanied by the express pardon of
the offended woman.
c.   The right to file action of the parents,
grandparents and guardian shall be EXCLUSIVE
of other persons and shall be exercised
successively in the order provided.
d.   Pardon by the offended party who is a minor
must have the concurrence of parents, EXCEPT
when the offended party has no parents.
Rape complexed with another crime against chastity
need NOT be signed by the offended woman, since
rape is a public crime. When the evidence fails to
prove a complex crime of rape with another crime,
and there is no complaint signed by the offended
woman, the accused CANNOT be convicted of rape.
Marriage of the offender with the offended party in
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape,
extinguishes criminal action or remits the penalty
already imposed.
Marriage (in cases of seduction, abduction, and acts
of lasciviousness) extinguishes the criminal action
even as to co-principals, accomplices, and
accessories.
Marriage must be entered into in good faith.
Marriage may take place AFTER criminal proceedings
have commenced, or even after conviction
(extinguishes criminal action and remits penalty).
12.  A rticle 345: Civil Liability
of Persons Guilty of
Crimes Against Chastity
Those guilty of rape, seduction or abduction:
a.   Indemnify the offended woman
Page 281 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
b.   Acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from doing so
c.   In every case to support the offspring, EXCEPT:
1.   in cases of adultery and concubinage
2.   where either of the offended party or
accused is married
3.   when paternity cannot be determined, such
as in multiple rape
4.   other instances where the law prevents such
The adulterer and the concubine can be sentenced
only to indemnify for damages caused to the
offended spouse. Acknowledgment of offsrpring is
not legally possible, because only children born of
parents who could marry at the time of conception
may be acknowledged. Support of the offspring is
also not included, because the person who gives birth
is one of the offenders.
In rape of a married woman, only indemnity is
allowed.
13.  A rticle 346 – Liability of
Ascendants, Guardians,
Teachers and Other
Persons Entrusted with
the Custody of the
Offended Party
a.   Persons who cooperate as accomplices but are
punished as principals in rape, seduction,
abduction, etc.
1.   Ascendants
2.   Guardians
3.   Curators
4.   Teachers, and
b.   any other person, who cooperate as accomplice
with abuse of authority or confidential
relationship
c.   The teachers or persons entrusted with
education and guidance of the youth shall also
be penalized with disqualification.
d.   Any person falling within the terms of this article,
and any other person guilty of corruption of
minors for the benefit of another, shall be
punished by special disqualification from filling
the office of guardian.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

committed, shall also be held liable under

14.  RA 7877: Anti-Sexual this Act.[Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]
Harassment Act
Penalties
Work, Education or Training-Related, Sexual Any person who violates the provisions of this Act
Harassment Defined shall, upon conviction, be penalized
Work, education or training-related sexual by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor
harassment is committed committed by an employer, more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten
employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the thousand pesos (P10,000) or more than Twenty
employer, teacher, instructor, professor, coach, thousand pesos (P20,000), or both such fine and
trainor, or any other person who, having authority, imprisonment at the discretion of the court. [Sec. 7
influence or moral ascendancy over another in a R.A. 7877]
work or training or education environment, demands,
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from Prescription
the other, regardless of whether the demand, request Any action arising from the violation of the provisions
or requirement for submission is accepted by the of this Act shall prescribe in three (3) years.[Sec. 3
object of said act. [Sec. 3 R.A. 7877] R.A. 7877]

Work-related environment
a.   The sexual favor is made as a condition in the
hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of said individual, or in
granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or
the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating or classifying the employee
which in any way would discriminate, deprive
ordiminish employment opportunities or
otherwise adversely affect said employee;
b.   The above acts would impair the employee's
rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
c.   The above acts would result in an intimidating,
hostile, or offensive environment for the
employee.[Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]

Education or training environment

a.   Against one who is under the care, custody or
supervision of the offender;
b.   Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the
offender;
c.   When the sexual favor is made a condition to the
giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
honors and scholarships, or the payment of a
stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges,
or consideration; or
d.   When the sexual advances result in an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for
the student, trainee or apprentice.[Sec. 3 R.A.
7877]

Other persons liable

Any person who directs or induces another to commit
any act of sexual harassment as herein defined, or
who cooperates in the commission thereof by
another without which it would not have been

 
Page 282 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

  Title XII. Crimes against
the Civil Status of
Persons
Chapter I: Simulation of Births and Usurpation of Civil
Status
1.   Art 347: Simulation of births, substitution of one
child for another and concealment or
abandonment of a legitimate child
2.   Art 348: Usurpation of civil status
The fact that the child will be benefited by the
simulation of its birth is not a defense.
Substitution of one child for another
This is committed when a child of a couple is
exchanged with a child of another couple without the
knowledge of the respective parents.
The substitution can also happen by placing a live
child of a woman in place of another’s dead child.
Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child

Chapter II: Illegal Marriages Requisites:

1.   Art 349: Bigamy 1.   The child must be legitimate
2.   Art 350: Marriage contracted against provisions 2.   The offender conceals or abandons such child;
of law and
3.   Art 351: Premature marriages 3.   The offender has the intent to cause such child to
4.   Art 352: Performance of illegal marriage lose its civil status.
ceremony
The unlawful sale of a child by his father is not a
crime under this article.
1.   Chapter I: Simulation of
“Abandon” as used in Art. 347 - The practice of
Births and Usurpation of abandoning newly born infants and very young child
Civil Status at the door of hospitals and churches.

Art. 347 Art. 246

a.   Article 347 - Simulation of Offender: the one who
Births, Substitution of One Offender: any person has the custody of the
Child for Another, and child
Purpose: to cause the Purpose: to avoid
Concealment or Abandonment child to lose his civil obligation of rearing and
of a Legitimate Child status caring for the child

Mode 1. Simulation of births; A physician or surgeon or public officer, who

Mode 2. Substitution of one child for another;
Mode 3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate
child with intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status.
The object of the crime under Art. 347 is the
creation of false, or the causing of loss of, civil
status.
Simulation of birth
Takes place when the woman pretends to be
pregnant when in fact she is not, and on the day of
the supposed delivery, takes the child of another as
her own.
The simulation of birth which is a crime is that which
alters the civil status of a person.
cooperates in the execution of these crimes, is also
liable if he acts in violation of the duties of his
profession or office.
b.   Article 348 - Usurpation of
Civil Status
This crime is committed when a person represents
himself to be another and assumes the filiation or the
parental or conjugal rights of such another person.
Usurpation of profession may be punished under Art.
348.
There must be an intent to enjoy the rights arising
from the civil status of another.
The purpose of defrauding the offended party or his
heirs qualifies the crime.

 
Page 283 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2.  C hapter II: Illegal
Marriages
a.   Article 349 – Bigamy
Elements:
1.   Offender has been legally married;
2.   The marriage has not been legally dissolved or,
in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse could not yet be presumed dead
according to the Civil Code
3.   He contracts a second or subsequent marriage
4.   The second or subsequent marriage has all the
essential requisites for validity.
The first marriage must be valid.
Nullity of marriage, not a defense in bigamy.
The fact that the first marriage is void from the
beginning is not a defense. As with voidable
marriage, there must be a judicial declaration of
nullity of marriage before contracting the second
marriage.
Good faith is a defense in bigamy.
Failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the
whereabouts of the first wife is bigamy through
reckless imprudence.
One who contracted a subsequent marriage before
the declaration of presumptive death of the absent
spouse is guilty of bigamy.
The second marriage must have all the essential
requisites for validity.
One convicted of bigamy may also be prosecuted for
concubinage as both are distinct offenses. The first is
an offense against civil status, which may be
prosecuted at the instance of the state; the second is
an offense against chastity, and may be prosecuted
only at the instance of the offended party.
The test is not whether the defendant has already
been tried for the same act, but whether he has been
put in jeopardy for the same offense.
The second spouse is not necessarily liable for
bigamy.
Whether the second spouse should be included in the
information is a question of fact that was to be
determined by the fiscal who conducted the
Page 284 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
preliminary investigation. [People v. Nepomuceno, Jr.,
G.R. No. L-40624 (1975)]
The second husband or wife who knew of first
marriage is an accomplice.
The witness who falsely vouched for the capacity of
either of the contracting parties is also an
accomplice.
Bigamy is not a private crime.
In Marbella-Bobis v. Bobis, we laid down the elements
of bigamy thus:
1.   The offender has been legally married;
2.   The first marriage has not been legally dissolved,
or in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse has not been judicially declared
presumptively dead;
3.   He contracts a subsequent marriage; and
4.   The subsequent marriage would have been valid
had it not been for the existence of the first.
Applying the foregoing test to the instant case, we
note that the trial court found that there was no
actual marriage ceremony performed between Lucio
and Lucia by a solemnizing officer. Instead, what
transpired was a mere signing of the marriage
contract by the two, without the presence of a
solemnizing officer.
The first element of bigamy as a crime requires that
the accused must have been legally married. But in
this case, legally speaking, the petitioner was never
married to Lucia Barrete. Thus, there is no first
marriage to speak of.
Under the principle of retroactivity of a marriage
being declared void ab initio, the two were never
married “from the beginning.” The contract of
marriage is null; it bears no legal effect.
Taking this argument to its logical conclusion, for
legal purposes, petitioner was not married to Lucia at
the time he contracted the marriage with Maria
Jececha. The existence and the validity of the first
marriage being an essential element of the crime of
bigamy, it is but logical that a conviction for said
offense cannot be sustained where there is no first
marriage to speak of. The petitioner, must, perforce
be acquitted of the instant charge. [Morigo v. People,
G.R. No. 145226 (2004)]
The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of
the first marriage was immaterial because prior to
the declaration of nullity, the crime had already been
consummated. Moreover, petitioner's assertion
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
would only delay the prosecution of bigamy cases
considering that an accused could simply file a
petition to declare his previous marriage void and
invoke the pendency of that action as a prejudicial
question in the criminal case. We cannot allow that.
The outcome of the civil case for annulment of
petitioner's marriage to Narcisa had no bearing upon
the determination of petitioner's innocence or guilt in
the criminal case for bigamy, because all that is
required for the charge of bigamy to prosper is that
the first marriage be subsisting at the time the
second marriage is contracted. Thus, under the law, a
marriage, even one which is void or voidable, shall be
deemed valid until declared otherwise in a judicial
proceeding.
In this case, even if petitioner eventually obtained a
declaration that his first marriage was void ab initio,
the point is, both the first and the second marriage
were subsisting before the first marriage was
annulled. [Abunado v. People, G,R. No. 159218
(2004)]
A careful study of the disputed decision reveals that
respondent Judge had been less than circumspect in
his study of the law and jurisprudence applicable to
the bigamy case. In his comment, respondent Judge
stated: “That the accused married Manuel P. Diego in
the honest belief that she was free to do so by virtue
of the decree of divorce is a mistake of fact.”
This Court, in People v. Bitdu [G.R. No. L-38230
(1933)], carefully distinguished between a mistake of
fact, which could be a basis for the defense of good
faith in a bigamy case, from a mistake of law, which
does not excuse a person, even a lay person, from
liability. Bitdu held that even if the accused, who had
obtained a divorce under the Mohammedan custom,
honestly believed that in contracting her second
marriage she was not committing any violation of the
law, and that she had no criminal intent, the same
does not justify her act.
This Court further stated therein that with respect to
the contention that the accused acted in good faith in
contracting the second marriage, believing that she
had been validly divorced from her first husband, it is
sufficient to say that everyone is presumed to know
the law, and the fact that one does not know that his
act constitutes a violation of the law does not exempt
him from the consequences thereof.
Moreover, squarely applicable to the criminal case for
bigamy, is People v. Schneckenburger [G.R. No. L-
48183 (1941)], where it was held that the accused who
secured a foreign divorce, and later remarried in the
Page 285 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Philippines, in the belief that the foreign divorce was
valid, is liable for bigamy. [Diego v. Castillo, AM RTJ-
02-1673 (2004)]
b.   Article 350 - Marriage
Contracted against Provisions
of Laws
Elements:
1.   Offender contracted marriage;
2.   He knew at the time that –
a.   The requirements of the law were not
complied with; or
b.   The marriage was in disregard of a legal
impediment.
Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage.
Illegal marriage includes also such other marriages
which are performed without complying with the
requirements of law, or marriages where the consent
of the other is vitiated, or such marriage which was
solemnized by one who is not authorized to
solemnize the same.
Conviction of a violation of Art. 350 involves a crime
of moral turpitude. [Villasanta v. Peralta,
Administrative Case (1957)]
c.   Article 351 - Premature
Marriage
This provision has been repealed on 13 March 2015
when President Benigno Aquino III signed into law
RA 10655. Said law reads: “Without prejudice to the
provisions of the Family Code on paternity and
filiation, Article 351 of the Revised Penal Code,
punishing the crime of premature marriage
committed by a woman, is hereby repealed.”
The author of RA 10655 explained that the law on
premature marriages “is discriminatory for it curtails
the right of a woman to marry under the stated
circumstances when no such penalty is imposed on
the man who does the same. Similarly, the effect of
the provision is an enforced mourning period on the
part of the woman although none is imposed on the
man.”
BEFORE REPEAL:
Persons liable:
1.   A widow who is married within 301 days from
the date of the death of her husband, or before
having delivered if she is pregnant at the time of
his death;
 U.P. LAW BOC
2.   A woman who, her marriage having been
annulled or dissolved, married before her
delivery or before the expiration of the period of
301 days after the date of the legal separation.
The purpose of the law punishing premature
marriages is to prevent doubtful paternity. [People v.
Rosal, G.R. No. L-25706 (1926)]
d.   Article 352 - Performance of
Illegal Marriage Ceremony
PERSONS LIABLE: Priests or ministers of any
religious denomination or sect, or civil authorities
who shall perform or authorize any illegal marriage
ceremony
The offender must be authorized to solemnize
marriages.
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
  Title XIII. Crimes against
Honor
Chapter I: Libel
1.   Art 353: Definition of Libel
2.   Art 354: Privileged communication
3.   Art 355: Libel by means of writings or similar
means
4.   Art 356: Threatening to publish and offer to
prevent such publication for a compensation
5.   Art. 357: Prohibited Publication of Acts Referred
to in the course of Official Proceedings
6.   Art 358: Slander
7.   Art 359: Slander by Deed
Chapter II: Incriminatory Machinations
1.   Art 363: Incriminating innocent person
2.   Art 364: Intriguing against honor
1.   Chapter I: Libel
a.   Article 353 - Definition of Libel
Elements:
1.   There must be an imputation of–
a.   a crime,
b.   a vice or defect, real or imaginary, OR
c.   any act, omission, condition, status, or
circumstance;
2.   The imputation must be made publicly;
3.   It must be malicious;
4.   The imputation must be directed at a natural or
juridical person, or one who is dead; and
5.   The imputation must tend to cause dishonor,
discredit or contempt of the offended party.
Defamation is composed of:
1.   Libel – written defamation
2.   Slander- oral defamation
3.   Slander by deed – defamation through acts
Test of the defamatory character of words used:
Whether they are calculated to induce the hearers to
suppose and understand that the person against
whom they (i.e. the defamatory words) were uttered
was guilty of certain offenses; OR are sufficient to
impeach his honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold
him up to public ridicule. [U.S. v. O’Connell, G.R. No.
L-13173 (1918)]
First element: There must be an imputation of a
crime, a vice or defect, real or imaginary, OR any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstance;
Page 286 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Imputation of a criminal act may be implied from the
acts and statements of the accused.
Imputation of criminal intention is not libelous.
An expression of opinion by one affected by the act of
another and based on actual fact is not libelous.
Second element: The imputation must be made
publicly.
Publication: communication of the defamatory
matter to some third person or persons. There is no
crime if the defamatory imputation is not published.
Sending an unsealed libelous letter to the offended
party constitutes publication. [Magno v. People, G.R.
No. 133896 (2006)]
In libel, publication means making the defamatory
matter, after it is written, known to someone other
than the person against whom it has been written.
Petitioner’s subject letter-reply itself states that the
same was copy furnished to all concerned. Also,
petitioner had dictated the letter to his secretary. It is
enough that the author of the libel complained of has
communicated it to a third person. Furthermore, the
letter, when found in the mailbox, was open, not
contained in an envelope thus, open to public. [Buatis
v. People, G.R. No. 142509 (2006)]
Third element: The publication must be malicious.
Malice in fact – may be shown by proof of ill-will,
hatred or purpose to injure.
Malice in law – presumed from a defamatory
imputation. Proof of malice is not required. (Art. 354,
par.1)
But where the communication is privileged, malice is
not presumed from the defamatory words.
Malice in law is not necessarily inconsistent with
honest or laudable purpose. Even if the publication is
injurious, the presumption of malice disappears upon
proof of good intentions and justifiable motive.
But where malice in fact is present, justifiable motive
cannot exist, and the imputations become actionable.
Fourth element: The imputation must be directed at
a natural or juridical person, or one who is dead.
In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that the
victim be identifiable, although it is not necessary
Page 287 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
that the person be named. It is enough ifby intrinsic
reference the allusion is apparent or if the publication
contains matters of description or reference to facts
and circumstances from which others reading the
article may know the person alluded to, or if the latter
is pointed out by extraneous circumstances so that
those knowing such person could and did understand
that he was the person referred to.
Kunkle v. Cablenews-American and Lyons laid the rule
that this requirement is complied withwhere a third
person recognized or could identify the party vilified
in the article. [People v. Ogie Diaz, G.R. No. 159787
(2007)]
Defamatory remarks directed at a group of persons is
not actionable unless the statements are all-
embracing or sufficiently specific for the victim to be
identifiable.
Libel published in different places may be taken
together to establish the identification of the
offended party.
While it is true that a publication's libelous nature
depends on its scope, spirit and motive taken in their
entirety, the article in question as a whole explicitly
makes mention of private complainant Rivera all
throughout. It cannot be said that the article was a
mere general commentary on the alleged existing
state of affairs at the aforementioned public market.
Rivera was not only specifically pointed out several
times therein but was even tagged with derogatory
names. Indubitably, this name-calling was, as
correctly found by the two courts below,directed at
the very person of Rivera himself. [Figueroa v. People,
G.R. No. 159818 (2006)]
Fifth element: The imputation must tend to cause
dishonor, discredit or contempt of the offended party.
Dishonor – disgrace, shame or ignominy
Discredit – loss of credit of reputation; disesteem
Contempt – state of being despised
For a statement to be considered malicious, it must
be shown that it was written or published with the
knowledge that they are false OR in reckless disregard
of WON they were false.
Reckless disregard– the defendant entertains
serious doubt as to the truth of the publication, OR
that he possesses a high degree of awareness of their
probable falsity.
To avoid self-censorship that would necessarily
accompany strict liability for erroneous statements,
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

rules governing liability for injury to reputation are Narrow and few: (malice in fact)
required to allow an adequate margin of error by 1.   Privileged speeches
protecting some inaccuracies. [Borjal v. CA, G.R. No. in Congress Based on par 1 and 2 of
126466 (1999)] 2.   Statements made in Art 354, although the list
judicial proceedings is not exclusive
Fine preferred penalty in libel cases as long as they are
Administrative Circular No. 08-2008 stated the rule of relevant to the issue
preference of fine only rather than imprisonment in 3.   Military affairs
libel cases, having in mind the ff. principles:
1.   The circular does not remove imprisonment as an Art 354 does not cover absolute privilege because
alternative penalty character of communications mentioned therein is
2.   Judges may, in the exercise of their discretion, lost upon proof of malice in fact.
determine whether the imposition of fine alone
would best serve the interest of justice. Malice in Law Malice in Fact
3.   Should only a fine be imposed and the accused To be proved by
unable to pay the fine, there is no legal obstacle Presumed from
prosecution ONLY IF
to the application of the RPC on subsidiary defamatory character of
malice in law has been
imprisonment. statement
rebutted
Can be negated by
Statement is presented
b.   Article 354 - Requirement for to court, and the latter
evidence of:
1.   Good motives AND
Publicity will decide whether or
justifiable ends; or
not it is defamatory
2.   Privileged character
General rule: MALICE IS PRESUMED in every
defamatory imputation, even if it be true, if no good
Requisites of privileged communication under par. 1
intention and justifiable motive for making it is
of Art. 354:
shown.
1.   That the person who made the communication
had a legal, moral or social duty to make the
Exceptions: In privileged communications, namely:
communication, or, at least, he had an interest to
1.   A private communication made by any person to
be upheld;
another in the performance of any legal, moral,
2.   That the communication is addressed to an
or social duty;
officer or board, or superior, having some interest
2.   A fair and true report, made in good faith,
or duty in the matter.
without any comments or remarks, of
3.   That the statements in the communication are
1.   any judicial, legislative or other official
made in good faith without malice in fact.
proceedings which are not of confidential
nature, OR
Applying to the wrong person due to honest mistake
2.   any statement, report or speech delivered in
does not take the case out of privilege. [US v. Bustos,
said proceedings, OR
G.R. No. L-12592 (1918)]
3.   any other act performed by public officers in
the exercise of their functions.
Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith.
Defamatory remarks are PRESUMED malicious. The
The privileged character simply does away with the
presumption of malice is REBUTTED, if it is shown by
presumption of malice.
the accused that – (see discussion of Art. 361)
1.   The defamatory imputation is true, IN CASE the
The rule is that a communication loses its privileged
law allows proof of the truth of the imputation;
character and is actionable on proof of actual malice.
2.   It is published with good intention; AND
3.   There is justifiable motive for making it
That the statement is a privileged communication is a
matter of defense. To overcome the defense of
Privileged communication is NOT PRESUMED
privileged communication under par. 1 of Art. 354, it
malicious.
must be shown that:
1.   The defendant acted with malice in fact; or
Kinds of Privilege:
2.   There is no reasonable ground for believing the
Absolute Qualified charge to be true.
NOT actionable. Actionable IF Malice or
Bad faith is proven
 
Page 288 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Fair and true report of official proceedings
Official proceedings refer to proceedings of the 3
branches of the government: judiciary, legislative,
and executive.
Requisites:
1.   That it is a fair and true report of a judicial,
legislative, or other official proceedings which
are not confidential in nature, or of a statement,
report, or speech delivered in said proceedings,
or of any other act performed by a public officer
in the exercise of his functions.
2.   That it is made in good faith; and
3.   That it is without comments or remarks
The communication must be pertinent and material
to the subject matter.
Doctrine of fair comment: Fair commentaries on
matters of public interest are privileged and
constitute a valid defense in an action for libel or
slander.
In order that a discreditable imputation to a public
official may be actionable, it must either be:
(1)   A false allegation of fact; OR
(2)   A comment based on a false supposition.
[People v. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444 (2000)]
PUBLIC FIGURE – one who, by his accomplishments,
fame, mode of living, OR by adopting a profession or
calling which gives the public a legitimate interest in
his doings, his affairs and his character, has become a
“public personage” [Ayer Productions v. Capulong,
G.R. No. 82380 (1988)]
Based on the ruling in US v. Ocampo [G.R. No. L-5527
(1910)], proof of knowledge of and participation in the
publication of the offending article is not required, if
the accused has been specifically identified as
“author, editor, or proprietor” or “printer/publisher”
of the publication.
c.   Article 355 - Libel by Writing
or Similar Means
Libel may be committed by means of:
1.   Writing;
2.   Printing;
3.   Lithography;
4.   Engraving;
5.   Radio;
6.   Photograph;
7.   Painting;
8.   Theatrical exhibition;
9.   Cinematographic exhibition; or
Page 289 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
10.   Any similar means. (e.g. video broadcast)
Common characteristic of written libel: their
permanent nature as a means of publication.
Use of amplifier system is not libel but oral
defamation (slander). But the defamation made in
the television program is libel.
d.   Article 356 - Threatening to
Publish and Offer to Prevent
Such Publication for a
Compensation
Acts Punished:
1.   Threatening another to publish a libel
concerning – him, his parents, spouse, child or
other members of his family
2.   Offering to prevent the publication of such libel
for compensation or money consideration.
The essence of this crime is blackmail, which is
defined as any unlawful extortion of money by threats
of accusation or exposure.
Blackmail can also be in the form of light threats,
which is punished under ARTICLE 283.
e.   Article 357 - Prohibited
Publication of Acts Referred to
in the Course of Official
Proceedings (Gag Law)
Elements:
1.   Offender is a reporter, editor or manager of a
newspaper, daily or magazine;
2.   He publishes facts connected with the private
life of another;
3.   Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person.
Requisites of violation:
1.   That the article published contains facts
connected with the private life of an individual;
and
2.   That such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue
and reputation of said person.
Prohibition applies even if the facts are involved in
official proceedings.
Newspaper reports on cases pertaining to adultery,
divorce, legitimacy of children, etc. are barred from
publication.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Under RA 1477, a newspaper reporter cannot be
compelled to reveal the source of the news report he
made, UNLESS the court or a House or committee of
Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by
the security of the state.
f.   Article 358 - Slander
Slander, or oral defamation is composed of two
kinds:
1.   Simple slander
2.   Grave slander, when it is of serious and insulting
nature
Factors that determine the gravity of the oral
defamation:
1.   Expressions used
2.   Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party.
3.   The surrounding circumstances.
Illustration of grave slander:
A woman of violent temper hurled at a respectable
married lady with young daughters offensive and
scurrilous epithets including words imputing
unchastity to the mother and tending to injure the
character of the daughters [U.S. v. Tolosa, G.R. No. L-
12696 (1917)]
Illustration of simple slander:
1.   Calling a person a gangster
2.   Uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger
with some provocation on the part of the
offended party
The Court does not condone the vilification or use
of scurrilous language on the part of petitioner,
but following the rule that all possible
circumstances favorable to the accused must be
taken in his favor, it is our considered view that
the slander committed by petitioner can be
characterized as slight slander following the
doctrine that: uttering defamatory words in the
heat of anger, with some provocation on the part
of the offended party, constitutes only a light
felony. [Villanueva v. People, G.R. No. 160315
(2006)]
3.   The word “putang ina mo” is a common
expression in the dialect that is often employed
not really to slander but rather to express anger
or displeasure. It is seldom, if ever taken in its
literal sense by the hearer, that is, as a reflection
on the virtue of a mother. [Reyes v. People, G.R.
Nos. L-21528-29 (1969)]
The slander need not be heard by the offended party.
Page 290 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
g.   Article 359 - Slander by Deed
Elements
1.   Offender performs any act not included in any
other crime against honor;
2.   Such act is performed in the presence of other
person/s; and
3.   Such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt
upon the offended party.
Slander by deed is a crime against honor which is
committed by performing any act which casts
dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon another
person.
Slander by deed is of two kinds
1.   Simple slander by deed
2.   Grave slander by deed
There is no fixed standard in determining whether a
slander is serious or not; hence the courts have
sufficient discretion to determine the same, basing
the finding on the attendant circumstances and
matters relevant thereto.
Slapping the face of another is slander by deed if the
intention of the accused is to cause shame or
humiliation.
Fighting the offended party with intention to insult
him is slander by deed.
Pointing a dirty finger constitutes simple slander by
deed.
Slander by deed and acts of lasciviousness –
distinguished by presence of lewd designs. If such is
present, it is an act of lasciviousness.
Slander by deed and maltreatment – the nature and
effect of maltreatment determines the crime
committed. If the offended party suffered from shame
or humiliation caused by the maltreatment, it is
slander by deed.
Slander by deed and unjust vexation – If it merely
annoys and irritates, without any other concurring
factor, it is unjust vexation. If the irritation or
annoyance was attended by publicity and dishonor, it
is slander by deed.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
h.   Article 360 - Persons
Responsible for Libel
1.   The person who publishes, exhibits or causes the
publication or exhibition of any defamation in
writing or similar means.
2.   The author or editor of a book or pamphlet.
3.   The editor or business manager of a daily
newspaper, magazine or serial publication.
4.   The owner of the printing plant which publishes a
libelous article with his consent and all other
persons who in any way participate in or have
connection with its publication.
Liability of the editor is the same as that of the
author.
Lack of participation in the preparation of libelous
articles does not shield the persons responsible from
liability.
Under Republic Act 8792, otherwise known as the
Electronic Commerce Act, a party or person acting as
a service provider incurs NO civil or criminal liability in
the making, publication, dissemination or distribution
of libelous material if:
1.   The service provider does not have actual
knowledge, or is not aware of the facts or
circumstances from which it is apparent that
making, publication, dissemination or
distribution of such material is unlawful or
infringes any rights;
2.   The service provider does not knowingly receive a
financial benefit directly attributable to the
infringing activity;
3.   The service provider does:
a.   not directly commit any infringement or
other unlawful act and
b.   does not induce or cause another person or
party to commit any infringement or other
unlawful act
c.   and/or does not benefit financially from the
infringing activity or unlawful act of another
person or party (Section 30, in relation to
Section 5, E-Commerce Law).
Where to file the criminal action? It depends on who
the offended party is.
If he is a public officer, the criminal action can only be
instituted in either:
1.   RTC of the province or city where the libelous
article is printed and first published, OR
2.   RTC of the province or city where he held office at
the time of the commission of the offense
Page 291 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
If he is a private person, the criminal action may be
brought in:
1.   RTC of the province or city where the libelous
article is printed and first published, OR
2.   RTC of the province or city where he actually
resided at the time of the commission of the
offense
In order to obviate controversies as to the venue of
the criminal action for written defamation, the
complaint or information should contain allegations
as to whether, at the time the offense was
committed, the offended party was a public officer or
a private individual and where he was actually
residing at that time.
Whenever possible, the place where the written
defamation was printed and first published should
likewise be alleged. That allegation would be a sine
qua non if the circumstance as to where the libel was
printed and first published is used as the basis of the
venue of the action. [Macasaet v. People, G.R. No.
156747 (2005)]
Civil and criminal action must be filed with the same
court.
Offended party must file the complaint for
defamation imputing a crime which cannot be
prosecuted de officio.
Libel imputing a vice or defect, not being an
imputation of a crime, is always prosecuted upon
information signed and filed by the fiscal.
i.   Article 361 - Proof of Truth
When admissible?
1.   When the act or omission imputed constitutes a
crime regardless of whether the offended party is
a private individual or a public officer.
2.   When the offended party is a Government
employee, even if the imputation does not
constitute a crime, provided it is related to the
discharge of his official duties.
Rule of actual malice [or malice in fact]: Even if the
defamatory statement is false, NO liability can attach
IF it relates to official conduct, UNLESS the public
official concerned proves that the statement was
made with actual malice, i.e., with knowledge that it
was false or with reckless disregard of WON it was
false.
That the publication of the article was an honest
mistake is not a complete defense but serves only to
mitigate damages where article is libelous per se.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Libel against a public official to establish actual malice. The prosecution bears the
An open letter addressed to the stockholders of burden of proving the presence of actual malice in
OPMC was the subject of a full-page advertisement instances where such element is required to establish
published in 5 major daily newspapers. Coyiuto, Jr., guilt. The defense of absence of actual malice, even
wrote in his capacity as Chairman of the Board and when the statement turns out to be false, is available
President of OPMC, that there was a sweetheart deal where the offended party is a public official or public
between Commissioner Mario Jalandoni of the PCGG figure.
and Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. (RCBC) to the
prejudice of the Government. Malice is presumed, however, when the offended
party is a private individual. The law presumes its
In the recent case of Vasquez v. Court of Appeals, et. existence (RPC Art 354) and the accused has the
al., the Court ruled that: "The question is whether burden of proof to show that he has a justifiable
from the fact that the statements were defamatory, reason for the defamatory statement.
malice can be presumed so that it was incumbent
upon petitioner to overcome such presumption. j.   Article 362 - Libelous Remarks
Under Art. 361 of the Revised Penal Code, if the
defamatory statement is made against a public 1.   Libelous remarks or comments
official with respect to the discharge of his official 2.   connected with the matter privileged under the
duties and functions and the truth of the allegation is provisions of Art. 354,
shown, the accused will be entitled to an acquittal 3.   if made with malice,
even though he does not prove that the imputation 4.   shall NOT exempt the author thereof nor the
was published with good motives and for justifiable editor or managing editor of a newspaper from
ends." criminal liability.
Moreover, the Court has ruled in a plethora of cases Libelous remarks or comments on matters privileged,
that in libel cases against public officials which relate if made with malice in fact, do not exempt the author
to official conduct liability will attach only if the and editor.
public official concerned proves that the statement
was made with actual malice, that is, with knowledge
that it was false. 2.  C hapter II: Incriminatory
Imputations regarding official conduct do not carry
Machinations
the presumption of malice, hence even if the
defamatory statement is false, if malice was not a.   Article 363 - Incriminating
proven, there is no libel. Here petitioner failed to Innocent Person
prove actual malice on the part of the private
respondents. Nor was the Court of the opinion that Elements:
the open letter was written to cast aspersion on the 1.   Offender performs an act
good name of the petitioner. 2.   By such an act, he incriminates or imputes to an
innocent person the commision of a crime
The paid advertisement merely served as a vehicle to 3.   Such act does not constitute perjury.
inform the stockholders of the goings-on in the
business world and only exposed the irregularities
Incriminating
surrounding the PCGG and RCBC deal and the Intriguing
Slander Innocent
parties involved. [Jalandoni v Drilon, G.R. Nos. Against Honor
Person
115239-40 (2000)]
The source of Offender made
Offender
the defamatory the utterance,
Truth is a legitimate defense but only under the performs an
utterance is where the
condition that the accused has been prompted in act by which
unknown and source of the
making the statement by good motives and for he directly
the offender defamatory
justifiable ends. [Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. incriminates
simply repeats nature of the
203335 (2014)] or imputes to
or passes the utterance is
an innocent
same to blemish known, and
There must be sufficient evidence to permit the person the
the honor or offender makes
conclusion that the accused in fact entertained commission
reputation of a republication
serious doubts as to the truth of the statement he of a crime
another thereof
published. Gross/extreme negligence is not sufficient
 
Page 292 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

As far as this crime is concerned, this has been on subsidiary imprisonment.

interpreted to be possible only in the so-called
planting of evidence. If this act is resorted to, to c.   RA 10175: The Cybercrime
enable officers to arrest the subject, the crime is
unlawful arrest through incriminating innocent Prevention Act of 2012
persons.
The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in
This crime cannot be committed through verbal Article 355 of the RPC, as amended, committed
incriminatory statements. through a computer system or any other similar
means which may be devised in the future constitute
Perjury by the offense of cybercrime punishable under the Anti-
Intriguing Cybercrime Law. [Sec. 4(c)(4) R.A. 10175]
Making False Defamation
Innocent Person
Accusations
Public and Penalty
malicious All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, as
Giving of false amended, and special laws, if committed by, through
imputation
statement under and with the use of information and communications
Act of planting calculated to
oath or making technologies shall be covered by the relevant
evidence and the cause
a false affidavit, provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to
like in order to dishonor,
imputing to the be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that
incriminate an discredit, or
person the provided for by the RPC, as amended, and special
innocent person contempt
commission of a laws, as the case may be.[Sec. 4(c)(4) R.A. 10175]
upon the
crime
offended
party

b.   Article 364 - Intriguing against

Honor
Elements:
1.   Offender disseminates any intrigue
2.   Its principal purpose is to blemish the honor or
reputation of a person.

Intriguing against honor is referred to as gossiping:

the offender, without ascertaining the truth of a
defamatory utterance, repeats the same and pass it
on to another, to the damage of the offended party

Administrative Circular 08-2008 Re: Guidelines in

the Observance of a Rule of Preference in the
Imposition of Penalties in Libel Cases
1.   This Administrative Circular does not remove
imprisonment as an alternative penalty for the
crime libel under Article 355 of the RPC
2.   The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of
sound discretion, and taking into consideration
the peculiar circumstances of each case,
determine whether the imposition of a fine alone
would best serve the interests of justice or
whether forbearing to impose imprisonment
would depreciate the seriousness of the offense,
work violence on the social order, or otherwise be
contrary to the imperative of justice;
3.   Should only a fine be imposed and the accused
be unable to pay the fine, there is no legal
obstacle to the application of the RPC provision
 
Page 293 of 296
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
  Title XIV. Quasi-Offenses
1.   Article 365 - Imprudence
and Negligence
Quasi-offenses punished:
a.   Committing through reckless imprudence any act
which, had it been intentional, would constitute a
grave or less grave felony or light felony;
b.   Committing through simple imprudence or
negligence an act which would otherwise
constitute a grave or a less serious felony;
c.   Causing damage to the property of another
through reckless imprudence or simple
imprudence or negligence;
d.   Causing through simple imprudence or
negligence some wrong which, if done
maliciously, would have constituted a light
felony.
Imprudence Negligence
Lack of skill; deficiency of Lack of foresigh;
action deficiency of perception
Failure in precaution Failure in advertence
Imprudence or negligence is not a crime itself; it is
simply a way of committing a crime. It becomes
punishable only when it results in a crime.
The rules for graduating penalties (under Art. 64)
based on mitigating and aggravating circumstances
are NOT applicable to offenses punishable thru
criminal negligence.
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE: failure to render
immediate assistance to the injured party. This
qualifying circumstance must be distinguished from
the punishable OMISSION under Article 275.
If the danger that may result from the criminal
negligence is clearly perceivable, the imprudence is
reckless. If it could hardly be perceived, the criminal
negligence would only be SIMPLE.
Criminal negligence is only a modality in incurring
criminal liability. This is so because under Article 3, a
felony may result from dolo or culpa. THEREFORE,
even if there are several results arising from ONLY
ONE CARELESSNESS, the accused may only be
prosecuted under one count for the criminal
negligence. Otherwise, double jeopardy would arise.
Elements of Reckless Imprudence:
a.   The offender does or fails to do an act
Page 294 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
b.   The doing of or the failure to do the act is
voluntary
c.   It is without malice
d.   Material damage results
e.   There is inexcusable lack of precaution on the
part of the offender, taking into consideration:
1.   His employment/occupation
2.   Physical condition
3.   Degree of intelligence
4.   Other circumstances regarding the persons,
time and place
Note:
a.   Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide
b.   Resulting in Physical Injuries
Inexcusable lack of precaution
Factors to be considered in determining inexcusable
lack of precaution:
a.   Employment or occupation
b.   Degree of intelligence and physical condition of
the offender; and
c.   Other circumstances regarding persons, time,
and place.
Force majeure is an event which cannot be foreseen,
or which being foreseen is inevitable; it implies an
extraordinary circumstance independent of the will of
the actor.
Once malice is proven, recklessness disappears.
[People v. Agliday, supra.]
Elements of Simple Imprudence
a.   There is lack of precaution on the part of the
offender
b.   The damage impending to be caused is not
immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest.
Test of negligence: Would a prudent man, in the
position of the person to whom negligence is
attributed, foresee harm as a result of the course
actually pursued? If so, it was the duty of the actor to
refrain from that course or to take precautions
against its mischievous results, and the failure to do
so constitutes negligence.
The measure of the damage should be the difference
in value of property immediately before the incident
and immediately after the repair.
Art. 64 relative to mitigating and aggravating
circumstances is not applicable to crimes committed
through negligence.
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The penalties provided in Art. 365 are not applicable
in the ff. cases:
a.   When the penalty provided for the offense is
equal to or lower than those provided in the first
two paragraphs of Art. 365, in which case the
courts shall impose the penalty next lower in
degree that that which should be imposed, in the
period which they may deem proper to apply.
b.   When, by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, the death of a
person shall be caused, in which case the
defendant shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.
When death or serious bodily injury to any person has
resulted, the motor vehicle driver at fault shall be
punished under the Penal Code.
Contributory negligence is not a defense. It only
mitigates criminal liability.
Sec. 59 of Act 3992 (Revised Motor Vehicle Law)
gives the right of way to the driver coming from the
right of another, when both are travelling on
intersecting streets of the same class. The grant of
right of way does not relieve the motorist from the
duty of keeping a lookout for motorists entering the
intersection from his left or right.
Doctrine of last clear chance
The contributory negligence of the party injured will
not defeat the action if it be shown that the accused
might, by exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the negligence of
the injured party.
Emergency rule
An automobile driver who, by negligence of another
and not by his own negligence, is suddenly placed in
an emergency and compelled to act instantly to avoid
collision or injury is not guilty of negligence if he
makes such a choice which a person of ordinary
prudence placed in such situation might make even
though he did not make the wisest choice.
One who suddenly finds himself in a place of danger,
and is required to act without time to consider the
best means that may be adopted to avoid the
impending danger, is not guilty of negligence, if he
fails to adopt what subsequently and upon reflection
may appear to have been a better method, unless the
emergency in which he finds himself is brought about
by his own negligence. [Gan v. CA, G.R. No. L-44264
(1988)]
Page 295 of 296
CRIMINAL LAW
Violation of a rule or regulation or law is proof of
negligence. But negligence cannot be predicated
upon the mere fact of minority or lack of an operator’s
license.
The penalty next higher in degree is imposed if the
offender fails to lend on the spot to the injured
parties such help as may be in his hands to give.
Carillo v. People [G.R. No. 86890 (1994)]: The
gravamen of SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE is the failure to
exercise the diligence necessitated or called for by
the situation which was NOT immediately life-
destructive BUT which culminated, as in the present
case, in the death of a human being 3 days later.
Medical malpractice, which is a form of negligence,
consists in the failure of a physician or surgeon to
apply to his practice of medicine that degree of care
and skill which is ordinarily employed by the
profession generally, under similar conditions, and in
like surrounding circumstances. [Garcia-Rueda v.
Pascasio, G.R. No. 118141 (1997)]
Res ipsa loquitur – the fact of the occurrence of an
injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances,
may permit an inference or raise a presumption of
negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case,
and present a question of fact for the defendant to
meet with an explanation. [Ramos v. CA, G.R. No.
124354 (1999)]
Requisites for the application of res ipsa loquitur
a.   The accident was of a kind which does NOT
ordinarily occur UNLESS someone is negligent;
b.   The instrumentality or agency which caused the
injury was under the exclusive control of the
person in charge; and
c.   The injury suffered must NOT have been due to
any voluntary action or contribution of the person
injured.
Ordinarily, only physicians and surgeons of skill and
experience are competent to testify as to whether a
patient has been treated or operated upon with a
reasonable degree of skill and care.
HOWEVER, testimony as to the statements and acts
of physicians and surgeons, external appearances,
and manifest conditions which are observable by any
one may be given by non-expert witnesses. [Reyes v.
Sisters of Mercy Hospital, G.R. No. 130547 (2000)]
Illustration:
People v. Carmen [G.R. No. 137268 (2001)]: It would
appear that accused-appellants are members of a
cult and that the bizarre ritual performed over the
 U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

victim was consented to by the victim's parents. With
the permission of the victim's parents, accused-
appellant Carmen, together with the other accused-
appellants, proceeded to subject the boy to a
"treatment" calculated to drive the "bad spirit" from
the boy's body. Unfortunately, the strange procedure
resulted in the death of the boy. Thus, accused-
appellants had no criminal intent to kill the boy.
common use of such descriptive phrase as 'homicide
through reckless imprudence', and the like; when the
strict technical sense is, more accurately, 'reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide'; or 'simple
imprudence causing damages to property'."

Their liability arises from their reckless imprudence

because they ought that to know their actions would
not bring about the cure. They are, therefore, guilty of
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and not of
murder.

Art. 365 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,

states that reckless imprudence consists in
voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do
an act from which material damage results by reason
of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person performing such act.

Compared to intentional felonies, such as homicide

or murder, what takes the place of the element of
malice or intention to commit a wrong or evil i: the
failure of the offender to take precautions due to lack
of skill taking into account his employment, or
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition,
and other circumstances regarding persons, time and
place.

The elements of reckless imprudence are apparent in

the acts done by accused-appellants which, because
of their lack of medical skill in treating the victim of
his alleged ailment, resulted in the latter's death. As
already stated, accused-appellants, none of whom is
a medical practitioner, belong to a religious group,
known as the Missionaries of Our Lady of Fatima,
which is engaged in faith healing.

Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro, supra.:The accused got

involved in a car accident for which he was charged
with two separate offenses (RI resulting to slight
physical injuries and RI resulting to homicide and
damage to property). He was convicted of the first
offense and he wanted the second information
quashed on the ground of double jeopardy. The Court
held that the Reckless Imprudence is a single crime
and the consequences on persons and property are
material only to determine the penalty. The
conviction or acquittal of such quasi-offense bars
subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-offense,
regardless of its various resulting acts. The law
penalizes the negligent act and not its result.

Rafael Reyes Trucking v. People, G.R. No. 129029

(2000): Much of the confusion has arisen from the
 
Page 296 of 296