Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Criminal Law Ii - Knotes
Criminal Law Ii - Knotes
BLOCK 1-K
AY 2011-2012
In Loving Memory of
Marvin ‘Marvs’ P. Reglos –
Block mate, Brother and Friend
CRIMINAL LAW II 2
K notes
ART. 114
TREASON
Q: who may commit treason?
Filipinos and aliens residing within the country
Q: So Filipinos who commit treason abroad may be held criminally liable under Philippine laws?
Yes
Q: Is there a conflict between the principle of territoriality and the fact that a Filipino who commits
treason abroad may be liable under Philippine laws?
Yes, there is.
Q: How would you then resolve the conflict? State your legal bases.
1. Under par.5, art.2 of the RPC, treason is a crime against national security. It falls within the
exceptions to the doctrine of territoriality.
2. Art.114 uses the phrase ‘Any Filipino citizen who levies war against the Philippines or adheres
to her enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere’
Q: What’s the principle behind the fact that a Filipino Citizen, as opposed to an alien, may be held liable
for treason even if he happens to commit it outside Philippine shores?
1. Because treason is a crime against national security and the State
2. and his CITIZENSHIP requires him to owe permanent allegiance to his State
Q: Why is that?
Because the ‘Treason’ he commits is treason against the host state, and he may only commit it
during his actual residence within that state.
Q: Doesn’t an alien residing in the Philippines owe the state his allegiance, too?
Yes, he does. But the allegiance he owes to the state is temporary.
He only owes it to the state during his actual residence there, in return for the protection he
receives from the state.
Q: How long does he (the alien) have to stay in the Philippines in order to be held liable for the
Commission of treason?
Any length of time would suffice for the liability to attach.
Q: Even if he stays for only a day and commits treason within that day?
Yes, even then.
Not in this case. ‘Residence’ as contemplated by the provision on treason is not synonymous to
‘residence’ contemplated by civil law. The alien may be held liable even if his ‘residence’ within
the country is only for a day.
*NB: ‘residence’ here does not connote any definite length of time. The raison de etre of the law
is to make any alien who betrays the state liable. Theoretically, even if he stays for an hour, and
commits treason within that hour, he may still be held liable. What is meant by ‘residence’ is the
stay of the alien within the country, during which stay he shares our resources, and the
protection afforded to us by the State.
Q: What if the alien was a former Japanese citizen when he committed treason, and then he becomes
Naturalized. May he still be held liable?
Yes.
Q: What are the elements of committing treason by levying war against the government?
1. There is an assembling of persons
2. The purpose is to execute a treasonable design against the government
Q: In levying war, should there be an actual military encounter with the government forces?
Not necessarily. The mere assembly of persons for the purpose of executing a treasonable
design is already made punishable.
Q: Supposing the Philippine government was at war with Japan. We were all unarmed inside this
classroom and were discussing ways and means of effectively delivering the government into the hands
of a foreign power. May we be held liable for treason?
Yes. There is compliance with all the elements of levying war against the government.
Q: Treason in the 2nd mode (adhering to the enemies and giving them aid and comfort), does the
‘adherence’ have to be a physical act?
Yes, it does.
Q: If that’s the case, then you mean that mere adherence – the favouring of the enemy mentally – is
punishable?
No. Mere mental adherence is not punishable. The adherence has to be coupled with a physical,
overt act. Adherence is qualified by the phrase ‘giving them aid and comfort’.
*NB: note the bipolar consequence. You aid the enemy, you weaken our defence.
CRIMINAL LAW II 4
K notes
Q: Supposing that during the Japanese occupation, certain Filipinos were moving around, convincing the
people that the principles of the Japanese government were better than those of the Philippines. Is
this treasonous?
No. There is only adherence in this case. Adherence and giving aid or comfort must concur to
consummate the crime of treason in the second mode.
Q: Supposing during that same occupation you were a merchant engaged in the selling of weapons. You
had transactions with the Japanese involving those weapons. Is this treasonous?
Yes. Arming them augments their capability for war and is analogous to adhering to them and
giving them aid or comfort.
Q: Suppose that you were engaged in the transportation business. Japanese hired your buses to
transport their troops to another province. Are you liable?
Yes. The act directly strengthens the enemy.
Q: Suppose you were a rice dealer and the Japanese bought rice from you. Are you liable?
No. The purpose here is purely commercial.
Q: Why not? Won’t the selling of rice to them operate to strengthen them?
It will, but there is no adherence on my part. Aid or comfort must be extended to the enemies in
their capacity as enemies, not as regular or paying customers or individuals.
Q: And if you were supplying the Japanese troops with comfort women?
I will not be liable. This does not aid them in war.
Q: Supposing you performed an act of duty in favour of the enemy government (i.e.: serving as an
official under their regime), will you be liable?
It depends. If the position is a highly-responsible one (think: policy-determining), I am liable.
If the duty contemplated is purely a ministerial one, I am not liable.
*NB: If you present 2 witnesses, but only one is believed, there is no compliance. The two
requirements must concur.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Why? (Ah, the killer question. 3 rounds of shotgun recits for us here, mates. Be careful)
Because…
1. The law requires it
2. The seriousness of the offense of treason and its corresponding afflictive penalties need to
be proven by evidence greater than proof beyond reasonable doubt.
3. The crime of treason is a continuing crime composed of many acts
4. Treason is committed in time of war and under abnormal circumstances
5. To prevent to miscarriage of justice
CRIMINAL LAW II 5
K notes
*NB: Treason is the only crime where proof beyond reasonable is not sufficient.
*NB: During arraignment, the contents of the information are read to the accused in a language
Or dialect known to him. He is asked whether or not he understands the charges levied against
Him, then he is asked how he pleads: guilty or not guilty. THIS is the ‘confession of guilt’
contemplated by Art.13, par.7
Q: If the accused pleads guilty, does the prosecution still need to present evidence against him to prove
his culpability?
Not anymore
Q: What about the defence? What proof may it present, assuming the accused pleads guilty?
The defence may present evidence to mitigate or justify the act.
*NB: this is known as a reverse trial. Defence presents evidence of mitigation, Prosecution
refutes the evidence of the defence.
Q: If during arraignment, the accused is asked if he understands the charges read to him and he says no,
what should the court do?
Exert effort to make him understand (think: translators, sign language experts etc.)
Q: And if after those efforts, he still does not understand, may the court proceed with trial?
No.
*NB: to proceed at this stage would violate the accused’s constitutional right to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusations against him. (Btw this may sound ridiculous, but there
you have it.)
Q: If the accused pleads guilty at another time, will it still be considered mitigating?
Not anymore. The plea of guilty must be done in open court before the prosecution presents its
Evidence
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES:
*Treason, definition: a breach of allegiance to the government, committed by a person who owes
allegiance to it.
*Allegiance: the obligation of fidelity and obedience owed by a citizen to his state, and the alien to the
host state. It may be permanent or temporary.
CRIMINAL LAW II 6
K notes
*The following circumstances are inherent in treason and are therefore not aggravating: evident
premeditation, abuse of superior strength and treachery.
*Treason is a war crime. It cannot be committed during times of peace. It is, however, not necessary
that there be a formal declaration of war.
*There is no such thing as ‘attempted treason’. The mere attempt to commit it is punishable.
*Treason absorbs other common crimes committed in furtherance of its goals. It may not be complexed
with them.
ART. 115
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON
Q: What are the elements?
a. In the time of war
b. 2 or more persons come to an agreement to –
1. Levy war against the government
2. Adhere to the enemies and give them aid or comfort
c. They decide to commit it
NOTES:
*Mere proposal, even without acceptance, is punishable too. If the other person accepts, the crime is
already conspiracy to commit treason.
ART. 116
MISPRISION OF TREASON
Q: Does mere silence make a person criminally liable?
Generally, No.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Supposing you have knowledge of a conspiracy to commit treason. You did not disclose it to the
authorities because to your mind, they are all corrupt. You disclosed the information instead to the
Chief of Staff. Are you liable?
No. There is no intention to keep the secret. No criminal intent
Q: The accused is prosecuted for MT, it was alleged in the information that, being a Filipino citizen, he
owed permanent allegiance to the Philippines and yet, having knowledge of persons who were armed
and who performed acts with the view of overthrowing the government, he did not disclose the same.
May he be held liable?
No. The knowledge he had was knowledge of full-blown treason already, and not a mere
conspiracy.
Q: The accused is a resident of a city, has knowledge of a conspiracy to commit treason, but refused to
disclose the same to the proper authorities because they are among the most corrupt. He disclosed his
knowledge to the AFP. Is he liable?
No. There was no intent to NOT disclose the information he had.
NOTES:
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Art.116 does not apply when the crime of treason is already committed because Art.116 speaks of
‘knowledge of conspiracy against… xxx’
*The offender in Art.116 is punished as an accessory (penalty: 2 degrees lower than that for principals in
treason), although he is a principal in the crime of misprision of treason.
*Art.116 is an exception to the rule that mere silence does not make a person criminally liable.
CRIMINAL LAW II 8
K notes
Art. 117
ESPIONAGE
Q: How is this committed?
1. By entering without authority therefor, any 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; or
2. By disclosing to the representatives of a foreign nation the contents of the articles, data, or
information referred to in par.1, art.117, which the offender had in his possession by reason of
the public office he holds
Q: You mean to say that in this first manner of commission, liability is not conditioned by citizenship?
Yes
Q: Supposing the US donated armaments, etc. to the RP for us to use against Malaysia. These arms were
stored in a warehouse in Nueva Ecija. A newspaper reporter, without permission from the government,
entered the place in order to take pictures. On his way out, he was apprehended. Is he liable?
Yes. The elements of espionage in the first mode are complete.
Q: Suppose a journalist who was accosted told the authorities that he only wanted to take pictures of
modern war machines he previously read about in the Manila Bulletin?
No. The information he intends to obtain is no longer confidential. It has been declassified.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: A high-ranking official has possession of classified information. In order to impress a foreign beauty
candidate, he shared the information with her. May he be criminally liable under the second manner of
commission?
Yes. The law speaks of ‘representatives’. It makes no distinction as to what kind of
representative. A foreign beauty candidate is a representative of her nation.
CRIMINAL LAW II 9
K notes
Art. 118
INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS
Q: How is this committed?
The offender performs unlawful or unauthorized acts, and such acts provoke or give occasion
for a war involving or liable to involve the Philippines or expose Filipino citizens to reprisals in
their persons and property.
Q: The US is involved in a war. Suppose the Philippines trained a battalion of soldiers to be deployed in
Iraq; if the person training those soldiers has no authority to do so, will he be liable?
No. He becomes liable if he is authorized to train those soldiers.
Art. 119
VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
Q: What is neutrality?
The state of taking no part in a contest of arms going on between others.
A condition of abstinence from armed hostilities.
Q: So you mean that without a regulation, a person will not be liable under this provision?
Yes.
Art. 120
CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY
Q: How is this committed?
It is in time of war in which the Philippines is involved, the offender makes correspondence with
an enemy country or a territory occupied by enemy troops; and the correspondence is either
a)prohibited by Government; b)carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; or c)containing
notice or information which might be useful to the enemy
CRIMINAL LAW II 10
K notes
Q: Supposing the Phils is at war with Malaysia. Mindanao is under control of Malaysia. You left your
boyfriend in Davao, you wrote a letter to him and sent it. The government previously restricted all mail
into Mindanao. Will you be liable?
Yes.
Q: Supposing you wrote a letter with a heart and an arrow drawn on the paper. No words were used.
Will you be liable?
Yes. ‘Ciphers and conventional signs’.
Q: May a person be held liable even if the correspondence contains innocent matters?
Even if the matters are innocent, so long as it is prohibited by the government and you send it or
commit the prohibited act, you are liable.
Q: Why is intent immaterial when the government has expressly prohibited correspondence?
Because of the possibility that some information that might prove useful to the enemy might be
unwittingly revealed.
NOTE:
Art. 121
FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY
Q: How is this committed?
There is a war in which the Philippines is involved; the offender must be owing allegiance to the
Government; the offender attempts to flee or to go to enemy country; that going is prohibited
by competent authority.
Yes. ‘Allegiance’ may be temporary or permanent. The law does not qualify.
Q: Supposing you fly to enemy country. The act is not prohibited by the government. May you be liable?
No. There must be prohibition by competent authority.
Art. 122
PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS
OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS
CRIMINAL LAW II 11
K notes
Q: What is piracy?
Robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas or in PH waters without lawful authority, and
done with animo furandi and in the spirit of universal hostility.
Q: What is a vessel?
Any craft used for the transport of passengers and cargo from one place to another through PH
waters, including all kinds and types of vessels or boats used in fishing (sec.3, PD 532)
Q: Suppose you were on board a banca in Burnham lake (Baguio City); you took out your phone and a
person suddenly seized it from you. What crime was committed?
Piracy under the RPC (because the offender was a stranger)
Yes
Q: The person who took your phone, was he a member of the complement or a passenger?
CRIMINAL LAW II 12
K notes
He was a stranger
Q: May piracy be committed in the Estero de San Miguel, beneath the Mendiola Bridge?
Yes
Q: Suppose the estero was full of garbage, may piracy still be committed?
No, the waters must at least be navigable
Q: On a banca from Mandaluyong to Makati, one of the passengers was a hold-upper, in the middle of
the river, he announced a hold-up and demanded that you give your belongings to him. What crime did
he commit?
Piracy under PD 532
Q: On a ship from Manila to Cebu: while waiting for the departure of the ship, a person suddenly
boarded the ship, pointed a knife at you, demanded that you surrender your belongings, after which, he
got off. What crime was committed?
Piracy under RPC
Q: Supposing you are in a floating casino in Manila Bay. While you were there, a person pointed a
revolver at you and demanded that you give him your winnings. What crime was committed?
Piracy under the RPC and PD 532
Q: Supposing Indonesian pirates committed the crime in Malaysian waters. They fled and encountered
engine trouble. They were brought by the Philippine Coastguard to Manila. May they be prosecuted in a
Regional Trial Court in Manila?
Yes
*NB: Piracy is a crime against the law of nations and pirates are hostes humani generis (enemies
of the human race)
RA 6235
THE ANTI-HIJACKING LAW
Q: What are the punishable acts, as far as an aircraft of Philippine registry is concerned?
CRIMINAL LAW II 13
K notes
*NB: ‘flight’ as far as an aircraft of PH registry is concerned is the crucial time element which
would determine the commission of the crime of hijacking
Q: On a PAL flight from Manila to Davao: the accused compelled the pilot to veer the plane a little to the
right for a couple of minutes. Is this a violation of RA 6235?
Yes, the accused compelled to pilot to change the course of the plane for a few minutes
Q: The accused bribed the pilot to veer the plane a little to the left in exchange for money. Is he liable
under this law?
No. There was no compulsion involved.
Q: May a plane be considered in flight when its doors are already closed but the plane itself is still on the
ground because there happens to be an engine problem?
Yes
Q: Supposing the doors were already closed, the passengers were already on board but the pilot was still
waiting for instructions from the control tower. The accused seized control of the plane during this
interval. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Is that not ridiculous? (trolling moment, mates. Say the answer loud and clear: )
Yes, sir.It isridiculous :D
Q: Supposing a group of skydivers on board a PH plane were about to stage an exhibition. At an altitude
of 15,000 ft. the door of the plane opened and the divers jumped out. The last person, instead of
jumping, seized control of the plane instead. Is he liable?
No. Legally speaking, the plane is no longer in flight, notwithstanding the fact that it is actually
flying.
Q: What are the punishable acts, as far as a plane of foreign registry is concerned?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Is it necessary that the usurping or seizing of control be done while the foreign plane is legally in
flight?
No
Q: Japan Airlines. After the plane has landed, the external doors were opened and the accused barged
into the cockpit and seized control of the plane. Is he liable?
Yes
CRIMINAL LAW II 14
K notes
Q: Under the same circumstances, except that the plane was one of PAL. Is the accused liable for
hijacking?
No
Q: May the offenders still be held liable for shipping/loading/carrying any explosive… material if they did
so on a chartered plane?
Yes
Q: Why?
The character of a public utility is NOT changed by a mere contract (i.e. the fact that it was
chartered). It remains a public utility.
Q: Why won’t an offender be held liable if the acts were to be committed on a private aircraft?
Because there is no threat to innocent passengers, and this threat is what the law seeks to
avoid. (if you do this on your own plane, go ahead. Pakamatay ka mag isa –Atty. A)
ART. 123
QUALIFIED PIRACY
Q: What are the qualifying circumstances?
1. Whenever the offenders have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape
PEOPLE v. CATANTAN
278 SCRA 761
Bellosillo, J.
FACTS:
Emiliano Catantan was found guilty of piracy for having attacked Eugene and Juan Pilapil, Jr.,
who were then fishing. He allegedly boarded the Pilapils’ pump boat, levelled his gun at Eugene,
struck the latter on the cheek and ordered Juan, Jr. to lie down. When they were far out into
sea, the engine stalled and the brothers were directed to row the boat. They saw another boat
and Catantan ordered them to approach it. He boarded the new boat, along with his co-accused,
Ursal. The outrigger of the new boat caught the front part of the Pilapils’ boat and Catantan
kicked it hard, causing the prow to break. The Pilapil brothers ended in the sea, where they
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
swam together, clinging to their boat. Catantan argues that his actions merely constituted
Grave Coercion and not Piracy; and that in order for Piracy to be committed, it is essential that
there is an attack and seizure of a vessel. He claims that he and Ursal merely boarded the
Pilapils’ boat and when aboard, used force to compel the brothers to take them to some other
place. Catantan insists that he and Ursal had no intention of permanently taking possession or
depriving the Pilapils of their boat.
ISSUE:
Did the actions of Catantan constitute Piracy as defined by Section 2, par.(d) of Presidential
Decree No. 532?
HELD:
CRIMINAL LAW II 15
K notes
YES. Sec.2, par.(d) of PD 532 defines piracy as ‘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
the complement or passengers, irrespective of the value thereof, by means of violence against
or intimidation of persons, including a passenger or member of the complement of said vessel in
Philippine waters.’ The compulsion on the Pilapils was obviously part of the act of seizing the
boat. Catantan and Ursal abandoned the Pilapils only because their pump boat broke down and
it was necessary to transfer to another boat.
- oOo -
PEOPLE v. TULIN
364 SCRA 10
Melo, J.
FACTS:
‘M/T Tabangao’ was sailing of the coast of Mindoro, carrying a total value of Php 40.4 Million in
petroleum products. It was suddenly boarded by seven fully armed pirates led by Emilio
Changco. The pirates detained the crew and took complete control of the vessel. The crew was
ordered to paint over the name ‘M/T Tabangao’ on the front and rear portions of the vessel as
well as the logo on its chimney. They were then ordered to paint the name ‘Galilee’. The crew
was forced to sail to Singapore where, following a failed attempt to anchor, it returned to
Batangas. A few days later, it sailed again to Singapore and anchored a few miles from the
shoreline where another vessel named ‘Navi Pride’ anchored beside it, to which the captive crew
was ordered by Changco to transfer the petroleum products. ‘M/T Tabangao’ returned to
Batangas, but remained at sea. 2 days later, the members of the crew were released in 3
batches, the 1st and 2nd batches were fetched from the shoreline by Cecilio Changco, Emilio
Changco’s brother. The crew called their employer and reported the incident. A series of arrests
were made and accused-appellants Tulin, Loyola, Changco, Infante and Hiong were apprehended
and charged with Qualified Piracy, to which they pleaded not guilty. Tulin, Infante and Loyola
claimed that they were standing by the beach, conversing, when ‘M/T Tabangao’s Captain and
2nd Mate approached them and asked if they wanted to work on the vessel, to which they
allegedly agreed even if they had no sea-going experience. The trial court found them guilty
beyond reasonable doubt and convicted them to Reclusion Perpetua.
ISSUES:
1. Did Republic Act 7659, amending Art.122 of the Revised Penal Code, obliterate the crime of
Piracy under PD 532?
2. Can Accused-Appellant Cheong be convicted as an accomplice despite the fact that the actions
he allegedly committed were executed outside Philippine waters and territory?
HELD:
1. NO. Art.122 of the RPC, before its amendment, provided that piracy must be committed on the
high seas by any person not a member of a ship’s complement nor a passenger. Upon its
amendment by RA 7659, the coverage of the pertinent provision was widened to include
offenses committed ‘in Philippine waters’. On the other hand, under PD 532, the coverage of the
law on piracy embraces any person, ‘including a passenger or member of the complement.’ RA
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
7659 neither superseded not amended the provisions on piracy under PD 532. Art.122, as
amended; and PD 532 exist harmoniously as separate laws.
2. YES. Although PD 532 requires that the attack and seizure of the vessel and its cargo be
committed in Philippine waters, the disposition by the pirates of the vessel and its cargo is still
deemed part of the act of piracy, hence the same need not be committed in Philippine waters.
Piracy falls under Title One, Book Two of the Revised Penal Code. As such, it is an exception to
the rule on territoriality in criminal law.
CRIMINAL LAW II 16
K notes
TITLE II
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
ART. 124
ARBITRARY DETENTION
Q: What are the classes of arbitrary detention?
1. Detaining a person without legal ground
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities
3. Delaying release
Q: How?
By proving him to be an accomplice, accessory or a principal (by inducement/indispensable
cooperation)
Q: How?
By proving a conspiracy between the private individual and the public officer
Q: May this be committed by an officer who arrested and detained a person by virtue of a warrant
issued by court?
No. The moment there is a warrant, no arbitrary detention can be committed. A warrant grants
the authority to arrest a person.
Q: What are the instances when a warrantless arrest may be considered lawful?
1. When the offender has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an
offense in the presence of the arresting officer
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
2. When the arresting officer has personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances of the
commission of the crime
3. When the person arrested is a prisoner who has escaped
Q: May a crime be committed in the presence of an officer who is blind? Deaf? Both?
Yes; Yes; and Yes.
Q: Explain.
Said officer still has other senses with which to determine the commission of a crime.
CRIMINAL LAW II 17
K notes
Q: Under arbitrary detention, is it necessary that the arrest is without legal ground?
Yes
Q: Under the 1st manner, suppose you were walking home and you saw A,B,C entering the house of your
neighbor, carrying out their plan to rob the latter. May you as a private individual arrest them?
Yes. The crime is being committed in my presence.
Q: Supposing one night, while on your way home, you saw Pedro tinkering with the padlock of your
gate. May you arrest him?
Yes. He is attempting to commit an offense.
Q: Are you sure that he is? Suppose he told you he was merely curious. May you still arrest him?
Yes. I can link the overt act of tinkering with the gate to the commission of robbery or trespass
to dwelling. It’s also illogical for him to be tinkering with a padlock at that time of the night. The
circumstances tend to prove robbery.
Q: Under the first instance of a warrantless arrest (i.e: the offender has committed a crime). Give an
example
Q: Supposing on your way to San Beda, you saw a commotion. A was stabbed by B. They were 5 meters
away from you. B starts to run. You stopped him and proceeded to arrest him. Were your actions
lawful?
Yes. A crime was just committed in my presence.
Q: One day you saw Juan stab Pedro. You failed to arrest him. After a month, you saw Juan walking near
your house. May you arrest him?
Yes. The crime was committed in my presence
Q: There was a commotion in front of UE. While on your way there, you saw people running towards
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
your direction. You asked them what happened. They told you that a person was stabbed in front of the
university. You reached UE and saw the victim. He pointed to a running figure and told you that the said
figure was the stabber. You ran after the suspect but lost him in the crowd. When you reached Morayta,
you saw a man wearing a bloody shirt. May you arrest him?
Yes. There is probable cause to believe that he was the one who committed the offense. I talked
to the victim and obtained personal knowledge of the facts of the crime. I can link the bloody
shirt to the facts. This gives me probable cause to believe that the man was indeed the stabber.
Q: Supposing you did not get to talk to the victim, you simply heard the shouts about the fleeing
stabber. You saw a man with a knife somewhere along Morayta. He was cleaning his knife. May you
arrest him?
CRIMINAL LAW II 18
K notes
No. I do not have personal knowledge of the facts of the crime. I may not unilaterally assume
that he committed the stabbing simply because I saw him cleaning a knife.
Q: Supposing the victim told you the man that stabbed him is tall, white, with a prominent chin and
dressed in a white shirt. When you reached Morayta, you saw a man fitting the description. May you
arrest him?
No. The facts are too general. They are not what the law contemplates by ‘personal knowledge
of facts’ – they aren’t enough to sustain a lawful warrantless arrest. They do not constitute
probable cause.
*NB: going by the above description, anybody can be the stabber. ‘Tall, white, with a prominent
chin and wearing a white shirt’ – perhaps half the male population of metro manila can fit the
description
Q: Ms. Palay is a victim of rape. Together with her parents, she proceeded to the NBI to report the
incident. Due to the influence of the media, the case became well-known. A task force was organized,
this task force was independent of the NBI. The task force learned that the rapist was in Bacolod. They
went there, and found him. May the lawfully arrest him without a warrant?
No. There is no personal knowledge, merely hearsay knowledge.
Q: Under the same facts, you were in Bacolod airport and saw a man wearing a jacket with the name
‘Mabelle Palay’ embroidered on it. May you arrest him?
No. I have no personal knowledge of the facts.
*NB: the jacket alone is not a sufficient basis for probable cause.
Q: 10 cars were carnapped from the Toyota showroom. The incident was reported to your office. The
following morning, Manila PD received a call from a secret informant that the carnappers were on their
way to Binondo and will have dinner at one of the restaurants there. 5 officers were dispatched to the
scene and at 8pm, the carnappers arrived. May the officers effect an arrest?
No. They merely have hearsay knowledge.
Q: Why not?
Because suspicion is not the same as probable cause.
Q: X stabbed someone and was chased by people as he fled. He was holding a knife and wearing a shirt
stained with blood. From the opposite direction, a police officer saw the commotion. He arrested X. Is
the arrest a lawful one?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Yes
Q: Your house was robbed. You saw the robbers as they fled. You were able to give a description of
them to the police. After 3 days, the officers saw a person who fitted the descriptions you gave. Is the
warrantless arrest lawful?
No. The officers had enough time to secure a warrant.
Q: Y was killed by an unknown assailant. The officers got a tip that X was the offender. They arrested
him. X voluntarily admitted that he did it although he was not asked by the officers to do so. He was
detained. Was there arbitrary detention?
None. Once X made the confession, the officers had a right to arrest him.
NOTES:
*There is detention when a person is placed in confinement or there is restraint on his liberty
*The person detained need not be ‘restrained’ literally. He may even be able to walk around. The
essence of detention is that the person is not allowed to leave of his own volition and his liberty is
curtailed.
*Although the primary persons liable for this crime are public officers/employees, private individuals
who conspire with public officers may also be liable
ART. 125
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL
AUTHORITIES
Q: What are the elements?
1. The offender is a public officer/employee
2. He has detained a person for some legal ground
3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within –
a. 12 hrs, for crimes/offenses punishable by light penalties or their equivalent
b. 18 hrs, for crimes/offenses punishable by correctional penalties/their equivalent
c. 36hrs, for crimes/offenses punishable by capital punishment or afflictive penalties, or
their equivalent
*NB: the filing of the information may be waived if a preliminary investigation is asked for
Q: So you’re saying that the delivery here does not pertain to actual physical delivery?
Yes. What is meant by delivery is the filing of the complaint/information/charge
Q: How is that?
CRIMINAL LAW II 20
K notes
The filing of the proper complaint puts the accused under the ambit of judicial protection. The
courts will take it from there. If certain actions (i.e.: conveyance to prison or facilities like an
asylum) is necessary, the courts may order them. Without the complaint, and the protection of
the law, the accused is open to all sorts of abuse.
Q: If the detention was illegal to begin with (i.e.: done in excess of the period for filing the
complaint/information allowed by law), does a subsequent filing cure the illegality?
No
Q: May the officers ask the accused to sign a waiver concerning the detention?
Yes, but the waiver must be executed by the accused under oath and with the assistance of
counsel, in order to avoid a violation of the accused’s constitutional rights.
Q: If the offender is not a public officer, or is a public officer acting in a private capacity, what is the
crime committed?
Illegal detention
Q: May a public officer who arrested an offender by virtue of a warrant of arrest be held liable for
arbitrary detention?
No. The presence of a warrant takes the act out of the contemplation of Art. 125
*NB: Art.125 applies only when the arrest is made without a valid warrant of arrest AND the
subsequent warrantless arrest is a lawful one.
Q: Supposing the accused was delivered to the fiscal/prosecutor, does art.125 still apply?
Yes. The fiscal is not part of the judiciary.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Is a turnover to the PNP sufficient compliance with the law? The Ombudsman? The Public Prosecutor?
The Provincial Governnor?
No to all the above-mentioned officials, they are not part of the judiciary
Q: Suppose you arrested a robber by virtue of a warrant of arrest. Due to bad weather conditions, you
failed to deliver him to the proper authorities. May you be held liable?
No, there is a warrant of arrest, I can detain him for as long as the circumstances warrant
Q: Suppose you killed a neighbour in the course of your town fiesta. There was a police officer present
and he arrested you because he saw the killing happen. Within how many hours must he deliver you to
the proper authorities?
36 hours, the crime I committed is punishable by an afflictive penalty (homicide/murder)
CRIMINAL LAW II 21
K notes
Q: And if you were delivered within 48 hours, what crime did the officer commit?
Violation of Art. 125
Q: Supposing the police officer could not deliver you within 36 hours, what should he do?
Release me.
Q: Assuming that the detention was illegal to begin with, does this affect the validity of your arrest?
Not necessarily. The arrest may have been valid at its inception, notwithstanding that the
subsequent detention was illegal.
Q: As a police officer, you validly arrested a murderer. Instead of delivering him to the proper judicial
authorities, you proposed a different deal: he would serve as your manservant for a year. He agreed.
What crime may you be charged with?
Art.125
Q: Why isn’t a public officer liable if he failed to deliver the accused to the judicial authorities beyond the
specified periods in Art. 125 when the arrest was effected by virtue of a valid warrant?
Because the accused is already within the sphere of judicial protection. The issuance of a
warrant presupposes that a criminal information sheet was already filed before a competent
court.
Q: A police officer delivered a murderer to the public prosecutor on the 37 th hour following the incident.
The prosecutor filed an information 3 days later. Is the police officer liable under this provision?
Yes
Q: When an officer releases a person because he could not deliver that person to the proper judicial
authorities within the timeframe provided for in this provision, may he be held criminally liable?
No, but he may be held administratively liable
ART. 126
DELAYING RELEASE
Q: Who are the public officers most likely to violate this provision?
Wardens and jailers; bailiffs, sheriffs, and clerks of court as far as service of notice is concerned
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example of a proceeding for the liberation of a person contemplated by this provision
CRIMINAL LAW II 22
K notes
ART. 127
EXPULSION
Q: What are the elements?
1. Offender = public officer/employee
2. He expels a person from the Philippines or compels a person to change his residence
3. The offender is not authorized by law to do so
Q: Suppose there is a convict who has already served the minimum of his sentence and was allowed
parole. The condition of his parole fixes his residence in a different place, against his own will. Is the
condition valid?
Yes, the law on probation allows the court to fix conditions for a person’s parole. The
compulsion is authorized by law.
Q: The Mayor of Manila ordered the arrest of prostitutes in order to clean up the city and to stop
prostitution. He had them brought to Mindanao. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: May an alien be deported by the Commission on Immigration and Deportation without violating this
provision?
Yes, if the alien is an undesirable alien
Q: Suppose X, a Filipino citizen, was refused re-entry into the PH after he had voluntarily left the country
a year before. May the act of refusal be considered as forcing him to change his residence?
Yes
Q: Is a threat to national security a valid reason for expelling a citizen?
No
Q: Give instances when a person may be lawfully compelled to change his address
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.128
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE
*NB: Pay special attention to this provision. It almost always comes up in the Midterm Exam
Q: Under the first manner, must entry be done against the owner’s will?
Yes
Q: Suppose there is a judicial order for the entry, May the officer be liable?
No
Q: Suppose the house was made of cardboard. May the officer still be held liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose one of the requisites is missing, what is the legal effect on the warrant?
The warrant becomes null and void
CRIMINAL LAW II 24
K notes
Q: Suppose the search warrant was not obtained lawfully, what is its effect on the personal property
seized?
The things seized are inadmissible as evidence against the accused
*NB: Recall the Doctrine of the Fruit of the Poisonous Tree (you can thank Justice Holmes for the
cheesy label btw)
Q: The NBI conducted a surveillance operation for 2 weeks, after which the agents were convinced that
there is indeed a shabu lab inside a certain compound. They applied for a search warrant for a violation
of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act (CDDA) and for Illegal Possession of Firearms. Is the warrant
issued by the court a valid one?
No, it was issued for 2 offenses. The agents should have applied for 2 separate warrants.
Q: A warrant was issued for a violation of the CDDA. When the agents entered the compound, they saw
a warehouse whose door was open, through which they could see high-powered firearms. They seized
the firearms. May those same firearms be used as evidence against the owners of the compound?
Yes. Although the warrant specified a search for illicit drugs only, the seizure of the firearms
may be justified under the Plain View Doctrine
*NB: The Plain View Doctrine allows officers to seize incriminating evidence so long as the items
seized were within their plain view. What is meant by ‘plain view’ however is that the items
must be (1)open to eye and hand and that (2)the incriminating nature of the items is obvious or
apparent to the officers seizing them. It does NOT allow the officers to SEARCH for the items if
the same items are not included in the warrant and are not within plain view.
Q: Suppose the warrant issued was for the seizure of equipment etc for the production of shabu, and
stated the location of the shabu lab as being ‘inside a compound, within a white house with a blue gate’.
Is the warrant valid?
No. There is no particularity of description. Any compound or house could fit the description.
Q: A warrant was issued for Illegal Possession of Firearms. It ordered the peace officers to seize high-
powered firearms in the condominium unit of the accused located on the 5 th floor of a building. The
agents saw that there were several other units on that floor, so they knocked on the door of the 1 st unit
there and inquired about the one they were searching for. The tenant pointed to the one on the far end.
The agents raided that unit and seized the firearms. May the firearms be used as evidence?
No. There was an intervention of a third person in conducting the search and seizure. The
warrant did not fulfill the requirements for validity. It did not state with particularity the place
to be searched.
Q: A warrant was issued against 4 accused for violation of the internal revenue law. It ordered the
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
seizure of ‘all documents contained inside 2 cabinets in the office of the accused’, the agents
implemented the warrant and seized each piece of paper found within the cabinets. The prosecutor
sifted through the papers and chose the relevant ones and then presented them as evidence. May the
papers be admitted as evidence against the accused, in view of their relevance to the offense charged?
No. They were illegally obtained. The warrant was in the nature of a general warrant, it did not
contain a particularity of description of things to be seized.
Q: NBI agents applied for a search warrant in order to search a house said to be a shabu lab. It was
almost 5pm when they arrived at the sala of the judge. The judge was in a hurry and instructed the clerk
of court to receive whatever evidence the agents were to present in support of their application for the
warrant, to draft the warrant, and to bring the same to the judge. Everything was done by the clerk,
CRIMINAL LAW II 25
K notes
who left a blank space for the signature of the judge. The clerk brought the order to the judge who
signed it. The NBI agents implemented the warrant. Is the warrant valid?
No, probable cause was not determined by the judge
Q: Suppose the judge was not in his sala. You were one of the NBI agents. You were pressed for time so
you asked the judge’s wife – who was present –to sign the warrant. The wife happened to be an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Is the search warrant valid?
No, the duty to determine probable cause is a personal one. The only person who could have
issued it was the judge, not his wife.
Q: In the course of a search for violation of the CDDA, NBI agents inadvertently came across unlicensed
firearms. May the seize the guns and use them as evidence?
No
Q: A SW was issued directing officers to seize firearms in a unit on the 3rd floor of ABC Condominium.
When the NBI agents got there, they found many units. They searched every room until they found the
one containing the firearms. Was the search and subsequent seizure valid?
No, the fact that they had to search roomtoroom presupposes that the warrant did not contain
a sufficiently particular description of the place to be searched
Q: Suppose the accused owned the entire 3rd floor. Was the room-to-room search valid?
Yes
Q: A SW was issued. The place described was a ‘2-storey blue house within XYZ compound’. When the
officers arrived there, they found 3 two-storey houses. They entered each of the houses and served the
warrant. Were their actions lawful?
No
Q: Suppose then that when the officers arrived at XYZ compound, they found no 2-storey blue house.
One officer asked the guard on duty and the guard told them the house they were looking for was on
the other street. They followed the guard’s instructions and found the house. They served the warrant.
Was the service of warrant lawful?
No
Q: Suppose the warrant described the place to be searched as a ‘rainbow painted house – blue door,
pink roof, yellow windows’. When the officers arrived, they served the warrant. Was the service valid?
Yes (‘hard to miss a house painted so garishly’ –Atty A.)
*NB: Why the outlandish hypotheticals, you ask. Simple enough: He’s drilling it into you: the NBI
agent/ officers implementing the warrant should NOT need nor ask any help in identifying the
place to be searched because once they do;the warrant does not contain a sufficient description
of the locale to be searched.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the person who committed the punishable acts under this provision is a private individual,
what crime did he commit?
Trespass to dwelling
Q: When may we say that there has been entry against the will of the owner?
When the entry is effected against an express or implied prohibition
CRIMINAL LAW II 26
K notes
Q: A police officer who is your neighbour noticed that the front door to your house was slightly ajar. HE
entered to investigate what was going on because it aroused his suspicion. Is this a violation?
No
Q: There was a sign on the door ‘DO NOT ENTER AT ALL TIMES’ but the door was slightly open. Would
entry be a violation?
Yes, the sign constitutes an express prohibition
Q: Suppose the door was locked, and the police officer picked the lock in order to enter and investigate.
Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the sign says ‘ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK’. Would entry make the officer liable?
No
Q: An officer saw your younger brother enter your house with an unlicensed firearm. The door was half-
open but a sign said ‘Strangers Keep Out’. The officer entered. Is he liable?
Yes – express prohibition
Q: Suppose the officer entered and sat on the sofa. The door was closed but not locked. Is he liable?
Yes, closed door = implied prohibition
Q: Under the second manner of commission (searching papers and effects without the owner’s previous
consent), is it necessary that the entry be done without the consent of the owner?
No. What is punished here is an unconsented search, not entry.
*NB: It’s easy enough to imagine the scenario contemplated by the law. For instance, the officer
entered without the owner’s consent, but when the owner saw the officer, he did not complain.
The officer then proceeded to conduct a search. Notice that the owner subsequently allowed
the entry, but did not give permission for a search.THATsearch is what the second manner
punishes, not the earlier entry. The essence of the crime is searching without consent,
regardless of whether or not the entry was done with or without permission.
Q: What if the owner consented to a search of the living room and the officer continued searching into
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
the hallways and the bedrooms, is he liable under the second manner?
Yes. The permission was only for the living room.
Q: A police officer entered your house with your consent. While waiting in the sala, he saw an unlicensed
firearm atop the TV. He seized the same. Were his actions valid?
Yes, under the plain view doctrine
Q: Suppose you allowed a police officer to enter the living room. You left to make him some coffee.
When you returned, he was searching the room. You asked him what he was doing and he said ‘trying to
look for shabu’. You said ‘there’s no shabu here, if you want, you can search the other rooms of the
house’. Was the search in the living room valid?
No, there was no previous consent
CRIMINAL LAW II 27
K notes
Q: So he is liable for the search in the living room, but not in the other rooms?
Yes
Q: Suppose that while waiting for you, he opened several cabinets and drawers in your house, and was
able to seize an unlicensed gun and shabu. Was the search valid?
No, the items were not in plain view and are consequently inadmissible as evidence
Q: Under the 3rd manner of commission (entering surreptitiously, refusing the leave the premises after
having been required to do so), what consummates the crime?
Refusal to leave the premises
Q: Give an example
Q: If the entry was made through the main door which was closed but was not locked, and the owner
required the officer to leave, which the officer did, is the he still liable?
Yes, under the 1st manner of commission
ART.129
MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED SEARCH WARRANT AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE
OF A LEGALLY OBTAINED WARRANT
Q: Give examples of other crimes which, by direct provision of law, may not be complexed under Art.48?
-Direct Bribery (Art. 210)
-Maltreatment of Prisoners (Art. 235)
CRIMINAL LAW II 28
K notes
Q: Suppose NBI agents, through a false affidavit, procured a search warrant. During the search, they
destroyed several furniture, committed acts of lasciviousness against the daughter of the owner and
kicked the son. What crimes were committed?
1. Maliciously obtaining a search warrant
2. Perjury
3. Physical Injuries
4. Malicious Mischief (resulting in destruction of property)
5. Acts of lasciviousness
*all separate crimes
Q: Suppose you had a persistent suitor whom you don’t like and so rejected. He turned out to be an NBI
officer. To get back at you, he caused an application for a search warrant against your brother for
keeping firearms in your house, which is not true. The warrant was issued. What crimes may he be liable
for?
1. Maliciously obtained search warrant and
2. Perjury
*separate crimes
Q: Suppose he came to you and told you that unless you answer him, he will implement the warrant. In
order to save your brother, you answered him. Is he still liable for procuring a warrant without just
cause?
Yes, the crime is already consummated. The warrant need not be implemented for liability to
attach.
Q: Suppose that when he applied for a search warrant, he had no legal cause, but when the warrant was
served, an unlicensed firearm was found beneath the pillow of your brother. May the officer still be
liable for procuring a search warrant without just cause?
No, not anymore
Q: NBI agents, after conducting a surveillance operation, applied for a warrant. The application
contained 2 offenses: violation of the CDDA and Illegal possession of firearms. The judge issued the
search warrant. The agents raided the shabu lab and were able to seize several shabu paraphernalia and
50 unlicensed firearms. The same were deposited in the custody of the NBI. The items were sought to be
used as evidence in court. Are they admissible?
No, the warrant was not lawfully obtained, the application contained 2 offenses. ‘No warrant
shall issue except for a single offense’ (Rule 126, Revised Rules of Court)
Q: Even if the evidence is vital to the case and would prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt?
Yes, even if
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: The rule on the validity of a search warrant is strictly construed against the State. This is
because a warrant is the state’s most potent weapon for intruding into the privacy of a person.
When a warrant is illegally obtained, all evidence seized by virtue of that warrant are tainted
(fruits of the poisonous tree) and may not be used as evidence against the accused, regardless
of their relevance or materiality to the case.
Q: A warrant was issued by the RTC for the search of a house suspected to be a shabu lab. The things to
be seized were particularly described and thereafter, the NBI agents conducted the search. They saw an
unlicensed firearm which was not mentioned in the search warrant. They seized the same. A
corresponding case for illegal possession of firearm was filed. Is the evidence admissible?
Yes. The seizure of the unlicensed firearm was done because a crime was then being committed
in the presence of the NBI agents and the object of the crime was the unlicensed firearm.
CRIMINAL LAW II 29
K notes
Q: You’re saying that a continuing crime was being committed? What crime?
Yes – illegal possession of firearm
Q: A search warrant was issued for shabu and other paraphernalia. After digging around in the back of
the house, the agents found unlicensed firearms. Are the same admissible?
No, the firearms were not seized by virtue of a lawful search, they were also not within the
ambit of the plain view doctrine
Q: Under the second manner (abuse in the service of a warrant), suppose that in the implementation of
a SW lawfully obtained, an officer with his rifle hit an occupant who did not even resist the search to
begin with. The occupant died. What crime/s were committed?
1. Art.129(2) – abuse in the service of a warrant; and
2. Homicide
*separate crimes
Q: Suppose one of the agents destroyed your things during the implementation of a search warrant
lawfully obtained. What crime/s were committed?
1. Abuse in the service of a warrant; and
2. Malicious mischief
*separate crimes
Q: Does the law require that for abuse to be committed, the search warrant must first be lawfully
obtained?
Yes
*NB: NOT the right to privacy, do NOT say ‘right to privacy’ and ruin your recit streak :)
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
PEOPLE v. SINOC
275 SCRA 357
Narvasa, C. J.
FACTS:
Isidoro Viacrusis was motoring on a company Pajero, driven by Tarsisio Guijapon. As they
approached the public cemetery of Claver, several armed men stopped them. Claiming to be
New People’s Army members, the men boarded the vehicle and ordered Guijapon to proceed.
Once in Barobo, Surigao del Norte, the armed men ordered Viacrusis and Guijapon to alight, led
them with their hands bound behind their backs to a coconut grove, and shot them. Viacrusis
survived. Witness Marlyn Legaspi saw the victims, and the Pajero, which left the scene. The
police, acting on a tip-off by a secret informant, went to the Bliss Housing Project where they
found Danilo Sinoc approaching the stolen Pajero, and found on his person the keys to the
CRIMINAL LAW II 30
K notes
vehicle. Sinoc was arrested. 4 months after the arrest, Sinoc was brought to the Public
Attorney’s Office where police asked Atty. Alfredo Jalad for permission to take Sinoc’s
statement in writing. Sinoc confessed to the occurrences leading up to his arrest after he was
informed of his rights by Atty. Jalad. The former was then brought to the City Prosecutor that
he might take oath on his statement. After having ascertained the voluntariness of the affidavit,
the Prosecutor affixed his signature. During trial, Sinoc proferred an alibi and alleged further
that he was not informed of his constitutional rights during custodial interrogation and that he
was made to sign the affidavit of confession under duress.
ISSUE:
Was there a valid warrantless arrest?
HELD:
YES. An arrest without a warrant may be liawfully effected by a peace officer when an offense
has just been committed and he has personal knowledge of the facts indicating that the person
to be arrested has committed it. There is no question that the police were aware that an offense
had just been committed, that an informant saw the Pajero and that Sinoc had the key to the
vehicle. Sinoc’s link to the stolen vehicle was palpable and the officers had no alternative save to
arrest him. It was their clear duty to do so, the omission of which would have been inexcusable.
- oOo –
PEOPLE v. SALVATIERRA
276 SCRA 55
Kapunan, J.
FACTS:
Charlie Fernandez was walking towards the direction of Quiapo, along M. de la Fuente Street
when he was met by 4 persons, one of whom was David Salvatierra. Salvatierra lunged at
Fernandez with a bladed instrument, hitting him in the chest. Charlie Fernandez died of his
wound. The incident was witnessed by Milagros Martinez, who at the time, was afraid and told
no one save for her daughter. Meanwhile, Marciano Fernandez, Charlie’s father, reported the
death of his son to the Western Police District (WPD) where an advance information was
prepared, indicating that 4 unidentified persons perpetrated the crime. 3 months after the
stabbing, David Salvatierra was apprehended for causing a commotion along Miguelin Street,
Sampaloc, Manila. The arresting officers found out that he was a suspect in the killing of Charlie
Fernandez and turned him over to the WPD. Salvatierra was charged with murder and he
pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented Milagros Martinez, who had been persuaded to
testify by Marciano Fernandez, and the trial court found Salvatierra guilty as charged. On
appeal, Salvatierra assigns as error the trial court’s failure to find that the warrantless arrest for
the offense of malicious mischief – which led to his detention for the alleged murder of Charlie
Fernandez – was unconstitutional.
ISSUE:
Were the irregularities in the warrantless arrestof David Salvatierra for the crime of murder
deemed waived by his failure to raise them before entering his plea?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
HELD:
YES. Accused-appellant Salvatierra is estopped from questioning his arrest considering that he
never raised it before entering his plea. Any objection involving a warrant of arrest or in the
procedure in the acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of an accused must be made before
he enters his plea. Otherwise, the objection is deemed waived. Consequently, any irregularity
attendant to his arrest, if any, had been cured by his voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of
the trial court when he entered his plea and participated during trial.
- oOo –
CRIMINAL LAW II 31
K notes
PEOPLE v. FLORES
358 SCRA 319
Ynares-Santiago, J.
FACTS:
Samson Sayam was last seen drinking beer in the company of Sgt. Winnie Tampioc, and Citizens
Armed Force Geographical Unit (CAFGU) members Aaron Flores, Sulpecio Silpao and Edgar
Villeran. They left the store where they were drinking and walked towards the direction of the
military detachment headquarters, after which, witnesses heard gunshots. Despite diligent
efforts by Sayam’s mother and relatives to locate him, he has not been found. The prosecution
contends that Sayam was kidnapped and illegally detained pursuant to a conspiracy among the
accused. The trial court rendered a decision acquitting Sgt. Tampioc on the grounds of
reasonable doubt, and convicting Flores, Villeran and Silpao of the crime of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention.
ISSUES:
1. Did the trial court err in ruling that the accused-appellants committed kidnapping and serious
illegal detention?
2. Are the accused guilty of arbitrary detention under Art.124?
HELD:
1. YES. The crime of kidnapping and serious illegal detention has the following elements: (a) the
offender is a private individual; (b) he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner
deprives the latter of his liberty; (c) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and (d)in
the commission of the offense, the following circumstances are present: (i) the kidnapping or
detention lasts for more than 3 days; (ii) it is committed simulating public authority; (iii) any
serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill
him are made; or (iv) the person kidnapped is a minor, female, or public officer. Accused-
appellants, being members of the local Citizen Armed Force Geographical Unit (CAFGU), are not
private individuals but public officers. As such, they can only be held liable for the crime of
arbitrary detention.
2. NO. Detention is defined as the actual confinement of a person in an enclosure or in any manner
depriving him of his liberty. The records show no evidence sufficient to prove that Samson
Sayam was detained arbitrarily by accused-appellants. While the prosecution witness testified
that they were seen walking with Sayam toward the direction of the detachment headquarters,
there is no evidence that he was actually confined there or anywhere else. The fact that Sayam
has not been seen or heard from since he was last seen with the accused-appellants does not
prove that he was detained and deprived of his liberty. The fact of detention, whether illegal or
arbitrary, was not clearly established by credible evidence. Likewise, there was no proof that
there was actual intent on the part of the accused-appellants to deprive Sayam of his liberty.
That Sayam is missing up to this date cannot be a basis for the trial court to render conviction.
Mere suspicion is insufficient to convict the accused-appellants.
NOTES
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*On warrants. A question was once asked in Constitutional Law II (under the coverage of ‘Search and
Seizure’) whether or not a warrant could in fact contain more than one offense. The class suffered a
shotgun round, and was made to say ‘yes’ despite deep instincts to the contrary. It was said that a
warrant could in fact contain more than one offense IF it was issued for (1) complex crimes; or (2) special
complex crimes. We asked Atty. A for clarification and he spent 30 whole minutes drilling it into us: a
warrant CANNOT – EVER – contain more than A SINGLE offense.
*Notwithstanding the presence of art.48, RPC on complex crimes, a warrant may still NOT contain two
or more offenses. The complexing is done by the PROSECUTOR, NOT the arresting officers; and it’s done
AFTER a warrant has been served because the Prosecutor looks at the evidence obtained through that
very warrant and determines the degree of perversion – and hence, culpability – of the
CRIMINAL LAW II 32
K notes
accusedfollowing the formula: did one offense result in two or more grave or less grave offenses? Was
one a necessary means to commit the other? Beyond that, complexing cannot be assumed. Besides,
what is the basis of the arresting officers to apply for a warrant in connection with a complex or special
complex crime? And what basis would the issuing Judge have to find probable cause for a complex or
special complex crime? ‘If I were counsel for the defence, I would move for the nullification of your
warrant. The best remedy is to apply for TWO separate warrants’ –Atty. A
ART.130
SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT A WITNESS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender = public officer/employee
2. He is armed with a search warrant legally obtained
3. He searches the domicile, papers or other belongings of any person
4. The owner or any member of his family, or 2 witnesses residing in the same locality are not
present
Q: What is the order of the people who must witness the search?
1. Homeowner
2. Members of the family who are of sufficient age and discretion
3. Responsible members of the community (2)
Q: Are 2 housemaids considered ‘witnesses’, in the event that the owner and blood relatives are not
present?
Yes
Q: 2 Barangay tanods?
Yes
Q: Suppose the owner was not present, but his 2 daughters aged 12 and 8 respectively were there. May
the search be made?
No
Q: Why not?
The members of the family must be of sufficient age or discretion
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: What about 2 neighbors whom you were not in good terms with?
They may be witnesses. The law does not require that the owner be on good terms with them.
ART.131
PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
CRIMINAL LAW II 33
K notes
Q: Under the 1st mode of commission (prohibiting or interruption the holding of an assembly without
legal ground/dissolving the same), what constitutional right is safeguarded?
The right to peaceful assembly
Q: If the meeting that was interrupted or dissolved is a session of the city council, and the dissolution is
done by a public officer, is Art. 131 applicable?
No, the crime in this case is a crime against a legislative body, not punishable under this article
Q: May a police officer stop a peaceful meeting taking place in a freedom park?
No. By law (BP 880), meetings in freedom parks need not be conducted pursuant to a permit.
The officer has no lawful cause to interrupt the peaceful meeting
Q: Suppose you and your classmates are failing Criminal Law 2. You assembled in front of San Beda
without a permit, demanding the removal of Atty. Amurao. Are you liable?
Yes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: If you conducted it in front of the San Beda gate, may you be arrested without a warrant?
Yes
CRIMINAL LAW II 34
K notes
Q: You decided to start the rally from España to Mendiola. It was a spontaneous decision. May you be
intercepted anywhere between those areas and arrested?
Yes
Q: You conducted a rally at a freedom park. In the course of the rally, you uttered libellous speeches.
May the rally be dispersed?
Yes, it has ceased to be peaceful
Q: Under the 2nd mode of commission (hindering a person from joining any lawful association/attending
any of its meetings), what constitutional right is safeguarded?
The right to association
Q: Your distant relative, a police officer, prevented you from joining an unrecognized fraternity within
San Beda College of Law. Is he liable?
Yes, the fraternity is not necessarily an unlawful association, notwithstanding the fact that San
Beda Law does not recognize it
Q: Same facts, except that the organization you wanted to join was the Abu Sayyaf. Is your relative
liabel?
No
Q: And if you wanted to join the National Democratic Front-New People’s Army (NDF-NPA)?
He is not liable
Outline of Definitions
Public Assembly:
Public Place:Includes any highway, boulevard, avenue, road, street, bridge, or other thoroughfare,
CRIMINAL LAW II 35
K notes
park, plaza, square and/or any open space of public ownership where the people are allowed access
Freedom Parks: Parks duly established by every City or Municipality where demonstrations and
meetings may be held at any time without the need of any prior permit
Maximum Tolerance: The highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other peace-
keeping authorities shall observe during a public assembly or in the dispersal of the same
When Permits are required: organization and holding of a public assembly in a public place
No permits required for the use of freedom parks duly established by law
When the assembly is to be held on private property, the consent of the owner is needed
Salient Provisions
Sec.5 – Application Requirements: The application shall be in writing, shall include the names of the
leaders/organizers; the purpose of the assembly; date, time, duration thereof; the place/streets to
be used; and the probable number of persons participating; and the transport and public address
system to be used. The application shall be filed with the office of the Mayor of the city of
municipality in whose jurisdiction the intended activity is to be held, at least 5 working days before
the scheduled activity.
Sec.6 – Action to be taken on the Application: The Mayor/any official acting in his behalf has the
duty to issue or grant a permit unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the public assembly
will create a clear and present danger to public order, public safety, public convenience, public
morals and public health. The Mayor/official acting in his behalf shall act on the application within 2
working days from the date the application was filed, failing which, the permit shall be deemed
granted. Should for any reason, the Mayor/official refuse to accept the application for a permit, said
application shall be posted by the applicant on the premises of the office of the Mayor and it shall be
deemed to have been filed. If the mayor is of the view that there is imminent and grave danger of a
substantive evil warranting the denial/modification of the permit, he shall immediately inform the
applicant who must be heard on the matter. Action on the permit shall be in writing and served on
the applicant within 24hrs. If the mayor/acting official denies the application/modifies the terms
thereof, the applicant may contest the decision in an appropriate court of law.
Sec.10 – Police Assistance when requested: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; and they shall observe the policy of Maximum Tolerance. They shall
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
not carry any kind of firearms, but may be equipped with baton, riot sticks, and shields, crash
helmets with visor, gas masks, boots or ankle high shoes with shin guards. Tear gas, smoke
grenades, water cannons or any similar anti-riot device shall not be used unless the public assembly
is attended by actual violence or serious threats of violence or deliberate destruction of property.
Sec.11 – 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 it as follows: 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. 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,
the ranking officer shall audibly warn the participants that if the disturbance persists, the assembly
will be dispersed. If the violence/disturbance does not stop or abate, the ranking officer shall audibly
CRIMINAL LAW II 36
K notes
issue a warning to the participants and after allowing a reasonable period of time to lapse, shall
immediate order it to forthwith disperse. No arrest of any leader, organizer or participant shall also
be made during the public assembly unless he violates during that assembly a law, statute,
ordinance, or any provision of this Act. Such arrest shall be governed by Art.125 of the RPC as
amended. Isolated acts/incidents of disorders or breach of the peace during the assembly shall not
constitute a ground for dispersal.
ART.132
INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender = public official/employee
2. Religious ceremonies or manifestations of any religion are about to take place or are going
on
3. The offender prevents or disturbs the same
Q: Give an example
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose there was a mass going on in Luneta. A public officer fired shots in the air and the people
scattered. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the mass was over and a politician was giving a speech
He is no longer liable under Art.132
Q: Same facts. You learned of the mass in Luneta and you wanted to join. You were not allowed to join
by a police officer guarding the entrance. Is he liable?
CRIMINAL LAW II 37
K notes
ART.133
OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS
Q: Give an example
Q: The accused took a statue of the virgin mary and chopped it into pieces in front of a group that was
praying. He considered the statue to be merely a piece of wood. Is he liable?
Yes
If the offender is a
private person who is
not a member of the
meeting = Disturbance
of Public Order
CRIMINAL LAW II 38
K notes
Offending the Religious Crime against Public Public Officers, If the crime is not
Feelings Order Private Persons who are Tumults = Alarms and
(ART.133) members of the Scandals
meeting,
Outsiders If the meeting is illegal
from the onset =
Inciting to Rebellion
NOTES:
*If the crime is conducted in a place devoted to a religious purpose, there is no need for an on-going and
actual ceremony
*Religious ceremonies… well… think: acts performed (not necessarily) inside the church, i.e.:
processions and special prayers for burying the dead but NOT prayer rallies
*The offensive acts must be directed against religious practice or dogma or a ritual of the same nature
for the purpose of ridicule i.e.: mocking or scoffing at, or attempting to damage an object of religious
veneration
*There must be deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful. Mere arrogance or rudeness is not
enough
CHAPTER ONE
REBELLION, COUP D’ETAT, SEDITION AND DISLOYALTY
ART.134
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is –
a. A public uprising AND (*whatever you do, do NOT forget the conjunctive)
b. A taking up of arms against the government
2. The purpose of the uprising or movement is either –
a. To remove from the allegiance to said Government or its laws…
i. The territory of the Philippines OR any part thereof (*do NOT forget the disjunctive);
or
ii. Any body of land, naval, or other Armed Forces
b. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress wholly or partially of any of their powers of
prerogatives
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
TREASON REBELLION
(ART.114) (ART.134)
RE: Manner of Prosecution Two-Witness Rule Ordinary Rules of Evidence
Q: Suppose an NPA officer asked you to encash some of their checks and deliver the money to them. Are
you liable?
No, mere adherence to the enemy by giving them aid or comfort is NOT punishable in rebellion
Q: Members of the NPA kidnapped a Chinese merchant and demanded ransom. Upon payment, the
merchant was released and the ransom was used by the NPA to finance its activities. What crime/s was
committed?
Rebellion ONLY
Q: Why is that?
Because Rebellion ABSORBS common crimes committed in furtherance of its goals. It may not
be complexed with those crimes in order to aggravate the liability of the accused
*NB: Absorption of crimes is NOT synonymous with Complex Crimes. In complexing, the liability
of the accused is the one for the greater offense. In Absorption, the liability is set by law and
may not be aggravated by the commission of another crime. Why? Because penal laws should be
construed liberally in favour of the accused and strictly against the State. That’s just the way it
is.
Q: Suppose the kidnappers distributed the ransom amongst themselves and did not remit the money to
their higher-ups, what crime was committed?
Kidnapping, the crime is not absorbed by rebellion because it was not committed in furtherance
of the political goals of rebellion
Q: The NPA ambushed the Governor and killed him for being corrupt. What crime was committed?
Rebellion
Q: Suppose they raped the daughter of the Governor, What crime/crimes were committed?
1. Rebellion
2. Rape
*separate, not absorbed – because the rape was not committed in furtherance of rebellion
Q: Factory employees organized themselves as an armed group and become so powerful they had a
strike and declared their factory as being under their own laws. They killed 10 persons in the process.
What crime was committed?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Rebellion
Q: Suppose the leader of the Rebellion is unknown. Who may be held liable?
Any person who speaks for signs receipts for, or directs the Rebellion, or performs similar acts
on behalf of the rebels
NOTES:
*The success of a rebellion is immaterial. Whether it failed or not does not affect the liability of the
accused
*The term ‘Rebellion’ is used when the object is to completely overthrow the government and
supersede it
*Insurrection refers to a movement which seeks merely to effect some change of minor importance to
prevent the exercise of government authority with respect to particular matters or subjects
*An actual clash of arms between government forces and the rebels is not necessary to convict the
accused who is in conspiracy with others actually taking arms against the government
*The purpose of the uprising must be shown although it is not necessary that it is actually achieved
*Rebellion refers to the armed act of seeking a change of government without external participation
*Actual participation here refers to rising publicly and taking up arms against the government. If there
doesn’t happen to be a public uprising, the crime is direct assault
*Mere giving of aid or comfort is not a criminal act in the case of rebellion. Merely sympathizing with the
rebels is not considered as participation in the rebellion. There must be actual participation in the
uprising.
*There doesn’t have to be actual killing of any person. The mere threat of removing the Philippines from
the control of the government through force or violence is sufficient
*Rebellion cannot be complexed with other common crimes, HOWEVER, illegal possession of firearms in
furtherance of rebellion is DISTINCT from the crime of rebellion.
*A private crime (aka. crimes against chastity - note that RAPE is no longer a private crime by virtue of
RA 8353) may be committed during rebellion
PONCE-ENRILE v. SALAZAR
Narvasa, J.
FACTS:
Senate Minority floor leader Juan Ponce Enrile was arrested on the strength of a warrant issued on an
information charging him and the spouses Rebecco and Erlinda Panlilio, and Gregorio Honasan for the
crime of ‘rebellion with murder and multiple frustrated murder’ which they allegedly committed during
the period of the failed coup attempt from November 29 to December 10, 1990. Enrile was taken and
held overnight at the NBI Headquarters in Taft Avenue without bail, none having been recommended by
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
the Prosecutor. The following morning he was brought to Camp Tomas Karingal in Quezon City, and
given over to the custody of the Superintendent of the Northern Police District. Enrile filed for Habeas
Corpus, alleging that he was being held to answer for a criminal offense not contained in the statute
books, that he was charged in an information for which no complaint was initially filed or preliminary
investigation conducted, that he was denied his right to bail and arrested and detained on the strength
of a warrant issued without the judge having first personally determined the existence of probable
cause.
ISSUES:
1. Can Senator Enrile be held liable for the complex crime of ‘Rebellion with murder and multiple
frustrated murder’?
2. Was the arrest warrant issued without the judge’s personal determination of probable cause?
CRIMINAL LAW II 41
K notes
HELD:
1. NO. As held in the Hernandez case, rebellion cannot be complexed 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. The information filed against him
does in fact charge an offense. Read in the context of Hernandez, the information charges Enrile
with a crime defined and punished by the Revised Penal Code: simple rebellion.
2. NO. It is sufficient that the Judge follows established procedure by personally evaluating the
report and supporting documents submitted by the Prosecutor. Merely because respondent
Judge Salazar had what some might consider a relatively brief period (1 hour and 20mins) within
which to comply with the duty gives no reason to assume that he had not, or could not have so
complied; nor does that single circumstance suffice to overcome the legal presumption that
official duty has been regularly performed.
- oOo –
PONCE-ENRILE v. AMIN
Gutierrez, Jr., J.
FACTS:
Together with the filing of an information charging Sen. Enrile with ‘Rebellion complexed with
Murder and Multiple Frustrated Murder’ in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Government
Prosecutors filed another information charging him with a violation of Presidential Decree 1829.
The information alleged that Enrile, who had reasonable ground to believe or suspect that ex-
Colonel Gregorio Honasan had committed a crime, voluntarily concealed the ex-Colonel in his
own residence in Dasmariñas Village, Makati. Enrile filed an omnibus motion to quash or dismiss
on the ground, among others, that the pending charge of rebellion complexed with murder and
frustrated murder precluded the prosecution of a violation of PD 1829. His motion was denied.
The respondent Judge upheld the prosecution’s contention that simultaneous proceedings are
permissible because Rebellion is based on the Revised Penal Code; where the instant case is
based on a special law. Enrile appealed to the Supreme Court, and the High Court issued a
Temporary Restraining order enjoining proceedings in the instant case.
ISSUE:
Can Senator Enrile be simultaneously charged withobstruction of justice, a violation of
Presidential Decree 1829; and the Revised Penal Code, with regards to Rebellion?
HELD:
NO. If a person cannot be charged with the complex crime of rebellion for the greater penalty to
be applied, neither can he be charged separately for two different offenses where one is a
constitutive or component element of, or committed in furtherance of rebellion. Being in
conspiracy with Honasan, Enrile’s alleged act of harbouring/concealing was for no other purpose
but to further the crime of rebellion, thus constituting a component thereof. The crime of
rebellion consists of many acts. The acts committed in furtherance of it, though crimes in
themselves are deemed absorbed in the one single crime of rebellion. They cannot, therefore, be
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
made the basis of separate charges. The rationale remains the same: all crimes, whether
punishable under a special law or general law, which are components or ingredients, or
committed in furtherance thereof, become absorbed in rebellion and cannot be isolated and
charged as separate crimes. The theory of absorption in rebellion cases must not confine itself
to common crimes but also to offenses under special laws which are perpetrated in furtherance
of the political offense.
- oOo –
CRIMINAL LAW II 42
K notes
UMIL v. RAMOS
Per Curiam
FACTS:
Consolidated cases for Habeas Corpus.
ISSUE:
Were the arrests validly effected?
HELD:
RE: ROLANDO DURAL
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
YES, the warrantless arrest was valid. He was committing an offense when he was arrested –
being an NPA member. The NPA is an outlawed organization and membership therein is a
continuing crime. He did not cease to be a subversive for purposes of arrest simply because he
was confined at St. Agnes Hospital. Military agents were dispatched on confidential information
to verify if an NPA member had indeed been admitted for a gunshot wound. The information
was based on actual facts, supported by circumstances sufficient to engender a belief that an
NPA member truly was in that hospital.
delicto. The reason for all their arrests was that military authorities received information about
2 safehouses being used by the NPA, with exact locations and the names of Renato Constantine
and Benito Tiamzon. At the time of their arrests, they had ownership of unlicensed firearms,
ammunition, subversive documents. They also admitted to membership in the NPA. There was
probable cause to support their warrantless arrests.
ART.134-A
COUP D’ETAT
RE: Manner of Commission Rising Publicly and Taking Up A Swift attack accompanied by
Arms against the Government violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth
powers
Overt Acts Levying war Public Uprising; Swift attack Rising publicly or
against the accompanied by tumultuously
government; Taking up arms violence,
against the intimidation, *NB: ‘tumultuously’
Adherence to the government threat, strategy or refers to the
enemies, giving stealth presence of more
them aid or than 3 (i.e.: at least
comfort 4) armed men or
men provided with
means for violence
officer/employee;
Q: 5 members of the NPA ambushed and killed a company manager because he was responsible for the
dismissal of several workers. The workers were dismissed for union busting. What crime was
committed?
Rebellion
Q: Prof. Amurao flunked ½ of the class. He received a threat to change the grades or else he would be
killed. He refused to change the grades. The following day, he was ambushed by an NPA member who
happened to be the brother of one student who failed. What crimes were committed?
1. Rebellion (brother was an NPA member, rebellion is a continuing crime)
2. Grave Coercion
3. Murder complexed with Direct Assault
*All separate, not absorbed by rebellion because the common crimes were not committed
in furtherance of rebellion
Q: The provincial governor was liquidated by the Alex Boncayao Brigade (an NPA liquidation squad –
think: people who kill other people for the NPA). The governor had been a known drug lord. He was
found and killed by the Brigade. What crime was committed?
Rebellion
Q: 2 Victory Liner Buses were burned by the NPA because the management of Victory refused to pay
revolutionary taxes. 2 passengers died. What crime was committed?
Rebellion
Q: The sister of an NPA officer was raped by the commanding officer of the AFP. The prosecution for
rape was dismissed. To avenge the injustice, the NPA officer killed the military commander. What
crime/s did he commit?
1. Rebellion
2. Murder
*Separate, because the murder was committed for a personal motive
ART.135
PENALTY FOR REBELLION, INSURRECTION OR COUP D’ETAT
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB:
Persons Liable, as far as their occupations are concerned:
A. PERSONS IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE
Anyone who leads, directs, or commands others to undertake a coup d’etat
B. PERSONS NOT IN GOVERNMENT SERVICE
Anyone who participates or in any manner, supports, finances, abets or aids others in
the commission of coup d’etat
NOTES
*Serious violence is that inflicted upon civilians which may result in homicide. It is not limited to
hostilities against other military forces
*Diversion of Public Funds is Malversation, but when committed here, it is absorbed by rebellion.
*The public officer, to be liable, must take active part. Mere silence or omission is not punishable in
rebellion
*Common crimes committed for profit or personal motives, without any political motivation, would be
separately punished and not absorbed in rebellion
ART.136
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ETAT,
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
Q: Suppose military officers met outside the PH and agreed and decided to seize power from the present
administration. Upon arrival in the PH, they were arrested and prosecuted for conspiracy to commit a
coup d’etat. Are they liable?
No, the crime was committed outside the country. It cannot be prosecuted here because it is not
one of the exceptions to the rule on territoriality, as enumerated under Art.2 of the RPC
ART.137
DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS OF EMPLOYEES
Q: Give an example
NOTES
*Art.137 presupposes the existence of rebellion. No rebellion, no crimes committed under Art.137
*The public officer/employee so charged must not be in conspiracy with the rebels or coup plotters else
his liability is under art.135/art.136
*If the position was accepted in order to protect the people, the official is not liable
*The collaborator must not have tried to impose the wishes of the rebels on the people
CRIMINAL LAW II 47
K notes
ART.138
INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender does not take arms, nor is he in open hostility against the government
2. He incites others to the execution of any of the acts of rebellion
3. The inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end
Q: Suppose a member of the NPA was going around, recruiting members. What crime was committed?
Rebellion
Q: An ordinary barangay leader, fed up with the present administration, gave speeches aimed at
persuadingor convincing people to join him in the fight against the government. What crime did he
commit?
Inciting to rebellion
Q: Suppose the audience before whom he spoke was finally induced and persuaded to join the
movement to overthrow the government. What crime did he commit?
Rebellion
The persons induced will be principals by direct participation
The offender is a principal by inducement in the crime of rebellion
Q: And if the audience was not convinced? What are the respective liabilities?
The speaker = Inciting to Rebellion
The audience = No liability
Q: You were walking along Makati, naked, with a placard saying ‘Down with the Aquino Administration’.
You were distributing flyers containing pictures of a corrupt government, and inviting the reader to join
you and overthrow the government. What is your liability?
Inciting to Rebellion
The person who proposes the execution of the The inciting is done publicly
crime uses secret or covert means
-NAIA
-DMIA
ART.139
SEDITION
*NB: Pay close attention to this one, it comes up during Midterm Exams
Q: 10 persons armed themselves for the purpose of preventing the holding of a referendum through
violence. Are they liable for sedition?
No, a referendum is different from a popular election
Q: Several members of a barangay armed themselves and proceeded to the election precincts, and
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
prevented the election officers from performing their duty. What crime was committed?
Sedition in the 1st manner
Q: The city engineer of Makati issued an order for the demolition of the shantytowns in a certain area.
When the demolition was about to take place, residents of the area blocked the road leading to the site,
the purpose of doing so is to prevent the city engineer and his men from pushing through with the
demolition. What crime was committed?
Sedition in the 2nd manner
Q: Suppose Bayani Fernando, pursuant to his project ‘Metro Gwapo’, relocated all the squatters in
Baclaran. One morning while inside the Baclaran Church, the residents set his car on fire. What crime or
crimes did they commit?
1. Sedition
CRIMINAL LAW II 49
K notes
2. Arson
*separate crimes: unlike rebellion or coup d’etat, sedition does NOT absorb commit crimes
committed in furtherance of its goals
Q: Suppose you have a grudge against your municipal mayor and you burned down his house. What
crime/s may you be liable for?
1. Sedition in the 3rd manner
2. Arson
*separate crimes
Q: What are the two rules in determining culpability, as far as inciting to sedition goes?
1. The Clear and Present Danger Rule
2. The Dangerous Tendency Rule
Q: Suppose you incited others to commit sedition and they did. What crime was committed?
Sedition
Q: Give an example
Q: What is sedition?
A Raising of commotion or disturbances in the State, possessing as its ultimate objective a
violation of the public peace or at least such measures that evidently engender such violations
*NB: it doesn’t matter how many people there are, it matters how many ARMED people there
are – mind the qualification for means of violence
Q: If 6 were carrying World War II vintage M-1 Garand Rifles that would not even fire?
Sedition (trolling moment: they can still be used to hit somebody :D )
Q: What is the liability of the participants, supposing they were not able to achieve the purpose they
aimed for?
Sedition, The crime is consummated once all the elements concur (think: public and tumultuous
uprising + any of the 5 objects of sedition) – the success of the endeavour is not an element
*NB: That’s how it works. Once ALL elements are present, criminal liability inures (automatically
attaches) to the offense. Check the elements for every crime – if they are incomplete, the crime
is not consummated.
Q: The MMDA was set to demolish a shantytown. The residents blocked the MMDA officials’ access to
the site. The police arrived and the residents dispersed, allowing the demolition officers to do their job.
Are the residents liable?
Yes, the crime was already consummated
Q: Same facts, except that the residents held only pieces of wood. Are they liable?
Still liable (trolling moment: being hit by a piece of wood… hurts. Violence, mates.)
Q: In the 1st manner, is it necessary that the holding of popular elections is actually prevented?
No
Q: In the MMDA example, suppose there were 20 residents, only one carried a firearm, the rest were
simply being rowdy and noisy. The armed resident fired at a vehicle owned by the MMDA. The driver
died. What is the armed resident’s liability?
Murder/Homicide
Q: Suppose that the remaining 19 residents picked up pieces of wood. What is the liability of the resident
who shot a member of the demolition team?
1. Sedition
2. Murder/Homicide
*separate crimes because sedition does not absorb common crimes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES:
*As differentiated with rebellion, the nature of sedition may be either political or social, whereas
rebellion is always political
*A public uprising AND an object of sedition must concur, else it isn’t sedition
*Preventing an election through legal means (i.e.: electoral contests, filing civil cases pertaining to
elections) is not contemplated by sedition
*Persons liable for sedition are (1) the leader/s and (2) other persons participating in the seditious act/s
ART.143
ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY AND
SIMILAR BODIES
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a projected OR (*NB: disjunctive – very important) actual 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. The offender – who may be any person – prevents such meeting by force or fraud (*NB:
mind the 2 manners of prevention: force or fraud)
Q: Give an example
ART.144
DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDING
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a meeting of Congress or any of its committees, constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board/city/municipal council or board
2. The offenders does any of the following acts:
a. He disturbs any of such meetings
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
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
Q: Give an example
Q: Meeting of a committee created by the Senate. A resource person was being interpolated. Someone
in the audience shouted and booed the interpolating Senator. Is that someone liable?
Yes
NOTES:
*The nature of the crime of ‘disturbance of proceeding’ is criminal. When the Senate cites a person in
contempt, the nature of that offense (the one found to be contemptuous) is essentially legislative.
Hence, the 2 offenses are independent of each other, even if they result from the same overt act.
*The Senate, in the exercise of its inherent plenary powers, may also order the incarceration of the
accused, notwithstanding the filing of a criminal case for Art.144
ART.145
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY
*NB: It helps to review the table of penalties, as well as the definition of concepts like ‘session of
Congress’ and ‘parliamentary immunity’
*NB: Under the 1987 Constitution (which, needless to say, takes precedence over the
RPC), the privilege from arrest of any member of Congress while the same is in session
extends to all offenses punishable by not more than 6 years of imprisonment. The ambit
of the privilege, therefore, includes offenses punishable by prision mayor, which runs
from 6 years and 1 day to 12 years.
Q: Is it necessary that the member is actually prevented from doing those things?
No
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the committee on public order of the House of Representatives (HR) scheduled a meeting in
Basilan. The meeting was in connection to the hostages taken by the Abu Sayyaf. Because the airport
was waylaid by persons, they were not able to attend the meeting. Are those persons liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose that despite the threat, the legislator still casted his vote. Is the offender still liable?
Yes
*NB: It isn’t necessary that the offender actually succeeds in preventing the legislator
Q: So you’re saying that a legislator may only be arrested when his offense carries with it a penalty
higher than 12 years?
No – if the crime was committed when Congress is not in session, he may be arrested despite the
fact that the penalty is not within the privileged range provided for in art.145
Q: When a member of Congress commits a crime and the penalty for it is 6 years, may he be arrested?
No
*NB: 2 important qualifications in this crime are (1) the penalty for the offense committed and
(2) whether Congress happens to be in session or not
Q: Physical Injuries committed long before the legislator was elected. A warrant of arrest was issued for
the offense, which is punished by Prision Correccional. Congress is in Session. May he be arrested?
No
Q: The lower house is in session from July 1 to October 31. On September 15, the warrant was issued. The
legislator was arrested in his house. Are the arresting officers liable?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Yes
*NB: By ‘session’, the law does not mean the time when the members of Congress are actually
sitting in the Halls of Congress. As far as the concept goes, Congress is ‘in session’ 24/7 and is
deemed to be ‘in session’ for all the days included in the period of July 1 to October 31
Q: Same facts, except that the offense committed was murder. Would the police still be liable?
Not anymore, the penalty for murder is higher than 6 years
CRIMINAL LAW II 54
K notes
Q: A person committed a crime before he became a Member of Congress. When he was elected, the
warrant of arrest was issued. The penalty for the crime he committed is 6 years. The officers arrested
him, are the officers liable?
Yes
Q: A Congresswoman committed plunder long before being elected. A corresponding information was
filed with the Sandiganbayan. May she be arrested, notwithstanding the fact that Congress is in session?
Yes, the penalty for plunder is higher than 6 years
Q: Suppose a legislator uttered gravely slanderous words against you. Can you file a case against him?
Yes, the immunity is from arrest and searches only, NOT from the filing of complaints
*NB: file anytime you want, but be mindful that filing is NOT the same as arrest/search. For the
latter, the law imposes certain qualifications.
Q: So if the court prepared a warrant of arrest but did not have it implemented, the court is not liable?
Yes, the court is not liable. What is punished is actual arrest/search
ART.146
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES
Q: What are the 2 kinds of illegal assemblies?
1. Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the RPC
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 a person in authority
or his agent
Q: What is the presumption of the law, if a person at the meeting carries an unlicensed firearm?
1. It is presumed that the purpose of the meeting insofar as he is concerned, is to commit acts
punishable under the RPC
2. He is considered a leader/organizer of the meeting
Q: Suppose there are 10 members, only 1 of them is armed with 10 hand grenades. Is the same
considered an illegal assembly?
No
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose then that 5 of them are armed and the purpose of their meeting is to sell shabu, marijuana
and cocaine. Will they be liable for illegal assembly under the 1 st manner?
No, the crime committed is a violation of a special law (CDDA), not the RPC
Q: Is it necessary that the persons attending the meeting be armed, under the 2nd manner?
CRIMINAL LAW II 55
K notes
No
Q: Suppose you and your classmates gathered together since the midterm exam is upcoming and you
knew for a fact that all of you would fail. You planned to wipe your criminal law teacher off the face of
the planet. Will you be liable for illegal assembly?
Yes, under the 2nd manner
Q: Why?
Because the members are incited to commit the crime of direct assault upon a person in
authority
Q: Suppose that instead of going to class, you and 10 other classmatesgathered together for a meeting
wherein you, as the leader, incited them to join the NPA. What is your liability?
1. Inciting to Rebellion (*NB: you merely incited them, no mention was made as to whether or
not they actually joined)
2. Illegal Assembly in the 2nd manner
*separate crimes
Q: And the liability of your classmates, assuming they join the NPA?
Rebellion by direct participation
*NB: the classmates actually joined the NPA. You induced them to.
Q: What would be your liability if your classmates did NOT end up joining the NPA?
Illegal Assembly (only)
*NB: It is important under the 2nd manner that the audience is incited to the commission the
crime of treason, rebellion, insurrection, sedition or assault. If the audience ends up actually
committing those crimes, the liability for those crimes attach, as far as they are concerned. As
far as the person inciting them to commit those crimes, he becomes liable as a principal by
inducement for having caused the actual commission. It helps to recall the particeps criminis at
this point, because liabilities for crimes (as principals, accomplices and accessories) are affected
by commission or non-commission. Remember also that when the audience ends up committing
those crimes, the leader’s liability is for the crime they committed in addition to the liability for
illegal assembly – because by the time the audience members actually commit treason/rebellion
etc, the crime of illegal assembly in the 2nd manner has already been consummated.
Q: What if you and your classmates met to discuss your plans for illegal recruitment?
We are liable
*NB: Remember that ESTAFA is a crime punishable by the RPC, and that estafa can be
committed in connection with illegal recruitment
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.147
ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
Q: What are illegal associations?
1. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the RPC
2. Associations totally or partially organized for purposes contrary to public morals
RE: conduct of a meeting There should be an actual There is no need for an actual
meeting meeting
RE: purpose Commit crimes punishable under Commit any of the crimes
the RPC punishable under the RPC
Q: You and your classmates form an association for the purpose of taking money from your clients
through fraudulent acts. Are you liable?
Yes, the crime we plan on committing is estafa
Q: You, along with your friends, form an association called ‘Cheats, Inc.’ in order to help each other pass
criminal law II. Will you be liable for illegal associations?
Yes, cheating is contrary to public morals
Q: An organization was formed in order to pair couples together and orchestrate false weddings. Is this
punishable?
Yes, the acts are contrary to public morals
Q: Suppose you joined an association which propagates cohabitation without the benefit of marriage.
The philosophy of the organization is that marriage is just a piece of paper, no longer practicable nor
honoured by society. Are you liable?
Yes, the organization’s purpose is contrary to public morals
Q: An association is composed of married men and women. The purpose is to ‘foster love’ among
themselves. Are they liable?
Not necessarily, as long as they are not committing adultery or concubinage or bigamy
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.148
DIRECT ASSAULTS
*NB: Pay special attention, this comes up in Midterm Exams. Also, it helps to review the elements of
rebellion and sedition
*NB: Do NOT omit the ‘without public uprising’ phrase. Once there is a public uprising, the crime
is no longer direct assault but rebellion/sedition as the case may be.
Q: There are 3 armed persons who went to Binondo, employed force and intimidation on Chinese
retailers there because these retailers were dominating the retail business area. What is the liability of
the 3 persons?
Direct Assault in the 1st manner (see: 4th object of sedition)
*NB: ‘past’ because if the attack was done during the actual performance, the crime is direct
assault under the 1st manner, not the 2nd
Q: Give examples
-Barangay Captains
-Mayors
-Governors
-Municipal Councilors, etc.
Q: Teachers?
Yes (see: Art.152)
Q: Lawyers?
Yes (see: Art.152)
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: A senator?
Yes
Q: And who is an agent of a person in authority? (*NB: know this by heart, too)
CRIMINAL LAW II 58
K notes
Any person who, by direct provision of law, by election or appointment by competent authority
is charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and
property
Q: Give examples
-Peace officers/Policemen
-Barangay Tanods
-Soldiers/Members of the military
Q: Between the 1st and 2nd manners of commission, is there a difference in the degree of force necessary
to commit the crime of direct assault?
Yes –
a. If the offended party is a Person in Authority, the force employed does not have to be
serious
b. If the offended party is an Agent of a Person in Authority, the force employed must be
serious
Q: Suppose you were being arrested by a police officer, you hit him with your fists. Will you be liable?
No, fist blows aren’t serious
Q: A warrant of arrest was issued against you. The police sought to implement the warrant and your
family members blocked them from entering the house. Are they liable?
Yes, Direct Assault under the 1st manner (see: objects of sedition: preventing a public officer
from exercising his functions)
Q: Your brother was apprehended by the police while he was in a bar fight. He was incarcerated. You
asked the police for his release and they refused. You organized your friends and went to the police
headquarters and fired at the officers there. Are you liable for Direct Assault?
Yes
Q: Because you flunked Criminal Law I, you pushed your professor aside when you met him by the stairs
leading up to 13L. He lost his balance but didn’t fall. Are you liable for direct assault?
Yes, a professor is also considered a person in authority. The force necessary need not be serious
Q: You were not able to study for Criminal Law II. You came to class and pointed a rifle at Atty. Amurao.
The rifle had a sign that read ‘Do not call me for recitation’. Will you be liable?
Yes – serious intimidation
Q: A Mayor’s mistress assaulted him in his office because the Mayor refused to support her. Is she liable?
Yes
Q: But the reason for the assault was because he refused to support her
When the person in authority is engaged in the actual performance of duty, the motive for the
attack is immaterial
CRIMINAL LAW II 59
K notes
*NB: motive only becomes material when the offense is committed under the second manner
i.e.: when the person in authority is not engaged in the actual performance of duty
Q: Suppose we are having class in Criminal Law II. A person suddenly came in and shot Atty. Amurao. The
shot resulted in your teacher’s death. What crimes did that person commit?
Direct Assault complexed with Murder/Homicide as the case may be
Q: For example, after our class in Criminal Law II, Atty. Amurao was walking along Mendiola when a
person suddenly fired at him. He eventually dies. The reason for the attack was that Atty. Amurao had
an obligation to pay the amount of Php 100,000 and he refused to honor the obligation. What is the
offender’s liability?
Direct Assault (in the 2 nd manner) complexed with Murder
Q: For example, you ran into your teacher in Criminal Law II along one of the corridors. This was after
your Criminal Law II class which you failed. What crime did you commit?
Direct Assault in the 2nd manner
Q: Suppose a lawyer made arguments that significantly strengthened the case for the prosecution
during the trial. The offender saw the lawyer eating at a restaurant on the evening of the day when the
judgment pronouncing the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt was promulgated. He fired his gun
at the lawyer, causing serious physical injuries. Is the offender liable?
Yes, the attack was committed by reason of a past performance of duty
Q: Suppose you are a governor, and you recommended your niece to the Mayor for a position in said
Mayor’s office. The Mayor deferred your recommendation because the position was no longer vacant.
When you saw the Mayor, you shot him but he did not die. You succeeded in merely inflicting a serious
wound. What crime did you commit?
Direct Assault complexed with Serious Physical Injuries
Q: Say you are a Senator. You are in a hurry so you ran a red light. The traffic enforcer asked you to
present your driver’s license but instead of complying, you pointed a gun at him and fired, inflicting a
wound. Are you liable?
Yes
NOTES:
*Direct Assault is always complexed with the material consequence of the act (i.e.: murder, serious
physical injuries, etc.) EXCEPT when it results in a light felony, in which case, the liability for the light
penalty is absorbed by direct assault
*Hitting a policeman with your fists is not direct assault because the policeman is an agent of a person in
authority and the force necessary to consummate the crime must be of a serious character
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Because the provision uses the phrase ‘laying hands… xxx’ on a person in authority, the force that is
necessary to consummate direct assault when the offended party is a person in authority does not have
to be serious
*The intimidation or resistance employed against both a person in authority and his agent must be of a
serious character
*Even when the person in authority/agent agrees to fight, the crime is still direct assault. Their
agreement to fight does not mitigate the liability
*BUT when the person in authority/agent PROVOKES the fight (i.e.: the PIA/agent attacks first), the
innocent party is entitled to plead legitimate self-defence
*Direct Assault cannot be committed during rebellion – recall: elements of both crimes, need for public
uprising in rebellion
ART.149
INDIRECT ASSAULT
Q: How is this committed?
1. A person in authority or an agent of a person in authority is a victim of any form of direct
assault defined under art.148 (*NB: notice that one of the elements of this crime is a crime in
and of itself – direct assault under art.148)
2. A person comes to the aid of such person in authority/agent
3. The offender makes use of force or intimidation upon the person who came to the aid of the
person in authority/agent
Q: Does the person coming to the aid of the Person in Authority/Agent have to be a public officer?
No, even a private individual may come within the purview of the provision, as long as he came
to the aid of the assaulted person in authority/agent
*NB: this is an example of a ‘parasite crime’ (-Atty. A). No Direct Assault, no Indirect Assault
Q: Will the acquittal in Direct Assault carry with it the acquittal in Indirect Assault, as far as the offender
is concerned? (*NB: pay attention to this, it can be tricky)
It depends
Q: Depends on what?
The nature of the acquittal for the crime of Direct Assault
Q: Explain
If the acquittal in Direct Assault is because the offender DID NOT commit the act, there will be an
acquittal for Indirect Assault
If the acquittal in Direct Assault is by reason of an EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE, there will NOT be
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: Recall the nature of exempting circumstances (i.e.: minority, insanity) – unlike
justifying circumstances where, in the eyes of the law, no crime was committed, there is
no criminal and there is no criminal liability; in exempting circumstances, there is still a
crime committed, there is still a criminal offender and there is still criminal liability,
EXCEPT that the criminal offender is EXEMPTED. Think: when a person is exempted, it
does NOT mean that he is innocent of the crime. It simply means that the law does not
make him serve out the sentence for his crime.
If the acquittal in Direct Assault is because the evidence adduced for that crime does not prove
the offender’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, there will NOT be an acquittal in Indirect Assault
CRIMINAL LAW II 61
K notes
*NB: Remember that Indirect Assault depends on the commission of Direct Assault. If
the prosecution was not able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the offender did in
fact commit Direct Assault, it still does NOT mean that he did not commit it at all – it
simply means that the prosecution was not able to meet the quantum of proof
necessary for a conviction. Consequently, the case for Indirect Assault may still proceed.
Q: Suppose a judge who convicted X and sentenced him to suffer 10 years of imprisonment. X served out
the sentence and when he was released, the judge had already retired. X saw the judge leaving the
church one morning and he attacked the judge. The mayor was also on his way out of the church and
saw the commotion. He (the mayor) started to make his way to the judge in order to help the latter, but
someone – a third person – prevented him from doing so by hitting him. What is the liability of X? What
about the liability of the 3rd person who prevented the mayor from helping the judge?
X’s liability: Direct Assault
3rd person’s liability: Direct Assault as well. The mayor is a person in authority, too
Q: Same facts, except that the person coming to the aid of the judge was his neighbour, a businessman.
What is the liability of the 3rd person who prevented the professor?
Indirect Assault
ART.150
DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS
Q: How is this committed?
1. By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey the summons of Congress, its special/standing
committees and subcommittees, the Constitutional Commissions and their committees,
subcommittees or divisions, or by any commission of committee chairman or member
authorized to summon witnesses
2. By refusing to be sworn in, or placed under affirmation while being before such legislative or
constitutional body/official
3. By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to produce any books, papers, documents or
records in the offender’s possession, when required by them (Congress, constitutional
commissions etc) to do so in the exercise of their functions
4. By restraining another from attending as a witness in such legislative or constitutional body
5. By inducing disobedience to a summons or refusal to be sworn in by any such body or
official
Q: Jocjoc Bolante was being questioned by the Senate. He refused to answer the questions and invoked
his right against self-incrimination. Will he be liable?
No, there is a legal excuse for his refusal
Q: Bolante deposited Php 500,000,000 in several banks. The Senate required the banks to produce the
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
papers, books and records of the accounts allegedly belonging to Bolante. The banks refused to comply
and invoked the Bank Secrecy Law. Will the banks be liable?
No, there is a legal excuse
Q: Suppose Bolante answered all the Senate’s questions, but the Senate was not satisfied with the
answers because they weren’t what the Senators expected to hear. May Bolante be held criminally
liable?
No, he answered all the questions
Q: Suppose Bolante failed to produce the books, papers and documents required by the Senate and the
Senate ordered his imprisonment unless he complied. May the Senate validly do so?
No
CRIMINAL LAW II 62
K notes
ART.151
RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE
TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY
OR AN AGENT OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY
Q: How is this committed?
1. A person in authority/agent of a person in authority is engaged in the performance of
official duty or gives a lawful order to the offender
2. The offender resists or seriously disobeys such person in authority/agent
3. The act of the offender is NOT included in the provisions of art.148 (direct assault), 149
(indirect assault), or art.150 (disobedience to summons)
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose you are arrested for jaywalking. Instead of obeying the policeman, you lay prostrated on the
street. Are you liable?
Yes
Use of force against Mere use of force or No qualifications as to the Mere putting up of
the person in intimidation against the degree of resistance is
authority need not person coming to the aid refusal/disobedience punishable
be serious of a person in required to consummate
authority/agent the crime Disobedience,
Use of force against consummates the crime; however, must be
an agent of a person no qualification as to the serious
in authority must be degree of
serious force/intimidation
required
ART. 153
TUMULTS AND OTHER
DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER
Q: For instance, the person who interrupted and dissolved the rally is a public officer, will he be liable
under this article?
No, he will be liable under art.131 (prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful
meetings)
Q: For example, the person who interrupted and dissolved the rally is a public officer who also happens
to be a participant of that rally, what is his liability?
He is liable under art.153 because art.131 requires that the public officer-offender must not be a
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: When may an outcry be a crime under Inciting to Rebellion, and when may it be considered a
Disturbance of Public Order?
In Inciting to Rebellion, the outcry must be serious and deliberate; the offender should have
done the act with the idea of inciting his listeners/readers to commit the crime of
rebellion/sedition
*NB: Here the inciting to rebellion/sedition is the controlling aim of the outcry
CRIMINAL LAW II 64
K notes
In Disturbance of Public Order, the outcry is not serious and is a spontaneous, unconscious
outburst which, although rebellious/seditious in nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce
others to commit rebellion/sedition
*NB: Here, the inciting to rebellion/sedition is not the controlling aim – there is no aim,
to be exact, just that the inciting takes place as a result of a spontaneous outcry
Q: Give an example
Q: An Anti-Charter Change rally is on-going. Suddenly, a passer-by shouted ‘Revolution is the answer!’
What crime did he commit?
Disturbance of Public Order, he made an outcry not intentionally aimed at inciting others to
rebellion/sedition
Q: After you gave a speech, a person shouted ‘Down with the Aquino Government!’ What crime did he
commit?
Disturbance of Public Order
ART.154
UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF PUBLICATION
Q: How is this committed?
1. By publishing or causing to be published, by means of printing, lithography, or any other
means of publication, as news any false news which may endanger the public order, or cause
damage to the interest or credit of the State
2. By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the constituted authorities or by praising,
justifying, or extolling any act punished by law, by the same means or by words, utterances,
or speeches
3. By maliciously publishing or causing to be published any official resolution or document
without proper authority or before it has been published officially
4. By printing, publishing or distributing, or causing the same, books, pamphlets, periodicals,
or leaflets which do not bear the real printer’s name or which are classified as anonymous
Q: As a scriptwriter, you portrayed Commander Datu in one of your films as a hero of the Muslim
community. However, in the eyes of the law, he is a criminal. Will you be liable?
Yes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: As a columnist, you wrote an article which praises and justifies the acts of Jocjoc Bolante. You
described him as an honest, truthful and trustworthy public official and that he serves as an example to
be followed by everyone. Will you be liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the Court of Appeals is set to release its resolution regarding the GSIS-MERALCO
controversy. Before releasing the same to the public, you went to the Court of Appeals, obtained a copy,
and gave it to GSIS and MERALCO. Will you be liable?
Yes
Q: Are there any instances when a writer simply cannot include his name in his article?
Yes, i.e.: when to do so would endanger his life
Q: What about actors and showbiz personalities, are they allowed to use names other than their real
names?
Yes, they may use screen names
ART.155
ALARMS AND SCANDALS
Q: How is this committed?
1. By discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker or other explosives within any town or public
place calculated to cause alarm or danger
2. By instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive
to another or prejudicial to public tranquillity
3. By disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while engaged in any other
nocturnal amusements
4. By causing disturbance or scandal in public places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided
that Art.153 is not applicable
Q: Suppose it isn’t a holiday, and at midnight, you light a firecracker in your residential subdivision. Will
you be liable?
Yes
Q:What is a ‘charivari’?
A medley of discordant voices or a mock serenade of discordant noises made on kettles, tins, or
horns designed to annoy or insult
Q: Give an example where a person will be liable for disturbing the public peace while engaged in
nocturnal amusements
Q: Under the last manner (4th), does the disturbance have to be committed at night time?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
No
ART.156
DELIVERY OF PRISONERS FROM JAIL
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a person confined in jail or in a penal establishment
2. The offender removes therefrom such person, OR helps his escape
CRIMINAL LAW II 66
K notes
Q: Who are the persons who may be held liable for the commission of this crime?
-An outsider
-A fellow prisoner
-An employee of the penal establishment who does NOT have custody/charge of the prisoner
*NB: if the person responsible for the crime is one who has custody/charge of the
prisoner, the crime committed is Infidelity in the Custody of a Prisoner (Art. 223), not
Art.156
-A guard
*NB: NOT the offender’s act of receiving or agreeing to receive a bribe in consideration
for the commission of the offense because that is merely a generic aggravating
circumstance
Q: Does employment of deceit in the commission of the crime affect criminal liability?
No, the employment of deceit is not an element of the offense
Q: If the crime committed by the escapeehappens to be treason, murder or parricide, what is the legal
effect on the liability of the person who helps his escape?
The person who helps the criminal’s escape may be held liable as an accessory for assisting in the
escape of a principal (see: Art.19, par.3)
Q: What is the liability of the escapee if he is not a prisoner by final judgment and yet manages to
escape?
He has no criminal liability
*NB: Evasion of the Service of Sentence requires prior conviction by final judgment
Q: What is the escapee’s liability if manages to escape while his case is pending appeal?
The offender has no liability, the case has not yet been decided, He has not yet been convicted
by final judgment
CHAPTER SIX
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Art.157
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Q: If the prisoner is merely a detention prisoner and not one by final judgment, may he be held liable for
this crime?
No
CRIMINAL LAW II 67
K notes
Q: What if the person does happen to be convicted by final judgment but is a minor?
He is not liable
*NB: Recall the provisions of RA 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act) – minors are NOT
considered ‘convicts by final judgment’ because their sentence is suspended
Q: Does that hold true even if the appeal was dismissed because he escaped?
Yes
*NB: the Spanish text is controlling: ‘sufriendo privacion de libertad’. Destierro was meant to
deprive one of his liberty
ART. 158
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION
OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES
OR OTHER CALAMITIES
Q: What is being punished by this provision: the leaving of the penal institution or the failure to give
oneself up within 48 hrs?
The failure to give oneself up to the authorities within 48hrs after the proclamation announcing
the end of the calamity
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: Because this provision carries with it a sort of ‘loyalty award’, a special incentive for the
conscientious prisoner
Q: What is the legal effect on the accused’s liability if he fails to give himself up after the specified time?
An additional 1/5 of the unexpired jail time for his original offense will be added to his sentence
Q: And if the accused does turn himself in, what is the legal effect on his liability?
1/5 of his original sentence will be deducted from his remaining jail time
The deduction (1/5 of the original sentence, vs. the additional penalty of 1/5 of the unexpired
sentence. As always, penal laws should be construed liberally in favour of the accused)
Q: What is a mutiny?
An organized, unlawful resistance to a superior officer; a revolt
Q: Is there a ‘mutiny’ as contemplated by the law if the accused disarmed the guards and escaped and
the guards do not happen to be his superior officers?
None in this event, neither will there be a reduction of sentence upon surrender
ART.159
OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Q: May the court require the convict to serve the unexpired term of his original sentence if that sentence
does NOT exceed 6 years?
No, it may not
Q: In the event that the convict violates any condition appended to the pardon, may he be arrested and
incarcerated without trial?
Yes
Q: May the time the convict spent out of prison be deducted from the unexecuted portion of his
sentence, in the event that he is re-arrested?
No
Q: What is the time frame for the duration of the conditions of the pardon?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
The conditions of the pardon are limited only to the remaining period of the sentence
Q: Differentiate the legal effects of a violation of conditional pardon and evasion of service of sentence
by escaping
CHAPTER SEVEN
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING THE SERVICE OF PENALTY
IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE
ART.160
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING
SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER
PREVIOUS OFFENSE
RECIDIVISM QUASI-RECIDIVISM
BOTH the first and second offenses must be Does not require that the 2 offenses are embraced
embraced under the SAME TITLE of the Revised under the same title of the Code
Penal Code
(see: Art.160)
(see: Art.14, par.9)
QUASI-RECIDIVISM REITERACION
May be committed while sentence is being served Requires that the offender shall have served out
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
for the first offense, or before serving it the sentence for the prior offenses (plural)
Q: Is it a crime?
No
CRIMINAL LAW II 70
K notes
CHAPTER ONE
FORGERIES
ART.161
COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF
THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, FORGING THE SIGNATURE
OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Q: If the accused simply wrote down the initials ‘BA-III’ to stand for ‘Benigno Aquino III’, will he be liable?
No, the signature must be fully formed
ART.162
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Does not the act of using an item forged by somebody else constitute liability as an accessory?
Generally, it does
Art.163
MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING
FALSE COINS
Q: If the offender was caught merely counting the coins before paying them, is he liable?
Yes, the counting is a preparatory act and is considered to fall within the concept of ‘uttering’
false coins
Q: May coins that are no longer in circulation be considered ‘false coins’ if the offender chose to
counterfeit them?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Yes
*NB: Even former coins withdrawn from circulation may be counterfeited. The provision does
not qualify the word ‘coin’ with the adjective ‘current’ (ps: God I hated statcon so much)
*NB: more statcon. Demonetized coins are no longer considered ‘currency’ – root word is
obvious, the coins must be in circulation. I.e.: if you counterfeited a Franc, you are not liable
because the legal tender/currency of France is now the Euro
Art.164
MUTILATION OF COINS – IMPORTATION
AND UTTERANCE OF MUTILATED COINS
*NB: this is punishable because the coin diminishes in intrinsic value, one who utters it receives
its legal value in return for a lesser intrinsic value
Art.165
SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN
WITHOUT CONNIVANCE
*Trust me, I’m as bored as you are at this point, I have trouble imagining a court docket actually listing
hearings for cases of violations under these provisions
2. Actually uttering such false of mutilated coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated
**ELEMENTS
a. Actual Utterance
b. Knowledge of Falsity
NOTES:
*Possession of, or uttering false coins does NOT require that the counterfeited coin is legal tender
*BUT if the coin being possessed is accompanied by an intent to utter the same, or it is being uttered, or
it is a mutilated coin, it must be of legal tender
CRIMINAL LAW II 73
K notes
*Possession of false/mutilated coins by the counterfeiters of mutilators themselves does NOT constitute
a separate offense
*Actually uttering false/mutilated coins, knowing them to be so, is a crime under art.165 EVEN IF there
isn’t connivance (see: elements of the 2nd punishable act, note the absence of connivance as an essential
element of the crime)
Art.166
FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR
OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER;
IMPORTING SUCH FALSE/FORGED NOTES
AND DOCUMENTS
FORGERY FALSIFICATION
Giving the appearance of a true or genuine Erasing, Substituting, Counterfeiting or Altering by
document any means, the figures, letters, words or signs
*NB: Philippine National Bank (PNB) checks are commercial documents not covered by art.166
NOTES:
*The penalty for forging or falsifying notes and obligations is more severe than that for counterfeiting
coins
Art.167
COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING AND UTTERING
INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER
Q: Does the article cover instruments or other documents issued by a foreign government or bank?
Yes, art.167 has no specification of the country or government issuing the instruments or
documents
Art.168
ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY
OR BANK NOTES OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS
OF CREDIT
Q: How is this committed?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to bearer,
or any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is
forged or falsified by any person
2. The offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified
3. He –
a. Uses any of such forged/falsified instruments
b. Is in possession with intent to use any of such forged/falsified instruments
Q: What is the presumption of the law with regard to the person in possession of a falsified document?
A person in possession of a falsified document and who makes use of it is presumed to be the
material author of the falsification
NOTES:
*Intent to use is sufficient to consummate the crime when the offender is IN POSSESSION of
false/falsified obligations or notes
*BUT mere possession WITHOUT intent to use it to the damage of another is not a crime
Art.169
HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED
Q: How is forgery committed?
1. By giving to a treasury/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 signs contained therein
Q: What are the acts punished under Presidential Decree (PD) 247?
Defacing, mutilating, tearing, burning or destroying, in any manner whatsoever, currency notes
and coins issued by the Central Bank of the Philippines
Art.170
FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS
Q: May this crime be committed by a public officer who does NOT take advantage of his official position?
Yes
Q: Suppose the City Council passed an Ordinance and when it was transmitted to the Mayor for his
approval, the Mayor changed one of the WHEREAS clauses. Is he liable?
Yes, the Mayor has no authority to unilaterally change any of the parts of an ordinance
CRIMINAL LAW II 76
K notes
Q: Did the Mayor in the foregoing example take advantage of his official position? How?
Yes he did, he took advantage of the fact that the ordinance must first be signed by him and
changed one of the WHEREAS clauses
Q: Supposing the Mayor did not take advantage of his position and acted in a private capacity, will he
still be liable?
Yes
Art.171
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE,
OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer, employee or notary public
2. He takes advantage of his official position
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or Imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;
b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they
did NOT in fact so participate;
c. Attributing to person who have participated in any act or proceeding statements OTHER
than those in fact made by them;
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
e. Altering true dates;
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning;
g. Issuing in authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine original;
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book
4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the act of falsification is committed with
respect to any record or document of such character that its falsification may affect the civil
status of persons
RE: Manner of Commission Offender need not take Offender must take advantage
advantage of his official position of his public position
CRIMINAL LAW II 77
K notes
Q: What is a ‘document’?
-Any written statement by which a right is established or an obligation, extinguished
-A writing or instrument by which a fact may be proven and affirmed
Q: What are the punishable acts which require the use of a GENUINE document?
1. Making an alteration/Intercalation
2. Including in a copy a different statement
3. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in any protocol,
registry or official book
Q: Is the simulation of public, official or mercantile documents also contemplated by the article?
Yes – the provision says … ‘shall falsify adocument’ (type of document is not specified)
Q: Under the first mode (counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting etc), what are the two ways of
committing the crime?
1. Counterfeiting or Imitating any handwriting, signature of rubric
2. Feigning or Simulating any signature, handwriting or rubric which does NOT in fact exist
Q: Under the second mode of commission (causing it to appear that persons have participated etc),
what are the requisites?
1. The offender caused it to appear in a document that a person or number of persons
participated in an act or proceeding
2. Such person/s did NOT in fact so participate
Q: Under the 3rd mode of commission (attributing false statements to persons who have participated in
an act or proceeding), what are the requisites?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Under the 4th mode of commission, (making untruthful statements), what are the requisites?
1. The offender makes in a document statements in a narration of facts
2. He has the legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him
3. The facts narrated by him are absolutely false
4. The perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of
injuring a third person
CRIMINAL LAW II 78
K notes
Q: Does the person making the narration have to be aware of the falsity of the facts narrated by him?
Yes
Q: Suppose a Mayoral candidate wrote ‘eligible’ on the certificate of candidacy because he believed he
was of sufficient age when he filled up the form, although he actually was not.Is he liable?
No
Q: Why not?
Because the false narration must be one of FACTS not of a CONCLUSION OF LAW
*NB: This is an actual case (see: People v. Yanza, GR. No. 12089, 29 April 1960) – A woman wrote
‘eligible’ because she believed that turning 23 yrs old upon assuming the councillorship was
tantamount to being eligible for running for that position. Notice that she had no intent to
make an untruthful narration of facts and she did not actually write a false fact, she made a
conclusion of law regarding her eligibility. Had she written ‘I was born on <insert false date>’,
she would have been liable.
Q: Under the 5th manner of commission, (altering true dates), what is the controlling requisite?
The date/s altered must be material to the document
Q: Under the 6th manner of commission (making an alteration/intercalation in a genuine document etc),
what are the requisites?
1. There is an alteration (a change) or intercalation (an insertion)
2. It was made on a genuine document
3. The alteration/intercalation has changed the meaning of the document and
4. The change made the document speak something else
Q: Suppose a document was made on 27 April 2012. The document actually bore ’25 April 2012’. The
Secretary noticed this and changed the date to the 27th. Is she liable?
No, alteration which speaks the truth is not falsification. What she did was not a falsification, it
was a correction
*NB: to be liable, the alteration must affect the integrity or change the effects of the document.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
If it was made to safeguard the integrity of the same, there is no criminal responsibility for the
act
Q: Under the 7th manner of commission, (issuing in authenticated form a document purporting to be a
copy of an actually non-existent original), must the offender act in his official capacity?
Yes, the crime cannot be committed without taking advantage of official positions since these
acts can be made only by the custodian/the one who prepared and retained a copy of the
original document
NOTES:
CRIMINAL LAW II 79
K notes
*It is the OFFICIAL CHARACTER of the offender which is mainly taken into consideration by art.171 –
which is why intent to cause damage or intent to gain is NOT necessary to consummate the offense
*Be that as it may, a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL who cooperates with a public officer in the falsification of a
public document is guilty of falsification by public officer (art.171) and incurs the same liability and
penalty as the public officer (recall: particieps criminis – principal by indispensible cooperation)
*If a false official or public document was used in a CRIMINAL PROCEEDING to adversely affect the trial
or the admissibility of evidence (i.e.: to prevent or prohibit the investigation in a criminal case), the act is
punished under Presidential Decree 1829 as an act constituting obstruction of justice. Note that this only
applies if the falsification of the document is done in relation to a criminal proceeding
Art.172
FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND
USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS
Q: What are the 4 kinds of documents that may be the subject of falsification?
1. Public Documents (i.e.: health sanitation forms, etc)
2. Official Documents (i.e.: letters to government department heads)
*NB: here’s the difference: Public Documents are general in character and have for their
Scope the public safety. Official documents are those issued in official capacity or by virtue
of the duties or functions of office, they do not necessary target the public in general. DO
NOT confuse ‘public’ or ‘official’ documents with ‘legislative’ documents – they have
different natures and their respective falsifications are punished distinctly and separately.
RE: Manner of Commission Offender must take advantage Offender must act in a private
of his public position capacity
RE: Damage or Injury Caused Damage is not a necessary Prejudice to a third party is
element for consummation; primarily taken into account
Prejudice to a 3rd party is
immaterial *nb: damage need not be
material, damage to one’s
honour is included
Q: Suppose you prepared a solicitation letter and signed Atty. Amurao’s name. What crime did you
commit?
Falsification of a private document
Q: And if you followed it up with a real solicitation and appropriated the amount to yourself?
Estafa
Q: Through a falsified Pawnshop ticket you were able to redeem certain pieces of jewelry. What crime
did you commit?
Theft through falsification of a commercial document
Q: Suppose a public officer falsified a document, but he did not take advantage of his public position.
What crime did he commit?
Falsification under art.172
Q: How do you then determine which crime must be alleged in the complaint?
By the order of commission – If estafa was committed first, then the crime is estafa. If the
falsification came first, then the crime is falsification of a private document (*NB: ‘find out
which crime was committed first –Atty.A)
Q: Suppose you committed the crime of falsification in Makati. You brought the document to Manila and
were arrested here. Which court has jurisdiction?
The court in Makati
Q: When is the user of the falsified document deemed to be the author of the falsification?
1. If the use was so closely connected in time with the falsification, AND
2. The user had the capacity for falsifying the document
Art.173
FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS, CABLE, TELEGRAPH AND
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example of 1)falsifying these messages; 2)Uttering them; and 3) using them
Art.174
FALSIFICATION OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES,
CERTIFICATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE AND THE LIKE
Q: By whom is this committed, and how?
1. Any physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of his profession, shall issue a
false certificate
2. Any public officer who shall issue a false certificate of merit or service, good conduct or
similar circumstances
3. Any private person who shall falsify a certificate falling within the classes mentioned in the 2
preceding subdivisions
Q: What is a certificate?
Any writing by which testimony is given that a fact has or has not taken place
Q: Suppose you asked your father, a doctor, to give you a medical certificate so that you would be
excused from your criminal law class today. Who may be liable under art.174?
My father
Art.175
USING FALSE CERTIFICATES
Q: How is this committed?
1. A physician or surgeon had issued a false medical certificate or a false certificate of
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example
Art.176
MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INSTRUMENTS
AND IMPLEMENTS OF FALSIFICATION
Q: How is this committed?
1. By making or introducing into the PH any stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification
2. By possessing with intent to use the instruments or implements for counterfeiting or
falsification made in, or introduced into the PH by another person
Q: Suppose there was a raid on your house and the police officers saw equipment used for falsification
or making Philippine money. May you be liable?
No, mere possession does not make me liable – the possession must be accompanied by intent
to use the equipment
Q: Suppose your grandmother gave you instruments or implements for falsification. You hid it in your
jewelry box as a memento of her. Will you be liable?
No
Q: Suppose you had the intent to use it when the need arises. Will you be liable?
Yes
CHAPTER TWO
OTHER FALSITIES
SECTION ONE – USURPATION OF AUTHORITY, RANK, TITLE
AND IMPROPER UNIFORMS AND INSIGNIA
Art.177
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY
ANDOFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
Q: How is this committed?
1. By knowingly and falsely representing oneself to be an officer, agent or representative or
any department or agency of the Philippine Government or any foreign government
2. By performing any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the
Philippine Government or of a foreign government or any agency therefore, under pretence
of official position, and without being lawfully entitled to do so
Q: Give an example
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: You were at a party. A guest likes you, and in his effort to impress you, he introduced himself as
Mayor Amurao, when in fact he is not. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: What is the difference between usurpation of authority and usurpation of official functions?
RE: Overt Acts Positive, Express and Explicit Actual performance of any act
Representation pertaining to -
1) The Government itself
2) A person in authority
3) A public officer of government
Q: You violated a traffic regulation. The Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) confiscated your
driver’s license. The MMDA officer was previously dismissed from service. Is the officer liable?
Yes, He was not lawfully entitled to confiscate a license
Q: A person introduced himself to Chinese merchants as a Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) agent. He
examined books, records, accounts, etc. The merchants called the BIR and were told that the BIR does
not have an employee by such a name. What crime did the person commit?
Usurpation of official functions
Art.178
USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND
CONCEALING TRUE NAME
Q: Will the use of a fictitious name make one liable in all cases?
No, there are exceptions
Q: Give examples of the use of fictitious names which does not carry with it any criminal liability
CRIMINAL LAW II 85
K notes
Q: If damage is caused by concealing one’s true name to a private individual, and not the public, what
crime is committed?
Estafa
Art.179
ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender makes use of insignia, uniform or dress
2. The insignia, uniform or dress pertains to an office NOT held by the offender OR to a class of
persons of which he is not a member
3. The said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly and improperly
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose a PNP officer is dismissed from the service but he still wore his uniform when he attended a
public function. Is he liable?
Yes, he was already dismissed from office and the uniform now pertains to an office which he
does not hold
Q: A group of prostitutes wore the uniforms of Assumption College, College of the Holy Spirit and Centro
Escolar University. Are they liable?
Yes, the dress they wore pertains to a class of which they are not members
Q: Is the wearing or a badge or emblem of rank of the Armed Forces of the Philippines punishable under
this article?
No, it is punishable under Republic Act 439
Q: What about the manufacture or sale of these military uniforms without proper authority?
The manufacture or sale is not punishable under art.179, but under Executive Order No. 297
Art.180
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose you testified falsely against a battalion of solders in a court martial proceeding. Are you
liable?
No – court martial proceedings are executive in nature and are not criminal proceedings
CRIMINAL LAW II 86
K notes
Q: Suppose that in a homicide case, the offender testified falsely but the testimony was not believed by
the court. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Why is that?
Credence lent by the court to the testimony is immaterial. What is punishable is the act of giving
a false testimony per se
Q: And if you testified falsely in a petition for adoption? In an electoral case before the HRET?
I am not liable, the foregoing are special proceedings, not criminal proceedings
Q: You testified in a criminal case against your neighbour. Your testimony was a false one, one beyond
the realm of normal human experience, and the court found it to be so. Are you liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose you testified falsely in your own favour. May you be prosecuted for false testimony?
Yes – the right to testify on one’s behalf does NOT carry with it the right to testify falsely
Art.181
FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT
Q: What if the false testimony did not directly influence the decision of acquittal, or did not directly
benefit the accused?
It is still punishable, Intent to favour the accused is sufficient for criminal liability to attach
Q: Suppose you happen to be the defendant. You voluntarily take the witness stand and testify falsely,
albeit favourably in your behalf. Are you liable?
Yes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: And if you were asked a question and you merely denied the commission of the crime, are you liable?
No
Art.182
FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES
3. It must be false
4. It must be given by the defendant knowing it to be false
5. It must be malicious and given with intent to affect the issues presented in the case
Q: Suppose a person died intestate. The heirs cannot agree extrajudicially so they brought the case for
judicial settlement. In the course of the settlement hearings, one heir testified falsely. Is he liable?
No – Judicial settlement is NOT a civil case, it is a special proceeding
He may be liable for perjury
Q: Suppose in a guardianship proceeding that was pending in court, you testified falsely in your favour.
Are you liable? What crime did you commit?
No, I am not liable under art.181 – Guardianship proceedings are special in nature
I committed perjury
Art.183
FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND
PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
Q: What are the ways of committing perjury?
1. By falsely testifying under oath; or
2. By making a false affidavit
*NB: Falsely testifying under oath should NOT be done in a judicial proceeding, else
arts.180/181/182 apply
Q: What is an oath?
Any form of attestation by which a person signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an
act faithfully and truthfully. It involves the idea of calling upon God to witness what is averred as
truth, and it is supposed to be accompanied by an invocation of His vengeance or a renunciation
of his favour in the event of a falsehood
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: think: for people who believe in the existence of God. If you don’t, you undertake an
affirmation
*NB: This is why you’re required to take an oath on things like filling in forms – giving testimony,
etc., should you chose to lie notwithstanding your oath/affirmation, criminal liability for perjury
CRIMINAL LAW II 88
K notes
attaches. That’s why unverified complaints are prone to dismissal – legally speaking; nobody is
willing to believe a statement of facts unless the person making the statement puts his own
neck on the chopping block by swearing – under pain of criminal liability – that he is speaking
the truth
Q: Supposing you and your fiancé are applying for a marriage license. Your fiancé wrote his civil status to
be ‘single’ when in fact his previous marriage is still valid. What crime did he commit?
Perjury – Civil status is a material matter in an application for marriage license
Q: Suppose he wrote ‘Chinese’ as his citizenship, instead of ‘Filipino’ as should be the case. What crime
did he commit?
He did not commit any crime – Citizenship is NOT a material matter in an application for
marriage license
*NB: note how the concept of materiality is a relative one, depending on the circumstances and
facts
Q: Suppose your fiancé is a widower and he wrote ‘single’ as his civil status?
He did not commit any crime, the loss of his previous wife extinguished the marriage, the license
will still be issued and he is in fact single
*NB: ah, persons. It helps to reason with other branches of law – as long as you’re sure of what
you’re saying
Q: Suppose you wrote ’23 years old’ as your age in that same application for a marriage license. You are
in fact 16. What crime did you commit?
Perjury – Age is a material matter in an application for marriage license. Only persons who have
attained legal age are allowed to apply for one
*NB: the test of materiality is whether a false statement can influence the tribunal, not whether
it actually does or could probably influence the result of trial
(People v. Banzil, CA-GR No. 22964-R, 56 OG 4929)
Q: Suppose you want to run as Congressman. In the Certificate of Candidacy, you wrote ’40 years old’
when in fact you are only 20. What crime did you commit?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Perjury – Age is a material matter, sec.6, art.VI of the 1987 Constitution fixes the minimum age
for a Congressman at 25 years
Q: Suppose you wanted to be Mayor of your town. You wrote your age as ’35 years old’, when you are
only 20. What crime did you commit?
Perjury
Q: You wanted to run for Senator. You wrote your age as ’45 years old’ when you really are 50. Are you
liable?
No, Either way, I am still qualified to run
CRIMINAL LAW II 89
K notes
Q: Supposing you finished Law here at San Beda and applied to take the Bar Examinations. You were
previously convicted of a crime, but you declared in your application that you do not have a criminal
record. Are you liable?
Yes, previous conviction is a material matter in an application for taking the bar exams
Q: If you gave a false testimony relating to an act of terrorism, what crime did you commit?
A violation of Republic Act 9372 – the Human Security Act and Terrorism Law
*NB: Under the said law, any false testimony given in relation to the crime of Terrorism, as
defined under the statute, are punishable thereby
*Here’s a trick: when the elements of a crime require criminal intent, think: wilful and
deliberate/intentional/I-really-mean-to-do-this-and-screw-the-consequences kind of assertion of
will, good faith is a defence. Obviously, if you DIDN’T mean to do it, or you did it without any
malice, you’ve negated the element of criminal intent – in which case, you knock out one
essential requisite of the crime charged (Kimiko, paraphrasing Atty.A – yeah, I’m bad at
sounding serious)
Q: Suppose you executed a false Affidavit of Loss. You stated that your driver’s license was lost when
your wallet was snatched, when in fact the license had been confiscated. What crime did you commit?
Perjury
Q: Same facts, except that you had the affidavit notarized by someone whose license for the job was
already expired. May you be liable for perjury?
No, the element of competent authority is lacking
I may, however, be liable for Falsification of Private Documents
Q: Is it necessary that there be a specific provision of law requiring the affidavit/sworn statement to be
made?
Not really. HOWEVER, the 4th element may be read to say ‘that the sworn statement containing
the falsity is authorized by law’ (i.e.: as long as it was made for a legal purpose)
(People v. Angangco, unpublished – GR No. L-47693, October 12, 1943)
Q: Supposing you and your fiancé executed an application for marriage license. You had it notarized by
someone who, by all appearances, was a notary public. He turned out to be a cigarette vendor. Will you
be liable?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose you are placed under oath before the Secretary of the Civil Registry of your municipality. Will
you be liable for perjury if you assert a falsehood?
No, the secretary is not a competent person within the contemplation of the provision
Q: Suppose the Senate invited Jocjoc Bolante to one of the Senate hearings regarding the Fertilizer
Scam. Bolante made a wilful assertion of falsehood. What crime did he commit?
Perjury
Q: Suppose you are a journalist. In your column you glorified Bolante as a person of genuine honesty and
integrity, one to be emulated by all Filipinos. What crime did you commit?
CRIMINAL LAW II 90
K notes
*NB: ‘By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the constituted authorities or by praising,
justifying, or extolling any act punished by law, by the same means or by words, utterances, or
speeches’ (art.154, par.2)
Q: Supposing in a homicide case, you testified as a witness and stated that you were actually present
during the crime when in fact, you were sleeping in your own residence. The accused was found guilty as
charged. What crime did you commit?
False Testimony against a Defendant (art.180); (see: elements of art.180)
Q: Supposing in an application for marriage license, you placed ‘single’ as your civil status. A family court
previously promulgated a Decree of Legal Separation with regards to your marriage. Will you be liable
for perjury?
Yes, a Decree of Legal Separation does not extinguish the matrimonial ties. It does not grant the
right to re-marry, because it is merely separation ‘a mensa et thoro’ (in bed and board). My civil
status does not revert back to ‘single’ by virtue of the decree
Q: Suppose you are applying for the Civil Service Examination. In the application, you declared that you
believe you are a person of good moral character. You were previously convicted of rape, homicide and
physical injuries. Are you liable?
No
Q: Why not?
My declaration was one in the nature of an opinion, not a statement of fact
Q: Suppose Miss Philippines submitted an affidavit stating that she is beautiful. The statement is false. Is
she liable?
No, she made a statement of opinion
*NB: notice here that there’s a key difference between making a false statement of FACT and a
false OPINION. Perjury pertains to false statements of facts. You’re not allowed to lie under
oath, you are however entitled to false opinions, think: delusions of grandeur :D
Q: What if you made false statements to the Public Prosecutor during the preliminary investigation; or
to the Presiding Judge during pre-trial?
I may still be liable for perjury
Q: Why?
Because False Testimony in judicial proceedings contemplates an actual trial where a judgment
of conviction or acquittal is rendered
No, the prosecution must prove which of the 2 is false and show by OTHER EVIDENCE (not the
contradictory statements) that it is indeed false and was made knowingly
NOTES
*Under the Revised Penal Code, there is no longer a separate crime of ‘SUBORNATION OF PERJURY’. This
crime used to be penalized by the Old Code but was deleted upon revision. For purposes of definition,
subornation of perjury is committed by a person who knowingly and wilfully procures another to swear
falsely; and the witness suborned actually does testify under circumstances rendering him guilty of
perjury.
CRIMINAL LAW II 91
K notes
*The direct induction of a person by another to commit perjury may be punished under art.183 in
relation to art.17 (hello, particeps criminis) – The person who commits subornation of perjury is a
principal by inducement in plain perjury, and the person suborned is a principal by direct participation,
both being liable for plain perjury.
Art.184
OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender offered in evidence a false witness or false testimony
2. He knew the witness or testimony to be false
3. The offer was made in a judicial OR official proceeding
*NB: Under the Rules for the Offer of Evidence (Sec.35, Rule 132, Rules of Court), as far as
testimonial evidence is concerned, the offer begins the moment a witness is called to the stand
and interrogated by counsel. Obviously, the witness has to testify.
NOTES:
*Even if there is a conspiracy to offer false witness (between the witness himself and the person
offering him), if the witness desisted before testifying, the latter is not liable. The party not having
desisted is liable
*Art.184 applies when the offender does NOT induce a witness to testify falsely, but merely offers the
false witness in evidence. If the former happens, i.e.: if there is induction, art. 180/181/182/183 in relation
to art.7, par.2 applies
*If perjury was committed in connection with the Anti-Terrorism Law (RA 9372), the act is punishable
under RA 9372
CHAPTER THREE
FRAUDS
SECTION ONE – MACHINATIONS, MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS
Art.185
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose you offered a gift in order to get a bidder to stay away from the auction. Your offer was not
accepted. Are you liable?
Yes, the mere attempt consummates the crime
Q: Give an example
Art.186
MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Combination to prevent free competition in the market
- By entering into any contract/agreement or taking part in any conspiracy or
combination in the form of a trust or otherwise, in restraint of trade or commerce or to
prevent by artificial means free competition in the market
2. Monopoly to restrain free competition in the market
- By monopolizing any merchandise or object of trade or commerce, or by combining with
any other person/s to monopolize said merchandise or object in order to alter the prices
thereof by spreading false rumours or making use of any other artifice to restrain free
competition in the market
Art.187
IMPORTATION AND DISPOSITION OF FALSELY MARKED
ARTICLES OR MERCHANDISE MADE OF GOLD, SILVER,
OR OTHER PRECIOUS METALS OR THEIR ALLOYS
1. The offender imports, sells, or disposes of any of those articles or merchandise (gold, silver,
other precious metals and their alloys)
2. The stamps, brands or marks of those articles of merchandise fail to indicate the actual
fineness or quality of those metals/alloys
3. The offender knows that the stamps, brands, or marks fail to indicate actual fineness
Q: What are the standards used for punishing the failure to indicate actual fineness?
When actual fineness is –
-less than one-half karat for gold
-less than four one-thousandths for silver
-less than three one-thousandths for other articles such as watches
*NB: This is how Atty. Amurao wishes students to answer his questions. He gave this reminder during
the last meeting before the exams
The major premise is the ANSWER to the problem. It may be a PROVISION OF LAW, a SUPREME COURT
DECISION or an ESTABLISHED LEGAL PRINCIPLE
The minor premise is composed of the PERTINENT AND RELEVANT FACTS of the problem
The conclusion is the APPLICATION of the minor premise to the major premise. It should SUPPORT the
ANSWER. If it doesn’t, there’s something wrong with your analysis.
SAMPLE:
A police officer entered your house by opening the door which at the time was closed. What crime did
he commit?
I. MAJOR PREMISE:
Violation of Domicile
III. CONCLUSION:
The acts of the officer put him squarely within the contemplation of the law insofar as this crime is
concerned. Therefore, by opening the closed door without first having secured the permission of the
owner, the officer committed the crime of Violation of Domicile.
Of course, you don’t have to actually bullet your answers and label them as ‘major/minor premise,
conclusion’ – this was merely an illustration.
We asked the Professor if it was necessary to specifically mention the pertinent article and this is what
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
he said: ‘There is no need to, unless you are absolutely sure of the numbers and headings you are citing.
Do NOT cite them unless you are certain they are the right ones, else you will be given deductions. To be
safe, you may use the general phrase ‘under the law…’ Do not court disaster.’ –Atty. A
Well there you have it. Basic rules apply: keep margins neat and straight, do not write on the back page
(do NOT, because he certainly gives deductions for these infractions), do NOT tear or fold pages of the
booklet, do NOT use correction fluids (that’s marking, after all), and refrain from using parentheses or
completely shading out wrong words/phrases. One clean line – a STRIKETHROUGH SUCH AS THIS –
suffices. Begin on a new page for every item.Indications as to answers are allowed, i.e.: use of phrases
such as ‘please see answer in numeral II’ etc.
TITLE SIX
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
CHAPTER ONE
GAMBLING AND BETTING
*NB: PD 1602 REPEALED the provisions of arts.195-199 of the Revised Penal Code, Republic Act 3063, and
Presidential Decrees 483, 449, 510 and 1306
Gambling: Any game or scheme, whether upon chance or skill, wherein wagers consisting of money,
articles or value consisting of money, articles or value; or representatives of value are at stake or
made
Punishable Games:
1. Cockfighting, jueteng, jai alai or horse racing, including bookie operations and game fixing,
numbers, bingo and other forms of lotteries
2. Cara y cruz, pompiang or the like
3. 7-11 and any game using dice
4. Black jack, lucky nine, poker and its derivatives, monte, baccarat, cuajo, panguigue, and
other card games
5. Pak que, high and low, mah-jong, 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
8. Basketball, boxing, volleyball, bowling, Ping-Pong, and other forms of individual or team
contests which include game fixing, point shaving and other machinations
9. Banking or percentage games, or any other game or scheme, whether upon chance or skill,
wherein wagers consisting of money, articles of value or representatives of value are at
stake or made
Illegal Numbers Games: Any form of illegal gambling activity which uses numbers or combinations
thereof as factors in giving out jackpots, prizes or returns
Lottery: A scheme for distribution of prizes by chance among persons who have paid, or agreed to
pay, a valuable consideration for the chance to obtain a prize
ELEMENTS of LOTTERY:
1. Consideration
2. Chance
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
3. Prize or some advantage or inequality in amount or value which is in the nature of a prize
Maintainer: The person who sets up and furnishes the means with which to carry on the gambling
game or schemes
CRIMINAL LAW II 96
K notes
Conductor: The person who manages or carries on the gambling game or scheme
Betting:Betting money or any object or article of value or representative of value upon the result of
any game, race or other sports contests
Game Fixing: Any arrangement, combination, scheme or agreement by which the result of any
game, race or sport contest shall be predicted and/or known other than on the basis of the honest
playing skill or ability of the player or participants
Point Shaving: Any arrangement, combination, scheme or agreement by which the skill or ability of
any player or participant in a game, race or sport contest to make points or scores shall be limited
deliberately in order to influence the result thereof in favour or one or the other team, player or
participant therein
Game Machination: Any other fraudulent, deceitful, unfair or dishonest means, method, manner or
practice employed for the purpose of influencing the result of any game, race or sport contest
Bet-taker or promoter: [In cockfighting] A person who calls and takes care of bets from owners of
both gamecocks and those of other bettors before he orders commencement to the cockfight and
thereafter distributes won bets to the winners after deducting a certain commission
Bettor: [In cockfighting] Any person who participates in cockfights 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 also be the owner of a fighting cock.
Totalizer: [In horse racing] A machine for registering and indicating the number and nature or bets
made on horse races
Q: What is gambling?
Q: In the case of punishable games specified by the law, is it necessary that there should be actual
betting involved?
No, even if there were no actual bets placed, so long as the games are played – and the games
are among those enumerated by the law – criminal liability already attaches to those who play
them
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: In the case of games such as basketball, volleyball, etc., does the mere playing of them carry any
liability?
No, not if they were merely played. They become punishable games when they involve point-
shaving, game-fixing, etc.
Q: Who is a gambler?
Q: Who is a maintainer?
Q: Suppose you are the owner of a boat, and there is gambling going on in it. Are you liable?
It depends:
-If I can prove that I have NO knowledge of the gambling, I am not liable
CRIMINAL LAW II 97
K notes
Q: What is a lottery?
Q: Does the consideration made by the gambler have to be in relation to the prize obtained, in order to
be liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose that in a certain mall, customers were told that for every purchase worth Php 100.00, they
will be entitled to a raffle ticket. The prize for the final draw is a Mazuratti (a car – a very expensive car ;)
-kimi). Is this lottery?
Yes
Q: If you participated, do you get the full value for your money?
Yes
Q: Why not?
Because I get the full value for my money – this fact takes the game out of the contemplation of
the laws penalizing lottery.
*NB: Notice here that the mechanics of the game do not involve betting in order to win a prize,
and I did not buy the ticket for the sole consideration of winning the Mazuratti. I bought Php
100.00 worth of other items and was given a raffle ticket. This is not a punishable form of
lottery.
Q: You mean to say that not all forms of lottery are punishable?
Yes, not all forms are punishable
Q: Give an example
Q: Give an example
Q: What is betting?
CHAPTER TWO
OFFENSES AGAINST DECENCY AND GOOD CUSTOMS
Art.200
GRAVE SCANDAL
CRIMINAL LAW II 98
K notes
Q: Suppose the scandal was committed in the privacy of one’s room, is it a grave one?
No, the element of publicity is missing
Q: Give an example
Art.201
IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND
EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS
Q: How is this committed and by whom?
1. Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim doctrines openly contrary to public morals
2. The authors of obscene literatures, published with their knowledge in any form, the editors
published with their knowledge in any form, the editors publishing such literature; and the
owners or operators of the establishment selling the same
3. Those who, in theatres, fairs, cinematographs or any other place, exhibit indecent or
immoral plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or on 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;
c. Offend any race or religion;
d. Tend to abet traffic in, and use of, prohibited drugs; and
e. Are contrary to law, public order, morals, good customs, established policies, lawful
orders, decrees and edicts; and
4. Those who shall sell, give away, or exhibit films, prints, engravings, sculptures, or literature
which are offensive to morals
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
-Whether or not such publication shocks the ordinary sense of men as an indecency
Whether the motive of the pictures, as indicated by them, is pure and impure; or whether it is
naturally calculated to excited impure imaginations
Q: Give an example of the use of nude pictures that do not expose the user to any criminal liability
i.e.: A painting made for art’s sake
*NB: nude pictures, even if they possess only a slight degree of obscenity, if used for commercial
purposes, come under the purview art.201
Art.202
VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES
Q: Who are vagrants?
1. Any person having no apparent means of subsistence who has the physical ability to work
and who neglects to apply him/herself to some lawful calling
2. Any person found loitering about public or semi-public building 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
4. Any person who, not being included in the provisions of other articles of this code, shall be
found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any
lawful or justifiable purpose
5. Prostitutes
*For the purposes of this article, women who for money or profit habitually engage in
sexual intercourse OR lascivious conduct, are deemed to be prostitutes
Q: Suppose X is an able-bodied man, almost always seen in public places. His means of support is his
mother who is laundrywoman. Is he a vagrant?
Yes
Q: Suppose the mother is employed in a Fortune 500 company and can provide for the support of her
son. Is he still considered a vagrant?
Yes – he possesses all the characteristics enumerated by art.202: he is able-bodied, has no
apparent means of subsistence and does not apply himself to some lawful calling
Q: May a woman who has been in the prostitution business for the last 20 years still remain a virgin?
(*trolling moment xD )
Yes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Who is a prostitute?
A woman who, for money or profit habitually engages in –
1. Sexual intercourse; OR
2. Lascivious conduct
Q: A woman had sexual intercourse for 2 weeks but she did not ask her customers for money. Is she a
prostitute?
No
CRIMINAL LAW II 100
K notes
Q: Suppose she did it only once this year, and asked for money as compensation for her services. Is she a
prostitute?
No, the element of habitual frequency is lacking
Q: Suppose she does it regularly with one man, charging him php 50.00 per session. Is she a prostitute?
Yes
Q: Suppose she had sex with a man for 6 months. During those months, the man did not pay her
although he did keep promising to give her the money. Is she a prostitute?
Yes. The promise of payment is ‘profit’ as far as she is concerned
Q: Suppose she asks for jewelry for every sexual act. Is she a prostitute?
Yes, jewelry is profit as far as she is concerned
*NB: profit is the controlling motive in prostitution, and that ‘profit’ does not necessarily have
to be in monetary form
Q: The police conducted a raid on a house in Binondo known to be a whorehouse. They opened a cubicle
and surprised a woman and her customer in the sexual act. Is she liable?
No, the element of habituality is lacking
Q: Suppose there was proof that the woman had been with other men that day?
She is liable
Q: Who is a pimp?
One who provides gratification for the lust of others
Q: Who is a ruffian?
A brutal, violent, lawless persons
Q: If the prostitute caught in Binondo happened to be 15 years old, what is her liability?
She has none. Minors are exempt from criminal liability, by virtue of RA 9344
TITLE SEVEN
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
CHAPTER ONE
PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
*Contrary to the practice of some criminal law professors (i.e.: they skip this Title, because to their mind
this Title represents everything wrong with the criminal justice system, think: never really catching the
perpetrators), Atty. A spends a considerable amount of time for recits on this coverage. To HIS mind,
this Title is made all the more important because of the nature of the offenders and the fact that a
separate court altogether – the Sandiganbayan – has jurisdiction over offenses committed under this
Title. I suppose his thinking has influenced me a bit, and at the risk of sounding impertinent, I would like
to spell it out: Notwithstanding general pessimism, this Title is important. -Kimiko
CRIMINAL LAW II 101
K notes
Art.203
WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS
Q: Who are considered public officers?
1. Those whoare taking part in the performance of public functions OR who are performing in
the government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate
official of any rank and class;
2. Those whose authority to take part or perform public functions must be –
a. By direct provision of law;
b. By popular election; or
c. By appointment by competent authority
Q: Suppose the City of Manila entered into a contract with XYZ corporation to maintain the cleanliness
of the City Hall. The contract provided that the corporation would assign its men to clean the hall. Are
these people considered public officers?
No
CHAPTER TWO
MALFEASANCE AND MISFEASANCE IN OFFICE
Art.204
KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT
Q: What is a ‘judgment’?
The final consideration and determination of a court competent jurisdiction upon the matters
submitted to it, in an action or proceeding
Q: Suppose an appellant was unhappy with a decision handed down by the Court of Appeals. May he file
for Knowingly Rendering Unjust Judgment?
No
Q: Why not?
Art.204 does not apply to members of a collegiate court
Art.205
JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a Judge
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision
3. The judgment is manifestly unjust
4. The judgment is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance
Art.206
UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER
Q: How is this committed?
1. The 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 negligence or
ignorance
CRIMINAL LAW II 103
K notes
*NB: Test for determining whether an issuance by the court is interlocutory or not: Does
it leave something to be done in the trial court with respect to the merits of the case? If
it does, it is interlocutory. If not, it is a final decision.
Art.207
MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION
OF JUSTICE
Art.208
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES;
NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against violators of the law (Dereliction
of duty in the prosecution of offenses)
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is a public officer or officer of the law who has the duty to cause the
prosecution of, or to prosecute offenses
b. There is dereliction of the duties of his office, i.e.: Having knowledge of the commission
of a crime, he does not cause its prosecution
c. He acts with malice and deliberate intent to favour the violator of the law
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose a smuggler, knowing that an illegal shipment will be unloaded, talked to a police officer and
told him not to assign any men in the area where the shipment was to be unloaded and along the route
to be used for its transportation. The police officer agreed. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: May he also be held liable for violating RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)?
Yes
Q: Suppose a public prosecutor caused the dismissal of a complaint for estafa because it was filed
against his mother-in-law. Is he liable?
Yes
CRIMINAL LAW II 104
K notes
Q: Simultaneously?
No, he may either be held liable and prosecuted for art.208 OR PD 1829 – whichever metes out
the higher penalty
*NB: this is an interesting twist to the doctrinal line of ‘penal laws should be construed in favour
of the accused’. Here, if an act is punishable both under the RPC and under PD 1829, the accused
will be prosecuted for the crime bearing the heavier penalty. I suppose it would help to think of
it in the light of another doctrinal phrase – that public office is a public trust. Among the many
tables of crimes throughout Book Two of the RPC, you’ll notice that if the offender happens to
be a public official, the penalty is higher – under art.14 (aggravating circumstances) as well,
taking advantage of public position is an aggravating circumstance.
Q: Are you saying that dereliction of duty caused by poor judgment or an honest mistake is not
punishable?
Yes, it is not punishable
Art.209
BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY
OR SOLICITOR – REVELATION OF SECRETS
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Causing damage to a client either by –
a. Any malicious breach of professional duty
b. By inexcusable negligence or ignorance
*NB: When the attorney acts with malicious abuse of his employment or inexcusable
negligence/ignorance, there must be damage caused to the client for liability to attach
2. Revealing any of the secrets of the client learned in the offender’s professional capacity
3. Undertaking the defence of the opposing party in the same case without the first client’s
consent, and after having undertaken the 1st client’s defence or after having received from
him confidential information
*NB: If the client consents to the attorney’s undertaking of the opposite party’s
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: In the 2nd punishable act, would the lawyer be liable if the client consented?
No
Q: May anybody else besides the client waive the right to privileged communication?
No, only the client may do so
CRIMINAL LAW II 105
K notes
Q: Why is that?
Because the whole concept of privileged communication was intended for the benefit and
protection of the client
Q: Suppose the court asked your client whether or not he admitted the commission of a crime. May you
raise an objection?
Yes
Q: Suppose you are a lawyer and you gave advice to C because C approached you and said he wanted to
kill B. Despite your advice, B later turned out dead. You were asked to testify against C. May you invoke
privileged communication and refuse to do so?
No, the advice I offered C was not given with a view to professional employment. No attorney-
client relationship exists between me and him.
NOTES:
RULES OF EVIDENCE
RULE 130
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
xxx
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
xxx
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
Art.210
DIRECT BRIBERY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer within the scope of art.203
*NB: person liable = a public officer ‘or any other persons performing public duties’
CRIMINAL LAW II 106
K notes
*NB: The gift is either (a) voluntarily offered by a private person, or (b) solicited by the
public officer. In case there is only an offer of a gift or a promise to give something, the offer
or promise must be accepted by the public officer; else, only the offeror is liable for
Attempted Corruption of Public Officer (art.212)
3. Such offer or promise is accepted; or gift or present received by the public officer –
a. With a view to committing some crime
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
*NB: in a nutshell, these are the 3 ways of committing direct bribery (think: punishable acts)
4. The act which the offender agrees to person or which he executes is connected with the
performance of his official duties
Q: Under the 1st punishable act (agreeing to perform a crime in exchange for any officer, promise or
gift), what consummates the crime?
Mere agreement to perform an act which constitutes a crime
Q: Suppose the bribe-giver promised the officer a gift, but after he’d gotten what he needed, he no
longer delivered the gift. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose there was an extensive cross-examination during a trial. The opposing counsel did his job
well, and the cross-examination damaged the theory of the prosecution. The counsel for the
prosecution asked the stenographer to change certain portions of the transcript in return for Php
50,000. The stenographer agreed and promised that the altered transcript would be ready in a week.
Before he could even work on his promise, however, the lawyer was arrested by the NBI. Is the
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
stenographer liable?
Yes, his mere agreement already consummated the crime. Whether or not he was able to deliver
the transcript to the lawyer is immaterial insofar as his liability is concerned
Q: Suppose the stenographer actually changed the transcript and handed it to the lawyer but the latter
did not have enough cash and said that he would be back to pay the balance. What crime/s may the
stenographer be held liable for?
1. Direct Bribery (art.210)
2. Falsification of Public Document (art.171)
3. Violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
*separate crimes
CRIMINAL LAW II 107
K notes
Q: Was direct bribery a necessary means for the stenographer to commit falsification?
Yes
Q: If that is the case, then what crimes may the officer be held liable for, with regards to direct bribery
and your so-called ‘independent’ liabilities?
The officer who commits direct bribery under this manner is liable for –
1. Direct Bribery
2. The crime agreed upon; and
3. A violation of RA 3019
*NB: Very notable, the three-tiered liability for public officers. Always, as the good professor
drilled into us, a public officer has 3 liabilities under direct bribery
Q: Suppose you approached a Judge and told him that if he could render a favourable decision for you,
you would give him a sexbomb dancer of his choice for 2 nights – absolutely free. The decision was
rendered in your favour but you were not able to produce the dancer. Is the Judge liable?
It depends:
-If there was sufficient evidence to prove my innocence in the case which the Judge decided, he
will not be liable
-If the evidence was enough to prove my guilt, however, and the decision rendered by the Judge
was in my favour, then the Judge is liable
Q: Under the 2nd punishable act or manner of commission (accepting a gift in consideration of an act
which does not constitute a crime), what consummates the crime?
Actual acceptance of a bribe
Q: What about a promise to accept the bribe? (*trolling moment: a promise to accept is not the same as
acceptance, mind you)
No, the acceptance must actually be made, not simply promised
Q: Suppose a Land Transportation Officer accepted the amount you offered him but all the same did not
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
allow you to get ahead of others in your application for a license. Is he liable?
Yes, he already accepted the bribe
Q: Suppose the license was already handed to you but you had no money to pay him for his special
effort. The officer told you he would return to collect the sum but failed to do so. Is he liable?
No
Q: Under the 3rd manner (agreeing to refrain from performing official duty), what consummates the
crime?
Mere agreement to shirk performance of official duties for a bribe
CRIMINAL LAW II 108
K notes
Q: Suppose you apply for a driver’s license and instead of taking the written exam, you placed money in
the examiner’s desk drawer. He said he would take the exam for you. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose you passed the written exam but had to wait for the results before undergoing the practical
exams. You placed another Php 1,000 in the examiner’s drawer and he immediately told you to report to
him the next day for the practical exams. Is he liable?
Yes
*NB: Regarding principals by inducement, they cannot be held liable under this crime because
there is a separate crime altogether which penalizes the act of inducing or attempting to induce
a public officer to commit a crime: art.212 (corruption of public official)
Q: Explain
Moral Turpitude in direct bribery can be inferred from the 3rd element: ‘Accepting a promise or
gift and deliberately committing an unjust act/crime/refraining from performing an official duty
in exchange for favours. There is malicious intent to renege on the duties the public officer owes
to society and he also takes advantage of his office/position to do betray the public trust
(Magno v. COMELEC et. al. GR No. 147904; October 4, 2002)
Art.211
INDIRECT BRIBERY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He accepts gifts
3. The gifts are offered to him by reason of his office
There is an agreement between the public officer There is usually no agreement between the parties
and the giver concerned
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
The offender agrees to perform, or actually It is not necessary that the public officer should do
performs an act or refrains from doing something any particular act or even promise to do an act; it
because of the gift or promise is sufficient that he accepts the gifts by reason of
his office.
Q: Give an example
CRIMINAL LAW II 109
K notes
Q: Suppose you are the owner of a taxi cab company and you gave a car to the Land Transportation
Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB). Are you liable?
Yes
Q: When a public officer is prosecuted either for direct or indirect bribery, may he likewise be
prosecuted for a violation of RA 3019?
Yes – RA 3019 contains the phrase ‘in addition to… xxx’. The accused suffers penalties for
separate crimes
Q: Suppose the officer accepted a promise concerning the offer of a car to him by virtue of his public
office. Is he liable?
No – art.211 uses the words ‘gifts’, it refers to presents actual and material
Art.211-A
QUALIFIED BRIBERY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The 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. He refrains from arresting or prosecuting the offender in consideration of any promise, gift
or present
Art.212
CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The 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 or indirect bribery
Q: Give an example
Q: Is the person making the offer of gifts or promises still liable if he did so because the public official
concerned demanded the offer?
Yes
Q: Suppose you made such an offer to a public official. He refused your offer. Are you still liable?
Yes
Sec.2
*No immunity if the information/testimony turns out false or malicious or made only for the purpose of
harassing, molesting or in any way prejudicing the public official concerned.
Q: Suppose a witness testified against a public official, availed of immunity and after doing so, refused
to take the stand. What is the legal effect of his refusal?
The immunity will no longer cover him
Q: Suppose he testified but the testimony was incredible and tended to favour the official. Is he still
immune from prosecution?
No, the testimony must be necessary for the conviction of the official
CRIMINAL LAW II 111
K notes
Q: Suppose he testified but his testimony was already part of the evidence for the prosecution before he
did. Is he still immune?
No, his testimony must not be in the possession of the State prior to its offering
Public Officer:includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in the classified or unclassified or exemption service receiving compensation, even nominal,
from the government
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 of affinity even on occasion
of a family celebration or national festivity like Christmas, if the value of the gift is, under
circumstances, manifestly excessive
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;
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;
c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift or 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/obtain any government permit or license in
consideration for the help given or to be given, without prejudice to Sec.13 of this Act;
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
d) Accepting or having any member of his (the public officer’s) family accept employment in a private
enterprise which has pending official business with him during the pendency thereof and within one
year after his termination;
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;
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
CRIMINAL LAW II 112
K notes
indirectly from any person interested in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favouring his own interest or giving undue advantage in favour of
or discriminating against any other interested party;
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;
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;
i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal gain, or having 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 manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transactions or acts by the board, panel or
group to which they belong;
j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favour 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 of entitled;
*Taking advantage of family or close personal relation with a public official who has to intervene in
some business, transaction or application or request or contract of the government with any other
person
*Knowingly inducing or causing any public official to commit any of the acts in Sec.3
*Applies to: spouse/any relative within the 3rd civil degree, whether by consanguinity or affinity of the
President, Vice President, Senate President, Speaker of the House of Representatives
*Prohibition from intervening in any business, transaction, etc. with the government
*Exceptions:
1. Pre-existing business with the government before the official’s assumption of office;
2. Any application, the approval of which is not discretionary on the part of the public officer but
rather, depends on compliance with requisites required by the law;
3. Any act lawfully performed in an official capacity or in the exercise of a profession
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Prohibition against acquiring or receiving any personal pecuniary interest in any business enterprise
which will be directly or indirectly favoured by any law or resolution authored by him previously
approved or adopted during the same term
*To be submitted within 30 days after assuming office and thereafter on or before April 15 following the
CRIMINAL LAW II 113
K notes
close of every calendar year, as well as upon expiration of term of resignation or separation from office
*Contents: Assets, Liabilities, Net Worth, as well as sources of income taxes paid for the next preceding
calendar year
Sec. 9 (Penalties)
xxx
*Violations of this Act, if proven in an administrative proceeding, shall be sufficient cause for removal or
dismissal, even if no criminal prosecution is instituted against the offender
*Court with original jurisdiction over offenses under this Act: The Sandiganbayan (otherwise known as
the Graft Court, a special collegiate court with 15 Justices in 5 divisions, each one composed of 3
members)
*It is NOT allowed for a public official to resign or retire pending investigation or prosecution for
offenses punishable by this Act
*Rather self-explanatory, this. Oh, all right. For the heck of it: Any public official against whom charges
are filed may be preventively suspended. Note that the suspension here is preventive in nature, it is NOT
the penalty. Although the preventive suspension is mandatory, it ISN’T automatic. It has to be raised via
motion by the prosecution and is ordered after a hearing on the validity of the information has been had
*If the public officer is ACQUITTED (not ‘dismissed’), the public officer shall be entitled to reinstatement
and to the salaries and benefits which he failed to receive during suspension, unless in the meantime,
administrative proceedings have been filed against him.
*Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of
gratitude or of friendship according to local customs or usage are not punishable
*The practice of any profession, lawful trade or occupation during incumbency, when allowed by law
NOTES:
*Okay. You okay? Did the special law freak you out? :D Read on! Fight! :D
*RA 3019 is a catch-all piece of legislation intended to cover all loopholes. Notice that some, if not all, the
punishable acts are faintly reminiscent of some acts punished under the Revised Penal Code. The reason
CRIMINAL LAW II 114
K notes
for its enactment is obvious: to cut off any possible escaping of liability. Certain actions which the RPC
merely hints at, or vaguely alludes to, are made full-blown, black and white, and clear offenses under RA
3019. This is also why actions punishable under the law stand independent of their cousins in the RPC.
CHAPTER THREE
FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS
Art.213
FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY
AND SIMILAR OFFENSES
*NB: Number 1 above refers to the offense of ‘Fraud against public treasury’, and
numbers 2 through 4 are acts of ‘Illegal Exaction’
a. Demanding, directly/indirectly the payment of sums different from OR larger than those
authorized by law; or
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/indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise, things or
objects or a nature different from that provided by law
Q: Suppose the Department of Health appropriated Php 100 Million for medicines set to be distributed
to the poor. Instead of the medicines specified in the Order List, the manufacturer, acting in connivance
with DOH officials, distributed medicines of inferior quality. Are the DOH officials liable?
Yes
CRIMINAL LAW II 115
K notes
Q: Suppose there is a contract between the Department of Public Works and Highways and a private
contractor. DPWH purchases 100 truckloads of gravel, 200 truckloads of sand and 500 bags cement.
DPWH paid the contractor for that much, but the contractor, in connivance with DPWH officials
delivered only 10 truckloads of gravel, 10 truckloads of sand and 50 bags of cement. Are the officials
liable?
Yes
Q: An official asked a Chinese businessman to pay for Php 700,000 for delinquency taxes when in fact
the businessman is only liable for Php 500,000. Is the official liable?
Yes
Q: What crime?
Illegal Exaction – for collecting taxes larger than those authorized by the law
Q: Suppose you were the businessman in the previous example, and you were not in the position to pay
the Php 700,000 demanded by the official. He agreed to accept only Php 500,000 – which was really all
you were liable for. Is the official still liable?
Yes, the mere demand of Php 700,000 – even if it didn’t succeed – consummates the crime
Q: Suppose you had a shady agreement with an official regarding the payment of taxes but it did not
materialize. Is he liable?
No, the sum must either be demanded or received. He did not demand it, nor did he receive it.
Art.214
OTHER FRAUDS
Art.215
PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose a Regional Trial Court judge purchases millions of stocks from a company in Ortigas. Is he
liable?
Yes, Ortigas is Part of the National Capital Region and the judge’s jurisdiction spans the NCR
CRIMINAL LAW II 116
K notes
Q: Suppose a Senator purchased millions worth of Stocks in Makati. Is he liable under art.215?
No, a Senator is not an appointive official
Art.216
POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED INTEREST
BY A PUBLIC OFFICIAL
Q: Who are liable?
1. Public officers who directly or indirectly became interested in any contract or business in
which it was their 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 have acted
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to their wards or the
estate
Q: Suppose a guardian had to sell some of his ward’s property due to the ward’s hospitalization. The
court allowed him to do so. Is he liable?
No, the court allowed it
Q: Suppose he happened to sell the property to a company where he happens to be one of the major
stockholders. Is he liable?
Yes
CHAPTER FOUR
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
Art.217
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY –
PRESUMPTION OF MALVERSATION
Q: Who are liable?
Public officers who are accountable for public funds or property
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: The Director of the Manila Zoo has a caretaker who works for him. The caretaker sold the animals
during the Director’s absence. Is the latter liable?
No, he only had a qualified charge over the animals and was not an accountable public officer
Q: What would be the liability of the person who has a qualified charge over the missing property?
Theft or Qualified Theft, if it was done with abuse of confidence
*NB: If the officer had no authority to receive or to party with the funds or property, or had only
a qualified charge over them, the crime is theft, not malversation
Q: Suppose a Mercedes Benz was ordered confiscated for having been used in the commission of a
certain crime. The custodian sold the car. Is he liable for malversation?
Yes, the car became public property the moment it was seized by public authority and the
custodian was an accountable officer as far as it was concerned
Q: Suppose the car was used to transport shabu prior to its confiscation. A Philippine Drug Enforcement
Agency (PDEA) officer sold it. What crime is the agent liable for?
Violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act (CCDA)
Q: Suppose a kilo of heroine was confiscated and PDEA officers sold it. What crime was committed?
Violation of the CDDA
Q: a SWAT member was given a modern assault rifle to be used in relation to his job. He committed
irregularities in office and was dismissed from the service. He was ordered to surrender the rifle to his
superiors but he refused and sold it instead. What crime did he commit?
Malversation of public funds or property
Q: Suppose a property custodian of the DPWH left certain construction equipment by the side of the
road that was being constructed. The residents noticed the equipment and sold it. What crime is the
custodian liable for?
Malversation through negligence or abandonment
Q: The Commission of Audit (COA) conducted a surprise audit in a certain municipality. The COA officers
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
found that there was a shortage of Php 100,000 from funds that were in the custody of the municipal
treasurer. The treasurer was informed of the shortage and he immediately borrowed money from his
friend to fill in the shortage. Is he liable?
No because the presumption of misappropriation does not apply
Q: Suppose there was a demand from competent authority for the treasurer to account for the missing
sum of money within 10 days and the treasurer failed to comply. Is he liable?
Yes, the presumption then attaches
Failure of an accountable public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property
with which he is chargeable upon demand by any duly authorized officer shall be prima facie
evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use
Q: Suppose a criminal case was filed against the treasurer and upon knowing of the filing, he returned
the missing amount. Is he still liable?
Yes
Q: What is the legal effect of his act of returning the missing funds?
The return mitigates his criminal liability
Q: Suppose it was the municipal cashier who took the money, is he liable for malversation?
No, the cashier is not an accountable public officer
Q: As far as the presumption of malversation goes, what is the legal effect of a demand from a duly
authorized officer?
The demand allows the presumption of malversation to attach
Q: What is the effect of the return of the malversed funds to the civil liability of the offender?
The return has no effect whatsoever on his civil liability
Art.218
FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer, whether in the service or separated therefrom
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or property
CRIMINAL LAW II 119
K notes
Q: What is the required duration within which the officer should render accounts?
Within 2 months after such accounts should be rendered
Art.219
FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER TO
RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or property
3. He must have unlawfully left, or be on the point of leaving the PH without securing from the
Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his accounts have been finally settled
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose a municipal treasurer goes to Shinjuku, Tokyo to attend an official convention without
having finally settled his accounts. Is he liable?
No, at least not yet, he was on official business
Q: Suppose he goes to Disneyland with his family with the intention of returning, but he left without
securing a certificate to prove he had finally settled his accounts. Is he liable?
Yes
Art.220
ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
*NB: This is otherwise known as ‘Technical Malversation’
malversation commission
RE: Character of Funds or Public or if private, has been Public, with the additional
Property seized, attached or deposited by qualification that such fund or
public authority property was appropriated by
law or ordinance for a particular
use
RE: Personal Gain or Benefit Offender in certain cases profits Offender does not derive any
from the proceeds of the crime personal gain or profit
RE: Application of Malversed Malversed funds are applied to Malversed funds/property are
Funds personal use and to the benefit applied to another public use
of the offender or a 3rd person different from that which was
intended
Art.221
FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF
PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Failing to make payment, done by a public officer who is under obligation to make payment
from government funds in his possession
**ELEMENTS:
a. The public officer has government funds in his possession
b. He is under obligation to make payment from such funds
c. He maliciously fails to make the payment
2. Refusing to make delivery, done by a public officer who has been ordered by competent
authority to deliver any property in his custody or under his administration
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Art.222
OFFICERS UNCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING PROVISIONS
Q: Who are the persons liable under Arts.217 – 221?
1. Private individuals who, in any capacity whatsoever, have charge of any national, provincial,
or municipal funds, revenues or property
2. Administrators or depositories of funds or property attached, seized, or deposited by public
authority even if such property belongs to private individuals
CRIMINAL LAW II 121
K notes
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Preventing witnesses from testifying in any criminal proceeding or from reporting the
commission of any offense or the identity of any offender/s by means of bribery,
misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or threats
2. Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing any paper, record, document or object, with
intent to impair its verity, authenticity, legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence in any
investigation of, or official proceedings in criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation of, or
official proceedings in criminal cases
3. Harbouring or concealing, or facilitating the escape of, any person he knows, or has reasonable
ground to believe or suspect has committed any offense under existing penal laws in order to
prevent his arrest, prosecution and conviction
4. Publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or
the execution of judgment or concealing one’s true name and other personal circumstances for
the same purpose/s
5. Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by obstructing the service or process of court orders
or disturbing proceedings in the fiscals’ offices, in the Tanodbayan, or in the courts.
6. Making, presenting, or using any record, document, paper, or object with knowledge of its
falsity and with intent to affect the course or outcome of the investigation of, or official
proceedings in criminal cases
8. Threatening, directly or indirectly another with the infliction of any wrong upon his person,
honour or property or that of any immediate member/s of his family in order to prevent such
person from appearing in the investigation of, or official proceedings in criminal cases; or
imposing a condition, whether lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a person from appearing
in the investigation of, or official proceedings in criminal cases
9. Giving of false or fabricated information to mislead or prevent the law enforcement agencies
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
from apprehending the offender or from protecting the life or property of the victim; or
fabricating information from the data gathered in confidence by investigating authorities for
purposes of background information and not for publication, and publishing or disseminating
the same to mislead the investigator or the court
**If any of the acts mentioned herein is penalized by any other law with a higher penalty, the
higher penalty shall be imposed
CRIMINAL LAW II 122
K notes
Sec.1
xxx
(d) Ill-gotten wealth:Any asset, property or business enterprise or material possession of any person
within the purview of Sec.2 hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly, through dummies, nominees,
agents, subordinates, and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or
similar schemes:
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse or malversation of public funds or raids on the
public treasury
2. 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
3. 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
4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other
form of interest of participation including the promise of future employment in any business
enterprise or undertaking
5. 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
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence
to unjustly enrich oneself at the expense and to the damage of the Filipino people and the
Republic of the Philippines
*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 Php 50,000,000 shall be guilty of the crime of
plunder
*Any person who participated with the said public officer in the commission of an offense contributing
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten wealth and their interests and other incomes and assets
including the properties and shares of stocks derived from the deposit or investment thereof forfeited
in favour of the State
*The Sandiganbayan
*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 over-all unlawful scheme
or conspiracy
*prescription: after 20 years; however, the right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired
by public officers from them or their nominees or transferees shall not be barred by prescription, laches,
or estoppel.
RA 9160, AS AMENDED
THE ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT OF 2001
a. Covered Institutions:
1. Banks, non-banks, quasi-banks, trust entities and all other institutions and their subsidiaries
and affiliates supervised or regulated by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP)
2. Insurance companies and all other institutions supervised or regulated by the Insurance
Commission
3.
A. Securities, dealers, brokers, salesmen, investment houses and other similar entities
managing securities or rendering services as investment agent, adviser, or consultant
B. Mutual funds, close-end investment companies, common trust funds, pre-need
companies and other similar entities;
C. Foreign exchange corporations, money changers, money payment, remittance, and
transfer companies and other similar entities
D. Other entities administering or otherwise dealing in currency, commodities or financial
derivatives based thereon, valuable objects, cash substitutes, and other similar
monetary instruments or property supervised by the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC)
b. Covered Transactions:
Transactions in case or other equivalent monetary instruments involving a total amount in
excess of Php 500,000 within one banking day
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
of the client and/or the client’s past transactions with the covered institution
6. The transaction is in any way related to an unlawful activity or offense under this Act that is
about to be, or is being, or has been committed
7. Any transaction that is similar or analogous to any of the foregoing
*Money Laundering is a crime whereby the proceeds of an unlawful activity as herein defined are
transacted, thereby making them appear to have originated from legitimate sources
*Persons Liable:
1. Any person knowing that any monetary instrument, property, represents, involves, or relates to
the proceeds of any unlawful activity, transacts or attempts to transact said monetary
instrument or property
2. Any person knowing that any monetary instrument or property involves the proceeds of any
unlawful activity, performs or fails to perform any act as a result of which he facilitates the
offense of money laundering
3. Any person knowing that any monetary instrument or property is required under this Act to be
disclosed and filed with the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC)
a. Any person may be charged with and convicted of both the offense of money laundering and
the unlawful activity as herein defined
b. Any proceeding relating to the unlawful activity shall be given precedence over the prosecution
of any offense or violation under this Act, without prejudice to the freezing of assets and other
remedies provided
*The Court of Appeals, upon application ex parte by the AMLC and after determination that probable
cause exists, may issue a freeze order which shall be effective immediately. The order shall be for 20
days unless extended by the Court
*The AMLC may inquire into or examine any particular deposit or investment with any financial
institution upon order of any competent court in cases of violation of this Act, when it has been
established that the deposits or investments are related to an unlawful activity
*This Act shall not be used to for political persecution and to hamper competition in trade or commerce
*No case for money laundering may be filed against, and no assets shall be frozen, attached or forfeited
to the prejudice of a candidate for an electoral office during election period
CHAPTER FIVE
INFIDELITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
CRIMINAL LAW II 125
K notes
Art.223
CONNIVING WITH, OR CONSENTING TO EVASION
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose there is a prisoner who requested a pass to go home since his house is near the jail anyway.
The officer consented and granted him the pass. Is the officer liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the prisoner requested that he serve his sentence by acting as the servant of the jail guard. Is
the guard liable?
Yes
Q: Police officers allowed the detained prisoner to go home and take a bath. Are they liable?
Yes
Q: How is he different from the other type of prisoner mentioned in the article?
A detention prisoner has merely been arrested and charged with a crime; whereas a prisoner by
final judgment has been found guilty as charged by a competent court and conveyed to prison
by order of the same court in order to serve out his sentence
Q: What is the legal effect of releasing a prisoner in relation to the expiration of the periods specified in
Art.125 (Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities)?
The officer who released the prisoner will not be criminally liable
*NB: recall, art.125 specifies particular time periods for the delivery of a person to the proper
judicial authorities, i.e.:
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Art.224
EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
Q: How is this committed?
CRIMINAL LAW II 126
K notes
The escapee is a convict by final judgment The escapee may either be a prisoner by final
judgment or merely a detention prisoner
Q: Suppose a prisoner escaped through an officer’s negligence. The officer hunted him down and
captured him. Is the officer still liable?
Yes
Q: What is the legal effect of his effort to recapture the escaped prisoner?
It may mitigate his liability but it does not afford him complete exculpation
Art.225
ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY
OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a private person
2. The conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under arrest is confided to him
3. The prisoner or person under arrest escapes
4. The offender consents to the escape of the prisoner/person under arrest, or the escape
takes place through his negligence
Art.226
REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT OR
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose the building where an RTC was situated began leaking during a storm and the stenographer
removed several documents from the filing cabinets in order to save them. Will the stenographer be
liable?
No, the removal was not done with an illicit purpose in mind
*NB: think about it. Removing a document could still be done for a legal and lawful purpose, but
what legal or lawful purpose does concealing or destroying the document serve? I suppose the
inherent nature of the acts – hiding the documents (concealment) and destroying them speak
of a perversity behind the act that is in itself reprehensible and doesn’t have to be coupled by
actual ill-will -kimi
Q: Suppose a clerk of court saw a newspaper lying on the desk. She burned it. Is she liable?
No, the newspaper is not a document within the contemplation of the law
*NB: the document here must be complete and one by which a right could be established or an
obligation could be extinguished, i.e.: it must carry with it a binding legal effect, if it doesn’t,
then the offender isn’t liable
Q: In removal, is it required that the offender actually achieves his illicit purpose?
No, it is sufficient that he has removed the documents for an unlawful purpose; whether or not
that purpose was actually achieved is immaterial
Q: Suppose an officer delivered a document to someone who is not the proper recipient for it, and he
did so with an illicit purpose in mind. Is he liable?
Yes
Art.227
OFFICER BREAKING SEAL
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or property
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper authority
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken
Art.228
OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. Closed papers, documents or objects are entrusted to his custody
3. He opens or permits to be opened the said papers, documents or objects
4. He does not have the proper authority to do so
Art.229
REVELATION OF SECRETS
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Revealing any secrets known by the offending public officer by reason of his official capacity
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is a public officer
b. He knows of a secret by reason of his official capacity
c. He reveals such secret without authority or justifiable means
d. Damage, great or small, is caused to the public interest
2. Wrongfully delivering papers or copies of papers of which he may have charge and which
should not be published
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is a public officer
b. He has charge of papers
c. The papers should not be published
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES:
*If the papers contain secrets and shouldn’t be published, and they are removed and delivered to the
wrong person, art.229 applies
*If there aren’t any secrets, the crime is infidelity in the custody of documents or papers
Art.230
PUBLIC OFFICERS REVEALING THE SECRETS
OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He knows of the secrets of a private individual by means of his public office
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable reason
Q: Suppose an employee of the BIR disclosed your income to his co-employee. Is he liable?
Yes, a person’s income is his own secret
CHAPTER SIX
OTHER OFFENSES OR IRREGULARITIES BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
SECTION ONE – DISOBEDIENCE, REFUSAL OR ASSISTANCE AND
MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
Art.231
OPEN DISOBEDIENCE
Art.232
DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR OFFICER,
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example
CRIMINAL LAW II 130
K notes
Q: What is the legal effect on the inferior officer’s liability if he disobeyed an unlawful order issued by his
superior?
None, he is not duty-bound to obey an unlawful order
Art.233
REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE
Q: Suppose there was no demand; may the officer from whom assistance was expected be held liable?
No, demand is a necessary element. There can be no refusal if there was no demand to begin
with
Art.234
REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE
Q: Suppose you refused to discharge the duties of a barangay secretary, may you be held liable?
No, art.234 does not cover appointive officials
Art.235
MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
prisoner
Q: Suppose a detention prisoner was being suspected of having been involved in kidnapping. One of the
arresting officers inflicted wounds on the prisoner, which would have caused the detainee’s death, had
it not been for timely medical intervention. What crime/s did the officer commit?
1. Maltreatment of prisoners
2. Frustrated homicide
*separate crimes
CRIMINAL LAW II 131
K notes
Q: Is it a complex crime; does one absorb the other, or are they separate crimes?
They are separate crimes
Q: Suppose a detention prisoner was under the custody of a jail guard, and the guard orders the
detainee to wash his clothes and when the detainee refused, the guard punched him in the face. What
crime/s did the guard commit?
1. Maltreatment of prisoners
2. Physical Injuries
*separate crimes
Q: Under the second manner of commission (extortion of confession), what is the legal effect of the
extortion?
The act of maltreating the prisoner to extort a confession or obtain information aggravates the
offender’s liability and increases the penalty for the offense
Q: Give examples of crimes that, by direct provision of law, cannot be complexed with any other crimes
1. Rebellion
2. Estafa (cannot be complexed with Falsification of private document)
3. Direct Bribery
4. Search Warrants maliciously obtained
5. Maltreatment of Prisoners (cannot be complexed with Physical Injuries)
Sec.3 – Definitions
Torture:
*An act by which severe pain or suffering whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him or her or a 3rd person information or a confession;
punishing him or her for an act he or she or a 3rd person has committed or is suspected of having
committed; or intimidating or coercing him or her or a 3rd person; or for any reason based on
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
consent or acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of a person in authority. It does not include
pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to lawful sanctions
a. Physical Torture
Causes severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or more parts of the body, i.e.:
CRIMINAL LAW II 132
K notes
systematic beating, food deprivation, electric shock, burning, rape or sexual abuse, use of
psychoactive drugs… xxx
*Deliberate and aggravated treatment not enumerated in Sec.4 which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation, or debasement
Sec.6 – Freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, an
absolute right
*Torture, etc. as criminal acts shall apply to all circumstances. A state or threat of war or public
emergency, or order of battle shall not and can never be invoked as a justification for torture
*Secret detention places, solitary confinement, incommunicado or other forms of detention where
torture may be carried out
1. Principals:
*Any person who actually participated or induced another in the commission of torture or who
cooperated in the execution of the act of torture 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 liable as
principals
*The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or the
immediate senior public official of the Philippine National Police and other law enforcement agencies
shall be held liable as principals to the crime of torture for any act or omission or negligence committed
by him that shall have led, assisted, abetted, or allowed whether directly or indirectly, the commission
thereof by his subordinate. If he has knowledge of, or owing to the circumstances at the time, should
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
have known that acts of torture shall be committed, is being committed or has been committed by his
subordinates or by others within his area of responsibility and despite such knowledge, did not take
preventive or corrective action either before, during or immediately after its commission, when he has
the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of torture but failed to prevent or investigate them,
whether deliberately or due to negligence, he shall also be liable as principal
2. Accessories:
*Public officers or employees who have knowledge that torture is being committed, and without
participating therein either as principal or accomplice, who take part in any of the following manners:
a. By themselves profiting from or assisting the offender to profit from the effects of the act
of torture
b. By concealing the act of torture and/or destroying the effects or instruments in order to
CRIMINAL LAW II 133
K notes
*Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as
a consequence, or as a means in the conduct or commission thereof. In which case, torture shall be
treated as a separate and independent criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable without
prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international laws
*Persons who have committed any act of torture shall not benefit from any special amnesty law or
similar measures that will have the effect of exempting them from any criminal proceedings and
sanctions
*The provisions of the RPC insofar as they are applicable shall be suppletory to this Act
*If the commission of any crime punishable under Title 8 (Crimes Against Persons) and Title 9 (Crimes
Against Personal Liberty and Security) of the RPC is attended by any of the acts constituting torture, the
penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum period
NOTES:
*In case you didn’t read through all of that, or speed-read it, here’s an even shorter summary of the
legal effect of the commission of torture on a public officer’s liability:
1. Torture may not be complexed with any other crime or felony, it remains an independent
liability
2. If any felony under Title 8 or 9 of the RPC (Crimes against Persons; Crimes against personal
liberty and security) is committed alongside torture, the penalty for the felony remains
distinct BUT will be imposed in its maximum because the law on torture (See: sec.22, RA
9745) provides for a special aggravating circumstance
3. The offender cannot invoke the state or threat of war, or an order of battle as justification
for torture
4. The offender is excluded by direct provision of law from the scope of any special amnesty
law or similar measure which would exempt him from criminal liability for torture
…in short, if you happen to be the offender, your a** is toast.
Art.236
ANTICIPATION OF THE DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICER
Art.237
PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES AND POWERS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is holding a public office
2. The period provided by law, regulations or special provisions for holding such office has
already expired
3. He continues to exercise the duties and powers of such office
Q: Suppose an officer is about to retire, but his term is extended. As a result thereof, he continues to
discharge the duties of his office. Is he liable?
No, his term was extended
Art.238
ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION
Q: How is this committed?
1. The 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
*NB: Think: Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Co-Equal Branches of Government… Basically,
this is the portion of criminal law that protects the independence of the three branches of government
and punishes any unwarranted interference among those respective spheres -kimi
Art.239
USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS
CRIMINAL LAW II 135
K notes
Q: Give an example
Art.240
USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a Judge
2. He –
a. Assumes a power pertaining to the executive authorities; or
b. Obstructs the executive authorities in the exercise of their powers
Q: Give an example
Art.241
USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is an officer of the executive branch of the government
2. He –
a. Assumes judicial powers
b. Obstructs the execution of any order or decision rendered by any Judge within his
jurisdiction
Q: Give an example
Art.242
DISOBEYING REQUEST FOR DISQUALIFICATION
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the jurisdictional issue is resolved in the officer’s favour. Is he still liable?
Yes
Q: Why so?
CRIMINAL LAW II 136
K notes
Because the offence has already been consummated when the issue was not yet decided;
whether or not the decision would be in the officer’s favour is not material to his liability under
art.242
Art.243
ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The 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
Q: Suppose the Deputy Executive Secretary prepared a letter addressed to a Judge which states that the
judge should be lenient in the appreciation of evidence, and that any legal assistance given to a strong
political leader whose case was pending before the judge would be highly appreciated. Is the Deputy
liable?
Yes
Q: Why?
The Deputy Executive Secretary has no prerogative whatsoever to suggest leniency on the part
of the judge and to imply that a favourable decision would be highly appreciated; his suggestion
– however mild – could have the effect of influencing the disposition of the case
Q: Suppose the case was decided favourably anyway, despite lack of leniency in the appreciation of
evidence. Is the Deputy still liable?
Yes, what is punishable is the act of trying to interfere in matters within the exclusive
jurisdiction of the courts; the deputy was liable the moment he sent the letter – even if the
appreciation of evidence did eventually exculpate the political leader
Art.244
UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He nominates or appoints a person to a public office
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose you were aware that a friend of yours had just finished serving sentence for the crime of
rape. You knowingly recommended him for a public position which specifically requires that any person
who might hold that office should not have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Are
you liable?
No, the mere act of recommending an unqualified person – even if done so knowingly – is not
punishable
*NB: this is not to be confused with ‘Crimes against Chastity’. I know, I know, you’re not stupid. I’m just
saying. The law here specifically sets apart punishments for abuses against chastity committed by public
officers in connection with their duties -kimi
Art.245
ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY – PENALTIES
Q: What are the modes of commission?
1. By 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
2. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a woman under the offender’s
custody
3. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances towards the wife, daughter, sister or
relative within the same degree by affinity of any person in the custody of the offendeing
warden or officer
Q: Suppose a judge who happened to be married left a woman a note which said ‘I love you’. Is he liable?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
No (*trolling moment: don’t make the mistake of saying ‘yes’ or you’ll hear this: ‘You mean to
say LOVE is the monopoly of those who are single?? –Atty.A :D )
Sec.3 – Terrorism
*Any person who commits an act punishable under any of the following provisions of the Revised Penal
Code:
A. Art.122 (piracy in general)
B. Art.134 (rebellion/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:
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 (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
terrorism
*penalty: 40 years of imprisonment without parole, as provided for under Act 4103 (the indeterminate
sentence law)
**think: any of the aforementioned violations + a condition of widespread and extraordinary panic +
trying to coerce government to agree to an unlawful demand = terrorism
-kimi
*There is conspiracy when 2 or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of the
crime of terrorism and decide to commit the same
Sec.5 – Accomplice
*Any person who, not being a principal under art.17 of the RPC, or a conspirator under sec.4 hereof,
cooperates in the execution of either the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by
previous or simultaneous acts
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
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
arts.17 and 18, RPC, takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners:
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 harbouring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime
*Exception to RA 4200 (anti-wiretapping law): police or members of a law enforcement team may
conduct surveillance or listen to, or intercept communications upon written order of the Court of
Appeals; provided that surveillance of communication between lawyers and clients, doctors and
CRIMINAL LAW II 139
K notes
patients, journalists and their sources, and confidential business correspondence shall not be authorized
*custody lies with the authorizing division of the CA; the materials are considered classified and shall be
sealed and deposited therein
*it shall be unlawful for any person to copy those materials in whatever form
*classified sealed materials shall not be opened or revealed or divulged unless authorized via written
order by the CA upon application of the Department of Justice and only upon a showing that the DOJ
has been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council
*proper written notice shall be served to the person who has been the subject of the surveillance
*Anything obtained in violation of the pertinent provisions of this Act shall be absolutely inadmissible as
evidence
*xxx … provided that notwithstanding sec.15, the party aggrieved shall be allowed access to the sealed
material as evidence for the prosecution of any police or law enforcement personnel who maliciously
procured said authorization
*the following shall be declared as a terrorist and outlawed organization by the Regional Trial Court
upon application of the DOJ with due notice and opportunity to be heard given the organization:
*any organization, association, or group of persons organized for the purpose of engaging in terrorism,
or which, although not organized for that purpose, actually uses the acts to terrorize mentioned in this
Act or to sow or create a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace
to coerce the government to give to an unlawful demand
*Art.125, RPC, notwithstanding, 3 days (counted from the time of arrest). No criminal liability for the
arresting police officer
*provided that the arrest must result from the surveillance under sec.7 and examination of bank
deposits under sec.27
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*xxx … unless the police or law enforcement personnel who violated the detainee’s rights is duly
identified, the same penalty shall be imposed on the police officer or head or leader of the law
enforcement unit having custody of the detainee at the time of the violation
*where evidence of guilt is not strong and accused is granted bail, the court shall limit the right to travel
within the municipality or city where the offender resides or where the case is pending
Sec.27 – Judicial Authorization required to examine bank deposits, accounts and records
*RA 1405 notwithstanding, upon application, the CA may issue authorization after finding probable
cause that a person charged with or suspected of terrorism or being a member of an outlawed group
owns the accounts
*same procedure for obtaining authorization, custody of data, evidentiary value, penalties for violations
Sec.37 – Penalty for bank officials and employees defying a court authorization
*Deposits and their outstanding balances, placements, trust accounts, assets and records shall be
seized, sequestered and frozen in order to prevent their use, transfer or conveyance for purposes
inimical to the safety and security of the people, or injurious to the State
*However, a reasonable withdrawal of sums for family needs or the services of counsel shall be allowed
upon permission of the court
*the seized and sequestered property shall be deemed as property held in trust by the bank for such
person and the government during the pendency of the investigation; use or disposition of them shall
be subject to the approval of the court
*Any public officer who has direct custody of a detained person under the provisions of this Act and
who, by deliberate act, misconduct or inexcusable negligence causes or allows the escape of such
detained person shall be guilty of an offense
*notwithstanding the provisions of RA 6981 (witness protection, security and benefits act), the
immunity of government witnesses testifying under this act shall be governed by secs.17 and 18 of Rule
119, Rules of Court
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*provided that said witnesses shall be entitled to the benefits granted under RA 6981
*in cases of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, the judge shall set the case for continuous trial
on a daily basis from Monday to Friday or other short-term trial calendar to ensure speedy trial
Sec.49 – Prosecution under this Act shall be a bar to another prosecution under the RPC or any other
special penal laws
*When a person has been prosecuted under a provision of this Act, and after the accused had pleaded
CRIMINAL LAW II 141
K notes
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
*Upon acquittal, Php 500,000 for every day the offender has been detained without a warrant as a
result of such accusation – to be charged automatically against the appropriations of the police agency
or Anti-Terrorism Council that brought or sanctioned the filing of the charges and to be released 15 days
from date of acquittal
*Award of damages shall be without prejudice to the right of the acquitted person to file criminal or
administrative charges against those responsible for charging him with terrorism
*no person suspected or convicted of terrorism shall be subjected to any country unless his or her
testimony is needed for terrorist-related police investigations or judicial trials in the said country and
unless his or her human rights, including the right against torture and right to counsel, are officially
assured by the requesting country and transmitted accordingly and approved by the Department of
Justice
*subject to the provisions of an existing treaty of which the Republic of the Philippines is a signatory
and to any contrary provision of any law of preferential application, the provisions of this Act shall
apply:
1. To individual persons who commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act within the
terrestrial domain, interior waters, maritime zone, and airspace of the Philippines
2. To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines,
commit, conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes defined and punished in this Act inside the
territorial limits of the Philippines
3. To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the PH, commit
any of the said crimes on board a Philippine ship or airship
4. To individual persons who commit any of the said crimes within any embassy, consulate, or
diplomatic premises belonging to or occupied by the Philippine government in an official
capacity
5. To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the PH, commit
said crimes against Philippine Citizens or persons of Philippine descent, where their citizenship
or ethnicity was a factor in the commission of the crime; and
6. To individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the PH, commit
said crimes directly against the Philippine government
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
TITLE EIGHT
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
CHAPTER ONE
DESTRUCTION OF LIFE
CRIMINAL LAW II 142
K notes
Art.246
PARRICIDE
*NB: It helps to recall Persons with respect to the definition of the victims of parricide… quite obviously
because relationship is a key element in this crime
Q: Suppose you killed your brother. What crime did you commit?
Murder or Homicide, depending on the circumstances attending the killing
Q: Why is that?
A brother (or sister) is not included in the enumeration of the law with respect to the
relationship of the victim to the accused in the crime of parricide
Q: An illegitimate grandson killed his illegitimate grandfather. What crime did he commit?
Homicide or murder
Q: A husband and wife were married. At the time of marriage, the wife was a minor whose consent was
obtained through force. After 3 years, the husband killed her. What crime did he commit?
Parricide
Q: Why is that?
Semper Presumitur Matrimonio – ‘always presume marriage’. The law attaches a presumption
of validity to the marriage. If however, the marriage was proven to indeed be void ab initio, the
crime is murder or homicide
Q: A husband and wife were married in Hong Kong without a marriage license. When they visited the
Philippines, the husband killed the wife. What crime was committed?
Parricide
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: the law does not require that the marriage should be solemnized in the Philippines, it only
requires that the victim must be the legitimate spouse of the accused – as long as the marriage
is valid (and it is presumed to be so), the crime is parricide. For all we know, a marriage license is
not a requirement in HK, and even if it were… well, that’s another issue. For purposes of this
question, the presumption of validity with respect to the marriage still attaches
Q: Suppose the couple were Filipino Citizens and a Decree of Legal Separation was previously issued
before the husband killed the wife. What crime was committed?
Parricide
Q: Why?
CRIMINAL LAW II 143
K notes
Because a Decree of Legal Separation does not sever the marital bond, the couple are still validly
married under the law, and the victim was therefore the legitimate spouse of the accused
Q: Suppose an Annulment case was pending when the husband killed the wife. What crime was
committed?
Parricide, the pending case has not yet been finally decided and the marriage was still valid as of
the time of the killing
Q: Suppose that on the day of the killing, a judgment of Annulment had just become final. What crime
was committed?
Murder or Homicide, the victim was no longer the legitimate spouse of the accused by virtue of
the finality of the judgment
Q: A prostitute killed her illegitimate year-old son. What crime did she commit?
Parricide
Q: Why then do you say that the crime is parricide. Should it not be murder?
The crime is still parricide; notwithstanding the presence of the qualifying aggravating
circumstance of treachery because the law specifically sets apart the requirements of parricide
and those requirements are met by the facts: a person (child of 1 year) was killed, the accused
(prostitute) killed him, and he was her (illegitimate) son
NOTES:
*Notice that as far as the ‘other descendant’ is concerned, that descendant has to be legitimately
related to the accused, if he isn’t, the crime is murder or homicide, not parricide – which means that
only relatives by blood in the direct ascending/descending line are considered – except, of course, where
a legitimate spouse happens to be the victim
*If there is no clear evidence of marriage, the presumption cannot attach, and the crime therefore, is
murder/homicide
*the crime is STILL parricide, even if the accused was not aware of his/her relationship to the victim; the
law does not require knowledge of relationship
*the liability of a STRANGER cooperating in the commission of parricide is the liability for
murder/homicide
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Art.247
DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIESINFLICTED
UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Q: How is this committed?
1. A legally married person or parent surprises his (or her) spouse or daughter, the latter being
under 18 and living with him (or her), in the act of sexual intercourse with another person
2. He/she kills any or both of them or inflicts any serious physical injuries during the act or
immediately thereafter
CRIMINAL LAW II 144
K notes
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife or daughter; or he or she has
not consented to the infidelity of the other spouse
Q: What is Destierro?
It is a penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty whereby an accused is ordered by the court to
stay within the limits provided by the court and to not come within a 25 – 250 kilometre radius
of the area where the victim or victim’s family resides
Q: A husband surprised his wife in the sexual act with another man. He fired his gun at the two. The wife
was hit but according to the doctor, her injurious were only of a less serious character. Is he liable for
her injuries?
No
Q: Suppose that when the husband came home one night, he saw a man in his smallclothes jump out of
the bedroom window. He followed the man, overtook him, and killed him. May he avail of the benefits
of art.247?
No
Q: Why not?
The provision presupposes that the accused actually witnessed the act and committed the
killing or infliction of injuries during the act or immediately thereafter; neither of these
conditions were present
*NB: the time element is essential to the offence. 2 things have to be present: (1) observation of
the act (i.e.: actually seeing it happen) and (2) acting within that time frame (i.e.: right then and
there or just after). This is because the killing must be the direct by-product of the accused’s
uncontrollable rage; it should have been motivated by blind impulse and must not have been
influenced by external factors (i.e.: the accused should not have had time to seriously think
about what he was doing). In essence, it’s vital that the accused did not have time for cold
calculations, else that can only mean he purposefully considered the act of killing, and the full
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
liability for parricide (if the victim is the spouse or daughter) or murder/homicide (if the victim is
a stranger) attaches–kimi
Q: Suppose the husband saw his wife and her paramour both naked in their bedroom. He shot them and
they died. May he avail of art.247?
No, he did not surprise them in the act
Q: Suppose the husband saw the wife naked with her paramour. They were committing lascivious acts
preliminary to the sexual act. He shot them. May he avail of art.247?
No
CRIMINAL LAW II 145
K notes
Q: A husband had suspicions of his wife’s infidelity. He told her that he would go home to the province.
He did not proceed there but simply waited for an hour, after which he returned home and caught the
wife and her paramour in the act of intercourse. He went down to the kitchen, but couldn’t find a
suitable knife. He remembered that he had lent the neighbour his revolver a day before. He went to the
neighbour, recovered his gun and returned to his house. He found the paramour playing billiards and
the wife in the kitchen. He shot and killed the paramour. May he avail of art.247?
No, everything the husband did was premeditated. The liability for murder attaches.
Q: Same facts, except that the husband had no suspicions and did not say he would go to the province
or wait for an hour. He simply walked in, saw them, and commenced the earlier narrated actions. May
he avail of art.247?
Yes, all his actions in this case formed one fluid and spontaneous act and the killing happened
immediately after his observation of the sexual act; the killing was still the proximate cause of
his obfuscation
Q: Suppose the husband surprised his wife in the act with her paramour. He shot the paramour and the
bullet also hit the houseboy, who happened to be standing behind the bedroom wall. Is the husband
liable for the death or injuries of the houseboy?
Yes
Q: Suppose one night, the husband arrived home early and found his wife and her paramour sleeping in
the same bed. He took his gun from the nightstand and shot the paramour. Is he liable?
Yes (*trolling moment: do NOT interpret ‘sleeping in the same bed’ as the sexual act)
Q: Suppose he arrived home, heard a stranger’s voice from inside and before opening the door, peaked
through a crack in the door. He saw his wife and her paramour rising from the bed, the paramour was
buttoning up his drawers. He opened the door and fired at both of them. Is he liable?
Yes, he did not see the sexual act
Q: A husband saw his wife and a stranger in the sexual act. The wife was screaming for help. He ran
down to the kitchen, grabbed a knife and stabbed the stranger. May he invoke art.247?
No, but he may invoke art.11, par.2 (defence of relative)
Q: A husband saw the sexual act between his wife and her paramour. The act appeared to be voluntary.
He went down to the kitchen to get a knife but when he returned, the paramour was no longer there.
The next day, the husband saw the paramour by a convenience store and shot the latter. Will he be
liable for murder?
Yes
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the husband and his wife agreed that on certain days, they could both have sex with other
partners. One night, a night scheduled to be the husband’s turn, he caught the wife with another
partner in the sexual act. He stabbed the partner to death. Will the husband be liable?
Yes, he consented to his wife’s infidelity
NOTES:
*Whatever the book says, this article ISa felony. It defines the manner of commission of a criminal act
and attaches a penalty for it –Atty. A
Art.248
MURDER
*NB: Reviewing art.14 and the kinds of Aggravating Circumstances is a must when studying this crime
*NB: That’s pretty hairy memory work, so here’s my own aide-mémoire. I’ve found that it
becomes easier to associate whole classes with a few key words so that when you recall the
word, the whole class comes to mind: -kimi
a. Treachery
b. Incentives
c. Flood, Fire, Poison and Vehicles
d. Public Calamities
e. Premeditation
f. Cruelty
MURDER HOMICIDE
ART.248 ART.249
*let’s make this easier –kimi
Somebody was killed, the killing was attended by Somebody was killed and while there might have
qualifying aggravating circumstances been other kinds of aggravating circumstances,
there were no qualifying aggravating
circumstances
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: So if you killed a person without any of the 6 Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances, what is the
crime?
Homicide
Q: Suppose there was a generic aggravating circumstance, how would you classify the killing?
Homicide
3. Specific
4. Qualifying
5. Special*
Q: Suppose that in a trial, a qualifying aggravating circumstance is not alleged but the prosecution
introduced a witness and presented evidence proving the existence of such a qualified aggravating
circumstance. The defence did not object, and the qualified aggravating circumstance was actually
proven. What is the effect of the presence of that QAC?
The crime is homicide – the QAC will only serve to increase the penalty
Q: Suppose a person was killed and the accused was under the influence of alcohol. What crime was
committed?
Homicide
*NB: Intoxication is not a Qualified Aggravating Circumstance. As per article 15, RPC, intoxication
is an alternative circumstance which, depending on the conditions attending the crime, may
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: Influence of drugs is considered a qualifying aggravating circumstance, as per sec.25 of the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
No
NOTES:
*Because of the nature of murder, the obvious consummation of the crime is when the victim is actually
killed. Else, the crime is frustrated/attempted murder only
*When there are more than one qualifying aggravating circumstances attending the killing, only one will
serve to qualify the offense to murder. The other qualifying circumstances will operate as generic
aggravating circumstances (apparently this means, you can’t browbeat the accused by stacking the
qualifying circumstances)
*The qualifying circumstance(s) should be alleged in the information. Else, the crime will not become
murder and those circumstances will be considered generic aggravating circumstances
*There must be INTENT TO KILL if the crime was committed by means of the methods enumerated
under par.3, art.248 (i.e.: inundation, fire, poison etc), but killing a person with TREACHERY is murder,
even if there was no intent to kill, because of the voluntary nature of treachery
2. When the other circumstances are absorbed in one qualifying circumstance, they cannot be
considered as separate generic aggravating circumstances
*To constitute treachery, the means, methods, or forms of attack must be consciously adopted
*Re: armed men, the men must take part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly, and the
accused must avail himself of their aid or rely upon them
*TREACHERY and PREMEDITATION are inherent in murder by poison and CANNOT be considered as
aggravating circumstances for the purpose of further increasing the penalty
*Proving Premeditation:
1. Prove time when the determination to kill was made
2. Overt act manifestly indicating that the offender clung to his determination
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
3. Sufficient lapse of time between the determination and the execution of the killing
*Atty.A does not spend much time on discussing the 6 qualifying aggravating circumstances in murder
because he holds people responsible for reviewing their criminal law 1 notes regarding the
circumstances affecting criminal liability
ART.249
HOMICIDE
Q: How is this committed?
CRIMINAL LAW II 149
K notes
NOTES:
*Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death resulted, because with respect to crimes of personal
violence, the penal law looks particularly to the material results following the unlawful act and holds the
aggressor responsible for all the consequences thereof
*Evidence of intent to kill is important only in attempted/frustrated homicide – in these cases, if there is
no intent to kill, the crime is physical injuries
*Death of the victim due to his own refusal to seek medical attention is NOT a defence, that he would
have lived had he received proper medical aid is immaterial
*When the wounds that caused death were inflicted by 2 different persons acting independently, even if
they were not in conspiracy with each other, each one is guilty of homicide (because either wound could
have caused death) – this rule is applicable when there is no conspiracy, otherwise, the act of one is the
act of all
*Use of unlicensed firearm is aggravating in homicide. In such a case, the circumstance is not considered
a separate crime but will be appreciated as a mere aggravating circumstance
*In all crimes against persons of which death is an element, there must be satisfactory evidence of –
1. The fact of death
2. The identity of the victim (ergo, if the victim was unknown, the body unfound, the fact of
death was not sufficiently established – BUT if the victim was known and could not have
survived (i.e.: his hands were tied before being thrown into the water), even if the body was
never found, the corpus delicti is established)
ART.250
PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE,
MURDER OR HOMICIDE
Q: How may the courts apply penalties for the 3 crimes mentioned?
1. The penalty lower by 1 degree than that which should be imposed under the provisions of
art.50 may be imposed on the accused, in view of the facts
2. Considering the facts, the courts may likewise reduce by 1 degree the penalty which under
art.51 should be imposed for an attempt to commit parricide/murder/homicide
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES:
*Think: 2 degrees lower than the penalty imposed by the law for frustrated parricide/murder/homicide;
3 degrees lower for attempted parricide/murder/homicide/
CRIMINAL LAW II 150
K notes
ART.251
DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
*NB: Think, death in the course of a free-for-all lol
Q: Give an example
*NB: This is easy, just remember the adjectives – ‘confused and tumultuous’. There ought to be
a melee out there, with no two groups fighting in an organized manner. Something like a
spontaneous altercation – like in a bar. Conjure up a picture of someone drunk, who heard
something he didn’t like and… all hell breaks loose lol (what? bar fights amuse me :P ) –kimi
Q: Will this provision apply if the person who killed the deceased can be identified?
No, if he can be identified his liability is the one for murder/homicide
Q: Suppose 2 rival gangs met in alley and assaulted each other. One person died in the course of the
fight. Does this provision apply?
No – the groups must not be (a) identified and/or (b) organized
ART.252
PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A
TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a tumultuous affray as referred to in art.251
2. A participant/some participants thereof suffered serious physical injuries/less serious
physical injuries
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: If the person responsible for the injuries can be identified, what is his liability?
Physical Injuries
Q: What if the offender can be identified, but the injuries were only of a slight nature?
This provision does not apply
CRIMINAL LAW II 151
K notes
ART.253
GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether consummated or not (i.e.: furnishing him with
the means to commit suicide)
2. Lending assistance to another to commit suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself
Q: Give an example
Q: Is the suicidal person liable, supposing the attempt to take his life fails?
No he is not
Q: Suppose an abortion results from the suicidal act of a pregnant woman. Is the woman liable for the
abortion?
No
Q: Why not?
Suicide is not a crime under our penal laws. Since the woman is not liable for attempting suicide,
she is also not liable for the result of that attempt
Q: Suppose you feel that you will fail criminal law 2. You asked your classmate to push you off the ledge
while you stand at the top of this building. Instead of dying, you were able to recover. May you be liable?
No, the party committing suicide is not liable
*NB: curious, this…Perhaps because suicidal people are not truly balanced? I found myself
involuntarily staring off into space contemplating the reason for the lack of liability of the
suicidal party. At any rate, the law isn’t concerned with his/her motives. It is enough that the law
does not make that person liable –kimi
Q: Suppose you saw your grandmother suffering from a disease, she asked for your help, and you
decided to perform acts that constitute euthanasia (mercy killing). Will you be liable?
Yes (see: 2nd punishable act, assistance to the extent of doing the killing yourself)
Q: So you’re saying that the law considers this kind of euthanasia synonymous to ‘assisting suicide’?
Yes, it does
*NB: for purposes of this question – note that the suicidal person (grandma) requested your
help in ending her life. Even if she requested it, the law makes you liable. Consent of the victim,
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
therefore, is neither mitigating nor justifying. I wholly disagree with this part of the law, I think
suffering victims should be given the right to choose their manner of death – but my opinions
carry no weight as far as this provision goes. The law is clear: help anybody die – even for
humanitarian reasons as defined under existent theories for euthanasia – and you are liable.
(Needless to say, I personally make a quiet distinction between helping demented persons die –
which I believe is wrong because they are not aware of the consequences of their action and
could very well be obfuscated – and helping terminally ill, medically-diagnosed, physically-
suffering patients die; that last group, I think, if they can be proven to have reached a lucid and
wilful decision to end the pain, should be given a choice.) –kimi
Q: Is suicide lawful?
Yes
CRIMINAL LAW II 152
K notes
*NB: by ‘lawful’, we don’t mean ‘right’ or ‘moral’ or ‘good’. What is meant by ‘lawful’ is that the
act is not considered a crime, much less punished as such, by the law. Saying something is
‘lawful’ is in effect stating that there is an absence of a law punishing the act, it is NOT saying
that the act is morally or properly good
ART.254
DISCHARGE OF FIREARM
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender discharges a firearm at another person
2. He has no intention to kill that person
Q: How would you know if the crime is illegal discharge of firearm or grave threats?
Grave threats involve a condition; Illegal Discharge of firearm (while it is committed in a
threatening manner) does not involve a condition
Q: A gun was aimed at the house of your neighbour. Is this punishable under art.254?
No, the crime is alarms and scandals
Q: A gun was aimed at A, but when it was discharged, the shooter shifted and as a result, the bullet was
fired a few inches to A’s right. What crime did the shooter commit?
Illegal Discharge of Firearm
NOTES
*Actual discharge of the gun is controlling, and the gun must be aimed at somebody – not something
*A person can be held liable for discharge even if the gun was not pointed at the offended party when it
fired, as long as it was initially aimed at the offended party
*Intent to kill is negated by the distance between the offender and the victim (I honestly think this is
ridiculous, considering that a crack sniper – say, a member of the US Marine Sniper Company – can take
you out with a headshot from a kilometre away – that’s 1,000 metres, worrrd. And yes, I know more
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
about guns and shooting than most girls do, I like stuff that have to do with the military – not the
Philippine military, of course – because we’ve no such thing to speak of lol)–kimi
*’This provisions is already irrelevant, considering the nature of guns we have now. Is not the nature of
the weapon indication enough of intent to kill? You FIRED A GUN at somebody’ –Atty.A
ART.255
INFANTICIDE
Q: How is this committed?
1. A child was killed
2. It was less than 3 days (72 hours) old
3. The accused killed that child
Q: Suppose a stranger killed a 48-hour old baby with the use of poison. What crime did he commit?
Infanticide
*NOT murder, notwithstanding the use of poison, which would have resulted in murder if the
victim had not been a 2-day old child. The age of the victim is controlling, with respect to
infanticide
Q: Suppose the mother killed her 29-hour old baby. What crime did she commit?
Infanticide
Q: On what?
On who committed the crime, and for what reason – If the person who killed the child was its
own mother or maternal grandparents, and the killing was done to conceal dishonour, the
penalty may be mitigated
*NB: I extremely disagree with this part of the law. The original notes for this stated that
‘provided they are of good character’. In any event, how is ‘good character’ supposed to square
with killing a baby less than 3 days old? I think that only complete insanity should excuse a
mother for killing her child, and no circumstance should excuse that mother’s parents – the
child’s maternal grandparents – from killing it,honour or no honour –kimi
Q: Suppose the child was born dead, or although born alive, could not sustain an independent life of its
own. Is there infanticide?
No, the child could not sustain a life of its own
NOTES
*When the offender is the FATHER, MOTHER or LEGITIMATE ASCENDANT of the child, the offender shall
suffer the penalty prescribed for parricide. If the offender is another person, the penalty is that for
murder
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Only the mother and the maternal grandparents of the child are entitled to the mitigating
circumstance of concealing dishonour (this is deplorable –kimi)
*’What is material here is the AGE of the child, not the qualifying circumstances or the relationship of
the offender to the victim’ –Atty.A
*A stranger who cooperated in the killing is also guilty of infanticide, but the penalty is that for murder
*There is no infanticide if the child is born dead or although born alive, could not sustain an independent
life of its own
CRIMINAL LAW II 154
K notes
ART.256
INTENTIONAL ABORTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a pregnant woman
2. Violence is exerted on her; or drugs or beverages administered to her; or the accused
otherwise acts upon the pregnant woman
3. As a result of the use of violence/drugs/beverages/any other act of the accused, the foetus
dies, either in the womb or from having been expelled therefrom
4. The abortion was intended
Q: Is it necessary that the victim of abortion must be unable to live on its own?
Yes
Q: What if the foetus was killed after having been separated from the womb?
If it could sustain a life of its own, the crime is infanticide
ART.257
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a pregnant woman
2. Violence is used on her without intending an abortion
3. The violence is intentionally exerted
4. As a result of the violence, the foetus dies – either in the womb or after having been
expelled therefrom
Q: Suppose a jeepney driver who was driving recklessly hit a pregnant woman. She was thrown a few
metres away, as a result of which, she suffered an abortion. What crime did the driver commit?
Physical Injuries – the violence was not intended
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose a pregnant woman had an argument with her husband. He slapped her, which caused her to
fall and lose the baby. Is he liable under art.257?
Yes
Q: Suppose he did not slap her but the argument caused the wife to bleed and lose the baby. Is he liable?
No, there was no violence exerted
ART.258
ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN HERSELF
CRIMINAL LAW II 155
K notes
OR BY HER PARENTS
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an abortion
2. The abortion was intended
3. It was caused by –
a. The pregnant woman herself
b. Any other person with her consent
c. Any of her parents with her consent
Q: Does concealing dishonour operate as a mitigating circumstance here, as far as the woman is
concerned?
Yes
*NB: while it is true that under infanticide, the maternal grandparents may also invoke the
mitigating circumstance of concealing dishonour, this is not the case with art.258 (I honestly do
not know why, considering that in infanticide, a living, breathing, child is killed, as opposed to
the termination of a nameless, not yet fully formed foetus – not to say that one crime is less
reprehensible than the other, but the distinction is certainly odd, isn’t it? –kimi)
NOTES
*Instances when the woman is liable: (1) when she performs the abortion herself; (2) when she consents
that any other person or her parents perform the abortion
*persons liable: (1) the woman (under par.1); (2) the ‘other person’; (3) the woman’s parents
ART.259
ABORTION PRACTICED BY A PHYSICIAN
OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an abortion
2. The abortion is intended
3. The offender, who must be a physician/midwife, causes the abortion or assists in causing it
4. The physician/midwife takes advantage of his/her scientific knowledge or skill
ART.260
RESPONSIBILITY OF PARTICIPANTS
IN A DUEL
Q: What is a duel?
A formal or regular combat previously concerted between 2 parties in the presence of 2 or more
Seconds of lawful age on each side, who make the selection of arms and fix all the other
conditions of the fight
*NB: Think: Heath Ledger in the movie ‘A Knight’s Tale’; or Jim Caviesel in ‘The Count of Monte
Cristo’ – yes, this is so archaic(not to mention, it sounds ridiculous. So medieval. So dark ages) –
kimi
Q: Suppose no one was injured or harmed in the duel. Can the combatants still be held liable?
Yes
Q: One of the combatants was seriously injured but he survived. May he still be liable for participating in
a duel?
Yes
ART.261
CHALLENGING TO A DUEL
Q: What are the punishable acts?
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
CHAPTER TWO
PHYSICAL INJURIES
ART.262
MUTILATION
Q: What is mutilation?
The loping off, or clipping off, of some part of the body
CRIMINAL LAW II 157
K notes
Q: How would you know if the injuries inflicted constitute the crime of mutilation or
attempted/frustrated homicide?
By ascertaining the presence or absence of intent to kill
ART.263
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
Q: How is this committed?
By –
1. Wounding
2. Beating
3. Assaulting; or
4. Administering injurious substances
Q: How would you know if the crime was serious physical injuries or murder/ homicide/ parricide/
infanticide?
Presence/absence of intent to kill
Q: Suppose that during the recruitment of a neophyte, and his initiation into a fraternity, the neophyte
suffered injuries which lasted for more than 30 days. What are the liabilities of the fraternity members?
Violations of the Anti-Hazing Law
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Hazing:
Any initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity,
CRIMINAL LAW II 158
K notes
Organization:
Includes any club of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Philippine National Police, the
Philippine Military Academy, or Cadet Corps of the Citizen’s Military Training or Citizen’s Army
Training
Sec.2
*Prior written notice to the school authorities/head of the organization 7 days before the conduct of
such initiation which shall not exceed 3 days
*Notice shall include the names of those to be subjected to such activities, and an undertaking that no
physical violence shall be employed by anybody during such rites
Sec.3
*At least 2 representatives of the school or organization must be present to see to it that no physical
harm of any kind shall be inflicted
Sec.4
*If the person subject 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 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/s charged under these provisions
even before their conviction
*The maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed in any of the following instances:
a) When the recruitment is accompanied by force, violence, threat, intimidation or deceit on the
person of the recruit who refuses to join;
b) When the recruit, neophyte, or applicant initially consents to join but upon learning that hazing
will be committed on his person, is prevented from quitting;
c) When the recruit, neophyte or applicant having undergone hazing is prevented from reporting
the unlawful act to his parents/guardians, to the proper school authorities, or to the police
authorities, through force, violence, threat or intimidation;
d) When the hazing is committed outside of the school or institution; or
e) When the victim is below 12 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
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers/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 the faculty members who consent to the hazing or who have actual
knowledge thereof, but failed to take action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as
accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by the perpetrators
*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
CRIMINAL LAW II 159
K notes
*The presence of any person during the hazing is prima facie evidence of participation therein as a
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
Author’s Note:
February 19, 2012, Sunday, saw this particular piece of legislation come alive in a way this block
could never have anticipated. One of our own, Marvin P. Reglos, was set to join the Lambda Rho
Beta Fraternity and would be initiated that day. He died as a result of the injuries inflicted on
him during the initiation. His death shocked all levels of the academe – and was aired over a
period of weeks on national news channels. We all watched the story piece itself together. He
was taken to a poolside resort in Antipolo, Rizallate on February 18 (Saturday). The next day, at
around 3pm or thereabout, a red Honda Civic stopped by the emergency room of Unciano
Medical Centre, and Marvin was left to the care of the attending doctors. He was pronounced
dead after doctors tried in vain to revive him for 20 minutes. Later that afternoon, 2
unidentified men showed up at the medical centre, claiming to be ‘friends’ of Marvin, and
wanting to know how he was doing. They claimed that they had received messages, informing
them that Marvin was at the centre (a blatant lie which the doctors promptly refuted. Nobody
in that centre alerted them to Marvin’s condition – he died alone). The police who were then
investigating the death took them into custody. Murder charges were filed against those 2 men
– later identified as former Bedan law students and a few others, including the ‘Grand Rhoan’ of
the Fraternity. As I write this (May 27, 2012), trial is still on-going. There are no words at all to
describe the horror of what we went through as we travelled to Antipolo and saw him for
ourselves, the agony of watching a father weep over his son in a morgue (that father’s screams
echo forever in the darkest corners of my dreams), and of a mother arriving home from South
Korea to be at her son’s wake and the funeral that would follow. We made the 15-hour trip to
Marvin’s hometown of Burgos, Isabela – where we were met with the anger of an entire
community – people who hated what was done to him, the brutality he was subjected to…
People who did not know that it was our loss too. I’m writing this because Marvin was my
friend. And because his story deserves to be told. Unequivocally, I would like to state that I
denounce the use of violence as a requisite for membership in any organization. No amount of
justification can supply the lacking principle – not loyalty, or brotherhood, or strength or
courage; not even consent. Marvin made the mistake of thinking that being in a fraternity was a
way to help boost survival within the law school, and an avenue for acceptance. Those same
people he looked to for support took his life even as he trusted them with it. The extreme
cruelty with which they had treated my friend was evident from the injuries he bore –
everywhere skin showed, there were bruises. He died of kidney failure, the autopsy report said;
kidney failure from the sheer loss of blood.So ended the dreams of our kind, funny Marvin –
eldest among 3 siblings born to a farmer and an OFW. So much for the vaunted ideals of
brotherhood – which those particular fraternity membersclearly negated when they arrogated
to themselves the right to take a life. They deserve none of this society’s sympathy.
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
~ Kimiko
Q: What is hazing?
Q: how is it committed?
Q: What are the organizations covered and those that are not?
Q: What are the legal requirements regarding the conduct of initiation rites?
-Prior written notice to the school authorities/organization head containing the names of the
members who will be participating, and submitted 7 days before the event.
-The notice must also contain an undertaking that no physical violence shall be employed by any
person during the rites
-2 school/organization authorities must be present during the initiation rites to insure that no
physical harm shall be inflicted
Q: What is the legal effect on the mitigation of liability, as far as being charged with a violation of this
special law is concerned?
The accused is not entitled to the mitigating circumstance that there was no intention to
commit so grave a wrong
Q: What is the presumption of the law, with regards to persons actually present during the hazing?
Persons who are present during the hazing are presumed to have participated therein as
principals unless they can prove that they prevented the commission of the hazing
NOTES:
*Serious physical injuries may be committed through reckless imprudence or simple imprudence
*Blindness requires loss of vision in both eyes or one, it does not include mere weakness of vision
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*’Deformity’ involves physical ugliness, permanent and definite abnormality. It includes scars or bodily
impairments that are (a) not curable by natural means or by nature; as well as (b) conspicuous and
visible (i.e.: if it’s covered by clothing, even if it does happen to be a horrible scar, it isn’t deformity, as
far as the law is concerned)
*Loss of hearing must be in both ears; else the injury is merely considered a loss of the use of one part of
the body, not deafness as in loss of the power to hear
*When the category of the offense of serious physical injuries depends on the period of the
illness/incapacity for labour, there must be evidence of the length of that period, else the offense will be
considered merely as slight physical injuries
*There is no ‘incapacity for labour’ if the injured party could still engage in his work albeit less effectively
than before
*Serious physical injuries is qualified when the crime is committed against the same persons
enumerated under parricide; or when it is attended by any of the circumstances defining the crime of
murder HOWEVER, serious physical injuries resulting from excessive chastisement by parents is not
qualified (this is another thing I disapprove of – excessive chastisement by parents should be qualified –
no parent should be able to escape a higher penalty for seriously hurting a child just because he/she
happens to be that child’s parent –kimi)
ART.264
ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCES
OR BEVERAGES
ART.265
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
Q: What are less serious physical injuries?
Physical injuries not described by law as ‘serious’ (see: arts.263, 264) but which shall incapacitate
the offended party for labour for 10 days or more (but not more than 30 days), or shall require
medical attendance for the same period
ART.266
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES
AND MALTREATMENT
Q: When are injuries considered to be of a slight nature?
1. When the offended party was incapacitated for labour from 1-9 days, or shall require medical
attendance during the same period
2. When the offended party has sustained injuries which do not prevent him from engaging in his
habitual work nor require medical attendance
3. When the offender ill-treats another by deed without causing any injury
CHAPTER THREE
RAPE
(As amended by Republic Act 8353)
*NB: For obvious reasons, this chapter composes one consolidated discussion
ART.266-A
RAPE, WHEN AND HOW COMMITTED
ART.266-B
PENALTIES
ART.266-C
EFFECT OF PARDON
ART.266-D
PRESUMPTIONS
Q: Before being included under crimes against persons, what Title was Rape under?
Rape used to be a crime against chastity, and as such, a private crime
Q: What is the legal effect of the reclassification and redefinition of Rape under RA 8353?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
d. When the offended party is under 12 or is demented, even though none of the
circumstances mentioned above is present
2. By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in par.1 of art.266-A, shall
commit any act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal
orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person
*NB: here’s a table to help you out, I found the book rather disorganized when it came to this -
Kimi
*NB: As always, I found it simpler to memorize this by taking key words and associating the key
words with the entire circumstance, here’s my list:
1. Age and relationship
2. Official custody
CRIMINAL LAW II 164
K notes
Q: May a woman be criminally liable for rape under the 1 st manner (sexual intercourse) as a principal by
inducement?
Yes
Q: By indispensible cooperation?
Yes
Q: As an accomplice or accessory?
Yes
Q: Under the 1st manner of committing rape, must there be sexual intercourse?
Yes, else only acts of lewdness are being performed and the crime is therefore acts of
lasciviousness, not rape
Q: What is meant by ‘carnal knowledge’? (anybody who can’t answer this shouldn’t be in law school :P –
kimi)
Q: In the event that force is used, what degree of resistance must be put up by the offended party?
The same degree she would employ had she been fighting for her life
*NB: Remember though, that in cases where the force is overwhelming and resistance would
have been futile (think: sorry for the graphic illustration, but picture a scenario of gang rape
with guns thrown in for good measure), the law does not require that the woman should have
resisted, much less resisted strongly – ‘it is not necessary that she should have resisted up to the
point of death’
Q: In rape through force and intimidation, is it necessary that there be full penetration?
No, partial penetration is sufficient
Q: Suppose the woman did not resist, but was merely reluctant. Is the man liable?
No
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose some form of drug was placed in an unwilling woman’s drink, and as a result of drinking it,
her sexual appetites were aroused. The act was consummated. Is the man liable?
Yes, the man employed fraudulent machination
Q: Suppose a man had sex with a deaf-mute woman. May it be considered rape?
Not in the absence of any proof that the woman was an imbecile
Q: Suppose a man raped a feeble-minded woman who was not completely deprived of reason. Is he
liable?
Yes, deprivation of reason does not have to be complete – mental deficiency is sufficient
CRIMINAL LAW II 165
K notes
Q: Suppose an unconscious girl woke up to find a man on top of her and she did not offer any resistance.
Is the man liable?
It depends –
-If there was already partial penetration, resistance is unnecessary, the crime has been
consummated, and the man is liable
-If there was no penetration yet, and she did not resist, the man is not liable
Q: Suppose a man beat a woman unconscious before having carnal knowledge of her, is he liable? Under
what manner of commission?
Yes, he is liable under the 2nd manner
Q: Suppose your boyfriend picked you up for dinner, but instead of driving to the restaurant, he drove
to a secluded place and committed the act against you. Is he liable? How?
Yes, he is liable by employing fraudulent machination
Q: Suppose that by virtue of a promise made by your boyfriend, you agreed to have sexual intercourse.
When you found out you were pregnant, he disappeared. Is he liable? What crime did he commit?
Yes, he is liable for rape through fraudulent machination
*NB: Remember persons? Yeah, the Gasheem Shokat Baksh case - breach of promise to marry is
not actionable under civil law, except with respect to material costs incurred, but under criminal
law, a promise to marry which resulted in a woman’s consent to sexual intercourse may be
actionable if it can be proven that the promise was fraudulently madeand was the actual reason
for the woman’s consent–kimi, thinking aloud while paraphrasing the Great A
Q: Suppose that the offended party was 11 years, 11 months, and 29 days old at the time of the
commission of the offense, and the accused paid for her willing services. Is this rape?
Yes
*NB: This, my friends, is statutory rape. Consent and the involvement of profit are immaterial.
The law seeks to protect the victim, and assumes that at this age, any decision made by the child
– even if it was made willingly – to engage in the sexual act does not exonerate the offender one
bit –kimi
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*NB: the old doctrine – replaced now by RA 8353 – was that a husband and a wife shared one
and the same personality, so that it was not possible for a husband to, in effect, rape himself.
Still older doctrines contended that the woman’s act of marrying the man was consent for all
CRIMINAL LAW II 166
K notes
future sexual intercourse encounters. Kudos to the acumen of the new rape law and the
expanded sphere of protection now granted to married women :) --kimi
Q: Suppose that after a forced sexual encounter, the husband and wife again had intercourse, but this
time, there was willing consent on the part of the woman. What is the legal effect, if any, to the
previous act of rape, or even to the criminal case filed against the husband?
The subsequent act shall be deemed as forgiveness, and it shall extinguish the criminal action
against the husband, provided that the marriage is not void ab initio
Q: What is the effect of the marriage of the offended party to the offender in rape cases?
The criminal action shall be extinguished, or the penalty imposed, assuming that the action has
already been decided against the offender; PROVIDED that the marriage is VALID.
*NB: this is important! According to the book, marriage ‘extinguishes the criminal action’ but
only with respect to the principal and not the accomplices and accessories; apparently, this
means that only the offender who marries the victim is benefited by the marriage. Atty. A
however, draws attention to the words ‘shall extinguish the criminal action’ – which logically
means that ALL those impleaded in the action shall also be benefited – partial extinction of the
action with respect to the impleaded parties is not stated in the law (amazed, aren’t ya? I was
too, the professor’s logic is impeccable –kimi)
NOTES:
PAR.1 PAR.2
RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL INTERCOURSE RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL ASSAULT
- Absence of sperm does not negate rape (what is - Contemplates a violation of the body’s orifices
controlling is penetration – whether partial or full (which includes penetration by a finger)
– not emission)
*Rape does not have a frustrated stage – partial penetration already consummates the crime
*As far as multiple rape goes, the number of times the act was committed is the same as the number of
counts of rape for which the accused is/are liable
*When homicide is committed NOT by reason or on the occasion of the rape, there are 2 separate
crimes, not the special complex crime of rape with homicide
3. The uncorroborated testimony of the victim, but the same must be conclusive, logical and probable
3. Fraudulent Machination or Grave Abuse Fraudulent machination may take the form of insidious
of Authority words used in order to consummate the crime
CHAPTER ONE
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
ART.267
KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL
DETENTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps/detains another person, or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty
3. The act of detention/kidnapping must be illegal
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:
CRIMINAL LAW II 168
K notes
*NB: ‘liberty’ as contemplated by this provision is not restricted to physical locomotion; moral
compulsion may also be considered a form of deprivation of liberty (think: threatening a
person)
Q: Suppose the victim could get out but he chose to stay within the detention area for security reasons.
Is this illegal detention?
No
Q: What are the circumstances that must attend the detention, for it to be considered illegal?
*see: element #4
Q: Suppose the detention lasted for only 24hrs but the detainee was a minor. Is the accused liable?
Yes – The circumstances need not concur (see: wording, ‘any of the following instances… xxx’)
Q: The person detained was a 25-year-old woman, and she was detained for only 2 days. Is the accused
liable?
Yes
Q: Same facts as the previous question, except that the victim was a barangay tanod. Is the accused
liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose that the infliction of physical injuries was merely incidental, is the accused liable?
Yes – the law makes no distinction as to the manner of infliction of the injuries
Q: Suppose you were courting a woman but she neglected your proposal. You kidnapped her sister, and
informed her that her sister would only be released if she accepted your courtship. Is this a crime?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Yes, the acts constitute kidnapping, and were committed for a consideration
Q: Suppose A owes X Php 50,000. A could not pay his debt, so he kidnapped his own mother instead and
said that he would only release her if she would give him the money to pay off his debt to X. Is this
kidnapping for ransom?
Yes, notwithstanding that the money was legally due to X
Q: A borrowed a car but refused to return it to X. X kidnapped A’s brother with the condition that the
brother would only be released if the car was returned. A complied, and X released the brother. What
crime was committed?
CRIMINAL LAW II 169
K notes
Q: Suppose A, B and C kidnapped X and brought him to the next town. That same night, they killed him.
What crime was committed?
Murder – there was no indication of A, B and C’s intention to detain X; Kidnapping was merely
incidental to murder
Q: Suppose X was kidnapped, brought to the neighbouring town and a ransom for his release was
demanded. The ransom was not offered so X was killed. What crime was committed?
The special complex crime of Kidnapping with Homicide
Q: How do you know whether the crime was kidnapping or murder or the special complex crime of
kidnapping with homicide/murder?
By ascertaining specific intent
*NB: note that the provision imposes reclusion perpetua (formerly death) where the
kidnapping/ detention was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom; even if none of the
4 circumstances enumerated in par.1 were present during the commission of the offense
NOTES:
*If the offender is a public officer, the crime is arbitrary detention; provided that the officer had a duty
to detain a person
*As long as the crime was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom, actual demand for ransom is
not necessary
*The accused is not liable when there is a lack of motive to resort to kidnapping
*Two things make up ‘deprivation of liberty’: (a) actual or physical confinement; or (b) restrictions (not
necessarily physical) place upon the detainee
*The restraint need not be permanent in order for criminal liability to attach
*Purpose or motive is NOT material when any of the circumstances in par.1 is present
*See last paragraph of art.267 for the definition of the special complex crime of kidnapping with murder
*Where the victim is taken from one place to another for the purpose of killing him, the crime is murder
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*The penalty for the crime is not reduced by the circumstance of voluntary release by the captors as a
result of non-attainment of their purposes
*Conspiracy to extort ransom makes all the conspirators liable under par.2, art.267, including those who
did not take any part of the money
*There is NO complex crime of ‘illegal detention with rape’ – what the law provides for is the special
complex crime of ‘serious illegal detention/kidnapping with rape’ – there’s a difference between the
two, because the law (art.48) does not allow for ‘rape with illegal detention’ – there is no single act
CRIMINAL LAW II 170
K notes
resulting in 2 or more grave/less grave felonies; nor is illegal detention a necessary means for committing
rape
Re: Character of Offender The offender is a private The offender is a public officer
individual (or a public officer not with a duty to detain persons
vested with authority to detain a
person)
Re: Classification of the Crime Crime against personal liberty Crime against the fundamental
law of the State
ART.268
SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any manner deprives him of his liberty
3. The act of kidnapping/detention is illegal
4. The crime is committed without any of the circumstances under art.267
*NB: When this privileged mitigating circumstance is present, the liability of the captors is
mitigated, and the penalty is lowered by 1 degree; BUT in order for this to operate, it must be
shown that the offender was in the position to prolong the detention and ALL the requisites
must concur, FURTHERMORE, this circumstance is NOT mitigating if the victim is a woman
ART.269
UNLAWFUL ARREST
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender arrests or detains another person
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Distinguish this from arbitrary detention; and from serious or slight illegal detention
a. The kidnapping/
detention lasts
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
d. The person
kidnapped/detaine
d is a minor, a
female or a public
officer
*NB: In connection with the concepts of ‘custody’ and ‘parents’ and ‘minors’, it would be very
prudent to give your Persons notes on parental authority a once-over
CRIMINAL LAW II 172
K notes
ART.270
KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor (*NB: pursuant to the new Family Code, a
minor is one under 18 years of age; this provision and its definition of minor, i.e. ‘over or under 7
but less than 21’ has therefore been amended)
2. He deliberately fails to restore the said minor to his parents/guardians
Q: Suppose a husband and wife were legally separated. Custody of their child was awarded to them on a
scheduled basis – The wife was granted custody during weekdays (Mondays through Fridays), with the
husband having been given custody over the weekends. During one such weekend, the husband brought
the child to the countryside, where they stayed for 5 days. Is the husband liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose that in a judicial proceeding, the mother was deprived of custody over her children and the
family court awarded custody to the DSWD. The mother paid them a visit, but took them with her when
she left. Is she liable?
Yes
NOTES:
*What is punishable is the deliberate failure to restore the minor to his parent/guardian
*The qualifying and essential element to this crime is the requirement that the offender must have been
entrusted with the custody of the child
*It isn’t necessary that the purpose is to permanently separate the minor from his parent/guardian –
temporary separation, so long as the elements concur – is punishable
ART.271
INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON
HIS HOME
Q: How is this committed?
1. A minor is living in the home of his parents/guardians or the person (*NB: this includes juridical
persons like the DSWD) entrusted with his custody
2. The offender induces said minor to abandon that home
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Give an example
Q: Suppose the accused assembled some minors in the province and regaled them with stories of
Manila. The minors were immensely amused and when the accused was about to leave that evening, 3 of
them approached him and requested to tag along. The accused agreed and brought the minors to
Manila. Is he liable?
No
*NB: The inducement should be done with malicious intent/ a deliberate purpose to cause harm.
If the minor in question chose to abandon his home of his own free will, no crime is committed
CRIMINAL LAW II 173
K notes
Q: Same facts, except that the accused persuaded the minors to leave their homes and travel to Manila
because there would be lucrative jobs waiting for them there. The minors agreed, and were taken to the
city. Is the accused liable?
Yes
NOTES:
*The inducement must be actual, with criminal intent, and determined by a will to cause damage
*What constitutes the crime is the act of inducing a minor to abandon his home, it isn’t necessary that
the minor actually does abandon it
*The minor shouldn’t leave his home of his own free will
ART.272
SLAVERY
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a human being
2. The purpose of the offender is to enslave such a human being
ART.273
EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOUR
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender retains a minor in his service
2. The retention is against the will of the minor
3. It is done under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,
guardian, or person entrusted with the custody of such minor
NOTES:
*In line with the constitutional principle that no person shall be imprisoned by virtue of debt, this
provision makes it clear that even under criminal law, perhaps most especially under it, indebtedness is
not a ground for detaining a person
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.274
SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION
IN PAYMENT OF DEBT
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender compels a debtor to work for him, either as a household servant or farm labourer
2. It is against the debtor’s will
3. The purpose is to require or enforce the payment of debt
CRIMINAL LAW II 174
K notes
CHAPTER TWO
CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY
SECTION ONE – ABANDONMENT OF HELPLESS PERSONS AND EXPLOITATION OF MINORS
Art.275
ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER
AND ABONDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender finds in an uninhabited place
wounded or in danger of dying when he can render such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense
**ELEMENTS:
a. The place is NOT inhabited
b. The accused found there a wounded person or one in danger of dying
c. The accused can render assistance without danger to himself
d. The accused fails to render that assistance
2. Failing to help or render assistance to another whom the offender accidentally wounded or
injured
3. Failing to deliver a child under 7 years of age whom the offender has found abandoned, to the
authorities or to his family; or failing to take him to a safe place
Q: Suppose the person the accused found did not have a wound but simply fainted and lost
consciousness. The accused left him there. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the person was unconscious due to starvation. The accused failed to help. Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose the accused left the minor there because he believed that by the looks of the minor, he was
old enough to fend for himself?
The accused is liable – it is immaterial that the offender did not know the actual age of the child
ART.276
ABANDONING A MINOR
Q: How is this committed?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the abandoned child later died. May the accused be held liable for homicide/murder?
No – intent to kill is NOT presumed from the child’s death – this rule applies to crimes against
persons; the provision provides for a particular and specific penalty (prision correccional in its
medium to maximum periods) should the child die as a result of the abandonment
NOTES
*If the offender happens to be a parent of the child, civil law imposes the penalty of deprivation of
parental authority
ART.277
ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON
ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY;
INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Delivering a minor to a public institution or to other persons without the consent of the person
who entrusted the minor to the offender’s care; or without the consent of proper authorities
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender has charge of the rearing or education of a minor
b. He delivers said minor to a public institution or other persons
c. The one who entrusted the child to the offender has not consented to such an act; or the
proper authorities have not consented to it
2. Neglect by the offender of his own children by not giving them the education which their station
in life requires and financial condition permits
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is a parent
b. He neglects his own children by not giving them education
c. His station in life requires such education; and his financial condition permits it
*NB: Failure to provide education must be due to a deliberate desire by the parent to evade
such an obligation
ART.278
EXPLOITATION OF MINORS
4. Delivering a child under 16 gratuitously to any person following any of the callings enumerated
in par.2, or to any habitual vagrant or beggar; the offender being an ascendant, guardian,
teacher or person entrusted in any capacity with the care of such child
5. Inducing any child under 16 to abandon the home of his ascendants, guardians, curators, or
teachers to follow any person engaged in any of the callings mentioned in par.2 or to accompany
any habitual vagrant/beggar; the offender being any person
*NB: aide-mémoire –
1. Any person inducing a child below 16 to perform dangerous gymnastics
2. A person involved in the circus (think: gymnast, acrobat, animal tamer, manager… etc) employing
a child below 16 for the same calling
3. Any ascendant employing a descendant in the circus (rofl)
CRIMINAL LAW II 176
K notes
4. Person with parental authority (parents, teachers… etc) delivering the child to a vagrant/beggar
5. Any person inducing a child below 16 to run away with a vagrant/beggar
ART.279
ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR OTHER OFFENSES
*The imposition of the penalties described in the preceding articles shall not prevent the imposition
upon the same person of the penalty provided for any other felonies defined and punished by the Code
Art.280
QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender is a private person
2. He enters the dwelling of another
3. Such entrance is against the owner’s will
Q: Suppose the offender was a public officer, what crime was committed?
Violation of Domicile
Q: Suppose the accused entered through the back door, which was open at that time. The owner saw
him a few moments later as he was walking through the interior of the house, and asked him to leave. Is
he liable?
No, his entry was not against the will of the owner – the back door was open
NOTES:
*The definition of ‘dwelling’ depends upon the use the building is put to; it includes a room when it is
occupied by another person
*All members of a household are generally presumed to have authority to extend an invitation to enter
CRIMINAL LAW II 177
K notes
*Violence of intimidation as qualifying circumstances may take place immediately after entry
*Trespass may be committed by the owner of the dwelling against the actual occupant (think: nosy
landlords and landladies :P –kimi)
ART.281
OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender enters the closed premises or fenced estate of another
2. Entrance is made while the area is uninhabited
3. The prohibition to enter is manifest
4. The trespasser has not secured the owner or caretaker’s permission
ART.282
GRAVE THREATS
ELEMENTS OF GRAVE THREATS WHERE THE ELEMENTS OF GRAVE THREATS THAT ARE NOT
OFFENDER ATTAINED HIS PURPOSE SUBJECT TO A CONDITION
1. The offender threatens another with the 1. The offender threatens another person …
infliction upon the latter’s person, honour, of any wrong
or property (or those of his family) of any 2. Such wrong amounts to a crime
wrong 3. The threat is not subject to any condition
2. Such wrong amounts to a crime
3. There is a demand for money or a
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the threat was made and relayed only to the person 3hrs after its making. Is the accused
liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose a threat is used as a means for committing another crime. What is the legal effect of that
other crime?
CRIMINAL LAW II 178
K notes
NOTES:
*The offender in grave threats does not demand delivery of money on the spot, else the crime is robbery
with intimidation
*If the threat is not subject to a condition, the penalty does not depend on the crime threatened to be
committed, but is fixed by law (arresto mayor and a fine of Php 500)
*Grave threat is consummated as soon as the threats come to the knowledge of the person threatened;
it is not necessary that the offended party is present at the time the threats were made
*Threats made in connection with the commission of other crimes are absorbed by the latter
ART.283
LIGHT THREATS
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender makes a threat to commit a wrong
2. The threat does not constitute a crime
3. There is a demand for money or that other conditions are imposed, even though the conditions
may not be unlawful
4. The offender has either attained his purpose or not
Q: Give an example
Q: ‘If you do not lend me my book, I will be forced to cheat’. What crime was committed here?
Light threats
Q: ‘If you do not allow me to use your book for cheating, I will sell the book’. What crime?
Grave threats – the selling of the book here amounts to estafa
Q: ‘If you do not allow me to borrow your book, I will not pay you my debt’. What crime?
Light threats
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.284
BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
*In Articles 282 and 283, the person making the threats shall be required to secure a bond for good
behaviour in order not to molest the threatened person
*Failure to furnish a bond for good behaviour shall be punished with destierro
CRIMINAL LAW II 179
K notes
ART.285
OTHER LIGHT THREATS
Q: What are the other light threats?
1. Threatening another with a weapon or by drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in
lawful self-defence (see: art.11 for the requisites of lawful self-defence)
2. Orally threatening another in the heat of anger with some harm constituting a crime without
persisting on the idea involved in the threat
3. Orally threatening to do another any harm not constituting a felony
NOTES
*Threats which ordinarily are grave threats, if made in the heat of anger, may be considered light
threats
ART.286
GRAVE COERCIONS
Q: What are the punishable acts?
1. Preventing another by means of violence, threats, or intimidation, from doing something not
prohibited by law
2. Compelling another by means of violence, threats or intimidation to do something against his
will, whether it (the forced act) be right or wrong
-In grave coercion, the intimidation employed goes hand in hand with compulsion or prevention
of an individual’s will; the violence here is actually employed
CRIMINAL LAW II 180
K notes
Q: If the essence of grave threats is intimidation, what is the essence of grave coercion?
Violent compulsion (i.e.: using force to compel someone to do/not do something)
Q: Several armed men surrounded the farm in a certain area. The farmers did not leave their houses for
fear of danger. What crime did the armed men commit?
Grave threats
Q: You rode a taxi, but instead of taking you to your desired destination, the driver brought you
somewhere else despite your efforts to stop him. What crime did he commit?
He did not commit any crime
NOTES:
*The act of preventing another by force should be made at the time the offended party was doing or
was about to do the act to be prevented; if the act was already done when the violence was exerted, the
crime is unjust vexation
*Compelling another to do something includes the offender’s act of doing it himself while subjecting
another to his will
*When the complainant is in actual possession of a thing, even if he has no right to that possession,
compelling him by means of violence to give it up – even if done by the owner of the thing himself – is
grave coercion
*Even if the offended party did not accede to the purpose of the coercion, the offender is still liable
ART.287
LIGHT COERCION
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender must be a creditor
2. He seizes anything belonging to his debtor
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose the purpose of the seizure was to sell the properties seized and not to apply it to the debt?
Then the crime is robbery (think: intent to gain, possession through force)
RE: Manner of Commission The offender seizes anything The offender compels a debtor
belonging to his debtor through to work for him, either as a
violence or display of material household servant or farm
force producing intimidation labourer
Q: Suppose X is indebted to A but he cannot pay; A asked X to work as a janitor in his office as payment
for the debt. Is A liable?
No – this is neither light coercion nor services rendered under compulsion in payment of debt
(see: table above – the facts do not meet the requisites)
RE: Manner of Commission Seizure of any of the debtor’s Retaining a minor in one’s
possessions through service against the minor’s will
violence/material force
Q: Suppose the act was committed by taking possession through deceit and misrepresentation for the
same purpose, what crime was committed?
Unjust vexation
*NB: unjust vexation includes any human conduct which although not productive of some
physical or material harm would however unjustly annoy or vex an innocent person; no violence
or intimidation is employed here
ART.288
OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS –
COMPULSORY PURCHASE OF MERCHANDISE
AND PAYMENT OF WAGES BY MEANS OF TOKENS
ART.289
FORMATION, MAINTENANCE AND PROHIBITION
OF COMBINATION OF CAPITAL OR LABOUR
THROUGH VIOLENCE AND THREATS
NOTES
CRIMINAL LAW II 182
K notes
*Salary refers to the fruits of one’s labour, a person has a right to it and nobody can interfere with how
that salary is to be disposed of
*RE: Art.289 – The Labour Code grants the right to unionize; the essence of a union being that there is
strength in numbers (as opposed to a single employee vs. his employer); management of the
prerogatives of the union is vested solely in the employees themselves; the employer is considered an
interloper and may be held liable for unfair labour practice. Mere inquiry into membership may be
considered a form of interference –Atty. A
CHAPTER THREE
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS
ART.290
DISCOVERING SECRETS THROUGH
SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE
ART.291
REVEALING SECRETS WITH ABUSE OF OFFICE
Q: How is this committed?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.292
REVELATION OF INDIVIDUAL SECRETS
Q: How is this committed?
CRIMINAL LAW II 183
K notes
TITLE TEN
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
CHAPTER ONE
ROBBERY IN GENERAL
ART.293
WHO ARE GUILTY OF ROBBERY
Q: What is robbery?
The taking of personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by means of violence
against, or intimidation of any person or using force upon anything
Q: Suppose you saw X hide a kilo of shabu; he placed the article in his closet and locked the same. You
thought that the shabu would fetch a lucrative price on the streets so you broke the latch on his closet
and took it. Did you commit Robbery?
Yes – prohibited articles may also the subject matter of robbery
property is complete
*NB: the application of robbery depends on what point the violence/force was exerted, note ‘by
reason of or on the occasion thereof… xxx’
Q: Give an example
ART.294
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS – PENALTIES
*NB: these are special complex crimes because the common crimes here must be committed in
the course, or because of the robbery; they aren’t normal complex crimes under art.48
Q: Under art.294, when is robbery complexed; and what crimes may it be complexed with?
When the violence results in –
1. Homicide
2. Rape
3. Intentional mutilation; or
4. Any of the serious physical injuries in paragraphs 1 and 2 of art.263
CRIMINAL LAW II 185
K notes
*The taking of personal property is robbery complexed with any of these crimes, even if the
taking was already complete when the violence was employed by the offender
*Here’s the trick: when the original plan was robbery, and these crimes are committed because
of, or during that robbery – it’s a special complex crime
Q: A, B, and C decided to rob X’s house; they say X in front of a nearby store. A, B, and C shot him there,
after which, they proceeded to X’s house to commit robbery; what crime did they commit?
Robbery with Homicide (homicide by reason of the robbery – complexed)
Q: Suppose a robbery had already been committed. It was reported to the police; and while the police
were in pursuit of the robbers, a shootout took place in the nearby province. 2 policemen and 3 robbers
were killed. What crime was committed?
Robbery with Homicide
Q: In the course of the robbery, one offender stepped on a 48-hour child. What crime did he commit?
Robbery with Homicide
Q: With regards to the liability of persons when there is a conspiracy; suppose A, B, and C conspired to
rob X’s house. C took X’s wife outside of the house and raped her. What are the individual liabilities of
the offenders?
-A and B are liable for simple robbery
-C is liable for the special complex crime of robbery with rape (because A and B were not present
when he raped the woman, and were not in a position to prevent him from doing so – he acted
independently of their conspiracy for robbery
NOTES
*Table for ya :)
ART.295
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
Q: What is the legal effect of the presence of more than one of these circumstances?
Only one will qualify the offense, the rest will serve to aggravate the penalty
ART.296
DEFINITION OF A BAND AND
PENALTY INCURRED BY MEMBERS THEREOF
When more than 3 armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery
Q: Suppose A, B, C and D committed robbery with the use of an unlicensed firearm. What is the legal
effect of the firearm on their liabilities?
The penalty shall be imposed in the maximum
*NB: whenever any of the arms used in the commission of the offense is an unlicensed firearm,
the penalty imposed on all malefactors shall be the maximum period of the corresponding
penalty provided by law
Q: What is the presumption of the law with respect to robbery committed by a band?
Any member of a band who is present at the commission of robbery shall be punished as a
principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it can be shown that he
attempted to prevent the same
*NB: Requisites for liability for the acts of other members of the band –
1. The person is a member of the band
2. The band committed robbery
3. Other members of the band committed an assault (or assaults, plural)
4. He did not attempt to prevent the assault
NOTES
*When the robbery was not committed by a band, the robber who did not take part in the assault by
another isn’t 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 non-participant in the killing is liable only for robbery
*When there is conspiracy to commit homicide and robbery, all the conspirators, even if there are less
than 4 armed men, are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with homicide
*Art.296 is not applicable to principals by induction who were NOT present at the robbery, if the
agreement was to commit robbery (and yet homicide happened to be committed)
*Proof of conspiracy is not necessary when 4 or more armed persons committed robbery
*Members of the band must be present at the time of the robbery, although not necessarily during the
assault
*Republic Act 8249 considers the use of an unlicensed firearm in murder or homicide merely a special
aggravating circumstance, NOT a separate crime
*The special aggravating circumstance of the use of unlicensed firearm is NOT applicable to robbery
with homicide committed by a band (art.295 does not apply to subdivisions 1 and 2 of art.294)
*The use of a firearm – whether licensed or not – in making the intimidation is a qualifying circumstance
when the robbery defined in any of paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of art.294 is committed on a street, road,
highway or alley
ART.297
ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY
COMMITTED UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.298
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF
VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION
CRIMINAL LAW II 189
K notes
Q: Suppose no entry at all was effected by the accused; and he simply used a long pole to take the
article, what crime was committed?
Theft
*For this kind of robbery, entry is essential – if there is no entry, there is no robbery with force
upon things
Q: A, B, and C used a false key to open the door of their neighbour’s house. When they did so, they saw a
motorcycle in the living room. They took it. What crime did they commit?
Carnapping
Q: Suppose the accused broke the window of the car, and took the valuables inside. What crime did he
commit?
Theft
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: What if the accused pushed the car all the way to the other street before opening a door and taking
the valuables inside?
1. Carnapping
2. Theft
*separate crimes
Q: Your cell phone was taken from your bag when you were walking through the street and didn’t
notice. What crime was committed?
Theft
CRIMINAL LAW II 190
K notes
Q: Suppose you turned around at the moment you felt something being taken from your bag; and the
accused pointed a gun at you to stop you from running after him. What crimes did he commit?
1. Theft
2. Grave Threats
*separate crimes
Q: After robbery was committed, the building was set on fire. What crimes were committed?
Robbery with arson, complexed
ART.299
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR
PUBLIC BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED
TO WORSHIP
Q: How is this committed?
NOTES:
Subdivision A Subdivision B
The law focuses on the manner of gaining entry The law focuses on the manner of obtaining the
here (i.e.: breaking any wall, roof… etc.); entry is article (breaking anything INSIDE the building, i.e.:
controlling here chests, wardrobes, furniture… or taking the same
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
The ‘door’ contemplated here is an EXTERNAL one ‘Doors’ contemplated here are internal ones,
found within the building
The crime is theft if the offender did not enter the Entry by any of the means under subdivision A is
building not required for robbery under subdivision B
Any of the 4 means must be resorted to for When a thing is taken outside to be broken open,
ENTRANCE, not for getting out it isn’t necessary that it is actually forced open
The whole body of the culprit must be inside the The crime is estafa or theft if the thing is not
CRIMINAL LAW II 191
K notes
building to constitute entry forced open INSIDE the building where it was being
kept; or when it is taken therefrom to be broken
The wall must be an outside wall, not a party wall outside
or one in between rooms in a house/building
The penalty for robbery with force upon things in
The outside door must be ‘broken’, not merely an inhabited house, etc. depends on the VALUE of
‘forced open’ (roflmao) the property taken and on whether or not the
offender carries arms
‘False keys’ are genuine keys stolen from the
owner or any keys other than those intended by The arms carried by the offender must NOT be
the owner for use on the lock used to intimidate, else art.294 applies
‘Picklocks’ are tools specially adopted for the Note the adjectives used by the law: the furniture
commission of robbery or receptacle must be ‘locked or sealed’, if it isn’t
locked or sealed, there is no robbery –Atty. A
Mere possession of picklocks is punishable; even
the locksmith who made them may be held liable When the object is taken away (see: 2nd manner of
commission, under subdivision B above), there
Re: false keys, the genuine key must be stolen, not mere act of removing it consummates the crime
taken by force or intimidation of the owner
ART.300
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
AND BY A BAND
*The robbery mentioned in the next preceding article, if committed in an uninhabited place and by a
band shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty therefor
Q: Suppose the robbery committed was by means of violence and intimidation against persons. What is
the legal effect of the presence of a band?
The presence of a band qualifies the offense
ART.301
WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC BUILDING,
CRIMINAL LAW II 192
K notes
Q: Suppose there is a house. Adjacent to it is a grocery. There is a door connecting one to the other and
the offender destroys the external grocery door and went through the connecting door into the house.
Is he liable?
Yes
Q: Suppose in a public building, the accused entered through the external door, took something from
inside the building and left through the window. What crime did he commit?
Theft – he destroyed nothing, did not force entrance, used no false keys, etc.
Q: Suppose he merely reached for the valuables nearest to the open window. What crime did he
commit?
Theft
ART.302
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
OR IN A PRIVATE BUILDING
Q: How is this committed?
1. The offender entered an uninhabited place or building which was NOT a dwelling house or public
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.303
ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS OR FIREWOOD
IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING
*In the cases enumerated in arts.299 and 302, when the robbery consists in the taking of cereals, fruits
or firewood, the culprit shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in the said
articles
ART.304
POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR
SIMILAR TOOLS
ART.305
FALSE KEYS
Q: What are included in the term ‘false keys’?
1. Picklocks or similar tools
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock forcibly opened by the
offender
CHAPTER TWO
BRIGANDAGE
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: What is brigandage?
Brigandage is a crime committed by more than 3 armed persons who form a band of robbers for
the purpose of committing robbery in the highways; or kidnapping persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom for any other purpose to be attained by means of force or
violence
ART.306
WHO ARE BRIGANDS – PENALTY
Q: When is there brigandage?
When –
1. There are at least 4 armed persons
2. They formed a band of robbers
3. For any of the following purposes:
a. To commit robbery in the highways
b. To kidnap persons for ransom or extortion
c. To attain any other purpose through force or violence
NOTES:
*The law does not qualify the ‘arms’ necessary, except when the presumption as to unlicensed firearms
is applied
ART.307
AIDING AND ABETTING
A BAND OF BRIGANDS
Q: How is this committed?
1. There is a band of brigands
2. The offender knows the band to be of brigands
3. He does any of the following acts:
a. He in any manner aids, abets, or protects such band of brigands
b. He gives them information of the movements of the police or other peace officer of the
government
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by the brigands
*Philippine highway:
Any road, street, passage, highway and bridges, or other parts thereof, or railway/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
*Any person who aids or protects highway robbers, or abets the commission of highway
robbery/brigandage shall be considered as an accomplice
CRIMINAL LAW II 195
K notes
CHAPTER THREE
THEFT
Q: How is theft committed?
Theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain, but without violence against or
intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take personal property of another without
the latter’s consent
ART.308
WHO ARE LIABLE FOR THEFT
Q: Who may be held liable for theft?
1. Those who –
a. With intent to gain
b. But without violence against persons nor force upon things
c. Take personal property belonging to another
d. Without the latter’s consent
2. Those who –
a. Having found lost property
b. Fail to deliver the same to local authorities or to its owner
3. Those who –
a. After having maliciously damaged the property of another
b. Remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by them
4. Those who –
a. Enter and enclosed state or field
b. Where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another without the consent of its
owner
c. To hunt or fish upon the same or gather fruits, cereals or other forest/farm products
Q: What does the law presume, when a person is found in possession of property not belong to him?
The law presumes theft, provided that the property must have been recently stolen
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES
*There is ‘taking’ even If the offender received the thing from the offended party because taking is
defined with respect to the transfer of physical possession
*’Personal property’ includes electricity and gas, promissory notes, checks and invoices
*Selling the share of a partner or joint owner is NOT theft because, before the dissolution of the
partnership, the property is owned in common, no part of that property truly belongs to a co-owner or
partner
CRIMINAL LAW II 196
K notes
*In the sale of goods, there is theft if the goods are taken after payment but BEFORE measuring or
weighing without consent of the vendor
*Actual or REAL gain is not necessary, the law looks at anumo lucrandi (intent to gain)
*Lack of opposition is NOT consent, even if the offended party knew of the taking but did not consent
to it, the crime is still theft
*There is no robbery, (but theft instead) when violence is employed for a reason entirely foreign to the
act of taking
*Unless the force upon things is employed to ENTER the building, there is theft
*Delay in the delivery of lost property to the local authorities is immaterial when the finder surrendered
it voluntarily to the owner when the latter came to retrieve it
*Par.1, art.308 is not only limited to the actual finder, the finder in law as well (i.e.: a policeman) to
whom the actual finder surrendered the lost property is also within the scope of the provision
*The law does not require knowledge of the owner of the lost property (that his property was indeed
missing), as long as the accused knew of had reason to know that the property was lost, it was his duty
to return it
*Intent to gain is inferred from deliberate failure to deliver the lost property to the proper person
*The unlawful fishing should NOT be done in an actual fishpond, else the crime is qualified theft
ART.309
PENALTIES
Q: What are the bases for penalties in theft?
1. The value of the thing stolen
2. The value and nature of the property taken or
3. The circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime
ART.310
QUALIFIED THEFT
Q: When is theft qualified?
1. If the act is committed by a domestic servant
2. If it was committed with grave abuse of confidence
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES
CRIMINAL LAW II 197
K notes
*Theft by one who had access to the place where the property is kept is qualified theft
*The confidence gravely abused must be that existing between the offended party and the offender
*IMPORTANT! RE: The NOVATION THEORY (of extinguishing criminal liability in theft), according to
People v. Tanjuatco, GR. No. L-23924, April 29, 1968, the acceptance of payment by the complainant
converts the liability of the accused into a civil obligation or estops the complainant from proceeding
with criminal prosecution and this is applicable when there are contractual relations between the
accused and complainant. Atty A disagrees. ‘Does it extinguish criminal liability? No. Never. The grounds
for extinguishment of criminal liability are enumerated under Art.89, Novation is not one of them.
Criminal liability inures to the act the moment all elements are there, whether you like it or not; and the
moment this happens, criminal liability may ONLY be extinguished through the modes under art.89.
Does it extinguish criminal liability before the crime is committed or before all elements set in? No.
Legally speaking, there is no crime yet, and there is nothing to be extinguished.’ – Atty. A
*Qualified Carnapping:
When in the course of the commission or on the occasion of carnapping, the owner, driver, or
occupant of the vehicle is killed or raped
Includes the killing of large cattle, or taking its meat or hide without the consent of the owner
or raiser
*Large cattle:
Includes the cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass or other domesticated member of the bovine family
CRIMINAL LAW II 198
K notes
*Fencing:
The act of any person who, with intent to fain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive,
possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any manner deal in
any article, item or object or anything of value which he knows, or should be known to him, to
have been derived from the proceeds or robbery or theft
*Presumption of Fencing:
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object or anything of value which has been the
subject of robbery or thievery = prima facie evidence of fencing
*ELEMENTS of Fencing:
1. Robbery or theft has been committed
2. The accused, who is not a principal or accomplice in the robbery/theft, buys, receives,
possesses… any article … 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/thing of value has been delivered
from the proceeds of the crime of robbery/theft
4. There is, on the part of the accused, intent to gain for himself or another
ART.311
THEFT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE
NATIONAL LIBRARY AND NATIONAL MUSEUM
*If the property stolen be any property of the national library/national museum, the penalty shall be
arresto mayor/fine ranging from Php 200 – 500, or both, unless a higher penalty should be provided
under other provisions of this Code, in which case, the offender shall be punished by such higher penalty
CHAPTER FOUR
USURPATION
ART.312
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*ELEMENTS:
1. The offender takes possession of any real property or usurps any real rights in property
CRIMINAL LAW II 199
K notes
ART.313
ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS
*ELEMENTS:
1. There are boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks
intended to designate the boundaries of the same
2. The offender alters the said boundary marks
CHAPTER FIVE
CULPABLE INSOLVENCY
ART.314
FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY
*ELEMENTS:
CHAPTER SIX
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
ART.315
SWINDLING – ESTAFA
a. By abuse of confidence or
b. By means of deceit (fraudulent acts/fraudulent means)
2. Damage or Prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is
caused to the offended party or to a third person
qualifications, property,
ELEMENTS: credit, agency, business or ELEMENTS:
1. The offender has an onerous imaginary transactions; or 1. The offender induced the
obligation to deliver by other similar deceits offended party to sign a
something of value document
2. He alters its substance, 2. Deceit is employed to make
quantity or quality him sign the document
3. Damage or prejudice is 3. The offended party signed
caused to another the document
4. Prejudice is caused
ELEMENTS:
1. The money goods, or other
personal property must be
received by the offender in
trust/ on commission/ for
administration/ under any
obligation involving delivery
or return of the same
2. There is misappropriation or
conversion of such money/
property by the offender; or
denial on his part of such
receipt
d) By postdating a check or
issuing a check in payment
of an obligation when the
offender had no funds in
the bank, or his funds
deposited therein were not
sufficient to cover the
amount of the check
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender post-dated 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
**NOTES:
1. JURIDICAL POSSESSION is the kind of possession based on, or coming from a judicial act or
transaction (this is what gives you the right to possess), i.e.: an agreement/ a contract, express
or implied, oral or written; a provision of law (like a lease, commodatum, or deposit). This is the
kind of possession that can be set up even against the actual owner of the property, a ‘better’
right than the owner because it emanates from the law or an agreement
2. MATERIAL POSSESSION is possession that does NOT originate from a judicial act; it is an
extension of the personality of the owner (i.e.: the owner gives you instructions, commands,
orders or requests). This may not be set up against the owner of the property
*RE: ESTAFA, the obligation involves the ‘return of the SAME thing’. When the obligation is facultative,
therefore, there is no obligation to return that exact same thing
*Transfer of ownership is a transfer or all rights over the thing, therefore, misappropriation of the thing
carries no criminal liability, only civil liability (i.e.: co-ownership)
*When the agent acts within the scope and purpose of the agency when he sells/disposes of the thing,
there is no crime committed. If, however, there was an express prohibition NOT to employ a sub-agent,
for example, and the agent did, estafa is committed (because the agent acted beyond his scope, acted
as if he were the owner of the property, he CONVERTED the property and disregarded the terms and
conditions of the agency and the sale and acted in violation of what was agreed upon)
*RE: COMMISSON OF FRAUD VIA POSTDATING A CHECK: if this happened simultaneously with
contracting the obligation, estafa has been committed. If, however, there was already an existing
obligation when the check was issued, there is no estafa.
*RE, BATAS PAMBANSA 22 (BP 22): This is a catch-all provision, providing for criminal liability whether or
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
not there is a pre-existing obligation. The liability under BP 22 is SEPARATE from that under Art.315 of
the RPC.
Q: Suppose Amurao’s criminal law 2 book was borrowed by a student. Amurao allowed the student to
use the book for a week. Can he take back the book tomorrow?
No
Q: Suppose the week has passed, and you were not able to return the book. What crime did you
commit?
Estafa
CRIMINAL LAW II 203
K notes
Q: Suppose Atty. Amurao asked you to bring his book to the dean’s office. After 2 minutes, you were
called back because Amurao decided he does not trust you. Can you refuse to return the book?
No, Atty. Amurao has a better right to possession than I do
Q: Suppose that instead of going to the dean’s office, you went to Recto and sold the book. What crime
did you commit?
Theft – I only had material possession of the thing when I misappropriated it
Q: X borrowed the book. Already anticipating that it could be lost, he asked Atty. Amurao ‘what if I can’t
return it?’, to which Amurao answered ‘As long as you give me the same book, latest edition.’ The
student was not able to return the original book. What crime did X commit?
X did not commit any crime and is liable only for civil liability, he was not under the obligation to
return the exact same book, and ownership of the original book was transferred to him
*NB: the thing that has to be returned has to be the SAME thing. If, as in this case, only a similar
object is asked in the event that the original one is lost, ownership was transferred. X practically
owned the original book and could opt to replace it with the latest edition
Q: Atty. Amurao lent you his lucky Php 1,000 bill. He has kept the same in his wallet for 15 years because
it has brought him a lot of luck. Atty. Amurao told you to return the same bill and made a receipt for it,
on which he wrote down the bill’s serial number. He also made it clear that the bill was to be returned
on or before Monday. On Monday, you failed to return the bill. What crime was committed?
Estafa
Q: X asked Amurao if he could borrow the lucky bill. Amurao agreed, and told X that it would be okay if
he lost the original one and replaced it with another Php 1,000 bill. X failed to return the original bill.
What crime was committed?
None – X is only civilly liable
Q: Suppose Amurao has a driver. He handed the driver the keys to the car so he could gas up. The driver
did not return. What crime was committed?
Carnapping
*When the object of the misappropriation is a car or a motor vehicle, and the offender only had
MATERIAL possession of the thing, the crime is carnapping
Q: X borrowed Amurao’s car over the weekend to be used as a private car for X’s cousin’s wedding. The
car was not returned. What crime was committed?
Estafa – Both material and juridical possession were transferred, this is not carnapping
Q: Suppose A asked B to pay A’s business taxes, for which A gave B Php 50,000. Instead of paying for the
taxes, B spent the money for personal uses. What crime was committed?
Estafa
Q: A guardian was appointed by the court over the property of the ward. The property amounted to
Php 500,000. The guardian misappropriated Php 200,000. What crime was committed?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Estafa
Q: A student deposited Php 200,000 for the alleged destruction of laboratory materials in school. After
the hearing, the court found him not guilty. The school was asked to return the bills, but it returned Php
200,000 in bills with different serial numbers. What crime was committed?
None, the school was not under the obligation to return the exact same bills, only the same
amount
Q: Suppose A is the owner of several pieces of jewelry worth Php 2,000. He gave the jewelry to X to be
sold on a cash basis. Within 5 days, X was supposed to account for the proceeds of the sale. If it was not
sold, he would return the jewelry to A. X sold the jewelry on a credit basis and the buyer failed to pay on
the agreed date. X therefore failed to account for the sale. What crime was committed?
Estafa by conversion
Q: Suppose that when the jewelry was given to X, he was merely told to sell the same within 30 days and
if it was not sold, to return the same. X sold it on credit. Was the sale on credit within the scope of the
authority given to X?
Yes
Q: Suppose that instead of selling the jewelry, X gave it to a sub-agent who sold the jewelry to Y. Y could
not pay for the same on the agreed date. Is X liable for estafa?
No, there was no express prohibition against employing a sub-agent (if there was, X could be
liable for estafa)
Q: ABC Corporation’s head of office is in Manila. X was assigned to Cebu to collect ABC’s accounts there.
All collectors shall have a period of 30 days to remit the collected accounts. On the 10 th day, X played in a
casino and lost the entire amount. Was there misappropriation?
Yes
Q: Suppose that on the 20th day, X went to Manila, talked to the President of the company, and
confessed. He entered into an agreement with the President and signed a promissory note where he
acknowledged his obligation to pay, and that the amount would be deducted from his salary. After 5
days, X resigned. Was there novation?
Yes – novation arose from the agreement entered into with the President
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Q: Suppose that on December 18, the president said that the collectors have only under December 24 to
remit their collection; X did not want to leave Cebu since it was Christmas. He ended up spending the
money. On December 26, X went to Manila and talked to the president. They had an agreement, but X
resigned the next day. Is X liable for estafa?
Yes, the promissory note did not extinguish the criminal liability and all the elements of estafa
were complete
CRIMINAL LAW II 205
K notes
Q: Suppose one Saturday afternoon, you went to a grocery store, purchased groceries worth Php
10,000. You did not have enough cash with you and you also did not have enough funds in the bank but
you decided to issue a check anyway. The owner accepted the check. On Monday, the grocery store
owner deposited the check and it bounced. A demand to pay was made, and you failed to comply. What
crime was committed?
Estafa – the check was issued simultaneously with the obligation
Violation of BP 22 (provided you received sufficient notice)
*separate crimes
Q: Suppose you asked the owner if you could just pay on Monday and you would be allowed to bring
home the items you sought to buy. The owner agreed. On Monday, you issued a check which bounced. A
demand for payment was made and you failed to comply. Was estafa committed?
No, at the time the check was issued, there was already a pre-existing obligation
Q: On a Saturday afternoon, you purchased groceries worth Php 10.000. You issued a check in favour of
the owner, but before the check was deposited by the latter on Monday, you went to him and told him
that the check you issued will be replaced by a new one. The owner accepted the new check, but it
bounced. Is this estafa?
No, the issuance of the new check was already for a pre-existing obligation, but I could be liable
for a violation of BP 22
BATAS PAMBANSA 22
RE: BOUNCING CHECKS
Q: Who are liable?
Persons who –
1. Issue
2. Make; or
3. Draw
A bouncing check
Q: Suppose a check was issued not as payment of an account but as a guaranty for an obligation. The
check bounced. Is the person who issued it liable?
Yes, mere issuance constitutes a violation of BP 22
1.Making or Drawing and Issuing any check 2. Having sufficient funds in, or credit with
to apply on account tor for value, the drawee bank when the offender
knowing at the time of issue that the makes/draws or issues a check, by failing
(maker/drawer/issuer) does not have to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
sufficient funds in or credit with the credit to cover the full amount of the
drawee bank for the payment of such check if presented within a period of 90
check in full upon its presentment, which days from the date appearing thereon,
check is subsequently dishonoured for for which reason it is dishonoured by the
insufficiency of funds/credit; or would drawee bank
have been dishonoured for the same
reason, had not the person drawer,
without any valid reason, ordered the
bank to stop payment
ELEMENTS: ELEMENTS:
1. A person makes/draws of issues any check 1. A person has sufficient funds/credit when
2. The check is made/drawn/issued to apply he makes/issues/draws a check
CRIMINAL LAW II 206
K notes
NOTES:
*The making, drawing and issuing of a check, payment of which is refused by the drawee bank because
of insufficiency of funds in or credit, is prima facie evidence of knowledge of insufficiency of funds/credit
when the check is presented within 90 days from the date on the check
*Failure to make good the payment within 5 banking days gives rise to prima facie evidence of
knowledge of the lack and insufficiency of funds
*If the check that was issued without funds is presented AFTER 90 days, the drawer/maker/issuer is not
liable
*The maker/issuer/drawer is also not liable when the he pays the holder of the check 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 bank
*Prima facie evidence does not arise where notice of non-payment is not sent to the maker/drawer of
the check
*Conviction of acquittal under the Revised Penal Code is NOT a bar to prosecution under BP 22 (re:
estafa) because of the different requisites – BP 22 requires the additional fact of the drawee’s
knowledge of lack/insufficiency of funds, the RPC does not.
Q: Suppose at the time you issued a check, you had sufficient funds. After 2 days, you sent a notice to
the bank to stop payment because the payee failed to comply with his obligation. The bank refused to
honour the check. Are you liable?
No
Q: Same facts, but this time, you did not have sufficient funds when you ordered the bank to stop
payment. Are you liable?
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
Yes
ART.316
OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING
*The other forms of swindling are:
1. Conveying, selling, encumbering or mortgaging any real property, and pretending to be the
owner of the same
**ELEMENTS:
a. The thing is immovable
CRIMINAL LAW II 207
K notes
b. The offender, who is not the owner of the property, represents that he is the owner
c. He executes an act of ownership
d. The act is made to the prejudice of the owner or a 3rd person (actual damage is necessary)
2. Disposing of real property as free from encumbrance, although such encumbrance is not
recorded
**ELEMENTS:
a. The thing disposed of is real property
b. The offender knew that the real property was encumbered, whether the encumbrance is
recorded or not
c. There is express representation by the offender that the real property is free from
encumbrance
d. The act of disposing of the real property is made to the damage of another
3. Wrongful taking by the owner of his property from its rightful possessor
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is the owner of personal property
b. The property is in the lawful possession of another
c. The offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful possessor
d. Prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or to a 3rd person
5. Accepting any compensation for services not rendered or for labour not performed
*NB: Fraud here is required, else, the arrangement is solution indebiti, and carries with it only
the civil duty to return undue payment
6. Selling, mortgaging or encumbering real property or properties with which the offender
guaranteed the fulfillment of his obligation as surety
**ELEMENTS:
a. The offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action
b. He guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation with his real properties
c. He sells, mortgages, or in any other manner encumbers said real property
d. Such sale, mortgage or encumbrance is –
i. Without express authority from the court
ii. Made before the cancellation of his bond; or
iii. Made before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him
ART.317
SWINDLING A MINOR
*ELEMENTS:
1. The offender takes advantage of the inexperience or emotions/ feelings of a minor
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.318
OTHER DECEITS
*Punishable Acts:
CRIMINAL LAW II 208
K notes
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any other deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles
2. Interpreting dreams, making forecasts, telling fortunes or taking advantage of the credulity of
the public in any other similar manner for profit or gain
ART.320
ARSON
**NB: Presidential Decree 1613 expressly repealed or amended Articles 320-326 of the Revised Penal
Code, but Presidential Decree 1744 revived Article 320
*Kinds of Arson:
1. Simple Arson (Sec.1, PD 1613)
2. Destruction Arson (Art.320, as amended by RA No.7659)
3. Other cases of arson (Sec.3, PD 1613)
PD 1613
AMENDING THE LAW ON ARSON
*Summary of Important Definitions and Salient Provisions
Arson:
-Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of another
-The same penalty shall be imposed when the person sets fire to his own property under circumstances
which expose to danger the life or property of another
Destructive Arson:
-When the property burned is –
1. Ammunitions factories or establishments where explosives/combustible materials are stored
2. Archive/museum whether public or private; any edifice devoted to culture, education and social
services
3. Any church/place of worship/ building where people usually assemble
4. Train, airplane, vessel, watercraft or conveyance for transportation of persons or property
5. Building where evidence is kept for use in any legislative, judicial or administrative or other
official proceeding
6. Hospital, hotel, dormitory, lodging house, housing tenement, shopping centre, public or private
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
1. An uninhabited hut, 1. The offender 1. The offender set fire 1. The property
storehouse, barn, causes destruction to, or destroyed his burned is the
shed, or any other of the property own property exclusive property
property is burned 2. The destruction 2. The purpose of the of the offender
2. The value of the was done by means offender in doing so 2. The purpose of the
property burned of – was to commit arson offender in burning
does not exceed a. Explosion or to cause great it is to defraud or
Php25.00 b. Discharge of destruction cause damage to
3. The burning was electric current 3. The property another or
done at a time or c. Inundation belonging to another prejudice is actually
under d. Sinking or was burned or caused, or the thing
circumstances stranding of a destroyed burned is a building
which clearly vessel 1.in an inhabited
exclude all danger e. Damaging the place
of the fire engine of the
spreading vessel
f. Taking up rails
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
from railway
track
g. Destroying
telegraph wires
and posts or
those of any
other system
h. Other similar
effective means
of destruction
NOTES
CRIMINAL LAW II 210
K notes
*There is no complex crime of Arson with Homicide. If by reason or on occasion of arson, death results,
the crime of Homicide is absorbed in arson
*Under RA 9372 (Human Security Act of 2007), a person who commits an act punishable under PD 1613
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
terrorism (sec.3, RA 9372)
CHAPTER NINE
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
ART.327
WHO ARE LIABLE FOR MALICIOUS
MISCHIEF
*Any person who deliberately causes damage to another’s property and who does not fall within the
provisions of the next preceding chapter (arson, other crimes involving destruction)
NOTES:
*Malicious mischief is the wilful damaging of another’s property for the sake of causing damage due to
hate, revenge or other evil motives
*If after damaging the thing, the offender used it, the crime is theft
*Damage is not an incident of the crime (as compared to, for example, breaking windows in robbery) –
the act of causing damage itself is punishable
ART.328
SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
MISCHIEF
*Qualified Malicious Mischief:
1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of public functions
2. Using poisonous or corrosive substances
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
4. Causing damage to the property of the National Museum or Library or to any archive, registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public
ART.329
CRIMINAL LAW II 211
K notes
OTHER MISCHIEFS
*Mischiefs not included in Art.328, punished according to the value of the damage caused
ART.330
DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO
MEANS OF COMMUNICATION
*Damaging any railway, telegraph, or telephone lines
*Qualified if the damage results in any derailment of cars, collision or other accidents
ART.331
DESTROYING OR DAMAGING
STATUES, PUBLIC MONUMENTS
OR PAINTINGS
*Self-explanatory, this
CHAPTER TEN
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
ART.332
PERSONS EXEMPT FROM
CRIMINAL LIABILITY
*Crimes involved:
1. Theft
2. Swindling/Estafa
3. Malicious Mischief
*Persons Exempted:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, relatives by affinity in the same line
2. Widowed spouse who commits any of the 3 crimes above 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, sisters-in-law, if living together
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
NOTES
*Parties to the crime who are not related to the offended party still remain criminally liable
TITLE ELEVEN
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
CHAPTER ONE
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
ART.333
WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY
*Persons Liable:
1. Married woman who has sexual relations with a man not her husband
2. The man who has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be married, even if the marriage be
subsequently declared void
*Elements:
1. The woman is married
2. She has sexual relations with a man not her husband
3. With respect to the man, he knew her to be married
NOTES
*The acquittal of one party does not operate as acquittal for the other
ART.334
CONCUBINAGE
*Modes of Commission:
1. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling
2. Having sexual relations, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not the man’s
wife
3. Cohabiting with her in any other place
*Elements:
1. The man is married
2. He committed any of the 3 punishable acts
3. With respect to the woman, she must know him to be married
CHAPTER TWO
RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.336
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
*Elements:
1. The offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness
2. The act is committed against a person of either sex
3. The act is committed under any of the following circumstances:
a. Using force or intimidation
CRIMINAL LAW II 213
K notes
CHAPTER THREE
SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS, AND
WHITE SLAVE TRADE
*Seduction: Enticing a woman to unlawful sexual intercourse by promise of marriage or other means of
persuasion without the use of force
ART.337
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
*2 classes:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 and under 18 by certain persons (i.e.: person in authority, etc.)
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother, or descendant by her ascendant regardless or her age or
reputation
*Persons Liable:
1. Those who abused their authority
a. Person in public authority
b. Guardian
c. Teacher
d. Person entrusted with the education or custody of the seduced girl
2. Those who abused confidence
a. Priest
b. House servant
c. Domestic
3. Those who abused relationship
a. Brother who seduced his sister
b. Ascendant who seduced his descendant
ART.338
SIMPLE SEDUCTION
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Elements:
1. The offender party is over 12 years old, but under 18
2. She is of good reputation, single or a widow
3. The offender has sexual intercourse with her
4. The act is done by means of deceit
ART.339
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH
THE CONSENT OF THE OFFENDED PARTY
CRIMINAL LAW II 214
K notes
*Elements:
ART.340
CORRUPTION OF MINORS
*The promotion or facilitation of prostitution or corruption of persons under age to satisfy the lust of
another
ART.341
WHITE SLAVE TRADE
*Punishable Acts:
1. Engaging in the business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the services of women for the purpose of prostitution
CHAPTER FOUR
ABDUCTION
*Abduction: The taking away of a woman from her house or place where she may be for the purpose of
carrying her to another place with intent to marry or corrupt her
ART.342
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
*Elements:
1. The person abducted is any woman, regardless of age, civil status, or reputation
2. The abduction is against her will
3. The abduction is carried out with lewd designs
ART.343
CONSENTED ABDUCTION
*Elements:
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.344
PROSECUTION OF THE CRIMES OF ADULTERY,
CONCUBINAGE, SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION AND
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
CRIMINAL LAW II 215
K notes
*Art.344 no longer covers the prosecution of Rape, as per RA 8353. Rape may now be prosecuted ex
officio
*Order of preference for filing the complaint in the above mentioned crimes:
1. The offended party
2. Parents
3. Grandparents
4. Guardians
*parents, grandparents and guardians may file if the party is a minor or is incapacitated
*RE: ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE – Prosecution shall be upon a complaint filed by the offended
spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including both the guilty
parties, if they are both alive, or in any case, if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders
*RE: SEDUCTION AND ABDUCTION – Prosecution shall be upon a complaint filed by the offended party or
her parents, grandparents, or guardian. No prosecution if the offender has been expressly pardoned by
the above-named person
*RE: SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS – The marriage of the offender with the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him
*Silence or acquiescence of the offended party does not cure the defect of lack of subscription nor
operate to confer jurisdiction of the court
*Pardon must come BEFORE the institution of criminal action and BOTH offenders must be pardoned
*Prior consent bars the institution of criminal proceedings, subsequent consent bars it too
*Condonation is NOT synonymous with pardon; Condonation does not bar subsequent complaints
*Only the offended party may pardon, except in cases where the offended minor is dead or
incapacitated
*Marriage of the parties guilty of adultery/concubinage does not extinguish criminal liability because
both parties are offenders
ART.345
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS
GUILTY OF CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*The adulterer and the concubine can be sentenced to indemnify the offended spouse for damages
*In multiple rape, all the accused must support the offspring
ART.346
CRIMINAL LAW II 216
K notes
TITLE TWELVE
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
CHAPTER ONE
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
ART.347
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION
OF ONE CHILD FOR ANOTHER AND
CONCEALMENT OR ABANDONMENT OF
A LEGITIMATE CHILD
*Punishable Acts:
1. Simulation of birth
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status
*The fact that the child will be benefited by the simulation of its birth is not a defence
ART.348
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
*Committed by assuming the filiation or parental or conjugal rights of another for the purpose of
defrauding the offended party of his heirs
*’Civil Status’ includes one’s public station, profession, the rights, duties, capacities and incapacities
which determine a person to a given class
CRIMINAL LAW II 217
K notes
*There must be intent to enjoy the rights arising from the civil status of another, else the crime is
assuming or using a fictitious name under art.178 or estafa under art.315
*The purpose of defrauding the offended party of his heirs qualifies the crime
CHAPTER TWO
ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
Art.349
BIGAMY
*Elements:
1. The offender has been legally married
2. The marriage has not been legally dissolved or in case of an absentee spouse, that spouse could
not yet be presumed dead according to the civil code
3. He contracts a 2nd or subsequent marriage
4. The subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity
ART.350
MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST
PROVISIONS OF LAWS
*Elements:
1. The 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
*Qualifying: If either of the contracting parties obtains the consent of the other by means of violence,
intimidation, or fraud
ART.351
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
PREMATURE MARRIAGES
*Persons Liable:
1. Any widow who married within 301 days from the death of her husband, or before having
delivered if she is pregnant at the time of his death
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 period may be disregarded if the first husband was sterile or impotent
CRIMINAL LAW II 218
K notes
*The period applies only to women who are not pregnant. If they are, the prohibition is good only until
delivery
ART.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 marriage else, the liability is for Art.177 (usurpation of
authority or official functions)
TITLE THIRTEEN
CRIMES AGAINST HONOUR
CHAPTER ONE
LIBEL
SECTION ONE – DEFINITION, FORMS AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME
ART.353
DEFINITION OF LIBEL
*A libel is a public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any
act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonour, discredit or contempt
of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead
*Defamation: includes liber and slander, means the offense of injuring a person’s character, fame, or
reputation through false and malicious statements
*Elements of Defamation
1. Imputation of –
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
a. A crime
b. A vice or defect – real or imaginary
c. Any act or omission, status of circumstance
2. The imputation is made publicly
3. It must be malicious
4. It is directed at a natural or juridical person or one who is dead
5. It tends to cause the dishonour, discredit or contempt of the person defamed
*The meaning of the writer is immaterial, it is the meaning CONVEYED to the minds of persons of
reasonable understanding that the law looks at, taking into consideration the surrounding
circumstances
*There is no crime if the imputation is not published; publication being communication of the
defamatory matter to some 3rd persons
*MALICE IN FACT: may be shown by proof of ill-will, or purpose to injure; express malice
*MALICE IN LAW: presumed from a defamatory imputation; proof of malice is not required because it is
presumed to exist by the law
*Where the communication is privileged, malice is not presumed from the defamatory words; the
prosecution must prove malice whenever the imputation appears in a privileged communication
*Even if the publication is injurious, the presumption of malice in law disappears upon proof of good
intention and justifiable motive
*But where malice in fact is present, justifiable motive cannot exist and the imputations become
actionable
*Identification of the offended party is required; it isn’t sufficient that the offended party recognized
himself as the attacked or defamed; it must be shown that at least a 3rd person could identify him as the
object of the libelous publication
*Where the article is impersonal on its face and interpretation of its language does not single out
individuals, the requisite of identification is missing and defamation does not exist
*BUT the publication need not refer to the offended party by name; it is sufficient that the offended
party is the person meant or alluded to therein
*Defamatory remarks directed at a group of persons is not actionable unless the statements are all-
embracing or are sufficiently specific for the victims to be identifiable
*Liber published in different parts may be taken together to establish the identity of the offended party
*INNUENDO: a clause in the indictment or other pleading containing an averment which is explanatory
of some preceding word or statement; defines the defamatory meaning which the plaintiff set on the
words, to show how they came to have that meaning and also to show how they relate to the plaintiff
*In libel, there are as many offenses as there are persons defamed
ART.354
REQUIREMENT FOR PUBLICITY
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and
justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal,
moral, or social duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks of any judicial,
legislative, or other official proceeding which are not of confidential nature, or of any
statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by
public officers in the exercise of their functions
eyes of the public), and NOT at the intrinsic value of the publication (i.e.: whether it was truthful
or otherwise)
NOTE however, that the law enumerates specific instances when truth may be invoked as a
defence (SEE: ART.361)
*Malice in law is presumed from every defamatory imputation, EVEN IF it were true, the presumption
still exists if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown
Scope: narrow and practically limited to legislative If the case is not covered by absolute privilege, it
and judicial proceedings and other acts of state, may be tested in the light of the qualified privilege
including communications made in the discharge extended to a private communication made by
of duty under express authority of law, by or to person to another in the performance of any legal,
heads of executive departments and matters moral or social duty
involving military affairs
Lost by proof of malice
*The privileged communication covers also complaints against individuals who are not public officers,
like priests
in the matter
3. The statements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice
*RE: privileged communication in the performance of a legal duty, presupposes a provision of law
conferring upon the accused the duty to communicate; if there is no provision of law, there is no duty to
communicate, and the communication is therefore not privileged
*RE: moral duty, the existence of a moral duty depends upon the relationship between the giver and
receiver of the communication and whether the said communication is voluntarily given or not; i.e.:
complaints against priests to their superiors
*RE: social duty, this also depends upon the relationship between the sender and recipient
CRIMINAL LAW II 221
K notes
*That the statement is privileged is a matter of defence that must be established by the accused
*Even when the statements are found to be false, if there is probable cause for belief in their
truthfulness and the charge is made in good faith, the mantle of privilege may still cover the individual’s
mistake
*The communication made in the report must be pertinent and material to the subject matter in which
the author claims an interest to uphold
*The protection of the privilege may be lost by the MANNER of its exercise
*Defamatory remarks and comments on the conduct of public officers which are related to the
discharge of their official duties will not constitute libel if the defendant proves the truth of the
imputation; this concerns matters of PUBLIC INTEREST, where the imputation is based on this, the
presumption of criminal intent does NOT arise from the mere publication of defamatory matter; in
order that a discreditable imputation to a public official may be actionable, it must either be a false
allegation of fact or a comment based on false supposition
*The defamatory statements made by the accused must be a fair answer to the libel made by the
supposed offended party and must be related to the imputation made the answer should be
unnecessary libelous
ART.355
LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITING
OR SIMILAR MEANS
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
ART.356
THREATENING TO PUBLISH AND
OFFER TO PREVENT SUCH PUBLICATION
FOR A COMPENSATION
*Punishable Acts:
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning him, or his parents, spouse, child or other
members of his family
2. Offering to prevent the publication for compensation or monetary consideration
ART.357
PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS
REFERRED TO IN THE COURSE OF
OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
*Elements:
1. The 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 honour, virtue and reputation of said person
*The prohibition applies even if the facts are involved in official proceedings
*GAG LAW (art.357): newspaper reports on cases pertaining to adultery, divorce, issues about the
legitimacy of children will necessarily be barred from publication
*The reporter, etc. may NOT, however, be compelled to reveal the source of the news report unless the
Court/ House Committee of Congress finds it to be demanded by the security of the State
ART.358
SLANDER
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*Slander: oral defamation; libel committed by oral or spoken means instead of in writing
ART.359
SLANDER BY DEED
*Elements:
1. The offender performs any act not included in any other crime against honour
2. Such act is performed in the presence of other persons
3. Such act casts dishonour, discredit or contempt upon the offended party
*Slander by deed refers to slander BY PERFORMANCE, not by the use of words – written or spoken
ART.360
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE
*Persons liable for crimes against honour:
1. Person who publishes, exhibits or causes the publication or exhibition of any defamation in
writing or similar means
2. Author or editor of a book or pamphlet
3. 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 participated in, or have connection with its publication
*If the crime imputed is one that cannot be prosecuted publicly (i.e.: adultery), offended party must file
the complaint; the information filed by the fiscal is not sufficient to clothe the court with jurisdiction
ART.361
PROOF OF THE TRUTH
*When proof of truth is admissible:
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime regardless of whether the offended party
is a private or public individual
2. When the offended party is a government employee, even if the act or omission imputed does
not constitute a crime, provided it is related to the discharge of his official duties
*RE: public officers, when the imputation involves the private life of a government employee, which is
NOT related to the discharge of his official duties, the offender is not allowed to prove the truth of it as
a matter of defence
*Proof of truth must rest upon POSITIVE, DIRECT evidence, upon which a definite finding may be made
by the court; but PROBABLE CAUSE for belief in the truth of the statement is sufficient
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
*That the publication was made as an honest mistake only serves to mitigate the damages and is not a
complete defence
ART.362
LIBELOUS REMARKS
CRIMINAL LAW II 224
K notes
*Libelous remarks or comments connected with the matter privileged under the provisions of art.354, if
made with malice, shall not exempt the author thereof, nor the editor of a newspaper from criminal
liability
CHAPTER TWO
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
ART.363
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON
*Elements:
1. The offender performs an act
2. By such act he directly incriminates or imputes to an innocent person the commission of a crime
3. The act does not constitute perjury
*Art.363 is limited to ‘planting’ evidence and the like, which do not in themselves constitute false
prosecutions but tend to directly cause false prosecutions
ART.364
INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOUR
*Committed by fomenting any intrigue which has for its principal purpose to blemish the honour or
reputation of a person
*Includes in its scope any scheme or plot which consists of some trickery for the above-defined purpose
*Gossiping, which is done by availing directly of spoken words = Defamation, NOT intriguing against
honour
*Where the source of the information given can be pinpointed and definitely determined, and it passes
from one to another for the purpose of causing dishonour, the crime is Slander
*But where the source or the author of the derogatory information cannot be determined and the
defendant borrows that information and without subscribing to the truth thereof, passes it to others,
the crime is intriguing against honour
TITLE FOURTEEN
QUASI-OFFENSES
HIRYU KIMIKO OKUBO
SOLE CHAPTER
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
ART.365
IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE
*Four ways of commission:
CRIMINAL LAW II 225
K notes
1. By committing through reckless imprudence any act which, had it been intentional, would
constitute a grave or less grave or light felony
2. By committing through simple imprudence or negligence an at which would otherwise
constitute a grave or a less serious felony
3. By causing damage to the property of another through reckless imprudence or simple
imprudence or negligence
4. By causing through simple imprudence or negligence some wrong, which if done maliciously,
would have constituted a light felony
*RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE: 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 or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or occupation,
degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place
*SIMPLE IMPRUDENCE: consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases wherein the damage
impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest
*If the act performed would NOT constitute a felony (grave/less grave/light) under any other provision
of the Code which defines intentional felony, art.365 is not applicable. There is no crime committed.
*Imprudence or negligence is NOT a crime in itself, but rather a way of committing one; it merely
determines a lower degree of criminal liability and becomes punishable ONLY when it results in a felony
*Criminal negligence is a quasi-offense, dealt with separately from wilful offenses; what is principally
penalized is the mental attitude or condition behind the act, the dangerous recklessness, the lack of care
or foresight
*Criminal Negligence presupposes lack of intention to commit the wrong done, but that it came about
due to imprudence on the part of the offender
2. The damage impending to be caused is not immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest
*Art.64 relative to mitigating and aggravating circumstances is NOT applicable to crimes committed
through negligence; courts shall exercise sound discretion by judging on a case-by-case basis
*Doctrine of Last Clear Chance: In accordance with this, the contributory negligence of the injured party
will not the defeat the action if it is shown that the accused might have avoided the consequences of the
negligence of the injured party by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence
*Emergency Rule: An accused who, by the negligence of another and not by his own negligence, is
suddenly placed in an emergency and compelled to act instantly to avoid injury is not guilty of
CRIMINAL LAW II 226
K notes
negligence if he makes such a choice which a person of ordinary prudence placed in such a position
might make, even though he did not make the wisest choice
CONGRATULATIONS!
You made it through a semester under this law school’s most challenging Criminal Law Professor!
Good luck with the grade and the QPI, and here’s hoping that these notes helped out a bit –
If only to lighten to sometimes depressing mood:)
As for You, Marvin - I’d like to think you would have enrolled alongside us
For this coming semester, had you not been busy enjoying those wings. Fly high. ‘1-K all the way’,
remember? We love and miss you – and yes the dream lives on...
all the way to the Bar exam and beyond it.
~Kimiko