CRIMINAL LAW 2

TITLE ONE
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE
LAW OF NATIONS (Articles 114 – 122)

ARTICLE 114 – TREASON

-
is committed by a Filipino citizen or an alien residing in
the Philippines who levies war against the Philippine
Government or adheres to her enemies by giving them
aid and comfort
ELEMENTS:
1.
The offender is by birth, a Filipino Citizen or
an alien residing in the Philippines, even if
temporary allegiance
• The offender may either be a Filipino citizen,
because a Filipino citizen owes permanent
allegiance to the Philippine Government; or
another offender is a foreigner, an alien
temporarily residing in the Philippines. During
his temporary stay in the Philippines, he is
given protection by the Philippine Government
under its laws therefore it is but incumbent
upon him to have temporary allegiance to the
Philippine Government. That is why even an
alien, a foreigner temporarily residing in the
Philippines can also commit treason in times of
war.
2. That there is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
• The second element is that there is a war
in which the Philippines is involved. In the case
of Laura vs. Misa, treason is a war time
offense. It can be committed only in times of
war. In times of peace, Treason remains to be
dormant crime, however, the moment when
an emergency arises, the moment a war arises,
it is immediately put into effect as an act self-
defense and self-preservation of the Philippine
Government. Treason cannot be committed in
times of peace, because in times of peace,
there are no traitors.
• Who are these traitors?
These enemies are troops of the enemy state
which is in war with the Philippines. Filipino
men like the MILF, NPAs, even if they are at
war with the Philippine government, they
cannot be considered as enemies because they
are still considered as Filipino citizens. So the
aliens refer to the citizens of the enemy state
which is at war with the Philippines.
3. That the offender either—
a. Levies war against the Philippine
Government, or
b. Adheres to the enemies by giving them
aid or comfort.
• The third element refers to the mode of
committing treason.
Treason may be committed by either:
a. Levies war against the Philippine government ,
requires the concurrence of two elements:
1) there must be an actual of assembly of
men
2) it is for the purpose of executing or
effecting a treasonable design by force.
This means that the said offenders, Filipino citizens
who are said to be in collaboration with the enemy
troops in order to hand over the Philippine
Government to the enemy troops. Absent of that
collaboration, it cannot beconsidered as treason.
b. Adheres to the enemies by giving them aid or
comfort.
Adherence to the enemies —
mean that the Filipino citizen or the
offender intentionally, intellectually and emotionally
favors the enemy. Therefore, adherence to the
enemies is an internal state of mind, it is mental
state, you cannot see adherence to the enemies
• How now would you know that a person is
adhering to the enemy state?
It is manifested by his acts of giving aid
or comfort to the enemy.
That is why these two must concur:
1. Adherence to the enemies
2. Giving them aid or comfort
• Mere adherence to the enemies, without any
act of giving aid or comfort to the enemy will not
bring along treason, it is the act of giving aid or
comfort which is the manifestation of the
adherence to the enemies.
CRIMINAL LAW 2
EXAMPLES OF ACTS OF ADHERING TO THE ENEMIES
BY GIVING AID OR COMFORT:
• By giving the enemies information, transportation,
arms, supplies, all of these will weaken the defense of
the Philippines and strengthen the enemy state.
• People vs. Perez:
The court said, "the act of commandeering
women or giving women to the enemy troops in times
of war, to satisfy the lust of the enemy troops is not
considered as a treasonable act." Because according
the Court, whatever benefit is given to the enemy is
merely trivial in nature, imperceptible and it was not
the intent of the offender (unintentionally).
• There are two ways of proving treason under Article 114:
1. TESTIMONY OF TWO WITNESSES, AT
LEAST, TO THE SAME OVERT ACT,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE "TWO-WITNESS
RULE"
There must be two witnesses who will prove
only on the commission by the offender of an
overt act showing that he adheres to the
enemy. Therefore, treason cannot be proven
by mere substantial evidence. There must be
direct evidence, a witness to this act of giving
aid or comfort to the enemy.
2. CONFESSION OF THE OFFENDER OR THE
ACCUSED MADE IN AN OPEN COURT
Confession of guilt must be made before a court.
Extra-judicial confession will not give rise to
conviction in case of the crime of treason
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there is war which the Philippines is involved? X
was among those who committed treason against the
government. now X in committing treason killed a public
officer of the government of the Philippines, in furtherance
of his act of treason. Will such act amounting to murder
give rise to a separate and distinct crime? Will you charge
him for two crimes based on treason and murder?
A: There is only one crime committed by him
and the crime committed is treason. Common
crimes such as Murder, physical injuries, homicide,
arson, if they are committed in furtherance to, in
connection with or incidentally to treason shall be
absorbed in the crime of treason because they are
atrocities for war and therefore, they are considered
as absorbed in the crime of treason. It cannot even
be complex, they are considered absorbed in the
crime of treason.
Q: What if A, B and C, conspired and agreed to commit
treason against the Philippine Government. After their
conspiracy and agreement, A went to X. A told his friend X
that he was in conspiracy with B and C to commit treason
against the Philippine Government. After A told him such
conspiracy with X, A left. X, despite knowledge of the
conspiracy to commit treason among A, B, and C, did not
disclose such information to the proper authorities. What
crime/crimes is/are committed by A, B, C, and X?
A: A, B, and C are liable for the conspiracy to
commit treason. There is a meeting of two or
more persons come to an agreement to commit
the crime of treason and decide to commit it.There
is proposal to commit treason when a person has
decided to commit the crime of treason and
proposes its execution to some other person or
persons. The moment that other person whom the
proposal was given, raise to the commission of
crime, we no longer have proposal, but we have
Conspiracy to commit treason. In the problem, A,
B, and C, conspired, agreed to commit the crime
of treason against the Philippine government,
therefore they are all liable for conspiracy to
commit treason.
Q: X, who had knowledge of the conspiracy to commit
treason among A, B, and C, however, despite that
knowledge, he did not disclose it to the proper authorities.
What is the liability of X?
A: X is liable for misprision of treason –
iscommitted by any person who owes permanent
allegiance to the Philippine Government who fails
to disclose of knowledge to commit treason as
soon as possible to the proper authorities.In the
problem, C, despite having knowledge of the
conspiracy to commit treason among A, B, and C
did not divulge it, did not disclose it to the proper
authorities, therefore, X is liable for misprision of
treason.
• TREASON can be committed both by Filipino citizens
and a foreigner temporarily residing in the Philippines,
but MISPRISION OF TREASON can only be committed
by a Filipino citizen who owes permanent allegiance
to the Philippine government, it cannot be committed
by a foreigner residing in the Philippines.
ARTICLE 115. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason; Penalty. — The conspiracy or proposal to commit
the crime of treason shall be punished respectively, by prision
mayor and a fine not exceeding P10,000 pesos, and prision
correccional and a fine not exceeding P5,000 pesos.
CRIMINAL LAW 2

ARTICLE 116. Misprision of treason. — Every person owing
allegiance to (the United States) the Government of the
Philippine Islands, without being a foreigner, and having
knowledge of any conspiracy against them, conceals or does not
disclose and make known the same, as soon as possible to the
governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the
city in which he resides, as the case may be, shall be punished as
an accessory to the crime of treason.
ARTICLE 117 – ESPIONAGE
There are two ways of committing espionage under Article
117:
I. By entering, without authority therefor, a warship,
fort, or naval or military establishment or
reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential nature,
relative to the defense of the Philippines.
 The offender can be any person. He can be a Filipino citizen,
or a foreigner, or he can be a public officer or employee, or
he can be a private individual.
• When will the crime of espionage arise?
Under the first mode, the crime of espionage will arise
moment the offender enters the warship, fort or naval or military
establishment or reservation, without authority if his intention is
to obtain any information, plans, photographs or other data of a
confidential nature, relative to the defense of the Philippines.
 It is not necessary that for the crime to arise that he is
successful in obtaining the data. It is not necessary that he
indeed obtained the data. The mere act of entering without
authority is sufficient if his intention is to obtain the data of
confidential manner relative to the defense of the Philippines.
II. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign
nation the contents of the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph No. 1 of
art. 117, which he had in his possession by
reason of the public office he holds.
 This mode of committing espionage can only be committed
by a public officer who has been trusted, by reason of his
public position, of articles, data of confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines.
 The crime of espionage will arise the moment the offender
divulges or discloses the data and information to a
representative of a foreign nation.
 So even if he is in possession of the same, but he does
not divulge it to any representative of a foreign nation, the
crime will not arise.
 Espionage can be committed in BOTH, in times of peace
and in times of war.
ARTICLE 118 –INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING
MOTIVES
FOR REPRISALS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs unlawful or
unauthorized acts by the Philippine government.
2. That the said act provoke or give occasion for a
war involving or liable to involve the Philippines
or expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their
persons and property while they are in a foreign
country.
3. He is not legally authorized to do so.
• Inciting to war connotes that there is yet no war.
It is committed in times of peace.
Case of CAPTAIN MENDOZA
Hostage drama in Luneta. There were Hongkong
citizens boarded the bus and here comes Captain
Mendoza who was no longer a member of the military,
he entered the bus, with different weapons and grenades
and even killed some hongkong citizens. Captain Mendoza
performed unlawful, unauthorized acts which expose
overseas Filipino workers in Hongkong and china to
reprisals on their person or property. In fact, there were
news at that time that Hongkong or China would be
engaging in war with the Philippines. Head Captain
Mendoza, one of the crimes that may be held against
him is inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals.
ARTICLE119 – VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
ELEMENTS:
1. The crime is committed when there is a war but
the Philippines is not involved in the said war;
and
2. The competent authority issued a regulation for
the purpose of enforcing neutrality among
Filipino citizens; and
3. The offender violates such regulation imposed.
 Here, there is war but the Philippines is not involved
in the said the war.
Q: There is a war between country X and country Y.
Here comes Pedro, a Filipino citizen, he was siding with
country X. Is he liable?
A: No, he is not liable of violation of neutrality
because in the problem, it did not say that the
competent authority (the President) issued a
proclamation or regulation imposing neutrality.
 The violation will only arise if there is a proclamation
or regulation imposing neutrality and a Filipino
citizen violates such declaration or regulation issued
by a competent authority. Therefore, absence of such
declaration of neutrality, the crime of violation of
neutrality does not arise.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

ARTICLE120 – CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE

COUNTRY

ELEMENTS:

1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines is involved.

2. That the offender makes correspondence with an
enemy country or any territory occupied by enemy
troops.
3. That the correspondence is either —

a. Prohibited by the Philippine Government

b. Carried on in ciphers or conventional signs
c. Containing notice or information which might be
useful to the enemy.

 Here, there is a war in which the Philippines is involved.

Q: The Philippines is at war with the another country. Here

comes X, a Filipino citizen, he has a pen pal who is a
citizen of the country which is at war with the Philippines.
The competent authority or the President issued a
declaration of proclamation saying that there should be no
correspondence to the enemy state. But X missed his
penpal, and so, he wrote in a small piece of paper, "i love
you, i miss you, muamua!" Is X liable of the crime of
correspondence with the enemy?

A: X is liable because there was a declaration issued by a

competent authority that correspondence with the hostile
country is prohibited and if there is no declaration,
proclamation coming from the competent authority prohibiting
correspondence, the crime will only arise if the said crime is
carried on in ciphers or conventional signs or containing notice
or information which might be useful to the enemy.

ARTICLE 121 – FLIGHT TO ENEMY'S COUNTRY

ELEMENTS:

1. That there is s war in which the Philippines is involved.

2. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the
Philippine Government
3. That the offender attempts to flee or go to enemy's
country
4. That going to the enemy country is prohibited by a
competent authority.

 There must be a declaration or a proclamation issued

by a competent authority, that no Filipino shall flee to
the enemy's country and the offender violates such
proclamation.

 Mere attempt will readily rise to the crime. It is not necessary

that the offender has actually gone to the country.
ARTICLE 122 – PIRACY

ELEMENTS:

1. The first element is where the vessel is

located. The vessel can either be on the high
seas or on Philippine waters (this was brought
about by the amendment of RA 7659). Before
the amendment of RA 7659, Piracy under
Article 122 can only be committed when the
vessel is on the high seas. But because of
this amendment brought about by RA 7659,
Piracy now under Article 122 can be
committed when the vessel is on Philippine
waters.

2. The second element provides for the

offenders. The offenders must NOT be
members of the complement or passengers of
the vessel. Therefore, the offenders must be
STRANGERS to the vessel. They must be
coming from the outside, not from the inside.

3. The third element refers to the mode of

committing piracy.

a. The offenders either ATTACK or SEIZE the vessel.

b. The offenders either SEIZE IN WHOLE or IN PART

the cargo, the equipment or the personal
belongings of the passengers or members of the
complement.

 Based on these elements, you will notice that piracy is

akin to robbery. It is in effect robbery.

 It is just called piracy because the object of the thing

is either the vessel or the cargo or equipment of the
said vessel.

 There is also the use of force or intimidation. There is

also the use of violence against persons. There is also
intent to gain. So it is akin, similar to robbery

ARTICLE122 –MUTINY

COMMITTED WHEN:
1. The vessel is either on the high seas or on
Philippine waters
2. The OFFENDERS are MEMBERS OF THE
COMPLEMENT or PASSENGERS OF THE
VESSEL
3. The offenders raise a commotion or disturbance
on board the ship against the lawful command
of the captain or the commander of the ship.

 In mutiny, there is no taking because in mutiny there

is no intent to gain. Mutiny is the rising of commotion,
a resistance against the lawful command, against the
lawful authority of the commander or captain of the
ship.
 Since in mutiny, there is no intent to gain, mutiny is
akin to sedition. The rising of commotion, an uprising,
an act of dissent against lawful authority.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
SO HOW DO YOU DISTINGUISH PIRACY VS. MUTINY?
1. In piracy, the offenders are strangers to the vessel,
whereas, in mutiny, the offenders are necessarily inside the
vessel, they are either members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel.
2. In piracy, there is intent to gain because it is similar to
robbery, whereas, in mutiny, there is no intent to gain
because the essence of the crime is to go against the lawful
authority of the commander of the ship.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: The vessel is on the sea going to Mindoro. So while the ship is
on its way to Mindoro, suddenly there comes a big storm. The
commander or the captain of the ship said that they should first
move towards the shore and let the storm comes calm in order to
ensure the safety of the passengers of the vessel. The passengers of
the vessel and members of the complement didn’t want the decision
of the said captain of the ship and so they seize the captain of the
ship and manned the vessel until they reach Mindoro. What crime, if
any, is committed by these members of the complement and
passengers of the vessel?
A: They are liable of MUTINY. The vessel is on
Philippine waters. The offenders are members of the
complement and they go against the lawful authority of
the captain of the ship. Therefore they are liable of
mutiny.
Q: While a vessel is on Philippine waters, here comes a second
vessel. Four men from the second vessel boarded the first vessel
and at gunpoint, took the cargo and equipment of the said vessel.
Placed them in the second vessel and off they went. What crime is
committed by these four men?
A: They are liable of PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE 122.
The vessel is on Philippine waters, the offenders are not
members of the complement or passengers of the ship.
They seize the cargo and equipment of the vessel.
Therefore, it is piracy under Article 122.
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. While thevessel is on
Philippine waters, the members of the complement and passengers
of the said vessel in conspiracy with one another took the cargo and
equipment of the said vessel, and then they boarded a second
vessel and off they went. What crime is committed by the
members of the complement and passengers of the said vessel?
A: The members of the complement and passengers
of the vessel committed ACTS OF
PIRACY because they seize in whole or in part the cargo
or equipment of the vessel but NOT PIRACY UNDER ART.
122 because in Article 122, it is a requisite that the
offenders must be strangers to the vessel. Here, the
offenders are members of the complement and passengers
of the vessel. So the crime committed is PIRACY BUT
UNDER PD 532.
ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-ROBBERY LAW OF 1974 (PD 532)
Under PD 532, piracy is committed by attacking or seizing the
vessel or seizing in whole or in part the cargo, equipment or
personal belongings of the members of the complement or
passengers of the vessel IRRESPECTIVE of the value thereof,
committed by means of force and violence and committed by any
person whether he may a member of the complement or passenger
of the vessel or strangers to the vessel BUT the vessel is on
Philippine waters. Therefore, for PIRACY UNDER PD 532 to arise, it
necessary that the vessel is on Philippine waters. If the vessel is
on the high seas, immediately rule out PD 532.
HOW COULD YOU KNOW IF IT IS PIRACY UNDER PD 532
OR PIRACY UNDER ARTICLE 122 OF RPC?
 If the vessel is on Philippine waters, your choice is
either Piracy under PD 532 or Piracy Article 122.
 Where lies the difference?
Since Article 122 of RPC is the main law, we have to
reconcile it with P.D. 532. Or P.D. 532 must be reconciled
with Article 122. Piracy under P.D. 532, the offenders
can be any person. He can be a stranger. He can be
members of the complement.
 Therefore, where does PD 532 apply?
It will apply when the offenders are members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel and the
vessel is on the Philippine waters.
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters, suddenly men from the
outside committed acts of piracy. What crime is committed?
A: Piracy under Article 122
Q: The vessel is on Philippine waters. Acts of piracy were
committed by the members of the complement or passengers of
the vessel. What crime is committed?
A: Piracy under PD 532
Q: What if the vessel is on the high seas? While the vessel is on
the high seas, there comes a second vessel. Four men from the
second vessel boarded the first vessel and at gunpoint took the
cargo and equipment of the first vessel. What crime is committed
by these four men?
A: Piracy under Article 122. The vessel is on the high
seas. The offenders are not members of the
complement or the passengers of the vessel. They seize
in whole or in part the cargo and equipment of the said
vessel.
Q: While the vessel is on the high seas, members of the
complement or passengers of the vessel in conspiracy with
one another took away the cargo and equipment of the vessel.
What crime is committed?
• NOTE: It is not piracy under Article 122 because here,
the offenders are members of the complement or passengers of
the vessel. In Article 122, it is required that the offenders must
be strangers to the vessel. It cannot be piracy under PD 532
because the vessel must be on Philippine waters. In our
problem, the vessel is on the high seas. So, what crime is
committed?
A: Again, piracy is akin to robbery. Since Piracy under
Article 122 and Piracy under PD 532 do not apply, the
crime committed is ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED
PLACE.
 ARTICLE 123 – QUALIFIED PIRACY
What are the circumstances which will qualify piracy?
• Under Article 122, the following circumstances
will qualify piracy:
1. Whenever the offender have seized
a vessel by boarding or firing
upon; or

2. Whenever the offenders have

abandoned their victims without
means of saving themselves; or
• There is intent to kill.

3. Whenever the crime is accompanied

by murder, homicide, physical
injuries or rape.

CRIMINAL LAW 2
face three times and the face of the woman became
reddish. She suffered slight physical injuries. What about
the fact that the injury suffered was only slight?
A: It will not make a difference although the injury
suffered was only slight. In the third circumstance
which will qualify piracy, the word “physical
injuries” is used in its generic sense. Therefore,
whatever be of kind of physical injuries, whether
serious or slight for as long as it was accompanied

by piracy, it will be considered as qualified piracy.

Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didn’t want to
give the ring and one of the men touched the private parts
of the said woman and after touching the private parts of
the said woman with lust, he forcibly took the ring. What
crime is committed by the said men?
A: All of them will be liable for piracy. However, the
man who touched the private part of the woman
will be liable for two crimes: piracy and acts of
lasciviousness. Acts of lasciviousness is not
mentioned in Article 123. Therefore, its presence
will not qualify piracy. It will bring about a separate
and distinct charge of acts of lasciviousness.
•
So, only these four crimes (murder, homicide,
physical injuries and rape) will qualify piracy. If
other crime is committed and accompanied by
piracy and is not among these four crimes
mentioned in Article 123, it will bring about a
separate and distinct charge.

QUALIFIED MUTINY
•
Insofar as mutiny is concerned, what are the
circumstances which will qualify mutiny?
•
In Article 123, there is no specific mention of
qualified mutiny, however according to Reyes
and other legal luminaries, of the three

• Whenever these four crimes

accompanied the act of piracy,
it will not bring about a separate
and distinct crime or a separate
and distinct charge of murder,
homicide, physical injuries or
rape. These crimes are absorbed
because they are circumstances
which will qualify the penalty to
death.

NOTE: These circumstances are separate

and distinct from each other. It is not
necessary that all of themmust be present.
The presence of one will qualify piracy.
Notice the conjunction OR. These are
qualifying circumstances which are
prejudicial to the accused therefore they
must be strictly construed.

circumstances stated in Article 123, paragraphs 2 and 3 are considered as circumstances which will qualify mutiny. That is:
ILLUSTRATION:

abandoned their victims without

1.
whenever the offenders have
means of saving themselves; or
whenever the crime is accompanied with murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape
2.
•

Q: What if the vessel is on Philippine waters, and there

comes a second vessel. Four men from the second vessel
boarded the first vessel and at gunpoint, they asked the
passengers to give to them all their valuables. One woman
didn’t want to give her wedding ring because it was so
precious to her and so one of the men forcibly took the
wedding ring from the finger such that the finger was
severed from it. What crime is committed? According to Reyes and other
legal luminaries, only these two
A: QUALIFIED PIRACY because piracy was are considered qualified in
accompanied by physical injuries. mutiny because in mutiny, the
offenders are necessarily,
ordinarily inside the vessel
because they are members of the
complement or passenger of the
vessel.
Q: What if in the same problem, the woman didn’t want to
give the ring, one of the men slapped the woman on the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

ANTI-HIJACKING LAW (R.A. No. 6235 otherwise known

as An Act Prohibiting Certain Acts inimical to Civil
Aviation)

Under RA 6235, there are four prohibited acts.

1. By compelling the pilot of an aircraft of Philippine

registry to change its course or destination OR by
seizing or usurping control thereof while it is in flight

2. By compelling an aircraft of foreign registry to land

in Philippine territory OR by seizing or usurping
control thereof while the same is in Philippine
territory

• These are the first two prohibited acts. How could
you distinguish the first act from the second act?
•If the aircraft is of Philippine registry, the
seizure or usurpation to amount in violation
of RA 6235, requires that the aircraft must
be in flight. An aircraft is in flight the moment
all its external doors had been closed,
following embarkation until any of it external
doors had been opened for purposes of
disembarkation.
• On the other hand, if the aircraft is of foreign
registry, the seizure or usurpation did not need
while it is in flight. For as long as the aircraft of
foreign registry is within the Philippine territory,
seizure or usurpation thereof will bring about
violation of RA 6235 even if all its doors are
opened; even if it is not in flight.
Insofar as these two prohibited acts are concerned, what
are the circumstances which will qualify the penalty?
Under RA 6235, the following circumstances will
qualify the first two acts:
a. By firing upon the pilot or the member
of the crew or passenger of the aircraft; or
b. By exploding or attempting to explode
by mean of a bomb or explosive for
purposes of destroying the aircraft; or
c. Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, serious physical injuries
or rape
NOTE: In case of piracy, the law uses the
word “physical injuries” in its generic sense. Whatever be
the kind of physical injury that will accompany piracy, the
crime committed is qualified piracy. But in case of
hijacking under RA 6235, the law is specific; it must be
serious physical injuries. Therefore, if the physical injuries
that would accompany the act of usurpation and seizure
of the aircraft would only be less serious physical injuries
or slight physical injuries, the penalty is not qualified.
The penalty is qualified because from the penalty of 12 to
20 years, it would become 15 years to death.
3. By carrying or loading on board a
PASSENGER AIRCRAFT operating as a public
utility in the Philippines materials or
substances which are explosive, flammable,
corrosive or poisonous
4. By shipping, carrying or loading onboard a
CARGO AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility
in the Philippines materials or substances which
are explosive, flammable, corrosive or
poisonous in a manner not in accordance with
the rules and regulations of the Air
Transportation Office
HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH THE 3 rd FROM
THE 4th ACT?
• If the aircraft is a PASSENGER AIRCRAFT,
the mere act of carrying or loading explosive,
flammable, corrosive or poisonous substances
will immediately constitute a violation of
RA6235.
• If however the aircraft is a CARGO AIRCRAFT,
the loading of these poisonous substances,
flammable substances, is allowed because it is a
cargo aircraft. The crime will only arise if such
act of loading is not in accordance with the rules
and regulations of the Air Transportation Office.
HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF 2007 (R.A. No. 9372)
Q: What if there is a bus and the bus is parked
at Lunetapark and it was full of children. And here comes
X, X had different kinds of explosive all over his body.
And at gunpoint, entered the said bus and told the
children to keep quiet. Thereafter, there is a cartolina on
the glass window of the said bus. Written on the cartolina
were his demands to the government. His demands were
first, that his brother, a member of NPA and who is being
incarcerated by the military be released and his
second demand, was that funds be transferred to his
account. So these were the demands made by X against
the government. Because of this, the parents of the
children arrived, the media arrived, all the cabinet
secretaries arrived. Only the president did not arrive. So
everybody was there. They were afraid that the children
might die so there was chaos in the entire
Philippines. It took the members of the military and
police 12 hours to subdue X. So after 12 hours, they were
able to arrest X. What crime, if any, may be filed against
X?
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

A: X will be charged of the crime of terrorism

under RA 9372, the Human Security Act of 2007.
Under Section 3 of Ra 9372, terrorism is
committed when the offender commits any of the
following acts punishable under the RPC:

a. Piracy
b. Rebellion
c. Coup d’Etat
d. Murder
e. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
f. Crimes involving Destruction

If the offender commits any of these acts

punishable under the RPC or any of the following acts
punishable under special penal laws:

1. Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High

Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
2. Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
3. Article 134-a (Coup d’Etat), including acts committed
by private persons;
4. Article 248 (Murder);
5. Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);
6. Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction,

or under

1. Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);

2. Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
3. Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and
Liability Act of 1968);
4. Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
5. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-
highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
6. Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree
Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful Possession,
Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of
Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)

If the offender commits any of these crimes under

the RPC and any of the crimes under special penal
laws, thereby sowing and creating a condition
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among
the populace in order to coerce the government to
give in to an unlawful demand, he is liable of terrorism
and the penalty is 40 years imprisonment without the
benefit of parole under the Indeterminate Sentence
Law. So it is the maximum penalty of 40 years. He has
to serve it totally. Even if he has already served the
minimum, he cannot be given the benefit of parole
under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. So it is
necessary that he must commit any of these predicate
crimes and after committing these predicate crimes,
where lies the difference?
 Because his act that sowed and created fear and
panic among the populace coupled with an
unlawful demand against the government.

Q: So let us say that X was charged with terrorism

based on a valid complaint or information a case of
terrorism was filed against him before the RTC. However,
after trial on the merits, the judge acquitted him.
According to the judge, the prosecution failed to prove the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt therefore
acquittal for reasonable doubt. Since he is acquitted of
terrorism under RA 9372, can he still be prosecuted for his
predicate crime of kidnapping and illegal detention
because he detained the children for more than 12 hours?
Can he still be prosecuted for Illegal and Unlawful
Possession of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives
because he was full of firearms and ammunitions and
explosives?

A: No more. Because of Section 49 of RA

9372. Under Section 49 of RA 9372, whenever a
person has been charged of terrorism, or any act
punishable under RA 9372, based on the valid
complaint or information, sufficient information
and substance to bring about and thereafter he
is acquitted or the case is dismissed, he can no
longer be subsequently prosecuted for any other
felony or offense necessarily included in the
crime charged. The crime of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention is necessarily included in
terrorism because it is one of the predicate
crimes. Likewise, violation of PD 1866, as
amended Illegal and Unlawful Possession of
Firearms is also necessarily included in terrorism
because it is one of the predicated crimes in
terrorism. Or any of these predicated crimes, he
can no longer be charged because they are
necessarily included in terrorism. This is known
as the ABSORPTION PRINCIPLE in terrorism.

Q: But what if in the same problem, while X was waiting

for his demands to be given by the government, he saw
a girl and with lewd design, he touched the private
parts of the seven-year old girl. Therefore he committed
a violation of RA 7610 the Anti-Child Abuse Law. He
was acquitted of terrorism. Can the state prosecute him
for violation of RA 7610?

A: Yes, because it is not among the

predicate crimes. It is not a crime
necessarily included in the crime of terrorism.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

TITLE TWO
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS 2. That he detains a person
OF THE STATE (Articles 124 – 133)
The second element requires that the
offender detains a person.
The acts under TITLE TWO are made criminal because
they both appease the Bill of Rights. The rights stated • So when is there detention?
under the Constitution and the first of these is under
ARTICLE 124, 125 and 126 – Arbitrary Detention. There is detention when the offended
party is placed in incarceration. When the offended
party is placed behind bars or when the offended
party is restrained of his person or liberty.

• In order to amount arbitrary

detention there must be an act of restraint
on the person or liberty of the offended
party. Absent that intent, absent the actual
restraint on the person or liberty of the offended
party – It can be any other crime BUT NOT
ARBITRARY DETENTION.
Therefore, Supreme Court said that intent to
detain must be manifest, it must be evident.
Absent that, it can be any other crime but not
arbitrary detention.

3. That the detention is without legal

grounds

The third element requires that the

detention must be without legal ground.

• So when is detention without legal

grounds under Article 124?

1. When the said offended party was

arrested without a warrant of
arrest.

2. When the said offended party was

arrested and his arrest and
detention does not fall under any
of the circumstances or a valid
warrantless arrest.

3. When he is not suffering from

violent insanity or any other
ailment which requires
compulsory confinement.
3 KINDS OF ARBITRARY DETENTION:

1. Arbitrary Detention by detaining a person without

legal ground under Article 124

2. Arbitrary Detention by failing to deliver the

detained person to the proper judicial authorities
within 12, 18 or 36 hours under Article 125

3. Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of

prisoners despite the judicial or executive order to
do so under Article 126
ARTICLE124 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY DETAINING
A PERSON WITHOUT LEGAL GROUND

ELEMENTS:

1. That the offender is a public officer or employee

• Who is the offender in Article 124?

The offender is a public officer or

employee BUT NOT ALL PUBLIC OFFICERS
OR EMPLOYEES can commit arbitrary detention.

The public officer of employee can commit

arbitrary detention are only those who have
been vested with authority to effect arres
and detain a person or at least to cause
the detention of a person.

Public officers who have been vested with authority to

effects arrest and detain a person are POLICE OFFICERS. On
the other hand, public officers vested with authority to cause the
detention of a person are MEMBERS OF CONGRESS.
They can order the detention of a person who has been cited of
contempt for failing to accurate their proof, or we have JUDGES
they can order the summary detention of persons cited in
contempt of court.
CRIMINAL LAW 2
• All of these are not considered
valid grounds for detention.
• So to reverse, what are the valid grounds
for detention?
The following are valid grounds for
detention:
a. If the person does not
receive and detained by
virtue of a warrant of arrest.
b. If a person was arrested and
detained under any of the
circumstances for a valid
warrantless arrest
c. If a person was suffering
violent insanity or any illness
which requires compulsory
confinement.
• These are the valid ground
for the arrest and detention
of a person.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So if a person, driving his vehicle entered a one way
street and in violation of the LTO rules and regulation, was
stopped by police officer, his license was taken and gave
him a ticket and was bought to the nearest PNP station and
was placed behind bars. He was detained. That was 8
o’clock in the morning then the arresting officer left. And on
the afternoon, the police officer returned to the police
station. Upon his arrival, he immediately released the
incarcerated person whom he detained for entering a one
way street. Is the said police officer liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 124?
Q: What if X is suspected to be a snatcher and many
complaints was filed against him. One time, when the
police officers were conducting a patrol they saw X who
was perhaps waiting for a ride. When the police officers
saw X they immediately arrested X and brought him to the
nearest police station. They told X that he is to be
investigated for he is said to be a cellphone snatcher. So
he was brought to the investigation room however, the
investigation officer was not around so the arresting officer
told him that he needs to be investigated and that he can
leave but he must make sure to come back for purposes of
investigation otherwise if he does not come back the next
time they see him they will kill him. So because of that, X
would get out of the precinct but would immediately return.
Are the police officers liable for arbitrary detention?
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for
arbitrary detention. There is no intent to restrain
or detain the person or liberty of X, the offended
party. In order to amount to arbitrary detention it is
necessary that the intent of the public officer to restrain
the person or liberty of the offended party must be
manifest and it must be evident. In this case however,
it is not.
• Even if there is a threat on the part of the police officer
there is however no intent to detain X. What are the crimes if
any are the police officer liable for?
• They committed GRAVE THREATS because they threatened
to kill X if he would not come back. It is the grave threats that
made X come back in the police station.
ARTICLE125 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY FAILING
TO DELIVER THE DETAINED PERSON TO THE
PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES WITHIN 12, 18 OR 36
HOURS
ELEMENTS:
1.
The offender here is a public officer or
employee vested with authority to effect arrest
and detain a person
That offender has detained a person for some
legal ground
2.
The second element requires that the
offender arrests and detains a person
some legal ground.
for
•
What are these legal grounds referred to
under Article 125?
•
The legal ground being referred to in
Article 125 is not the fact that the
said arrest was made by virtue of a
warrant of arrest because if the
offended party was arrested by the
public officer by virtue of a valid
warrant of arrest he does not have

A: YES, he is liable ofARBITRARY DETENTION.

He is a public officer vested with authority to effect
arrest and detain a person. If he detained the
person, the detention was without legal ground. It
is without legal ground because entering a one
way street and violating the traffic rules and
regulation is not a ground for incarceration. It is
not a ground for a person to be placed behind
bars. If a person committed a violation of traffic
rules and regulation like entering a one way street
or beating the red light, he should only be given a
ticket. There should not even be a confiscation of
license. After that, he should be allowed to leave
but that is not a ground for him to be placed under
detention. Since the officer detained the person
without any legal ground HE IS LIABLE FOR
ARBITRARY DETENTION.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
What do you mean by delivery?
•
the obligation to deliver him to the
proper judicial authorities.

• So what are these valid instances in arresting a person?

• These refer to circumstances of valid warrantless

arrests under Section 5 Rule 112 of the Rules of
Court. It requires that a peace officer or a private
individual may even without a warrant arrest a
person under the following circumstances:

Delivery does not mean that you

really have to deliver the physical
body of the person arrested to the
court. It means constructive delivery
or legal delivery, meaning, the filing
of the appropriate case before the
proper court. That is delivery to
proper judicial authorities - filing of
the case before the proper court.
The law says that a public officer must
deliver to the proper judicial authorities.
So judicial authority, what does it mean?
The proper judicial authorities refers
to COURTS OF JUSTICES OR
JUDGES OF THE COURTS THAT
HAS THE POWER TO ORDER THE
INCARCERATION OR DETENTION
•
•
OF
A
PERSON OR HIS
TEMPORARY RESTRAIN UPON
POSTING OF APPROPRIATE

COMPLAIN.
The FISCAL does not belong to the
proper judicial authority because he
belongs to the executive branch. The
Fiscal is under the Department of
Justice and not under the Supreme
Court. The head of the Fiscal is
Secretary De Lima and the President
and not Chief Justice Sereno. That’s

a. That in his presence the person

to be arrested has committed,
is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit a crime.
This is otherwise known as
INFLAGRANTE DELICTO
ARREST

b. When a crime has in fact just

been committed, and the police
officer has probable cause to
believe based on personal
knowledge of facts and
circumstances that the person
to be arrested is the one who
committed the crime. This is
otherwise known as HOT
PURSUIT ARREST.

c. When the person to be arrested

is a prisoner who has escaped
from a penal establishment or a
place where he is serving final
sentence or temporarily detained
while his case is pending, or has
escaped while being transferred
from one penal institution to
another.

• These are the circumstances for

a valid warrantless arrest. These
are the circumstances referred to
in the second element of Article
125.

why a Fiscal is not within the

meaning of a judicial authority.
Second, the fiscal may fix or the
fiscal may recommend the bail but
he does not have the power to fix the
bail and allow the accused to go on
temporary liberty. Only the judges
are allowed to fix the bail and order
the temporary liberty of the accused
until upon the posting of the said
bail.
The law says that a public officer must deliver the person
arrested to proper judicial authority within:
12 hours, for crimes punishable by light penalties,
or their equivalent
18 hours, for crimes punishable by correctional
penalties, or their equivalent
a.

b.

c.

36 hours, for crimes punishable by afflictive or

capital penalties, or their equivalent

3.
That the offender fails to deliver the person
arrested to the proper judicial authorities
within 12, 18 or 36 hours.
ILLUSTRATION:
The third element requires that that the
offender fails to deliver the person arrested to
the proper judicial authorities within 12, 18 or
36 hours.
Q: What if a person has been arrested Inflagrante Delicto
in possession of an unlicensed firearm. Possession of
unlicensed firearm is punished by a special penal law (P.D.
1866 as amended). Is the arresting officer required to
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
Example of judicial order for the release of a
prisoner let’s say that a person has been charged
deliver the accused to the proper judicial authorities? Does
Article 125 apply even to violation of special penal laws?

A: Yes, because the law says “or their

equivalent”. 12 hours, for crimes punishable by
light penalties, or their equivalent. That means all
their equivalent refers to their equivalent even in
cases of violation of special penal laws. Therefore,
even if the crime committed or the crime for which
the offender is being arrested is based on violation of
special penal laws, the arresting police officer has the
obligation to deliver the person arrested to the proper
judicial authorities in consonance with Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code.

Q: What if the police officers caught X in the actual act of

killing Y. So they saw X and Y fighting and they saw X
stabbed Y to death. Therefore, X is liable of homicide. They
arrested X and that was Saturday, 3 o’clock in the
afternoon. Sunday, there is no office. The following day, Q: What if X has been charged of two crimes - Illegal sales
Monday, happens to be declared a special non-working of dangerous drugs and illegal possession of dangerous
holiday. Therefore, the police officers were able to deliver X drugs? So, two crimes were filed against him. The illegal
to the proper judicial officer only on Tuesday, 8 o’clock in possession of dangerous drugs was filed before the RTC
the morning. They were able to file the case in the Fiscal’s Branch 6 on the other hand; the illegal sale was filed before
office for purposes of proceedings Tuesday, 8 o’clock in the RTC Branch 87. Two different courts were filed with. In the
morning, beyond 36 hours which was required by law. Are illegal possession of dangerous drugs which was filed in
the police officers liable for arbitrary detention? RTC Branch 6, no witnesses were ever presented and so
the judge immediately declared the dismissal of the case
A: NO, the police officers are not liable for and he ordered that X should already be released from jail.
arbitrary detention. The Secretary of the Department However, the case for illegal sale of dangerous drugs under
of Justice has made a legal opinion that the said 12, 18 RTC Branch 87 is still ongoing. The jail warden receives
and 36 hours refers to WORKING HOURS. These refer the order coming from the judge RTC Branch 6 that X
to the time when the courts are open in order to receive should be released. The jail warden did not compel. Is the
the cases to be filed against them. This does not include jail warden liable for arbitrary detention under Article 126 -
the crime wherein the courts are closed and they did Arbitrary Detention by delaying the release of prisoners
not receive the complaint or information to be filed despite the judicial or executive order to do so?
against the accused.
in court and the public prosecutor failed to present
any evidence for consecutive times and no
witnesses has ever been presented since the
beginning.
The judge will dismiss the case and
order the release of the accused from jail. This is
an example of a judicial order for the release of a
prisoner. Or let’s say the judge acquitted the
accused then he will order the release of the said
accused from jail.
How about an example of an executive order for a
release of a prisoner? A person was arrested and
placed behind bars and proceeding was filed
before the fiscal’s office. The fiscal ordered the
release of the prisoner. This is an example of
•

executive order for the release the prisoner.

A: NO, the jail warden is not liable for arbitrary
detention under Article 126 because there is still
another pending case against the said prisoner before another court. Therefore, it is incumbent upon him not to compel with the judge of Branch 6
since there is another case in Branch 87 which is still ongoing. What the law punishes is delay without valid reason for the release of the prisoner.

1.
2.
The offender is a public officer or employee
That there is a judicial or executive order for
the release of the prisoner or detention
prisoner, or that there is a proceeding upon a
petition for the liberation of such person.
That the offender without good/valid reason
delays: (1) the service of the notice of such
order to the prisoner; or (2) the performance
of such judicial or executive order for the
release of the prisoner; or (3) the proceeding
upon a petition for the release of such person.
ARTICLE127 – EXPULSION
Expulsion is committed by public officers or employees who
shall expel any person from the Philippines or who compels
him to change his residence without any lawful authority to
do so. Again, the offender is a public officer or employee
who acts either:
3.
a.
b.
By expelling a person from the Philippines
By compelling a person to change his
residence

NOTE: What is punishable is the delay without valid

reason, the delay of the release of the prisoner despite the
judicial or executive order to do so.
•
What the law prohibits is that if this public officer
ARTICLE126 – ARBITRARY DETENTION BY DELAYING
THE RELEASE OF PRISONERS DESPITE THE
JUDICIAL OR EXECUTIVE ORDER TO DO SO
ELEMENTS:
or employee expels him from the Philippines or
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

He was not authorized by a judicial order to enter

the dwelling and/or make a search therein for
papers or other effects

For example, the President has the power to

deport or expel a person from the Philippines.
Another example is a foreigner who is known to
be a persona non grata; the President may order
compels him to change his residence without
lawful authority to do so because there are
persons who have been authorized by law to
deport a person from the Philippines or to compel
2.
•
The second element requires that
entering upon the dwelling of another
which is not authorized by a judicial
order. The judicial order refers to a
a person to change his residence.
•

search warrant
3.
He either enters the dwelling of another against
the will of the latter or searching for papers or
other effects found therein without the consent of
the owner, or after having surreptitiously entered
the dwelling, being discovered and asked to leave,
he refuses to leave.

his deportation to his home.

The courts on the other hand, have the power to
compel a person to change his place of residence.
Let’s say the offender is a concubine and the
penalty to be imposed to a concubine is destierro.
Therefore, the concubine is prohibited from
entering a particular place based on the judgment
of the court. Now, theprohibited place from which
she is prohibited from entering is the place where
she lives. She cannot enter the said place
therefore; the court is empowered to compel her
to change her place of residence because she
cannot enter the place wherein her house is
situated.
The third elements provides for the different modes of
violation of domicile
(These three modes are separate and distinct from each
other – do not look for all the three modes in a problem,
violation of one of them will bring about violation of

domicile)
1.
By entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof; or
There must a prohibition, an opposition from entering.
It can either be an implied or expressed opposition
from entering.

-
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE (ARTICLE 128, 129, 130)
Example:
•
a public officer or employee entered into a
dwelling of another which is not armed with a
search warrant
different prohibited acts constituting violation of
domicile:
implied opposition – the door is closed. It can
be said that the owner is saying that “No one
can enter my house”
expressed prohibition – when the owner is
inside the house and the officer knocks upon
the door and upon seeing the officer, the owner
closes the door.
•
I.
By entering any dwelling against the will
of the owner thereof; or
II.
By searching papers or other effects
found therein without the previous
consent of such owner; or
if there are sayings – “Do not enter”, “No entry”
III.
By refusing to leave the premises, after
having surreptitiously entered
-

-
It does not mean entering without the consent. An
entry without the consent is not an entry against the
will.

ARTICLE128 – VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

ELEMENTS:
The offender is a public officer or employee
When you say entry against the will, there must be an
opposition or a prohibition from entering the dwelling.

By searching papers or other effects found therein

without the previous consent of the owner; or
The consent of the owner matters. Even if the public
officer or employee is allowed inside, the fact that he is
allowed inside does not mean that he is allowed to
conduct the search.

1.
2.

-
•
Who is the offender in the violation of domicile?
He must be a public officer or employee
acting under color of authority
•
•
A public officer or employee is said to be
acting under color of authority if he has been
vested with the authority to implement a
search warrant, but when he entered in the
said dwelling, he is not armed with a search
warrant. Therefore, he was acting under color
of authority.
Even if he is a public officer or employee, but
he did not act under color of authority, is liable
only, not for violation of domicile, but is either
liable for qualified trespass to dwelling or
trespass to property because the public
officer or employee is acting under his private
capacity.
-
He must ask first for the previous consent of the owner
before proceeding with the search. Without the
previous consent of the owner to conduct the search,
any search would be a violation of domicile.

By refusing to leave the premises, after having

surreptitiously entered the dwelling
3.

-
•
-

it is his refusal to leave the premises that will bring

about the violation of domicile, NOT the surreptitiously
entering. But it is required that entering must be done
surreptitiously.
Surreptitious entering means entering the dwelling
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
secretly, candidly.
it, he is already liable because his entry was
-
Therefore, it is important that he mus-t refuse to leave
after being discovered and asked to leave in order to
amount to violation of domicile.
Mere surreptitious entering will not bring about
violation of domicile.
against the will of the owner. The door was closed
although it was not locked. Therefore, there was
an implied opposition, an implied prohibition from
entering.When he entered without a search
warrant intending to conduct a search is already a
violation of domicile
-

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if the door of the house was opened, a police
officer without being armed with a search warrant, entered
the door of the house and went up to the sala. The owner
of the house saw him and asked him to leave, and he left.
Is he liable for violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
When the door of the house is open, there is no
prohibition; there is no opposition from entering.
Anybody may enter even without a search
warrant; therefore, since there is no prohibition or
opposition from entering, violation of domicile
cannot be committed under the first act. Under the
second act, it cannot be committed because he
did not conduct the search. The third act also not
done because the entering of the house is not
Q: What if the police officer knocked on the door of the
house of X. X opened the door, upon seeing the public
officers, X allowed them to enter. The police officer told X
that they were looking for a stolen car stereo in the
neighborhood; we are going to conduct a search in your
house. X said, "No, you cannot conduct a search inside my
house”. The police officers agreed and left the house. Are
they liable for violation of domicile?
A: They are not liable. It is not entry against the
will. They did not conduct a search. The entry was
not done surreptitiously. It does not fall any of the
acts, therefore, they are not liable for violation of

domicile.

Q: In the same problem, when they told the owner that they
were conducting a search for the stolen car stereo, the
owner of the house said, “No, you cannot conduct a
search. There is nothing stolen inside my house” but the
police officers proceeded with the search.
A: This time, they are liable for violation of
 domicile because they made a search without the
previous consent of the owner – under the second
done surreptitiously.
Q: What if in the same problem, the door of the house was
opened, a public officer with the intent to conduct a search
warrant entered the house, when he was in the sala, the
owner of the house saw him and told him to leave. He did
not leave; he just stayed there and sat on the sofa. Is he
liable for violation of domicile?
A: He is not liable for violation of domicile.
Under the first act, is entry against the will? – NO,
the door was opened. Therefore, there was no
opposition or prohibition from entering. Under the
second act, he did not conduct a search. Under the
third act, is the entering done surreptitiously? – NO,
because the door of the house was opened;
therefore, he did not violate any of the following
acts amounting to violation of domicile.

act of Art. 128

Q: What if in the same problem, the owner of the house
told the police officers, “No you cannot conduct a search,
there is nothing stolen inside my house” The police officers
obliged, they were going to leave the house, obeying the
order of the owner. However, on their way out, before they
could go out, they saw near the door, a table and on top of
it, there were drug paraphernalia, contraband. And so, they
seized and confiscated the contraband and then thereafter
they leave the house. Are they liable for violation of
domicile? Are the evidences confiscated admissible against
the owner?
•
But he did not leave the house, although the
owner of the house asked him to leave. Is he
liable?
• Yes. He is liable for unjust vexation.
(Nangiinislangsiya)
A: They are not liable of violation of domicile.
When they were told not to conduct the search,
they did not conduct the search and they were
about to leave, therefore, not liable for violation of
domicile. But they confiscated the drug
paraphernalia that they saw. Yes, the confiscated
drug paraphernalia were admissible against the
owner because they were contraband. They are
illegal per se. And the police officers saw them
without conducting the search, they saw them
inadvertently. Even without conducting the search,
the police officers would see contraband,
narcotics, in their presence, in their plain view,
they are mandated by law to seize and confiscate
• Although he did not the house, he cannot
be liable for violation of domicile
because his act does not constitute
the acts prohibited by Article 128.

Q: The door of the house was closed, but it was not locked.
A police officer without a search warrant opened the door,
realizing it was not locked, entered the house and went up
to the sala intending to conduct the search. Before he could
conduct the search, the owner of the house saw him, and
told him to leave and he left. Is he liable for violation of
domicile?
A: Yes. He is laible for violation of domicile.
Even if he left the said place upon being told to do
CRIMINAL LAW 2
the same under the plain view doctrine. So in this
1.
2.
3.
It is required that it is for one specific offense.
There must be probable cause
The probable cause must be determined personally by
the issuing judge
The said probable cause was determined by the
issuing judge personally through searching questions
and answers in writing, under oath or affirmation as the
testimony given by applicant of the said search warrant
or any witnesses he may produce.
The applicant of the search warrant and his witnesses
must testify only as to facts personally known to them
The said search warrant must specifically state the
place to be searched and the place to be seized.
case, these drug paraphernalia where under the
plain view and therefore under the obligation to
seize and confiscate them and these are
admissible as evidence against the owner of the
house.
4.

Q: What if a police officer was conducting a surveillance of

X, a well-known drug pusher, so he was always within the
vicinity of the house of X. One time, it was the birthday of
X, the gate of the house was open, and the door of the
house was opened. The police officer disguised himself as
one of the guests and he entered the house together with
the flow of the guests. His intention was to conduct a
search. He was already about to conduct the search when
the owner of the house recognized him. The owner of the
house came up to him. “I know you, you are a police officer.
Get out of my house right now” and he left. Is he liable for
violation of domicile?
5.
6.

-
If any of these requisites is wanting, then the said
search warrant is illegally procured. It is procured
without just cause
A search conducted by virtue of a search warrant
illegally procured without just cause is a kin to a search without a search warrant.
-
A: No, he is not liable for violation of domicile.
The entry was done surreptitiously, secretly,
candidly, he was in disguise. It was not against the
will of the owner because the gates and the door
were open. He did not conduct the search
because the owner saw him before he could do
so. The entry was done surreptitiously. He was
discovered and ordered to leave, and he left.
Therefore, he is not liable for violation of domicile
•
However, upon being discovered and ordered to
leave and stayed in the house.
• Here, he is not liable for violation of
domicile.

•
Under Articles 129 and 130, there is still violation of
domicile despite the public officer or employee is
armed with a search warrant.

Q: What if the police officer was armed with a search

warrant, he procured the search warrant illegally without
just cause. The police had an enemy, B, then proceeded to
a judge to issue a search warrant testifying under oath, the
he is positive under his surveillance that B was in
possession of an unlicensed firearm inside his house. The
judge believed the police and issued a search warrant
against B. The police officer is now armed with a search
warrant, and went to the house of B and showed it to B. B,
upon reading the search warrant, knew it was maliciously
procured, it was procured without just cause. Should B
allow the police officer to conduct the search?
A: Yes. Even if the said search warrant was
procured without just cause, the police officer
must be allowed to enter and conduct the search,
because of the so-called, REGULARITY OF
PERFORMANCE OF DUTY on the part of the
judge in issuing the said search warrant. He is
armed with a search warrant issued by the judge
and therefore, he must allow him to enter his
house and to conduct his search.

ARTICLE129 – SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY

OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE
LEGALLY OBTAINED
Prohibited acts – violation of domicile is
committed through:
•
What now would be the remedy of the owner
of the house?
•
• The owner of the house has the following
remedies:
I. By procuring a search warrant without just
 cause
1.
He can file a motion to quash the
said warrant
• When a public officer or employee
conducts a search and the search
warrant was an illegally procured
search warrant. It was procured
without just cause.
2.
He can file a motion to suppress the
evidence that have been confiscated
inside the house.

• In addition to these motions, he can file a

case of violation of domicile against
the said public officer who conducted
the search. Violation of domicile under
Art. 129 because he procured the said
search warrant without just cause.
SEARCH WARRANT – is an order in writing, issued in the
name of the People of the Philippines, signed by a judge
and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search
for personal property described therein and to bring to court

• So in other words, the said police officers

must be allowed to enter and allowed
to conduct the search and the owner of
the house shall have abovementioned remedies thereafter.
the particular things to be seized.
Before a search warrant may be issue, the following
are the requisites to a valid search warrant:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

unnecessary severity in executing a search

warrant legally procured

is stated in the search warrant and the actual facts

II. By exceeding his authority or by using
of the case to be searched, the have to go back to
the judge that issued the said search warrant and
they have to ask or move for the amendment of
the said search warrant.

•
A search warrant is valid only for a period of 10
days from the date of its issuance appearing on
the search warrant.
Q: What if the third punishable act under Art. 129
amounting to the violation of domicile, when the public
officer or employee exercised excessive severity in the

ILLUSTRATION:
implementation of the said search warrant.
A search warrant was dated Dec. 1, a police officer
received it on Dec 3. The search was conducted Dec. 13.
The said search warrant is already invalid.
What if a search warrant is issued against X, the
police officers went to the house of X, upon reaching the
house of X, they showed the warrant to X and he allowed
them to enter. The search warrant said that they could
search for dangerous drugs, particularly, shabu. In
searching for shabu, they turned upside down and
deliberately destroyed each and every furniture and
appliance inside the house of X. When the wife of X saw
this, she told the police officers to stop, but she was
slapped twice. she then suffered less serious physical
injuries. In deliberately destroying the furniture and
appliances of X, the public officers committed malicious
mischief. In slapping the wife, they committed less serious
physical injuries. What crime/crimes would you file against
the police officers?
•
When they conducted the said search on Dec. 13,
they already exceeded the authority in the said
search warrant. Therefore, they are liable of

violation of domicile under Article 129.

Q: What if the said search warrant says that they could
conduct the search, anytime of the day. They conducted
the search at night time.
A: They are liable of violation of domicile under
Article 129 because they exceeded the authority

in the said search warrant.

A search warrant may only be conducted at day time. It
may only be implemented at day time, EXCEPTIONS:
A: You have to file 3 cases:
•
When there is a specific order in the
search warrant stating that if can be
conducted at anytime of the day or night.
Absence of such order in the said search
warrant, a search warrant can only be
implemented at day time.
1.
Violation of domicile – because they
exercised excessive severity in the
implementation of the said search warrant.
They need not destroy the property. They
need not slap the wife. All of these are
excess of the search warrant.
•

•
Therefore they should be filed in
violation of Art. 129, violation of
domicile, for exercising excessive
severity.
Q: What if a search warrant was issued against X, the
place to be search is located at 123 valentiono St. They
police went there. The house was owned not by X, but by
Y. So they look for the house of X, the house of X was 321
valentino St. They presented a search warrant to X. X said,
“you cannot conduct a search inside my house. The
address in the search warrant is 123 valentinost. and my
address is 321 valentinost. Nevertheless, the officers
conducted the search and they found the illegal items
inside the house. Are the police officers liable of violation of
domicile? Are the confiscated admissible evidence against
the owner?
1.

2.
Malicious mischief – for destroying the
furniture and appliances
less serious physical injuries – for slapping
the wife

•
Are you going to file all 3 cases or is it absorbed and
must be file within the court?
Violation of domicile cannot absorb malicious
mischief nor less serious physical injuries.
•
•
Although in reality, these two are merely the
manifestations of the excess in the
implementation of the said search warrant, they
cannot be absorbed, they cannot be complex.
Under Art. 129, he expressly prohibits such
absorption and such complexity of crimes
Under Article 129, the liability for violation of
domicile shall be in addition to the liability
attaching to the offender for commission of any
other crime. Therefore, if aside from violation of
domicile, Another crime is committed by the
police officers, they had to be charged with all
these cases. Art. 129 prohibits the complexing
of a crime. It also prohibits the absorption of
this crime, therefore all 3 cases must be filed
against the said police officers.
A: The officers are liable for the violation of
domicile. When they conducted the said search,
on a house that has a different address from that
said search warrant, they exceeded their authority
in the said search warrant. The search warrant is
so worded, expressly, as to the thing or place to
be searched. The police officer cannot exercise
discretion. They have to follow what is stated in
the search warrant. The moment they did not
follow what is stated in the search warrant, then
•

they exceeded the authority.

•
In that case, when there is variance between what
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

ARTICLE130 – SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT

WITNESSES

By conducting a search in the absence of the

owner of the house, or any member of his
family, or two witnesses residing in the same
locality

ARTICLE131 – PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND

DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS
•
This is committed by a public officer or employee
who commits any of the following acts:
•
Prohibited act:
I.
I.
By prohibiting or by interrupting, without
legal ground, the holding of a peaceful
meeting, or by dissolving the same. (any
peaceful meeting)

II.
By hindering any person from joining any
lawful association or from attending any
of its meetings.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if under Article 130, violation of domicile is
committed when the search was conducted in the absence
of the owner of the house, or any member of his family or
two witnesses residing from the same locality.
III.
By prohibiting or hindering any person
from addressing, either alone or together
with others, any petition to the authorities
for the correction of abuses or redress of

A search warrant was issued against X and the police

officers went to the house of X. They showed the search
warrant to X and they were allowed inside to conduct the
search. In conducting the search, the search was
witnessed by 2 barangay tanods who came with them, who
arrived with them in the house of X. in the conduct of the
search, they told the owner of the house, X, that his wife
and his two children to remain in the sala while they
conduct the search inside the bedroom of X. In conducting
the search in the bedroom of X, the search was witnessed
by 2 barangay tanods and they found 2 plastic sachets of
shabu underneath the pillow inside the bedroom of X. Are
the police officers liable of violation of domicile under Article
130? Are the evidence seized admissible against the
owner?
grievances.
•
For the crime to arise, it is necessary that the meeting
that was prevented, interrupted or dissolved must be a
peaceful meeting and it must be for any lawful
purpose. If the meeting is not a peaceful meeting or if
the meeting is not for lawful purpose, a public officer or
employee has all the rights to prevent, interrupt or

dissolve the said meeting.

This is in the exercise of the freedom of speech,
freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. However,
these 3 freedoms are not absolute. The Supreme Court has
enjoined the power of the State to regulate these meetings

through permits.
A: The police officers are liable of violation of
domicile under Article 130.
Before any of these peaceful meetings for a lawful purpose
may be held in a public place, there must be a permit
coming from the local authority of the place. The permit is
only to regulate the said meeting and not to prohibit it.
Regulate as to the time, place and to the date, so that the
Article 130 provides for an hierarchy of witnesses
who must be present in the conduct of the search.
The law says it must witnessed by the owner of
the house, it is only in the absence of the owner of
the house that it must be witnessed by any
member of his family. It is only in the absence of
the owner of the house or any member of his
family that there must be 2 witnesses residing
from the same locality.

public would not be in inconvenience.

ARTICLE132 – INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS
WORSHIP
ELEMENTS:
1.

2.
This is committed by an offender who is again
a public officer or employee.
Then there is a religious ceremony or
manifestations of any religion are about to
take place or are going on.
In the problem, the owner of the house was
there, the members of his family were there
but, they were not allowed to witness the said
search. Therefore, the said search was
conducted in violation of Article 130 and any
evidence confiscated will be inadmissible
against the owner of the house for being fruits
of poisonous tree under the exclusionary rule in
3.
That the offender prevents or disturbs the
said religious worship or religious ceremony.
•
If the offender makes us of violence or threats in
committing the crime, such use of violence or
threats would not constitute a separate and
distinct charge. Rather it is considered as an
aggravating or qualifying circumstance which
would mean an imposition of a higher penalty.

Political Law
GALVANTE VS. CASIMIRO

The Supreme Court says,

“There is no such crime as illegal search. So, what
is prohibited only the searching of the dwelling under Article
129. But, in case of search under vehicle or any other
places, there is no such thing as illegal search. The remedy
is to file an action for damages, a civil action for damages.”
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is a barrio fiesta and the priest is about
to celebrate the mass. Here comes X and he went to the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
priest and point the gun to the priest. Then the priest was
ritual, faith or he attempts to damage
the object of veneration of a certain
religion. The law says “notoriously
offensive”, according to Reyes, it
means that it is offensive to all
kinds of religion. If the same thing
would be done to any religion they
will also be offended.
about to celebrate the mass. At first the priest did not mind
him. But X intentionally pointed the gun to the head of the
priest and said, “I will kill you if you will celebrate the mass!”
So the priest did not celebrate the mass and all the faithful
went out of the church. What crime if any is committed by
X?
A: X is liable for interruption of religious
worship under Article 132. What about the fact
that he pointed a gun at the head of the priest?
Would it constitute a separate and distinct crime of
grave threats? It will not. The fact that threats
were employed in the commission of the crime
would only mean the penalty will be imposed in its

3.
That the acts must be notoriously offensive to
the feelings of the faithful.
•
The third element requires that the
said acts notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful can be
committed only (1) in a place
devoted to religious worship, or (2)
during the celebration of any
religious ceremony. The law uses
the word “or” therefore, if the act is
done in a place devoted to religious
worship, it is not necessary that
there be a religious ceremony
ongoing. Because it can either be
with or without a religious ceremony
for as long as the place is devoted
for religious worship.
maximum period.
It would be considered an
aggravating circumstance in committing the crime
of interruption of religious worship. BUT, IT WILL
BRING ABOUT A SEPARATE AND DISTINCT
CHARGE FOR GRAVE THREATS OR EVEN
UNDER LIGHT THREATS.

ARTICLE133 – OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS

ELEMENTS:
1.
Committed by a public officer or employee or
a private individual.
•
The first element provides for the
offender. The offender may be a
public officer or employee or a
private individual. This is the only
crime under Title Two where the
offender can be a private individual.
From Article 124 to Article 132 under
Title Two, the offender can ONLY be
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if X (A private individual) entered a catholic
church after that the tabernacle was opened and he took
out the chalice and inside the chalice was the host which
was being received by Catholics during communion. He
poured the host in the floor then he destroyed them, spit on
them and stepped on them. Is he liable under Article 133?
A: YES. The act he performed is notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the Catholics. If the
same act is done to the object of veneration of the
Buddhists or if the same act is done to the object
of veneration of the Muslims, they will also be
offended. Therefore, it is notoriously offensive to
the feelings of the faithful because even if it is
applied to other religions they would be offended
too. And it was done in a place devoted to
religious worship because it is done inside the
a public officer or employee.
The
only exception is Article 133,
offending the religious feelings
wherein the offender can either be a
public officer or employee or a
private individual. The reason is,
whoever may be the offender, a
public officer or employee or a
private individual, there will be the
same offense made on the feelings
church even if no religious ceremony is ongoing.
of the faithful.
2.

The said offender performs acts (1) in a place

devoted to religious worship, or (2) during the
celebration of any religious ceremony.

Q: What if inside the PICC there was this art exhibit

ongoing and one artist, this was a controversy before right?
There was this picture of Jesus Christ and on the picture of
Jesus Christ he put a representation of a penis on his face.
Is the said artist liable under Article 133 offending the
religious feelings?
•
The second element requires that
the offender performs acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings
of the faithful. Acts notoriously
offensive to the feelings of the
faithful are those acts directed
against their religious dogma, ritual,
faith of the religion, or mocks,
ridicule, or scoffs of the said dogma,
A: NO. He cannot be liable for offending
religious feelings under Article 133.
Because
the PICC is not a place devoted for religious
worship and the art exhibit is not a celebration of a
religious ceremony. Therefore, since the last
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
element is not present even if it offends religious
feelings, he cannot be held liable under Article 133
ARTICLE134-A – COUP D’ETAT
ELEMENTS:

for the absence of the 3

rd
element.
1.

2.

3.
That the offender is a person or persons belonging
to the military or police or holding any public office
or employment;

That it is committed by means of a swift attack

accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth;
That the attack is directed against duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or
any military camp or installation, communication
networks, public utilities or other facilities needed
for the exercise and continued possession of
power;
TITLE THREE
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER (Articles
134 – 160)

ARTICLE134 - REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

ELEMENTS:
1.

2.
That there must be (a) public uprising, and (b)
taking arms against the Government
That the purpose of the uprising or movement
is either –
to remove from the allegiance to said
Government or its laws:
the territory of the Philippines or
any part thereof; or
any body of land, naval or other
armed forces; or
4.
That the purpose of the attack is to seize or
diminish state power.

a.
•
Committed by any person or persons belonging to the
military or police or holding any public office or
employment, with or without civilian support, carried
out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the
Philippines for the purpose of seizing or diminishing
1.
2.
b.
to deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of any their
powers or prerogatives.
•
The essence of COUP D’ETAT is a swift attack directed against the duly constituted authorities, with or without civilians.
•
-
The essence or the gravamen of REBELLION is :
The armed uprising against the Philippine
Government. So it is a public uprising with the taking
up of arms. AN ARMED PUBLIC UPRISING.
REBELLION
COUP D’ETAT
•
In case of Rebellion, it can be committed by any
person, or with a participation of the public.

Essence – an Armed Essence – swift attack

public Uprising against the against the duly constituted
THE LEADERS - Any person who
(a) promotes
Government
authorities
(b) maintains or

Crime of the Masses, it It can be committed with or

involves a multitude of without the participation of
(c) heads a rebellion or insurrection
people
the public because it says,
with or without civilian
support, provided it has
been committed by any
member of the military, the
police or those holding
THE PARTICIPANTS – Any person who
(a) participates
(b) executes the commands of others in rebellion or

insurrection
public
office
or
employment.
Purpose – Overthrow the Purpose – only to diminish
Government of the state power, to destabilize
Philippines and replace it the government, not
with the Government of the entirely to overthrow the
Rebels
government.
Can only be committed by Can be committed not only
means of force and by means of force and
violence
violence but also by means
of intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth

THE LEADERS - Any person who

(a) leads
(b) directs or

(c) command others to undertake a coup d’etat

 CRIMINAL LAW 2
THE PARTICIPANTS – Any member of the Government
who
(a) participates
(b) executes the commands of others in undertaking a coup
crime such as murder, if the commission
of the crimes was done in furtherance of
Rebellion. Therefore, it is necessary that
there must be evidence shown in what
way the said killing has promoted,
fostered the idea of the Rebels. Absent
any connection with the commission of
the common crime and the furtherance of
rebellion, the appropriate charge is only
murder, homicide, arson or physical

d’etat
Any person who is not in the Government service who
(a) Participates
(b) Supports
(c) Finances
(d) abets or

injuries as the case maybe.

A: In the case, the proper charged would be
murder. There was no evidence showing in what
way the said NPA has promoted the ideas of the
Rebels in killing of the said police officer. Absent of
that evidence, it would be a charge of murder and
not rebellion.
Rebellion is a continuing crime. Therefore, these
NPA who rebelled against the Government, to
overthrow the Government, that one time uprising
is sufficient, they are already considered as rebels

(e) aids in the undertaking of a coup d’etat

•
What if common crimes are committed in the
course of Rebellion?
•
Common crimes committed in furtherance of,
incident to or in connection with Rebellion are
considered as ABSORBED in the crime of
Rebellion – known as the THEORY OF
ABSORPTION IN REBELLION.

THEORY OF ABSORPTION IN REBELLION

because it is a continuing offense.

•
Whenever in the course of committing rebellion,
murder, homicide, arson, physical injuries, other
common crimes are committed, and these
common crimes are in furtherance to, incident to,
in connection with Rebellion is considered as
absorbed in the crime of Rebellion. Therefore,
only one charge of Rebellion should be charged
against the said offender.
GONZALES v ABAYA
Senator Trillanes and company was charged with 2 crimes,
coup d’etat in the RTC of Makati and the violation of articles
of war, particularly acts of unbecoming of an officer and a
gentleman filed before the military court. While the case
was pending in the RTC of Makati, the lawyer filed a
petition, a motion, saying that the violation of the articles of
war should be absorbed by the case filed before the RTC of
Makati. Can Coup d’etat absorb the violations of article of
war?
The Supreme Court ruled in the NEGATIVE.
According to the Supreme Court, for the theory of
absorption to apply, it is necessary that both
cases must be heard or may be heard before
the same civilian court.

ENRILE v SALAZAR
Senator Juan Ponce Enrile was charged with the Following
crimes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
charged with Rebellion
charged with multipleMurder
Multiple frustrated murder
•
•
violation of PD 1829 – obstruction of Justice because
he harbored or concealed then Colonel Gregorio

Honasan.
•
In this case, the coup d’etat must be heard in a
civilian court, RTC of Makati, whereas the
violations of the articles of war can be heard
only before a military court. Therefore, one
cannot absorb the other.
•
What did the Supreme Court say?
•
The Supreme Court said:
“only one charge and it should be rebellion. The
violation of PD 1829, the multiple murder and
multiple frustrated murder are absorbed in
Rebellion under the theory of absorption in
Rebellion.”
The Supreme Court further said that although
violation of PD 1829 is a violation of a special
penal law, still if it is committed in furtherance of
Rebellion, it can still be absorbed in the crime of
•
•
Second reasoning given by the Supreme Court,
for the theory to absorption to apply, it is
necessary that both crimes are punished by the
same penal statute
Third reasoning, violation of the articles of war is
sui generis. It is a kind of its own. Nothing
compares to it. Therefore, it cannot be

absorbed by any other crime.

Rebellion.
ARTICLE136 – CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO
COMMIT COUP D’ETAT, REBELLION OR INSURRECTION
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a police officer was on his way to the office,
suddenly here comes a member of the NPA, he saw the
police officer and shot him. What crime is committed? is it
Rebellion or murder?
•
There is CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT
REBELLION when two or more persons come
into an agreement concerning the commission of
rebellion (to rise publicly and take arms against
the Government to any of the purposes of
•
Rebellion can only be absorbed common
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
rebellion) and decide to commit it.
purposes of sedition can either be political in nature or
social in nature.

There is PROPOSAL TO COMMIT REBELLION

when a person who decides to commit rebellion
proposes its execution to another person it is
necessary that the other person would not agree,
if that person agree, then it is already conspiracy
to commit rebellion
Conspiracy is a bilateral act which involves two or
more persons, whereas proposal is a unilateral act
only one person decides to commit the crime and
he proposes its execution to another person.
•
The purpose of sedition is not to overthrow the
government but to go against what the
government wants to implement. To go against a
new law, an administrative order or public officer
or employee.
•

•
It is a disturbance, a commotion against the lawful
command of the authority.
The rallies that you see everyday, the rallies
against a new law to be implemented, they are
considered as ordinary protest or rallies, but the
moment they are carried outside of legal methods,
by means of force and violence, they will become
•
There is a conspiracy to commit coup d’etat the same
way of committing it. Also the proposal to commit coup
d’etat.

ARTICLE138 – INCITING TO REBELLION OR

INSURRECTION

Inciting to Rebellion is a crime under the Revised Penal Code.

to be a seditious act.
•
So, sedition is like any other rally, it only becomes
seditious because there is the public uprising, done
tumultuously, by means of force, violation or any other means outside of the legal method.
ELEMENTS:
1.

2.
3.
It is committed by any person who does not take
up arms or is not in open hostility with the
Government
he incites others to uprise for any of the purposes
of rebellion (incite others to the execution of any of
the acts of rebellion)
by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, banners or other representations
tending to the same end.
REBELLION
SEDITION
Both have a public uprising
Objective – Political in Objective – can either be
nature
Political or social in nature
•
There is NO SUCH CRIME AS INCITING TO COUP
D’ETAT.
To overthr ow the
Government and to replace
the it with the Government
of the Rebels

SEDITION (ARTICLE 139)

ELEMENTS:
That the offender rise (1) publicly, and (2)
tumultuously;
That they employ force, intimidation or other
means outside of legal methods;

1.

2.

3.
ARTICLE141 – CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION
•
There is a crime conspiracy to commit sedition but
not proposal to commit sedition. A proposal to
commit sedition is not a punishable act under the
RPC.
That the offenders employ any of those means to
attain any of the following objectives:

a.

b.
To prevent the promulgation or execution
of any law or the holding of any popular
election
ARTICLE142 – INCITING TO SEDITION
ELEMENTS:
To prevent the National Government, or
any provincial or municipal government,
or any public officer thereof from freely
exercising its or his functions, or prevents
the execution of any administrative order;
To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon
the person or property of any public
officer or employee;
To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against
private persons or any social class; and
To despoil, for any political or social end,
any person, municipality or province or
the National Government of all its
property or any part thereof
1.

2.

3.
The offender is not a participant (does not take
direct part) in the crime of sedition
He incites others to uprise for any of the purposes
of sedition
By means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, cartoon, banners, or other
c.

d.

e.

representation tending to the same end.

•
Inciting to Rebellion or Inciting to Sedition can only
be committed by a person who is not a participant
in the Rebellion or the Sedition, because if he is a
participant in the Rebellion or Sedition, the
appropriate charge is Rebellion or Sedition as the
case may be. Not merely inciting to Rebellion or
Sedition.
•
There is a public uprising again but no taking up of
arms but it is done tumultuously by means of
force, intimidation or any other means outside the
•

legal methods.
•
Therefore, based on the objects of sedition, the

Inciting to Sedition is committed not only by

inciting others for any of the purposes of sedition.
Different acts of inciting to sedition:
I. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the
acts which constitute sedition by means of
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
etc.
II. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend
to disturb the public peace
father, the firearm was recovered. What crime or crimes
would you file against the son?
A: The son is liable of the crime ofPARRICIDE,
for having killed his own father. The use of
unlicensed firearm shall be considered as a
SPECIAL AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
Because as held by the Supreme Court, the use
of the word “murder” is in its generic sense,
therefore it includes any kind wherein the
imposable penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA
TO DEATH such as Parricide.
III.Writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libels
against the Government, or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, which tend to

disturb the public peace.

USE OF UNLICENSED FIREARM (PD 1866 as amended
by RA 8294 otherwise known as the laws on illegal/
unlawful possession, manufacture, dealing in,
acquisition or disposition of firearms, ammunition or
explosives or instruments used in the manufacture of firearms, ammunition or explosives.

Under Section 1 of PD 1866 as amended, it also provided

that a person can only be held liable of illegal possession of
unlicensed firearm provided that no other crime was
committed by the person arrested. It is necessary that no
other crime was committed by the person arrested.

PEOPLE VS. LADJAALAM

The police officers armed with a warrant of arrest
went to the house of WalpanLadjaalam to effect
the warrant of arrest. WalpanLadjaalam, upon
seeing the police officers, fired shots at the
officers. Hence, he was charged with direct
assault with multiple attempted homicide. Aside
from that, he was also charged with illegal
possession of unlicensed firearms. He was
convicted of both crimes before the Regional Trial
Court. On appeal before the Supreme Court, SC
said the illegal possession of firearms case should
be dismissed. He should be acquitted in the said
case because he committed another crime, and
that is, DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MULTIPLE ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE.

See: People vs. Ladjaalam and Celino Sr. vs. People

•
Under Section 1 – If the use of an unlicensed
firearm is in furtherance of, incident to, or in
connection with the crime of rebellion or sedition,
or attempted coup d’état, such use of unlicensed
firearm shall be absorbed in the crime of rebellion,

sedition or attempted coup d’état.

•
Therefore, the use of unlicensed firearm in case of
rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup d’état will
not bring about a separate or distinct charge.
There is only one crime that is rebellion or
sedition, or attempted coup d’état. The use of
unlicensed firearm is not even an aggravating
circumstance. It is absorbed in the crime of
rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup d’état.

•
Under the same Section 1 of PD 1866 as
amended by RA 8294, if the use of an unlicensed
firearm is in the crime of homicide or murder, as
the case may be, the use of unlicensed firearm
shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance. So in the law, it is an
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
•
WHAT KIND OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE?
•
As decided by the Supreme Court in number
of cases, it is a SPECIAL AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE which cannot be offset by
any mitigating circumstance. The Supreme
Court also held that the use of the word
“homicide or murder” under Section 1 is in its
generic sense, therefore, whatever be the
kind of killing for as long as the unlicensed
firearm is used, such use of unlicensed
firearm is considered as a SPECIAL
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So if a son had an argument with his father, in the
course of the argument with his father, the son killed the
•
IS HIS CONTENTION CORRECT?

What about in the case of CELINO, SR. VS. PEOPLE?

In this case, it was election time, there was a
COMELEC gun ban. A person was found in
possession of an unlicensed firearm. Arrested, he
was charged of 2 crimes: (1) violation of the
COMELEC gun ban, and (2) illegal possession of
unlicensed firearms. During the arraignment for
the violation of the COMELEC gun ban, he
pleaded not guilty. However, during the
arraignment for illegal possession of an
unlicensed firearm, he filed a motion to quash the
information. According to him, he cannot be
charged of illegal possession of an unlicensed
firearm because the law says that you can only be
charged of illegal possession of an unlicensed
firearm provided that no other crime is committed
by the person arrested. He said here, he
committed violation of COMELEC gun ban,
therefore, he can no longer be liable for violation
of PD 1866 that is Illegal Possession of
Unlicensed Firearm.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
His contention is wrong because according
committees or divisions thereof, or of any
provincial board or city or municipal council or
board
The offender either disturbs any of such
proceedings or he behaves while in the presence
of such proceedings in such a manner as to
interrupt the proceedings or impair the respect
due it.
So here, it is necessary that the offender, who was
present in the meeting, either he disturbs the said
proceeding, or while being there, he performed an
act which impair the respect due to them or which
interrupted the said proceeding
to the Supreme Court, when the law says
“provided that no other crime is committed by
the person arrested”, the word “committed”
means that there is already a final
determination of guilt – a final conviction of
guilt based on a successful prosecution or a
judicial admission. Therefore, the word
“committed” means he has already been held
guilty beyond reasonable doubt a final
•

judgment.
•

In the case of CELINO SR., he was not yet convicted. He

was only being prosecuted. He was only being charged of
illegal possession of unlicensed firearm. Therefore, both
cases can proceed. He can be charged both of illegal
possession of unlicensed firearms and violation of
COMELEC gun ban. However, the moment he is convicted
of violation of COMELEC gun ban, he should be acquitted
of illegal possession of unlicensed firearm, because this
time, the law says provided that no other crime is
committed by the person arrested. Therefore, a final
conviction is necessary before the illegal possession
of unlicensed firearm may be dismissed or he may be
acquitted of the same. So that is the relation of PD 1866
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: The FREEDOM OF INFORMATION BILLwas on the
committee level. It was votation time. On the right side of
the said place or meeting, there were some observers or
people who were coming from the media. On the left side,
there were ordinary people who do not agree on the
freedom of information bill. It was time to vote for the
passage of Freedom of Information bill, the members of the
committee were voting when suddenly some members of
the media immediately pulled out a placard and shouted:
“YES TO FREEDOM TO INFORMATION BILL!”Are they
liable of any crime?

A: YES. They are liable of disturbance of

proceedings under Article 144. Because while
in the presence of the said meeting, they behaved
in such a manner as to interrupt the proceedings,
to sedition, rebellion and coup d’état.
ARTICLE143 – ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE
MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES
•
•
Punishes acts preventing the meeting of Congress
The crime is committed if there is a projected or
actual meeting of the Congress and the offender,
by means of force or fraud, prevents such meeting
The offender here is any person: he may be a
private individual, public officer or employee
It is necessary that the offender prevents the
meeting of the Congress or any of its committees,
or constitutional committees or any provincial city
or municipal board.

or impair the respect due it.

ARTICLE145 – VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY
IMMUNITY
Punishes violation of parliamentary immunity
•

•
•
•
There are TWO (2) ACTS
PUNISHED IN
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY:
1.
Penalty: Prision Mayor – committed
by any person who by means of
force, intimidation, fraud or threat, or
any other means and by said means,
he tried to prevent any member of
the Congress either from attending
any meeting of the Congress or its
committees or subcommittees,
constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof ,
from expressing his opinions or
casting his vote

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is a meeting of the Sangguniang
Panlungsod. It was being presided by the Vice Mayor as
the presiding officer of the city council. During the session
of the SangguniangPanlungsod, here comes the mayor
together with some police officers. They entered the
session of and disturbed and prevented the said meeting
by force. What crime, if any, was committed?
A: It is the violation of Article 143 – ACTS
TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF
CONGRESS AND SIMILAR BODIES.
•
can be committed by
anyone (private
individual, public officer

ARTICLE144 – DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS

Punishes disturbance of proceedings
In disturbance of proceedings, there is a meeting
of Congress or of any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
or employee)
•
•
2.

Penalty: PrisionCorreccional – can

only be committed by a public officer
or employee who shall, while the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
period, therefore it is below Prision Mayor, hence,
the Congressman cannot be arrested while the

Congress is in regular or special

session, arrest or search any
member thereof, except in case such
member has committed a crime
punishable under this Code by a Q: What if Congressman A is charged with the crime of
penalty higher than prision mayor. attempted homicide. The fiscal found probable cause, the
case was filed in court. The court agrees with the fiscal
• Offender should be
only a public officer or and a warrant of arrest was issued against Congressman
employee and not any A. The warrant of arrest was issued by the judge on
individual because any December 24, the police officers had possession of the
individual cannot make said warrant of arrest on December 25, on Christmas Day.
a search or arrest a While Congressman was inside his house, the police
member of the Congress officers arrived and arrested the said Congressman for
having been charged of the crime of Attempted Homicide.
• It is necessary that at The penalty for Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional
the time of the arrest, the because under Article 249, the penalty for Homicide is
member of the Congress Reclusion Temporal and the attempted is two degrees
must be in its regular or lower, one degree is Prision Mayor, two degrees lower is
special session. Prision Correcional, therefore, the penalty to be imposed
in this Attempted Homicide is Prision Correcional. So the
• Likewise, it is necessary police officers armed with a warrant of arrest went inside
that the said member of the house of the Congressman and arrested him on
Congress has committed a Christmas Day, December 25, are the police officers liable
crime which is not for violating parliamentary immunity under Article 145?
higher than Prision Mayor.
A:YES, they are liable for violation of
Parliamentary Immunity. Because during Christmas
break or during Holy week break or any other kind of
ILLUSTRATION: break, Congress is still in its regular session. Because as
stated in Political Law,in Constitution, when does Congress
Q: How about in the case of Panfilo Lacson?
start? 4th Monday of July, that is when the President
states his SONA. When does Congress ends? 30 days
before the start of Congress. Therefore, during Christmas
break or during Holy week break or any other break, the
Congress is still in its regular session. Any arrest of a
member of Congress during this time, if the said member
of Congress has not committed a crime where a penalty
is higher than Prision Mayor, shall be punished as violation
parliamentary immunity under Art. 145.

Congress is in its regular or special session.

A: The case against Sen. Lacson was fortunately

dismissed by the Court of Appeals. But let us say,
it is not dismissed by the Court of Appeals, he was
being charged of double murder – Dacer-Corbito
double murder slay. He went into hiding. Let us
say that he made his appearance. Can he be
arrested even if the Congress is in regular or
special session? YES. Because the crime
committed by him is punishable by a crime
committer higher than prision mayor. It is
punishable by reclusion perpetua. Therefore, had
it not been dismissed by Congress and he
apparently appeared and the Congress is in

ARTICLE146 – ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY

• There are 2 KINDS OF ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY:

I. Any meeting attended by armed persons for the

purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable
under this Code

regular or special session, he could be arrested.

A: YES,they are liable for violation of parliamentary immunity under the second. Because at the time the Congress is in its regular
session and they arrested the said Congressman, Libel under Article 355 is punishable only by Prision Correcional in its minimum and medium

Q: What if a Congressman is charged with the crime of libel

before the RTC. The RTC issued a warrant of arrest
ELEMENTS:
against the Congressman. The police officers armed with a
warrant of arrest went inside the walls of Congress and 1. That there be a meeting, a
they arrested the said Congressman. Are the police officers gathering or group of persons,
liable under this Article? whether in fixed place or moving

2. The meeting is attended by

armed persons

3. The purpose of the meeting

is to commit any of the crimes
punishable under the Code
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
• In case of illegal assembly, the organizers or
leader of the meeting will be criminally liable,
as well as the persons merely present in the
said meeting.
II. 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 agents

ELEMENTS:
• Under Article 146, first paragraph, last
1. There is a meeting, a gathering or
group of persons, whether in fixed place
or moving

2. The audience, whether armed or not,

is incited to the commission of th crime
of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition or direct assault
ARTICLE147 – ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
WHAT ARE ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS?
• The said gathering of
men or men, may or 1. Associations totally or partially organized for the
may not be armed. It is purpose of committing any of the crimes
not required that they punishable under the Code
be armed. Provided 2. Associations totally or partially organized for some
that the audience purpose contrary to public morals
where incited to commit
treason, rebellion, or • In case of illegal associations, it is necessary that
insurrection, sedition or there be a formation of a group, not merely a meeting
assault upon a person and in the said association, not only the members of the
in authority or his agents association should be penalized, but also the founders,
directors and president of the said association or
organization should be held criminally liable.

sentence – it is provided that persons who are

merely present at the meeting shall be
punished by Arresto Mayor, unless they are
armed, the penalty shall be Prision
Correcional, therefore, whether you are armed
or not, you can be held criminally liable for
illegal assembly, it will only differ in the penalty.
o
o
If you are armed - Prision Correcional
Not armed - Arresto Mayor (lower)

ILLEGAL
ASSEMBLY
ILLEGAL
ASSOCIATION
 the purpose will
always be a violation
under the RPC. Even
under the second
mode – inciting to
commit treason,
rebellion, or
insurrection, sedition
or assault upon a
person in authority or
his agents
the purpose of the
association may be for
purpose of committing
crimes violating the
RPC or even in
violation of special
penal laws, provided
that it is in violation of
special penal law, it
must be against public
morals
Necessary that there
is an actual meeting
or assembly
Not necessary that
there be an actual
meeting
Act of forming or
organizing and
membership in the
association are the acts
punished
Meeting and the
attendance at such
meeting are the acts
• In case of illegal assembly, it is only
necessary that there be a meeting, the
meeting must be attended by armed persons,
under the first mode. In here, when it says
“armed persons”, it is not required that all
those persons present in the meeting must be
with arms. It suffices that one, two or more, or
some of them would be with arms.

• When we say “arms,” it does not only mean

firearms, it refers to any things, knives, stones,
anything which can cause violence or injury to
another person.

• It is necessary however, that the purpose of

the meeting is unlawful – that is to commit any
of the crimes punishable under the RPC.

• Under the second mode of committing illegal

assembly, again there is a meeting, and there
is no requisite that those in attendance must
be armed, therefore, they may or may not be
with arms. But it is requires for the crime to
arise that the audience must be incited to
commit treason, rebellion, or insurrection, sedition
or assault upon a person in authority or his agents.
Otherwise, the crime will not arise.

punished
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
those who are not armed. Prision Correcional – if
they are armed
Q: So what if A, B and C gathered 20 persons and proposed
to them the idea of committing simultaneous bank robbery all
over Metro Manila, so they will commit robbery in 4 banks
simultaneously. So these 20 men agreed to the said commission
of bank robbery, and after they have come to the agreement,
here comes the police, the police got a tip from an informer,
the police arrived and they were all arrested. What crime or
crimes if any should they be charged of?
A:They could not be charged of any crime.
There is no such thing as conspiracy to commit
robbery. Because in robbery, robbery is only a mode
of committing the crime, it is not a crime by itself,
unlike in case of treason, rebellion, there is such a
crime of conspiracy to commit treason, conspiracy
to commit rebellion, and they are punished by such
acts. There is no such crime as conspiracy to commit
robbery. So here, conspiracy is a mere preparatory
act which is not yet punishable by law. For them to be
punished, it is necessary that they must at least
perform an overt act directly connected to bank
robbery. So here, they just merely conspired to
commit robbery without the performance of any overt
act directly connected to robbery. Hence, they are not
criminally liable. What they did is only a preparatory
act not directly connected to robbery.
Q: Why not illegal assembly?
A: Because in the problem, it is not mentioned
that the persons were armed. Also, the crime of
bank robbery is not among the crimes mentioned
in the second act.
Arresto Mayor – if they are not armed
Q: Why not illegal association?
A: Because what they did was only a mere
meeting, it was not an organization or association.
Therefore, they are not liable of any crime.
-
LET US ADD FACTS TO THE PROBLEM.
Q: What if A, B and C gathered 1000 men and women.
Their intention was to incite the people to uprise against
the government to overthrow the present administration.
These 1000 men and women arrived in the said
designated place. These 1000 men and women were
arranging the chairs when suddenly here comes the police
officers who got a tip about the said meeting.The police
officers immediately arrested A, B and C and the 1000
men and women. What crime or crimes if any may these
1000 men and women be charged of?
A: They have not committed any crime. It
cannot be under the first act of illegal assembly
because the said 1000 men and women were not
armed. It cannot be under the second act of
illegal assembly, because for one to be liable
under this act, note that even if not all of them
need not to be armed, it is required that the
audience must be incited to commit treason,
rebellion, or insurrection, sedition or assault upon
a person in authority or his agents. Here the
intention of A, B and C is to incite them to
commit rebellion, BUT there was no statement
in the problem that they were indeed incited to
commit rebellion. In fact, they were just
arranging the chairs, the meeting was only
about to begin. Therefore, they have not yet
committed any crime.
Q: What if the jueteng lords of Southern Tagalog gathered,
they gathered in Batangas. So their purpose was to define
ways and means to propagate jueteng considering that the
government would not want to legalize jueteng, their
decision was define ways and means to propagate jueteng
by using minors, those 15years of age or below as kubrador
in the case of jueteng, so that was the purpose of their
meeting. In the said meeting, they elected their would- be
president, vice president, treasurer, etc. So they formed an
organization, an association and they said that at the end of
the month, they would meet and define ways and means to
propagate jueteng. The police officers arrived and they were
all arrested. But they are not with arms, it is not mentioned
that any of them were with arms.
Q: Let us say A, B, and C gathered 20 men – 10 were
armed and the other 10 were not armed. Again, they
conspired and agreed to commit simultaneous bank
robbery all over Metro Manila. After their agreement here
comes the police officers, the police officers arrested them.
Of what crime or crimes may the police officer file against
them?
A:They should be charged of illegal assembly
under the first act. They have the gathering of
men and their purpose is to commit a crime
punishable under the RPC which is robbery and it
is attended by armed persons, even if only 10
were with arms, still it is considered as illegal
assembly. Because the law does not require a
number as to the persons who should be armed.
So, all of them should be held criminally liable.
A, B and C, as leaders or organizers of the said
meeting, are liable for illegal assembly. Those
persons who are armed, the penalty is higher than

A: The crime committed is illegal association

under Article 147. It is an association totally and
partially organized for some purpose contrary to
public morals. Jueteng is in violation of PD 1602,
illegal gambling as amended and it is against public
morals because it has not yet been legalized by
law.
ILLUSTRATION:

ARTICLE148 – DIRECT ASSAULT

• The two forms in committing the crime of direct assault

under Article 148 are:
 I. Without public uprising, by employing FORCE or There is no public uprising
INTIMIDATION for the attainment of any of the
purposes enumerated defining the crimes of
II. Without public uprising, by ATTACKING, by
rebellion and sedition. EMPLOYING FORCE, or by SERIOUSLY INTIMIDATING
or SERIOUSLY RESISTING any person in authority
or any of his agents, while in the performance of
official duties, or on the occasion of such
performance.

• Most popular form of direct assault

a. the territory of the Philippines
or any part thereof; or

b. any body of land, naval, or

other armed forces; or

CRIMINAL LAW 2
3.
•
The intention of the offender is to commit
any of the purposes of rebellion or sedition.
PURPOSES OF REBELLION:
•
1.
To remove from the allegiance to the
Government or its laws:

ELEMENTS:
1.
The offender
a.
b.
c.
d.
Makes an attack,
Employs force,
Makes a serious intimidation, or
Makes a serious resistance
2.
To deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of any of
their powers or prerogatives.

• PURPOSES OF SEDITION:
•
If the offended party is a
person in authority , the
attack or the employment of
force need not be serious
because under Article 148, the
mere act of laying of hands in
the person in authority is
already qualified direct assault.
Therefore, the mere act of
pushing a person in authority is
already qualified direct assault
because the offender already
laid hands upon a person in
authority. Hence, it need not be
serious. However, if the
offended party is a mere
agent of a person in authority, it is necessary that the employment of force must be serious. The reason is that
 in order to show defiance of
law against a mere agent of
person in authority, it is
necessary that the attack or
force employed must be
serious in nature.
3.

1. To PREVENT the promulgation or

execution of any law or the holding
of any popular election;
2. To PREVENT the National Government,
or any provincial or municipal
government or any public officer thereto
from freely exercising its or his functions,
or PREVENT the execution of any
administrative order;

4.
To INFLICT any act of hate or
revenge upon the person or property
of any public officer or employee;
To COMMIT, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons or
any social class;
5.
To DESPOIL, for any political or
social end, any person, municipality,
province, or the National Government of all its property or any part thereof
NOTE: The law says that there is no
public uprising, therefore whenever there
is actual commission of rebellion or
sedition, direct assault can never be
committed because the element of direct
assault in whatever form is that there be
no public uprising, on the other hand, a
necessary element in the crime of
sedition or rebellion is there be public uprising.
•
If what has been done is
intimidation or resistance, to
amount to direct assault, it
must always be serious
whether the offended party is a
person in authority or a mere
agent of a person in authority.
2.
The second element requires that the
assault is against a person in authority or
an agent of a person in authority
ELEMENTS:
1.
•
Who are these so-called persons in
authority? (Art 152)
2.
AIM of the offender is to attain any of the
purposes of the crime of rebellion or any
of the objects of the crime of sedition
1.
Any person directly vested
with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a

The offender employs force or intimidation

 CRIMINAL LAW 2
member of some court or
public reason or whatever
reason, there is always
direct assault. There is
defiance of authority because the person in authority or his agent is actually engaged in the performance of official duty.
But if the person in authority
or his agent is not engaged
in the performance of his
official duty at the time of the
assault, motive on the part of
offender becomes material.
You have to determine the
motive on the part of the
offender. If the motive on the
part of the offender is a
personal vendetta, the crime
committed is murder,
homicide, serious physical
• Who is an agent of a person in
authority? (Art 152, par 2)
injuries or less serious
physical injuries, as the case
may be. But if the motive is
by reason of the authorities’
past performance of his
off icial duty, the crime
committed is still direct
assault.
government-owned and
controlled corporation,
board or commission
A barangay captain and a
barangay chairman
Teachers, professors, or
persons charged with the
supervision of public or duly
recognized private schools,
colleges or institutions
2.

3.
•
4.
Lawyers while engaged in
their professional duties or
while in the act of their professional duties.
•
A person who, by direct
provision of law, by election
or by appointment by
competent authority, is
charged wi th the
maintenance of public order
and the protection and
security of life and property
(e.g. police officer,
councilors). Likewise, it is
stated that any person who
comes to the aid of a person
in authority is deemed an agent of person in authority.
•
The phrase “on occasion of
such performance” means
that the said assault was by
reason of the past
performance of official duty.
So “on occasion” means it is
by reason of the past
3.

The third element provides that at the

time of the assault, the person in
authority is engaged in the performance
of his official duties or the attack was on
occasion of such performance of official
duty.
• Direct assault can be
committed whether the
public officer or employee.

• Direct assault can be committed

whether the public officer or agent
of a person in authority is in the
engaged in the performance of his
official duties or on occasion of
such performance.

• If a person in authority or his

agent is engaged in the
performance of his official
duty at the time of the
assault, regardless of the
motive of the offender, direct
assault will always arise.
Whether there is a personal
vendetta, whether it is a
performance of official duty.
4.
The fourth element provides that the
offender knows him to be a person in
authority or an agent of a person in
authority. So it is that the offender knows
him to be a person in authority because
otherwise, he cannot be said that he
defied the law, he defied the authority. In
the first place, he didn’t know that the
person he is attacking is a person in
authority or an agent of a person in

authority.
5.
The fifth element requires that there be
no public uprising.

QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT

There are three circumstances which will qualify
direct assault:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
1.
When the assault is committed by means of a
weapon;
•
city hall employees. Suddenly here comes X. X went near
the mayor and shot the mayor on the head. The mayor
died. What crime is committed by X?
WEAPON - firearms, knives or any other
A: QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER.
The city mayor was engaged in the performance of his
official duty at the time of the assault therefore it is
direct assault. Because the city mayor was engaged in
the performance of his official duty regardless of the
motive of X, even if it is by mayor’s past performance
of official duty or by reason of personal vendetta,
regardless of the motive of X, the offender, since the
mayor is engaged in the performance of his official
duty, it is direct assault.
Now, the mayor died. Therefore there is a
resulting felony of murder because obviously there
was treachery; therefore, it is direct assault with
murder.
Now, the offender made use of a weapon, he
made use of a pistol gun, a firearm which is a
qualifying circumstance, therefore, the crime
committed is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER.

items which will inflict injury.

2.

3.
When the offender is a public officer or employee;
•
So when a public officer or employee attacks
a person in authority, it is always qualified
direct assault.

When the offender lays hands upon a person in

authority
•
Will only lie if the laying of hands is upon a
person in authority.

Any of these three circumstances will qualify direct assault.

NOTE: The first two qualifying circumstance affects both a
person in authority or agent of a person in authority.
However, the third qualifying circumstance (laying hands
upon a person in authority) will only lie if the offended party
is a person in authority. Mere laying of hands to an agent of
person in authority is not qualified. It will only qualify if the
laying of hands is upon a person in authority.
COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT ASSAULT:
Whenever the crime of direct assault is committed, and
there is a resulting felony (e.g. death, physical injuries), you
always complex it.
Under Article 48, you should always complex it because
from a single act, two or more grave or less grave felonies
had resulted. Under Article 48, Book I, you have to complex
it. So it could be:
(EXAM TIP: the corresponding explanation must
be complete—what is the qualifying circumstance,

what is direct assault, what is a complex crime)

o
o
o
Direct assault with Murder
Direct assault with Homicide
Direct assault with Serious Physical
Injuries
o
Direct assault with Less Serious Physical

Q: What if the city mayor has just attended a Sunday mass.

He and his wife and children were getting out of the church
when suddenly here comes X. X, onboard the motorcycle
went straight to the city mayor and fired at the head of the
city mayor. The city mayor died. It was found that X was a
former employee of the city hall, who was dismissed by the
city mayor because he engaged in an anomalous transaction.
What crime is committed by X?
A:QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER.The city mayor was not engaged in the
performance of his official duty. Since the city
mayor was not engaged in the performance of his
official duty, he is a person in authority, you have
to know the reason, the motive of the offender.
The offender was a city hall employee who was
dismissed by the city mayor, therefore the motive
was by reason of the past performance of the said
person in authority. So it is by reason of the past
performance of his official duty, the attack, the
firing was done on occasion of such performance
of official duty therefore the crime committed is
direct assault.
Injuries
•
But if the resulting felony is only SLIGHT
PHYSICAL INJURIES, you cannot complex it. It is
prohibited under Article 48 because:
1.
It is only a light felony. Under Article 48, you
can only complex two or more grave or less
grave felonies but not a light felony.
Slight physical injury or light felony is
already absorbed in direct assault because
whenever you assault somebody, definitely,
somehow, any injury would happen to him.
That is why it is already absorbed in direct
assault.
2.

The mayor died. Obviously there was treachery

therefore it is direct assault with murder.
The offender made use of a firearm, which is a
qualifying circumstance in direct assault therefore
it is QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT WITH
MURDER.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if the city mayor attended the flag ceremony. It
was a mandate. So there was this flag ceremony attended
by the city mayor. After the flag ceremony, the mayor went
to the platform and was making an announcement to the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
Q: What if in the same problem, here comes X, the mayor
felony. Therefore it is only direct assault not
complex. The said accused laid hands upon the
court interpreter, would you qualify it? No,
because he is mere agent of person in authority.
Therefore the crime committed is only direct
was coming out of the church, X shot the city mayor. Now X
happened to be a former gardener who was dismissed
from the service of the household because he performed a
wrongful act while gardening. Therefore his reason was a
personal vendetta. What crime is committed by X?
ARTICLE149 – INDIRECT ASSAULT
• Indirect assault can be committed only when a
direct assault is also committed
ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority is the victim
of any of the forms of direct assault defined in
Article 148.
2. A person comes to the aid of such agent
3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation
upon such person coming to the aid of the
A: X committed a crime of MURDER. Obviously,
there was treachery on the part of X.

assault.
It is not direct assault because the mayor was
not engaged in the performance of his official duty
and the reason behind the assault was personal
vendetta. Therefore it cannot be said that the
attack was on occasion of such performance of

official duty.
Q: What if the judge has just rendered judgment. After
rendering the judgment, after finding the accused guilty
beyond reasonable doubt, the accused got mad. He
jumped on the judge and he boxed the judge several times.
The court interpreter, the person nearest to the judge,
came to the aid of the judge. This angered the accused.
The accused got mad at the court interpreter and he boxed
the court interpreter as well. Thereafter the security guards
arrived and took away the said accused. The judge
suffered serious physical injuries whereas the court
interpreter suffered slight physical injuries. What crime or
crimes is/are committed by the accused, first against the
judge, and second against the court interpreter?
A: As against the judge, the accused is liable
of the crime of QUALIFIED DIRECT ASSAULT
WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES. The
judge is a person in authority under Article 152.
He was engaged in the performance of his official
duty at the time of the assault therefore the crime
committed is direct assault. It has a resulting
felony, serious physical injuries; therefore it should
be direct assault with serious physical injuries.
The accused in boxing the judge, laid hands upon
 a person in authority therefore it is QUALIFIED
DIRECT ASSAULT WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL

a.

agent.

Q: What if a police officer was manning the traffic and it

was a heavy traffic so the vehicles were stuck. What if one
of the owners of the vehicles got mad at the police officer
and he went straight to the police officer, who at the time
has no pistol, and boxed the police officer. While he was
boxing the police officer a pedestrian saw the incident.
The pedestrian came to the aid of the police officer. This
angered the owner of the vehicle so he, too, boxed the
said pedestrian. The said pedestrian suffered slight
physical injuries while the police officer suffered less
serious physical injuries. What crime or crimes is/are
committed by the said owner of the vehicle against:
b.
The police officer
A: a. DIRECT ASSAULT WITH LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. The said owner of the
vehicle boxed the said police officer. The police
officer is an agent of a person in authority under
Article 152 because he was charged with the
maintenance of public order. The police officer is
in the actual performance of his official duty at the
time of the assault therefore the crime committed
is direct assault. There is also a resulting felony
which is less serious physical injuries, a less grave
felony; therefore we have to complex it, direct
assault with less serious physical injuries. The
offender laid hands upon the police officer,
however, laying of hands will not qualify because
he is a mere agent of person in authority;
therefore the crime committed against the police
officer is direct assault with less serious physical
injuries.
The pedestrian?

INJURIES.
As against the court interpreter, the accused is
liable of the crime of DIRECT ASSAULT. At the
time the court interpreter came to the aid of a
person in authority, who was the victim of direct
assault. Note under Article 152, any person who
comes to the aid of a person in authority is
deemed an agent of a person in authority
therefore, when the court interpreter came to the
aid of the said judge, who was a person in
authority, he became an agent of a person in
authority. And under Article 148, any attack on an
agent of a person in authority is direct assault.
Therefore the crime committed is direct assault.
The said interpreter suffered slight physical injury.
You cannot complex it because it is only a light

(NOTE: an MMDA officer is also an agent of a

person in authority because he is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection
and security of life and property)
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
b. INDIRECT ASSAULT under Art 149. An agent
•
In statcon, when there are two provisions which
of a person in authority was the victim of direct
assault. A person came to his aid who is the
pedestrian. When the pedestrian came to the aid
of this agent of person in authority, he did not
become an agent of a person in authority under
Art 152 because under Art 152, a person would
only become an agent of a person in authority if
he came to the aid of a person in authority. Here,
the pedestrian merely came to the aid of an agent

ARTICLE150 – DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED

BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ITS COMMITTEES OR
SUBCOMMITTTES, BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSIONS, ITS COMMITTEES, SUBCOMITTEES
OR DIVISIONS
of a person in authority who is the police officer.
Therefore, when the pedestrian came to the aid of
the police officer, he did not become also an agent
of a person in authority; as such, the crime
committed is INDIRECT ASSAULT. When the
pedestrian came to the aid of the police officer,
force and intimidation were employed against him
so the crime committed by the owner of the
vehicle against the pedestrian is indirect assault.
are contrary, you reconcile. So to reconcile, Article
149 or indirect assault will only apply if the victim
of direct assault is a mere agent of person in
authority and someone came to his aid, and that
someone was also employed with force and
intimidation.

•
Acts Punished:
I. By refusing, without legal excuse, to obey
summons issued by the Congress or any of
its extensions or any of its standing
committees or subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, its committees,
subcommittees or any other body which has
the power to issue summons.
•
Are you going to complex it to the crime
of slight physical injuries?
•
No, because it is absorbed and it is
•
Under the first act, for the crime to arise,
it is necessary that the offender’s refusal
to obey the summons is without any
legal excuse. If there is a valid reason, a
legal excuse, why the offender didn’t
attend the said committee hearing of the
congress or why he failed to comply
with the said summons or any of the
acts under Art. 150; the crime will not
only a light felony.
Under Article 149, INDIRECT ASSAULT is committed if a
person in authority or an agent of a person in authority
is the victim of direct assault. Any person who came to
his aid and that person was employed with force or
intimidation by the offender.
Why is it in the given problem, when the person
under attacked is a person in authority and when
someone came to his aid, and that someone was
also attacked, the crime committed is direct assault
against that someone. But when the victim of direct
assault is a mere agent of a person in authority,
and someone came to his aid, and that someone
was also attacked, the crime is indirect assault.
The reason is that the Congress
amended Article 152 without correspondingly amending Article 149.
Based on the amendment made by
Congress in Article 152, it is stated that
any person who comes to the aid of a
person in authority is deemed an agent
of person in authority. And if an agent of
a person in authority is attacked, such
attack is under Article 148 which is direct
assault and not indirect assault under
Article 149.
But if the victim of the said direct
assault is a mere agent of a person in
authority, and someone who comes to his
aid will not become an agent of a person
in authority; therefore when he is also
attacked, it will only be indirect assault
•

arise.
II. By refusing to be sworn or placed under
affirmation while being before such legislative
or constitutional body or official.
•
Under the second act the public official or
the person was required to appear in
the said meeting and obey the
summons however, the moment he
appeared in the said meeting, he
refused to be sworn to. He does not
want to be sworn to and he refused to
be placed under affirmation before such
legislative or constitutional body. Art.
150 is still violated.
•
•
III. By refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to
produce any books, papers, documents, or
records in his possession, when required by
them to do so in the exercise of their
•

functions.
IV. By refusing another from attending as a witness
in such legislative or constitutional body.
Under the fourth act punished, the said
offender did not fail to attend in the
summons; he restrained another from
•

under Article 149.

 CRIMINAL LAW 2
attending as a witness. He prevented
another person in attending as a witness
in such legislative or constitutional body
himself and asking him, requiring him, ordering
him to produce the books or to answer any

ARTICLE151 – RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A

PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH
PERSON
Punishes two acts:
I. RESISTANCE AND SERIOUS DISOBEDIENCE
(PAR 1)
ELEMENTS:
1.The person in authority or his agent
questions which would incriminate himself is akin
to making him a witness against himself and it is
unconstitutional.

hearing.
V.By inducing disobedience to a summons or
refusal to be sworn by any such body or
official.
•
NOTE that Congress where it be the
House of Representatives or the Senate
has the power to issue summons
because they have the power to
investigate that is inquiry in aid of
legislation. Whatever be the findings in
the said investigating body, it will be used
in the making of a bill, a proposal. NOTE
that they don’t have the power to file a
case so whatever be the product of their
investigation, they will give it either to the
Ombudsman or to the DOJ. It is upto the
DOJ or to the Ombudsman to file a case
because the purpose of the Senate or
the HOR is only inquiry in aid of
legislation.
a.
is engaged in the performance of official duty; or
b.
gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. Offender resists or seriously disobey
such person in authority or his agent
3. That such resistance or disobedience
will not amount to

b.indirect assault (Art 149); or

c.disobedience to summons
 issued by Congress
a.direct assault (Art 148),
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there is this committee hearing, an investigation
about anomalous transactions entered into by a former
officials of the DENR. While the said official received the
summons, he failed to appear because he was at St.
Lukes. He was confined because he was suffering from
hypertension. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot be held liable because he has a
legal excuse to attend or to obey the summons
issued by the Congress. The moment that there is
a legal excuse, the crime will not arise BUT if his
measure is without any legal excuse NOTE that
aside from violation of Art. 150, he can also be
held liable or cited for contempt by the said
committee of Congress and usually when cited for
contempt, he is placed in detention in the Senate
II. SIMPLE DISOBEDIENCE (PAR 2)
ELEMENTS:
1. An AGENT of a person in authority
is engaged in the performance
of official duty; or
gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. The offender disobeys such order of
the agent
3. Such disobedience is not serious in nature
a.

b.

ILLUSTRATION:

Q: What if the mayor has a project, a cleaning act

operation in order to prevent dengue. So they were
cleaning up the canals. While the mayor was cleaning
up the canals together with other city hall employees,
here comes Mang Pedro who had taken beer and was
a little tipsy. So the went there and was houting and
making noise, disturbing the people who were busy
cleaning up the canals. And so the police officer cleaning
told Mang Pedro to go home because he was disturbing
the cleaning up operation. Mang Pedro, instead of going
home, merely sat nearby the canal being cleaned by the
people. What crime, if any, did Mang Pedro commit?

Blue Ribbon Committee.

Q: He obeyed the summons, he appeared, he allowed
himself to be sworn in however, the moment that the
Senators asked him questions, and he refused to answer
the questions. He said: I invoke my right against self-
incrimination. When he was solely required to produce the
books which were confirmed to be in his possession; He
didn’t want to produce the said books because according to
him, the production of these books would incriminate
himself. Can he be held liable under Art. 150?
A: He cannot. If the answer to any of the
questions or if the conduction of the same will
incriminate the person in the said crime; he has
the right not to do so. Under the Constitution, No
person can be compelled to be a witness against

A : Mang Pedro committed SIMPLE

DISOBEDIENCE UNDER ART.151 par 2.
Art. 151, 2nd paragraph, simple disobedience
is committed when an agent of a person
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

in authority is engaged in the performance of official
duty or gives a lawful order to the offender, that
the offender disobeys and such disobedience is not
of serious nature. In the problem, it was the
police officer, an agent of a person in authority,
who gave the order to Mang Pedro and Mang Pedro
disobeyed him but such disobedience was not
serious in nature because he merely sat nearby the
canal; therefore there was no showing that such
disobedience is serious in nature so the crime
committed is simple disobedience.
A: The following are the persons in authority:
1.Municipal Mayors
2.Division Superintendent of schools
3.Public and private school teachers
4.Teacher-nurse
5.President of the sanitary division
6.Provincial Fiscal
7.Judges
8.Lawyers in actual performance of duties
9.Sangguniang Bayan member
10.Barangay Chairman
Q: Who is an agent of a person in authority?

A: Those who are in charged with:

Q: Is there direct assault with robbery? Let’s say that the • The maintenance of public order; and
city mayor was assaulted and thereafter he took the watch • The protection and security of life and
of the mayor. property
A: No, there is no such crime. The crime
committed is not direct assault with robbery. It is
already robbery with any resulting felony, if there ARTICLE153- TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES
is one.

•
What if the original motive was to assault the city
mayor?
• Acts punished:
I. Causing any serious disturbances in a public
place, office or establishment;
• If the original motive is to assault the
city mayor and not to commit robbery, but the
offender took the watch, there will be two
crimes because the offender already
performed two acts.
•
For the said disturbance to be
considered as a violation of Art 153;
it is necessary that the said offender
deliberately intended to disturb the
said meeting or public place. It was a
planned intentional act.
II. Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions
or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act
is not included in Arts. 131 and 132;
•
NOTE that there is a qualification
made by law provided that the said
interruption or disturbance of public
gatherings, functions and peaceful
meetings must not fall as a violation
under Art 131 or Art 132.
If the original intention was to assault the city
mayor and thereafter he committed robbery,
there will be two acts. Because his intention
was to assault and thereafter he committed
the second act of taking away the personal
property of the city mayor.
In case of DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER
or HOMICIDE, it is considered a complex
crime under Article 48 because based on the
single act performed, two or more grave or
less grave offense was committed. Because
with the single act of boxing, the offender
committed direct assault and serious/less

• If there are two separate and distinct

crimes, there shall be two information that will
be filed to the court. If it is a complex crime,
only one information is filed before the court.
If the intention is to rob, and in the occasion of
the said robbery, homicide, serious physical
injuries, rape, intentional mutilation, arson
was committed, the crime committed under
Article 294 is robbery with homicide, robbery
with intentional mutilation, robbery with rape,
robbery with arson or robbery with serious
physical injuries.

III. Making any outcry tending to incite rebellion or

sedition in any meeting, association or public

place.
IV. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of public order in such place;
•
Whether this making of an outcry or
the displaying of placards or
emblems, it is necessary that such
act of displaying placards or
emblems must be an unconscious
outburst of emotion. It must not be
intentionally calculated to incite
people to rebel or to commit sedition
because otherwise, the crime would
be inciting to rebellion or inciting to
sedition.

serious physical injuries.

ARTICLE152 – PERSONS IN AUTHORITHY AND

AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY
Q: Who are persons in authority?
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

First, In Art 131, the public officer must not be a

•
V. Burying with pomp the body of a person who has
participant in the meeting that he disturb or
interrupted. He must be an outsider, a stranger in
the said meeting. On the other hand, in Art 153,
Second, in Art 131, the mere intention of the
public officer is to prevent a person from freely
exercising his freedom of speech and expression
whereas in Art 153, the intention of the offender is
to disturb public peace and tranquility.

ILLUSTRATION:
the said Public Officer must be a participant, one
been legally executed.
•
When you say legally executed; it
means that the said person has
committed a heinous crime. The
penalty prescribed by law is death
and so he was killed by means of
lethal injection but at present
because of Republic Act No. 9346,
we have no more death penalty.
Death Penalty is prohibited to be

in attendance in the said meeting.

imposed.
•
But in burying with pomp the body of
the person who has been legally
executed; the said person must be
legally executed because the said
person has committed a heinous
crime yet when he was buried he
was buried with such extravagance
as if as he is a hero, as if as the
government has committed a crime
in legally executing him therefore it
causes sympathy arising on the part
of the people hence, it was a
disturbance of public order.
•
If any of these prohibited acts
constituting violation of Art 153 is
committed by more than 3 persons
who are provided with arms or any
means of violence it is said to be
tumultuous therefore there must be
at least four persons who are armed
or provided with means of violence
for it to be considered as tumultuous.
SO WHERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ART
153 AND ART 131 OR 132?
•
Article 153 punishes TUMULTS ANS OTHER
DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER, Article 131
punishes PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS, Article
132 punishes INTERRUPTING OF RELIGIOUS
Q: What if since RH Bill was enacted into law, there was a
huge rally at the EDSA Shrine which was initiated by the
members of the CBCP. They were against this law and
they encouraged the people to file a case before the
Supreme Court questioning the constitutionality of the said
law. At first, the head of the CBCP spoke then after him
another person, a private individual spoke, the head of
the organization spoke and he kept on attacking and
attacking the President. He said that the President bribed
the members of the Congress in order to pass this bill so
he kept on attacking and attacking the President. One of
the police officers, who was assigned to maintain the
peace and order in the place, heard the attacks against
the President. This Police Officer was indebted to the
President, he owed his position to the President. He went
straight to the person talking against the President and
told him to stop. When he didn’t stop, the Police Officer
fired shots in the air and the people scampered away and
the peaceful meeting/gathering was dissolved/interrupted.
What crime was committed by the Police Officer?
A: The crime committed by the Police
Officer is not Art 153 but Art 131. Because
the distinctions lie in this case. First, the said
Public Officer, a Police Officer is not a participant
in the said meeting. He is a stranger, an outsider
in the said meeting. Second, his only purpose is
to prevent the said person in freely exercising his
freedom of speech and expression, it is his right
to express his anger against the President yet the
said person prevented him in exercising such
freedom of Speech and expression therefore the
Police Officer is liable under Art 131 and not
under Art. 153.
AND
FEELINGS
•

For him to be liable under Art 153, let’s say that he

is a public officer, he is a participant in the said
meeting and while participating in the said meeting,
he interrupted the said meeting in order for him to
cause a disturbance of the said meeting. The crime
is Art. 153.
Articles 131 and 132 can only be committed by a
Public Officer. It cannot be committed by a private
individual whereas under Art 153, it can be
committed both by a Public Officer and a private
individual.

•
What if the offender is a public officer and he disturbs a
peaceful meeting. How would you distinguish if it is a
violation of Art 153 or a violation of Art 131?

Q: There was this peaceful gathering, let’s say a

public meeting, a peaceful meeting about the increase
of fares of the MRT and the LRT. One of the participants
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

• It is necessary that any publication has

therein, one of the persons therein went to the platform and
took the mic and then he incite the people, induced the people
to go to the streets, uprise, rebel against the government, to
overthrow the government. What crime was committed?
A: The crime committed was inciting to
rebellion.
contained the real printer’s name. It must
have been anonymous. The publisher, the
printer, the author, must be stated even
at the bottom.
Q: What if the Philippine Daily Inquirer has as its headline:
“KC Concepcion said.. PioloPascual is gay.” So that is the
headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer. It was posted.
KC never categorically stated that Piolo is gay, she only
impliedly stated it but she never categorically stated it. So
the Daily Inquirer published a false news and Piolo Pascual
filed a case in violation of Art 154 against the Philippine
Daily Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer knew that it is
a false news yet they still published it as news.
A: Art. 154 is not violated because whether or
not Piolo is gay it will not endanger public order. It
will not cause damage to the credit or interest of
the state.

Q: What if, he was among the participants. The head of the

meeting, the Public Officer was discussing about the
increase of fares of the MRT and LRT. This person could no
longer control his emotions. Suddenly he stood up and he
said: “buwisitnagobyernonaitonaiinisnako. Dapatnatayong
mag rebeldesagobyernowalangginawakundi increase ng
taxes”. They go and rebel against the government. What
crime was committed?
A: Tumults and other disturbances of public
order. It is just an unconscious outburst of
emotions not an intentionally calculated to incite

people to rebel against the government.


ARTICLE154 – UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF
PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES
Actspunished:
I. 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.
II. By encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
constituted authorities or by praising,
justifying ot extolling any act punished by law,
by the same means or by words, utterances
or speeches.
III. By maliciously publishing or causing to be
published any official resolution or document
without proper authority, or before they have
been published officially.
•
NOTE that in the third act there is
the word Malicious. The offender must maliciously publish or cause to be published any official resolution. If the publication of the official resolution
without official authority or publication was not done maliciously, there was no intent to cause damage,it was not done
maliciously. Art 154 is not violated. It
Q: What if the headline of the Philippine Daily Inquirer
said: “Tomorrow, Megamall will be bombed from a very
reliable source.” That was the headline of the
Philippine Daily Inquirer. The Philippine Daily Inquirer
later on learned that it was false nevertheless; since it
was already there they still published it and distributed
it. Can they be held liable under Art 154?
A: Yes because the said news will
endanger public order. It can cause
damage to the credit or interest of the state.
Imagine Megamall will be bomb, no person will
go to the said place, tourists will not go to the
said place therefore it will endanger public
order and can cause damage to the interest of
the state when the said newspaper published it
despite knowing that it was false news.
Art 154 is violated.
Q: What if members of the CBCP, they are against the RH
Law. They made leaflets,pamphlets and distributed it to all
persons in the church, in market.. Therein is stated:
Anyone who would obey or comply with the RH Bill which
is a Catholic will be ex-communicated. Can they be held
liable of Art 154?
A: Yes because they encouraged
disobedience to the law. It has been enacted
into law and by encouraging the people that they
would be ex- communicated if you will obey it,
then you can be held liable for unlawful use of
means of publication.
is necessary that the said publication
must be done maliciously under the
third act.

IV. 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.
I. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or
other explosives within any town or public
place calculated to cause (which produces)
alarm or danger.

ARTICLE155 – ALARMS AND SCANDALS

• Acts punished:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
II. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari
or other disorderly meeting offensive to
another or prejudicial to public tranquility.

Q: What if in the same problem, it was in a public place, X

went to the said place, he saw his enemy Y. He went near
Y, took out his gun and poked the gun at Y but did not
discharge the said gun. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is other light
threats. NOTE that under other light threats
the offender merely poked the firearm at the
victim without discharging or firing the firearm.
If the firearm has been discharged, 3 crimes may
be committed depending on the intent. It can be
alarms and scandals, illegal discharge of firearms
or attempted homicide or murder as the case
may be.
Q: You have a neighbor, it was his birthday. They rented
a videoke and kept on singing along till 12mn. The guests
already left, the birthday celebrant was the only one left,
it’s already 1:30am and he’s still singing at the top of his
voice with the use of the mic. His neighbors cannot sleep
because of his ugly voice. Everyone in the neighborhood
could hear him and cannot sleep. Can he be held liable
under Art 155 alarms and scandals?

•
Charivari includes a medley of
discordant voices, a mock serenade
of discordant noises made on
kettles, tins, horns, etc. designed to
annoy and insult.
III. Disturbing the public peace while wandering
about at night or while engaged in any other
nocturnal amusement.
IV. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public
places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided
Art 153 is not applicable

ILLUSTRATION:

Q: In a public park, there were so many people here comes

X. X went in the middle of the park and fired shots in the
air. The people were so afraid they scampered away. What
crime is committed?
A: Alarms and Scandals under Art 155. His act

can cause damage to public peace and tranquility.

Q: What if in the same problem, in a public park, there
were so many people and here comes X. X saw his enemy
Y. He took out his firearm, aiming his firearm at Y without
any intent to kill because he knew Y would not be killed and
he discharged the firearm. What crime is committed?
A: The crime committed is illegal discharged

of firearms under Art. 1254.

Q: What if in the same public place, X saw his enemy Y. He
pulled out his firearm with intent to kill, he aimed his firearm
at Y, discharged the firearm but Y was not killed. What
crime was committed?

A: Attempted murder or Homicide as the case

may be.
•
In case of alarms and scandals, the only
A: Yes. He can be held liable under alarms
and scandals because his only intention that
night is to cause a disturbance of public peace
and order.
Q: Let’s say a person was intoxicated. He was drunk. He
was on his way home. He was singing at the top of his
voice. Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: No because it is normal to sing at the top of
his voice.
Q: What if he saw this lead pipe (tubo) and upon seeing
this lead pipe, he would bang all the gates that he would
pass by. Is he liable for alarms and scandals?
A: Yes because his acts caused damage to public
peace and tranquility.

intention of the offender is to cause

damage to public peace and tranquility
that is to cause alarm and danger. That is
his intention.
•
In Illegal Discharge of Firearms under Art
1254 his intention is to threaten the said
person or any other persons. He aimed
the firearm and discharges the firearm
pointing at a particular person absent:
intent to kill. There was no intent to kill, it
is illegal discharge of firearm.
But given in the same problem, he knows
his enemy, pointed the firearm at his enemy but with intent to kill. He discharged the firearm but his enemy was not killed. It is attempted
homicide or murder as the case may be. Since there is an intent to kill on the part of the offender even if the victim was not killed it is still in the
attempted stage.

ARTICLE156 – DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL

ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment.

2. That the offender removes therefrom such persons,

or helps the escape of such person.

• The PENALTY for the crime is QUALIFIED if violence

or intimidation has been used in the commission of the
crime also if bribery is used in delivering prisoners from jail.

Who is the offender?

• The offender is any person. He can be a private

individual or a public officer or employee provided
that he is not the custodian of the said prisoner
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
because if the offender who helped in the escape
of the prisoner from jail is the custodian of the said
prisoner, the crime is under Art 223 Infidelity in the
custody of prisoners because the element of
and concealed him despite the fact that he was an escapee
from a penal institution. What are the crimes committed by
A (the prisoner), B (the friend), jail warden custodian, the
guard of the penal institution, and he friend who harbored
him?
A: A is liable of evasion of service of sentence
under Art 157. He is a prisoner convicted by final
judgment therefore he is liable forevasion of
service of sentence.

Q: What if he is not serving his sentence in Muntinlupa.

Let’s say he is just a detention prisoner. Can he be held
liable for evasion of service of sentence?
breach of trust and confidence reposed on him by
the government.

Who is the prisoner being referred to in delivering

persons from jail?
•
He can be a detention prisoner or a prisoner
convicted by final judgment for as long as he is in
a jail or penal institution.
•
A detention prisoner is a prisoner who is
behind bars but the case against him is
ongoing either because the crime he
committed is a non-bailable offense and
evidence of guilt is strong or the crime he
committed is a bailable offense but he does
not have the enough funds to put up the
A: No. Evasion of service of sentence can only be
committed by a prisoner convicted by final judgment.
•

•
In the given problem, A is convicted by final
judgment therefore A is liable for evasion of

service of sentence under Art 157.

required bail.
The prisoners at the provincial jail, city jail,
municipal jail, they are merely detention
prisoners. They are not yet convicts. They are
only accused, suspects therefore they are
presumed innocent unless and until proven
that they’re guilty of the crime charged. They

are merely detention prisoners.

•
On the other hand, a prisoner that is
convicted by final judgment is one who has
been convicted by the lower court and who
B the friend is liable under Art 156
Delivering prisoners from jail qualified by
the giving of bribe therefore his penalty will
be qualified because he gave bribe money
inorder to help in the escape of his friend. He
will not be liable for another crime of
corruption of public official because the giving
of bribe is considered clearly as a qualifying
or as an aggravating circumstance in
delivering prisoners from jail.
did not appeal his conviction within the period
to perfect an appeal then the judgment
becomes final and executory. He has to serve
the sentence. Or he has been convicted then
he appealed to the higher court within the
period to perfect an appeal and the said
higher court affirmed the said conviction. The
conviction will now become final and
executory so he is now a prisoner convicted
by final judgment. Generally, they are those
who are serving sentence in Muntinlupa.
•
The jail warden custodian who received the
bribed money and allowed A’s escape is
liable under Art 223 infidelity in the
custody of prisoners. Aside from that, he is
also liable for direct bribery because in
case of infidelity in the custody of prisoners,
the giving and receiving of bribe is not a
qualifying or aggravating circumstance
therefore the jail warden custodian will be
liable for 2 crimes; Infidelity in the custody of
prisoners and direct bribery for having
received the bribed money in the amount of

P500,000.00.
The guard at the entrance gate of the penal
institution will be liable for delivering
prisoners from jail. He is not the custodian
and he helped in the escape/removal of the
prisoner from jail. Therefore, he is liable for
delivering prisoners from jail. The fact that he
received bribed money will not make him
liable of direct bribery because in delivering
prisoners from jail, it is only a qualifying
circumstance which will only increase the
•
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: Let’s say A is a prisoner convicted by final judgment. He
is serving his sentence in Muntinlupa. B his friend visited
him. B was a rich man. He planned A’s escape on his
birthday. He did this by talking to the jail warden custodian.
B the friend gave the jail warden custodian P500,000.00.
He gave bribe to the jail warden custodian to allow A his
friend to escape at that night. He also went to the guard at
the entrance gate of the New Bilibid Prison and gave the
guard P100,000.00, also to allow his friend to leave at that
night. That night, A escaped and left the penal institution.
He went to the house of another friend who harbored him

imposable penalty.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•

The friend who harbored and concealed him

The law says, it is a prisoner serving his sentence
which involves deprivation of liberty. It is
necessary that the sentence imposed on him must
involve deprivation of liberty either it is behind
bars or he has been convicted of a crime wherein
the penalty is destierro. Even if the penalty
prescribed is destierro, the moment he enters the
place wherein he is prohibited from entering in the
judgment of the court, he also committed evasion
of service of sentence.
will be liable under PD 1829 that is
obstruction of justice. It is committed by any
person who willfully or deliberately obstructs
or impedes the investigation or the
apprehension of a criminal.
Why not an accessory?
o
ARTICLE158 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS,
EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER CALAMITIES (ART 158)
Because I did not mention in the problem
the crime committed by the prisoner. For
an accessory to the crime, it is necessary
that the crime committed by the prisoner
must be treason, parricide, murder,
attempt to take the life of the chief
executive or is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime. I did not
mention the crime committed by the
prisoner. Therefore his liability is under
•
Destierro under Art 27; Destierro is also a
penalty which involves deprivation of
liberty although partial not complete
deprivation of liberty because the
offender or the convict is not allowed to
enter a place designated in the judgment
of the court. The moment he enters the
said place, he commits evasion of
service of sentence.

PD 1829 Obstruction of Justice.

ARTICLE157 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
(Art 157)
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
That the offender is a convict by final judgment.
That he is serving his sentence which consists in
deprivation of liberty.
ELEMENTS:
3.
That he evades the service of his sentence by
1.

2.
That the offender is a convict by final judgment
who is confined in a penal institution.
That there is a disorder resulting from ----

escaping during the term of his sentence.

•

•
Evasion of service of sentence can only be committed
by a person convicted by final judgment. It cannot be
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
Conflagration
Earthquake
Explosion
Similar catastrophe
Mutiny in which he has not participated

committed by a mere detention prisoner.

PENALTY IS QUALIFIED if such evasion or escape takes
place:
1.
2.
3.

4.
That the offender evades the service of his
sentence by leaving the penal institution where he
is confined, on the occasion of such disorder or
during the mutiny.
That the offender fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
of a proclamation by the Chief Executive
By means of unlawful entry
By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or
floors;
By using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence or intimidation; or
Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.
3.

4.
announcing the passing away of such calamity.
ILLUSTRATION:
• It is required under Art 158 that the prisoner is serving
his sentence in a penal institution.
Q: You often read in the newspapers, heard over the
radios, watch on TV, 5 prisoners escaped from the
Caloocan city jail, 10 prisoners escaped from Palawan
Provincial Jail. Did they commit evasion of service of
sentence?
• In this kind of evasion of service of sentence under Art
158, the crime will arise not upon the act of leaving the
penal institution but upon the convict’s failure to return/
to give himself to the proper authorities within 48
hours. That is only when the crime will arise.

A: No. These persons did not commit evasion of

service of sentence under art 157 because they
are merely detention prisoners. For evasion of
sentence to arise, the prisoner who has escaped
must be a prisoner convicted by final judgment.
Under Art 157, the said prisoner the said prisoner
must be serving which involves deprivation of
liberty and he escapes during the service of his
sentence by evading the service of sentence.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if there was this earthquake, X was a prisoner
convicted by final judgment. Everything was shaking and
because of the earthquake, X escaped the penal institution.
He went to the house of his mother. That night while
watching the television, he saw the president announced/
declared that the calamity had already ceased/passed
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
away. Within 48hrs he returned. What is the effect on his
criminal liability?
A:If the said convict escaped and returned to
the proper authorities within 48hrs; there shall
be a credit or a deduction from his sentence.
There is 1/5 deduction/credit from his sentence.
Under Art 98 this is special time allowance for
loyalty. He was too loyal to the government that
even if he already left the penal institution he still
acceptance in the part of the prisoner granted
pardon. The moment he accepts the
conditional pardon, it means it is incumbent
upon him to comply to all of the strict
conditions. The moment he violate any of the
terms and conditions he commits evasion of
service of sentence because it shows that he
just accepted the conditional pardon so as to
returned; such kind of loyalty must be rewarded.

free himself from taking place behind bars.

Is violation of conditional pardon a substantive

offense or not?
•
Q: What if 48hrs had lapsed, still he did not return. What is
the effect of his criminal liability?
•
It depends. If you will look at Art 159, there
are 2 situations. Under Art 159, if the penalty
remitted by the grant of pardon does not
exceed 6yrs, the moment he violates any of
the conditional pardon, there is a new penalty
imposed upon him that is prisioncorreccional
minimum 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and
4 months. A new penalty is imposed on him
therefore in this case, violation of the
conditional pardon is a substantive offense
because a new penalty is imposed on him.
BUT on the second part of Art 159, if the
penalty remitted is more than 6 years; no new
penalty is imposed on him for having violated
the terms of the pardon. He is only required to
serve the remainder of the sentence. In this
case, violation of the conditional pardon is not
a substantive offense because there is no
new penalty imposed for the commission of
A:There will be an additional penalty imposed
on him. 1/5 on the basis of the remainder of his
sentence but note that it shall not exceed six

months.
Q: There was this earthquake, everything was shaking. He
just hid under the table. He did not leave the penal
institution. He was so loyal to the government that he did
not even think to leave. Will he be given credit?
A:No. Under Art 158 there is no credit to be
given to him. Under Art 98, there is no special
time allowance of loyalty for just hiding under the

table and not leaving the penal institution.

Q: Why those who are loyal to the government and did not
leave the penal institution be not given credit? Isn’t it
unfair?
A: The reason is that prisoners are considered as
accountabilities of the government. It is the duty of
the government to protect the prisoners. In times
of calamities or public disorders, the state cannot
protect these prisoners therefore the State
encourages them to leave inorder to protect
themselves. But important thing is that they show
their loyalty to the government hence they will

the crime.

return.

ARTICLE159 – EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

BY VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON
ELEMENTS:
ARTICLE160 – COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME
DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR
ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense.
2. He committed a new felony before beginning to
serve such sentence or while serving the same.
Who is a quasi-recidivist?
1.

3.
2.
The offender was a convict
He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive
•
A quasi-recidivist is any person who shall commit
a felony after having been convicted by final
judgment before serving his sentence or while
He violated any of the conditions of such pardon
TWO KINDS OF PARDON:
Under Art 160 it is stated that the maximum penalty
prescribed by law shall be imposed therefore it is a
special aggravating circumstance.
criminal liability

1. Absolute Pardon which totally extinguishes the

2.
Conditional Pardon which partially extinguishes
criminal liability.
•
Art 160 is a misplaced article because book 2 is
about felonies and art 160 is a special aggravating
•
Conditional Pardon is said to only partially
extinguishes criminal liability because the said
pardon is subject to strict terms and
conditions. Therefore, there must be an
circumstance.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
3.
That in case of uttering such false or counterfeited

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST (Articles 161 – 189

importers
coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or
ARTICLE161 – COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL
OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS,
FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF
EXECUTIVE

•
When is it committed?
•
A. Counterfeiting (imitation of false coins)
is committed by any person who shall imitate
a genuine and authentic coin making it
appear that it is a true, genuine, and authentic
coin. The offender copies the peculiar design
of the coin and makes a spurious one out of
•
Acts punished:
I.
Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines.
Forging the signature of the President.
II.

III.
Forging the stamp of the President.
it.
•

Art 161 punishes the person who forges the great

seal of the Philippines, signature of the chief
executive and forging the stamp of the chief executive.

Art 161 is the crime when the person is the one who
committed the forgery, but if the offender is not the one
who forges the great seal, signature but he knows that
the document contain a forge stamp, signature of the
President and despite such knowledge that it was a
forgery he makes use of the same, liability is under
162.
ARTICLE162 – USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR
COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP (Art 162)
ELEMENTS:
That the Great Seal of the Republic was
counterfeited or the signature or stamp of the
Chief Executive was forged by another person.
That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or
forgery.
B. Importing false coins is committed by
any person who shall bring into the Philippine
ports any false and counterfeited coins. It is
not necessary for the offender to be liable that
he shall circulate the false coins because
there is a third act of uttering false coins.

•
In case of counterfeited or imitated false coins, it is not

C. Uttering false coins is committed by any

person who shall circulate, give away to
another, pass from one person to another any
counterfeited or false coins.
necessary that the coins be the subject of
counterfeiting must be of legal tender. Even if the coin
is not a gold coin, if the offender copies or imitates or
counterfeits the peculiar design of the said coin; he
becomes liable under Art 163.
1.

2.

3.
ILLUSTRATION:
That he used the counterfeit seal or forged
Q: A is in possession of a coin which was of legal tender
during the time of Marcos in 1972. It was a proven genuine
coin. He copied the said coin and made a spurious one out
of it. Is he liable under Art 163?
A: Yes he is liable for making and importing and
uttering false coins under Article 163.

signature or stamp.
•
Art 162 punishes the person who, despite knowledge
of the forged signature, stamp or great seal of the
Republic of the Philippines still he makes use of the
same document.
 TITLE FOUR

Q: What if while he was in possession of the said coin; he

took out a part of the metal content of the said coin. Can he
be liable for Mutilation of coins under Art 164?
A: No, he cannot because in Art 164 or mutilation
of coins, it is necessary that the coin subject of
mutilation must be of legal tender. It must be in
present currency because otherwise, it cannot be
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: In an official document, the signature of the President
was forged by A then it was given to B. B knew that it was a
forgery nevertheless he made use of the same. What crime
was committed?
A: A committed a crime under 161. And B

committed a crime under 162.

said that the public has been deceived.
ARTICLE163 – MAKING AND IMPORTING AND
ARTICLE164 – MUTILATION OF COINS
UTTERING FALSE COINS
•
Acts punished:
ELEMENTS:
I.
Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the
further requirement that there be intent to damage
or to defraud another.
1.
2.
That there be false or counterfeited coins
That the offender either made, imported or uttered
such coins.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
II.
Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with the
further requirement that there must be connivance
who counterfeited the coin. The offender
is only in possession of it but in order for
him to be held liable; he must have the
knowledge that the coin is counterfeited
or mutilated and despite having such
knowledge; he has the intent to utter,
circulate, pass away, to give away to

with the mutilator or importer in case of uttering.

•
Mutilation is the act of taking off a part of the metal
content by filing it or substituting it for another metal of
inferior quality.

•
The offender gathers the metal dust that he has taken
off from the said coin.
another the said coin.
While the offender took out a part of the metal coin, he
is in effect diminishing the intrinsic value of the said
coin therefore who would be given the said coin would
be deceived of the this crime hence a crime in violation
of public interest is committed.
II.
Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin
knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Actually uttering, and
2. Knowledge.

In the second act it is the act of actually

•
ILLUSTRATION:
circulating or uttering the counterfeited
coin despite knowledge that it is
counterfeited or mutilated.
Q: There were 3 children/adults. They were playing kara-
krus. So they toss the coin, however before doing that, they
would scratch the coin on the steel therefore the metal
content of the coin is diminished. Can they be held liable
under Art 164?

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A is under surveillance, reports came to the
police that he had been circulating false coins. A went to
the bakery store, he bought bread worth P 50.00. He gave
the store owner 5 P 10.00 counterfeited coins. Thereafter,
after giving the counterfeited coins, he immediately left. The
police arrived and A was gone and it was the owner of the
store who is left. The police officer asked the owner of the
store to open the cash bin. There they saw the 5 P 10.00
coins which were counterfeited. They arrested the owner of
the store. Is the owner of the store liable under Art 165?
A:No he is not liable of selling of false coins or
mutilated coins, without connivance under Article 165.
First, he was caught in possession.
A: No. because there was no intent to gather the
metal dust of the said coin.
•
Can they be held liable of any crime?
•
Yes. They can be held liable under PD

247
•

•
PD 247 punishes any person who willfully or knowingly
defaces, mutilates, tears, burns or destroys any
currencynotesor coins issuedby the
BangkoSentralngPilipinas.
In case of violation of PD 247 it is not required that
there is intent to mutilate on the part of the offender. It
is not required that the offender has the intent to gather
the metal dust of the coin although these are required
Was there possession?
Yes. The counterfeited coins were found
•

under Art 164.

in his cash drawer. Possession does not
only mean physical or actual possession.
Possession means constructive
possession which means that the
counterfeited or mutilated coins are in his
control and custody. Therefore the first
Q: In a P 1000.00 bill, a person put his cell phone no. on it.
Is he liable under PD 247?

A: Yes he is liable under PD 247.

•
But PD 247 is akin to a dead law because no one has
element of possession is present.
Was there intent to utter the counterfeited coins on

been prosecuted by it.

ARTICLE165 – SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED
COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE
the part of the said owner?
•
Yes. The fact that he placed it in the cash
drawer means he can use it to buy
another thing or as a change to the
people who will buy from his bakery
therefore circulation has a way from one
person to another. Therefore the second
•
Acts punished:
I.
Possession of coin, counterfeited or mutilated by
another person, with intent to utter the same,
knowing that it is false or mutilated.
ELEMENTS:
1. Possession,
2. With intent to utter, and
3. Knowledge

element is also present.

How about the third element of knowledge on his
•
Under the first act, the offender is in
possession of the false, mutilated,
counterfeited coin. It is another person
part the coin was counterfeited?
•
The third element is absent evidently
based on the facts that the store owner
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
has no knowledge that the coins are
e.g. Check payable to cash. Whoever is
in possession of the said check can
come to the bank. It can be transferred
counterfeited. In fact he gave bread
worth P 50.00. He was also deceived. If
he had only known that the coins were
counterfeited, he would not have given
bread worth P 50.00.
Therefore, he may not be held liable
because also he is in possession, and he
has the intent to utter the coins; he does
not have the knowledge that the said

by mere delivery.
•
On the other hand a check is payable to order where
it can be transferred by mere delivery when there is an
endorsement coming from the person named or
specified therein. It is an instrument payable to the
order of a specific person or his order.

coins were counterfeited.

e.g. Payable to the order of Charmaine.
This cannot be transferred from one
person to another without an order
coming from Charmaine.
ARTICLE166 – FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES
OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER;
IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR
FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS

ARTICLE169 – HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED (Art

•
Acts punished:
169)
I.Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or
other documents payable to bearer.
II.Importation of such false or forged obligations or
notes.
III.Uttering of such false or forged obligations or
notes in connivance with the forgers or
importers.
1.

2.
By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true
and genuine document.
By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or
altering by any means the figures, letters,

words, or sign contained therein.

ARTICLE167 – COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING, AND
UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER
ELEMENTS:
•

•
If what has been falsified is a coin; you call it
counterfeiting.
If it is the stamp, seal or signature of the President;
you call it forging.
If it is treasury or bank notes; it is considered as
forging.
1.
That there be an instrument payable to order
or other document of credit not payable to
bearer.

2.

3.
That the offender either forged, imported or
uttered such instrument.
That in case of uttering, he connived with the
forger or importer.
•
It is a document; you call it falsification.
FALSIFICATION (ART 170, 171, 172)

•
In case of FALSIFICATION, to amount to falsification, it
is necessary that the writing that is falsified must be a
document in a legal sense of the word – capable of
making rights and/or extinguishing an obligation.
Therefore, it must be complete in itself so that it would
be sufficient in evidence.
Falsification of mere forms does not amount to
falsification of a public document. Because the said
form is not yet complete in itself – it has no name, no
address – an unfilled-out/up form. It is not falsification.
ARTICLE168 – ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF
FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER
INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT
ELEMENTS:
1.
•
That 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 another
person.
That the offender knows that any of those
instruments is forged or falsified.
That he performs any of these acts ----

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if A was found outside the building of the LTO
office. He was carrying falsified unfilled-out/up forms of
driver’s license. It was distinct, it was falsified, it was not
the real driver’s license form. He was arrested by the NBI.
2.

3.

Can he be held liable for falsification of a public document?

a.

b.
Using any of such forged or falsified
instruments; or
Possessing with intent to use any of
A: NO. Because what he is carrying is only an
unfilled-out form. It is not yet complete in itself. It is
not yet capable of creating rights or extinguishing
an obligation. It is not yet susceptible of evidence

such forged or falsified instruments.

of the facts stated thereon.

•
An instrument is payable to bearer when it can be
transferred by mere delivery.

Q: So what crime if any was committed by A?

 CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: A merely committed violation of Article 176 –
•
On the other hand, if what has been falsified is a
that is mere possession of instrument or
implements for falsification, but not yet falsification
of a public document.
PRIVATE DOCUMENT, for the crime to arise, it is
necessary that there must be damage or at least,
intent to cause damage to the private offended party or
to any other party.
If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC OR OFFICIAL
DOCUMENT, it is not necessary that there be damage
or intent to cause damage. Because a public
document – an official document - is presumed
authentic and legal. It is presumed to be “prima facie

There 4 types of documents which may be falsified:

PUBLIC DOCUMENT – a document which is
issued by a notary public or competent public
•
1.

official with the solemnities required by law

2.
OFFICIAL DOCUMENT – a document issued by a
public official in the exercise of his official
evidence” of the facts stated therein.
As such, the
moment it is falsified, the crime will immediately arise,
without need that there be damage on the part of the
offended party. Because in Falsification of a Public
Document, what has been violated is the
PERVERSION OF TRUTH being solemnly proclaimed
by the said document. Hence DAMAGE IS NOT AN

functions
3.

4.
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT – any document
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce

or any other mercantile law

ELEMENT.
PRIVATE DOCUMENT – a document, a deed or
instrument executed by a private person without
the intervention of the notary public of any other
person legally authorized, by which document
some disposition or agreement is proved,
evidenced or set forth
ARTICLE171 – FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER,
EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL
MINISTER
•
The first kind of falsification under Article 171,
we have the falsification committed by a public
officer, employee or notary public or an
ecclesiastical minister.

•
Is a public document distinct from an official

document?
ELEMENTS:
1.
The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public or an ecclesiastical minister.
•
All official documents are considered as
public documents, but not all public
docu men ts are co nsi dered offi ci al
documents. Before a public document may
be considered as an official document, it is
necessary that it shall be issued by a public
officer in the exercise of his official functions.
There is a law that requires a public officer to
issue the said public document, then it
becomes an official document.

2.
He takes advantage of his official position.
•
The offender is said to have taken
advantage of his position or office when:
a.

b.
He has the duty to make or prepare
or to otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document; or

He has the official custody of the

document which he falsifies

•
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT, one which has been
executed by a private person, if there is no intervention
of public official.
3.
That the said offender falsifies a document by
committing any of the following modes stated
therein:

c.
By counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric.
Causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or
proceeding when they did not in fact
so participate.
•
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT however, even though
executed by a private person without the intervention
of a notary public or a legally authorized person, can
also become a public document. That is when the said
private document is submitted to the public officer and
it becomes part of the public records. The moment the
said private document becomes part of the public
records, it is now a public document and when it is
issued and it is falsified, what is falsified is a public
d.
e.

f.
Attributing to persons who have
participated in an act or proceeding
statement other than those in fact
made by them
Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts

document and no more a private document.

•

•
It is necessary to distinguish the kind of document that
is being falsified - whether it is a public, official,
commercial or private because of the different effects.
g.
h.
Altering true dates

Making any alteration or intercalation

in a genuine document which
changes its meaning
If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC, OFFICIAL OR
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT, damage or intent to
cause damage to the offended party or to any other
i.
Issuing in authenticated form a
document purporting to be a copy of
any original document when no such
copy a statement contrary to, or
different from that of the genuine
original
person is not an element.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
j.
Intercalating any instrument or note
•
So there is an original handwriting or
signature and the offender imitiated or
copied the said original handwriting or
relative to the issuance thereof in a

signature.
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 the
falsification may affect the civil status of persons.

k.
•
Is COUNTERFEITING the same as
FEIGNING?
Feigning a handwriting, signature or

Rubic is NOT THE SAME as counterfeiting.

•
EXPLANATIONS:
When you say FEIGNING, it means “simulating” a handwriting, signature or rubric. That is, making a handwriting, signature or rubric out of
nothing which does not exist. It is an
imaginable, an inexistent handwriting, signature or rubric.

1.
The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public or an ecclesiastical minister.
•

•
If the offender is an ecclesiastical
minister, for him to be liable under Article
171, it is necessary that the document
that he falsifies must affect the civil status
of a person.
If the document falsified by an
ecclesiastical minister will not affect the
civil status of a person, he is still liable for
falsification, but not under Art. 171, rather
under Art. 172.
So, a priest falsified the communion

II. CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE

PARTICIPATED IN ANY ACT OR PROCEEDING WHEN
THEY DID NOT IN FACT SO PARTICIPATE.
certificates of one of the students/pupils
Q: What if a notary public issued, he prepared or issued an
extrajudicial settlement of an estate. In the said
extrajudicial settlement of an estate, it is stated that all the
heirs of a certain decedent can already agree by
themselves to partition the property. So it is an extrajudicial
settlement of an estate and in it, the notary public made it
appear that all the 12 heirs of the decedent had
participated, but un truth and in fact, two of the heirs where
in another country and they did not participate in the
execution of this extrajudicial settlement of the estate. Is
the notary public liable?
A: YES. The notary public is LIABLE under the
second act (causing it to appear that persons
have participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate). He
caused it to appear that A and B participated in the
execution of the extrajudicial settlement of the
receiving the first communion, the crime
committed is falsification under Art. 172,
not under Art. 171 because a certificate
of communion will not affect the civil

status of the said child.

2.
He takes advantage of his official position.
•
It requires that the offender takes
advantage of his official position.
•
The offender is said to have taken
advantage of his position or office when:
a.
He has the duty to make or prepare
or to otherwise intervene in the
preparation of the document; or
He has the official custody of the
document which he falsifies
b.

3.

estate, when they did not in fact so participate.

III. ATTRIBUTING TO PERSONS WHO HAVE PARTICIPATED

IN AN ACT OR PROCEEDING STATEMENT OTHER THAN
THOSE IN FACT MADE BY THEM
That the said offender falsifies a document by
committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
•
If you will look at Art. 171, it does not
state the kind of document that has been
falsified, it may not be stated because it
necessarily follows that the document
falsified is a public or official document
because the offender is public officer or
employee or notary public. Therefore
necessarily, the document being falsified
in Art. 171 is a public official or official
document.
•
So under the third act, persons participated in
an act or proceeding, they made statements
therein, however, the offender in a document
may appear that these persons have made
certain statements which were not in fact
made by them.
Q: So what if in the SangguniangPanglungsod, an
ordinance was being passed. There was a votation,
majority of the councilors voted, two of the councilors
dissented and their vote were NO. they just stated
that
Art. 171 provides for the DIFFERENT ACTS OF FALSIFICATION. These acts of falsification are also applicable
in Art. 172:
they were voting in the negative, but, they did not give any
explanation for their dissent or the vote of NO. however, in
the minutes appeared by the Sangguniang Secretary, the
latter made it appear that the two councilors made
statements that they voted NO because the said ordinance
is contrary to law. Is the said secretary liable for
I.
BY COUNTERFEITING OR IMITATING ANY HANDWRITING, SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC.
•
So what is COUNTERFEITING?

falsification?

• The offender is said to have counterfeited

a signature, handwriting or rubric if he A: YES. He is a public officer. He is the one who
has imitated an official handwriting, prepared the minutes for the Sangguniang
signature or rubric. Panglungsod and he made it appear that the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
2 ACTS:
The offender makes an alteration
i.
2 councilors stated that the said ordinance is contrary
to law and in truth and fact, they did not made those
statements. So the said secretary is liable for
falsification.
ii.
The offender makes an intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its
meaning

•
•
ALTERATION – changes in a document
INTERCALATION – there must be some
insertion made in the said document, in a
genuine document that changed the meaning
IV. MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A NARRATION OF FACTS
•
The evidence of this act of falsification
requires:
i.That the offender makes in a document
untruthful statement in a narration of
facts;
ii.That he has legal obligation to disclose
the truth of the facts narrated by him
iii.The facts narrated by the offender are
absolutely false
of the said document

VII. ISSUING IN AUTHENTICATED FORM A DOCUMENT

PURPORTING TO BE A COPY OF ANY ORIGINAL
DOCUMENT WHEN NO SUCH COPY A STATEMENT
CONTRARY TO, OR DIFFERENT FROM THAT OF
THE GENUINE ORIGINAL
iv.The untruthful narration must be such as
to effect the integrity of the document
and that the offender does so with the
intent to injure or prejudice another
•
2 ACTS PUNISHED:
1. The offender issued in an authenticated
form a document purporting to be an
authenticated copy of an original document,
but no such original exists

person
2. By including such copy a statement
contrary to or different from a genuine original
•

•
It is necessary that the intention of the
intention of the offender must be to INJURE
ANOTHER PERSON.
In case of making false statements in a
narration of facts, it is necessary that the
offender must have the legal obligation to
disclose the truth in the said narration of facts.
Absence of such legal obligation, then it
cannot be said that he is liable for
falsification.
•

•
When you say legal obligation, there is a law

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a notary public issued a deed of absolute sale
and he said that it is an original copy of a deed of absolute
sale between A and B. A selling his property to B, but in
truth and in fact, no such deed of absolute sale was
executed between A and B. Is the notary public liable?
A: YES. He is liable under the second act of
falsification in the seventh act of the 3rd element in
Art. 171.
which requires him to state nothing but the

truth in the said document.

Q: What if a civil registrar issued a certificate of live birth.
So here comes A. A was asking that he should be given a
certified copy of a certificate of live birth. In the said
certificate of live birth issued by the said civil registrar, there
was a statement that A was an illegitimate child, but in the
original copy of the certificate of live birth submitted to the
office of the Office of the Civil Registrar, there was no such
Q: So what if the offender, a public officer, falsified the
statement in his residence certificate or community tax
certificate. Although he stated his true name, he did not
state his address, citizenship, etc. So makes false
statement of facts in his residence certificate or community
tax certificate, otherwise known as cedula. So he was
charged with falsification. He contended that there is no law
which requires him to state the truth in his residence
certificate. Is his contention correct?
statement. Is the civil registrar liable?
A: YES. He is liable under the second act of
falsification in the seventh act of the 3rd element in
A: His contention is wrong. According to a ruling in
the Supreme Court, if it is a residence certificate
or community tax certificate, there need not be a
law which requires a person to state the truth in
the said residence certificate, it is inherent in the
kind of document. Since it is a residence
certificate or cedula, it is inherent that in this
document, nothing but the truth must be stated –
no falsity. Because it requires identification.

VIII. INTERCALATING ANY INSTRUMENT OR NOTE

RELATIVE TO THE ISSUANCE THEREOF IN A
PROTOCOL, REGISTRY OR OFFICIAL BOOK.
•
INTERCALATION – making any insertion in
any instrument or note

V.
ALTERING TRUE DATES
It is necessary that what has been altered
•
•
So these acts, under ARTICLE 171, are also the very
same acts punished under Art. 172.
must be a true date and in the alteration of
the said true date, the document will no

Art. 171. Because he included in the said copy a

statement contrary to or different from that of a
genuine original.

longer have any effect.

ARTICLE172 – FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE
INDIVIDUALS AND USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS
THREE PUNISHABLE ACTS/FELONIES?
VI. MAKING ANY ALTERATION OR INTERCALATION IN
A GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS
MEANING
•
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
I.
Falsification of a public, official or commercial
document by a private individual
So in case of FALSIFICATION OF A PUBLIC,
can be committed by any person.
OFFICIAL OR COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT
by a PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL, is just the same
Articles 174 and 175 refer to the persons who shall be
criminally liable in case of falsified document.
as ARTICLE 171 – they only differ in that in
ARTICLE174 – FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES,
FALSE CERTIFICATES OF MERIT OR SERVICE, ETC
Art. 171, the offender is a public officer or

• Under Art.174, if the offender is a PHYSICIAN

OR SURGEON who issues a false medical
certificate in the practice of his profession, he
becomes liable under Art. 174.

• Likewise, Art. 174 punishes a PUBLIC OFFICER

who issues a false certificate of merit, service or
good conduct, moral character, etc.

• And, under Art.174, ANY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL

who falsifies a medical certificate or certificate of
merit or service or good conduct shall be also
criminally liable.

• The off ender is the person who falsifies, issues

the false medical certificate or certificate or
merit.

• If the offender is not the falsifier, but he knows

that the said document is falsified and he makes
use of the same, his liability is under Art. 175.

employee.

•
•
In ARTICLE 172, yes, the document falsified
is a public, official or commercial document,
but, the offender is a private individual even if
the offender is a private individual, since the
document falsified is a public, official or
commercial document, DAMAGE OR INTENT
TO CAUSE DAMAGE IS NOT AN ELEMENT.
II.
Falsification of private document by any
person
•
The document falsified is a PRIVATE
DOCUMENT. The offender is any person. He
can be a private individual, he can be a
private officer or employee for as long as the
document falsified is a private document, it
necessary that there must be damage caused
to a third person or at least the intention of
the offender is to CAUSE DAMAGE.
•
Absence of damage or intent to cause
damage, then falsification of a private

document will not arise.

III.
Use of falsified document
•
A document has been falsified and the
offender uses the said document.
•
If the falsified document is used in a
JUDICIAL PROCEEDING, again, DAMAGE
or INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE is NOT AN
ELEMENT because it is a judicial proceeding.
But if the said falsified document is used in
any other transaction, this time, damage or
intent to cause damage is an ELEMENT.
•

ARTICLE175 – USING FALSE CERTIFICATE

• Under Art. 175, the offender knows that the

medical certificate or certificate of merit has been falsified
and despite that knowledge, he makes use of the same.

ARTICLE173 – FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS

TELEGRAPH AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES
•
Punishable acts
I.
Uttering fictitious, wireless, telegraph or
telephone message
II.

III.
Falsifying wireless, telegraph or
telephone message
Using such falsified message
•
If the act punished is UTTERING FICTITIOUS,
WIRELESS, TELEGRAPH OR TELEPHONE
MESSAGES and FA LSIFYING WIRELESS,
TELEGRAPH OR TELEPHONE MESSAGES, note
that these can only be committed by a person working
in a department, agency or corporation which is
engaged in a business of receiving and sending
wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.
Under the third act –
•

ILLUSTRATION:

Q: So what if the defense counsel is about to present

his witness. The witness is a person who was present
in the scene of the crime who actually saw the incident
– that is according to the defense counsel. However, on
the date of the said hearing, the said witness failed
to appear, the defense counsel said to the judge: “Your
Honor, my witness is in the hospital, he cannot even get
out of bed. He is very, very sick.” The judge, however,
was doubtful of the said manifestation of the defense
counsel and so the judge told the defense counsel:
“Okay, let him appear in the next hearing and make
sure that he brings with him a medical certificate to
show that indeed he can testify in this hearing. With that,
the defense counsel informed the witness of the said
order of the court. The said witness was in that time,

USING FALSIFIED WIRELESS, TELEGRAPH OR

TELEPHONE MESSAGES, this time, it
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

healthy, it is just that he was too afraid to testify. However,

in the next hearing, he is deemed required to produce a
medical certificate showing that he was bedridden. And so,
he went to his medical doctor. He asked the doctor to issue
a medical certificate saying that he was very, very sick and
that he could not get out of bed on the said date. The said
doctor issued the said medical certificate and then his
witness appeared on the second hearing and presented
him to the court. It was submitted to the records of the
court. What crime or crimes is/are committed by doctor or
the physician as well as by the witness?
A: The PHYSICIAN is liable under Art. 174. He issues
a false medical certificate in the exercise or in the
practice of his profession.
On the other hand, the WITNESS, despite knowledge
that it is a falsified medical certificate, still made use
of the same and he presented and submitted it to the
court.
2. There is usurpation of official function if any
person performs an act pertaining to a person in
authority or a public officer of the Philippine
Government or of a foreign government or
agency thereof, under pretense of official
position, and without being lawfully entitled to
do so.
 It is necessary that the offender performs an
act. Mere representation will not suffice. It is
necessary that he performs an act pertaining to
a person in authority or a public officer of any
department or agency of the Philippine
government or of a foreign government.
 In usurpation of official functions, it is necessary
that the act pertaining to a person in authority
or a public officer must be under pretense of
official position and without being lawfully
entitled to do so.

 This is the felony that is if a person was found in

possession of unfilled-out forms of driver’s license, he
can be held liable for falsification of a public document
and liable only in Article 176.

 Under Art. 176, what was being punished are:

1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any stamps,

dies, marks or other instruments or implements for
counterfeiting or falsification.

2. Possessing with intent to use the instrument or

implements for counterfeiting or falsification made in or
introduced into the Philippines by another person.

ARTICLE176 – MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION

OF INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION

ARTICLE177 – USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR
OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
1. Usurpation of authority is committed when a person
knowingly and falsely represents himself to be an
officer or agent of any department of the Philippine
government or agency thereof or of a foreign
government.
 The crime will immediately arise from the mere act of
person of knowingly and falsely representing himself to
be an officer or agent of any department or agency of
the Philippines or of a foreign country. It is not
necessary for the offender to commit any act, to
perform any act. It suffices that he falsely represents
himself to be an officer or agent of the Philippine
government. The crime will immediately arise. However,
the said false representation, aside from being done
knowingly, must be such that he intended to be known
by such other person or by public as a representative
or agent of Philippine government.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if an administrative case was filed against the
mayor before the Office of the Ombudsman. During the
investigation of the case, the Ombudsman preventively
suspended the mayor for a period of six months. The DILG
implemented the suspension order and the vice-mayor was
made the acting mayor. However, upon advice of his
counsel, the suspended mayor began working, began
performing the acts of being a mayor after 90 days of
preventive suspension. That is because according to his
counsel, he can only be suspended for a period of 90 days.
So on the 91st day of his suspension, he again began
assuming the function of a mayor. He signed documents,
he issued memorandum, etc. as the city mayor. Is he liable
under Article 177 for usurpation of official function?
A: Yes, he is liable for usurpation of official
function under Article 177. The reason is that he is
still under preventive suspension. Unless and until
it is lifted by the Ombudsman and the said lifting
was implemented by the DILG, he remains to be a
suspended mayor. And for having acted, for having
performing an act pertaining to the office of a
mayor, he is said to be committed a violation of
Article 177, usurpation of official function.
Q: What if there was heavy traffic. So there was no MMDA
officer or policeman manning the traffic. One of the owners
of the vehicle caught in the traffic alighted from the vehicle
and he manned the traffic to ease the flow of the traffic.
The said man performed an act pertaining to an officer
of the MMDA, pertaining to a traffic enforcer. Is the
said man liable for usurpation of official function?
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
What is an alias? What does C.A. 142, as
amended, or the Anti-Alias Law provide?
•

A: NO. While the man performed however he did not do

so under pretense of official position and without being
lawfully entitled to do so. There was no intent on his part
to falsely represent himself as to be in that position.
There was no false pretense of official position therefore
he cannot be held liable under Article 177 or usurpation
of official function because his act was only done
out of pacific (promote peace; to end a conflict) spirit
to help ease the said traffic.

ARTICLE 178 – USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND

CONCEALING TRUE NAME

Punishes two acts:

According to the SC, an alias is a name or

names use intended to be used by a person
publicly and habitually, usually in business
transaction other than the name registered at birth
for the first time before the local civil registrar.
Under C.A. 142 as amended, except as
pseudonym, in literary, cinema, television, radio
and other entertainment purposes, and in athletic
events wherein the use of a pseudonym is a
normal practice, no person can use any name
other than his name by which he is registered at
birth at the local civil registrar or by which he is
registered by the Bureau of Immigration upon his
entry into the Philippines.

I.
USING FICTITIOUS NAME
•

•
The use of any other name must only be upon
approval by the judicial or competent authority.
Therefore, no person can use any other name
other than the name by which he is baptized at the
office of the civil registrar in your place other than
the name by which he is recorded in Bureau of
Immigration, if case he is a foreigner coming here
in the Philippines. He can only use his name.
EXCEPT if he is an actor, if he is an athlete, then
he is allowed to use a pseudonym. When he is a
writer of a book, then he is allowed to use a
pseudonym, a pen name other than his real name
because it is a normal practice OR if he files the
use of a substitute name before the court and he
is allowed by judicial or competent authority to use
any other name, then he can also use another
name. But outside these, a person can only use
the name by which he is registered at the office of
civil registrar.
•
Committed by any person who shall
use a name other than his real name
publicly for concealing a crime, or evade
the execution of a judgment, or to cause
damage to public interest.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender uses a name other than his
real name
2. That he uses that fictitious name publicly
3. That the purpose of the offender is either:
a. to conceal a crime; or
b. to evade execution of a judgment; or
c. to cause damage to public interest.
CONCEALING TRUE NAME
ELEMENTS:
II.
1. The offender conceals—
a. his true name; AND
b. all other personal circumstances
2. That the purpose is only to conceal his

identity
CESARIO URSUA v. CA
The said accused made use of a different
name. he used the name of Oscar Perez in the
office of the Ombudsman as he was trying to get a
copy of the complaint filed against him. It was
however discovered that a case of violation of CA
142 was filed against him.
•
HOW WOULD YOU DISTINGUISH IF THE CRIME
COMMITTED IS USING FICTITIOUS NAME OR
CONCEALING TRUE NAME?
•
In case of using fictitious name, the use of a
name other than his real name, is done publicly.
There is the element of publicity. Whereas, in case
of concealing true name, it is not necessary that
the use of another name, concealing his true and
real name must be done publicly.
Using fictitious name and concealing true
name differ in purposes. In case of using fictitious
name, the purpose is to conceal a crime, evade
the execution of judgment or to cause damage to
public interest. On the other hand, in concealing
true name, the only purpose of the offender is to
•
The SC held that he is not criminally liable. The
SC acquitted the accused because according to
the SC, the use of the name Oscar Perez in an
isolated transaction, without any showing, absent
an evidence that henceforth he wanted to be
known by the name of Oscar Perez in not within
the prohibition of CA 142 as amended. There was
no evidence that showed that henceforth he
wanted to be known by that name. There was no
showing that henceforth, he wanted to be called
by the said name therefore it cannot be said that
Oscar Perez is an alias of the accused.
•

conceal his true and real identity.

ANTI-ALIAS LAW (C.A. No. 142, as amended)
SO RELATED IN ARTICLE 178 IS C.A. 142 AS AMENDED
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
He is also not liable under CA 142, as
amended, because the use of the name Y in
a single transaction, in a single isolated
PEOPLE v. ESTRADA

• In this case, the former president made use of the name

Jose Velarde in signing a trust account. So he signed a
trust account, using the name Jose Velarde and so he
was charged with violation of CA 142 as amended.

Again, the SC said, the use by Erap of the name

Jose Velarde in a single, isolated transcation, without
ARTICLE179 – ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS AND
any showing that henceforth he wanted to be known by INSIGNIA
such name, is not within the prohibition of CA 142 as
amended. First, it was not done publicly and was in fact
done secretly in the presence of Laquian and Chua and the
said act of signing does not make it public because these
two are his close friends therefore it was done secretly, in a
discreet manner. Hence, it was not done publicly. It was
also not done habitually. The element of habituality is
not present because there was no showing that in any other ELEMENTS:
transaction, he made use of the name Jose Velarde. Hence, 1. The offender makes use of INSIGNIA, UNIFORM
he was also acquitted although convicted by Sandiganbayan, or DRESS
he was acquitted by the SC. 2. That the insignia, uniform or dress pertains to
an office not being held by the offender or to a
class of person of which he is not a member.
3. That the said insignia, uniform or dress is used
publicly and improperly.

transaction, without any showing that

henceforth he wanted to be known as Y is
not within the prohibition of CA 142, as
amended.

• Committed by any person who makes use of

any insignia, uniform or dress which pertains to an
office not being held by the offender or to a class
of person of which he is not a member and he
makes use of such insignia, uniform or dress
publicly and improperly.
 Q: What if a lawyer was having a massage in a sauna bath
parlor. He did not know that as a front it is a sauna bath
parlor but in truth and in fact, it was a prostitution den. At
the time that he was having this massage service, the
police raided the place because they were able to secure a • The offender uses the insignia, uniform or
search warrant. And among those arrested was the said dress of an office not held by him or a by a
attorney. The said attorney was brought to the PNP station class of person of which he is not a member
and he was asked of his name, ashamed to reveal his true and he used the same publicly and improperly.
identity, his true name, he said that he was Y and did not
state that he was Atty. X. However, when he was asked his
residence, he stated the truth. As of the name of his wife,
he stated the truth. As of the name of his children, he
stated the truth. Is he liable for using fictitious name?

A: He is not liable for using fictitious name.

First, he did not do so publicly. Second, his use of
the name was not done to conceal a crime, to
evade the execution of sentence or to cause
damage to public interest—none of these
purposes is present; therefore he is not liable for
using fictitious name.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a person was wearing a uniform. So he said that
it was a uniform of a certain organization known as H world
but in fact, no such organization ever existed. Is he liable
under Article 179?
A: No, he is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress Article 179. The reason is that
H world does not belong to any office, doesn’t
refer to a class of persons; therefore, he is not liable
under Article 179.
Q: What if a person made use of a uniform of a prisoner.
So you see a person, he was receiving a holy communion,
he was wearing an orange t-shirt with a big letter P at the
back which means Prisoner. Can he be held liable under
Article 179?
•
Is he liable for concealing true name?
No, he is not liable for concealing true
•
name. Although he concealed his real
name, Atty. X, he did not conceal his other
personal circumstances. He divulged his
address. He divulged the name of his wife,
the names of his children; therefore, it
cannot be said that he has the intention to
conceal his true identity. In fact, his true
identity can easily be verified just by going to
the said address; therefore he is not also
liable for concealing true name.
A: He is not liable of Illegal use of insignia,
uniform or dress under Article 179. Although he used the
uniform of a prisoner, it is not an office held by the offender,
it is not also a class of persons. When you say a class of
persons of which he is a member, it refers to a dignified
class of persons. He is assuming that he belongs to the
said class of persons. Here, he is even belittling himself
because he was wearing a uniform of a prisoner. Hence, it

cannot be said that he violated Article 179.

•
Is he liable under CA 142, as amended?
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: Yes, A can still file a case of false testimony

• False testimony can either be false testimony in

criminal cases (Articles 180 and 181), false
testimony in civil cases (Article 182) and false
testimony in other cases.
•
False testimony in criminal cases can either be:
(1) false testimony against a defendant (Article
180) and (2) false testimony favorable to
defendant (Article 181).
against the false witness. He can still file a case

Q: What if in the same case, A was being prosecuted for

homicide. Then the prosecution presented the witness. The
witness testified falsely against the defendant saying that
he saw the actual act of killing. After trial on the merits, the
judge convicted the accused, the judge believed the false
testimony and so the judge convicted him. Upon conviction,
within 15 days from the promulgation of judgment, the said
accused, the said convict, filed an appeal before the CA.
While the case was pending before the CA, can the said
accused, the convicted person, already file a case of false
testimony against the false witness who testified against
him?
of false testimony against the said false witness
even of the court did not consider the said false
testimony. Even if the court did not give any merit
on the said false testimony and acquitted him. The
crime will arise the moment the said offender
testified falsely in open court whether in favor or
against a defendant.

ARTICLE180 – FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A

DEFENDANT
In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness
testified falsely against a defendant knowing that
his testimony is false and then the said defendant
•

is either acquitted or convicted.

ELEMENTS:
1. That there be a criminal proceeding
2.

3.
That the offender testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein.
That the offender who gives false testimony
knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false
testimony is given is either acquitted or
convicted in a final judgment. (People v. Maneja)
A:Not yet. Any case would still be a premature
case. In fact, you would not know what court will
have jurisdiction. You would not know if the court
that will have jurisdiction over the false testimony
is the RTC or the MTC because the penalty to be
imposed on the false witness is always dependent
on the penalty imposed on the convict.
• In a criminal proceeding, the offender-witness
testified falsely in favor of the defendant and he
•
Under Article 180, if the defendant has been
convicted and the penalty imposed is capital
punishment or death then the false witness shall
be imposed with a penalty of reclusion temporal. If
the defendant, upon conviction is imposed with a
penalty of reclusion perpetua and reclusion
temporal, the penalty will be imposed on the false
witness is prision mayor. If the said defendant is
convicted and the penalty imposed on him is any
other afflictive penalty, the penalty to be imposed
on the false witness is prision correcional. On the
other hand, if the penalty imposed on the said
defendant is prision correcional, arresto mayor,
fine or he was acquitted. If he was acquitted, the
penalty to be imposed on the said person who
testified falsely is arresto mayor.
So in this case, the penalty on the false
witness is always dependent on the penalty to be
imposed by the court on the defendant; therefore,
there must first be a final conviction by final
judgment.
NOTE: if it is an acquittal, the case can be
immediately filed because an acquittal is
immediately executory. You cannot appeal an
acquittal. It is immediately executory.
ARTICLE181 – FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO
DEFENDANT

• Whether it be a false testimony against or false

testimony in favor of a defendant, it is
immaterial whether the court will consider or
not the said false testimony. The case may be
filed.

knew that his testimony is indeed false.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A is being prosecuted for the crime of homicide,
for having killed the victim. So while he is being
prosecuted, the fiscal presented a witness. This witness
was also brought in by the heirs of the victim. The heirs of
the victim said that the witness saw the said act of killing.
The fiscal believed and the fiscal presented the said
witness. The witness however was not present at the scene
of the crime but in his testimony the witness said that he
was present at the scene of the crime and that he actually
saw the accused stabbing the victim to death. The
accused, A knew that the witness was testifying falsely
because he knew that at the scene of the crime, it was only
he and the victim who were present. After trial on the
merits, the judge, acquitted the said accused A. In other
words, the judge did not give weight to the testimony of the
false witness. Can A still file a case against the false
FALSE TESTIMONY (ART 180, 181, 182)
witness?
•

Q: So the case was filed against A for homicide, here

comes a witness, the witness testified falsely in favor of the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
accused. Can the private complainant, the heirs of the
victim, immediately file a case of false testimony against
the witness right after the giving thereof?
•In order to amount to perjury, it is necessary
that the said oath must be given before
an officer duly authorized to receive and
administer. Otherwise, it cannot be
considered as perjury because the
essence of perjuryis the violation of
the solemnity of oath.
•If the person who received the oath is not
duly authorized, it cannot be said that
there is a violation of the solemnity of the
A: Yes, because in case of false testimony in
favor of the defendant, the penalty of the false
witness is not dependent on the penalty to be

ELEMENTS:

imposed on the said accused or defendant.

ARTICLE182 – FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES
•
Right after the giving of the false testimony, the
private complainant or the aggrieved party, can
immediately file a case against the false witness
who testified in favor of the defendant.

oath.
3. That in the said statement or affidavit, the
offender makes a willful and deliberate
assertion of falsehood
•It is necessary for perjury to arise that the
offender deliberately, knowingly
ascertained a falsehood. There was a
deliberate intent on his part; therefore,
good faith is a defense in perjury.
1. The testimony must be given in a civil case
2. The testimony must relate to the issues
presented in said case (relative or pertinent)
3. The testimony must be false
4. The false testimony must be given by the
defendant knowing the same to be false.
5. The testimony must be malicious and given with
intent to affect the issues presented in the
said case (U.S. v. Aragon)
In case of false testimony in a civil case, right after
the giving of the false testimony, the false witness
can be immediately prosecuted in court.
In order to amount in false testimony in civil cases,
there must be litigation. Take for example a sum of
money, breach of contract. If the false testimony is
given in a special proceeding, for example,
petition for nullity of marriage, petition for
separation, petition for habeas corpus, these are
special proceedings and a false testimony of a
person who testified falsely during this special
proceeding, the case is under Article 183, false
•Perjury likewise cannot be committed out of
mere negligence. It is necessary that
there must be a deliberate intent on his
part to assert a falsity either in the
•

statement or affidavit.
4.
The said statement or affidavit containing
falsity is required by law.
•If it is not required by law then it cannot be
considered as a crime.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if X made a false statement in a criminal
proceeding, what crime is committed?
testimony in other proceedings.

A: The crime committed is FALSE TESTIMONY.

Q: A makes a statement in a labor case against B. What

crime is committed?
ARTICLE183 – PERJURY
• PERJURY is the willful and deliberate
A: The crime committed is PERJURY.
assertion of falsehood on a material matter
made before an officer duly authorized to
receive and administer oath.
If the false statement under oath is made in a
judicial proceeding whether it be a criminal or
civil proceeding, the crime committed is
FALSE TESTIMONY. If the said false
statement, however, is made in a non-judicial
proceeding, administrative proceedings, or
quasi-judicial proceedings, then the crime
committed is PERJURY. So if the false
testimony or the false statement is made in a
labor case, in an administrative case, in an
application for search warrant, during the
preliminary investigation, before the fiscals’
office, the crime committed is perjury.
ELEMENTS:
1.
The accused made a statement under oath or
executed an affidavit upon a material matter
•There are two ways of committing perjury:
The offender either:
1. Makes a statement under
 oath (he makes a false testimony); or
2. Executes an affidavit on a
material matter (if it is an
affidavit, it is also required
under oath)
The said statement under oath or affidavit
was made before a competent officer duly
authorized to receive and administer oath

2.
Q: What if the offender makes false narration of facts in a
cedula. The offender makes a false narration of facts in a
driver’s license. What crime is committed?
A: FALSIFICATION.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Q: What if the offender makes a false narration of facts in a

statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. So a public
officer filed a statement of assets, liabilities and net worth. It
contains falsities, false narration of facts. What is the
liability?
Q: What if in a case submitted in a fiscal’s office, so there
was a complaint and attached thereto is a sworn statement.
In the said sworn statement, the witness said that he saw
the accident. He saw the accused bumped the victim.
According to him, at the time, he was watching Saksi, when
suddenly a commotion occurred outside, he ran out of the
window, he saw at that particular time the accused hitting
the said victim with his vehicle and so he saw the accused
that caused the death of the victim. That was his statement
in the affidavit filed to the fiscal’s office. During
investigation, however, it was discovered he was not
watching Saksi, he was watching Bandila, the news
program in ABS-CBN and not the news program in GMA. Is
he liable of perjury?

A: The liability is PERJURY.

WHERE LIES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
FALSIFICATION AND PERJURY?
•
In falsification, the document is not required to be
under oath. In case of perjury, the document is
required to be under oath.

HOW ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE OF FA LSE

STATEMENT AND PERJURY?
A: No, he is not liable of perjury. Although it was
under oath, administered by a fiscal, still it is no
perjury because it is not on a material matter.
Whatever it is that he was watching at the time,
even if it is cartoon, it doesn’t matter. What
matters is that he heard the commotion, he ran to
the window, and he saw the accused bumping the
victim. He saw that it was the accused who killed
the victim and that it was the car of the accused
that hit the victim. Only then, it will be considered
as perjury but whatever he was watching, it was
immaterial. It was not on a material matter;
•
If the false statement is made in a judicial
proceeding, it is false testimony. If the false
statement is made in a non-judicial proceeding or
administrative proceeding or quasi-judicial
proceeding, it is perjury.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: An applicant for the bar filled out an application form for
the bar, there was a statement therein, “Have you ever
been fined or convicted of any crime?” and the answer was
no, however, in truth and in fact, he has already been fined
for the crime of jaywalking. He answered no and then this
application for the bar is required to be under oath. He was
looking for a notary public since it was a Sunday, there was
no office opened so he went to the legal office of his father,
hoping that there was a lawyer there. However, there was
only the janitor and he asked the janitor to sign in the
notary public part and then submitted it to the office of the
bar confidante. Is the said applicant for the bar liable for
perjury or is he liable for falsification?
A: He is liable of FALSIFICATION and not of
perjury because the person who received and
administered the oath is not a confidante officer
duly authorized to receive and administer the
oath. He was a mere janitor and not a notary
public. As such, the crime committed is
falsification. Again, the essence of perjury is the

therefore it will not amount to perjury.

SUBORNATION OF PERJURY is committed by a person
who knowingly and willfully procures another to swear
falsely and the witness suborned does testify under the
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury.
NOTE: Subornation of perjury is not expressly penalized in
RPC; but the direct induction of a person by another to
commit perjury may be punished under Article 183 in
relation to Article 7, meaning, the crime is plain perjury but
the one inducing another will be liable as principal by
inducement and the one who testified as principal by direct

participation.
ARTICLE184 – OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN

Committed by any person who shall offer in

violation of the solemnity of the oath.
EVIDENCE
•
Q: A wrote a love letter to the girl that he is pursuing. In the
said love letter, he stated falsities such as “You are the only
one in my life.” when in truth there were three of them. He
stated “I love you and I miss you” and they were all
falsities. He even asked it to be notarized and sent it to his
third girlfriend. Is he liable for perjury?
evidence any false testimony or any false witness
either in a judicial proceeding or in any official
proceeding.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender offered in evidence a false witness
or false testimony.
A: No, he is not liable for perjury. He is not
liable for perjury because the said love letter is not
required by law. The fourth element requires, to
amount to perjury, the sworn statement under oath
or the said affidavit must be required by law
because it is a crime against public interest not a
crime against personal interest.
2. The offender knew the witness or the testimony
was false.
3. The offer was made in a judicial or official
proceeding.
•
Is this the same as subornation of perjury?
•
Subornation of perjury is committed by any
person who procures a false witness in order
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
to perjures himself and testify falsely in a
4. The accused had the intent to cause
the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned.
case. There is no such crime as
subornation of perjury under the present
RPC because we already have Article 184.
Article 184 is committed when any person
•
who procures a witness and offers him as
evidence in court can be held liable under
Article 184 or he can be held liable as a
principal by inducement in false testimony or
as a principal by inducement in perjury;

• In public auction, it is necessary that the

public must be able to get the best price for
the thing being auctioned. If there will be less
bidders, less participants in the said public
auction, then the public will not be able to get
the best price for the thing subject of the
public auction. Here, if the non-participation of
the other bidders was caused by a person,
then he is liable under Article 185. Again, the
intention of the offender is to cause the
reduction of the price of the thing which is the
subject of the public auction.
therefore subornation of perjury is not
necessary and it is not a crime under
•
In order to be liable for this crime, whether it
be the act of solicitation or the act of
attempting to cause bidders to stay away from
public auction, it is necessary that the
intention of the offender is to cause the
reduction of the price of the thing which is
the subject of the public auction. The acts
complained of must be done for the purpose
of reducing the price of the thing being
auctioned.

Philippine jurisdiction, under the RPC.

ARTICLE185 – MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS
There are two acts punishable under Article
185
•
I.
SOLICITING GIFT OR PROMISE
•By soliciting any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking
part in any public auction.
•The mere act of soliciting any gift or promise,
so that he will refrain from taking part of
the public auction, will already give rise to
the crime. It is not necessary that he
 actually received the gift, it is not
necessary that he actually will not
participate in the said auction.
Acts punished:

ELEMENTS:
ARTICLE186 – MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS
1. There be a public auction. IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE
2. The accused solicited any gift or a •
promise from any of the bidders. I.
3. That such gift or promise was the
consideration for his refraining from
taking part in that public auction.
4. The accused had the intent to cause the
reduction of price of the thing auctioned.

II. ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE BIDDERS TO STAY

AWAY

COMBINATION TO PREVENT FREE

COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
•This is committed by any person who shall
enter into any contract or agreement or
taking part in any combination whether in
the form of trust or otherwise, in restraint
of trade or commerce or to prevent by
artificial means free competition in the
market.
II.

•By attempting to cause bidders to stay away

from an auction by threats, gifts,
promises or any other artifice
•The mere attempt to cause bidders not to
participate in the said public auction by
threats, gifts or promise will already give
rise to the crime. It is not necessary that
the bidders would not actually participate.
MONOPOLY TO RESTRAIN FREE
COMPETITION IN THE MARKET
•This is committed by monopolizing any
merchandise or object of trade or
commerce or by combining with any
other person or persons in order to alter
the prices thereof by spreading false
rumors or making use of any other
artifice to restrain free competition in the
 market.
III.

ELEMENTS:
1. There be a public auction
2. The accused attempted to cause the
bidders to stay away from that public
auction.
3. It was done by threats, gifts, promises
or any other artifice.

MANUFA CTURER, PRODUCER, OR

PROCESSOR OR IMPORTER COMBINING,
CONSPIRING OR AGREEING WITH ANY
PERSON TO MAKE TRANSACTIONS
PREJUDICIAL TO LAWFUL COMMERCE
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
OR TO INCREASE THE MARKET PRICE
1. The offender IMPORTS, SELLS or DISPOSES

OF MERCHANDISE
•
any article or merchandise made of gold,
silver, other precious materials, or their alloys

• This is considered a criminal act because the

offender, despite knowing that the articles or
merchandise that he imported are
misbranded, he still imports the same, sells
the same or disposes the same
•
2. That the STAMPS, BRANDS, or MARKS of
those articles or merchandise FAIL TO
INDICATE the actual fitness or quality of said
metals or alloys
The FIRST TWO ACTS under Article 186 can
be committed by any person and not
necessarily by manufacturers, producer or
processors. The THIRD ACT however, can be
committed only by manufacturers,
processors, producers and importers who
combined with any other person or persons in
order to commit a transaction prejudicial to
lawful commerce or to increase the market
price of any merchandise or object of
commerce
3. The OFFENDER KNOWS that the stamps,
brands or marks fail to indicate the actual
fitness or quality of the metals or alloys.

Whether it be the first, second or third act, the

mere conspiracy in order to restrain or to
prevent free competition will already give rise
to the crime. It is not necessary that there be
actual restraint in trade or commerce.
• Mere importation is a punishable act;
therefore it is not necessary for the offender
to become liable under Article 187 that he
must have sold the misbranded articles or
that he must have disposed the article
because mere importationwill already give

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if Petron, Caltex and Shell connived, combined
and agreed with one another to hoard fuel. They know that
the fuel prices will increase by March and so they decided
to hoard it. Can they be held liable under Article 186?
 Juridical corporations cannot be the subject of
criminal action. First, it cannot be said that juridical
persons can act with intent. Second, you cannot
imprison a juridical person in case of conviction.
So if the offender is a juridical entity, who shall be
held liable?
The president, the directors or any of the
members of the said corporation, association
or partnership, who knowingly permitted and
allowed this combination or monopoly in
restraint of trade or commerce. Note that they
must have knowingly permitted the same
otherwise, they cannot be held criminally

rise to the crime.

TITLE FIVE
CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND OTHER
PROHIBITED DRUGS

COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002

(RA 9165)
•

•
SECTION 4 – IMPORTATION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS
AND/OR CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND
ESSENTIAL CHEMICALS
Is committed by:
Any person, who, unless authorized by
•
law, shall import or bring into the Philippines any
dangerous drug, regardless of the quantity and

purity involved.
liable.

If the objects, which are the subject of this

monopoly or combination in restraint of trade
or commerce are prime commodities such as
food, motor fuel, lubricants, it is not even
necessary that there be conspiracy. A mere
proposal, a mere intial step to hoard, to
prevent free competition in the market will
already give rise to the crime.
•
In one Supreme Court decision, it held that: For
one to be liable for importation of dangerous
drugs, it is necessary to be proven that the
dangerous drugs that were taken in a vessel came
from a foreign country with the said dangerous
drugs on board the said vessel; therefore the
prosecution must prove that the vessel which
came into the Philippine ports had with it the
dangerous drugs. Only then can it be said that
the dangerous drugs have been imported from

ARTICLE187 – IMPORTATION AND DISPOSITION OF

FALSELY MARKED ARTICLES

Committed by any person who shall imports,

sells or disposes any article or merchandise
made of gold, silver, other precious materials,
or their alloys
another country.
SECTION 5 – SALE, TRADING, ADMINISTRATION,
DISPENSATION, DELIVERY, DISTRIBUTION AND
TRANSPORTATION OF DANGEROUS DRUGS AND/OR
ELEMENTS:

•
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
CONTROLLED PRECURSORS AND ESSENTIAL

CHEMICALS
When the poseur-buyer said that he wants to buy
illegal drugs for P200, the price has already been
established. Therefore, all the elements will suffice
even if the marked money has not been given by
the buyer to the seller. In fact, even if the marked
money is not presented in court it will not be a
hiatus on the evidence of the prosecution provided
that the police officers and the witnesses were
able to prove the crime of illegal sale of dangerous
drugs.
Selling Dangerous Drugs
•
Act of giving away any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical

whether for money of any other consideration.

ELEMENTS OF SALE OF ILLEGAL DRUGS:
1.
The identity of the buyer and the seller

•
It is necessary that the identity of the
buyer and the seller are clearly
identified.
Q: How about the poseur-buyer? Is it necessary for the
poseur buyer to testify in court? What if the prosecutor
failed to have the poseur-buyer testify in court? Does it
mean to an acquittal?
2. The object and the consideration
3. The delivery of the thing sold and the payment
thereof
•
Because if the dangerous drugs had
not been delivered, the third element
is lacking, the sale is abds forted,
there is only ATTEMPTED ILLEGAL
SALE of dangerous drugs not
consummated illegal sale of
dangerous drugs because the third
element is lacking.
A: The testimony of the poseur-buyer is not
indispensable in a case of illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. It is not indispensable because
the transaction can be proven by the other police
officers who have witnessed the transaction.
However if the seller denies the existence of the
said transaction; it is the incumbent upon the
prosecution to grove the said transaction by the

Q: What if a person has been prosecuted for Illegal sale of

Dangerous Drugs. The said operation was a buy bust
operation. It is an entrapment procedure which is allowed
by law. Here, the criminal/evil intent originated mainly from
the offender himself that’s why it is not considered as an
absolutory cause. Here, the Police Officers employed
means and methods to entrap and capture the criminal in
flagrante that is in the actual act of committing the crime.
So what if in the buy bust operation, the accused drug
seller was arrested. In the said operation, the informant
acted as the posuer buyer. He was given marked money.
The policemen ran into the place of the drug seller. Only
the poseur-buyer knocked at the door of the drug seller.
The drug seller came out and the poseur-buyer said that he
wanted to buy dangerous drugs in the amount of P200. The
drug seller said okay and gave 2 plastic sachets of
dangerous drugs to the poseur buyer. However, the
poseur-buyer without having given the marked money yet
to the drug seller negligently removed his eyeglasses so
the Police officers thought that that was the signal that the
sale has been consummated. They arrived at the said
place and arrested the drug seller. The marked money was
presentation the said poseur-buyer.
General Rule: The testimony of the poseur-buyer
is not indispensable in a case of illegal sale of
dangerous drugs.
Exemption: When the accused denies the
existence of the said transaction. If the
prosecution failed to present the poseur-buyer to
testify in court, it will amount to the dismissal of

the case.
Q: Let’s say there is this cigarette vendor on the side walk
and here comes a man who parked his car near the side
walk. He called the cigarette vendor and told the cigarette
vendor to deliver a package to the man inside the car which
is parked on the other side of the street. He told the
cigarette vendor that he will give him P1000 if the he
agreed to deliver the package to the man inside the car
which is parked at the other side of the street. The cigarette
vendor asked the man what is inside the package however
the man said “it’s none of your business to know what’s
inside that. I will give you P1000 if you deliver this to the
man inside that car parked at the other side of the street.”
So the cigarette vendor with the P1000 got the bag and
delivered it to the man at the other side of the street. He
knocked at the window and the man lowered his window.
However at the time of the said delivery the police officers
arrived and arrested the cigarette vendor. Can he be
prosecuted for delivery of dangerous drugs? Can he be
not given to drug seller. Does that constitute his acquittal?
A: No provided that all the elements are

Note that the second element only requires the

crime must be established. The corpus delicti and
the price must be established. It does not require
that there must be giving of the price/money. It
suffices that the crime was established.

convicted for delivery of dangerous drugs?

present:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: He can be prosecuted for delivery of
3.
The owner of the said house must be
included as an accused in the
information or complaint.
dangerous drugs however it is a defense on his
part that he has no knowledge that the thing he is
delivering is dangerous drugs because under RA
9165, delivering has been defined as the act of
knowingly passing a dangerous drug to another,
personally or otherwise, and by any means, with
or without consideration. Therefore it is necessary
that the one delivering dangerous drug must have
the knowledge of the thing that he is delivering is
dangerous drug.
If these 3 elements are present; then the said
house shall be confiscated and escheated in
favor of the government.

SECTION 11 – ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DANGEROUS

DRUGS
ELEMENTS OF POSSESSION OF ILLEGAL DRUGS:

SECTION 8 – MANUFACTURE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS

•
The presence if any controlled precursor and
essential chemical or laboratory equipment in the
clandestine laboratory is a prima facie evidence of
manufacture of any dangerous drug.

DELIVER – an act of knowingly passing a dangerous drug

to another, personally or otherwise, and by any means, with
or without consideration.

SECTION 6 – MAINTENANCE OF A DEN, DIVE, OR

RESORT
•

•
Any person who maintains a den, dive, or resort
for the use of illegal drugs are liable under this
section.
1. The accused was in possession of prohibited
drug

In illegal possession of dangerous drugs;

•
Are the owners, persons maintaining the said
dangerous drug dens are only the ones who are
criminally liable?
the word possession does not only
mean actual possession of the
dangerous drug in his body. It suffices
that the said dangerous drug is found in
a place under the control and
•
Under Section 7 of the act, even the
employees who are aware of the nature of the
said den, dive or resort for the use and sale of
dangerous drugs are also criminally liable.
Likewise, even persons who are not
employees which knowingly visit the same
place despite the knowledge of the nature of
such den, dive, or resort are also criminally
liable.
dominion of the said offender.

Q: What if the said den, dive, or resort is owned by a third

person? Let’s say A and B rented a house. After giving the
down payment, A and B went to the said house. A and B
used the house as a den for illegal sale of dangerous
drugs. The police officers were able to secure a warrant
and A and B were arrested. Can the owner of the said
house be criminally liable for the maintenance of the said
den? How about the house? Can it be forfeited in favor of
A: Yes because it is under his control
and dominion. Possession does not only
mean physical or actual possession. It
also means as constructive possession
for as long as the dangerous drugs is

Q: By virtue of a search warrant the police officers

conducted a search in the house of A to look for cocaine.
They looked inside the bedroom and underneath the pillow
on the bedroom of A, the found several sachets of cocaine.
Can it be held that A is in possession of the said drugs?

under his control and dominion.

2.
Such possession is not authorized by law

possess such drugs. Dangerous drugs

the government?
•
The offender is not authorized by law to
A: Under Sec. 6, the said den, dive, or resort for
the use of illegal sale of dangerous drugs shall be
escheated in favor of the government provided
that the following circumstances concur:
are per se contraband. They are per se
illegal items. The presumption is that
such possession is without authority of
law. Therefore the burden of proof is on
the accused to prove that he has the
authority to possess unlike illegal
possession of firearms. Illegal
possession of firearms is not per se
contraband therefore in illegal
possession of firearms, it is the
prosecution who has the burden of proof
that the said person lacks license.
1.
The information must allege that the said
place is intentionally being used in
furtherance of illegal sale/use of
dangerous drugs.
2.
Such intent must be proven by the
prosecutor.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

The first element requires that the

offender must be actually using,
•
3.
The accused freely and consciously

possessed the prohibited drug

sniffing the dangerous drugs.
•
There must be an animus posidendi on
the part of the said accused. This animus
posidendi on the part of the accused is a
prima facie presumed by law. The
moment a person was found in
possession of dangerous drugs, the
presumes that the person knows that the
thing in his possession is dangerous
drugs.
2. After a confirmatory test; he was found to be
positive for use of any dangerous drugs.
He was at the PNP Crime Lab and
after the confirmatory test, he was
found to be positive for use of
•

dangerous drugs.

found in his possession.

3. No other amount of dangerous drugs must be
SECTION 12 - ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DRUG
•
If any other amount of dangerous
drugs was found in his possession,
then the proper charge would no
longer be illegal use but illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.
PARAPHERNALIA
e.g. A person was found in possession of empty
plastic sachets and other instruments used for
using dangerous drugs. He is therefore liable for
Illegal Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.
Q: What if a person was found in possession of drug
paraphernalia can they avail the benefit of probation?
A: Yes he can avail for probation. The penalty
prescribed by law for illegal possession of drug
paraphernalia’s is an imprisonment ranging from 6
months and 1 day to 4 years which is within the
probationable penalty. Under Sec. 24 of R.A.
9165, any person convicted for drug pushing and
drug trafficking, regardless of the penalty imposed

by the Court, cannot avail for probation.

So under Sec. 24; only those who are convicted of
drug pushing and drug trafficking which cannot
avail for probation therefore for any other violation

Q: The police officers saw a man snatched the cell phone

of a woman. Since the police officers saw the man in
committing the crime inflagrante delicto of actual act of
snatching and the man runaway, they followed the man.
The man entered the house. The police officers upon
entering the house saw 3 men on a round table; they were
in the actual act of sniffing shabu. They were arrested and
they were asked to stand up and fold their arms up and
they were searched. Upon the search, they found out that
these 3 men; each of them was found a sachet of illegal
drugs in their pockets aside from the dangerous drug that
they were using. What cases will you file against the 3
men?
A: Illegal Possession of Dangerous Drugs. No
illegal use of dangerous drugs because the third
element is one thing. Let’s say after the
confirmatory test they were found to be positive
of Dangerous Drugs Act, for as long as the penalty

however 3 elements must concur:

1st element:
They were caught in the actual act of sniffing
shabu. 2nd element: After confirmatory test they
were found positive of the use of dangerous drugs
however the 3rd element is lacking because they
imposed by the court is 6 years and below, he can
avail for the benefit of probation. But if he is a drug
trafficker/ pusher, one who is engaged in selling
dangerous drugs, he cannot avail of the benefit of
probation even if the penalty imposed by the court
is within the probationable penalty because it is

expressly prohibited by Sec. 24 of RA 9165.

SECTION 13- ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF DANGEROUS
DRUGS DURING PARTIES, SOCIAL GATHERINGS OR
MEETINGS
 in Sec. 13, if any person was found in possession
of dangerous drug in a party, social gatherings or
meetings, or in the proximate company of at least
two (2) persons; the maximum penalty prescribed
by law shall be imposed.
found to have in their possession a plastic sachet
of other dangerous drugs other than the one they
used. Therefore the proper crime charged is illegal
possession of dangerous drugs.
SECTION 21 – PROCEDURE IN THE SEIZURE AND
CONFISCATION OF DANGEROUS DRUG
The apprehending team which has the initial
possession of the seized/confiscated dangerous drugs
shall:
1.
2.
Inventory the dangerous drugs
Take photographs of the same in the
presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs

SECTION 15 – ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS

ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS:

1. The offender was apprehended/ arrested in
the actual use of dangerous drugs.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
have been confiscated or in the
from the time of confiscation/seizure to the
receipt in the forensic laboratory to
safekeeping to presentation in court for
destruction.
presence of his counsel, a
representative from the media, a
representative from the Department
of Justice, and an elected public
official who shall be given a copy of
the said inventory and who shall be
required to sign the same.

•
What is the purpose Chain of Custody rule?
•
The purpose of Chain of Custody rule is to
ensure that the dangerous drug seized/
confiscated from the accused is the very
same dangerous drug which has been
tested by the forensic chemist and it is the
very same dangerous drug presented in

Procedure:
1.
Upon seizure/ confiscation of dangerous drugs,
the same must be stated in the inventory list.
There must be a picture taking of the dangerous
drugs in the presence of the accused or from the
person whom the dangerous drugs have been
confiscated or in the presence of his counsel, a
representative from the media, a representative
from the Department of Justice, and an elected
public official.
2.
court that is; there has been no
substitution of evidence.
•
Dangerous drugs are so small. There can be
a replacement of the effects therefore this
Chain of Custody rule will ensure that there
will be no substitution of the very same
dangerous drug seized/confiscated from the
accused at the time that they were presented
to the court.
3.
The elected public official must be required to sign
the inventory list and shall be given a copy of the
same.

Q: What if a person is charged for illegal possession of

dangerous drugs and during his arraignment, he pleaded
not guilty and during the pre-trial, he said that he will
change his plea if he will be allowed to plead guilty for a
lesser offense of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia.
So he wanted to avail of the plea-bargaining rule under the
rules of court. Under the plea-bargaining rule, you can
plead guilty to a lesser offense provided that the said lesser
offense is necessary included in the offense charged. Here,
the charge is illegal possession of dangerous drugs; can he
plead for a lesser offense of illegal possession of drug
Q: What if the police officers failed to comply with this
procedure? In People vs. Sta. Maria, the police officers
failed to comply with this procedure however there was
conviction. However, in the case of Dolera vs. People; the
police officers failed to comply with Sec. 21 procedure and
this time there was an acquittal. Why is there an acquittal in
the case of Dolera and why is there a conviction in the case

of Sta. Maria?
A: The Supreme Court held that even if there is
failure to comply with the procedure underlined in
Sec 21 of RA 9165 by the arresting officers, there
will still be conviction if the said non-compliance is
due to justifiable reasons and provided that the
police officers were able to preserve the integrity
and evidentiary bond of the confiscated
dangerous drugs this is in consonance with the

paraphernalia?
A: He cannot because Sec. 28 of R.A. 9165
provides that any person charged in violation of
any of the crimes charged under this act cannot
avail of the plea-bargaining under the rules of
court. Therefore any person charged in violation of
any of the punishable acts under R.A. 9165

chain of custody rule.

cannot plead guilty to a lower offense.

If the police officers were not able to comply with

the procedure due to justifiable cause, they must
be able to preserve the integrity and evidentiary
bond of the confiscated dangerous drug that is;
right after confiscation, it must be marked to
ensure that it was the dangerous drugs taken from
the accused and must be turned over to the
SECTION 25 – A POSITIVE FINDING FOR THE USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS SHALL BE A QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE

Q: A killed B. The police officers arrested A and they

brought him to the crime lab to be tested for the use of
illegal use of dangerous drugs. After testing, he was found
positive for the use of dangerous drugs. What is the effect
of it in the criminal liability of A?

forensic laboratory for testing.

CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE
What is the Chain of Custody rule? (People v
 Gutierrez)
•
A: Sec 25 states the a positive finding for the use
of dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying
aggravating circumstance.
•
It is defined as the duly recorded authorized
movements and custody of dangerous drugs
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
•
What is the effect of a qualifying aggravating
circumstance?
you cannot apply the provision of RPC to the
provisions of RA 9165.
•
It changes the nature of the crime or even
without changing the nature of the crime it will
bring about a higher imposition of penalty.
•
Exception to Section 98: If the offender is a minor
offender.

for acts punishable by life imprisonment to

death provided shall be reclusion perpetua
to death.
•
Where the offender is a minor, the penalty

SECTION 26 –ATTEMPT OR CONSPIRACY

Express exception to the general rule that in case
of violation of a penal law, there are no stages and
•
TITLE SIX
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
(Articles 200 –202)

there is no conspiracy.
•
As a rule, in case of violation of penal law, we have no
attempted stages. In violation of special penal laws,
conspiracy unless expressly provided because these
are only for violation of the RPC, for felonies. One of
those exceptions is under Section 26 of RA 9165.
Under Section 26 of RA 9165, any attempt or
conspiracy of any of the following acts shall be
ARTICLE 200 – GRAVE SCANDAL
Grave Scandal – a highly scandalous act
offensive to good morals, good customs and
decency committed in a public place or within
public knowledge or public view.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender performs an act or acts
punished already by penalty prescribed by law:
2. Such act or acts be HIGHLY SCANDALOUS as
offending against decency or good customs
1.
2.
Importation of any dangerous drug;
•
It is necessary that the act must be
highly scandalous and offensive to
morals, offensive to decency and
offensive to good customs.
Sale, trading, administration, delivery,
distribution, transportation of dangerous drug;
Maintenance of a den, dive, or resort where
any dangerous drug is used in any form;
Manufacture of any dangerous drug;
3.
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not
expressly falling within any other article of this
Code.
4.
5.
Cultivation or culture of plants which are the
sources of dangerous drugs.
•
The third element requires that it must
not expressly fall within any other
article of this code. It must not
constitute any other violation in the

•
If any of these acts mentioned is committed by the
offender, a mere attempt; or conspiracy will
already give rise to the crime as an exception to
the rule that in case of violation of penal law, there
are no stages in the commission of the crime and
conspiracy will not lie. So if any of the crime
committed is any of these five acts, mere attempt
will lie against the offender, conspiracy will lie
against the offender.
RPC.
Grave scandal is a crime of
last resort because you only file a
complaint for grave scandal when the
said act is not punishable under any
other article in the RPC.
4. The act or act complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or
view.
•
Then the fourth element provides that
the highly scandalous act must be
committed either in a public place or
within public knowledge or view. If the
highly scandalous act is committed in
a public place, the crime of grave
scandal will immediately arise. The
place being public, the law presumes
that someone may have witnessed
the commission of the highly
scandalous act. However, if the crime
is committed or if the highly
scandalous act is committed in a
private place, for the crime of grave
scandal to arise, it is necessary that it
must be witnessed by one or more
persons to be said that it is within the
public knowledge or public view.
As held in the case of People v Rolando Laylo, the
charge was only attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.
The sale was aborted because even before the said drug
poseur was able to transfer the dangerous drug to the
police officer, the police officers already introduced
themselves as such and arrested him. As such, we only

have attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.

SECTON 98 – LIMITED APPLICABILITY OF THE RPC
•
In Book I, under Article 10, the provisions of the
RPC shall apply suppletorily or supplementarily to
the provisions of the special penal laws UNLESS
the special penal law provides otherwise.
One of the exceptions is provided for in Sec 98 of
RA 9165, it is provided that the provisions of RPC,
as amended, shall not apply to the provisions of
RA 9165. The law uses the word shall; therefore

•
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So let us say that A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend
and it is their anniversary. They went to Luneta Park and at
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
exactly 12 midnight, in the middle of Luneta Park, they
the editor, the owner or proprietor of the
establishment that sells the said materials SHALL
BE HELD CRIMINALLY LIABLE.
The third act punished is the exhibition of indecent
shows, plays, scenes or acts in fairs, theaters,
cinemas or any other places.
Selling, giving away or exhibiting films,,
engravings, sculptures or literature which are
offensive to public morals.
engaged in sexual intercourse. No one witnessed their
sexual intercourse. Are they liable for grave scandal?
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. They
have the right to engage in sexual conduct but the
fact that they performed the sexual conduct in
Luneta Park, a public place makes the act
offensive to public morals, decency and good
customs and the said act does not constitute any
other violation in the RPC because they have the
right to engage in sexual intercourse. Therefore,
the crime committed is grave scandal because
they performed the act in a public place even if no
one saw the commission of the said act still, still
because it is performed in a public place , it is
presumed that someone may have seen the
III.

IV.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there is this building, when the person
entered the said building, on the floor of the said building
were these magazines. And the magazines contain men
and women engaging in sexual intercourse, naked women
and men, and other obscene materials. Who shall be held
liable when the place was raided by the police?
A: The author of the said literature, the editors
publishing such literature and the owner or
proprietor of the establishment where the said
magazines were being sold. They will be held

commission of the highly scandalous act.

Q:
So what if a wife and a husband, celebrating their
anniversary, engaged in sexual intercourse in their terrace.
So the act is committed in their premises, in the terrace of
their house. However, the gate was open and so passersby
would see them performing the sexual intercourse. Are they
liable for grave scandal?

criminally liable under Article 201.

VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES (ART 202)
A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. The
said act does not constitute another offense in the
RPC because they have the right to engage in
sexual conduct. The sexual conduct was
performed in the privacy of their home however;
people witnessed the commission of the said act.
It now becomes a highly scandalous act because
it is within the knowledge of the public or within
Q: Let us say that there is this man, a healthy man and he
can look for work but he does not want to work. So he was
just roaming around and he saw houses of prostitutes or
houses of ill-fames and he is always in this places. Can he
be held liable for vagrancy?
A: NO, because vagrancy has been decriminalized
by R.A. No. 10158 which was approved on March 27, 2012. We no longer have the crime of vagrancy. No person can longer be prosecuted
for being a vagrant.

public view.
Q: What if A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend. The
girlfriend is 11 yrs old and the boyfriend is 21 yrs old. And
because it is their monthsary the girlfriend thought of giving
herself as a gift and engaged in sexual intercourse in a
public place Are they liable for grave scandal?

• How about prostitution? Is there still a crime

for prostitution?
YES.

A: NO. They are not liable for grave scandal. The

man is liable for statutory rape. A man who had
sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years of
age, regardless of the consent, regardless of the
willingness of the said child, the man is liable for
statutory rape. Because in so far as criminal law is
concerned, a child under 12 yrs old has no
intelligence of his/her own and is not capable of
giving a valid consent. Therefore, even if the girl
voluntarily gave herself in so far as the law is
concerned, it is still statutory rape. It is not grave
scandal because the third element is wanting. The
said act fall under the violation of article of RPC
that is under article 266-A for rape. As I said,
grave scandal is a crime of last resort. You only
charge it when the crime committed does not
• Who is a prostitute?
•
A prostitute is any woman who, for money or
profit, indulges in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct. So it is the work or job of
a woman. Note that the law defines it to be a
woman therefore; a man cannot be
considered a prostitute. Before, if a man
engages in sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct he can be punished under Article 202
but now since vagrancy has been
decriminalized by R.A. No. 10158, he can no
longer be prosecuted. Only prostitutes who

are woman.
TITLE SEVEN
CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
 (Articles 203 – 245)

constitute any other violation in the RPC.

ARTICLE 201 – IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE

PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS, AND INDECENT
REQUISITES TO BE A PUBLIC OFFICER:

ARTICLE 203 – PUBLIC OFFICERS

1. One must be taking part in the performance of
public functions in the Government or one
must be performing in said Government or in
any of its branches public duties as an
SHOWS
Punishes:
 I.
Public proclamations of doctrines openly contrary
to public morals
Publication of obscene literature. In case of
publication of obscene literature, it is the author,
II.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
employee, agent or subordinate official, of any
rank or class; and
interpreted it. The judge cannot be held civilly,
administratively, and more so, criminally liable. The said
judgment is an unjust judgment because it was based on
this error in the interpretation of the law. However, there
was no intent on the part of the said judge. Considering the
basis of the unjust judgment is mere error. The said judge
acted in good faith.
2. That his authority to take part in the
performance of public functions or to perform
public duties must be –
a. by direct provision of the law; or
b. by popular election; or

c. by appointment by competent authority

If however, the unjust judgment is based on bad
faith, that is, it is based on ill-motive on the part of the said
judge, therefore, he can be held liable criminally, civilly and
Whenever a person applies to a public office, he has the
so-called, OATH OF OFFICE. If he is high-ranking official,
the oath is also before a high-ranking official. If he is a
cabinet secretary, the oath is before the President or to the
Supreme Court Chief Justice. If he is only an ordinary
employee, still he has oath of office. It is a document which

administratively
-
For him to be criminally liable, knowing that he
rendered an unjust judgment, it is necessary that
the unjust judgment is rendered out of ill-motive
or bad faith, out of greed, revenge, envy, or any
other ill-motive. Hence he is known to have
rendered an unjust judgment.

is entitled, “OATH OF OFFICE”, he merely signs it.

Felonies under TITLE SEVEN are felonies in violation of

this oath of office, they can either be:
BASED ON MERE ERROR – no criminal, no civil, no

administrative liability
NON-
FEASANCE
MISFEASANCE
MALFEASANCE
ARTICLE 205 – JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH
NEGLIGENCE
This is again committed by a judge, who in a case
submitted to him for decision, renders manifestly unjust
judgment.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted
to him for decision
3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust
4. The it is due to his inexcusable negligence or
ignorance

A public officer
performs an
A public officer
knowingly,
willfully refuses
or refrains from
doing an act
which is his
A public officer
performs in his
official acts in a
manner not in
accordance with
what the law
public office an act

prohibited by law.

do.
provides
official duty to

(GN: Performance
of some act which
ought not to be
(GN: Improper
performance of
some act which
might be lawfully
(GN: Omission
of some act

done
which ought to
done)
be performed)
•
ARTICLE
210-211
•
ARTICLE
•
MANIFESTLY UNJUST JUDGMENT – means that it is
evident that a judgment is unjust. A first year law student
would know that it is unjust, therefore it is manifestly unjust
judgment, because he acted in inexcusable negligence or
204 TO 207

ARTICLE 204 – KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST

JUDGMENT
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted
to him for decision
3. That the judgment is unjust

ignorance.
ARTICLE 206 – UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a judge
2. That he performs any of the following acts:
a. knowingly renders unjust interlocutory
order or decree

ARTICLE
208

4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust

b. renders a manifestly unjust
interlocutory order or decree through
inexcusable negligence or ignorance
UNJUST JUDGMENT – is one which is contrary to law, or
one that is not supported by evidence or both.
The source of unjust judgment can either be mere
error or ill-will. If the source of an unjust judgment is
mere error on the part of the judge, then the said judge
is not civilly, criminally, and administratively liable.

•
ARTICLE 207 – MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
 ELEMENTS:

ILLUSTRATION:
1. The offender is a judge
In a case submitted to him for decision, the judge
wrongfully interpreted a provision of law. It is a new law,
there is no jurisprudence yet, the judge wrongfully
2. There is a proceeding in his court
3. He delays the administration of justice
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
4. The delay is malicious, that is, delay is caused
by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict
-

THOSE WHO CAN CAUSE THE PROSECUTION OF THE

OFFENDERS:
damage on either party in the case.
ARTICLE 208 – PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES;
NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE
ARTICLE 209 – BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN
ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR – REVELATION OF
SECRETS
ACTS PUNISHED AS BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY
ATTORNEY:
-
-
Judges
Barangay Chairman
Persons in authority

•
ACTS PUNISHABLE:
I.
By maliciously refraining from instituting
prosecution against violators of the law
Note that the first crime, he knows that a
crime was committed but he does not
prosecute the offender;
•
I.
By causing damage to his client, either
a. by any malicious breach of
professional duty
II.
By maliciously tolerating the commission
of offenses
the second act, a crime was about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission. It
must be done with MALICE. Absent
malice, Article 208 will not apply.
b. by inexcusable negligence or
ignorance
THERE MUST BE DAMAGE TO HIS
•

II.
By revealing any of the secrets of his
client learned by him in his professional
capacity.
CLIENT
ELEMENTS OF DERELICTION OF DUTY IN THE
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES:
1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of
the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution
of, or to prosecute, offenses.
2. That there is a dereliction of the duties of his
office; that is knowing the commission of the
crime, he does not cause the prosecution of the
criminal or knowing that a crime is about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission.
•
DAMAGE IS NOT NECESSARY
III.
By undertaking the defense of the
opposing party in the same case, without
the consent of his first client, after having
undertaken the defense of said first client
or after having received confidential
information from said client.
3. That the offender acts with malice and
•
IF THE CLIENT CONSENTS TO
THE ATTORNEY’S TAKING THE
DEFENSE OF THE OTHER PARTY,
THERE IS NO CRIME

deliberate intent to favor the violator of the law.

•
•
Otherwise known as DERELICTION.
Can only be committed by a public officer or a officer of
the law who has the duty to cause the prosecution of
or to prosecute the offenders. The said public officer
commits dereliction of duty in the prosecution of
offenses under any of the following circumstances:
ELEMENTS:
1.
Causing damage to his client, either:
by any malicious breach of professional duty
by inexcusable negligence or ignorance
Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned
by him in his professional capacity
Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in
the same case, without the consent of his first
client or after having received confidential
information from said client
a.
b.
a.
knowing the commission of the crime, he
does not cause the prosecution of the
criminal, or
2.
3.
b.
knowing that a crime is about to be
committed, he tolerates its commission
and the said offender acts with malice and
deliberate intent to favor the violator of the
law
•

•
The dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses
cannot be committed by just any public officer.
The public officer must be charged with the
prosecution of the cases or he is the one who can
cause the prosecution of these offenders.
•
Under Article 209, this betrayal of trust is IN ADDITION
TO A PROPER ADMINISTRATIVE CASE which may
be filed against an attorney or solicitor. So aside from
the criminal case in violation of Article 209, he can also
be charged in a case also for disbarment, for violation
of lawyer’s oath of duty may be filed against him, and
these two cases can be proceeded at the same time.
CHARGED WITH THE PROSECUTION OF THE
OFFENDERS:
Fiscals
Prosecutors
State Prosecutors

-
-
-
ILLUSTRATION:

A lawyer for 3 consecutive times, without any

justifiable reason, failed to file his formal offer of exhibits.
During the first time he was given 15 days, he failed to file,
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
second time he was given 15 days, he failed to file. On the
X. Atty. X signed a contract and he is now the counsel of B.
Is Atty. X liable for betrayal of trust by an attorney?
A: Atty. X is liable for betrayal of trust by an
attorney. He takes the case of B, the opposing
party, even after he has already taken the case
of A and after he has acquired valuable
information about his client. How can he prevent
himself from being convicted of the betrayal of
trust?
third time, he was given 5 days still, he failed to file, without
giving any justifiable reason for his non-compliance with the
order of the court. By reason thereof, there is no evidence
in behalf of the defense of his client was admitted by the
Court. Because only evidences offered may be admitted by
the court. And so, the judge convicted the accused, the
client was prejudiced because of the counsel’s malicious
breach of his professional duty. It is incumbent upon any
counsel to file a pleading within the reglementary period
provided by law or required by the court.
•
He must first secure the consent of the
said first client
-
In the said problem, there was no consent. The
said consent was only in the motion to withdraw.
The said consent in the motion to withdraw is not
the consent on the acceptance of the case. For
every motion to withdraw, there must be a
consent written, otherwise the court will not grant
the motion to withdraw. The consent here is to
secure or to accept the service s of the other
party.
-
For failing to do so without any justifiable reason,
he caused damage to his client by malicious
breach of his professional duty.

Q: What if Atty. A was the counsel of X, he was behind bars

for the crime of kidnapping for ransom. Atty. A visited X to
ask the facts of the case in order for him to study and to
nput up a good defense. During their conversation, X
informed his counsel, Atty. A that there will be another
kidnapping tomorrow night at 9PM in Quezon City, to be
done by his other gang mates who were at large. Atty. A,
upon knowing this information from his client X,
immediately went to the police officers of Quezon City in
order to pre-empt the commission of the crime. Is Atty. A
liable for the second act because he divulged the secrets of
his client which he learned in his professional capacity?
A: Atty. A is not liable under Article 209. The
-
Since consent was not given, he is liable for
betrayal of trust by an attorney.
•
Just remember aside from betrayal of
trust, an attorney or solicitor can also be
held liable of administrative case. So
there may be disbarment.
•
He can be disbarred or he can be
suspended by reason of committing any
of these acts.
secrets being referred to under Article 209 refers
to the past crimes of the said client and it refers
to the facts and circumstances related to the
crime which is being handed by the said Attorney
•
I.
By agreeing to perform, or by performing,
in consideration of any offer, promise, gift
or present – an act constituting a crime,
in connection with the performance of his
official duties.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
officer with a view of committing
some crime.
or counsel.
also to the STATE, to the GOVERNMENT.
It is his duty to the Government, to the State of
any future crime that is about to be committed
more than his duty to his client. Hence, in this
case, since it refers to a future crime, for the
protection of the state and the citizenry, it is
incumbent upon him to divulge, disclose or to
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he

ARTICLE210 – DIRECT BRIBERY

ACTS PUNISHABLE:

It does not refer to future crimes that are still

about to be committed. When a lawyer takes his
oath of office, he says, or he promise, he swears
that he shall be liable not only to the client, but

executes be connected with the

performance of his official duties.

reveal the said secrets.

II.
By accepting a gift in consideration of the
execution of an act which does not
constitute a crime, in connection with the
Q: What if A filed a case against B, Atty. X was the counsel
of A, A failed to give Atty. X his appearance list for 5
consecutive hearings, no appearance list. So Atty. X, filed a
motion to withdraw as counsel of A. The said motion to
withdraw was with the CONSENT OF A, because without
the consent of A, the said motion to withdraw will not be
granted by the court. So the court granted and Atty. X is no
longer the counsel of A. When B learned about this, went
immediately to the office of X and secured the services of

performance of his official duty.

ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
3. That such offer or promise be
is not a criminal act. It is his official thing to do,
but he doesn’t want to do it without the bribe first
to be given to him. So it is only upon
ACCEPTANCE OF THE BRIBE that criminal

liability for direct bribery will arise.

accepted, or received by the public
officer in consideration of the
execution of an act, which does not
constitute a crime, but the act must
be unjust
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
Whatever may be the act constituting direct
bribery, in order to amount to direct bribery, it must always
be in connection with the performance of his official duty. If
it is not in connection with his official duty, it could other

crime like estafa or swindling, but NOT DIRECT BRIBERY.

III.
By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining,
from doing something which it is his
official duty to do, in consideration of gift
or promise.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender be a public officer within
the scope of Article 203
2. The offender accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or present
by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be
accepted, or received by the public
off icer to refrain from doing
something which it is his official duty
to do so.
ACEJAS, III vs. PEOPLE
It is the second act of direct bribery that has been
violated. The second act because it is the duty of the said
BID agent to return the passport. The duty to return the
passport is not a criminal act. It is also not an act of
refraining to do so. But he does not want to perform the act

without the bribe, so he becomes liable under the 2

nd
act.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a mother wanted her daughter to work in
another country. The daughter was still a minor, 16 years
old. So what the mother did, was to ask the civil registrar to
alter the birth date or the date in the certificate of live birth
with a promise that the first 2 months of the salary of the
daughter will be given to the civil registrar. The civil
registrar altered the date in the birth certificate. What crime/
crimes is/are committed by the civil registrar and by the
mother?
A: The civil registrar is liable for direct
bribery because he agreed to perform an act
constituting a crime in consideration of a promise
that the 2 months salary will be given to him. The
said act is in connection with his performance of
his official duty. Therefore he is liable for direct
bribery. He actually performs the act, he actually
committed a crime, therefore he is also liable for
the falsification of a public document because he
actually altered the birth date which is a very
important date in the birth certificate so he is
also liable for the falsification of a public
document.
4.
That the act which the offender
agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the
Under the First Act - By agreeing to perform or
-
If the thing which the public officer is required to
do, is an act which will constitute a crime, a mere
agreement to do so, will already give rise to
direct bribery. It is not necessary that he actually
commits the crime, it is not necessary that he
actually receives the gift or present.

performance of his official duties.

performing, in consideration of offer or promise, gift or

present any act constituting a crime in connection with
the performance of his official duties

•
A MERE AGREEMENT WILL SUFFICE.
Likewise in the Third Act - By agreeing to
refrain or by refraining from doing an act which is his
official duty to do, in consideration of an offer,
promise, gift or present.
-
If the thing that a public officer is required to do, is
to refrain from doing an act which is his official
duty to do, a mere agreement to refrain to do an
act will already give rise to direct bribery. It is not
necessary to refrain from doing an act, it is not
Without the said bribe, the mother would not
have committed falsification, so are you going to
complex them? because direct bribery is a
necessary means to commit falsification.
•
Even if in reality, they should be complex
because direct bribery is a necessary
means to commit falsification, you cannot
complex them because ARTICLE 210
PROHIBITS SUCH COMPLEXITY OF
CRIMES.
necessary to receive the said gift.
However, if the thing that a public officer is
required to do, does not constitute a crime, under the
Second Act, mere agreement will not suffice. There
must be actual acceptance of the thing. There must be
acceptance of the gift, in consideration of the execution of
an act which does not constitute a crime in connection with
the performance of his official duty. WHY?

Under Article 210, it is expressly provided that

the penalty for direct bribery shall be IN
ADDITION TO THE LIABILITY FOR THE
CRIME COMMITTED. Here, he actually altered,
-
because the thing that he is being required to do
actually committed the crime, therefore his
liability for falsification is in addition for his

CRIMINAL LAW 2
liability for direct bribery. Therefore, 2 separate
distinct charges have to be filed against the civil
registrar, we have direct bribery and the other
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with
law enforcement
2. The offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has committed a
crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or
death
3. The offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting
the offender in consideration of any promise, gift
or present.
• Qualified bribery is committed by any public officer who
is in charge with the enforcement of the law. So, in
order to amount to qualified bribery, it is necessary that
the offender whom the public officer does not want to
prosecute must have committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death.

one is falsification of the public document.

The mother is liable for corruption of public
official (Art. 212). Direct bribery is the crime of
the public officer who receives the bribe. On the
other hand, the private individual or the public
officer who gives the bribe is liable for corruption
of public official under Art. 212. (Refer to Art.

212 – elements)
The mother gives a promise under circumstances
in which the public officer becomes liable for direct bribery. She is liable for corruption of public official. The mother is also liable for falsification of a
public document as a principal by inducement.Without the bribe, without the said inducement, the said public
officer will not have committed the said falsification.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A police officer was conducting a patrol. He saw a man
behind the tree, looking at the other house adjacent to the
tree as if waiting for someone. So the police officer parked
his vehicle and observed what this man would do. The
moment that a man came out of the gate of the house, this
man hiding behind the tree, immediately went directly to
him and shot him 5 times, and killing him instantly. Then,
the said man rode a motorcycle and left. The police officer
chased him. The Police officer arrested him, however, he
gave the police officer P500,000 and told the police officer,
“Mr. Police officer, you saw nothing, you heard nothing.”
And the police officer allowed him to leave. What crime/
crimes is/are committed by the said police officer?
A: The said police officer is liable for
qualified bribery. The crime committed by the
said man is murder, because obviously, in his act
 of killing, there was treachery, the other party
was defenseless and obviously the said man
deliberately and consciously adopted the ways
means and methods employed by him in killing
the victim. Since there was treachery, the crime
committed is murder, punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death. His failure to arrest and
prosecute this man constitute qualified bribery

ARTICLE211 – INDIRECT BRIBERY

ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer
2. That he accepts gifts
3. That the gifts are offered to him by reason of his

office.
•
Indirect Bribery is committed if the public officer
accepts any gift or present by reason of his office that
he owns. In case of indirect bribery, the public officer is
not deemed required to do a thing. By the MERE
ACCEPTANCE, indirect bribery is consummated. NO
ACCEPTANCE, NO CRIME IS COMMITTED.

ILLUSTRATION:
A is the newly appointed secretary of DENR. On his
first day of office, Mr. X visited him, paid a courtesy call. Mr.
X is the president of a big logging company. They
exchanged some pleasantries, thereafter, when this
president of the logging company left, he placed a small
box on the table. When he left, the new DENR secretary
opened the box and it was a key to a car parked in front of
the building. The new DENR secretary used it and drove
the car
He is liable for Indirect Bribery. The president of
the logging company does not require him to do
anything, it was merely given to him because he
was newly appointed as the DENR secretary. His
acceptance brings about consummated indirect
bribery; therefore, indirect bribery has no
attempted or frustrated stage because outside
acceptance, no crime is committed.

because he did so after accepting P500,000.

Q: What if a police officer was conducting a patrol, he saw
A and B fighting, boxing each other, killing each other, until
they already on the ground. In the course thereof, A pulls
out his balisong and stabbed B several times on the heart,
a vital organ. B died instantly. Thereafter, A ran away, the
police officer tried to catch up with A and he was able to
arrest A. However A, gave the police officer P100,000. The
police officer allowed him to leave. What crime/crimes is/
are committed by the said police officer?
A: The crime committed by A in killing B is
precedent by a fight, therefore it is merely
homicide. Homicide is punishable only by
reclusion temporal. Since it is only punishable by
-
ARTICLE211-A – QUALIFIED BRIBERY
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
reclusion temporal, therefore, qualified bribery is
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence.
ELEMENTS:
1. The said offender was in charge of his official,
administrative or judicial function
2. That he acted with manifest partiality, evident
bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence
3. The said accused caused any undue injury to
any party, including the government, or gave any
private party unwarranted benefits, advantage, or
preference in the discharge of his official

not applicable.
He committed direct bribery, because he
accepts a bribe, in consideration of an act of
refraining to arrest the said criminal. He actually
refrain from arresting and prosecuting the
criminal, therefore in addition to direct bribery, he
also committed dereliction of duty in the
prosecution of offenses because he actually
committed dereliction of duty by refraining from
arresting the person who has actually committed
a crime. So this time, there are 2 crimes
committed:

functions.
SANTOS v PEOPLE

•
•
DIRECT BRIBERY (ARTICLE 210) AND
DERELICTION OF DUTY IN THE
PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
(ARTICLE 208)
•
The Supreme Court said that there are two acts
punished under Section 3 (e) of RA 3019:
1. Causing any undue injury; or
2. Giving any private party any unwarranted
benefit, advantage or preference
•The law uses the conjunctive “or”; therefore,
the fact that the offender causes any
undue injury to any party or the fact that
the offender gave any party unwarranted
benefit, advantage or preference, they
can be charged distinctly or separately
from each other.
The Supreme Court also stated that the
elements of Sec 3 (e) of RA 3019
UNDUE INJURY – means there must be an actual
damage caused to the offended party. Absent any
actual damage caused to the offended party, then
ARTICLE 212 – CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives
or presents to a public officer.
2. That the offers or promises are made or the
gifts or the gifts or presents given to a public
officer, under circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect
•

bribery.
THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
(RA 3019)

PUBLIC OFFICER
- a public officer is any

section 3 (e) is not violated.

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. (Sec 2, RA 3019)
(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

•
The public officer entered into any contract or
transaction on behalf of the government. The
said contract is manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the government.
JAVIER v SANDIGANBAYAN
Although Javier has been appointed as a
representative of the private sector, in the book
publishing board attached to the office of the
president (NBDB), she is still considered as a
public officer; first, the said board functions as a
collegial body performing public functions;
second, according to SC, she was receiving
allowance, a salary even though nominal, from the
government. Hence, she considered as a public

In NAVA v PALLATTAO, the violation was Section 3 (g).

The DECS officials bought laboratory science materials and
after COA audited, it was discovered that there was an
overpricing. The same is true in CAUNAN v PEOPLE
where Joey Marquez and company bought walis-tingting,
and according to the COA auditors, there was also
overpricing of these walis-tingting. But in the case of Nava,
there was conviction but in the case of Caunan, there was
an acquittal.

officer.
SECTION 3 – CORRUPT PRACTICES OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
•
Where lies the difference?
•
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 3:
•
In the case of Nava, the COA officials proved
the overpricing because they bought the very
same laboratory materials from the same
supplier where the DECS officials bought and
(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
CRIMINAL LAW 2
by reason thereof, it was discovered that
there was indeed an overpricing.
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
•
However, in the case of Caunan, Joey
Marquez bought from a different supplier than
where the COA officials bought. The COA
officials bought from a Las Pinas supplier
which they compared with the price of walis-
tingting bought by Joey Marquez. Not only did
they buy the said walis-tingting from a
different supplier, the walis-tingting bought by
COA officials was of different specifications
from that of the walis-tingting bought by Joey
Marquez and company. Hence, the Supreme
Court said that prosecution was not able to
prove beyond reasonable doubt that there
was overpricing. Because the walis-tingting
bought by Joey Marquez was very much
different from the walis-tingting bought by the
COA officials. They were not able to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that there was
overpricing because of the difference in

commit such violation or offense.

Persons liable:
1.
Public officer who persuades, induces, or
influences another public officer;
Public officer who is persuaded induced or
influenced
2.
Note: requesting or receiving any gift, present, or benefit is

not required in this provision.

(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 part, wherein the
public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under

the law.
Note:
•
the lack of demand is immaterial, the law uses the
word OR between requesting and receiving.
There must be clear intention on the part of the public
officer and consider it as his or her own property from
then on. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by
any other sign, circumstance or act to show
•
specifications.
•

•
In both cases, there was NO PUBLIC

acceptance is not sufficient to lead the court to

conclude that the crime has been committed
Refers to a public officer whose official intervention is
required by law in a contract or transaction
BIDDING.
•
Will the mere lack of public bidding bring
about a violation of Section 3 (g) of RA 3019?

•
The Supreme Court said that mere lack of
public bidding may mean that the government
was not able to get the best price for the thing
purchased. However, it does not bring about
a violation of Section 3 (g) because what
Section 3 (g) requires is the transaction must
be manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to
the government and mere lack of public
bidding will not show such gross and manifest
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or
for another, from any person for whom the public officer, in
any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will
secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in
consideration for the help given or to be given, without
prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has pending
official business with him during the pendency thereof or
within one year after its termination.

disadvantage.
SECTION 4 – PROHIBITION ON PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS
(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.
•
Under Section 4, it is unlawful for any private
individual who has a close personal relation
to any public officer to request, ask or receive
present from any person in any case from
which the said public officer has to control.
Close personal relation does not only
include family members. It also includes those
who have social and fraternal relations;
therefore even a private individual who is not
in conspiracy of a public officer can be held
liable under RA 3019.
•
(f) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,
without sufficient justification, to act within a reasonable
time on any matter pending before him for the purpose of
obtaining, directly or indirectly, from any person interested
in the matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his own interest
or giving undue advantage in favor of or discriminating
against any other interested party.
•
Not only public officers but also private
individuals can be held liable under RA 3019.

Enumerated corrupt practices of Public Officials

(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
(g) Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any contract
or transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
the same, whether or not the public officer profited or will
profit thereby.
SECTION 8 – PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF AND
DISMISSAL DUE TO UNEXPLAINED WEALTH
•
When is there a prima facie presumption of
graft and corrupt practices?
(h) Director or indirectly having financing 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.
•
There arises a prima facie presumption of
graft and corrupt practices if a public officer has
been found to have in his possession money or
property, whether in his name or in that name of
another person, which is manifestly out of
proportion from his lawful income. There arises a
prima facie presumption of graft and corrupt
practices.
(i) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for personal
gain, or having a material interest in any transaction or act
requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which
he is a member, and which exercises discretion in such
approval, even if he votes against the same or does not
participate in the action of the board, committee, panel or
group.

SECTION 10 – COMPETENT COURT & RA 8429

Where do you file a case for violation of RA
3019?
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those
public officers responsible for the approval of manifestly
unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transaction or acts by the
board, panel or group to which they belong.
•
•

•
You file a case of violation of Article 3019
before the Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan
has jurisdiction unless otherwise provided by law.
There is a law, RA 8429 which provides for
the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan. Under this law,
if a public officer is of salary grade 27 and above,
it must be before the Sandiganbayan. If the public
officer is below salary grade 27, it must be before
the RPC.
(j) Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or
not legally entitled to such license, permit, privilege or
advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one
who is not so qualified or entitled.
(k) Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account of his
official position to unauthorized persons, or releasing such
information in advance of its authorized release date.
SECTION 11 – PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES
When is the prescriptive period?
Note: if damage was caused, Article 229 under the RPC is

•
committed.
•
Violation for RA 3019 shall prescribe
after 15 years. However, the right of the
government to forfeit or to recover ill-gotten
wealth does not prescribe. So there are no
latches and estoppel insofar as the right of
the government to recover ill-gotten wealth
is concerned.
SECTION 9 – PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS
•
Under Section 9, both private individuals and
public officers have just the same penalty. It is
six years and one month to fifteen years plus

forfeiture of the ill-gotten wealth.

SECTION 7 – STATEMENT OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

& RA 6713
When do you start counting the
running of the prescriptive period of
crime?
From the time the crime has been
committed or if it is not known, that is from
the time of the discovery of the said crime,
then it is from the time of the institution of
the criminal perseverance.

•
• When do the officers file the statement of assets,
liabilities and net worth?
•
• The said public officer can file his SALN within 30
days from assumption into office. And then it must be
filed on or before the 30th day of April of the next years
and within 30 days after separation from the service.

• In RA 3019, it is stated “on or before 15th of April”

but there is another law which provides also for the
filing of SALN and that is RA6713 which is the code of
ethical standards for public officers.

• Under RA 6713, and this is what is being followed, it

must be on or before the 30th day of April.

• So you file first within 30 days upon assumption to

office and then the years thereafter on or before the
30th day of April and then if you got separated from
office, within 30 days from separation from office.
SECTION 13 – SUSPENSION AND LOSS OF BENEFITS
Q: What if a public officer, has been charged for violation of
RA 3019, the Ombudsman found probable cause. The case
was now filed before the Sandiganbayan. Is it incumbent
upon the Sandiganbayan to immediately place him under
preventive suspension? Is preventive suspension
automatic? Is preventive suspension mandatory?
A: Preventive suspension is mandatory but it
is not automatic. There must first be a pre-
suspension period to determine the validity of the
information. The moment the Sandiganbayan
discovers the said information is valid, sufficient in
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
substance to bring about a conviction, it is now
1. Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or
malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;
mandatory upon the Sandiganbayan to place the
said accused public officer under preventive
suspension.
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift,
share, percentage, kickbacks or any/or entity in connection
with any government contract or project or by reason of the
office or position of the public officer concerned;
So it is not automatic because there must first be
a pre-suspension period. The only issue in the
pre-suspension period is the information filed by
the Ombudsman against the said public officer
valid, is it sufficient enough to bring about a
conviction in court? If the answer is yes,
immediately, mandatory on the part of the
Sandiganbayan, a ministerial duty, the said public
officer must be placed under preventive
suspension. It it ministerial not discretionary, not
either or.
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 or
participation including the promise of future employment in
any business enterprise or undertaking;
•
For how long should the suspension be?
•The suspension must not exceed the maximum
of ninety days, in consonance with Section 52
of the Administrative Code.
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

SECTION 14 - EXCEPTION
6. By taking undue advantage of official position, authority,
relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich
himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the
Q: What if a public officer saw an old man waiting line. So
the old man received a notice, the notice said that his
license is ready, it has already been approved. So he was
waiting in line for the release of his license, it was already
approved. The head of office saw the old man. 85 years
old, under the heat of the sun and with his frail body. So the
head of office took the man and the head of office asked
the man to his office. The head of office asked the
secretary, “Is the license of this man approved?” The
secretary said yes. The head of office said, “get it.” The
secretary took it and gave to the head of office. The head of
office, upon seeing that it is approved, and the man was
only waiting for its release, gave it to the man; therefore the
man need not wait in the long line. The man was so
thankful that the following day, the man went back to the
office with two big bilaos of bibingka to the said head of
office to say thank you. The said head of office received
two big bilaos of bibingka. Is the said head of office liable
under RA 3019?

Philippines
Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder, Penalties. Any
public officer who, by himself or in connivance with
members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity,
business associates, subordinates or other persons,
amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through
a combination or series of overt or criminal acts as
described in Section 1 (d) hereof, in the aggregate amount
or total value of at least Seventy-five million pesos
(P75,000,000.00), shall be guilty of the crime of plunder
and shall be punished by life imprisonment with perpetual
absolute disqualification from holding any public office. Any
person who participated with the said public officer in the
commission of plunder shall likewise be punished. In the
imposition of penalties, the degree of participation and the
attendance of mitigating and extenuating circumstances

shall be considered by the court.

A: No. It falls under the exception. Under
Sec. 4. Rule of Evidence. For purposes of establishing the
crime of plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each
and every criminal act done by the accused in furtherance
of the scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or
acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish
beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts
Section 14, unsolicited gifts or presents of small or
insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary
token of friendship or gratitude, according to local customs
or usage is excepted from the provisions of RA 3019;
therefore the said public officer will not be held criminally

indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or conspiracy.

liable.
Sec. 6. Prescription of Crime. The crime punishable under
this Act shall prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the
right of the State to recover properties unlawfully acquired
by public officers from them or from their nominees or
transferees shall not be barred by prescription, laches, or
RA 7080: ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
Ill-gotten wealth
means any asset, property, business enterprise or
material possession of any person within the purview of
Section two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly
through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or series of the
-

estoppel.
following means or similar schemes:
Torture refers to:

CRIMINAL LAW 2
(i) The administration or drugs to induce
1.
an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether
confession and/or reduce mental competency; or
physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him/
her or a third person information or a confession;
punishing him/her for an act he/she or a third
person has committed or is suspected of having
committed;
(ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or
certain symptoms of a disease; and
2.
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
(b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts committed
by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority
which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or
undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
3.
4.
or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third
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 the consent or
acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of
a person in authority.
(1) Blindfolding;
(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/fher relative(s)
with bodily harm, execution or other wrongful acts;

(3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret

detention places;
It does not include pain or Buffering arising only from,
inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.

(4) Prolonged interrogation;

Acts of torture:
(5) Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial", public
display or public humiliation of a detainee or
prisoner;
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another in his/her custody that causes
severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
more parts of the body, such as:
(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
deprived of liberty from one place to another,
creating the belief that he/she shall be summarily
executed;
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,
kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt or other
similar objects, and jumping on the stomach;
(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed
by the person's family, relatives or any third party;
(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with
spoiled food, animal or human excreta and other
stuff or substances not normally eaten;
(9) Denial of sleep/rest;
(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places, shaving
the victim's head or putting marks on his/her body
against his/her will;
(3) Electric shock;
(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically
RA 9745 Anti-Torture Act:
heated rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of pepper
or other chemical substances on mucous
membranes, or acids or spices directly on the
wound(s);
(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to
communicate with any member of his/her family;
and
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water
polluted with excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood
until the brink of suffocation;
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological
torture.
Any confession, admission or statement obtained as a
result of torture shall be inadmissible in evidence in any
proceedings, except if the same is used as evidence
(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
stressful bodily position;

(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion

of foreign objects into the sex organ or rectum, or
electrical torture of the genitals;
against a person or persons accused of committing torture.
Rights of Tortured Victims:
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts
of the body such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
(a) To have a prompt and an impartial investigation by the
CHR and by agencies of government concerned such as
the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Public Attorney's
Office (PAO), the PNP, the National Bureau of Investigation
(NBI) and the AFP. A prompt investigation shall mean a
maximum period of sixty (60) working days from the time a
complaint for torture is filed within which an investigation
report and/or resolution shall be completed and made
available. An appeal whenever available shall be resolved
within the same period prescribed herein,
(9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the
teeth;
(10) Pulling out of fingernails;
(11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as
sunlight and extreme cold;
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials
placed over the head to the point of asphyxiation;
(b) To have sufficient government protection against all
forms of harassment; threat and/or intimidation as a
consequence of the filing of said complaint or the
presentation of evidence therefor. In which case, the State
through its appropriate agencies shall afford security in
(13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the
perception, memory. alertness or will of a person,
such as:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
order to ensure his/her safety and all other persons
involved in the investigation and prosecution such as, but
not limited to, his/her lawyer, witnesses and relatives; and
(4) Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in
consequence of torture, the victim shall have become
insane, imbecile, impotent, blind or maimed for life; and

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. (Sec 15)

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. (sec 16)

(5) Torture committed against children.

(c) To be accorded sufficient protection in the manner by
which he/she testifies and presents evidence in any fora in
order to avoid further trauma.
Note:

Who are Criminally Liable. - Any person who actually
participated Or induced another in the commission of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal
Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or
senior government official who issued an order to any lower
ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose
shall be held equally liable as principals.

The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of
the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the PNP
and other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as
a principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman
and degrading treatment or punishment for any act or
omission, or negligence committed by him/her that shall
have led, assisted, abetted or allowed, whether directly or
indirectly, the commission thereof by his/her subordinates.
If he/she has knowledge of or, owing to the circumstances
at the time, should have known that acts of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
shall be committed, is being committed, or has been
committed by his/her subordinates or by others within his/
her area of responsibility and, despite such knowledge, did
not take preventive or corrective action either before,
during or immediately after its commission, when he/she
has the authority to prevent or investigate allegations of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or investigate allegations
of such act, whether deliberately or due to negligence shall
also be liable as principals.
Refouler- No person shall be expelled, returned or
extradited to another State where there are substantial
grounds to believe that such person shall be in danger of
being subjected to torture.
CHAPTER THREE – FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL
EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS

ARTICLE 213 – FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC

TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES
Article 213 punishes two (2) acts:
1.
2.
Fraud against public treasury (par.1)

Illegal exactions (par. 2)

ELEMENTS OF FRAUD AGAINST PUBLIC TREASURY
(ART. 213, PAR. 1):
1.
2.
That the offender is a public officer
that he should have taken advantage of his office, that
is he intervened in the transaction of his official
capacity
That he entered into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or made use of any other scheme
with regard to:
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment is
being committed and without having participated therein,
either as principal or accomplice, takes part subsequent to
its commission in any of the following manner:
3.

4.

1.
2.
3.
furnishing supplies
the making of contracts
the adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds
(a) By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
That the accused had intent to defraud the

Government
(b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
and/or destroying the effects or instruments
thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or(c) By
harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of
the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment:
Provided, That the accessory acts are done with
the abuse of the official's public functions.
So here, the public officer took advantage of his official
position in entering into contract which involves the
furnishing of supplies, or which involves public funds or
property and the intention is to DEFRAUD THE
GOVERNMENT. It is not necessary that the Government,
the treasury be actually be defrauded, it suffices that
entering in the said contract, the intention of the said

offender, the public officer, is to defraud the Government.

ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL EXACTION (ART. 213, PAR. 2)
Aggravating Circumstances in torture:
(1) Torture resulting in the death of any person;
(2) Torture resulting in mutilation;
(3) Torture with rape;
1.
That the offender is a public officer entrusted with the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
He is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:
2.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
1.

2.

3.
Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those authorized
by law; or
Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially; or
Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of
a nature different from that provided by law.
Q: So what if it was January 2, all kinds of payment are
being made at the start of the year. So the collecting officer
in the treasurer’s office rans out of official receipt (O.R.).
And so he got a half sheet of typewriting paper and he note
there about the said payment and a provisional receipt and
he gave it to the same person who made the payment. Is
the said collecting officer liable of illegal exaction?
A: He IS NOT. Because he did not voluntarily

O.R., it was not voluntary on his part. It was an

emergency situation. It is good that she even
fail to issue the said O.R. He ran out of the said
Here, the offender is a COLLECTING PUBLIC
OFFICER. A public officer who has been entrusted with
duty to collect taxes, licenses, fees or other imposts. Only
this kind of public officer can commit this crime because
ILLEGAL EXACTION involves violation of rules on
gave a provisional receipt as a proof of
payment. In this case, he cannot be held liable
for illegal exaction.

collection.
3
rd
Act - Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way
of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law.
sums different from or larger than those authorized by
law;or
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: There was this cashier in the city treasurer’s office. Here
comes X, X said that he is going to get a cedula (residence
certificate) and then X said, “How much am I going to pay?”
and then, the cashier or the collecting officer said, “you
have to pay Php200” but it is actually Php20. X said, “hmp,
angmahalpala, ayokona.” and so he left. Is the said
collecting officer liable of any crime?
1
st
Act - Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
Here, under the third act, it does not refer to the
amount of payment. It refers to the KIND OR NATURE OF
PAYMENT. So, when the law says that it should be paid in
cash, ONLY CASH may be received by the said collecting

officer.
ILLUSTRATION:
So the collecting officer is known as a sabungero. So
here comes one of the persons who was making payment.
He has no money, but said, he has a magandangtandang.
And so, that was the payment received. He commits a
A:YES, he is liable. For merely demanding an
amount larger than that authorized by law, he is
already liable for ILLEGAL EXACTION under
Article 213, Par. 2.

violation of illegal exaction.

Q: What if the person who demanded an amount or

different from or larger than that which is provided for by
law is an officer, a collecting officer from the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, or a collecting officer form the Bureau of
Customs. Is he liable under Article 213?
Q: He is already liable, he merely demanded, but what if in
the same problem, X said he was going to get a cedula.
The collecting officer saw him and he appears to be poor
man and so X asked the collecting officer, “How much am I
going to pay?” and the collecting officer took pity of X and
said, “Only Php 10”. So, the poor man said, “Oh, I have
more money, I’ll get two”. Is the collecting officer liable of
A: He is not liable for illegal exaction under
Art. 213. He is liable under the Tax Code or
under the Tariffs and Customs Code. Under Art.
213, it is expressly provided that if the
collecting officer is a collecting officer coming
from the Bureau of Internal Revenue or Bureau
of Customs is not liable under this Article. The
reason here is that, this collecting officer from
the BIR and the BOC, have the right to ask for
penalties, surcharges, and compromise.
Therefore, they can always demand and
amount different from or that which is larger
than that authorized by law. If they exceeded
that authority, then they are liable under the
Tariffs and Customs Code or under the Tax

any crime?
A:YES, he is liable because he demanded an
amount different from that authorized by law. Note
that what the law requires is the demanding of an
amount, directly or indirectly, different from or
larger than those authorized by law. Therefore,
even if it is lower, so long as it is different from that
provided by law, and so long as it is demanded by
the said collecting officer, then it is considered as

ILLEGAL EXACTION.

It is not necessary for the said collecting officer to

have misappropriate the funds, the moment that he
misappropriates the funds, in addition to illegal
exaction, he may also be held liable for
MALVERSATION, because Illegal Exaction is only
about the rules on collection. It has nothing to do
with the appropriation or misappropriation of funds
or property. Only a violation of the rules on
Code, but NOT UNDER THE RPC.

ARTICLE 214 – OTHER FRAUDS

ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
He takes advantage of his official position
He commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in
Articles 315-318
1.
2.
3.

collection.
2
nd
Act - Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
If any of the public officer commits any of the frauds or
by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially;
deceits constituting ESTAFA or SWINDLING, under Art.
ILLUSTRATION:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
315-318, and he does so by taking advantage of his official
position, his criminal liability is Other Frauds under Art. 214.
permitting any other person to take such public funds
or property
-
Not estafa, Not swindling. the reason is that in
case of a public officer, there is additional
penalty. If you look at Article 214, the law says
that the penalty is the same penalty as the first
offense under Art. 315-318. But additional to
that, temporary disqualification to perpetual
disqualification for having taken advantage of his
official position. Therefore, if it is a public officer
who commits estafa or swindling, the crime is
under Art. 214 and there is an additional penalty.
4.
Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property

Malversation of Public Funds and Property can be

committed either through a positive act, that is, that the
said public officer is the one who misappropriates, takes or
appropriates the public funds and property, OR, through a
passive act, that is, through his abandonment or
negligence, he permitted others to misappropriate the

same.
ARTICLE 215 – PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS
ELEMENTS:
-
Malversation can be committed either through a
positive act, which is through deliberate intent or
through dolo. He is the one who appropriates or
misappropriates, who took the the said public funds
or property
1.
2.
Offender is an appointive public officer
He becomes interested, directly or indirectly in any
transaction of exchange or speculation
Transaction takes place within the territory subject to
his jurisdiction
3.

4.

-
Passive Act which is through his abandonment or
negligence, or cupla. he allowed others to
appropriate or misappropriate the said public funds
or property
He becomes interested in the transaction during his
incumbency
ARTICLE 216 – POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED
INTEREST BY A PUBLIC OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
Public Officer who, directly or indirectly, became
interested in any contract or business in which it was
his official duty to intervene.
Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in
like manner, took part in any contract or transaction
connected with the estate or property in the appraisal,
distribution or adjudication of which they had acted
Guardians and executors with respect to the property
belonging to their wards or the estate
-
Under Article 217, there arises prima facie
presumption of malversation of public funds or
property when demand is made by a duly
authorized officer to an accountable public officer to
account for public funds or property, and the same
is not forthcoming
1.

When is there prima facie presumption of malversation?

2.
ILLUSTRATION:
So the COA auditor, appeared and conducted an
3.
audit He demanded for the said amount, the said
accountable public officer cannot reduce the said amount.
There arises the prima facie presumption that he has
malverse the said public funds or property. Although that is
what is written under Article 217, last paragraph. The
Supreme Court in the number of cases said:

CHAPTER FOUR – MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS

OR PROPERTY

ARTICLE 217 – MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS

OR PROPERTY (PRESUMPTION OF MALVERSATION)
ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer or employee
He has the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office
“Mere shortage in audit will not suffice. For the Prima
facie presumption to arise the following requisites
must be present: - It is necessary that there must be
complete, thorough and reliable audit.
1.
2.
-
In the said complete, thorough and reliable audit,
the following were discovered:
3.

4.
Those funds or property were public funds or property
for which he was accountable
%L. The public officer indeed receive the public
funds or property. That is, he is an
accountable public officer
%L. The said public funds and property was
missing, or there was a shortage, or he
cannot produce it, and
He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented,
or through abandonment or negligence, permitted

another person to take them

•
Who is the offender?
%L. The said public officer cannot give a
justifiable reason, a legal excuse for the said
shortage or missing of public funds or
-
The offender is an accountable public officer. An
accountable of public officer is an officer in the
course of the performance of his duties, receives
funds or property from the government which he
has the obligation to account later. So he has in
his custody, public funds or public property and he
has the obligation to account these to the
Government.

property.”
If all of these are present, the Supreme Court says
that there arises the prima facie presumption that there is
malversation of public funds or property. Therefore, there
may NOT be direct evidence to convict one for
malversation of public funds or property. Obviously, there
cannot be any witness, because when you say direct
evidence, there is a witness. Of course, he would not let
anyone see him malversing the funds. It suffices in the
audit, these three things were discovered. If these three are

Punishable acts:
1.
2.
3.
Appropriating public funds or property
Taking or misappropriating the same
Consenting, through abandonment or negligence,
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
discovered, then there arises the prima facie presumption
Malversation of public funds and property through dolo. So,
in the information, it was stated that he is the one who
misappropriate, appropriates or has taken the said public
funds, and so he was charged with Malversation through
dolo, through deliberate intent. That was the case filed
against him because they did not know that it was B who
took the money. So, the presumption is that, he is the one
who took the money, who appropriated it. During the trial of
the merits, during the presentation of the defense evidence,
when it was already A’s term to testify, it was divulged or
disclosed to the court that it was in fact another cashier, B
who misappropriated the said funds through the negligence
of A. And by reason of this evidence presented in court, the
said judge, convicted A of Malversation through culpa, in an
information of malversation through dolo. Is the judge
correct? can he convict A?
that there is a so-called MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC

Q: His contention was, it cannot be malversation, because

the firearm was owned by a private person. It is not a public
property, therefore I cannot be held liable for malversation.
Is the contention correct?

FUNDS OR PROPERTY
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a man was walking, in the middle of the night, a
police officer who was conducting a patrol saw something
bulging on his waist. The police officer stopped him and
frisked him and there, they saw a firearm. They ask for the
license, the said man could not produce the license for the
said firearm. He was arrested for illegal possession of
unlicensed firearm, and the firearm was confiscated. During
the trials of the case, the fiscal move for subpoena for the
custodian of the said firearm. The custodian appeared but
failed to bring the firearm. He had already sold the said
firearm confiscated. What crime is committed by the said
custodian?
A: Yes, the judge is correct. The reason is that,
according to the Supreme Court, whether
Malversation is committed through deliberate
intent or culpa, DOLO and CULPA are merely
modalities of committing the crime. Nevertheless,
it is still malversation, and if you look at Article
217, whether malversation is committed through
deliberate intent or through negligence, they just
have one and the same penalties. Further, the
Supreme Court said, Malversation through
negligence or culpa is NECESSARILY INCLUDED
in Malversation through deliberate intent or dolo.
Hence, even if the information is Malversation
through dolo, one can be convicted of
A: He is liable for Malversation under Article 217.
A: His contention is wrong. The said firearm
has already been confiscated by public
authority, therefore it is now deemed,
CUSTODIA LEGIS. The moment it is in
custodialegis, it loses its character as a private
property and it now assumes a character of a
public property. Hence the crime committed is
Malversation.
Malversation through Culpa or Negligence.
Q: What if, there was this collecting officer, a cashier, and
there were many persons paying. And the long line persons
paying, one cashier said that he needed to answer the call
of nature, and so he asked another fellow cashier to look
after his drawer, and so, he left and went to the restroom.
But he also left the key of his drawing on the key holder.
And so, the moment he left, his fellow cashier went to his
drawer and opened it and took Php 2000 from the
collection of A on the same day. Then A arrived, and he
then accepted collections. In the afternoon, there was a
surprise audit coming from the COA. and it was discovered
that based on the receipts, The php 2000 were missing
from the collection of A. Therefore, A was charged. What
crime if any, has been committed by A? Is A liable for
Q: What if, there was this rape in a warehouse, in the
course of the said rape, dangerous drugs worth millions of
pesos were confiscated and they were placed in the PDEA
warehouse. The persons therein were charged with illegal
possession of dangerous drugs. In the course of the
hearing in this possession of dangerous drugs, the court
sent a subpoena to the PDEA custodian, to bring to the
Court the said dangerous drugs which were confiscated.
And so, on the designated day, the said PDEA agent
boarded
all the dangerous drugs confiscated in a PDEA
van and off he went to the Court. However, before the
PDEA agent could reach the court, here comes two
motorcycles who went in and fired at him, and he fell on his
seat, lifeless. And then, a big vehicle arrived at the back of
the said PDEA van and took all the said dangerous drugs.
Now the said PDEA agent was brought into the hospital
and despite the fatal wound, because of the immediate

malversation?
A: Yes, he is liable for malversation through
negligence. That is the passive act. That is
through his abandonment or negligence, he
permitted another person, Cashier B to
misappropriate a part of his collection for the day.
Hence A is also liable for Malversation. Not B, but
A, the one who went to the restroom, because he
is the one accountable for the said public funds in
medical intervention, he survived. Is he
crime?
liable of any
his drawer.
That other person, B, who took the said property
is liable for qualified theft. because he was
entrusted with the same funds, and he took the
A: Yes, he is liable of Malversation of public
funds or property under Article 217 through
Negligence. There was inexcusable negligence on his
part said the Supreme Court, because all by himself,
carried the millions worth of dangerous drugs in the
PDEA van, considering the value of the said dangerous
drugs, he should have asked for back up. Yes, he
survived, but he was charged with Malversation of
public funds or property through CULPA.
same funds.
Q: What if, in the same problem, after the COA auditor
found out that Php 2000 was missing, A was charged with

Q: What if, there is a public officer whose office is in pasay. He is

going to have a meeting in Caloocan. And so he went to Caloocan
in one afternoon and attended the said meeting. He had to go to
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
pasay in order to make a report, However, the traffic was heavy,
so instead of using his car on the way back, he rode the LRT.
Upon reaching the office, he realized that his bag was opened, and the cellphone which was __5:17___ by the Government was already
gone. By reason thereof, he was charged with Malversation under Article 217 because through his negligence, the cellphone which was
____ to him
by the Government and for which he is accountable to the
Government was now missing. It was taken or stolen by
somebody. Is he liable? He was convicted by the
SandiganBayan but when it came to the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court acquitted him.

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if a public officer has under his administration
public funds which is for a certain project. So let us say that
X is the city administrator. Under his administration, there
was Php500,000, the said Php 500,000 was for the
construction of a bridge between one barangay to another
barangay. Then suddenly there was a typhoon, a big
A: According to the Supreme Court, there was no
negligence on the part of the said public officer.
He cannot be faulted for having taken the LRT
because of the said heavy traffic. It cannot be said
that there was negligence on his part in placing
the cellphone inside his bag, because, where else
would you place a cellphone but inside the bag for
safekeeping. It would have been different while on
board, he was using the said cellphone. Hence,
the Supreme Court said, there was no negligence
and therefore, although convicted by the
SandiganBayan, he was acquitted by the
Supreme Court.
typhoon and many of the constituents were rendered
homeless. And so, they had to stay in the basketball court,
they need food, clothing, water and other basic needs. And
so, the city administrator made use of the Php 500,000
under his administration to buy these basic needs of his
constituents. Is the said public officer, the city administrator

liable of any crime?

A: Yes, he is liable for technical Malversation

under Article 220.

BEST EXAMPLE:
GMA
and other head of Philhealth before was
charged by Frank Chavez because of Technical
Malversation because of transfer of COA funds, which was
used for Philhealth purposes during the elections. And so,
because of that, according to Frank Chavez, they are liable
for Malversation. They were charged with Technical
Malversation. But their contention was there was a law that
allowed it. If there was a law that allowed it, then, there was
no violation. But, if there is no law, there is an illegal
transfer of funds, therefore, technical Malversation will
ARTICLE 218 – FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER
TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
resolve.
ELEMENTS:

1.
2.

3.

4.

Offender is a public officer, whether in the service or

separated therefrom
He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
He is required by law or regulation to render accounts
to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial Auditor
He fails to do so for a period of two months after such
accounts should be rendered
ARTICLE 217
ARTICLE 220
The public officer The public officer did not
misappropriates the fund misappropriate the funds
for his personal use.
for his personal use, he
used it for another public
purpose other than that
which
has
been
ARTICLE 219 – FAILURE OF RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC
OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING
THE COUNTRY
appropriated by law or
ordinance that is why it is
T E C H N I C A L
MALVERSATION – the
offense is on the
technicality of the use of
funds.
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
Offender is a public officer
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 Philippines without securing from the
Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his
accounts have been finally settled
The public officer has in his The public officer has in his
possession public funds or possession public funds or
property for safekeeping. It property is only under his
is under his custody and administration. Not for
control and therefore it is safekeeping, but only for the
for his safekeeping and he

ARTICLE 220 – ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR

PROPERTY (Technical Malversation)
ELEMENTS:
1. purpose of administrating
2.
Offender s a public officer
there is a public fund or property under his
administration
Such public fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance
He applies the same to a public use other than that for
which such fund or property has been appropriated by
law or ordinance.
has the obligation to it that is, for applying it
account it later on to the for the purpose which
Government
has been appropriated by law or ordinance
3.
4.

ARTICLE 221 – FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF

PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
ELEMENTS:
4.

through his negligence

Offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or
Whether it be under Art. 223, 224, 225, the offender
infidelity in the custody of prisoners is one who has been
entrusted with the custody and charge of the prisoner.
Whether the prisoner is a prisoner convicted by final
judgment or a detention prisoner. He must be charged, he
must be the custodian of the said prisoner because the
essence of the crime is the violation of the trust reposed on
him. Because prisoners are accountabilities of the
Government.
1.
That the public officer has government funds in his
possession
person under arrest or that the escape takes place
2.
That he is under obligation to make payments from
such funds
That he fails to make payment maliciously

3.
Punishable acts:
1.

2.

Failing to make payment by a public officer who is

under obligation to make such payment from
Government funds in his possession
Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has
been ordered by competent authority to deliver any
property in his custody or under his administration

•
Can a private individual commit infidelity?
ARTICLE 222 – OFFICERS INCLUDED IN PRECEDING
-
Yes, under Art. 225. If he is entrusted with the
custody of this prisoner and the prisoner escapes,
either in connivance with him or through his
negligence, then his liability is infidelity in the
custody of prisoners
PROVISIONS
Private Individual who may be liable under Art.
217-221:
1.

2.

3.
Private Individual who in any capacity whatsoever,
have charge of national, provincial or municipal funds,
revenue or property
Administrator, depository of funds or property attached,
seized or deposited by public authority even if such
property belongs to a private individual
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: A has been charged with illegal sale of dangerous
drugs. She is behind bars, it is a non-bailable offense, and
therefore, while the case is ongoing, she is behind bars.
So, it was the hearing date, she was accompanied by the
jail warden, the jail guard to the court, and after trial, there
was this husband and two children of the said woman who
was in jail. The husband and two children talked, and when
the said woman prisoner was about to be brought to jail,
the husband talked to the jail warden. He invited the jail
warden for a merienda, in a canteen inside the hall of
justice. And so, the jail warden saw nothing wrong and so,
he had merienda with the woman prisoner, the husband
and the two children. The handcuffs had to be removed for
the woman prisoner to eat. After eating, the woman
prisoner said that she needed to answer the call of nature,
and so, she went to the restroom, also inside or within the
hall of justice. The jail guard allowed her inside while the jail
guard was left outside, waiting. Hours passed, no woman
prisoner came out. It so happens that the said husband put
some disguise for the woman to use so that she could
escape without being noticed by the said jail guard, and
woman prisoner was able to escape without being noticed
by the said jail guard. Is the said jail guard liable for
infidelity in the custody of prisoner, or is it a mere laxity
which would not amount to infidelity in the custody of
Those who acted in conspiracy in malversation
Accomplice and accessories to malversation

4.
Can private property be the subject of Malversation?
-
YES, under the 2 act in Article 222, that is when
nd
the said funds or property has been attached,
seized or deposited by public authority, it now
becomes in custodialegis and it now assumes the
character of being public funds or property. If any
are misappropriated, then the crime committed is
Malversation and not theft.

INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS (Articles

223, 224, 225)
ARTICLE 223 – CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO
EVASION
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
Offender is a public officer
He has in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment
Such prisoner escaped from his custody
3.
4.
That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the

latter’s escape, or is with his consent

prisoner?
ARTICLE 224 – EVASTION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
ELEMENTS:
A: People vs. Nava – The Supreme Court said
that mere laxity would not amount to negligence
1.
2.
Offender is a public officer
under Art. 224. Because
according to the
He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a
prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment
Supreme Court in that old case, the negligence
being required in order that a public officer may be
entitled, must be a deliberate non-performance of
his duty. Here, it is only a mere laxity on the part of
the said public officer for not having accompanying
3.

ARTICLE 225 – ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE

CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
Such prisoner escapes through his negligence
the said woman in the rest room.

Rodriguez vs. SandiganBayan(new case) – The

Supreme Court said otherwise. According to the
Supreme Court, the moment that a public officer, a
jail warden has accompanied a prisoner outside
jail, he must not have lost sight of the said prisoner.
The only obligation of the said jail warden after the
1.
2.
Offender is a private individual
Conveyance (or charge) of custody of prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him
Prisoner or person under arrest escapes
3.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
trial was to bring her back to the court. The fact
MERE ACT OF OPENING the said closed document
will give rise to the crime.

that the said jail guard allowed himself to have a

merienda, and even allowed the woman prisoner to
go to the restroom alone, there was laxity on the
part of the said jail guard. The Supreme Court said,
LAXITY is a deliberate non-performance of his
official duty as the guard of the said prisoner,
thereby amounting to infidelity in the custody of
prisoner under Art. 224.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if A has been charged with illegal sale of
dangerous drugs. The case was on trial, during the trial of
the case, the fiscal presented the first police officer who
acted as the poseur buyer in the course of the testimony of
the police officer, the fiscal produced and showed to him for
identification the marked money. So the marked money
consists of 5, 100 peso bill. The fiscal presented it to the
police and the police identified it as indeed the marked
money because of the serial numbers and because of the
markings, and thereafter the marked money have been
marked as Exhibit A, B, C, D, E for the prosecution. After
the trial, they were placed inside an envelope and given to
the clerk of court, the custodian of the evidence which have
already been marked. So trial ended that day, it was now
lunch time. The clerk of court was on her table and so the
vendor arrived. The clerk of court wanted to buy lunch and
she said, how much. The vendor said it costs 50 peso. The
clerk of court pulled out her money; it was a 1000 peso bill.
The vendor said, “anglakinamanniyan, walaakongpanukli”
And so, by reason thereof, he gave it back to the clerk of
court. The clerk of court said that she had no smaller bills,
and he remembered the exhibits. And so, he took 100 peso
bill, marked as Exhibit E. And she paid it to the vendor and
the vendor gave him the change of 50 peso. After eating,
before 1:00, the said clerk of court immediately went
outside to change her big 1000 peso bill into smaller bills.
When he now has these smaller bills, he got one 100 peso
bill and marked it as Exhibit E and then he signed it and
placed it inside the envelope. Here comes the next hearing
date, on the next hearing date, another police officer was
presented, the fiscal produced the said documentary
exhibits, the marked money and asked it from the clerk of
court. So the fiscal showed it to the police officer, the police
officer identified Exhibits A, B, C, D. However, when it
comes to exhibit E, the police officer said, “Your Honor, it
has a different serial number from the one in our sworn
statement” and so because of that, an investigation
happened and the court learned that it was taken by said
clerk of court and used in buying food. What crime, if any is
committed by the said clerk of court? Is it malversation or is

INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS

(ARTICLES 226, 227, 228)
ARTICLE 226 – REMOVAL, CONEALMENT OR
DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENT
ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
He removes, destroys, or conceals documents or
papers
 Said documents or papers should have been entrusted
to such public officer by reason of his office
Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to
the public interest should have been caused
1.
2.
3.
4.

Under Article 226, in order for infidelity in the custody

of documents to arise, it is necessary that there be damage
caused to a third person or to the public interest. If damage
is serious, the penalty is QUALIFIED, therefore, the
damage may or may not be serious provided that there is
damage, the crime will arise.
DAMAGE IS NECESSARY in order to give rise to
infidelity in the custody of documents.

ARTICLE 227 – OFFICER BREAKING SEAL

ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
He is charged with the custody of papers or property
These papers or property are sealed by proper
authority
1.
2.
3.

4.
He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken
Under Article 227, officer breaking the seal, infidelity in
the custody of prisoners to arise, even without damage
caused to a third party or to public interest. Damage is NOT
an element.
MERE BREAKING of the seal of the document will
already consummate the crime.

it infidelity in the custody of documents?

A: The crime committed is infidelity in the

custody of documents under Art. 226 by the
public officer in destroying the said document.
This marked money becomes documentary
evidence, the moment they have been marked as
exhibits. Money here is not used as a medium of
exchange, but as documents because they have
been marked as documentary evidence. The
moment they have been taken, removed,
concealed or destroyed, the crime committed is
infidelity in the custody of documents because the
clerk of court is the custodian of the documentary
exhibits. If money is used, not as a medium of
exchange, but like this, as documentary exhibits
or any other use other than as a medium of
exchange, the one who malverse, or use it is the
custodian of the said documents, the crime is
infidelity in the custody of documents and NOT
malversation.

ARTICLE 228 – OPENING A CLOSED DOCUMENT

ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
Any closed papers, documents, or objects are
entrusted to his custody
He opens or permits to be opened said closed papers,
documents or objects
1.
2.
3.

4.

He does not have proper authority

Infidelity in the custody of documents, the public officer
has been entrusted with papers, documents or objects,
which have been closed by proper authority and the said
public officer opened the said closed document or
permitted others to open the same. Again, Damage is NOT

an element.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

When the clerk of court took the 100 peso bill, he

destroyed the exhibit, the documentary exhibit of
the said prosecution and the prosecution was
seriously damaged interface.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: What if in the case of Duterte, the sheriff wishes to
execute a writ of execution and cause the squatters to
leave the place because of the execution issued by the
court has to be implemented. Had not the sheriff performed
the said act, is he liable of any crime? Had the sheriff
refused to execute the writ of execution issued by the said

REVELATION OF SECRETS (Article 229-230)

ARTICLE 229 – REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN

OFFICER
Punishable acts:
judge? Is he liable of any crime?
A: Yes, he is liable of Open Disobedience
1.
By revealing any secrets which affect public interest
learned by him in his official capacity
ELEMENTS:
3. Offender is a public officer
4. He knows of a secret by reason of his
official capacity
under Article 231. He openly refused to execute
a writ of execution issued by a judge.

ARTICLE 232 – DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF

SUPERIOR OFFICER, WHEN SAID ORDER WAS
SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER
ELEMENTS:
5. He reveals such secret without authority or
justifiable reasons
1.
2.
3.
Offender is a public officer
6. Damage, great or small, is cause to the
public interest
An order is issued by his superior for execution
He has for any reason suspended the execution of
such order
His superior disapproves the suspension of the
execution of the order

It is necessary that there be Damage caused, whether

serious or not.
4.
5.

Offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval

of the suspension
2.
Wrongfully delivering papers or copies of papers of
which he may have charge and which should not be
published thereby causing damage, whether serious or
not, to a third party or to public interest.
The offender refuses to disobey the suspension of the
said order which was disapproved by the said public officer.

i.
Offender is a public officer

ELEMENTS:
ARTICLE 230 – PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING
SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
ELEMENTS:
ii.
iii.
iv.
He has charge of papers
ARTICLE 233 – REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE
ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
Competent authority demands from the offender that
he lend his cooperation towards the administration of
justice or other public service
Those papers should not be published
He delivers those papers or copies thereof
to a third person
1.
2.
v.
The delivery is wrongful
3.
Offender fails to do so maliciously
vi.
Damage is caused to public interest
 Public officer who shall fail to lend his cooperation
towards the administration of justice or any other public
service despite demand by competent authority.

1.
2.
Offender is a public officer
He knows of the secrets of private individual by reason
of his office
ILLUSTRATION:
3.

He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable

reason
Q: A raped B. B was treated by a medico legal officer at the
PNP. This medico legal officer who has examined A, issued
a medical certificate, And so in the case filed by B against A
for this so-called “rape”, the fiscal moved that the subpoena
(adjustificandum) be sent to this public officer, the medico
legal office who examined the rape victim. However,
despite receipt of the said subpoena, the medico legal
officer failed to appear. He did not appear without any
justifiable reason at all. The said prosecutor move again for
the issuance of another subpoena, a second subpoena.
Again, despite the receipt, the medico legal officer failed to
appear in court and testified and failed to give the copy of
the medico legal certificate. What crime if any has the said
Damage is NOT an element in Article 230.
ARTICLE 231 – OPEN DISOBEDIENCE
ELEMENTS:
Offender is a judicial or executive officer
There is judgment, decision, or order of a superior
authority
Such judgment, decision or order was made within the
scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority and
issued with all the legal formalities
Offender without any legal justification openly refuses
to execute the said judgment, decision or order which
he is duty bound to obey
1.
2.
3.

4.

medico legal officer has committed?

A: He is liable for Refusal of Assistance under
Article 233. It is committed by a public offcer that despite
demands of the public authority shall fail to lend his
cooperation toward the administration of justice or any
other public service. Thereby, causing damage serious or
not, to public interest.
Open Disobedience is committed by any judicial or
executive officer who shall openly refuse without any legal
motive to execute a judgment or decision rendered by a
superior authority in the exercise of his duty and in the legal
infirmities of the law.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

X. X snatched the handbag with the money. A police officer

NOTE: If the damage is serious, the penalty is QUALIFIED.

passing by saw the incident and on boarded their mobile
patrol. They were able to arrest the man, took the bag and
returned it to the said victim. Thereafter, they placed X
inside the mobile patrol. While inside, they kicked, mold the
man. And so, the man suffered less serious physical
injuries. What crime is committed by the said police

ARTICLE 234 – REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE

OFFICE
ELEMENTS:

1.

2.

3.

Offender is elected by popular election to a public

office
He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of
the said office
There is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in
or to discharge the duties of said office
officers?
A: The crime committed is less serious
physical injuries. It is not maltreatment of prisoners
because the said person, X, is not yet a prisoner. He is only
a person under arrest because he has just been arrested
for having committed a crime, but he is not yet a prisoner.
In order to be considered as a prisoner, he must be brought
to the PNP station, taken a picture, left view, side view,
front view, thumbmark and incarcerated. He is now an
accountability of the Government, he is now a prisoner. But
before that, he is not yet a prisoner. He is only a person
under arrest. That is why in the problem, the police officers
are liable only for less serious physical injuries and not of
This is a crime which cannot be committed in
Philippine Jurisdiction. Refusal to discharge public duties is
committed by any person entitled to a public office by
means of popular election, refuses to assume to assume
the powers and duties of his office. He refuses to be sworn
in. This will not happen in our lifetime. This will never
happen in the Philippine Jurisdiction because here, even if
he did not win in the election, he wanted to hold office.
maltreatment of prisoners.
Q: What if in the same problem, they chased the man.
They were able to catch the said man and brought him to
the PNP station. Booked him and incarcerated him, and all
the things needed to be done to a prisoner. Later, he was
brought out of jail for investigation to be brought in the
Investigation section. In the investigation, he was being
forced to admit to the commission of the crime. And so, by
reason thereof, the police officer boxed him and gave him a
huge black eye. The left eye suffered so much that he lost
sight, amounting to serious physical injuries. What are the
crimes committed by the police officer?
3.

ARTICLE 235 – MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS

ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
prisoner
He maltreats such prisoner either of the following
manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or handling
of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his
charge either:
i. By the imposition of punishments not
authorized by the rules and regulations
ii.By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel or humiliating
manner
b. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a
confession or to obtain some information from
the prisoner
A: Two crimes – Maltreatment of Prisoners and
Serious Physical Injuries.
Maltreatment of Prisoners because he is a
prisoner who was maltreated in order to extort a
confession and Serious physical injuries because

by reason of the injury inflicted, he lost an eye.

constitute a grave and less grave felony, are you going to

complex them under Art. 48?
Q: Are you going to complex them? because a single act
•
Who is the offender?
Any public officer or employee

-
A: No. You cannot complex them. Because under
Article 235, it is expressly provided that the liability for
maltreatment of prisoners shall be in addition to the
liability for any other physical injuries or damage
caused. Therefore two crimes will be charged against
•
Who is the offended party?
He must be a prisoner
-

In order to be considered a prisoner, it is necessary that the

said person has already been arrested, brought to the PNP
station and he has been incarcerated. If he is not a
prisoner, then, the crime can be physical injuries, whatever
injuries that may have been sustained by the prisoner, but
the police officer.
There is also a violation of R.A. 9745, Anti-Torture
Act, because under Section 14 of the Anti-Torture Act,
Torture shall not absorb and shall not be absorbed by
any other crime committed as a consequence.
Therefore, he can also be held liable under the so-
called Anti-Torture Law.

NOT maltreatment of prisoners

 What if maltreatment does not only include physical
maltreatment. It shall also include moral, emotional,
psychological maltreatment because the law uses the
phrase physical injuries or damage caused.

ARTICLE 236 – ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A

ILLUSTRATION:
PUBLIC OFFICE
ELEMENTS:
Q: What if A has just withdrew his money from her ATM
account, she placed the money inside her bag and she was
already walking towards home when suddenly here comes
1.
That the offender is entitled to hold a public office or
employment either by election or appointment
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.

3.

Shall assume the performance of the duties and

powers of a public official or employee

Without being sworn into office or having given the
bond required by law
ARTICLE 241 – USURPAT ION OF JUDICIAL
FUNCTIONS
ELEMENTS:
1.
That the offender is holding office under the Executive
Branch of the Government
That he:
ARTICLE 237 – PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF
DUTIES AND POWERS
2.
ELEMENTS:
a. Assumes the power exclusively vested in the
Judiciary, or
b. Obstructs the execution of any order or decision
given by a judge within his jurisdiction
NOTE: It can only be committed by a public officer of the
Executive Branch of the Government
1.
2.
That the offender is holding a public office
That the period allowed by law for him to exercise such
function and duties has already expired
That the offender continues to exercise such function
and duties
3.

ARTICLE 238 – ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR

Therefore, if the person who assumes judicial
power does not belong to the Executive Branch, but
belongs to the legislative branch, the crime is not
Usurpation of Judicial Function, but USURPATION OF
PUBLIC FUNCTION AND OFFICIAL AUTHORITY under
Article 177, because Article 239, 240 and 241 are specific
as to the offenders.
So, let us say, in the one who encroached upon
the powers of the Judge, does not belong to the executive
branch but he is legislator, it cannot be considered as
usurpation of judicial functions, rather it will beUsurpation
POSITION
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
That the offender is holding a public office
That he formally resigns from his office
But before the acceptance of his resignation, he
abandons his office
Abandonment of office is committed by a public officer
who has already formally resigns from his position, and
having formally resigned from his position, he abandons to
the detriment of public service. Despite the fact that his
resignation has not yet been accepted by a superior
authority. Under Labor Law, when you are an employee,
when you file a resignation, it does not mean you are
already resigned. There must be an ACCEPTANCE from
the superior officer before it can be said that he have
already resigned.
So here, the public officer has already formally
resigned, his resignation has not been accepted, yet he
abandons to the detriment of public service. What is the
penalty?

Of Public Function And Official Authority Under Article 177.

ARTICLE 242 – DISOBEYING REQUEST OF
DISQUALIFICATION
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
That the offender is a public officer
That a proceeding is pending before such public officer
That there has been a question regarding the
jurisdiction brought before the proper authority
There is a question brought before the proper authority
regarding his jurisdiction, which is yet to be decided
4.
-
In the abandonment of office, the penalty is
QUALIFIED if the purpose of the said public officer
is to evade the prosecution punishment of the
crime involving violation of Title 1 – Book 2 (Crimes
against National Security), or Chapter 1 – Title 3 of
Book 2 (Rebellion, Coup d’etat, Sedition, etc.)

ARTICLE 243 – ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY
ELEMENTS:
That the offender is an executive officer
That the offender addresses any order or suggestion to
any judicial authority
That the order or suggestion relates to any case or
business within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts
of justice
1.
2.

ARTICLE 239 – USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS

3.

ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
That the offender is an executive or judicial officer
That he:

ARTICLE 244 – UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS

ELEMENTS:
Offender is a public officer
He nominates or appoints a person to a public office
Such person lacks the legal qualification thereof
Offender knows that his nominee or employee lacks
the qualifications at the time he made the nomination
or appointment
a. Makes general rules and regulations beyond the
scope of his authority, or
b. Attempts to repeal a law, or
1.
2.
3.
4.
c. Suspend the execution of thereof
NOTE: It can only be committed by an executive or

judicial officer
ARTICLE 240 – USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE

FUNCTIONS
ELEMENTS:
ARTICLE 245 – ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY
ELEMENTS:
1.
2.
That the offender is a judge
That the offender:
a. Assumes the power exclusively vested to
executive authorities of the Government, or
b. Obstructs executive authorities from the lawful
performance of their functions
1.
2.
That the offender is a public officer
That he solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
That the offended party is a woman who is:
a. Interested in matters pending before the public
officer for his decision or where the public
3.
NOTE: It can only be committed by a Judge
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
officer is required to submit a report or to
•
Parricide is committed when a person kills his father,
consult with a superior officer; or
mother, child, whether legitimate or illegitimate,
legitimate other ascendant, legitimate other
descendant, or legitimate spouse. Therefore the
offended party or deceased or the victim is specified,
he must be the father, mother, child whether legitimate
or illegitimate, legitimate other ascendant, legitimate
other descendant, or legitimate spouse.
b. Under the custody of the offender, who is a
warden or other public officer directly charged
with the care and custody of prisoners or
persons under arrest; or
c. The wife, daughter, sister or any relative falling
within the same degree of affinity of the person
under the custody and charge of the offender

What kind of relationship?

•
Parricide is a crime based on relationship.
•
•
How are abuses against chastity is committed?
There are three acts. (Refer to the elements)
•
First, it must be a legitimate relationship
except in the case of parent and child.
Second, the said relationship must be in the
direct line
-
1.
Public officer solicits or makes any
indecent or immoral advances to a woman
who is interested in matters pending
before his for his decision or where the
public officer is required to submit a report
or to consult with a superior officer
Third, the relationship must be by blood
(grandfather killed a grandson, a mother
killing a son, a son killing a father)

2.

3.
Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and he
solicits or makes any indecent or immoral
advances to a woman
Q: So a father killed an illegitimate son. What crime is
committed?
A: It is parricide. Although the crime is based on
legitimate relationship, the exception is in case of
Warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest, and the
said officer makes any indecent or immoral
advances to the wife, daughter, sister or
any relative falling within the same degree

children, whether legitimate or illegitimate.

Q: A brother killed another brother. Is the crime committed
parricide?
A: No, the crime committed is murder or
homicide, as the case may be and not
parricide because the relationship between a
brother and another brother is in the collateral line
and not in the direct line.
Q: What if a stepfather killed his stepson?
A: The stepfather is not liable for parricide. It
can either be murder or homicide, as the case
may be, because their relationship is not based on
blood.

of affinity of the male prisoner.

•
Who is the offender?
-
He must be a public officer because there must be
abuse of public office in making immoral or
indecent advances.
Essence of the crime is taking advantage of one’s
position in soliciting or making immoral or indecent
•
Again, the relationship must be
legitimate, in the direct line and by
blood.

advances.
Mere act of soliciting or making immoral and indecent

advances will already give rise to the crime. It is not

necessary that the woman will comply with the said
solicitation or immoral or indecent advances.
•
In Parricide, the circumstance which will qualify is the
relationship, therefore relationship between the
offender and the offended party must be stated in the
information.

The solicitation must not be the gospel type of

solicitation. It must be bad, persistent, threatening such that
if the woman would not comply then it would adverse on
Q: Let us say that the husband killed the wife. In the
information filed by the fiscal, the fiscal failed to state that
the husband is the legal husband of the said victim.
However, during trial, by virtue of a certificate of marriage, it
was proven that the accused was the legal husband of the
said victim-wife. Can the husband be convicted of
parricide?
her part.
If a jail warden impregnated a female detainee, even if they
love one another, still liable because detainees are

liabilities of the state.

A: No, the husband cannot be convicted of
parricide. This is because the relationship was
not alleged in the information although proven
during trial. Since the relationship between the
husband and the wife is not alleged in the
information, although proven during trial, he
cannot be convicted of parricide. It can only be
TITLE EIGHT

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS (ARTICLES 246 – 266-A)

ART 246 – PARRICIDE
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person is killed
murder or homicide, as the case may be.
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
other ascendant, or legitimate other descendant, or
legitimate spouse of the accused

Q: What if a husband wanted to kill his wife. So he has a

mistress, the husband wanted to dispose his wife.
However, he cannot do it on his own and so the husband
hired a high-profile killer, he paid the man 100,000 pesos to
kill the wife. And so the man conducted surveillance on the
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
wife, checked the itinerary of the wife and so when the wife
•
The Supreme Court said, “immediately
thereafter” means there must not be lapse of
time between the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries.
Therefore the surprising and the killing or
infliction of serious physical injuries must be a
was getting out of the grocery, here comes the killer. The
killer, on board a motorcycle, went directly to the wife, shot
her and off he went. The wife died. What crime/crimes is/
are committed?
A: The husband is liable for principal but said
killer is liable for murder. Conspiracy will not lie.
Although they conspired for the killing of the wife,
the husband, being the principal by inducement
and the killer, being the principal by direct
participation, conspiracy will not lie. This is
because the circumstance which qualifies
parricide, the relationship, is personal to the
husband and cannot be transferred to a stranger.
That is why there will two informations filed, one is
parricide as against the husband as a principal by
inducement and the other one is murder as

continuing process.
Q: What if the husband arrived home and the wife arrived
home from the market. She was about to go the kitchen
when suddenly, she heard voices in the master’s bedroom
and so she opened the said master’s bedroom and saw her
legal husband in actual sexual intercourse with another
person. Notice that the law says, “other person” which
means it could be a man or a woman. Upon seeing that,
the wife who still has a knife in the basket, immediately
went towards the husband and stabbed him. The woman
fled. The husband died. Of what crime would you prosecute
the said wife? The wife is liable for parricide under Article
246 for having killed her husband. If you are the counsel of
the said wife, what defense would you put up in order to
free your client from criminal liability?

against the killer.

ART 247 – DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED
UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
ELEMENTS:
1.That a legally married person or a parent surprises
his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18
years of age and living with him, in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another
person.
2.That the said legally married spouse he or she
kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or
both of them any serious physical injury in the
act or immediately thereafter
A: Article 247 or Death under exceptional
circumstances. The Supreme Court said that
Article 247 is not a felony. Article 247 is a
privilege, in fact is it a defense. If Article 247 is
invoked, the accused is free from criminal liability.
It is an absolutory cause, an exempting
circumstance. The Supreme Court said that the
penalty stated therein, destierro, is not really a
penalty on the legally married spouse who killed
the other spouse. It is not a penalty but it is more
of a guard, a privilege for him so that he may be
free from any retaliation of any of the family of the
victim. So destierro here is not really a penalty.
Again, Article 247 is not a felony. It is a defense, a
privilege; it is an exempting circumstance or an
3.That he has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or
she has not consented to the infidelity of the

other spouse.
FIRST REQUISITE/ELEMENT:

•Under the first element, it is required that the legally

married spouse surprises the other spouse while
in the actual act of sexual intercourse with another
person. So note the surprising must be in the
actual act of sexual intercourse and NOT
before, NOT after.
•If you will read the book of Reyes, Justice Laurel,
naghinanakitsya. Sabinya, “Why? Why should it
be in the actual act of sexual intercourse, you
already saw your spouse with another man, why
wait for the sexual intercourse? You know it will
happen, why wait for it for Article 247? This is
what Justice Laurel said. But the Supreme Court
said no, the surprising must be in the act of sexual
intercourse with another person. Not before, not
absolutory cause.
PEOPLE v. ABARCA
In this case, there was this student reviewing for the
bar. There were already rumors that his wife was having an
affair. So one time, he went home unannounced. Upon his
arrival, he saw his wife in sexual intercourse with another
man. The man jumped out the window. The husband
wanted to kill the man but he had no weapon at the time.
The man went away. It took the husband an hour before he
was able to find a weapon and upon finding a weapon, he
went directly to the whereabouts of the man, the lover of
the wife and killed the man. It took him one hour. The killing
took place an hour, not in the actual sexual intercourse, but
is it immediately thereafter? Despite the fact that one hour
had lapsed, would it be within the meaning of immediately

thereafter?
after, not during the preliminaries.
SECOND REQUISITE/ELEMENT:

•
The second element requires that the said legally
married spouse kills any or both of them or he
inflicts serious physical injuries upon any or both
of them. Again, while in the act of sexual
intercourse or immediately thereafter. There is no
question as to the “actual act of sexual
intercourse” but what about “immediately
 thereafter”?
The Supreme Court, in this special case, said yes.
According to Supreme Court, when the law uses the
phrase “immediately thereafter”; that the killing or the
infliction of serious physical injuries must take place
immediately thereafter, the law did not say that the killing
must be done instantly. According to the Supreme Court, it
suffices that the proximate cause for the said killing is the
said pain and the look on the said husband upon chancing
his wife in the basest act of infidelity. This is an exceptional
case.
•What does the phrase “immediately thereafter” mean?
CRIMINAL LAW 2

•Why an exceptional case?

6.
With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim or
outraging or scoffing at his person or
•
Because henceforth, after People v Abarca,
the Supreme Court has already interpreted
“immediately thereafter”, as there must be no
lapse of time between the surprising and the
killing. The surprising and the killing must be
continuous.

corpse (RA 7659)

•

•
These are the qualifying circumstances for murder
(See Article 14-aggravating circumstances, Book
I) Know the elements in Article 14.
•
Legal luminaries say that this is an
exceptional case because the husband was
reviewing for the bar which is why he was
given this special _. Because in all other
cases after this, the Supreme Court is strict in
implementing “immediately thereafter”. The
Supreme Court is strict because this is not a
felony, it is a privilege therefore it must be
strictly interpreted and not liberally interpreted
in favor of the accused.
All of these are aggravating circumstance under
Article 14. Note, in order to qualify a killing to

murder, only one is necessary.

•
If in the information, A killed B and it was attended by
treachery, in consideration of a price, reward or
promise, by means of a motor vehicle, so there are
three qualifying circumstances. Only one will suffice to
qualify the murder to killing, all the other aggravating
circumstances will be considered not as qualifying
circumstances but as mere generic aggravating
•
Look that if the injury inflicted by the legally
married spouse on the lover or the other
spouse, is less serious physical injuries or
slight physical injuries, he is totally free from
criminal liability. Liability will only come in if
the other spouse is killed or inflicted with
serious physical injuries.
circumstances.
ART 249 – HOMICIDE
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying
circumstance
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is
presumed
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of
parricide or infanticide.
When a person kills another person, and it is not
attended by any qualifying circumstance under Article
248, the killing is considered as Homicide under Article
249.
•

•
With regards to the liability of the accused to
the injuries sustained by other people, liable
to physical injuries through negligence, as the
case maybe. There is no intent to kill the
other victims.
Note that the SC ruled that inflicting death
under exceptional circumstances is NOT
•

murder.
ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed
2. That the accused killed him
3. That the killing was attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances mentioned in Article 248

ART 248 – MURDER

ART 250 – PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED OR
ATTEMPTED PARRICIDE, MURDER OR HOMICIDE

4. That the killing is not parricide or infanticide

ART 251 – DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTOUS AFFRAY
What is a tumultuous affray?
•
•
Murder is committed by any person who shall kill
another person which will not amount to parricide or
infanticide and the killing is attended by the following
qualifying circumstances:
•
A tumultuous affray is a commotion, wherein
people fight in a tumultuous or confused manner
such that it cannot be ascertained or determined
who has killed the victim or who has inflicted
physical injuries on the victim.
1.
Treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or
of means or persons to insure or afford
mutiny.
ELEMENTS:
1. That there be several persons
2. That they did not compose groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking each
other reciprocally
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted
one another in a confused and tumultuous manner
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased
2.
3.
In consideration of price, reward or promise
By means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin.
4.

5.
On occasion of any calamities enumerated
in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic, or any other public
calamities.
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.

•
Article 251, death in a tumultuous affray, is committed
when there are several persons who do not compose
groups which have been organized to assault and
With evident premeditation.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
quarrel with one another reciprocally, assaulted and
attacked each other reciprocally and in the course of
the affray, someone is killed. And it cannot be
ascertained or identified or determined who killed the
victim, then the person who inflicted serious physical
injuries or those who used violence against the said
Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were
attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor who saw the affray and he was just there,
watching. While he was watching the affray, one of the
participants of the affray, X, saw him and went directly to
the balot vendor and stabbed him twice. The balot vendor
died. What crime is committed? Is it under Article 251,
Death in tumultuous affray?

victim can be identified.

•
Someone is killed. Note that he can be any person; he
can be someone from the affray, he can be a mere
passerby, he can be just someone watching the affray,
so long as he is killed in the affray and it cannot be
ascertained who killed him, then the person who
inflicted serious physical injuries on him is liable if he
can be identified. If this person cannot be identified,
then the person who used any kind of violence against
A: No. It is murder or homicide as the case
may be. This is because the perpetrator of the
crime is identified, ascertained or determined.
Death in a tumultuous affray under Article 251 can
only be charged if the actual perpetrator of the
crime who killed the victim cannot be ascertained

or identified.

him shall be criminally liable.

ART 253 – GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
TWO ACTS PUNISHABLE:
I.By assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not; or
II.By lending assistance to another to commit suicide to
the extent of doing the killing himself.

ART 252 – PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN

TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY
ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray
2. That a participant or some participants thereof suffer
serious physical injuries or physical injuries of a
less serious nature only.
3. That the person responsible thereof cannot be
identified
•
•
Giving assistance to suicide – binigyan mong rope;
binigyan mo ng poison.
A friend wanted to commit suicide, he doesn’t know the
way, the means and you agreed with him, you assisted
and gave the best poison in the world. So you assisted
the said friend in committing suicide. Note that if a
person assisted in committing suicide by giving him
poison, the initiative must come from him. The desire
to kill himself must come from the victim. He wanted to
commit suicide and you merely provide assistance in
the commission of suicide.
B wanted to commit suicide, here comes A, A gave
assistance to B but B survived. B did not die. Only A is
criminally liable because suicide or attempt to commit
suicide is not a felony within Philippine jurisdiction. It is
only the one who assisted to commit suicide is
criminally liable but not the person who attempted to
4. That all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party are known.

•
Note that the victim here must be a participant. The
law is specific. The participants must be the one
injured with serious physical injuries or less serious
physical injuries. Not slight physical injuries.

•
•
Article 252, we have physical injuries inflicted in
tumultuous affray, is committed when in a tumultuous
affray, a participant has suffered serious physical
injuries or less serious physical injuries and it cannot
be ascertained who inflicted these injuries but the
person who used violence on the victim can be
identified or determined.
If the injury caused to the victim is only slight physical
injuries, then no one is liable because if a person
engaged in a tumultuous affray or participated therein,
the law presumes that it is __ therefore no one is liable
if the injuries sustained is only slight physical injury
and it cannot be determined who inflicted the said
slight physical injury on the victim.

commit suicide.
Q: What if a terminally sick person with cancer, he was
lying in bed, almost lifeless and it was only a machine that
was giving life to his body. Now, the mother of the patient
and she took pity of her son because the son was
agonizing and was only breathing through the said
machine. The mother wanted to finish the suffering of the
son and at the time she visited the hospital, she turned off
the machine and the son died. He killed her son out of
mercy. So it is mercy-killing or euthanasia. Is the mother
liable for giving assistance to suicide?
A: No because the initiative to kill did not come
 from the sai person who was ill. The crime
committed by the mother is parricide for killing
her son. If it were other person, it was murder.
Evidently, it was murder because there was
evident premeditation; there was thinking before
•

Q: There was this tumultuous affray, several people were

attacking and fighting each other. Suddenly, here comes a
balot vendor. He saw the affray. He was just there,
watching, suddenly he fell on the ground. He died because
of a stab wound. Now, it cannot be ascertained who
stabbed him, so no one saw who stabbed him. Who will be
held criminally liable?

A: Any person who inflicted serious physical

injuries on him. No one has seen also who had
inflicted serious physical injuries against him. The
any person who inflicted any violence against
doing the act of mercy-killing.
ART 254 – DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS/ ILLEGAL
DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm against or at
another person

him shall be criminally liable.

 CRIMINAL LAW 2

relationship.
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that person
infanticide.
It is the age that is controlling, not the
Q: What if there was this park. The park was full of people
and then suddenly, here comes X, X went to the park, put
out his firearm, and he fired shots in the air. What crime is
committed?

ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there was this woman and this woman gave
birth to a child. After giving birth to the child while the child
was only a day old, she already wanted to kill the child in
order to conceal her dishonor. However, she could not kill
the child by herself and so she asked a favor from a friend.
And so the friend arrived and both the mother and the said
friend killed the child, a day old, by suffocating the said
child with a big pillow. The child less than three days old,
died. What crime/s is/are committed?
A: X committed Alarms and Scandals under
Article 155. When he fired shots in the air, his
intention was to cause disturbance of public peace
and tranquility. The firearm was not aimed towards

any person.
Q: What if X went to a public place full of people. X saw his
enemy, Y, and so to threaten Y, X pulled out his firearm,
aimed the firearm at Y in order to threaten him. X
discharges the firearm, however, with no intention to kill Y.
His only intention is to threaten Y and Y was not killed.
What crime is committed?
A:
The mother is liable for infanticide.
The
said stranger friend is also liable for
infanticide. There was conspiracy on them. This
time conspiracy on life, both of them are liable for
infanticide under only one information. Isang
information langsa court and that is infanticide.
Both the mother and the friend are conspirators of
infanticide.
A: The crime committed is Article 254, Illegal
Discharge of Firearms. Illegal discharge of
firearms is committed by any person who aims
and discharges the firearm to any other person
absent the intent to kill the said person. The
purpose is merely to threaten the said person.
Now let us say that the mother is convicted. If the
mother is convicted, the penalty imposed by the law as
provided in Article 255 is equivalent to parricide which is
reclusion perpetua to death. On the other hand, if the
stranger is convicted under Article 255, the penalty to be
imposed is equivalent to murder therefore, also reclusion
perpetua to death. But note the charge is that he is guilty
of infanticide.
Q: What if in the same public place, X went there and
pulled out his firearm because he saw his enemy, Y. He
aimed the gun at Y with intent to kill, because he wanted to
kill his enemy. However, Y saw it and was able to avoid.
What crime is committed?
A: X committed attempted homicide or murder,
as the case may be. Although Y was not hit, the
fact that the said firearm was discharged with
intent to kill, it is already attempted homicide or
The fact that the said mother killed the child, less
than three days old, in order to conceal dishonorwill
mitigate the criminal liability of the mother. NOTE:The
penalty will be lowered not by one, but by two degrees,
from reclusion perpetua to death, the penalty of the mother

murder, as the case may be.

Q: What if in the said merry-making, there were so many
people. X went there. He saw his enemy Y and went
directly to Y, took out his gun and he poked the gun without
discharging. What crime is committed?
will only now become prision mayor.
A: The crime committed is other light threats.

Q: What if let us say that the killer of the less than three
day old child is the maternal grandparents. The
grandparents conspired in the killing in order to conceal the
dishonor of their daughter.
concealment of the dishonor?
A: The concealment of the dishonor will also
mitigate the criminal liability of the maternal
grandparents that is one degree lower. So sa
mother, two degrees lower, from reclusion
perpetua to death magigingprision mayor.
maternal grandparents one degree lower lang,
from reclusion perpetua to death it will now
So here, threatening another with a gun, without
discharging, only poking. It is other light threats. It
is not grave threats, it is not light threats. It is only
What is the effect of the

other light threats, arrestomenor.

•
So kapag discharge, pinutok – it could either be alarms
and scandals, illegal discharge of firearms or
attempted or frustrated murder or homicide, as the
case may be.
Sa
•
If no discharging, only poking, or threatening with a
firearm, it is only other light threats
Whatever it is,

ARTICLE 255 – INFANTICIDE

Infanticide is the killing of a child less than three

(3) days old or less than seventy-two (72) hours. So in the

case of infanticide, it is the age of the victim that is
controlling. The victim, the child, the infant, must be less
than three (3) days old. He must be less than seventy-two
hours. If it is only three (3) days old or above it is any other
crime but not infanticide.
Q: So what if in the same problem I gave, the woman gave
birth to the child and wanted to kill the child but this time
the infant is already three days old and the child was killed
by the said mother and the friend. What are the crimes
committed?
•
Who is the offender in Infanticide?
The offender can be the parents, the mother, the
A:
The mother is liable for
father, the grandparents or it can be any other person so
long as the child is less than three (3) days old, it is
parricidewhile the stranger/friend is liable for
murder. And this time no amount of concealment

become reclusion temporal.

concealment of dishonor is akin to a privilege

mitigating circumstance because the lowering of
the penalty is not merely by periods but by
degrees. So it is akin to a privilege mitigating
circumstance.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
of dishonor will mitigate the criminal liability of the
So there lies a difference between
parricide and infanticide if the offender is the
parent or the mother of the child.
to abort the fetus. So what the boyfriend did was he went to
the sidewalks of Quiapo and bought there aborting
beverages and he administered the same to the said
mother.
woman.
And the female student drank the aborting
JUST REMEMBER: If the child is less than three days old
or less than 72 hours, IT IS INFANTICIDE. It is the age

Q: But what if despite the fact that the female student had
already taken or drank the abortive beverage still the fetus
survived? Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal womb. What
crime is committed if any by the boyfriend and the
girlfriend? Is there a crime such as frustrated intentional
abortion?

Note that there are four (4) articles on abortion but there
are only two (2) type of abortion:
INTENTIONAL ABORTION
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
that controls. If the child is three days old and above,
PARRICIDE OR MURDER, as the case may be. It is
obvious murder because a three day old child or infant is
beverage and the fetus died.
committed?
What crime/s is/are
A: In so far as the boyfriend is concerned, the
crime committed is intentional abortion under Article
256. In so far as the said female student is
concerned, the crime committed is also intentional
abortion but it is under Article 258 – Abortion
practiced by the woman herself or by her parents.
So, both of them are liable for intentional abortion.

totally defenseless.
ARTICLE 256, 257, 258 AND 259 ARE ALL ABOUT
ABORTION
ARTICLE 256 – INTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 257 – UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
ARTICLE 258 – ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE
WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS
ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
A: YES. There is a crime such as frustrated
intentional abortion. Here, the said woman has
already taken the said abortive beverage. He has
already performed all the acts necessary to
consume the crime of abortion however, abortion
did not result because of causes independent of
ABORTIVES
1.
2.
Because the abortion practiced by the woman herself or
the mother and the abortion practiced by a physician or
midwife are all intentional abortion. So in effect, we only
have to kinds of abortion. We have intentional abortion and
unintentional abortion.
their will.
Malakasangkapitngbatasa maternal
ABORTION – is the willful killing of a fetus from the

womb and so the baby survived. And so, they are

both liable for frustrated intentional abortion.

NO. This time there is no crime such as
frustrated unintentional abortion.
IS THERE A CRIME SUCH AS FRUSTRATED
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION? Because in
unintentional abortion, the intention is against the
woman and abortion only happens unintentional.
mother’s womb or the violent expulsion of a fetus from the

maternal womb which results in the death of the fetus.

INTENTION ABORTION is committed in three (3) ways:

1.
By using violence upon the person of the pregnant
woman resulting to abortion.
2.
Without violence, by acting without violence,
without the consent of the woman by
administering aborting drugs or beverages without
the consent of the pregnant woman.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So let’s say a man exerted physical violence against the
woman who happens to be his enemy. The said woman
was severely hurt however, the baby was not hurt.
The
3.
By acting without violence, with the consent of the
pregnant woman that is by administering aborting
drugs or beverages to a pregnant woman this time
with her consent.
fetus inside the tummy did not die. What is the crime
committed by the said man?
A:
Only serious physical Injuries against the

was no intent in so far as the fetus is concerned.

woman. No crimes against the fetus because there
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION can only be committed in
one (1) way and that is by exerting physical violence on a
pregnant woman. And in result thereof, an unintentional
abortion was suffered.
In unintentional abortion the force employed was

Q: But what if in the said problem, the man inflicted

violence on the pregnant woman who happens to be his
enemy. Let’s say he kicked and moved the said woman
severely and by reason thereof the pregnant woman was
1:44:17. What crime/s is/are committed?
physically exerted on a pregnant woman. The intention of
the offender is not against the baby or the fetus but against
the mother. His intention is against the mother but in so
doing, since the mother is pregnant, the baby/fetus was
A: The crime committed against the woman is
serious physical injuries. As against the fetus,
the crime committed is unintentional abortion.
Now, it resulted from one single act therefore it will
result to a complex crime of SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES WITH UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
under ARTICLE 48 OF BOOK 1. It is a complex
crime. It is a single act resulting to two less grave
also aborted. So abortion was unintentionally caused.
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: So what if there were two college students, a boyfriend
and girlfriend. The girlfriend became pregnant and the
boyfriend said, ‘I am not yet ready. We are still so young so
I cannot marry you.’ And so by reason thereof the girlfriend
said, ‘how about my situation? I am already pregnant.’ And
so by reason thereof, they both decided in order to conceal
the dishonor of the said female student, they both decided

felonies.
Q: What if a husband arrived home at 5 o’clock in the
morning. He saw his wife looking at the children and is
making breakfast. Suddenly the cellphone of the wife rang,
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
the pregnant wife answered the cellphone and she began
3.
By scoffing at or decrying another publicly for
giggling. When she began giggling, the husband took the
cellphone from the said wife and listened to the cellphone.
He heard a voice of a man on the other line of the
cellphone. Since he heard the voice of the man and he just
arrived from work, he became jealous and with the use of a
knife he stabbed the wife. The wife died and the fetus died.
What crime/s is/are committed?
having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.

Under Article 261, the persons criminally liable are both the
challenger and the instigator.
NOTE that if it is not a duel or there is no agreement to
combat or to fight, let’s say there was no agreement
between A and B to fight and yet they fought and B died,
the crime committed is HOMICIDE because Article 260 and
261 only applies if there is an agreement to fight, to a duel
A: In so far as the wife is concerned, the crime
committed is parricide. In so far as the baby is
concerned, the crime committed is
unintentional abortion. Again, it resulted from
one single act of stabbing the wife therefore it will
give rise to a COMPLEX CRIME OF PARRICIDE
WITH UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION. There is a
crime against the wife which is parricide and
against the fetus which is unintentional abortion
resulting from a single act therefore, it is parricide

or a combat.
CRIMES OF PHYSICAL INJURIES:
ARTICLE 262 – MUTILATION
Mutilation is the clipping off or chopping off of a
particular part of a body which is not susceptible to grow
again.

Two kinds of mutilation:

with unintentional abortion.
ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A
PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF
ABORTIVES
1.
2.
By intentionally depriving another of a part of his
body which is an essential part for reproduction.
By intentionally committing other mutilation that is,
by depriving him of any other part of his body with
intent to deprive him of such part of his body.
UNDER ARTICLE 259, there is another act punished and
that is dispensing of abortives. Dispensing of abortives is
committed by a pharmacist who shall dispense an abortive
without a prescription from a physician. The mere act of
dispensing the said abortives without prescription from a
Under the first kind, that is mutilating an organ
essential for reproduction, is otherwise known as
CASTRATION. You will know that the penalty is even
higher than homicide. Killing a person is only punishable
by reclusion perpetua while castrating a person is
punishable by reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
Because if you are castrated it is as if you are already
killed. That’s why it has a higher penalty.

physician will hold the said pharmacist criminally liable.

ARTICLE 260 - DUEL
ARTICLE 261 – CHALLENGING TO A DUEL
What is a duel?
A duel is a combat with deadly weapons
concerted between two or more persons who have decided
or agreed to fight.
•
Mutilation is a felony which cannot be committed
out of imprudence or negligence. Because the
law requires that there must be the deliberate
intent to mutilate, the deliberate intent to clip off, to
severe a particular part of the body of a person.
Absent that deliberate intent, any person who
loses a part of his body, it can only be serious
physical injuries but not mutilation. So in mutilation
it is always committed with deliberate intent or
dolo to mutilate. Absent that, it is serious physical
injury.

Under Article 260 - Duel, there are three acts punished in

a duel:

ELEMENTS OF A DUEL:
1.

2.

3.
It is necessary that the offenders that there was an
agreement to engage in combat or in a fight.
There must be two or more seconds for each
combatant.
The firearms or the arms to be used as well as the
other terms of the combat must be agreed upon
by the said seconds.
ILLUSTRATION
Q: Let’s say A and B were engaged in a fight, they were
both fighting and A was losing and so he took out his bolo.
His intention was to cut the body of B in order to defeat him
however, B tried to prevent him and placed his hand and by
reason thereof, the right hand of B was severed from his
body. Is the crime committed mutilation?
1.
2.
By killing one’s adversary in a duel.
By inflicting physical injuries upon one’s
adversary.
3.
By making a combat by merely entering into a
duel.
A: NO. It is not mutilation because there was no
deliberate intent to clip off or to severe the right
hand of B. His intention was to attack or to stab B
and in so doing, it resulted to the loss of an arm
therefore, the CRIME COMMITTED IS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES. Physical injuries can either
be serious physical injuries, less serious physical
injuries or slight physical injuries.

So under Article 260, the persons who are liable are the
combatants and adversaries, those who engage in a duel
and yungkanilangalalay, yung seconds.

Under Article 261- Challenging to a duel, there are also

three acts punished:
PHYSICAL INJURIES is the act of wounding, beating or
assaulting another with no intent to kill. It also involves the
act of knowingly administering injurious beverages or
substances absent intent to kill. So always there is no
intent to kill in order to amount to physical injuries because
1.
2.
By challenging another to a duel.
By inciting another to give or accept a challenge to
a duel.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
even if the injury is only slight or no injury at all but if there
is intent to kill, it is already in the stage of homicide. So
there must be no intent to kill.

The offender loses the use of speech or the power to heal

or to smell, or looses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a
leg.

BLINDNESS requires loss of vision of both eyes by reason

of the injury inflicted. Mere weakness in vision is not
substances absent intent to kill.

It also includes the act of knowing administering injurious

contemplated.

Under the SECOND CATEGORY:

So always, there is no intent to kill in order to amount to

physical injuries.
Because even if the injury is only SLIGHT or no injury at all,
but there is intent7 to kill, it is already in the attempted
-
So if it is only an eye which has been lost, it is
serious physical injury but under the Second
Category already. The penalty is lesser than that
of the First Category.

stage of Homicide. So there must be no intent to kill.

Under the THIRD CIRCUMSTANCE/CATEGORY:

ARTICLE 263 –SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
Under Art. 263, the serious physical injuries punished

When the offender becomes DEFORMED.

are:
1.

2.
When the injured person becomes insane,
imbecile, impotent, or blind in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted.

So what is this so-called DEFORMITY which will result in

serious physical injury?

When the injured person:
a.
Loses the use of speech or the
power to heal or to smell, or looses
an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a
leg; or
Q: A hacked B with the use of a bolo on his stomach. So
there was a big mark on his stomach despite the fact that it
was already healed, there was a big scar on the said
stomach. The doctor said that the said injury requires
medical treatment for 2 weeks. What crime is committed?
Is it serious physical injury or is it less serious physical
b.

c.
Loses the use of any such member,
or
Becomes incapacitated for the work
in which he was therefore habitually
engaged in the consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted

injury?
A: The crime committed is only LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURY. There was no deformity.
Although there was a big scar on the stomach, it
would not amount to deformity. An injury in order
to amount to deformity which would bring about
serious physical injury must result to a physical
ugliness on a person. There are 3 requisites befor
deformity may be considered as a serious physical
3.
When the injured:
a.
b.
Becomes deformed
Loses any other member of his
body; or
c.
Becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he
was habitually engaged for more
than 90 days, in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted
injury:
1.

2.
There must be physical ugliness produced on
a body of a person
4.
When the injured person becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more that 30 days (but
must not be more than 90 days), as a result of the
physical injuries inflicted.
The said deformity should be permanent and
definite abnormality and it would not heal
through the natural healing process
The said deformity must be located in a
conspicuous and visible place
Note: All of this, all of the enumeration mentioned in Art.
263 are already considered serious physical injury. If a
person becomes ill or incapacitated for more than 30 days,
it is already serious physical injuries. It is already divided
into categories for purposes of penalty. Because they differ
in penalty. But the moment the said person, by reason of
the said injury becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for
3.

EXAMPLE OF “The said deformity should be permanent

and definite abnormality and it would not heal through the

natural healing process”:

crime was committed?

more than 30 days, it is already, serious physical injury.
A boxed B. He lost his 2 front teeth permanently. What
So the FIRST CATEGORYis, that the injured person

becomes INSANE.
A: The crime committed was SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURY. Because it is a deformity
even if the doctor says that he can still replace it,
the fact still remains that it cannot be healed
INSANITY refers to a mental disease by reason thereof a
person can no longer appreciate the consequences of his
act.
through a natural healing process.
yet he has only the mind of a 2-7 year old child.

IMBECILITY is when a person is already advanced in age,

A boxed B, A lost another tooth.

A: The crime committed will LESS SERIOUS OR

SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES depending on the
IMPOTENCY includes the inability to copulate or sterility.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
medical attendance. Because it cannot be seen. It
is not located in a visible or conspicuous place.
2.
3.

4.
When there are circumstances adding ignominy to
the offense
When the victim is the offender’s parents,
ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers
When the victim is a person of rank or person in
authority, provided the crime is not direct assault

A poured muriatic acid on the face of another person whom

he hates and so because of that, the face of that person
becomes deformed, it became ugly. Later, she went on a
plastic surgeon. When he got out of the plastic surgery
clinic, she now looks like Vilma Santos. Is the accused

So the crime committed here, with the attendance of these

circumstances qualify less serious physical injuries.

person liable for serious physical injuries?

A: Yes. Even if she became prettier than before, it
is still a fact that by reason of the said injury it
cannot be healed through the natural healing
process. It will require the attendance of medical
surgeon. Therefore, it is considered as a

ARTICLE 266 – SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND

MALTREATMENT

3 KINDS OF SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND

MALTREATMENT:
1.

Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended

party for labor from 1 to 9 days, or required
deformity.
If the said physical ugliness is not located on a visible or
conspicuous place, it would be depending on the
deployment of medical attendance.
medical attendance during the same period
Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual work
or which did not require medical attendance
Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury

2.

3.
Q: When is serious physical injuries qualified?
1.

2.

If it is committed against any of the persons

enumerated in Parricide. That is when serious
physical injuries is committed against the
father, mother, child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate; legitimate other ascendant or
other descendant and legitimate spouse of
the accused.
If in the infliction of serious physical injuries, it
is attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances for murder. That is, if it is done
with treachery, evident premeditation, the
crime committed is qualified serious physical
injuries.

A: Serious physical injuries is qualified:

Maltreatment of another by deed without causing any injury
is the act of INFLICTING PAIN ON ANOTHER PERSON
WITHOUT CAUSING ANY WOUND OR INJURY.

CASE: PEOPLE VS MAPALO (in Book I)

Let us say that A was walking. Here comes B. B
used a lead pipe, he went to A and hit the head of A with a
lead pipe. Thereafter, he ran away. The medical certificate
showed that the head of A did not sustain any injury. He
was charged with wttempted homicide. Supreme Court
said, the crime committed is ILL-TREATMENT OF
ANOTHER BY DEED, a form of slight physical injury under
ARTICLE 264 –ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS
SUBSTANCE OR BEVERAGES
Art. 266.
According to the Supreme Court, there was pain
inflicted on A, but there was no injury and there was no
intent to kill because the said offender immediately ran
away after hitting him a single time. So the crime committed
ELEMENTS:
The offender inflicted serious physical injuries
upon another
It was done by knowingly administering to him any
injurious substances or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or cruelty
He had no intent to kill
1.

2.
is MALTREATMENT OF ANOTHER PARTY.

3.
ARTICLE 266-A – RAPE
RAPE is now a crime against person; it is no
ARTICLE 265 – LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
longer a crime against chastity. Because of the amendment
brought about by RA 8353 – THE ANTI-RAPE LAW.
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES is
committed if by reason of the injury inflicted, the offended

2 TYPES OF RAPE/HOW RAPE IS COMMITTED:

party
requires medical attendance or he cannot perform
1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman
2. Sexual Assault

the work with which he is habitually engaged for a period of

10-30 days. So the requirement of medical attendance or
his incapacity to do his work for a period of 10-30 days, it

will bring about less serious physical injury.

There is RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE when a man
has carnal knowledge of a woman against her will.
Q: What circumstances will QUALIFY LESS SERIOUS

PHYSICAL INJURIES?
ELEMENTS OF A RAPE BY A MAN WHO SHALL HAVE
CARNAL KNOWLEDGE OF A WOMAN :
Offender is a man
1.
When there is manifest intent to insult or offend
the injured person
1.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
2.

3.
Offender had carnal knowledge of the woman
against her will
Such act is accomplished under any of the
following circumstance:
threat, or intimidation. That is why in case of
inceuous rape, force, threat, or intimidation is not
indispensable; it is not necessary. Because it is
the overpowering and overbearing moral influence
or moral ascendency which a father has over his
daughter which takes place of force, threat or
intimidation.
a.
b.
Through force, threat, or intimidation
When the offended party is deprived of
reason or is otherwise unconscious
c.
d.
By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority
When the offended party is under 12 years of
age or is demented, even though the
circumstances mentioned above be present

Q: What if A and B are lovers and then suddenly B filed a

case against A because according to B, he was raped by
her boyfriend. In the course of the trial of the case, the
defense of the man was the so-called, “sweetheart defense
theory.” According to him, “We are sweet lovers.” Therefore
according to him, it is impossible for him to have raped her
because we are sweet lovers. Will said sweetheart defense

FIRST - “OFFENDER IS A MAN”

So in rape by carnal knowledge, who is the offender? A
MAN.
Who is the offendeaprty? A WOMAN.
The law is SPECIFIC.

theory lie in his favor?

A: Supreme Court said, in case of “sweetheart

defense theory”, for it to lie, mere oral testimonty
will not suffice. There must be documentary
evidence, memorabilia, picture, love letters, etc.
which would show that indeed they are
sweethearts – boyfriend & girlfriend or lovers. But
mind you, even the Supreme Court said this, there
was not a case wherein the “sweetheart defense
SECOND - “OFFENDER HAD CARNAL KNOWLEDGE
OF THE WOMAN AGAINST HER WILL”"
The offender has carnal knowledge of a woman against her
will and it is committed by using force, threat, or
intimidation. When the offended party is deprived of reason

theory” has acquitted a man.

or otherwise unconscious.
Q: What if the woman was sleeping when a man had a
carnal knowledge of the said woman. Is it rape by carnal
knowledge?

Therefore, under any all circumstances which involves the

“sweetheart defense theory” will not lie in favor of a man.
Because it does not mean that when you are the

A: Yes. The Supreme Court said that the woman

who is sleeping is unconscious.
sweetheart, you can no longer rape the other person.
In Book I, there is no such thing as FRUSTRATED RAPE.
Rape admits only 2 stages: ATTEMPTED RAPE and
CONSUMMATED RAPE.
Q: What if the woman is half asleep when the carnal
knowledge was done by the said man? Is it still rape?

A: Yes, said by the Supreme Court. The woman

was unconscious.
The reason is that a mere touch of an erected penis on the
labia or lips of a woman’s genitalia will already
consummate rape.
THIRD:
It is not necessary that there be deep or complete
penetration. It is not necessary that the vagina did
lacerated. Mere touch of the lips or the labia of a woman’s
A is 11 years old. He is cohabiting with a man who is 20
years old. They are luvingtgether as if they are husband
and wife. Of course, they had carnal knowledge. The man
is liable for STATUTORY RAPE. The number of times that
he had carnal knowledge of the said woman, that is the
number of the counts of rape. So if he had carnal
knowledge of the woman 5 times during the time that they
were together – 5 counts of statutory rape. That is because
the child, the victim, is below 12 years of age. Insofar as
criminal law is concerned, she does not have a mind of her

genitalia already consummates rape.

Q: What if, what the erectile penis has touched was the
outer portion of genitalia, that portion which became hairy
during puberty, you have to distinguish whether it is acts of

lasciviousness or attempted rape.

A:

own, she cannot give a valid consent.

CASE: PEOPLE VS JALOSJOS
Q: What if, so the law requires that the said act of carnal
knowledge must be with the use of force, threat, or
intimidation, a father raped his daughter. The daughter did
not put up a fight, the father did not use force, threat, or
intimidation in the said carnal knowledge of a daughter. Is
If when an erectile penis has touched the outer
portion of a woman’s genitalia which becomes
hairy during puberty, if the intention of the said
offender is to lie, to have carnal knowledge
against the said woman, it is attempted rape. But
if in doing so, the said man has no intention to lie
or to have carnal knowledge, that is only ACTS OF

the crime committed rape?

A: Yes. The crime committed is rape. It is

INCESTUOUS RAPE. In case of incestuous rape,
it is the overpowering and overbearing moral
influence or moral ascendency of an ascendant
over a descendant which takes place of force,
LASCIVIOUSNESS.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT

ELEMENTS:
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault
2. The act of sexual assult is committed by any of the
following means:
a. by inserting his penis into another person's
mouth or anal orifice; or
b. by inserting any instrument or object into the
genital or anal orifice of another person
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under any any
of the following circumstances:
a. by using force or intimidation;
b. when the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious; or
c. by means of fraudulent machinations or grave
abuse of authority;
d. when the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented

*So what if what has been inserted is the penis inside the
mouth or the anal orifice, before that would only amount to
acts of lasciviousness - before the passage of RA 8353.

*The law says that it must be an instrument or object which

was inserted in the genitalia or in the anal orifice of another
person.

Q: What if it was the finger which was inserted in the

genitalia of a person? Is it acts of lasciviousness or rape by
sexual assault?

A: Supreme Court said it is RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT.

According to the Supreme Court, it would be so weird if
what has been inserted is an instrument or object, it would be
rape by sexual assault, but if it was finger, it would be rape
by acts of lasciviousness. The finger is within the mean of an
instrument or object insofar as rape by sexual assault is
concerned.

Q: In case of a RAPE, what are the circumstances which will

qualify the penalty?

A: In case of RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT, the

penalty is only PRISION MAYOR. It is a bailable offense.
If it is a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, note that the
penalty is RECLUSION PERPETUA. It is a non-bailable offense

Q: In case of a RAPE BY CARNAL KNOWLEDGE, when is

a penalty qualified?

A: Reclusion Perpetua to Death:

1. When rape is committed with the use of a
deadly weapon.
2. when rape is committed by 2 or more
persons.
3. When by reason or on occasion of rape, the
victim becomes insane.
4. when rape is attempted and homicide is
committed.
Q: What are the instances wherein the penalty to be
imposed is the capital punishment of death, so the extreme
penalty of death?

2. When by reason or on the occasion of rape,

homicide is committed

3. When the victim is under 18 years of age

and the offender is a parent, ascendant,
step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the 3rd civil
degree, or the common law spouse of the
victim.

4. When the victim is under the custody of the

police or military authorities or any penal
institution

5. When rape is cmmitted in full view of the

spouse, parent, any of the children or
relative by consanguinity within the 3rd civil
degree

6. When the victim is a religious and gauged

in legitimate religious calling or vocation
and he known to be such by the offender
before or during the commission of the rape

7. When the victim of the rape is below 7

years of age

8. When the offender knows that he has been

afflicted with HIV virus or AIDS or any other
sexually transmissible disease and the virus
of the disease is transmitted to the victim

9. When the said offender is a member of the

AFP or parliamentary units, the PNP or any
other member of the law enforcement
agency who took advantage of his position
in order to facilitate the commission of the
crime

10. By reason or on the occasion of rape, the

said victim suffered permanent physical
mutilation or disability

11. When the offender knew that the offended

party or victim is pregnant at the time of
the commission of rape

12. When the offender knew of the mental

disability, emotional disorder and/or
physical handicap of the offended party at
the time of the commission of the crime
CRIMINAL LAW 2
The presence of any of these circumstances will
bring about the imposition of the maximum penalty
of death. However, death is lifted because of RA 9346
which prohibits the imposition of death penalty.

In case of rape, PARDON will not extinguish the criminal

liability of the offender. According to Art. 266, pardon
will not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. It
is only through:
1. The offended woman may pardon the offender
through a subsequent valid marriage, the effect
of which would be the extinction of the
offender's liability
2. The legal husband may be pardoned by
forgiveness of the wife provided that the
marriage is not void ab initio

EXCEPTION: In case of MARITAL RAPE. If the legal

wife has forgiven or pardoned the legal husband.

Q: When is there PRESUMPTION OF RESISTANCE?

A: If in the course of the commission of rape,
the said offended party has performed any acts in any
degree amounting to resistance of rape or when the
said offended party cannot give a valid consent

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR

CHILDREN ACT (VAWC) – R.A. 9262

Violence against women and their children

- refers to any act or a series of acts committed
by any person against a woman who is his wife, former
wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or
had a sexual or dating relationship, or with whom he
has a common child, or against her child whether
legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family
abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical,
sexual, psychological harm or suffering, or economic
abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault,
coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of liberty.

Acts consisting violence against women and

children:

A. "Physical Violence" refers to acts that include

bodily or physical harm;

B. "Sexual violence" refers to an act which is

sexual in nature, committed against a woman or her
child. It includes, but is not limited to:

a) rape, sexual harassment, acts of lasciviousness,

treating a woman or her child as a sex object, making
demeaning and sexually suggestive remarks, physically
attacking the sexual parts of the victim's body, forcing
her/him to watch obscene publications and indecent
shows or forcing the woman or her child to do
indecent acts and/or make films thereof, forcing the
wife and mistress/lover to live in the conjugal home or
sleep together in the same room with the abuser;

b) acts causing or attempting to cause the victim to

engage in any sexual activity by force, threat of force,
physical or other harm or threat of physical or other
harm or coercion;

c) Prostituting the woman or child.

 C. "Psychological violence" refers to acts or
omissions causing or likely to cause mental or emotional
suffering of the victim such as but not limited to intimidation,
harassment, stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental infidelity. It
includes causing or allowing the victim to witness the physical,
sexual or psychological abuse of a member of the family to
which the victim belongs, or to witness pornography in any
form or to witness abusive injury to pets or to unlawful or
unwanted deprivation of the right to custody and/or visitation
of common children.

D. "Economic abuse" refers to acts that make or

attempt to make a woman financially dependent which includes,
but is not limited to the following:
1. withdrawal of financial support or preventing the
victim from engaging in any legitimate profession,
occupation, business or activity, except in cases
wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid,
serious and moral grounds as defined in Article 73
of the Family Code;
2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of financialresources
and the right to the use and enjoyment of the
conjugal, community or property owned in common;
3. destroying household property;
4. controlling the victims' own money or properties or
solely controlling the conjugal money or
properties.

Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children.- The

crime of violence against women and their children is
committed through any of the following acts:
(a) Causing physical harm to the woman or her
child;
(b) Threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(c) Attempting to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(d) Placing the woman or her child in fear of
imminent physical harm;
(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the woman
or her child to engage in conduct which the
woman or her child has the right to desist from or
desist from conduct which the woman or her child
has the right to engage in, or attempting to restrict
or restricting the woman's or her child's freedom of
movement or conduct by force or threat of force,
physical or other harm or threat of physical or
other harm, or intimidation directed against the
woman or child. This shall include, but not limited
to, the following acts committed with the purpose
or effect of controlling or restricting the woman's or
her child's movement or conduct:
(1) Threatening to deprive or actually
depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family;
(2) Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman's
children insufficient financial support;
(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her child of a legal right;
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
(4) Preventing the woman in engaging in
beats the wife. Will such defense mitigate the criminally
guilty husband? Can he use such defense?
any legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity or controlling the
victim's own mon4ey or properties, or
solely controlling the conjugal or common
money, or properties;
(f) Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm
on oneself for the purpose of controlling her
actions or decisions;
(g) Causing or attempting to cause the woman or
Battered Women Syndrome (Sec. 26)
her child to engage in any sexual activity which
does not constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through intimidation
directed against the woman or her child or her/his
immediate family;
(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless
conduct, personally or through another, that
alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child.
This shall include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
A: Under Sec. 27 it cannot be used because
under Sec. 27; the fact that the husband is under
the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or any
other mind-alteringsubstance cannot be used as
defense in VAWC therefore; alcoholism and drug

addiction cannot be a defense in VAWC.

-
Scientifically defined pattern of psychological
and behavioral symptoms found in the
battering relationship as a result of cumulative
abuse.

Under Sec. 26, it is provided that victim survivors

founded to be suffering from this battered women
syndrome shall be exempted from both criminal
and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of

any of the elements of self-defense.

(1) Stalking or following the woman or
her child in public or private places;
(2) Peering in the window or lingering
outside the residence of the woman or
her child;
(3) Entering or remaining in the dwelling
or on the property of the woman or her
child against her/his will;
The court however shall be held by a testimony of
a psychologist or psychiatrist if the woman is
indeed suffering from the so called battered
women syndrome.

Q: What is hazing?
(4) Destroying the property and personal
belongings or inflicting harm to animals
or pets of the woman or her child; and
(5) Engaging in any form of harassment
or violence;
(i) Causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child,
including, but not limited to, repeated verbal and
emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or
custody of minor children of access to the
woman's child/children.
A: Hazing is an initiation rite or practice which is
used as an admission into membership in any
fraternity or any other organization wherein the
said recruit/neophyte/applicant is placed under the
an embarrassing or humiliating situations such as
forcing him to do menial, silly, and foolish tasks or
ANTI-HAZING LAW – R.A. 8049
services or subjecting him into psychological or
physical injury or crime.

Q: Is hazing totally prohibited in the Philippines?

A: No. Hazing is not totally prohibited in the
Philippines. Hazing is allowed provided that the

There must be a prior written notice sent to

the head of the school authorities or the head
of the organization 7 days before the said
initiation rites and this prior written
notice shall contain the following:

following requisites are present:

DATING RELATIONSHIP - refers to a situation wherein the
parties live as husband and wife without the benefit of
marriage or are romantically involved over time and on a
continuing basis during the course of the relationship. A
casual acquaintance or ordinary socialization between two
individuals in a business or social context is not a dating
relationship.
1.
a.
It shall indicate the date of the said
initiation rites which shall not be more
than 3 days.
Q: The neighbor was aware of the beatings that the
husband has been doing to his wife so the neighbor who
was a witness to all these beatings filed a case against the
husband. Will the case prosper?
A: Yes because under sec. 25, Violation Against
Women and Children (VAWC) is a public offense.
Q: When does the crime prescribe?
A: If it involves physical abuse; it shall prescribe
after 20 years. If it involves psychological, sexual,
and economical abuse; it shall prescribe in 10
b.
It shall indicate/state the names of
the neophytes or applicants who will
undergo the said hazing or initiation
rites.
c.
It shall contain an undertaking
which states that there shall be no
physical violence employed in any form
on these neophyte recruits or
applicants.

years.

Q: Let’s say the wife filed a case against the husband for
violation of RA 9262; during the presentation of evidence
by the defense, the husband testified that he was always
drunk. He was alcoholic. That’s why he lost temper and
2.

Upon the receipt of such prior written

notice; the head of the school or
organization shall assign atleast 2
representatives from their school or
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
organization who must be present during the
time of the said initiation rite or hazing and
these 2 representatives shall see to it that no
amount of physical violence shall be
employed on any person or any neophyte or
recruit or applicant during the said hazing or
initiation rite.
Q: What if in the course of the said hazing or initiation rite
someone died or suffered physical injuries; who shall be
held criminally liable?
A: If in the course of hazing or initiation rite,
someone died or some suffered any physical
injuries; all of the officers and members of the said
fraternity or organization who are present and who
participated
liable as principal.
in the said initiation rite shall be
Q: What if the said initiation rite was conducted or held in a
house of an Aling Nene? Is Aling Nene criminally liable?
A: Aling Nene is liable as an accomplice if
she has knowledge of the conduct of the said
ANTI- CHILD ABUSE ACT – R.A. 7610
In so far as RA 7610 is concerned; Children are those:
 Below 18 years of age
 Above 18 years of age who does not have the capacity to
fully protect themselves against any abuse, cruelty or
maltreatment because of their physical or mental disability.
Q: What if two children, A and B were fighting over a gun
toy. The mother of A saw B beating A so A’s mother held B
and gave him a tender slap. However, because B is still a
child, his face became reddish. Based in the medical
certificate, it showed that the said act of slapping was the
cause of the injury sustained by B that made his face
reddish. What crime was committed by the mother of A? Is
the mother liable for Child abuse or is the mother liable for
slight physical injuries?
A: The mother of A is liable for slight physical
injuries only and not for violation of RA 7610.
Q: What do you mean by Child Abuse?
A: Child abuse refers to the maltreatment,
whether habitual or not, of the child which includes any of the
following:
 Physical or psychological abuse, neglect, cruelty, sexual
abuse and emotional maltreatment;
 Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or
demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a
human being.
 Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for survival,
such as food and shelter; or
 Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an injured
child resulting in serious impairment of his growth and
development or in his permanent incapacity or death.
 Not all acts committed against a child will result to child
abuse. It is necessary that in the said act, there was
this intention to debase, degrade or demean the
intrinsic worth of a child as a human being
initiation rites and she did not do any act in order
to prevent its occurrence.

Q: When is there a prima facie evidence of participation?

A: Any person who is present in the said hazing
or initiation rite shall constitute a prima facie
evidence that there is a participation and shall be

held liable as principal.

Q: What if in the said hazing an officer beat an applicant
and he hit the neck thereby causing the death of the said
neophyte/recruit/applicant and so when prosecuted he
said: “I have no intention to commit so grave a wrong as
that committed”. Can such defense be used so as to
mitigate his criminal liability?
A: No such defense is prohibited defense. Under
RA 8049; the defense that such person has no
intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed cannot be used by an accused under

• If the said initiation rite took place in the

house of a member or an officer of the said
fraternity or sorority; the parents of the said
members or officers shall be held liable not as
an accomplice but as a principal if they have
such knowledge of the said conduct of the
initiation rites and they did not perform any
act inorder to prevent its occurrence.

RA 8049.
•

Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse

What is child prostitution?

Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit,

or any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence
of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse.

•
Whenever a person hits an applicant/
neophyte, he is already performing a felonious
act therefore he shall be held criminally liable
for all the consequences of his actions. (Art 4
book 1)
In the case of Lenny Villa Hazing; Sereno et.
al. considered Art. 4 wherein they ruled
Reckless Imprudence resulting to homicide.
(I disagree) In Reckless imprudence, the said person must be performing an act which is not felonious but by reason of negligence or
imprudence, a felony resulted. Therefore, in the case of Lenny Villa, the ruling shall be homicide, it shall not be reckless imprudence.
Aggravating Circumstances:
(a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are not
limited to, the following:
(1) Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;
(2) Inducing a person to be a client of a child
prostitute by means of written or oral
advertisements or other similar means;
(3) Taking advantage of influence or relationship
to procure a child as prostitute;
CRIMINAL LAW 2
 (4) Threatening or using violence towards
a child to engage him as a prostitute; or
(5) Giving monetary consideration goods
or other pecuniary benefit to a child with
intent to engage such child in prostitution.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse
of lascivious conduct with a child exploited in
prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse;
Provided, That when the victims is under twelve
(12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be
prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended,
the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious
conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That
the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim
is under twelve (12) years of age shall be
reclusion temporal in its medium period; and
(c) Those who derive profit or advantage
therefrom, whether as manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes place, or
of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a cover
or which engages in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has been issued to
said establishment.
When is there attempt to commit child prostitution?
1. when any person who, not being a relative of a
child, is found alone with the said child inside the
room or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel, motel,
pension house, apartelle or other similar
establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other hidden
or secluded area under circumstances which would
lead a reasonable person to believe that the child
is about to be exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse.
2. when any person is receiving services from a child
in a sauna parlor or bath, massage clinic, health
club and other similar establishments.
What is Child Trafficking?
Any person who shall engage in trading and
dealing with children including, but not limited to, the act
of buying and selling of a child for money, or for any other
consideration, or barter
Aggravating Circumstance: if the victim is under 12 years
of age
Attempt to Commit Child Trafficking. –
There is an attempt to commit child trafficking under
Section 7 of this Act:
(a) When a child travels alone to a foreign
country without valid reason therefor and
without clearance issued by the Department
of Social Welfare and Development or written
permit or justification from the child's
parents or legal guardian;
(b) when the pregnant mother executes an
affidavit of consent for adoption for
consideration;
(c) When a person, agency, establishment
or child-caring institution recruits women or
couples to bear children for the purpose of
child trafficking; or
(d) When a doctor, hospital or clinic official
or employee, nurse, midwife, local civil
registrar or any other person simulates birth
for the purpose of child trafficking; or
(e) When a person engages in the act of
finding children among low-income
families, hospitals, clinics, nurseries, day-care
centers, or other child- during institutions
who can be offered for the purpose of
child trafficking.
Title Nine
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY
AND SECURITY
Chapter One
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
Section One – Illegal Detention
Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
It is committed when any private individual who
kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprive
him of his liberty. When such detention is illegal or
committed in any of the following circumstances:
a. If the kidnapping or detention shall have
lasted more than three days;
b. If it shall have been committed simulating
public authority;
c. If any serious physical injuries shall have
been inflicted upon the person kidnapped
or detained; or if threats to kill him
shall have been made;
d. If the person kidnapped or detained shall
be a minor, female or a public officer.
- The crime committed is serious illegal detention.
qualify the penalty that will make the institution of
Who is the offender?

CRIMINAL LAW 2

1
st
Element
the maximum penalty of death?

-
He must be a private individual because if he
is a public officer vested with the power to
effect arrest and detain a person, he will be
The circumstances are the following:
we have kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with homicide.

If the person kidnapped or detained is

a.
If the purpose of the kidnapping or
detention was to extort ransom from the
victim or any other person. Therefore, we

liable for arbitrary detention under Article 124.

have kidnapping and serious illegal

Can a public officer also commit kidnapping and
detention with ransom.
serious illegal detention?
b.
If the person kidnapped or detained died
-
Yes. If said public officer has not been vested
by law with the authority to effect arrest and
detain a person, then said person is acting in
his private capacity. Since he is acting in his
private capacity then he is liable for
kidnapping and serious illegal detention and
not under Article 124 which is arbitrary
detention.
or is killed as a consequence of kidnapping and serious illegal detention,
c.

d.
raped, we have kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with rape.
If person kidnapped or detained is subjected to torture or other dehumanizing acts.
2nd Element

When is there detention?
-

There is detention if the offender detains the

person or liberty of another person. He must
be detained or incarcerated, there must be
showing that there was restraint in his person
or liberty. Otherwise, if there is no restraint in
his person or liberty, it could be any other
crime but not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention.

-
The law requires that detention must be
illegal. Therefore, there should be no

People vs. Mamantak

reasonable ground thereof.
While the mother and her daughter were in a
food chain in Tondo, the mother lost her
daughter. She searched for her daughter over
a year. A year and 6 months thereafter, she
received a phone call from a Muslim woman
claiming that she has her daughter and she
was demanding P30,000 in exchange of her
child. The woman instructed the mother to go
to a restaurant, where the exchange will take
place. However, the mother already reported
the call to the police. When they were in the
 Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with
Ransom

Ransom

- Any money, price or consideration given or

demanded as a redemption for the liberty of
the person detained. Any money, price or
consideration which is given in exchange for
the liberty of the person detained or
incarcerated is considered ransom.
restaurant and while the exchange was taking

 Circumstances that will make the crime

serious illegal detention:

place, the police apprehended Mamantak.

The crime charged was kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. The
RTC convicted the accused, however for
kidnapping and serious illegal detention but
not for ransom. According to the RTC, the
amount given, 30 thousand pesos, is such a
small amount to be considered ransom.
According to the RTC it is merely a payment
for the board and lodging of the child during
a.

b.
The kidnapping or detention shall have
lasted more than three days;
It shall have been committed simulating
public authority;
- By pretending to be a public officer,
pretending to be NBI agent.
c. Any serious physical injuries shall have
been inflicted upon the person kidnapped
 or detained; or if threats to kill him shall
have been made;
d. The person kidnapped or detained shall be
a minor, female or public officer.

 The presence of any of these circumstances will

make the crime serious illegal detention and the
absence of any of these circumstances will make

the crime slight illegal detention under Article 268.

 Note that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
death. What then are the circumstances that will
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
the child was held by Mamantak.

But what if in the same problem, the father told the
SC: The crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. Kahit 5
pesos pa yan if it was given or demanded as
a redemption for the liberty of the person
detained it is already considered as ransom.
There is no such thing as small amount in so
far as ransom is concerned.
NBI agents about the kidnapping. The agents
were ale to track down than place where the child
was being kept. They went over the hide out and
exchange of gunfire took place. The father saw
that his child and took him away. While they were
escaping the kidnapper saw them and shot the
father. What crime or crimes was or were
committed?
Example

-In so far as the minor is concerned, the crime
committed is kidnapping and serious illegal
detention. Even if it has not lasted for a period
of more than three day, the fact that the victim
is a minor, the crime committed is kidnapping
and serious illegal detention.
A was indebted to B. B was asking for the
payment, however A failed to pay. B got fed up
therefore he kidnapped the minor child of A. B
called A telling him that he would only release his
child if he pays his indebtedness of half a million.
Is the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with ransom committed?
-In so far as the father is concerned, since he is
not the victim of the crime of kidnapping, a
separate crime of homicide should be filed.
-Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed by said
kidnapper: kidnapping and serious illegal
detention, in so far as the minor is concerned
and homicide in so far as the father is
concerned.
-Yes, it is already kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with ransom even if the amount
being asked by the kidnapper is the
indebtedness of the father of the kidnapped
child. So any amount given or demanded for
the release of the person detained, that is
already considered ransom.
NOTE: The same is true for kidnapping and
 Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with
Homicide
-It is a special complex crime. Therefore, since it is
a special complex crime, regardless of the
number of the victims, it is still kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with murder or homicide.
serious illegal detention with rape. It is necessary
that the victim is the one raped and since it is
People vs. Laranaga
again a special complex crime regardless of the
number of times that the victim was raped the
crime committed is only kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with rape. There is no such crime
as kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
multiple rapes. Only kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with rape and so with kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with physical injuries
which is also a special complex crime.


- There were 2 kidnapped victims. They were

sisters kidnapped and raped, thereafter killed.
SC held that even though there were 2
victims the crime committed is kidnapping and
Example:

serious illegal detention with homicide.
A, is a 6 year old child, while playing in the
playground was approached by X and gave her
candy. Meanwhile, the mother was busy hanging
their clothes. After a while, X came back and this
time gave the child money. The child was so
happy and easily persuaded to go with X. The
mother searched for her daughter but she was
nowhere to be found. X brought the child in his
house and molested her twice. The following day,
the mother found her child in their house with torn
and blooded clothes. The crime charged was
kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape.
Is the crime charged proper?
NOTE: It is the victim himself or herself who
died. If it is another person, it is another
separate and distinct crime because the law
is particular that the victim himself is the one
that is killed or dies as consequence thereof.
 A kidnapped the child of B who is his enemy. Child
is 10 years old. While being held, the child tried to
escape. A caught the child trying to escape. He
shot the child. What was the crime committed?
-The crime committed was kidnapping and serious
illegal detention with homicide
-No, the charge is wrong because the obvious intention is to rape the child and not to detainer. SC held that the man is guilty
of 2 counts

Example:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
of statutory rape because the child is below
b. It must be made without having attained the purpose intended;
12 years of age and she was molested twice.
Therefore, unless and until there was an
intention to detain the child on the part of the
offender, it could be any other crime but not
kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
c. It must be made before the institution
of criminal proceedings against him.
- If all these are present, then such voluntary
release of the offender will mitigate the
criminal liability of said offender.

A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy
and placed him in a vacant lot. The following
morning, his enemy was found in a vacant lot
dead with 10 gun shot wounds. The crime
committed is murder. Obviously there was no
intent to detain the said offended party. The intent
was to kill him. Therefore, the proper charge is
murder and not kidnapping and serious illegal
detention with murder or homicide as the case
maybe. In order to amount to kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with homicide or murder
or physical injuries, it is necessary that there must
be intent to detain and in the course of such
detention the victim is killed or raped or subjected

A kidnapped a public officer in the morning. In the
evening he released the said public officer. Will
such release mitigate the criminal liability of A?
-No. Because the fact that the person kidnapped is a public officer the crime committed is already kidnapping and serious
illegal detention under Article 267. If the crime committed is Article 267, no amount of voluntary release will mitigate the
criminal liability of the offender.


NOTE: If the victim is a minor, female, public
officer automatically the crime committed is a
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Article 267 and no amount of voluntary release will

to torture or other dehumanizing acts.


If any of the circumstances is absent it will only be
slight illegal detention under article 268.
mitigate the criminal liability of the offender.
Art. 268. Slight illegal detention.
Art. 269. Unlawful arrest.
Elements:
Elements:
1.
2.
Offender is a private individual
1.
2.
Offender arrests or detains another person
He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprive him of his liberty
The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal
Committed absent any of the circumstances under
Art. 267
The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the
proper authorities
3.
4.
3.
The arrest or detention is not authorized by law or
there is no reasonable ground therefor.
Example:
Example


A was walking when he was arrested by B a police
officer. The arrest was without warrant but the
same was not executed under any of the
circumstances for a valid warrantless arrest.
Because there were no complainants and
evidence presented, the fiscal dismissed the case.
What is the proper crime to be charged?
A, was envious of his neighbor. He kidnapped said
neighbor in the morning and placed him in a
secluded place. A realized that he might be
imprisoned, so he decided to release his neighbor
in the evening. What is the effect if such release to
the criminal liability of A?
-The public officer is guilty of unlawful arrest. The
fact that he has been detained is already
absorbed because the intention of the said
public officer is to file a case against him, that
is, to deliver him to the proper authorities.
Therefore the arbitrary detention is absorbed
in unlawful arrest.

- Under Article 268, slight illegal detention, it is

provided that if the victim is released, such
release shall be considered as a privilege
mitigating circumstance because from the
penalty of reclusion temporal, the penalty will
be lowered by one degree which is prision
mayor. However, in order that this voluntary
release maybe considered a privilege mitigating
circumstance these are the requisites:
Section Two – Kidnapping of minors
Art. 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor
Elements:
1.
Offender is any person entrusted with the custody

a. The release must be within three days

from the commencement of the detention;
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
of a minor
2.
He deliberately fails to restore the minor to his
parents or guardians or any person charged with
shall be imposed upon any other person but if it
shall be the father or the mother of the minor, the
penalty shall be arresto mayor or a fine or both under
the discretion of the court. Therefore, even the
mother or the father can be criminally liable under
articles 270 and 271. The only difference is in the
penalty

Section Three – Slavery and Servitude

Art. 272. Slavery

Elements:
1. Offender is any person who shall purchase,
sell, kidnap or detain a human being
2. The purpose is to enslave the human being

 If the purpose is to engage in some immoral

traffic, the penalty shall be qualified.
the custody of the minor
Example

A and B has a child who was entrusted to X
because they were going on vacation for a week.
They instructed X to return the child after 7 days.
When they came back home X failed to return the
child. X was so busy and she forgot to return the
child. Can X be charged with kidnapping under
Article 270?

-No because he did not deliberately fail to restore

the child to his parents or guardian. The law
requires deliberately. Here he failed to return
the child because of his negligence. He was
so busy.
1. Offender is any person who retains a minor in his

Art. 271. Inducing a minor to abandon his home Art. 273. Exploitation of child labor

Elements:
Elements:
1. That a minor is living in the home of his parents or
guardian or the person entrusted with his custody
2. The offender induces said minor to abandon such
home
 It is committed by any person who shall induce a minor
to abandon the home of his parent or guardians or the
persons entrusted with his custody.
Art. 274. Services rendered under compulsion in
payment of debt
 The crime will arise even if the child has not left the
house of his parents or guardian. Mere inducement Elements:
with intent to cause damage will suffice.
service

2. It is against the will of the minor

3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a
debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person entrusted with the custody of a minor
1. Offender is a creditor who compels a debtor to
work for him, either as household or farm laborer
2. It is against the debtor’s will
Example

3. The purpose is to require or enforce the payment
of a debt

A and B, husband and wife, whose marriage has

been declared a nullity by the court. The custody
of their child who is 5 years of age is given to the
mother as provided by law. The father was
granted visitation rights. One Sunday the father
visited the 5 years old son and he brought him
out. Usually, he would return the child by
nighttime. However, the father did not bring back
the child to his mother’s house. The mother
demanded the return of the child but the father still
failed to return the child. Therefore the mother
filed a case of kidnapping under article 270
against the father. Will the case prosper?
Chapter Two

CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY

Section One – Abandonment of helpless persons and

Exploitation of minors

1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any person whom he shall find 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;
- Yes the case will prosper. Under article 271 it is
provided that the father or the mother of the minor
may commit any of the crimes covered by the two
preceding articles. The only difference is that in
case kidnapping and failure to return a minor
under Art. 270, the penalty of reclusion perpetua

Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and

abandonment of one's own victim

3 acts punished:
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
Elements:
 2nd Act
1.The place is not inhabited
2.The accused found there is a person
wounded or in danger of dying

Example
3.The accused can render assistance
w/out detriment to himself

-No, because it was purely accidental. It

is an exempting circumstance. He was
performing a lawful act with due care.
An incident happened without fault or
accident on his part.
 However, when the left eye of the bystander bled,
he saw it, instead of bringing the person to the
hospital, he sped up. Is A criminally liable?
-Yes, A is criminally liable. When he failed to
render assistance to his victim, he is criminally
liable under Article 275.

4.The accused fails to render

Art. 276. Abandoning a minor

Elements:
assistance
 A was driving his car when suddenly it tripped
over a stone. The stone flew, hitting the left eye of a bystander. Is A liable?

assistance to another whom he has

2.Anyone who shall fail to help or render

accidentally wounded or injured;

3.Anyone who, having found an abandoned child
under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver
said child to the authorities or to his family, or
shall fail to take him to a safe place.

Example

A saw B at Luneta Park. He was wounded, he was
bitten by a dog. He was crying for help, instead of
helping B, A took off. Is he liable under Article
275?
1.
2.
3.
Offender is any person who has custody of a child
The child is under 7 years of age
That he permanently, deliberately and consciously
abandons such child
-No because Luneta park is not an uninhabited
place. Uninhabited place is one where there
is remote possibility for the victim to receive
some help. Luneta Park is a public place.
Therefore, A cannot be held liable under
Article 275.
4.
That he has no intent to kill the child when the
latter is abandoned


Penalty will be qualified if –
a.death of the minor shall result by reason of such
abandonment or
b.the safety of the child has been placed in

 1st Act
Example
danger.
 A was hunting in the forest. He found B in the
middle of the forest. There was a big trunk of a
tree in his neck; thus, B cannot move. He was
2 acts punished:

-Yes because A found B in an uninhabited 1. Abandonment of a child by a person entrusted with the
place, the forest. He was wounded, he custody
Elements:
was in danger of dying because there was
a big trunk in his neck. There was no
detriment on the part of A if he renders
assistance but he failed to render the
same. Therefore he is liable under
Article 275.

begging for help. A however just left. B thereafter

was rescued. Can A be held liable under Article 275?
Art. 277. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted
with his custody; indifference of parents
1.The offender is any person who has
charge of the rearing or education of
a minor
2.The he deliver said minor to a public
institution or other persons
3.That it is without the consent of the
one who entrusted such child to his
care or in the absence of the latter,
without the consent of the proper
authorities

 But what if A found B. B was bitten by a snake and

it was still there. B was asking for help but A did
not help him because he was afraid that the snake
too might bite him. Can A be held liable under
Article 275?
-No, because helping B would be detrimental
on his part.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

2. Indifference of Parents
 These acts are considered exploitation of
Elements: minors because these acts endanger the life
1.The offender is a parent and safety, the growth and development of
2. That he neglects his children by not giving them
the education said minors. This usually involves circus.
3.That his station in life requires such education
and financial conditions permits it

Art. 278. Exploitation of minors.

The following are the acts punished:

Section Two – Trespass to dwelling

Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling

Art. 279. Additional penalties for other offenses. —

The imposition of the penalties prescribed in the
1.
Any person who shall cause any boy or
girl under sixteen years of age to
perform any dangerous feat of
balancing, physical strength, or
preceding articles, shall not prevent the imposition upon
the same person of the penalty provided for any other
felonies defined and punished by this Code.

contortion;
2.
Any person who, being an acrobat,
gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild-animal
tamer or circus manager or engaged in a
similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions
of these kinds children under sixteen
years of age who are not his children or
descendants;
Elements:
1.
2.
3.
Offender is a private person
He enters the dwelling of another
That such entrance is against the latter’s will


Trespass to Dwelling or Qualified Trespass to

Dwelling is committed by any private person who
shall enter the dwelling of another against the
3.

4.

Any person engaged in any of the

callings enumerated in the next
paragraph preceding who shall employ
any descendant of his under twelve
years of age in such dangerous

latter's will
It is committed by a private person because if it is
public officer the crime committed is under Art.
128 which is Violation of Domicile. Under Art. 128,
when the law says “against the will”, it means that
there is some prohibition, there is opposition of
entering whether express or implied. Mere entry
without the consent of the owner will not bring
about qualified trespass to dwelling. If the door is
open it means that anybody can enter even
without the consent of the owner. The moment he
enters he cannot be held liable with qualified
trespass because there is no prohibition or
opposition to enter. It is necessary that there must
be prohibition or opposition from entering.

exhibitions;
Any ascendant, guardian, teacher or
person entrusted in any capacity with the
care of a child under sixteen years of
age, who shall deliver such child
gratuitously to any person following any
of the callings enumerated in paragraph
2 hereof, or to any habitual vagrant or
beggar.
In either case, the guardian or curator
convicted shall also be removed from
office as guardian or curator; and in the
case of the parents of the child, they
may be deprived, temporarily or
perpetually, in the discretion of the court,
-
It can be express an express prohibition
such as, when there is a note stating “
DO NOT ENTER” or when the door is
closed after a person knocks when the
owner sees the person knocking.
It is implied if the door is closed even if it
is not locked.

of their parental authority;

-

5.
Any person who shall induce any child
under sixteen years of age to abandon
the home of its ascendants, guardians,
curators, or teachers to follow any
person engaged in any of the callings
mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or to
accompany any habitual vagrant or beggar.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
place and someone is occupying it even if at the
moment it is uninhabited because the owners
went on vacation. It is considered an inhabited

Art. 281. Other forms of trespass. — The penalty of

arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any person who shall
enter the closed premises or the fenced estate of
another, while either or them are uninhabited, if the
prohibition to enter be manifest and the trespasser has
not secured the permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.

3 kinds of threats:

1. Grave threats
2. Light threats
3. Other light threats

Art. 282. Grave threats

Acts punished:
place therefore the moment someone enters, it
is considered trespass to dwelling and not

trespass to property.

Section Three – Threats and coercion


Trespass to Property
Elements:
1.Offender is any person who shall enter the
closed premises or the fenced estate of
another person

2.The entrance is made while either of them is

uninhabited
3.That the prohibition to enter be manifest
4.That the trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the caretaker
thereof


Trespass to Dwelling vs. Trespass to Property
Trespass to Dwelling
Trespass to Property
Place is a dwelling and Place is a closed
inhabited
premise or the fenced
estate of another which
is unihabited
Prohibition to enter can Prohibition to enter
either be express or must be manifest
implied
Entry was made against Entry was made without
the will of the owner/ seeking the permission
possessor of property
1. Threaten another with the infliction upon
the person, honor or property of the
latter or of his family of any wrong
amounting to a crime coupled with a
demand of money or imposition of any
other condition, even though not unlawful,
and said offender attained his purpose

2. Threaten another with the infliction upon

the person, honor or property of the
latter or of his family of any wrong
amounting to a crime coupled with the
demand of money of money or imposition
any other condition, even though not
unlawful, and said offender did not attain his
purpose

3. Threaten another with the infliction upon the

person, honor or property of the latter or
of his family of any wrong amounting to a
crime without the demand of money or
imposition of any other condition

Art. 283. Light threats

Light threats
of the owner/caretaker thereof

- Any threat to commit a wrong not constituting a

Example
crime, but it is always subject to a demand of
money or imposition of any other condition, even
though not unlawful
Townhouse A was currently uninhabited. There was a
notice posted that it was for rent. X entered the said
townhouse. What crime was committed by A?
-Trespass to Property because at that time the
premises was closed and uninhabited and he
enters without securing the permission of the

owner or the caretaker.

against A. Upon filing of the case, what bail if any should
the court impose upon A?
A and B, husband and wife, went on vacation for a
month. Their house was therefore uninhabited. X learned
that there was no one inside the house. he entered the
house. what crime was committed? Is it Trespass to
Property or Qualified Trespass to Dwelling?
ANS: BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR - is a bail
required by the court to be posted by any accused
only in the crimes of grave threats and other light
threats. This is to ensure that the offender will not
make good the threat imposed by him. Failure to
-Qualified Trespass to Dwelling. It is a residential

Art. 284. Bond for good behavior

Example:
A threatened to kill B. B filed a case of grave threats
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
post the bond, the offender shall be sentenced to

Acts punished:

destierro.
Example:
A learned that B was spreading negative rumors against

Orally threatening, in the heat of anger, another

with some harm not constituting a crime, and who
by subsequent acts show that he did not persist in
the idea involved in his threat

Art. 285. Other light threats

him. A was so mad so he went to the house of B and
shouted, “B get out of your house. I will kill you! I will kill
you!” But B did not go out of the house. Instead, it was
the son of B who went out. A told the son to let his father
go out because A would kill him. Upon hearing this, the
son went inside the house and did not go back. B as well
did not go out. Later, A left B’s house.

1.
Threatening another with a weapon or draw such
weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-
defense
2.
CRIME: A committed other light threats. A, in the
heat of anger, orally threatened B with a wrong
constituting a crime but he did not pursue the
idea.

3.
Orally threatening to do another any harm not
constituting a felony
A saw that B has a new Lexus. A knew that the car was
smuggled. A told B. “If you will not give me 500,000php, I
will tell the Bureau of Customs that your car is
smuggled.”

Whether it be grave, light or other light threats, the essence of the threats is intimidation - the promise of a future wrong or harm.

CRIME: Light threats. A threatened to commit a

wrong not constituting a crime. It is not a crime to
tell Customs that the car was smuggled. The
threat is subject to a demand of money or the
imposition of any other condition, even though not
unlawful.

DISTINCTION: GRAVE, LIGHT, OTHER LIGHT THREATS

A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter
seeking for payment of debt. B said, “get out of my
house. If I still see you later afternoon in my house when
I come back, I will kill you!”
GRAVE
LIGHT
OTHER LIGHT
THREATS
THREATS
THREATS
CRIME: B committed Grave threats because there
is a promise of a future wrong of killing to be
committed in the afternoon.

A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter

seeking for payment of debt. B said, “get out of my house
right now or else I will kill you!”
CRIME: B committed Grave coercion. The threat
Threats can be committed personally, orally, in writing or
through an intermediary. If committed in writing or through
an intermediary, the penalty is qualified.
is present, direct, personal, immediate and
imminent. It is not in the future.

The threat does Committed by

not amount to a threatening another
crime. It is always with a weapon or
draw such weapon
and always
in a quarrel, unless
subject to a it be in lawful self-
demand of defense; or orally
money or the threatening, in the
imposition of any heat of anger,
other condition, another with some
even though not harm not
unlawful. constituting a crime,
and who by
subsequent acts
show that he did not
persist in the idea
involved in his
threat; or orally
threatening to do
any harm not
constituting a
felony.
1.

Art. 286. Grave coercions

2 ways to commit grave coercion:

PREVENTIVE COERCION
-
if a person prevents another by means of
violence or intimidation from doing
something not prohibited by law.
Example:
A wanted to enter the house of B against the latter’s will.
X saw A, so he prevented A. Nevertheless, A continued

The threat is
always &
always
amounting to
and
constituting a
crime. It may or
may not be
subject to
demand of
money or
imposition of
other
conditions. The
offender may
or may not
attain his
purpose.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
to enter. Because of this, X boxed A resulting to slight
physical injuries.
CRIME: Slight physical injuries because X
Art. 288. Other similar coercions
OTHER LIGHT COERCION - more on labor
Acts punished:

1. Committed by forcing or compelling directly,

indirectly, knowingly permitting or forcing an
employee or laborer to buy merchandise or
commodities from the employer

2. By paying the wages due to the employees or

laborers by objects other than the legal tender of
the Philippines, unless it is requested by the
employee or laborer

prevents a person from doing something

prohibited by law. In grave coercion, the offender
prevents someone to do something not prohibited
by law.
-
if a person compels another by means of
violence and intimidation from doing
something against his will, whether it be

2.
COMPULSORY COERCION

right or wrong, prohibited or not.

-
Unlike in threats where the essence of
the threats is the promise to do a future
wrong or injury; in coercion, the threat is
present, direct, personal and imminent.
Hence, grave coercion cannot be
committed through an intermediary or in
writing because the threat is always
personal, present and imminent. The
threatened act is about to be committed.
 Chapter Three
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS

Art. 290. Discovering secrets through seizure of

correspondence
SEIZURE OF CORRESPONDENCE to discover the secrets
of another

- committed by any person who shall seize any

correspondence of another to discover the secrets
of the latter. DAMAGE is not a requirement. The
mere act of seizing the correspondence to
discover the latter’s secrets will consummate the
crime. It is also NOT necessary that the secret be
REVEALED.

the wrong threatened to be

committed is direct, personal,
present and imminent

threats cannot be comitted in

wrinting or through an
intermediary because they
should always be personal
and direct

it is violence; or intimidation
sufficient enough to amount
to violence

DISTINCTION: THREAT AND COERCION

THREAT
COERCION
the wrong threatened to be committed is in the future

threats may be committed in writing or through an intermediary

threat means intimidation


Art. 287. Light coercions
LIGHT COERCION
- committed by a creditor who shall seize
anything belonging to his debtor by means of
violence or intimidation for the purpose of
applying the same to the indebtedness
- related to light coercion is UNJUST
VEXATION which refers to any human
conduct, although not capable of producing
any harm or material injury, annoys or vexes
an innocent person.
Art. 291. Revealing secrets with abuse of office
REVEALING SECRETS BY ABUSING OFFICE
- committed by a manager, employee or
servant who reveals the secrets of his master
learned by him in such capacity. It is the
revelation of secrets which will consummate
the crime, not mere discovery. DAMAGE is also
not an element.
Art. 292. Revelation of industrial secrets
REVELATION OF INUSTRIAL SECRETS
- committed by any person in charge or
an employee in an industrial of manufacturing
establishment who shall learn and discover
the secrets of the industry and shall reveal the
same to the prejudice of the owner thereof.
DAMAGE must be caused to the offended party.
Mere revelation of secrets will not suffice.
In relation to –
RA 4200 (ANTI-WIRE TAPPING LAW)
ACTS:
1. It shall be unlawful for any person, not obtaining
the consent of all the parties to any private
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
communication or spoken word, to tap any wire or
cable, or by using any other device or arrangement,
to secretly overhear, intercept, orrecord such
communication or spoken word by using a device
like dictaphone or dictagraph or dictaphone or
walkie-talkie or tape recorder, orother similar
means
Example:
Q:A told B to go inside his room. When inside the room, A
started scolding B saying slanderous remarks against him.
Unknown to A, B was recording the private communication
between them. Can B use the record in filing a case for slander
against A?
ANS: No, because the act of tape recording without
being authorized by all the parties in a private
communication is inadmissible in evidence in any
judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or administrative
proceeding or investigation.
The only exception is when a police officer is authorized by a
written order of the court to listen to, intercept or record
any communication in crimes involving treason, espionage,
provoking war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny
in the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal to
commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to
commit sedition, inciting to sedition and kidnapping.
2. Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record, or
copies thereof, of any private communication or
spoken word
3. By replaying the wire record, tape record, disc
record for any other person or persons; or
communicating the contents thereof, either verbally
or in writing, to another person
4. Furnishing transcriptions of the wire record, disc
record or tape record, whether totally or partially, to
any other person
Elements:
1. Offender unlawfully takes the personal property
of another
UNLAWFUL TAKING - deprivation of the
offended party of his personal property.
2. The personal property belongs to another person
- If the property does not belong to
another person, it cannot be said that there is
intent to gain on the part of the offender
3. Intent to gain in taking the property
- Intent to gain is an internal state of mind.
The law presumes that there is intent to gain
the moment that there is taking of personal
property of another
4. Taking is with violence and intimidation or force
upon things
Section One – Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
2 Types of Robbery:
1. WITH VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION
In this kind of robbery, the value of the
property taken is immaterial because the penalty
is dependent on the violence employed by the
offender.
2. WITH FORCE UPON THINGS
The value of the property taken is material
because the penalty is dependent upon the value of
the property.
 Title Ten
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AND
Chapter One
INTIMIDATION
ROBBERY IN GENERAL
ACTS:

1. When by reason or on the occasion of

Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery
ROBBERY- committed by any person who, with
intent to gain, shall take any personal property
belonging to another, by means of violence or
intimidation of any person, or using force upon
anything
robbery, homicide is committed
2. When robbery is accompanied by rape,
intentional mutilation, or arson
3. When by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, any of the serious physical
injuries resulting to insanity, imbecility,
impotency or blindness was committed
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
4. When by reason or on the occasion or robbery, any
of the serious physical injuries resulting to the loss
of the use of speech or the power to hear or to
smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm, or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such
member, or shall have become incapacitated for
the work in which he was therefor habitually
engaged
5. When the commission of the robbery is carried to a
degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of
the crime
6. In the execution of the robbery, and in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the
person injured shall have become deformed, or
shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall
have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or
incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which he as habitually engaged for a period of
more than ninety days
7. If the violence employed in the commission or
robbery does not constitute the physical injuries
covered by sub-divisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263
or that only intimidation is employed.
Based on the foregoing, there exists crimes such as
robbery with homicide, robbery with rape, robbery with
serious physical injuries and robbery with unnecessary
violence and simple robbery.
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
- is a special complex crime because in reality there are
two crimes committed but in the eyes of the law, there
is only one crime. For as long as the original intent or
original
criminal design of the offender is to rob, the killing may
take place before, during or after the robbery
- regardless of the number of persons killed, there is
only one crime committed. Also, even if the killing is
unintentional or accidental, there is still one crime
committed.
- even if the victim of the killing is different from the
victim of the robbery, still it is robbery with homicide.
This constitutes the difference between kidnapping
with serious illegal detention because in this crime,
the victim of the kidnapping must also be the victim of
the killing
In same problem, wife of X was also awakened
and
she started to shout. Because of this, A also shot the
wife
CRIME: Robbery with homicide even if two
persons were killed since the crime is a special
complex crime. All the offenses are merged into a
single indivisible crime of robbery with homicide.
A was about to go out bringing with him the
valuables
he robbed. However, he bumped the door. This
awakened the owner, X, who tried to chase A. They
reached the garden part of the house. While therein, A
positioned himself to shoot X, so X jumped on A to
struggle possession of the gun. In the course of the
struggle, the gun fired and hit a balot vendor who
passed by the house of X.
CRIME: Robbery with homicide. Since it is a
special complex crime, even if the victim of
robbery is different from the victim of homicide or
even if the killing is accidental, there is only a
single indivisible crime committed. So long as the
killing is by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery.
A, B and C entered the house of X to commit robbery.
After taking the valuables and as they were about to
leave, X was awakened. Among the three, it was only
A who shot and killed X.
CRIME: All are criminally liable even if it is only
A who shot X. While there is a rule that
in an express or direct conspiracy the
conspirators are liable only for the crime agreed
upon by them, the situation however falls under
the exception.
EXCEPTION: That is, when the conspiracy
results to a special complex crime. The crimes
cannot be separated from each other. Thus, even
if it’s only A who shot X or even if the agreement
is only to commit robbery, since homicide was
committed by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, all are criminally liable for the crime
of robbery with homicide.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: is when B
and C performed acts to prevent A from killing X.
Example:
A went to the house of B and took the
valuables
therein. During the taking, one jewelry box suddenly
fell on the floor. This awakened the owner of the
house, X. When A saw this, he immediately shot X
CRIME: Robbery with homicide because by
reason or on the occasion of robbery, homicide
was committed.
People vs Cabbab
In a game played by A, B, X, Y and Z, it was A who
won the game. After the game, while A, B and Z
were about to leave, X and Y were furiously looking
at them. Suddenly, X and Y fired several shots against
A, B and Z. Z, who was a police officer, dove into the
canal in order to prevent himself
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
from being killed. Z was injured. Unfortunately, A and B were
killed and thereafter, the winnings of A were taken by X and Y.
Fiscal filed the cases of - 1. Robbery because of the taking of
the winnings, 2. Double murder because of the death of A and
B, and 3. Attempted murder insofar as Z is concerned.
RTC ruled that the charges were wrong because the crime
committed is robbery with double homicide and attempted
murder
Upon appeal, CA ruled that the ruling of RTC is incorrect
because the crime committed is robbery with homicide and
attempted murder
SC: The Fiscal, RTC and CA were all wrong. The
crime committed is only the single indivisible
offense of robbery with homicide. All the acts are
considered absorbed by robbery with homicide
despite the fact that 2 persons were killed and 1
person was injured. All these circumstances are
merged into an integrated whole; that is, the single
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
Example:
- is also a special complex crime. So long as
the intention of the offender is to commit
robbery, the rape can be committed before,
during and after the robbery. Regardless of
the number of rapes, there is only a single
indivisible crime. There is no such crime as
robbery with multiple rapes.
Example:
A woman was walking on her way home. It was payday
and her salary was inside her bag. X, the robber, took the
bag of the woman and got the money therein. X found
the woman attractive so he raped her twice.
CRIME: Robbery with rape, regardless of the
number of times the woman was raped.
CRIME: Robbery with rape. Regardless of the fact
that two persons raped the victim, regardless of
the fact that the victim was raped three times, and
regardless of the fact that two natures of rape
(carnal knowledge and sexual assault) were
committed against the victim, there is only one
indivisible crime.
Even if not all of the offenders raped the victim,
still all of them are criminally liable for the crime of
robbery with rape because the two lookouts did
not perform acts to prevent the rape.
ROBBERY WITH INTENTIONAL MUTILATION,
ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
ROBBERY WITH ARSON
- For as long as the original intent is to commit
robbery, the intentional mutilation, serious physical
injury or arson may be committed before, during or
after the robbery.
It was payday. A and B saw X with a bag. A and B
signaled X to give them his bag. X gave the bag and left. A
and B went to a nearby waiting shed bringing with
them the bag of X. In the waiting shed, A and B divided
the money of X. In the course of the partition, A gave B
only a small share of the money. B got mad. B shot A.
CRIME: Robbery with Homicide, even if it was an
offender killed. This is because the killing took
place by reason of the robbery, while A and B
were dividing the loot.
In the same problem, while A and B were dividing
the
loot, B got a small share. Because of this, B without
intent to kill shot A who suffered serious physical injuries.
CRIME: Robbery with serious physical injuries
People vs Suyu
A couple was having snack inside the car. While
eating, they saw shadows of four men trying to push the
car. One of them was Suyu. The couple was forced to open
the door and get out of the car. The men took the
valuables of the couple. While the men were taking the
valuables, the boyfriend ran and left the girlfriend. After
taking the valuables, the men dragged the abandoned
girlfriend to a nearby nipa hut. Inside the nipa hut, the
girlfriend was raped by Suyu, the mastermind. After Suyu,
the girlfriend was again raped by the other companion.
The girlfriend was raped three times. Rape with carnal
knowledge and rape with sexual assault were committed
against her. The other two men remained outside the nipa
hut t serve as lookouts.
In the same problem, while A and B were dividing
the
loot, B got a small share. Because of this, B took his ice
pick from his pocket and used it to put an X mark on the
face of A. This serious physical injury resulted to deformity.
CRIME: Robbery and Serious Physical injury.
Under Art. 294 par 4, when the serious physical
injury that resulted is a deformity, or the loss
of any other member of his body, the law
requires that the said serious physical injury or
deformity is inflicted in the course of the
execution of the robbery upon a person not
responsible for the robbery. Otherwise, it will
bring about a separate and distinct crime.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
Here, the deformity was inflicted after the robbery
and upon a person responsible for the commission of
the robbery. Thus, there are two crimes committed:
Robbery and Serious Physical Injury.
What if A went to the house of B, instead of X which was
his original plan. A, while taking the valuables, made
some noise and awakened the owner of the house, and
so A shot the owner of the house. The owner of the
house died. Thereafter A hurriedly went downstairs.
Downstairs he saw the wife, found the wife attractive,
and he raped the wife. After raping the wife, he also saw
the maid and found the maid attractive, so he raped the
maid. The moment he got out of the door of the house,
the gardener saw him and tried to prevent A from leaving
the house. And so A shot the gardener, and in shooting
the gardener, A shot the arms several times, resulting in
the severance of the arm, so intentional mutilation. Not
only that, when he was going out of the gate, here comes
the driver, preventing A from leaving the house. So what
A did was that he boxed the driver several times which
resulted to serious physical injuries. What are the crimes
committed?
So we have one death, two rapes, intentional mutilation
and serious physical injuries.
A only committed the single indivisible offense of
robbery with homicide. All the rape, intentional
mutilation and serious physical injuries are
merged into the composite integrated offense and
that is, the single indivisible offense of robbery
with homicide.
You have to observe the sequence because the
highest is robbery with homicide.
If rape took place after A committed robbery, A after
taking the valuables of the house, raped the wife and
while he was raping the wife, the husband saw A, so A
killed the husband, and then later the driver put up a fight
and resulted to serious physical injuries. What are the
crimes committed?
A: This time the crime committed by B is not the
single indivisible crime of robbery with serious physical injuries
but two crimes, Robbery and Serious physical injuries under
par.3 of Article 263 because of the deformity. Why? Because
under par.4 of Article 294, when the serious physical injury
that resulted is a deformity or the loss of any of the member
of his body, the law requires that the said physical injury or
deformity must be inflicted because of the execution of a
robbery and to a person not responsible to the commission of
the crime of robbery. Here, the deformity was inflicted after
the robbery, not before. Not only that. The deformity was
inflicted on A, the person responsible for the commission of the
robbery
If the serious physical injuries inflicted resulted
to a deformity or to a loss of any of the member of his
body or loss of the use of any such member or incapacity to
go to work in which the injured person is thereto
habitually engaged for more than 90 days, under
paragraph 3 of Article 263, it is required that in order to
amount to a single indivisible offense the said deformity or
serious physical injury must be inflicted in the course of the
execution of the robbery and to a person not responsible to
the commission of the robbery. Otherwise, it will bring about a
separate and distinct crime.
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.
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by
the members thereof.
Art. 297. Attempted and frustrated robberycommitted
under certain circumstances.
Art. 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or
intimidation.
Section Two – Robbery by the use of force upon things
ROBBERY WITH USE OF FORCE UPON THINGS
Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building
or edifice devoted to worship
• Another form of robbery is robbery with the use of
force upon things in Art 299.
• In case of violence against persons, the value of the
property is not important because the penalty is the
basis of the violence.
• In Art. 299, the basis of the penalty is the value of the
property taken.
3 ways of committing robbery with use of force upon
things:
 The crime committed is robbery with homicide.

 The first is homicide, rape, intentional mutilation,

arson, serious physical injuries, unnecessary
violence and simple robbery. All the others are
merged, and that is robbery with homicide. The
other offenses will not be considered as
aggravating circumstances because there is
nothing in Art. 14 that will consider the other
offenses as aggravating circumstances. That is 1. When a person enters the dwelling, house, public
why you have to observe the sequence. So if building or edifice devoted to worship where personal
there was only rape, intentional mutilation, property is taken through:
serious physical injuries, it will be robbery with
rape. It will only be a single indivisible offense. a. An opening not intended for entrance or
It will be a special complex crime. egress
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
Q: What if in the same problem,A were dividing the things breaking any door or window.
and B said, why is my share so small compared to your c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools
share? B got mad and what he did was took an ice pick d. By using any fictitious name or pretending
from his pocket and stab A in his face and placed the ice the exercise of public authority
pick in A’s face. A suffered serious physical injuries and
deformity in his face. It caused physical ugliness to A
therefore there is deformity. What crime/s is committed?
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
NOTE:
 Under the first act, the essence of the crime is in the
unlawful entry; it is the act of trespassing and also
the taking of the property of another.
 It is necessary that the entire body must have
enter, otherwise, even if there is breaking, it
would only amount to theft and that breaking
would amount only to aggravating circumstance.
The Supreme Court ruled that when the law
used the word “enter”, it means that the
entire body must have entered said place to
take the property of another.
Example
A, in order to rob the house made an opening in the roof,
sufficient for him to enter. So he used a rope in going
down and thereafter he took the valuables and then left.
What crime is committed?
Robbery by use of force upon things. A made an opening
and he was able to enter fully.
What if he made an entry, let down a rope with a hook and
used it in taking the valuable.
The crime committed only is theft with aggravating
circumstance of the breaking of the roof. His body
did not enter the premises.
2. When the offender manages to enter said inhabited
place, dwelling, public place or place dedicated to
religious worship without any unlawful entry, or is an
insider, and once inside, he used force in opening in
order to:
a. Break doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle
NOTE:
 The second act is when the offender was able to
enter without unlawful entry or was an insider and
once inside, breaks the doors, wardrobes, chest,
receptacles, and thereafter took the personal
properties inside the house.
ANS: A is guilty of robbery with use of force upon things.
He is an insider, and he used force to break open the
cabinet of B. He did not commit theft. Since the crime
committed is robbery, brother A is criminally liable and
civilly liable. Because under Article 332, it is only on
cases of theft, swindling, estafa, and malicious mischief,
wherein there’s no criminal liability but only civil
liability in case of relatives living together.
In the same problem, what if A was in need of
money, he saw the expensive watch of B on top of the
table and sold the watch. What crime was committed?
A committed the crime of theft since there is
no breaking or forcibly opening the receptacle.
Under Art 332, he is only liable for civil liability.
They are free from criminal liability.
Art. 332. Persons exempt from
criminal liability. — No criminal, but only
civil liability, shall result from the commission
of the crime of theft, swindling or malicious
mischief committed or caused mutually by the
following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and
descendants, or relatives by affinity in
the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to
the property which belonged to the
deceased spouse before the same
shall have passed into the
possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-
law and sisters-in-law, if living
together.
The exemption established by this article shall not be
applicable to strangers participating in the commission
of the crime.
• Since it refers to simple crimes, if the crime committed
is estafa through falsification of public document, there
will be criminal liability. This exemption from criminal
liability will only lie in the cases mentioned in Art. 332.

Example:
A and B are brothers, living in the same house and in the
same room but have different cabinets where each of the cabinets
have locks. One time brother A was in need of money and wanted
to borrow money from brother B, but brother B was out of the
house. So what brother A did was that he forcibly opened the
cabinet of brother B and took the expensive jewelries of brother B
and appropriated the jewelry? What are the crimes committed? Is
Brother A only liable civilly?
3. When the offender manages to enter said
inhabited place, dwelling, public place, or place
dedicated to religious worship without any unlawful
entry, once inside he took the sealed receptacle
outside to be opened or forced open.
 The offender was able to enter and once inside,
he did not use force to open the close cabinet
or receptacle. Instead, he took the cabinet and
receptacle outside to open it.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Circumstances that will qualify robbery with use
of force upon things:
Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and
by a band.
 Under Article 300, if robbery is committed with in an
uninhabited place and by a band — the law used
the conjunction AND, both must concur in order
to amount a qualifying circumstance, to increase
the penalty. So it should be in an uninhabited
place and by a band, therefore both must be
present.
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.
In case of robbery with serious physical injuries,
unnecessary violence or simple violence, how will the crime
be qualified?
The answer is under Art. 295, where if the said
robbery is:
 In order to amount to special complex crime,
it is necessary that both the robbery and
homicide must be consummated.
What if in the course of robbery, the said owner was
shot but was able to survive. What crime is committed?
The crime committed is robbery with physical
injuries depending on the injuries sustained by
the victim. In order to amount to robbery with
homicide, it is necessary that both crimes must be
present and there is no such thing as robbery
with frustrated homicide or attempted homicide,
for it is the law which provides for the crime
which must be complexed, and the law does not
provide that frustrated homicide or attempted
homicide must be complexed with robbery.
In the instant case, since the killing took place at
the spur of the moment, then it is robbery with
homicide.
Chapter Two

BRIGANDAGE
1. Committed in an uninhabited place OR by
a band
2. By attacking any moving train, street car, What if robbery was committed by 4 armed men?
motor vehicle or airship
3. By entering the passenger's compartments
in a train; or
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred
4. Taking the passengers by surprise in their by the members thereof.
respective conveyances
5. On a street, road, highway, or alley and
the Intimidation is made use of a firearm

NOTE:
 That in case of robbery with violence or
intimidation on persons, the qualifying
circumstances are present, only one of these is
sufficient to qualify the penalty. The law here
uses the conjunction OR not AND.
Example:
A went to the house of B. A told B “this is a hold
up and bring out the valuables”. Instead of bringing the
valuables to A, B panicked and shouted. A therefore shot
B. B died. A also panicked and left the place without
bringing his loot. What is/are the crime/s committed?
The crime committed by A is attempted
robbery with homicide. This is also a special
complex crime. Here robbery was attempted
because he was unable to take any of the
property. The fact that A was able to announce
hold-up and bring the valuables to him means that
the original design is to commit robbery. It was
attempted because he was unable to take the
property, and in the course of thereof, he killed
the owner.
A was walking, suddenly there are 4 men with knives
and took A’s bag which is full of money. A put up a fight. And
so these armed men killed A. What crime is committed? Is
the crime committed robbery in band with homicide?
There is no such crime as robbery by a band with
homicide. The said use of band is only an aggravating
circumstance. The proper designation of the crime is
robbery with homicide. The fact that it is committed by
4 armed men is only an aggravating circumstance.
Under Art. 296, if a band committed robbery, it is
only an aggravating circumstance.
Art. 306. Brigandage
Under Article 306, it is committed by at least 4 armed men
for the purposes of –
1. committing robbery in the highway;
2. kidnapping persons for the purpose of
extortion or ransom
3. for any other purpose to be attained by
means of force and violence.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Theft is likewise committed by:

Art. 296 Art. 306
Both require at least 4 armed persons
It is required that the 4 The crime is already
armed men must actually consummated by the mere
take part in the commission fact that 4 armed men
of the robbery formed a band of robbers.
It is not required that
they actually commit the
enumerated purposes.
PD 532 (THE ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF 1974)
1. Any person who, having found lost property,
shall fail to deliver the same to the local authorities
or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously
damaged the property of another, shall remove or
make use of the fruits or object of the damage
caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate or
a field where trespass is forbidden or which belongs
to another and without the consent of its owner,
shall hunt or fish upon the same or shall gather
cereals, or other forest or farm products.

In PD 532, brigandage is defined as the seizure of any
person for ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes, or
the taking away of property of another by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons of force upon
things or other unlawful means, committed by any person
on any Philippine highway.
The definition is almost the same as robbery. The difference
lies in the case of robbery where there is violence or
intimidation of persons and use of force upon things,
while in theft, there is no violence, intimidation against
persons or force upon things.
Example:

Art 306 vs. PD 532, or the Anti-Highway Robbery Law of
1974
Art. 306 PD 532
Requires that there must No requisite as to the # of
be at least 4 armed men perpetrators of the crime
Even a single person can
commit the crime of
brigandage
The mere formation of the There must be an actual
band of robbers for any of commission of the crime or
the purposes mentioned no crime will arise
will bring about the crime
There is a predetermined There is no preconceived
or preconceived victim victim. It is committed
indiscriminately on any
person passing on the
highway as long as it is
committed in a Philippine
highway.
1. A person who found a lost personal property of
another but did not give it to the police, there is theft.
2. A damaged the property of B, he make use of that
damage.
3. There is a vacant lot guarded by X. A person entered
the vacant lot and took the fruits.
Valenzuela v. People
There is no frustrated theft. In this case, the offender took
boxes of tide from SM North Edsa and placed it in the taxi.
Before they were able to left the premises of SM, they were
apprehended. The offenders were charged of consummated theft.
They did not deny that they committed theft but their defense is
that they committed frustrated theft.
The SC En Banc in 2007 ruled that there is no crime as
frustrated theft. In case of theft, unlawful taking is deemed
complete the moment the offender gain possession of the property
of another, theft is consummated.

Chapter Three
THEFT
Art. 308. Who are liable for theft. — 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. 309. Penalties
When is theft
qualified?
Art. 310. Qualified Theft
Theft is qualified in the following instances:
1. If theft is committed by a domestic servant
2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence
3. If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b)
mail matter, or (c) large cattle
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of the plantation
CRIMINAL LAW 2
5. If the property stolen is taken from a fishpond
or fishery
6. If property taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or
any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.
Example:
A is a domestic servant. When his master was out of the
house, A went to the masters’ bedroom and took the
jewelries. In the information cited that he was a domestic
servant but the information did not state that A took the
jewelries with grave abuse of confidence. Is A liable for
qualified theft?
Yes, according to the Supreme Court, the law
uses the conjunction OR. The fact that the
accused is a domestic servant, it will suffice. The
law does not require that abuse of confidence to
be established. It will suffice that the accused is a
domestic servant.
A was a security guard. The owner of the house left
his
key to the security guard. However, the security guard
used the key to open the house of the owner and took
the valuables. What crime is committed?
The Security Guard is liable for qualified theft
because of grave abuse of confidence.
RA 6539 (ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT)
Carnapping - is the taking with intent to gain, of
motor vehicle belonging to another without the consent
of the latter, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by use of force upon things.
The crime committed is carnapping. Even if there is no
violence or intimidation against person or force upon
things, so long as said taking is without the consent of
the owner, it will amount to carnapping.
Under Sec. 14, the penalty if there no violence or
intimidation against persons or use of force on
things, the penalty is 14 years and 8 months to 17
years and 4 months.
In the given situation, what if A saw X and there was a
fight that ensued between them. X shot A, and X was
able to take the vehicle. A however survived due to
immediate medical treatment. What is/are the crimes
committed by X?
The crime committed by X is only carnapping. The
fact that X shot A, where there is frustrated
homicide, it falls under violence or intimidation
which was used by the offender in committing the
crime. Since there is violence, the penalty is 17
years and 4 months to 30 years.
If again, in the same problem, A tried to stop X
and X shot A. A died. What is the crime committed?
The fact that the owner is killed or raped as a
consequence, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
death. It will bring about a higher penalty, but
not as a special complex crime because it is a
Special Penal Law. Though it is akin to a special
complex crime, the killing is absorbed. The crime
carnapping. It is also not a bailable offense.
PD 533 (ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW)

Elements:
1. Actual taking of motor vehicle
2. The vehicle belongs to another
3. There is intent to gain in the taking of the
vehicle of another
4. Said taking is taking without the consent of
the owner or by means of violence or
intimidation or by means of force upon things.
Example:
A was driving his car and suddenly felt the need to
answer the call of nature so he parked his vehicle.
Suddenly, there was X and saw A was out of the car, and the
door of the car was open and the key was left inside the car.
X drove away with the car. What is the crime committed?
Cattle Rustling - defined as the taking away by
any means, method or scheme, without the consent
of the owner/raiser, of any large cattle whether or not
for profit or for gain, orwhether committed with or
without violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things. It includes the killing of a large
cattle or taking it as a meat or hide without the
consent of the owner/raiser.
Large Cattle - shall include cow, carabao, horse,
mule, ass, or other domesticated member of the
bovine family. Goats are not large cattle. (sabi nung
isang justice sa SC na prof naming dati, si Lawyer daw
pag kinidnap cattle rustling daw tawag dun. Ang evil nya!)
A’s carabao was tied on the mango tree. X saw the
carabao alone. So what X did was he untied the carabao
and took the carabao away. A saw X with his carabao so
A tried to catch up with X. As A was able to catch up with
X, a fight ensued. X took his bolo and hacked A to death.
What is the crime committed by X?
The crime committed by X is only cattle rustling.
The fact that the owner was killed is within the
meaning of violence or intimidation against
persons. It will not bring about a separate and
distinct crime of murder. The Anti-Cattle Rustling
Law, although a special law, is not malum
prohibitum but a malum in se. Under Sec. 10 of
the law, it is expressly provided that this law
amends Art. 309 and 310 of the RPC. Since it is
an amendment, the SC it is a malum in se and not
a malum prohibitum.
Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library
and National Museum.

•
The value of the property is immaterial because
the law prescribed the penalty of arresto mayor or
fine or both.

Chapter Four
USURPATION

Art. 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation

of real rights in property. – Any person who, by
means of violence against or intimidation of
person, shall take possession of any real poperty or
shall usurp any real rights in property belonging to
another, in addition to the penalty incurred for the
acts of violence executed by him, shall be punished
by a fine from 50 to 100 per centum for the gain
which he shall have obtained, but not less than 75
pesos.
If the value of the gain cannot be ascertained a
fine from 200 to 500 pesos shall be imposed.

2 acts punished under Art. 312:

1. Occupation of real property which is committed

by any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall occupy the real property of another

2. Usurpation of real rights in property committed

by any person who by means of violence against or
intimidation shall usurp any real rights in property of
another person
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Example: Example:

There was a vacant lot. Here comes A and B and his

family. The said land or property was being guarded by
X. A and B went inside the vacant lot and tried to build a
nipa house because they do not have any house. And so
the guard told them that A and B has no right to build a
nipa house because the lot is owned by Y. However, A
and B told the guard that they do not have any house. In
the course of the argument, A and B killed the guard.
What is/are the crimes committed?

The crime committed is only occupation of real

property. The killing is only a means to occupy the real
property. It falls under violence against or intimidation
of persons in occupying the real property.

In the same problem A and B put up their house in the

vacant property. The owner learned this and went to A
and B’s house. However, A and B killed the owner.
In this case, two crimes are committed. The killing
took place after occupying the place. This time,
the crimes committed are occupation and
homicide or murder as the case maybe.

Art. 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks. —

Any person who shall alter the boundary marks
or monuments of towns, provinces, or estates,
or any other marks intended to designate the
boundaries of the same, shall be punished by
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 100
pesos, or both.

Chapter Five
CULPABLE INSOLVENCY

Art. 314. Fraudulent insolvency. — Any person

who shall abscond with his property to the
prejudice of his creditors, shall suffer the penalty
of prision mayor, if he be a merchant and the
penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
period to prision mayor in its medium period,
if he be not a merchant.
CRIMINAL LAW 2

Chapter Six
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
Art. 315. Swindling (estafa). — Any person who shall
defraud another by any of the means mentioned here in
below shall be punished by:
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum
period, if the amount of the fraud is over 12,000
pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, and if
such amount exceeds the latter sum, the penalty
provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its
maximum period, adding one year for each
additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which
may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In
such cases, and in connection with the accessory
penalties which may be imposed under the provisions
of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision
mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be;
2nd. The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, if the amount of the
fraud is over 6,000 pesos but does not exceed
12,000 pesos;
3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum period
if such amount is over 200 pesos but does not
exceed 6,000 pesos;
4th. By arresto mayor in its maximum period, if such
amount does not exceed 200 pesos, provided that in
the four cases mentioned, the fraud be committed by
any of the following means:
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse
of confidence, namely:
(a) By altering the substance, quantity, or
quality or anything of value which the
offender shall deliver by virtue of an
obligation to do so, even though such
obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration.
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the
prejudice of another, money, goods, or any
other personal property received by the offender
in trust or on commission, or for administration,
or under any other obligation involving the duty
to make delivery of or to return the same,
even though such obligation be totally or
partially guaranteed by a bond; or by denying
having received such money, goods, or other
property.
(c) By taking undue advantage of the signature
of the offended party in blank, and by
writing any document above such signature in
blank, to the prejudice of the offended party
or of any third person.
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or
fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with
the commission of the fraud:
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending
to possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by
means of other similar deceits.
(b) By altering the quality, fineness or weight of
anything pertaining to his art or business.
(c) By pretending to have bribed any Government
employee, without prejudice to the action for calumny
which the offended party may deem proper to bring
against the offender. In this case, the offender shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty.
(d) [By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in
payment of an obligation when the offender therein were
not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure
of the drawer of the check to deposit the amount
necessary to cover his check within three (3) days from
receipt of notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder
that said check has been dishonored for lack of
insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie evidence of
deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent act. (As
amended by R.A. 4885, approved June 17, 1967.)]
(e) By obtaining any food, refreshment or
accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
house, lodging house, or apartment house and the like
without paying therefor, with intent to defraud the
proprietor or manager thereof, or by obtaining credit at
hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging house, or
apartment house by the use of any false pretense, or by
abandoning or surreptitiously removing any part of his
baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house,
lodging house or apartment house after obtaining credit,
food, refreshment or accommodation therein without
paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
3. Through any of the following fraudulent means:
(a) By inducing another, by means of deceit, to
sign any document.
(b) By resorting to some fraudulent practice to
insure success in a gambling game.
(c) By removing, concealing or destroying, in
whole or in part, any court record, office files,
document or any other papers.
3 ways of committing estafa or swindling:
1. Estafa with unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence Art
315 (1)
2. By means of false pretense or by fraudulent acts
executed prior to or simultaneous to the commission of
the offense Art 315 (2)
3. Through fraudulent means Art 315 (3)
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
Whatever be the crime of estafa, there are always 2 general
elements:
1. That the accused defrauded another by means of abuse of
confidence, or by means of deceit; and
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation
is caused to the offended party or third persons.
ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS or ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE (1st form)
Committed through:
a. By altering the substance, quantity, or quality or anything of value
which the offender shall deliver by virtue of an obligation to do so,
even though such obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration.
NOTE: The law says that even if it based on an immoral or illegal
consideration.
Example:
A is bound to deliver boxes of marijuana to B. At
the bottom of the box were inferior qualities of marijuana
while on top are high grade marijuana. Is A liable of estafa?
A is liable for estafa. B can file a case of estafa
against A. (for purposes of example only because B
may be held liable for dangerous drugs act)
b. By misappropriating or converting, to the prejudice of
another, money, goods, or any other personal property
received by the offender in trust or on commission, or for
administration, or under any other obligation involving the
duty to make delivery of or to return the same, even
though such obligation be totally or partially guaranteed by
a bond; or by denying having received such money, goods,
or other property.
• The moment that the offended party entrusted the money or
goods or any other personal property to the offender, it is
necessary that there must be a transfer of juridical possession.
Juridical possession is a legal right over the property;
possession in the concept of the owner. During the time that
the possessor has legal possession of the property, even the
owner cannot file estafa to the possessor because it is the
rightful possessor at that moment.
• If what has been transferred is material or physical
possession, and the offender misappropriates the same, he is
only liable for qualified theft.
Example:
A rented a bicycle from B for Php500 for 2 hours. A was
in possession of the said bicycle. 2 hours had lapsed, A was
not able to return the bicycle to B. B demanded that A return
the bicycle, but A did not. What is the crime committed by A?
The crime committed by A is estafa because it there
is a lease agreement. What has been transferred to A
is juridical possession of the property by virtue of the
lease agreement.
A gave B a watch. A told B “This is my watch, use it as a
collateral for my debt”. B however, instead of using it as
collateral for the loan of A, sold the watch and appropriated
the proceeds of the watch. What is the crime committed?
The crime committed by B is qualified theft and not
estafa. There is no transfer of juridical possession. A
remains to be the owner of the watch, and said
watch is only used as a collateral.
A went to the bank and then A told the teller, “Here is
100k, kindly deposit this to my account. Here is my passbook
and here is the money. Deposit it because I am in a hurry and
I will drop by later in the afternoon.” However, A was not able
to drop by in the afternoon. So A went the following day.
When A asked for the passbook, he realized that the 100k was
not deposited by the teller to his account. The teller
misappropriated the 100k. What is the crime committed?
The crime committed is Qualified Theft. The SC ruled that
when the depositor leaves to the bank his money for deposit,
what has been transferred is only the material or physical
possession. The juridical possession of the money remains with
the owner of the money. Hence, when it is misappropriated by
the teller of the bank, it is only qualified theft and not estafa.
A works in the field and makes cash advance to his
company. One time he went to a certain place and there is a
cash advance. When A returned, A failed to liquidate the
expenses in the cash advance despite demands. What is the
crime committed by A?
According to the SC, a cash advance is in the nature
of a loan. When an employee makes a cash advance to the
company, it is in effect obtaining a loan from the company.
Therefore, ownership is transferred to the employee because
there is no obligation to return the very same money. Hence,
there can be no estafa. Since ownership was transferred and
that the employee cannot pay, we have the relationship of
creditor and debtor, not that entrustor -entrustee. There will
be no criminal case but only civil liability. Hence, we have a
civil case of collection for sum
of money.
c. By taking undue advantage of the signature of the
offended party in blank, and by writing any
document above such signature in blank, to the
prejudice of the offended party or of any third
person.
Example:
The owner of the company has blank documents with
his signature and gave it to his secretary. The said documents
will be used in case of emergency. One time the secretary
wrote a document above the blank signature stating that the
said owner will be assuming the indebtedness of the secretary.
The crime committed by the secretary is estafa
because there is abuse of confidence. The owner
entrusted the blank document to the secretary.
What if the secretary placed the blank document it on the
table. Here comes a visitor, and upon seeing the blank
document, he took one and then he went to his house and
wrote a document stating that the said owner shall assume his
liability.
The crime committed is not estafa but falsification of a
private document because he made it appear that the
owner participated in procuring the document when in
fact, the owner did not.
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSE or BY
FRAUDULENT ACTS PRIOR TO OR SIMULTANEOUS TO
THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE (2nd form)

a. By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to

possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or
by means of other similar deceits.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Example:

A, Band C are newly graduates. They just passed the

nursing board exam. X learned that A, B, and C passed

the board so he went to the house of A, B and C and told
them that X has a placement agency that will help them
find work abroad. AB and C believed X, and X demanded

X may be liable of estafa by falsely pretending to

possess power or agency, where in fact, he is not
icensed by the POEA of Department of Labor.
Example:
that they give X 100k for processing fees. A, B, and C
never saw X again. Later X was arrested. What are the
crimes committed by X?
2.Failing to keep sufficient funds to cover the full
amount of the check.
•
The funder knows that he has sufficient amount at
the time of the issuance of the check but failed to
keep sufficient funds to cover the amount after the
issuance of the check. The crime will arise for his
failure to keep sufficient funds or maintain his
credit to cover the full amount for a period of 90
days from the date appearing on the check.

Can he also be held liable for illegal recruitment?

A is building a house, so he went to B, who is the owner
of the hardware store. A told B that he doesn’t have any
money at the moment but he will be issuing a check
guaranteeing that it will be funded on the 15 , which is
the maturity date. B believed A’s representation that the
check will be funded so B placed the construction
He can also be liable for illegal recruitment under
the labor code.
th
Under PD 2018, which amended Article 38 and 39
of the Labor Code, where if illegal recruitment is
committed by a syndicate (3 or more persons) or
in large scale (where the victims are 3 or more
persons individually or as a group), the crime
materials to A. On the 15 day of the month, the check
th
bounced. B sent a notice of dishonor to A, but despite
such notice of dishonor, months had passed and yet A
still failed to pay. What crimes may be filed against A?
B may file a case of estafa because the said
check was issued in concomitance with the said
fraud. Where it not for the said check, B would not
give the construction materials to A.

committed is economic sabotage.

By reason thereof, the offender is liable for 2

crimes, and that is estafa and illegal recruitment.

Can the offender be prosecuted at the same time?

Yes, because estafa requires illegal deceit or false
pretense, while in illegal recruitment does not
require deceit or false pretense. The mere fact of
recruiting where he does not have any license
Aside from that, can A also be held liable for violation of
BP22?
A may also be held liable for violation of BP 22. It
will apply in any cases the moment the check
bounce. The essence of BP22 is the issuance of

the worthless check.

makes him liable for illegal recruitment.
d.

By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in

payment of an obligation when the offender
therein were not sufficient to cover the amount
of the check. The failure of the drawer of the
check to deposit the amount necessary to cover
his check within three (3) days from receipt
of notice from the bank and/or the payee or
holder that said check has been dishonored for
lack of insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie
evidence of deceit constituting false pretense
or fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885, approved
June 17, 1967.)
However, said offense will not automatically
amount to estafa. In order to amount estafa, it is
necessary that the issuance of the check is the
reason of the defraudation. That is, where it not for
the said check, where it not for the promise of the
said check, the offended party would not have
parted with his property or money.
In order to amount estafa by postdating a check,
the issuance of the check must not be in payment
of a pre-existing obligation. It is necessary that the
obligation is in concomitance with the issuance of
the check.
o

o
In case of BP 22, even if in payment of pre-
existing obligation, the moment the check
bounced, BP 22 will apply.
1.Making or drawing and issuing a check knowing at
the time of issue that he does not have sufficient
funds.
In case of estafa, the offender must make good of
the check within a period of 3 days. In BP 22, the
offender must make good of the check within 5
banking days.
•
The offender knows that he does not have
sufficient funds in his account at the time of the
issuance of the check.

BP 22 (BOUNDING CHECKS LAW)

2 acts punished in BP 22:
CRIMINAL LAW 2
intent of AC 10-2000 does not erase imprisonment
When is there prima facie evidence of knowledge of
as an alternative penalty. What 10-2000
establishes is a rule of preference, and that is, if
the offender acted in good faith, and there is clear
mistake of fact without any taint of negligence, fine
should be the appropriate penalty. Nevertheless,
still whether to impose penalty of imprisonment of
fine is within the sound discretion of the court.
insufficiency of funds in BP 22?
Section 2 of BP 22, there arises the prima facie knowledge
of insufficiency of funds when the offender makes or draws
and issues a check which bounced when deposited within

the period of 90 days from the moment of its issue.

1.

2.

3.
The check must be deposited within 90 days from
date appearing on the check;
Elements of prima facie knowledge:
In case the penalty imposed is only fine, there is
no hindrance in the court to impose subsidiary
There must be notice of dishonor received by the
drawer of the check;
imprisonment in case of failure to pay fine.
The drawer of the check failed to make good of
the check within 5 banking days from receipt of
the notice of dishonor.

• If the drawer was able to make good of the

check within 5 banking days, the prima facie
presumption of knowledge of insufficiency of
funds will not arise.
Example:
If the holder deposited the check on the 100
th
 day. Can
the drawer of the check be still held liable for violation of
BP 22?
Yes, the drawer is liable for violation of BP 22.
What is erased only is the prima facie knowledge
of insufficiency of funds. But so long as the check
is not a stale check (check beyond 6 months or
120 days). If said check is dishonored, violation of
BP 22 can still arise, because the prima facie
knowledge of insufficiency of funds can be proven
by other evidence.

Penalty for violation of BP22:

Imprisonment of not less than 30 days but not
more than 1 year or a fine of not less than but not
more than double the amount of the check which
fine shall in no case exceed PHP200,000, or both
such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the
court.

NOTE:
•
In consonance with this penalty, the SC in the
cases of Rosalie v. CA and VACA v. CA, SC
issued AC 10-2000. In this Supreme Court AC,
because of its decision in the said cases, in lieu of
penalty, in lieu of imprisonment, the proper penalty
to be imposed would be fine, if the offender acted
in good faith or clear mistake of fact without any
taint of negligence.

•
The SC again issued AC 13-2001 to clarify the
first circular. AC 13-2001 states that the tenor and
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Art. 316. Other forms of swindling. — The penalty of Chapter Eight

arresto mayor in its minimum and medium period ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING
and a fine of not less than the value of the damage DESTRUCTIONS
caused and not more than three times such value, shall
be imposed upon:

4. Any person who, pretending to be ownerof any

real property, shall convey, sell, encumber or
mortgage the same.

5. Any person, who, knowing that real property is

encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although
such encumbrance be not recorded.

6. The owner of any personal property who shall

wrongfully take it from its lawful possessor, to the
prejudice of the latter or any third person.

7. Any person who, to the prejudice of another,

shall execute any fictitious contract.

8. Any person who shall accept any compensation

given him under the belief that it was in payment
of services rendered or labor performed by him,
when in fact he did not actually perform such
services or labor.

9. Any person who, while being a surety in a

bond given in a criminal or civil action, without
express authority from the court or before the
cancellation of his bond or before being relieved
from the obligation contracted by him, shall sell,
mortgage, or, in any other manner, encumber the
real property or properties with which he
guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation.

Art. 317. Swindling a minor. — Any person who

taking advantage of the inexperience or emotions or
feelings of a minor, to his detriment,shall induce him to
assume any obligation or to give any release or
execute a transfer of any property right in consideration
of some loan ofmoney, credit or other personal
property,whether the loan clearly appears in the
document or is shown in any other form, shall suffer
the penalty of arresto mayor and a fine of a sum
ranging from 10 to 50 percent of the value of the
obligation contracted by the minor

Art. 318. Other deceits. — The penalty of arresto

mayor and a fine of not less than the amount of the
damage caused and not more than twice such amount
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
defraud or damage another by any other deceit not
mentioned in the preceding articles of this chapter.

Any person who, for profit or gain, shall interpret

dreams, make forecasts, tell fortunes, or take
advantage of the credulity of the public in any other
similar manner, shall suffer the penalty of arresto
menow or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
Art. 320. Destructive arson. — The penalty of reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua
shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:

1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder

or fireworks factory, ordinance, storehouse, archives
or general museum of the Government.

2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion or

vessel out of port.

3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of

inflammable or explosive materials.

Art. 321. Other forms of arson. — When the arson

consists in the burning of other property and under the
circumstances given hereunder, the offender shall be
punishable:

1. By reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua:

(a) If the offender shall set fire to any building,
farmhouse, warehouse, hut, shelter, or vessel in port,
knowing it to be occupied at the time by one or more
persons;
(b) If the building burned is a public building and value
of the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
(c) If the building burned is a public building and the
purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used in
instituting prosecution for the punishment of violators of
the law, irrespective of the amount of the damage;
(d) If the building burned is a public building and the
purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used in
legislative, judicial or administrative proceedings,
irrespective of the amount of the damage; Provided,
however, That if the evidence destroyed is to be used
against the defendant for the prosecution of any crime
punishable under existing laws, the penalty shall be
reclusion perpetua;
(e) If the arson shall have been committed with the
intention of collecting under an insurance policy against
loss or damage by fire.

2. By reclusion temporal:
(a) If an inhabited house or any other building in which
people are accustomed to meet is set on fire, and the
culprit did not know that such house or building was
occupied at the time, or if he shall set fire to a moving
freight train or motor vehicle, and the value of the
damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
(b) If the value of the damage caused in paragraph (b)
of the preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000
pesos;
(c) If a farm, sugar mill, cane mill, mill central, bamboo
groves or any similar plantation is set on fire and the
damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos; and
(d) If grain fields,pasture lands, or forests, or plantings
are set on fire, and the damage caused exceeds 6,000
pesos.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
3. By prision mayor:
(a) If the value of the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraphs (a), (c), and (d) in the next
preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000 pesos;
(b) If a building not used as a dwelling or place of
assembly, located in a populated place, is set on fire,
and the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
4. By prision correccional in its maximum period to
prision mayor in its medium period:
(a) If a building used as dwelling located in an
uninhabited place is set on fire and the damage caused
exceeds 1,000 pesos;
(b) If the value or the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraphs (c) and (d) of subdivision 2 of this
article does not exceed 200 pesos.
5. By prision correccional in its medium period to
prision mayor in its minimum period, when the damage
caused is over 200 pesos but does not exceed 1,000 pesos,
and the property referred to in paragraph (a) of the
preceding subdivision is set on fire; but when the value of
such property does not exceed 200 pesos, the penalty next
lower in degree than that prescribed in this subdivision
shall be imposed.
6. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the damage caused in the case
mentioned in paragraph (b) of subdivision 3 of this
article does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is over 200 pesos.
7. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the damage caused in the case
mentioned paragraph (b) subdivision 3 of this article does
not exceed 200 pesos.
8. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine ranging from
fifty to one hundred per centum if the damage caused
shall be imposed, when the property burned consists
of grain fields, pasture lands, forests, or plantations
when the value of such property does not exceed 200
pesos. (As amended by R.A. 5467, approved May 12,
1969).
Art. 324. Crimes involving destruction. — Any person
who shall cause destruction by means of explosion,
discharge of electric current, inundation, sinking or
stranding of a vessel, intentional damaging of the
engine of said vessel, taking up the rails from a railway
track, maliciously changing railway signals for the
safety of moving trains, destroying telegraph wires and
telegraph posts, or those of any other system, and, in
general, by using any other agency or means of
destruction as effective as those above enumerated,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal if the
commission has endangered the safety of any person,
otherwise, the penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed.
Art. 325. Burning one's own property as means to
commit arson. — Any person guilty of arson or causing
great destruction of the property belonging to another
shall suffer the penalties prescribed in this chapter,
even though he shall have set fire to or destroyed his own
property for the purposes of committing the crime.
Art. 326. Setting fire to property exclusively owned by
the offender. — If the property burned shall be the
exclusive property of the offender, he shall be
punished by arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its minimum period, if the arson
shall have been committed for the purpose of
defrauding or causing damage to another, or prejudice
shall actually have been caused, or if the thing burned
shall have been a building in an inhabited place.
Art. 322. Cases of arson not included in the preceding
articles. — Cases of arson not included in the next
preceding articles shall be punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods, when the damage caused does not exceed 50
pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period, when the damage
caused is over 50 pesos but does not exceed 200
pesos;
3. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if the damage caused is over 200 pesos but
does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
4. By prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods, if it is over 1,000 pesos.
Art. 323. Arson of property of small value. — The arson of
any uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn, shed, or any
other property the value of which does not exceed 25
pesos, committed at a time or under circumstances
which clearly exclude all danger of the fire spreading,
shall not be punished by the penalties respectively
prescribed in this chapter, but in accordance with
the damage caused and under the provisions of the
following chapter.
Art. 326-A. In cases where death resulted as a
consequence of arson. — If death resulted as a
consequence of arson committed on any of the
properties and under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding articles, the court shall impose
the death penalty.
Art. 326-B. Prima facie evidence of arson. — Any of the
following circumstances shall constitute prima facie
evidence of arson:
1. If after the fire, are found materials or substances
soaked in gasoline, kerosene, petroleum, or other
inflammables, or any mechanical, electrical chemical
or traces or any of the foregoing.
2. That substantial amount of inflammable substance
or materials were stored within the building not
necessary in the course of the defendant's business;
and
3. That the fire started simultaneously in more than one
part of the building or locale under circumstances that
cannot normally be due to accidental or unintentional
causes: Provided, however, That at least one of the
following is present in any of the three above-
mentioned circumstances:
CRIMINAL LAW 2
usually gather or congregate for a definite purpose
such as but not limited to official government
function or business, private transaction,
commerce, trade workshop, meetings,
(a) That the total insurance carried on the building and/
or goods is more than 80 per cent of the value of such
building and/or goods at the time of the fire;
(b) That the defendant after the fire has presented a
fraudulent claim for loss.

The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed

on one who plants the articles above-mentioned, in
order to secure a conviction, or as a means of extortion
or coercion. (As amended by R.A. 5467, approved May 12, 1969).

conferences, or merely incidental to or for a

ARSON - is the malicious destruction of property set by fire.
It can be either destructive or simple arson. Destructive or
simple arson is not dependent on the value of the property but
rather on the

definite purpose such as but not limited to motels,

transient dwellings, public conveyances or stops,
or terminals, regardless of whether the offender
had knowledge that there are persons in said
building or edifice at the time set on fire and
regardless also of whether the building is actually
inhabited or not.
Any train, locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance,
or for public use, entertainment and leisure;
Any building, factory, warehouse installation and
any other appurtenances thereto, which are
devoted to the service of public utilities;
3.

4.

5.

SAMPLE PROBLEM:
Any building the burning of which is for the
purpose of concealing or destroying the evidence
of another violation of law, or for the purpose of
concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or
to collect from insurance.
1.
A is a maid and it was Christmas time. A wanted to
go to the province so she asked the master of the
house if she can go to the province. The master of
the house said no. The maid got mad, so while
the master of the house and his family are
sleeping, A burned the house and left. The house
of the master was not the only one burned, but
also the neighbors’ houses. The master and his

There is also destructive arson in the following

instances:
1.
When the arson is committed by 2 or more
persons, regardless of whether their purpose is
merely to burn or destroy the building or the
burning merely constitutes an overt act in the
commission of another violation of the law;
When any person shall burn:
children were killed.
What is/are the crimes
committed by A? Is A liable for destructive arson or
simple arson only?

Destructive Arson is found under Art 320 of the RPC while

Simple Arson and other arson is repealed by PD 1613
repealing Article 320 to 326 B of the RPC. Even though
there are five deaths, the deaths will be absorbed in the
crime of arson and will only qualify the penalty to death.
The maid is only liable for simple arson, because what has
been burned is an inhabited dwelling. For as long as the
thing burned is an inhabited house or dwelling, the crime
committed is simple arson. If in the course of burning the
dwelling, homicide results, the crime committed is still
2.
a.
Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or
military power or fireworks factory,
ordinance, storehouse, archives or
general museum of the Government; or
In an inhabited place, any storehouse or
factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.
b.

When is there simple arson otherwise known as other

cases of arson in PD 1613?
Burning of:
Any building used as offices of the government or
any of its agencies;
Any inhabited house or dwelling;

arson.
If the intention is to kill the offended party, and the means
employed is through burning the house, the crime
committed is MURDER. If however, the intention of the
offender is to destroy the property of the offended party by
fire, and the offender did not know that someone is inside
and death results, the crime is still simple arson. It will only
1.
2.
3.
Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or
mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
4.
Any plantation, farm, pasture land, growing crop,
grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
Any rice mill, sugarmill, cane mill, or mill central;
Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf, or
warehouse.
5.
6.
qualify the penalty to RP to death.
2.
A killed B while sleeping. The crime committed is
murder. In order to conceal the crime, A burned
the house. This time, the crime committed is 2.
Murder for killing B and Arson, order to hide the
crime committed. The arson committed is
destructive arson, as it is defined by the law.

Penalty for destructive arson: Reclusion Perpetua to

Death
If as a result of the commission of any acts of
destructive arson, death results, the penalty
should be death.


How is destructive arson committed?
1.
One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to
one single act of burning, or as a result of
simultaneous burnings or committed on several or
different occasions;
Any building of public or private ownership,
devoted to public in general, or where people


In case of simple arson, reclusion temporal to
reclusion perpetua
Under Sec 5 of PD 1613, if by reason or on the
occasion of simple arson, death results, the
penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. Therefore,
whatever may be the crime may be, if by reason of
2.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
said arson, death results, it will aggravate the
crime of arson and the homicide will be absorbed
in the arson.
2.
3.
4.
Using poisonous or corrosive substances
Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
Causing damage to the property of the National
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
Library or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
road, promenade, or any other thing used in
common by public

Art. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. — Any

person who shall deliberately cause the property of
another any damage not falling within the terms of the
next preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious mischief.

Art. 330. Damage and obstruction to means of communication. — The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods shall be imposed upon any person who shall damage any railway, telegraph or telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or other accident, the penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed, without
prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender for the other consequences of his criminal act.
For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the
electric wires, traction cables, signal system and other
things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to constitute an integral part of a railway system.

Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. — Any person who shall cause damage to obstruct the performance of public functions,
or using any
poisonous or corrosive substance; or spreading any
infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause
damage to the property of the National Museum or
National Library, or to any archive or registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used
in common by the public, shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds
1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the
abovementioned amount but it is over 200 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 200 pesos.

Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings. — Any person who shall destroy or damage statues or
any other useful or ornamental public monument shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in
its minimum period.
Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or ornamental painting of a public nature shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.

Art. 329. Other mischiefs. — The mischiefs not included in the next preceding article shall be punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such value is over 200 pesos but does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of the damage caused and not more than 200 pesos, if the amount involved does not exceed
200 pesos or cannot be estimated.

Malicious Mischief - is the willful damaging of another’s

Chapter Ten
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
property for the sake of causing damage due to hate,
Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. — No
criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the
commission of the crime of theft, swindling or
malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by
the following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives
by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property
which belonged to the deceased spouse before the
same shall have passed into the possession of
another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-
in-law, if living together.
The exemption established by this article shall not be
applicable to strangers participating in the commission of
the crime.

revenge or other evil motive.

If the intention of the offender is to cause damage in the
property of another, by any means outside arson, is
malicious mischief.
It is a crime which can only be committed by means of
intent. There must be deliberate intent to cause damage to
the property of another, because if there is no intent to
cause damage in the property, the liability will be damages

only; civil liability and not criminal liability.

Sample problem:
A and B were fighting, and in the course of their fight, A fell

1st Act
Q:In the Case of Carungcong vs People, the son in law a
Japanese National , by means of deceit made his mother in
law sign a SPA, said SPA was used to sell the property of
Tagaytay. The mother died without receiving the proceeds
of the sale. The daughter of the mother wanted to file a
case against the son-in law. Note that the wife of the
Japanese national is already deceased. Does article apply
in this case where the crime committed is estafa even if the
wife of the Japanese National is already dead?
on the floor and the floor was damaged. The liability will

only be a civil action for damages.

Special cases of Malicious Mischief:
1.
Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
public functions;
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
A: The relationship by affinity is still existing. The purpose
is to ensure harmony within the family. Article 332 will still
apply. The Son in law may be prosecuted. The crime is
estafa through falsification of public document. The crime
committed is the complex crime of estafa through
falsification of public document. Article 332 will not apply
though there is a relationship because the crime is already
complexed. Article 332, paramours, mistresses, are within the
meaning of wives. Step fathers-ascendants, step children-
descendants.
Title Eleven
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Chapter One
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
Art. 333. Who are guilty of adultery. — Adultery
is committed by any married woman who shall
have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband
and by the man who has carnal knowledge of her
knowing her to be married, even if the marriage
be subsequently declared void.
Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods. If the person
guilty of adultery committed this offense while being
abandoned without justification by the offended
spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that
provided in the next preceding paragraph shall be
imposed.
Offended party: husband
Elements of concubinage:
1. The man must be married
2. That he committed any of the following
acts:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling;
b. Having sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstances;
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place
3. The woman must know that the man must
be married
1st Act: the conjugal dwelling is the house of the husband
2nd Act: the best witnesses are the neighbors of the husband.
It must be in such a manner that the neighbors are shocked.
Just like adultery, concubinage is a private crime. It cannot be
prosecuted if the offended spouse will not file a complaint against
the offender spouse. The wife must also prosecute both the
husband and the concubine. It is a matter of defense on the
concubine that she does not know the husband is married.
The penalty for the concubine is destierro.
RAPE IS ALREADY REPEALED
Art. 336. Acts of lasciviousness. — Any person who
shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other
persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished
by prision correccional.

Offender: legally married woman
To whom shall the case be filed: Wife and Lover
Who shall file: only by the offended husband.
Adultery is a private crime. It can only be prosecuted by the
offended spouse. Without the complaint filed by the
offended spouse, no crime.
 If the lover does not know that the woman is
married, still the husband should file the case on
both of them. It is a matter of defense only on the
lover. So, there are cases where only one is
convicted and the other one is acquitted. The wife is
convicted and the lover is acquitted
 If adultery is abandoned by her husband without
justification, mitigated
 Adultery is a crime of consequence, so there is no
attempted or frustrated stage. It is always in the
consummated stage.
 Adultery may be proven by circumstantial evidence.
For example, the husband was working
in Saudi for 10 years, and upon reaching
home, he sees his wife pregnant, there is
adultery except if the wife is raped.
Acts of lasciviousness - acts committed with unchaste design
and done under circumstances of rape. As it is done under
circumstances of rape, so the offender may be any person, for
example a man touching the private parts of another man.
Elements:
1. That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or
lewdness;
2. That the act of lasciviousness is committed against a
person of either sex;
3. That it is done under any of the following
circumstances:
a. Using force or intimidation
b. When the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious
c. By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is under 12 years
of age or demented
Chapter Three
SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS
AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE
Art. 337. Qualified seduction. — The seduction of a
virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of
age, committed by any person in public authority, priest,
home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any
person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with
the education or custody of the woman seduced, shall
be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods.
Art. 334. Concubinage. — Any husband who shall keep a
mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or shall have sexual
intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a
woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her in
any other place, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods. The
concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed

upon any person who shall seduce his sister or
descendant, whether or not she be a virgin or over
eighteen years of age.
Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of
any of the persons and under the circumstances
described herein.

In one case, the woman committed sexual congress

with a married man because the man promised that
he will marry the woman. The SC said that there is
no seduction. The fact that the woman knows that
the man is married, the man cannot marry her.
There is no deceit.

Two kinds of qualified seduction:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years of age and
under 18 years of age by persons who abuse their
authority or confidence reposed in them
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age and
reputation.
In the 1st kind is the seduction of a virgin
1. Committed by a public officer, a domestic servant,
a priest, teacher, guardian or any person who has
custody over the person
2. In this case, the elements are:
a. The offended party must be a virgin
b. She must be over 12 and under 18yrs old
c. The offender is a priest, domestic servant,
teacher, guardian
d. The offender had sexual intercourse with her
e. There is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender
Virginity does not refer to physical virginity. It would suffice
that the woman is not married, she is single and living a
chaste life.
The law presumes that she is a virgin.
The offender is any person, public authority, priest, guardian.
Note: sexual intercourse is an element of any kind of
seduction.
Art. 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the
offended party. — The penalty of arresto mayor shall be
imposed to punish any other acts of lasciviousness
committed by the same persons and the same circumstances
as those provided in Articles 337 and 338.
This is under circumstances of seduction.
Offender: Man
Offended Party: woman
Under this circumstance, the acts of lasciviousness are
committed through:
a. Abuse of authority
b. Abuse of confidence
c. Abuse of relationship
d. Means of deceit
Art. 340. Corruption of minors. — Any person who shall
promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of
persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall
be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a
pubic officer or employee, including those in government-
owned or controlled corporations, he shall also suffer the
penalty of temporary absolute disqualification. (As amended
by Batas Pambansa Blg. 92).
Art. 341. White slave trade. — The penalty of prision
mayor in its medium and maximum period shall be
imposed upon any person who, in any manner, or
under any pretext, shall engage in the business or shall
profit by prostitution or shall enlist the services of any
other for the purpose of prostitution (As amended by Batas
Pambansa Blg. 186.)

In the 2nd case:
Virginity does not matter, even if the said sister or
descendant is a married woman. Likewise, age does
not matter. There can still be a seduction of a sister or
descendant. There must be an element of sexual
intercourse and committed in abuse of authority.
Art. 338. Simple seduction. — The seduction of
a woman who is single or a widow of good
reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years
of age, committed by means of deceit, shall be
punished by arresto mayor.
In case of simple seduction, the offended party
must be a WOMAN who is single or widow.
Deceit – the offended party gave herself to the man
because of the latter's promise.
Sample Problem:
In order to have sexual congress with the woman, the
man promised to marry the man. Crime committed is
seduction.
Chapter Four
ABDUCTION
Art. 342. Forcible abduction. — The abduction of any
woman against her will and with lewd designs shall be
punished by reclusion temporal.
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the
female abducted be under twelve years of age.
Art. 343. Consented abduction. — The abduction of a
virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of
age, carried out with her consent and with lewd
designs, shall be punished by the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
Forcible abduction- taking away of a woman against her will
with lewd design.
Woman can be any person. Age, virginity, civil status is not
material. For as long as the taking away is done with lewd
design and against her will.
 Note that sexual intercourse is not an element. If by
reason of the forcible abduction, the man had sexual
intercourse with the woman, it may result in a complex
crime of rape with forcible abduction.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
SAMPLE PROBLEM:
1. X is a turned down suitor of A. X forcibly took A,
who was sitting in the door step of her house. X professed
his love to A. However, A did not accept him so X raped him
7 times within 7 days. How many crimes are committed?
What are the crimes
committed?
The crimes committed by X are 7 crimes: 1 crime forcible
abduction with rape and 6 crimes of rape. Separate and
distinct from each other.
 Note that only 1 forcible abduction is
necessary and only 1 rape is necessary to bring
about complex crime of forcible abduction with
rape. The other rapes are separate and distinct
from the crime of rape
2. In the same case, the woman was inside the house
of the man. The man attempted to rape the woman but the
woman was able to run away.
There is no crime of forcible abduction with attempted rape.
The attempt to rape the woman is the manifestation of the
lewd design which is an element of forcible abduction.
CONSENTED ABDUCTION:
Elements:
1. The woman must be a virgin
2. She must be over 12 years but under 18
3. The taking away must be with her consent,
after solicitation or cajolery from the offender
4. The taking away must be with lewd designs.
This time, the offended party consented to the taking away.
But take note of the age (12-18). This is what makes the
crime of abduction.
Art. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
lasciviousness. — The crimes of adultery and
concubinage shall not be prosecuted except 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, nor, in any case, if he shall have consented
or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by the above
named persons, as the case may be.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness
and rape, the marriage of the offender with the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him.
The provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable
to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories after
the fact of the above-mentioned crimes.
Art. 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes
against chastity. — Person guilty of rape, seduction or
abduction, shall also be sentenced:
1. To indemnify the offended woman
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the
should prevent him from so doing
3. In every case to support the offspring
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided
for in Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced, in
the same proceeding or in a separate civil proceeding,
to indemnify for damages caused to the offended
spouse.
Sample Problem
The girl was 15 and the boyfriend was 25. The said
boyfriend was able to take away the girl with her consent.
The parents of the girl filed a case. Per Ma’am, she was
able to handle a similar case where the girl was 16 and the
man was above 18. The parents of the girl do not like the
man so the lovers eloped and lived in the house of the
man. The mother filed a case of consented abduction.
During the P.I., the said girl loved the man and even if
the mother will take her away from the man, she will
always return to the man. Also, the woman has keys of
the house of the man. Per ma’am the man was not at fault
because it was always the woman who would go to the
man’s house. So she dismissed the case.
In qualified seduction and consented abduction, acts of
lasciviousness in circumstances of seduction: INSTANCES
WHERE VIRGINITY IS AN ELEMENT
Art. 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers,
or other persons entrusted with the custody of the
offended party. — The ascendants, guardians, curators,
teachers and any person who, by abuse of authority or
confidential relationships, shall cooperate as
accomplices in the perpetration of the crimes
embraced in chapters, second, third and fourth, of this
title, shall be punished as principals.
Teachers or other persons in any other capacity
entrusted with the education and guidance of youth,
shall also suffer the penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual
special disqualification.
Any person falling within the terms of this article, and
any other person guilty of corruption of minors for the
benefit of another, shall be punished by special
disqualification from filling the office of guardian.
Note: In consented abduction, sexual intercourse is not an
element, so if after the woman ran away with the man, yet
she does not want to have sexual intercourse but the man Title Twelve
forced her and was able to succeed in having sexual CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
intercourse, the crime committed is consented abduction Chapter one
with rape. 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. — The simulation of births and the
substitution of one child for another shall be punished by
prision mayor and a fine of notexceeding 1,000 pesos.
 Chapter Five
PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING
CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN
CRIMINAL LAW 2

The same penalties shall be imposed upon any Chapter Two

person who shall conceal or abandonany legitimate
child with intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status. Any physician or surgeon or public officer
who, in violation of the duties of hisprofession or
office, shall cooperate in the execution of any
of the crimes mentioned in the two next preceding
paragraphs, shall suffer the penalties therein
prescribed and also the penalty of temporary
special disqualification.
ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
Art. 349. Bigamy. — The penalty of prision mayor shall
be imposed upon any person who shall contract a
second or subsequent marriage before the former
marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the
absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead
by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.

Three acts punished under Art. 347: Sample problem:

1. Simulation of birth
2. Substitution of a child A and B are married. B, the husband fell in love with
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child another woman, and married the woman thereafter. It is
with intent to cause such child to lose its civil now a bigamous married. A bigamous marriage is an
status otherwise valid marriage, except for the fact that there is a
subsisting marriage.
Simulation of birth - takes place when the woman
pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on the
day of the delivery, takes the child of another as her own.

1. A was a pregnant. She told the midwife that she

does not want the baby. The midwife said that she
knew a couple who wanted a child. This couple
took the baby and registered the child as their
own. What are the crimes committed and who are
liable?

Bigamous marriage through reckless imprudence- in the

book, there is such crime because a woman contracted a
marriage because she believed the statements of the
relatives of her former spouse that the latter is already
dead. However, such ruling was erroneous. There must be a declaration of presumptive death.
Art. 350. Marriage contracted against provisions of

Sample problem:
laws. — The penalty of prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon
any person who, without being included in the
provisions of the next proceeding article, shall have
not been complied with or that the marriage is in
All of them are all liable for simulation of birth.
The said couple pretended that the child is their own
child. In that case, said child lost its original status.

disregard of a legal impediment.

If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the
consent of the other by means of violence, intimidation
or fraud, he shall be punished by the maximum period
of the penalty provided in the next preceding paragraph.
 2. In substitution of a child, the classic example is
MARA and CLARA.
3. In the 3rd act, it is necessary that the child is
legitimate, not illegitimate. The offender conceals
or abandons the legitimate child and the intention
of the offender is to lose the child’s civil status.
Sample problem:
1. The offender abandons the child in the forest. The
child is one month old. Later however the child
was rescued. The crime committed was attempted
parricide, because it can be seen that there was intent
to kill.
2. A couple gave birth to its 13th child. They are very
poor. So the couple placed the baby in the gate of
a well-known family. What crimes are committed?
-Crime committed abandonment of the
legitimate child with the intent to lose its civil status.
There is no other intent of the parents but to lose its
status as a poor child.
Illegal marriage- marriage contracted without the requisites
of the law.
If a person contracted marriage if knowledge of the
infirmities, liable under Art. 350
The solemnizing officer is liable also criminally.
Art. 351. Premature marriages. — Any widow who shall
marry within three hundred and one day from the date
of the death of her husband, or before having delivered
if she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death,
shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 500 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman
whose marriage shall have been annulled or dissolved, if
she shall marry before her delivery or before the
expiration of the period of three hundred and one day
after the legal separation.
Person liable:
Art. 348. Usurpation of civil status. — The penalty of
prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall usurp the civil status of another, should he do so
for the purpose of defrauding the offended part or his
heirs; otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.
1. A woman who married within 301 days from the
death of her husband, or before delivery of her
baby
2. A woman whose marriage having been annulled
or dissolved, married before delivery or before
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in

expiration of the period of 301 days after the date
of legal separation.
The requirement that the marriage must be done within 301
days must only apply if the woman is not pregnant. If the
woman is pregnant, it is only at the time of the delivery of
the baby. After the baby is delivered, she can already
marry.
Why is it that the law requires that the baby must be first
delivered, or it must be 301 days? This is to ensure that
there is no doubt as to the paternity of the child, otherwise
there would be confusion.
Art. 352. Performance of illegal marriage ceremony. —
Priests or ministers of any religious denomination or
sect, or civil authorities who shall perform or authorize
any illegal marriage ceremony shall be punished in
accordance with the provisions of the Marriage Law.
Title Thirteen
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Chapter One
LIBEL
Section One. — Definitions, forms, and punishment of
this crime.
Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is 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 dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one
who is dead.
the course of official proceedings. — The penalty of
arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to 2,000 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor or
manager or a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall
publish facts connected with the private life of another
and offensive to the honor, virtue and reputation of
said person, even though said publication be made in
connection with or under the pretext that it is
necessary in the narration of any judicial or
administrative proceedings wherein such facts have
been mentioned.
Art. 358. Slander. — Oral defamation shall be punished
by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious
and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be
arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
Art. 359. Slander by deed. — The penalty of arresto
mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in
its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000
pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall
perform any act not included and punished in this title,
which shall cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon
another person. If said act is not of a serious nature,
the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not exceeding
200 pesos.

Forms of libel:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Written defamation
Oral defamation
Slander by deed
Defamatory acts
Elements of libel:
1.
There must be an imputation or allegation of a
crime, or a vice of defect, real or imaginary, or any
act or omission, condition, status or circumstance
which tend to dishonor or discredit a natural or
juridical person.
2.
3.

4.
That there must be a publication of these
imputation;
The identity of the person defamed must be
established or identified;

The existence of malice.

Identity of the person - must be identified, not necessary

that the person must be named. It suffices that the person
is described and identifiable by a third person.
Malice - malice is presumed as a rule for every statements
made. However in defamatory statements, if the offender
cannot state any good intention for stating defamatory
statements, the law presumes malice.
Prosecution need not prove malice because the law
Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. — 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 proceedings 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. Publication – satisfied the moment that a third person has
heard or read the libelous statement, even if the person
Art. 355. Libel means by writings or similar means. — A pertained has not read it. So the basis is that a third person
libel committed by means of writing, printing, has heard or read the libelous statement.
lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, painting,
theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition,
or any similar means, shall be punished by
prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000
pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action which
may be brought by the offended party.

Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present

such publication for a compensation. — The penalty of
arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000 pesos,
or both, shall be imposed upon any person who
threatens another to publish a libel concerning him or
the parents, spouse, child, or other members of the
family of the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to
prevent the publication of such libel for a
compensation or money consideration.
presumes malice. This is MALICE IN LAW.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2

Art. 360. Persons responsible. — Any person who shall

Malice in fact - refers to privilege in communication, refers to publish, exhibit, or cause the publication or exhibition
private communication, reports, or any acts performed by a of any defamation in writing or by similar means, shall
public officer. In this case the law does not presumes be responsible for the same.
malice. Malice must be proven by the prosecution otherwise there The author or editor of a book or pamphlet, or the
would be acquittal
editor or business manager of a daily newspaper,
magazine or serial publication, shall be responsible for
Libel can be committed through the following:
1. Writing the defamations contained therein to the same extent as
2. Printing if he were the author thereof.
3. Lithography The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of
4. Engraving written defamations as provided for in this chapter,
5. Radio shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the
6. Phonograph
7. Painting court of first instance of the province or city where the
8. Theatrical exhibition libelous article is printed and first published or where
9. Cinematographic exhibition any of the offended parties actually resides at the time
10. Or any similar means of the commission of the offense: Provided, however,
That where one of the offended parties is a public officer
whose office is in the City of Manila at the time of the
commission of the offense, the action shall be filed in
the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, or of
the city or province where the libelous article is printed
and first published, and in case such public officer does
not hold office in the City of Manila, the action shall be
filed in the Court of First Instance of the province or city
where he held office at the time of the commission of
the offense or where the libelous article is printed and
first published and in case one of the offended parties is
a private individual, the action shall be filed in the Court
of First Instance of the province or city where he
actually resides at the time of the commission of the
offense or where the libelous matter is printed and first
published: Provided, further, That the civil action shall
be filed in the same court where the criminal action is
filed and vice versa: Provided, furthermore, That the
court where the criminal action or civil action for
damages is first filed, shall acquire jurisdiction to the
exclusion of other courts: And, provided, finally, That
this amendment shall not apply to cases of written
defamations, the civil and/or criminal actions which
have been filed in court at the time of the effectivity of
this law.
Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written
defamations as provided for in the chapter shall be
conducted by the provincial or city fiscal of the province
or city, or by the municipal court of the city orcapital of
  If libel is committed, the liability is prision correctional.
 TV is within the phrase any similar means.
 If amplifier or microphone was used for
everyone to hear, the crime committed is slander
or oral defamation, but not libel.
Venue: RPC provides that even if the crime is prision
correccional, it must be filed before the RTC where the
article was printed or first published, or RTC where any of
the offended party is residing. Note that this is a
substantive law. It is not found in the Rules of Court
If the offended party is a public officer and is working in
Manila, it must be filed before RTC of Manila or where the
article was first published. If the public officer is not working
in Manila, it shall be filed in the RTC where he is working at
the time of the commission of the offense or where the
libelous article was printed or was first published.
If private individual is the offended party, RTC of the place
where the private individual resides at the time of the actual
commission of the offense or where the libelous material
was published
ORAL DEFAMATION/SLANDER

1. Grave oral defamation - when serious and insulting

and nature.
Factors to consider: not only the grammar and meaning,
but also the:
a. Personal relations of the accused and the offended party
b. Facts and Circumstances surrounding the case
c. Social standing and position of the offended party.
  PUTANG INA MO is not a slanderous remark; it
is merely an expression of the Filipino People.
(Pader vs People)
2. Simple slander
Instances:
SLANDER BY DEED
Slander by deed- refers to acts not words, with the intent to
defame the person. It can also be (a)serious, grave slander
by deed, or (b) simple slander by deed.
 A priest was slapped by a person, serious
slander by deed
Section Two. — General provisions
Art. 361. Proof of the truth. — In every criminal
prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in
evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter
charged as libelous is true, and, moreover, that it was
published with good motives and for justifiable ends,
the defendants shall be acquitted.
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or omission
not constituting a crime shall not be admitted, unless
the imputation shall have been made against
Government employees with respect to facts related to
the discharge of their official duties.
In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the
imputation made by him, he shall be acquitted.
 CRIMINAL LAW 2
Art. 362. Libelous remarks. — Libelous remarks or
comments connected with the matter privileged under
the provisions of Article 354, if made with malice, shall
not exempt the author thereof nor the editor or
managing editor of a newspaper from criminal liability.
Chapter Two
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
Art. 363. Incriminating innocent person. — Any person
who, by any act not constituting perjury, shall directly
incriminate or impute to an innocent person the
commission of a crime, shall be punished by arresto
menor.
Act of directly incriminating or imputes to an innocent
person the commission of the crime. It is necessary that it
must not be made on an affidavit, because if it is through
an affidavit, it will be perjury. It will only arise if it will
not amount to (a) perjury or (b) sec 29 of RA 9165
Sample problem
 A’s ballpen was lost. B took it and placed it in the
bag of C so that C will be liable for theft. B
committed incriminating innocent person.
 In the case of dangerous drugs, the law that will
govern is sec 29 of RA 9165, or planting of
evidence. Person found guilty of planting
evidence, regardless of quantity or purity of the
dangerous drugs shall suffer the penalty of death.
damages to three times such value, but which shall in no
case be less than twenty-five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall
be imposed upon any person who, by simple imprudence or
negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if done
maliciously, would have constituted a light felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall
exercise their sound discretion, without regard to the
rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be
applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to
or lower than those provided in the first two
paragraphs of this article, in which case the court shall
impose the penalty next lower in degree than that
which should be imposed in the period which they may
deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, to death of a person
shall be caused, in which case the defendant shall be
punished by prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without
malice, doing or falling to do an act from which material
damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of
precaution on the part of the person performing of
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 in which the damage impending
to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly
manifest.
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for
in this article shall be imposed upon the offender who
fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such help
as may be in this hand to give. (As amended by R.A.
1790, approved June 21, 1957).
Art. 364. Intriguing against honor. — The penalty of
arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be
imposed for any intrigue which has for its principal
purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of a person.

Title Fourteen
QUASI-OFFENSES
Sole Chapter
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person
who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act
which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave
felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its medium
period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony,
the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium periods shall be imposed; if it would have
constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor
in its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence,
shall commit an act which would otherwise constitute a
grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor
in its medium and maximum periods; if it would have
constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article
shall have only resulted in damage to the property of
another, the offender shall be punished by a fine
ranging from an amount equal to the value of said
Take note of the case of Ivler vs Modesto.
Reckless imprudence or negligence is the crime itself.
Hence, once committed or acquitted of a specific act of
reckless imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted
again for that same act. For the essence of the quasi
offense of criminal negligence under Art 365 of the RPC
lies in the execution of an imprudent or negligent act that if
intentionally done, would be punishable as a felony. The
law penalizes thus the negligent or careless act, not the
result thereof. The gravity of the consequence is only taken
into account to determine the penalty; it does not qualify
the substance of the offense. And, as the careless act is
single, whether the injurious result should affect one person
or several persons, the offense (criminal negligence)
remains one and the same, and cannot be split into
different crimes and prosecutions.
1st case: reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical
injuries
2nd case: reckless imprudence resulting to homicide and
damage to property
CRIMINAL LAW 2



One quasi-offense cannot give rise to another
quasi-offense.
Note simple negligence is not a means to commit
a crime. They are crimes by themselves.
(2) The above acts would impair the employee's
rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
(3) The above acts would result in an intimidating,

hostile, or offensive environment for the employee.

R.A 9995 Anti-Voyeurism Law
(b) In an education or training environment, sexual
harassment is committed:
(1) Against one who is under the care, custody or
supervision of the offender;
Acts Punished:
a.
Taking photo or video coverage of a person or a
group of persons performing sexual act or any
similar activity or to capture an image of a private
area of a person such as the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks,
or female breasts without the consent of the
persons involved and under circumstances in
which the person/s has/have a reasonable
expectation of privacy
(2) Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the
offender;
(3) When the sexual favor is made a condition to
the giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
honors and scholarships, or the payment of a
stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges, or
consideration; or
b.

c.

d.
To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or
reproduced such photo or video or recording of
sexual act or any similar activity with or without
consideration
To sell or distribute or to cause to be sold or
distributed , such photo or video or recording of
sexual act, whether the original copy or
reproduction thereof;
To publish or broadcast, or to cause to be
published or broadcast whether in print or
broadcast media, or show or exhibit the photo or
video coverage or recordings of such sexual act or
any similar activity through VCD/DVDV, internet,
cellular phones and other similar means or device.
(4) When the sexual advances result in an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment for
the student, trainee or apprentice.

Any person who directs or induces another to commit any

act of sexual harassment as herein defined, or who
cooperates in the commission thereof by another without
which it would not have been committed, shall also be held liable under this Act.

Sample problem:
A and B are having sex. B proposed to video their sexual
act to which A consented. There is no crime. However, if B
later on reproduced the video, B is still liable.
Penalty: imprisonment of not less than 3 years but not
more than 7 years AND fine of not less than 100k but not

more than 500k, or both at the discretion of the court.

RA 7877 Anti-Sexual Harassment Act

Definition of Work, Education, or Training Related Sexual
Harrassment
- Committed by an employer, employee, manager,
supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having
authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a
work or training or education environment, demands,
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the
other, regardless of whether the demand, request or
requirement for submission is accepted by the object of
said Act.
(a) In a work-related or employment environment, sexual
harassment is committed when:
(1) The sexual favor is made as a condition in the
hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of said individual, or in
granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or
the refusal to grant the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating or classifying the employee
which in any way would discriminate, deprive
ordiminish employment opportunities or otherwise
adversely affect said employee;