UNIVERSITY OF MAKATI

SCHOOL OF LAW

COURSE OUTLINE IN CRIMINAL LAW 1

First Semester, AY 2018-2019

Renato M. Pambid

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This three-unit course is designed to provide law students with insights into
the basic concepts, principles and elements of criminal law as provided for in Book I
(Articles 1-113) of the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815), as amended, and related
penal laws. There will be discussions on the basic concepts of felonies, penalties and
criminal/civil liability arising from felonies.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

1. Active Participation in Class Discussions/ Quizzes (30%)

2. Mid-Term Examination (30%)
3. Final Examination (40%)

BASIC REFERENCES

The Revised Penal Code, Book I (L. B. Reyes)

Cases on Criminal Law decided by the Supreme Court
Additional cases and laws may be assigned

COURSE OUTLINE

INTRODUCTION

A. Course Guidelines, Overview and Administrative Concerns

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW

A. Definitions
 2

1. Criminal law

Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of
their nature, and provides for their punishment. [Reyes, supra, at 1, citing 12
Cyc. 129]

It is that branch of public substantive law which defines offenses and

prescribes their penalties. It is substantive because it defines the state’s right to
inflict punishment and the liability of the offenders. It is public law because it
deals with the relation of the individual with the state.

2. Crime

Crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or

commanding it. [Reyes, supra, at 1, citing I Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Rawle’s
Third Revision, 729]

3. Sources of Philippine criminal law

a. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) and amendments

thereto
b. Special criminal laws
c. Penal provisions in other laws
d. Local ordinances

4. RPC, art. 5, 21

B. State authority to punish crimes

1. Sources
a. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 5
b. Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1
c. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 1
d. Cases:
(i) People v. Santiago, 43 Phil. 120 (1922)
(ii) United States v. Pablo, 35 Phil. 94 (1916)

2. Limitations

a. Const. (1987), art. III, secs. 1, 14, 18, 19, 20, 22

b. Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115
c. Civil Code, art. 2
d. Cases:
(i) Pesigan v. Angeles, 129 SCRA 174 (1984)
 3

(ii) Tañada v. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985)

Ex-post facto law

Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22
(iii) In re. Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., 35 SCRA
429 (1970)
(iv) People v. Villaraza, 81 SCRA 95 (1978)
(v) U.S. v. Diaz-Conde, 42 Phil. 766 (1922)
(vi) People of the Philippines vs. Roman Derilo
et al., G.R. No. 117818, April 18, 1997

Bill of attainder
Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22
(vii) People v. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 (1972)

C. Characteristics of criminal law

1. General

a. Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1

b. Civil Code, art. 14
c. Agreement Between the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines and the Government
of the United States of America Regarding the
Treatment of United States Armed Forces
Visiting the Philippines, 10 February 1998
(Visiting Forces Agreement), art. V
d. Republic Act No. 75
e. Republic Act No. 7055
Cf. Pres. Decree No. 1850; R.A. 6975
f. Cases:
(i) United States v. Sweet, 1 Phil. 18 (1901)
(ii) Raquiza v. Bradford, 75 Phil. 50 (1945)
(iii) Liang v. People, 323 SCRA 692 (2000)
Read also Annotation on “Various
Categories of Diplomatic Immunity from
Local Jurisdiction” in 323 SCRA 699-715 (2000)
(iv) Schneckenburger v. Moran, 63 Phil. 249
(1936)

2. Territorial

a. RPC, art. 2
b. Const. (1987), art. I
c. Visiting Forces Agreement, art. V
 4

d. Cases:
(i) United States v. Bull, 15 Phil. 7 (1910)
(ii) People v. Look Chaw, 18 Phil. 573 (1910)
(iii) United States v. Ah Sing, 36 Phil. 978
(1917)
(iv) People v. Lo-lo & Saraw, 43 Phil. 19 (1922)
(v) People v. Wong Cheng, 46 Phil. 729 (1922)
(vi) Miquiabas v. Commanding General, 80
Phil. 262 (1948)
(vii) Suzette Nicolas vs. Alberto Romulo, G.R. No. 175888,
February 11, 2009

3. Prospective

a. RPC, arts. 1, 21, 22

A person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within

a period of ten (10) years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said
crimes a third time or oftener. [ Revised Penal Code, art. 62(5), as
amended by Rep. Act No. 7659, sec. 23]

b. Civil Code, art. 4

c. Cases:

(i) Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA

420 (1971)
(ii) In Re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., supra
(iii) People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389, (1983)
(iv) People v. Ringor, 320 SCRA 342 (1999)
(v) People v. Pimentel, 288 SCRA 542 (1998)
(vi) See also People v. Lacson, 382 SCRA 365
(2002), 400 SCRA 267 (2003), and 413
SCRA 20 (2003) for further reference
(vii) Joemar Ortega vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No.
151085, August 20, 2008

D. Construction/Interpretation of Penal Laws

1. Strict construction against the State and liberally in favor of the

accused
 5

Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 14(2)

2. Spanish text of the Revised Penal Code prevails over its English
transaction
3. Retroactive application if favorable to the accused
RPC, art. 22
4. Prescribed, but undeserved, penalties,
RPC, art. 5, 2nd par.
5. Effects of repeal/amendment of penal law
a. Tuates v. Bersamin, G.R. No. 138962, 4 October
2002
b. Benedicto v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125359, 4
September 2001
c. People v. Garcia, 85 Phil. 651 (1950)

II. FELONIES AND CRIMINAL LIABILITY

A. Felonies

1. Definition/Elements, RPC, art. 3

a. Act
People v. Gonzales, 183 SCRA 309 (1990)
b. Omission
(i) RPC, art. 116, 137, 208, 213(2)(b), 223,
234, 275(1)
(ii) Pres. Decree Nos. 953, 1153
(iii) People v. Sylvestre and Atienza, 56 Phil.
353 (1931)
c. Punishable by the Revised Penal Code
(i). Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege

A familiar maxim in criminal law is “Nullum crimen nulla poena

sine lege” which means “There is no crime where there is no law punishing it.”
[Potenciano Evangelista v. People, G.R. Nos. 108135-36, 14 August 2000]

The maxim Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege has its roots in
history. It is in accordance with both centuries of civil law and common law
tradition. Moreover, it is an indispensable corollary to a regime of liberty
enshrined in our Constitution. It is of the essence then that while anti-social
acts should be penalized, there must be a clear definition of the punishable
offense as well as the penalty that may be imposed - a penalty, to repeat, that
can be fixed by the legislative body, and the legislative body alone. So
constitutionalism mandates, with its stress on jurisdictio rather than
guvernaculum. The judiciary as the dispenser of justice through law must be
 6

aware of the limitation on its own power. [Concurring Opinion, Justice

Fernando, People v. Cabural, G.R. No. 34105, 4 February 1983]

(ii) RPC, art. 3, 5, 1st par., sec. 21

2. How committed
RPC, art. 3, 365

a. Dolo
(i) Elements
(ii) Presumption of intent
United States v. Apostol, 14 Phil. 92 (1909)
United States v. Catolico, 18 Phil. 504
(1911)
(iii) General and specific intent
People v. Puno, 219 SCRA 85 (1993)
People v. Delim, 396 SCRA 386 (2003)
(iv) Intent and Motive
People v. Temblor, 161 SCRA 623 (1988)
People v. Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988)
People v. Delim, supra
(v) Mistake of fact
United States v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil. 488
(1910)
People v. Oanis, 74 Phil. 257 (1943)

b. Culpa
(i) Elements
People v. Carmen, 355 SCRA 267 (2001)
(ii) Distinguished from dolo
People v. Pugay, 167 SCRA 439 (1988)

B. Crimes defined and penalized by special laws

1. Crimes Mala in se and Mala prohibita

a. Lozano v. Martinez, 146 SCRA 323 (1986)

b. Magno v. Court of Appeals, 210 SCRA 475 (1992)
Read also Annotation, “A Theory of Crime and
Punishment” David Nitafan, 210 SCRA 483 (1992)
c. United States v. Go Chico, 14 Phil. 128 (1909)

2. Relation of RPC to special laws

a. RPC, art. 10
 7

b. Ladonga v. People, 451 SCRA 673 (2005)

C. Criminal Liability

1. How incurred
a. Wrongful act done be different from what was
intended
(i) RPC, art. 14(1), 13(3), 48, 49, 14(3)
(ii) United States v. Brobst, 14 Phil. 310 (1909)
(iii) People v. Mananquil, 132 SCRA 196 (1984)
(iv) People v. Iligan, 191 SCRA 643 (1990)
(v) People v. Sabalones, 294 SCRA 751 (1998)
(vi) People v. Guillen, 85 Phil. 307 (1950)
(vii) People v. Albuquerque, 59 Phil. 150 (1933)
(viii) Bataclan v. Medina, 102 Phil. 181 (1957)

b. Impossible crimes
(i) RPC, art. 4(2), 59
(ii) People v. Balmores, 85 Phil. 493 (1950)
(iii) Intod v. Court of Appeals, 215 SCRA 52 (1992)

2. Stages of commission

a. Definitions
(i) RPC, art. 6 and 7
(ii) United States v. Eduave, 36 Phil. 209
(1917)
(iii) People v. Enriquez, 281 SCRA 103 (1997)
(iv) People v. Listerio, 335 SCRA 40 (2000)

b. Specific felonies
(i) Rape
People v. Erinia, 50 Phil. 998 (1927)
People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil. 980 (1925)
People v. Orita, 184 SCRA 105 (1990)
People v. Campuhan, 329 SCRA 270 (2000)
(ii) Theft
United States v. Adiao, 38 Phil. 754 (1918)
People v. Dino, 45 O.G. 3446
Aristotel Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No.
160188, 21 June 2007
(iii) Robbery
People v. Lamahang, 61 Phil. 703 (1935)
People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671 (1990)
(iv) Murder
 8

People v. Borinaga, 55 Phil. 433 (1930)

People v. Sy, 94 Phil. 885 (1954)
People v. Trinidad, 169 SCRA 51 (1989)
People v. Ravelo, 202 SCRA 655 (1991)
(v) Homicide
People v. Kalalo, 59 Phil. 715 (1934)

c. Penalties to be imposed in relation to stages of

commission
RPC, art. 6, 7, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 and 57

3. Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony

a. RPC, art. 8, 115, 136, 141, 186, 306
b. People v. Peralta, 25 SCRA 759 (1968)
c. United States v. Bautista, 6 Phil. 581 (1906)

4. Multiple offenders
a. Recidivism, RPC, art. 14(9)
b. Habituality (Reiteracion), RPC, art. 14(10)
c. Quasi-Recidivism, RPC, art. 160
d. Habitual Delinquency, RPC, art. 62(5)

5. Classification of felonies, RPC, art. 7, 9

III. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY

A. Justifying Circumstances RPC, art. 11

1. Self-defense
People v. Boholst-Caballero, 61 SCRA 180 (1974)
People v. Alconga, 78 Phil. 366 (1947)
United States v. Mack, 8 Phil. 701 (1907)
People v. Sumicad, 56 Phil. 643 (1932)
People v. Genosa, 419 SCRA 537 (2004)
Republic Act No. 9262, sec. 3 & 26

2. Defense of honor
People v. Luague, 62 Phil. 504 (1935)
People v. De la Cruz, 61 Phil. 344 (1935)
People v. Jaurigue, 76 Phil. 174 (1946)

3. Defense of property
People v. Apolinar, 38 OG 2870
United States v. Bumanglag, 14 Phil. 644 (1909)
 9

People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389 (1983)

4. Defense of relative
United States v. Esmedia, 17 Phil. 260 (1910)

5. Avoidance of a greater evil

People v. Norma Hernandez, 55 OG 8465
Ty v. People, 439 SCRA 220 (2004)

6. Fulfillment of duty
People v. Delima, 46 Phil. 738 (1922)
People v. Belbes, 334 SCRA 161 (2000)

7. Lawful order of superior

People v. Beronilla, 96 Phil. 566 (1955)

B. Exempting Circumstances RPC, art. 12

1. Insanity
People v. Bonoan, 64 Phil. 87 (1937)
People v. Ambal, 100 SCRA 325 (1980)
People v. Puno, 105 SCRA 151 (1981)
People v. Dungo, 199 SCRA 860 (1991)
People v. Yam-id, 308 SCRA 651 (1999)
People v. Valledor, 383 SCRA 653 (2002)
People v. Belonio, 429 SCRA 579 (2004)

2. Somnabulism
People v. Taneo, 58 Phil. 255 (1933)

3. Minority
Republic Act No. 9344, as amended
RPC, art. 80
Pres. Decree No. 603, as amended
Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M. No. 02-
1-18-SC)
People v. Doquena, 68 Phil. 580 (1939)
People v. Navarro, 51 OG 4062
Jose v. People, 448 SCRA 116 (2005)
People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239, 16 March 2011
People v. Arpon, G.R. No. 183563, 14 December 2011

4. Accident
People v. Bindoy, 56 Phil. 15 (1931)
U.S. v. Tanedo, 15 Phil. 196 (1910)
 10

Pomoy v. People, 439 SCRA 439 (2004)

5. Irresistible force/uncontrollable fear

United States v. Caballeros, 4 Phil. 350 (1905)
United States v. Exaltacion, 3 Phil. 339 (1904)

6. Insuperable cause
U.S. v. Vicentillo, 19 Phil. 118 (1911)
People v. Bandian, 63 Phil. 530 (1936)

C. Mitigating Circumstances, RPC, art. 13

1. Lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong

People v. Ural, 56 SCRA 138 (1974)

2. Sufficient provocation
People v. Leonor, 305 SCRA 285

3. Immediate vindication of a grave offense

United States v. Ampar, 37 Phil. 201 (1917)
People v. Pajares, 210 SCRA 237 (1992)

3. Passion or obfuscation
United States v. Hicks, 14 Phil. 217 (1909)
United States v. De la Cruz, 22 Phil. 429 (1912)

4. Illness
People v. Javier, 311 SCRA 576 (1999)

5. Analogous circumstances
Canta v. People, 353 SCRA 250 (2001)

D. Aggravating Circumstances, RPC, art. 14

1. Insult to public authorities

People v. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981)

2. Dwelling
People v. Daniel, 86 SCRA 511 (1978)

3. Nighttime/Disguise
People v. Bermas, 309 SCRA 741 (1999)

4. Evident premeditation
United States v. Manalinde, 14 Phil. 77 (1909)
 11

5. Treachery
People v. Sangalang, 58 SCRA 737 (1974)

6. Ignominy
People v. Torrefiel, 45 OG 803
People v. Alfanta, 320 SCRA 357 (1999)

E. Alternative Circumstances, RPC, art. 15

1. Intoxication
People v. Camano, 115 SCRA 688 (1982)

F. Absolutory Causes and Similar Situations

1. Instigation and entrapment

People v. Lua Chu, 56 Phil. 44 (1931)
United States v. Phelps, 16 Phil. 440 (1910)

2. Absolutory causes
RPC, art. 6(3), 7, 16, 20, 247, 280, 332, 344

IV. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE

A. In Grave and Less Grave Felonies, RPC, art. 16

1. Principals, RPC, art. 17

a. Principals by direct participation
United States v. Diris, 26 Phil. 133 (1918)
b. Principals by inducement
People v. Ong Chiat Lay, 60 Phil. 788 (1934)
United States v. Indanan, 24 Phil. 203 (1913)
People v. Kichi Omine, 61 Phil. 609 (1935)
c. Principals by indispensable cooperation
People v. Montealegre, 161 SCRA 700 (1988)
People v. Simbra, 117 SCRA 242 (1982)

2. Accomplices
a. RPC, art. 18
b. People v. Nierra, 96 Phil. 1 (1980)
People v. Doble, 114 SCRA 131 (1982)
People v. Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632 (1991)

3. Accessories
a. RPC, art. 19 and 20
 12

b. People v. Talingdan, 84 SCRA 19 (1978)

Vino v. People, 178 SCRA 626 (1989)
c. Pres. Decree Nos. 1612 and 1829

B. In Light Felonies, RPC, art. 16

V. PENALTIES
RPC, art. 21-88

A. General Principles

1. Constitutional limitations
Const., art. III, sec. 1, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, & 22
a. No ex post facto law and bill of attainder
b. Due process
c. No cruel and inhuman punishment

2. Prospectivity
RPC, art. 1, 21, 22, Civil Code, art. 4

B. Purposes

C. Penalties that may be imposed

RPC, art. 21, 24, 25

1. Death penalty
a. Const., art. III, sec. 19(1)
b. Republic Act No. 9346
c. Republic Act No. 7659
d. People v. Echegaray, 267 SCRA 682

D. Classification RPC, art. 25, 26

E. Duration and Effect RPC, art. 27 to 45

1. Reclusion perpetua v. Life imprisonment

2. Destierro
3. Preventive imprisonment RPC, art. 29
4. Civil interdiction RPC, art. 34
5. Bond to keep the peace RPC, art. 35
6. Subsidiary penalty RPC, art. 39

F. Application
 13

1. Rules for the application of penalties on principals,

accomplices and accessories
RPC, art. 46, 50 to 57

2. Rules for graduating penalties

RPC, art. 61 to 65, 71

3. Complex crimes and Special complex crimes

a. RPC, art. 48
b. Enrile v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217
c. Napolis v. Court of Appeals, 43 SCRA 301
d. People v. Toling, 62 SCRA 17
e. People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671
f. People v. Valdez, 304 SCRA 611

4. Continued crime and Continuing crime

a. People v. De Leon, 49 Phil 437

5. Penalties in special cases

RPC, art. 48, 49, 58, 59, 60, 67, 68, 69

6. Three-fold rule
RPC, art. 70

7. Indeterminate Sentence Law

a. Act 4103, as amended
b. People v. Simon, G.R. No. 930280, 29 July 1994,
234 SCRA 555 (1994)
c. Rosa Lim v. People, G.R. No. 130038, 18
September 2000
d. People v. Gabres, 267 SCRA 581, 595-596 (1997)
e. People v. Lampaza, 319 SCRA 112 (1999)
f. People v. Oyanib, G.R. No. 130634-35, 12 March
2001
g. People v. Ducosin, 59 Phil. 109 (1933)
h. People v. Formigones, 87 Phil. 658 (1950)

G. Execution and Service

1. Probation
a. Pres. Decree No. 968, as amended
b. Francisco v. Court of Appeals, 243 SCRA 384
(1995)
c. Yusi v. Morales, 121 SCRA 854 (1983)
 14

d. Cal v. Court of Appeals, 251 SCRA 523 (1995)

e. Llamado v. Court of Appeals, 174 SCRA 566 (1989)
f. Baclayon v. Mutia, 129 SCRA 148, 154 (1984)
g. Bala v. Martinez, 181 SCRA 459 (1990)
h. Salgado v. Court of Appeals, 189 SCRA 304 (1990)

2. Children in conflict with the law

VI. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

RPC, art. 89-99

A. Total Extinction
RPC, art. 89

1. Death of the convict

a. People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994)
b. People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 190610, 25 April
2012

2. Service of the sentence

3. Amnesty
Const., art. VII, sec. 19
People v. Patriarca, G.R. No. 135547, 29 September
2000
People v. Casido, G.R. No. 116512, 7 March 1997
Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, 82 Phil. 642 (1949)

4. Absolute pardon
Const., art. VII, sec. 19
Flora v. Oximana, G.R. No. 19745, 31 January 1964
Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, supra
Pelobello v. Palatino, G.R. No. 48100, 20 June 1941
RPC, art. 23, 344

5. Prescription of the crime

RPC, art. 90 and 91
Act No. 3326

6. Prescription of the penalty

RPC, art. 92 and 93

7. Marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article

344 of the RPC
 15

B. Partial Extinction
RPC, art. 94

1. Conditional pardon
RPC, art. 95
In re. Antonio Infante, G.R. No. 4164, 12 December
1952

2. Commutation of the sentence

RPC, art. 96

3. Good conduct allowances

RPC, art. 97, 98 and 99

VII. CIVIL LIABILITY

RPC, art. 100-113
Chua v. Court of Appeals, 443 SCRA 142 (2004)

A. Persons civilly liable

1. Carpio v. Doroja, 180 SCRA 1(1989)

2. Basilio v. Court of Appeals, 328 SCRA 341 (2000)
3. Philippine Rabbit v. Court of Appeals, 427 SCRA 526 (2004)
4. Quinto v. Andres, 453 SCRA 511 (2005)

B. What civil liability includes

1. Heirs of Raymundo Castro v. Bustos, 27 SCRA 327

(1969)

C. Extinction of civil liability

1. People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994)