Criminal Law 1

QUIZ 1 THIRD TRI 2019-2020

1. Jessie G., self-proclaimed God’s gift to women got married to Harrieth before the embassy of
the Philippines located in Singapore. After 3 years of blissful marriage, Jessie couldn’t resist the
temptation of being close to other women. Finally, Jessie met one Stephanie Lu, a gorgeous
Singaporean and immediately fell in love with her. God’s gift to women Jessie G. asked
Stephanie to marry him and thus, in a lavish Singaporean ceremony they celebrated their
wedding. As hell hath no fury in a woman scorned, Harrieth left Singapore and filed a case of
bigamy against Jessie. Will the case prosper? Why?

2. State and distinguish the rules applied and observed in crimes committed in foreign vessels?

3. What is an ex post facto law?

4. In an apparent case of double sale of property, the second buyer B filed a case against the
seller C for estafa for allegedly selling to B knowing fully well that she had already sold the same
to a third party. In both the trial court and the by the CA, she was found guilty of estafa. C,
before the Supreme Court filed an appeal and maintains her innocence and alleging that she was
found guilty of a crime not included in the charges/information against her. Given the state of of
the case, one showing her guilt and the other her innocence, how would you decide on her case,
if you were the assigned Supreme Court judge to decide on the case?

5. Arnold met and married Jem in Makati City. Two years after he met Naomi whom he had a
whirlwind romance and he later on married in Baguio City. Arnold however merely stayed with
Naomi twice or thrice a year which proompted Naoimi to investigate and thereafter learned that
Arnold had a previous marriage, thus a case for Bigamy was filed and Arnold was convicted for
the said crime. On appeal, Arnold maintains his innocence, and alleges that the trial court erred
as he entered the second marriage in good faith and without malicious intent, hence he cannot be
made liable in the absence of malice on his part.

A. What are the elements of crimes committed by Dolo and by Culpa?

B. Decide with justification the case of Arnold.

6. Four counts of rape was filed against Mark B. and was convicted by the trial court in all four
counts. Before the Supreme court, Mark alleges that the trial court erred and that his guilt was not
proved beyond reasonable doubt more specifically on the fourth case as the alleged rape was not
consummated. If in fact there was a crime committed, it was merely acts of lasciviousness.The
prosecution on the other hand maintains that he is guilty, as there was showing of preparatory
acts in the attempt to execute a plan of rape, thus he is guilty of rape in its attempted stage.

A. State and distinguish the stages of execution as discussed in criminal law.

B. Based on the case assigned, People vs. Lizada, decide the case.

Prepared by RJDSOLANO
2019-2020 Third trimester