CARLA MARTINEZ | JD

CRIMINAL LAW 1 | 1st YEAR 2ND SEM | 2020

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

1. Memorize by heart - Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15; no excuses here;
2. For Justifying Circumstances:
a. Is there civil liability?
As provided by the penal law, Article 11 which provides the justifying circumstances do not have civil
liability as the act performed does not constitute a crime. However, the rule is not absolute. There is an
exemption which is the fourth circumstance which provides that any person who, in order to avoid an evil
or injury, does not act which causes damage to another. Here, the civil liability is borne by the person
benefited.

b. Who has the burden of proof to prove justifying circumstances and why.
The burden in proving the justifying circumstance is vested on the defense and incumbent upon the
accused in order to avoid criminal liability.

c. What are the rights included in self defense, defense of relatives and defense of strangers;
 Right to life
 Right to property acquired by us
 Right to honor

d. Meaning and kinds of unlawful aggression; retaliation; US vs Laurel and People vs Cabungcal; their
differences; People vs Cajurao (p. 162) and People vs Arellano (p. 163); People vs Alconga
 Unlawful Aggression – is equivalent to assault or at least threatened assault of an immediate or
imminent kind. There is unlawful aggression when the peril to one’s life, limb or right is either
actual or imminent. There must be actual physical force or use of weapon. It cannot consist in
oral threats or mere threatening stance or posture.
o Peril to one’s life,
o ~ limb; or
o ~ right
 Retaliation – refers to the counter attack given by the accused. Retaliation is different from self
defense as; as in the former, the aggression that was begun by the injured party has ceased to
exist while in the latter, the unlawful aggression was still existing.
Distinguish the cases of:
 US v Laurel -ACTUAL
o Here, Laurel stole a kiss from Concepcion Lat. Two nights after the incident, Laurel was
approached by Exequiel (sweetheart of Concepcion Lat) and asked why he kissed
Concepcion and told him he should have not done it; then, Exequiel gave Laurel a fist
blow, worried that Exequiel might give him another blows, he picked a pocket knife and
stabbed Exequiel in the left side of his breast.
o The defensive act by laurel was justified as there was unlawful aggression, reasonable
necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it and lack of sufficient provocation
on the part of Laurel. The unlawful aggression here was actually used by physical force
against the victim.
 People v Cabungcal – IMMINENT
o Here, the accused invited several properties for a picnic in a fishery on his property in
Infanta, Tayabas. In the afternoon, visitors returned in two boats. There were nine
persons in the boat steered by the accused, majority of them were women. Upon
reaching a place of great depth, the deceased rocked the boat and started to take the
water in. After several warnings by the accused, the deceased continued to rock the
boat which drew scare to the passengers, which led the accused to struck the deceased
with his oar. The deceased fell into the water and was submerged, but a little while after
appeared on the surface, having grasped the side of the boat. The deceased threatened
that he was going to capsize the boat and started to move it; the accused struck him
again with the same oar and submerged the deceased and died.
o Here, the deceased put the lives of the boat passenger into imminent danger after
rocking the boat in the a place of great depth. The unlawful aggression was imminent by
first rocking the boat and subsequently threatening to capsize the boat and move it
 thereafter. If not for the action of the accused, the boat would have sunk and take the
lives of many including the family of the accused. The action of the accused is justified.
o In US vs. Laurel, the unlawful aggression by Exequiel was in actual using physical
force against Laurel. While, in People vs. Cabungcal, the unlawful aggression was
the action of accused by putting the lives of the passenger of the boat in danger.

 People vs Cacjurao (p162)

o
 People v Arellano

 People v Alconga

o There were two stages of fight. First, the deceased is the unlawful aggressor being the
one who repeatedly make blows to the deceased. Here, Alconga can invoke self-
defense. However, the deceased sustained several wounds and ran away. The
accused, Alconga, being virtually unscathed, followed the deceased and fatally wounded
the deceased. On the second fight, Alconga cannot invoke self-defense as the unlawful
aggression made by the deceased has ceased to exist.
o In a case where the deceased, who appeared to be the first aggressor, ran out bullets
and fled, and the accused pursued him and, after overtaking him, inflicted several
wounds on the posterior side of his body, it was held that in such a situation the accused
should have stayed in his hand, and not having done so he was guilty of homicide.
o However, if it is clear that the purpose of the aggressor in retreating is to take more
advantageous position to insure the success of the attack, the unlawful aggression is
still continuing.

e. What is "stand ground when in the right"; Rationale;

 Where the accused is where he has the right to be, the law does not require him to retreat when
his assailant is rapidly advancing upon him with a deadly weapon.
 The reason for the rule is that if one flees from an aggressor, he runs the risk of being attacked in
the back by the aggressor.

f. Defense of Right to Chastity - People vs De la Cruz and People vs Jaurigue;

 Defense of Right to Chastity on attempt to rape a woman.
o Embracing a woman, touching her private parts and her breasts, and throwing her to the
ground for the purpose of raping her in an uninhabited place when it was twilight,
constitute an attack upon her honor, therefore, an unlawful aggression.
 People v. Dela Cruz
o The accused, woman, was walking home with a party including the deceased, Franciso
Rivera. It was already dark; while far ahead from other people and passing the narrow
path, the deceased caught hold of her breasts, kissed her and touched her private parts.
He then started to throw her down. When the accused felt helpless, she got her pocket
knife and stabbed the deceased.

She was justified in making use of the knife in repelling what she believed to be an
attack upon her honor.

An imperiled woman may kill her offender if that is the only means left for her to protect
her honor from so grave an outrage.

 People v. Jaurigue
o The deceased was courting the accused in vain. One day, the deceased approached
her but the accused refused. Upon refusal, the deceased embraced and kissed her on
account of which the accused gave him fist blows and kicked him. Thereafter, the
accused armed herself a fan knife whenever she went out. One week after, while the
accused is inside the chapel, the deceased sit with her and placed his hand on the
upper part of her thigh. Accused, thereafter, pulled her fan knife and stabbed the
deceased on the neck.
 The means employed by the accused was excessive. The chapel was lighted and there
were several people, including her father as barrio lieutenant. Under the circumstances,
there was and there could be no possibility of her being raped.

The SC apparently considered in this case the existence of unlawful aggression

consisting in the deceased’s placing his hand on the upper thigh of the accused. The
accused was not given the benefit of complete self-defense, because the means
employed was not reasonable. If the accused only gave him the fist blows or kicked him,
she would have been completely justified.

 The difference between Dela Cruz and Jaurigue case is that in the former there was a possibility
of the accused being raped on the circumstances that it was already dark, they are far from other
people, and she was thrown to the ground. While in Jaurigue, the unlawful aggression was
delivered in a well-lit place being accompanied by several people.

g. Defense of Property - People vs Apolinar; People vs Narvaez, GR Nos L-33466-67, April 20, 1983 (read
entire decision); differences between Apolinar and Narvaez;
 People v. Apolinar
o The accused fired on the man carrying a bundle on his shoulder inside his property.
Accused believed that the man had stolen his palay, the accused shouted for him to
stop, but the deceased did not stopped.

Defense of property is not of such importance as right to life, and defense of

property can be invoked as a justifying circumstance only when it is coupled with
an attack on the person of one entrusted with the said property.

 People and Narvaez; GR L-33466-67

o The accused was taking a nap in his house while he was awaken of the noise. His
house was being chiseled as the deceased (Davis and Rubia) and other laborer of Davis
are fencing on the disputed land. The land was allegedly owned by the father of Davis,
but the accused refused. Pending the case on the land ownership, the accused paid
rentals just to avoid remonstrations between them. The afternoon, while the accused
was sleeping, he heard noises and his house was chiseled. After several attempts in
asking the aggressors to talk everything over, Davis did not hear his pleadings and told
his laborers to continue the fencing. Accused fired at Davis with a shotgun; Rubia ran
away to the jeep, knowing that there may be a firearm in the jeep, accused shot Rubia.

The Court finds that there was an established unlawful aggression by the deceased.
However, the cause of action by the accused to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression
was excessive. Accused was given two counts of homicide with mitigating circumstance
as the accused voluntarily surrendered to the authorities after the incident.

 Diffirence bet. Apolinar and Narvaez

o The difference between Apolinar case and Narvaez case is that in the former there was
no established unlawful aggression, as the accused did not even catch the deceased
stealing crops from his property. While in Narvaez case, there was a clear unlawful
aggression shown by Davis and Rubia, as they are about to block the way of accused’s
house and the bodega used for his business from the highway. Clearly, in the latter
there was a defense of right to property, while in the former there was none.

h. Test of reasonableness of the means employed; test applied to ordinary people vs a peace officer
 Whether the means employed is reasonable by the aggressor, his physical condition, character,
size and other circumstances, and those of the person defending himself, and also the place and
occasion of the assault.
 Reasonable necessity of the means employed does not imply material commensurability between
the means of attack and defense, What the law requires is ration equivalence, in the
consideration of which will enter as principal factors the emergency, the imminent danger to
which the person attacked is exposed, and the instinct, more than reason, that moves or impels
the defense, and the proprietary thereof does not depend upon the harm done, but rest upon the
imminent danger of such injury.
 Application: Ordinary people v. Peace officer
 o The peace officer, in the performance of his duty, represents the law which he must
uphold. While the law on self-defense allows a private individual to prevent or repel an
aggression, the duty of a peace officer requires him to overcome his opponent.
o A police officer is not required to afford a person attacking him, the opportunity
for a fair and equal struggle.

i. People vs Del Pilar;

j. Battered Woman Syndrome (RA 9262); Salient points;
 Sec. 26 Battered Woman Syndrome as a defense - Victim-survivors who are found by the courts
to be suffering from battered women syndrome do not incur criminal and civil liability
notwithstanding the absence of any elements for justifying circumstance of self-defense
under RPC.
 A battered woman – a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or
psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do
without concern for her rights. Battered woman include wives of women in any form of intimate
relationship with men.
 In order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple must go through the battering cycle at
least twice.
k. Who are relatives; who are strangers;
 Relatives:
o Spouse
o Ascendants
o Descendants
o Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the same
degrees
o Relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree
 Stranger:
o Basis: the ordinary man would not stand idly by and see his companion killed without
attempting to save his life.
o Any person not included in the enumeration of relatives. Hence, even a close friend or
distant relative is a stranger.

l. Distinguish the 3rd requisites of self defense; defense of relative and defense of stranger;
 Defense of a relative 3rd requisite:
o In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making the defense
had no part therein. This does not mean that the relative defended should give
provocation to the aggressor, This merely states an event which may or may not take
place. There is still a legitimate defense of a relative even if the relative being defended
has given the provocation, provided that the one defending such relative has no part in
the provocation.
o Reason for the rule: That although the provocation prejudices the person who gave it, its
effects do not reach the defender who took no part therein, because the latter was
prompted by some noble or generous sentiment in protecting and saving a relative.

 Defense of a stranger 3rd requisite:

o The person defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
o This Code requires that the defense of a stranger be actuated by a disinterested or
generous motive. The third requisite would be lacking if such person was prompted by
his grudge against the assailant, because the alleged defense of the stranger would be
only a pretext.

m. People vs Ricohermoso;
 When the accused was not avoiding any evil, he cannot invoke the justifying circumstance of
avoidance of a greater evil or injury.
 Here, Pio Ricohermoso with a bolo and Severo Padernal with an axe attacked Geminiano who
was wounded. Nearby, Juan embraced Marianito, Geminiano’s son, who had a gun slung on his
shoulder, and grappled with him. Geminiano died. Pio, Severo and Juan were prosecuted for
murder. Juan cannot invoke the justifying circumstance of avoidance of a greter evil or injury in
explaining his act of preventing Marianito from shooting Pio and Severo. The act of Padernal in
 preventing Marianito de Leon from shooting Pio and Severo was designed to ensure the killing of
Geminiano de Leon without any risk to the assailants.
 Even if Marianito was about to shoot Pio and Severo, his act, being in defense of his father, is not
an evil that could justifiably be avoided by disabling Marianito.

n. Doctrine of Self-Help;
 The instinct of self-preservation will always make one feel that his own safety is of greater
importance than that of another.
o. People vs Delima and People vs Lagata; differences; People vs Bentres; (Fulfillment of duty or lawful
exercise of right of office
 People v. Delima
o Here, a prisoner, Napilon, escaped from the jail where he was serving sentence.
Afterwards, policeman, Felipe Delima, who was looking for him, found the fugitive in the
house of Jorge Alegria. The fugitive was armed with a pointed piece of bamboo in the
shape of lance. The policeman demanded his surrender but the fugitive answered with a
stroke of his lance. The policeman dodged it, and to impose his authority, he fired his
revolver, but the bullet did not hit him. The criminal ran away, without parting with his
weapon. The peace officer went after him and fired again his revolver, this time hitting
and killing him.

The killing was done in the performance of a duty. The deceased was under the
obligation to surrender, and had no right, after evading service of his sentence, to
commit assault and disobedience with a weapon in his hand.

 People v. Lagata
o Shooting of prisoner by guard must be in self-defense or be absolutely necessary to
avoid his escape
o Here, one of the prisoners was missing. So, the guard ordered the others to look for him.
The other prisoners scampered. Guard fired at the two of the prisoners, wounding one
(Abria) and killing the other (Tipace). His reason was to prevent the attempt of the
prisnoers to escape. Clearly, Abria was shot when he was only three meters away from
the guard and the defense has not even shown that Abria attempted to escape. Tipace
was also shot when he was about 4-5 meters away from the guard. Due to
inconsistencies on the testimonies and evidence presented, it is clear that the guard
had absolutely no reason to fire at Tipace. The guard could have fired at him in
self-defense or if absolutely necessary to avoid his escape.

 People v. Bentres
o Doctrine used: No violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an
arrest and the person arrested shall not be subject to any greater restraint than in
necessary for his detention.
o Here, the security guard accosted a thief who had stolen ore in the tunnel of a mining
company. After several orders to stop the thief, the thief continued to flee. To show his
authority, the guard fired 4 times in the air but the thief did not stop even if he died. The
guard fired for the fifth time aiming the leg of the thief, but the bullet hit the thief in the
lumbar region which caused the death of the thief.
o The security guard acted in the performance of his duty, but he exceeded the
fulfillment of his duty by shooting the deceased.

EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Definition; basis; civil liability
 Definition: Exempting circumstances are those grounds for the exemption from punishment
because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the
act voluntary or negligent.
 Basis: The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence of intelligence,
freedom of action, or intent or on the absence of negligence on the part of the accused.
 Civil liability: All circumstances have civil liability except 4 and 7 because the accused performed
lawful activity.
2. Imbecility vs Insanity;
Imbecility Insanity
 Meaning Advanced in age, has a mental Insane
development comparable to that
of children between 2 to 7 years
old.

Deprived completely of reason

discernment or freedom of the
will at the time of committing the
crime.
Criminal Liability Exempt in all cases Generally, yes.

Exceptions: Acted during lucid

interval; accused is not
exempted

a. basis – complete absence of intelligence

b. Burden of proof to prove insanity – is a matter of defense that the accused was insane at the time of the
commission of crime; presumption is always in favor of sanity.
c. Tests of insanity
 That the accused be deprived of reason
 That he acts without the least discernment
 That there be a total deprivation of the freedom of the will

Evidence of insanity:
 Insane at the time preceding the act under prosecution or to the very moment of its
execution
 Presumed to be sane:
o When the evidence points to insanity subsequent to the commission of crime
o When insanity is only occasional/intermittent in nature
o Person who has been adjudged insane, or which has been committed to a
hospital or to an asylum for the insane
d. Coverage of insanity
 Dementia praecox – most common form of psychosis (e.g. homicidal attack)
 Schizophrenia – formerly called dementia praecox; chronic mental disorder characterized by
inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality and often accompanied by hallucinations and
delusions.
- This can be recognizable through odd bizarre behavior apparent in aloofness
or periods of impulsive destructiveness and immature and exaggerated emotionally, often
ambivalently directed.
 Kleptomania – this must be investigated by competent alienist or psychiatrist to determine
whether the impulse to steal is irresistible or not.
 Epilepsy – chronic nervous disease characterized by fits, occurring at intervals, attended by the
conclusive motions of the muscles and loss of consciousness.
 Other cases of lack of intelligence
o Committing a crime while in a dream or somnambulism/sleepwalking
o Hypnotism (debatable)
o Committing a crime while suffering from malignant malaria.

Feeblemindedness not imbecility. Feebleminded can distinguish right from wrong.

Pedophilia not insanity; Pedophilia is a sexual disorder wherein the subject has strong, recurrent and
uncontrollable sexual and physical fantasies about children which he tries to fulfill, especially when there
are no people around.

Amnesia is not a proof of mental condition of the accused, unless it is shown by competent proof
that the accused did not know the nature and quality of his action and it was wrong.

3. Minority
a. Read Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (RA No. 9344), as amended by RA No. 10630
b. Child in conflict with the law – above 15 but below 18 years old;
 c. Discernment – capacity of the child at the commission of the offense to understand the differences
between right and wrong.

Minor is presumed to have acted without discernment. It is incumbent upon the prosecution to
prove that the child acted with discernment

d. Who determines age, rule: Based on RA 10630, a child is fifteen years old on the 15th anniversary of
his birthdate

Age of the child shall be determined according to the ff rules:

(1) Best evidence: original or certified true copy of certificate of live birth
(2) In the absence of the former, authentic documents such as baptismal certificates and school records,
or any pertinent records that shows the date of birth of the child
(3) In the absence of the aforementioned docs, the testimony of the child, testimony of a member of the
family related to the child by affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to testify on matters respecting
pedigree such as the exact age or date of birth of the child.

e. Research on effects if child is:

 15yrs and under -absolute irresponsibility; no criminal liability; shall be surrendered to the
parents or if no parents to the closest relative; the child shall also undergo community-
intervention program
 15 yrs and 1 day to under 18 yrs acted with or without discernment
o With Discernment: subject to appropriate proceedings in accordance with RA 10630.
Child in conflict with the law is required to undergo diversion after he/she is found
responsible for an offense without resorting to formal court proceedings.

“Diversion" refers to an alternative, child-appropriate process of determining the

responsibility and treatment of a child in conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
social, cultural, economic, psychological or educational background without resorting to
formal court proceedings.

System of Diversion:
Children in conflict with the law shall undergo diversion programs without undergoing
court proceedings subject to the conditions:
a) If imposable penalty not more than 6 years imprisonment – mediation, family
conferencing, conciliation
b) In victimless crimes where the imposable penalty is not more than 6 years – shall
meet with the child and parents or guardians for development of appropriate
diversion or rehabilitation
c) If imposable penalty for the crime committed exceeds 6 years imprisonment,
diversion measures may be resorted to only by the court.

o Without Discernment: exempt from criminal liability; undergo intervention program

f. Prepare your own flowchart

4. Accident;
a. requisites
 A person is performing a lawful act
 With due care
 He causes injury to another by mere accident
 Without fault or intention of causing it

b. US vs. Tanedo
 Here, the accused performed a lawful act as the gun accidentally recoiled and struck the tenant
while aiming at the wild chicken. He was not negligent or at fault because he was not in the
direction at which the accused fired his gun.

c. Accident vs negligence

Accident Negligence
Something that happens outside the sway of our Failure to observe, for the protection of interest of
 will, although it comes about through some act of another person, that degree of care, precaution
our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly and vigilance which the circumstances justly
foreseeable consequences demand without such other person suffers.

If the consequences are plainly foreseeable

This presuppose the lack of intention to commit
the wrong done

5. Irresistible force vs uncontrollable fear;

Irresistable Uncontrollable fear

The offender uses violence or physical force to The offender employs intimidation or threat in
compel another person to commit a crime compelling another to commit a crime

a. requisites
b. People vs Rogado
6. Insuperable cause
a. Requisites
b. US vs. Vicentillo
7. Justifying vs Exempting
8. Absolutory causes; kinds
9. Instigation vs Entrapment

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. Definition, basis and classes
2. Ordinary vs privilege vs specific mitigating
3. Incomplete justifying/exempting
a. Incomplete self defense, defense of relatives, defense of stranger
i. Unlawful aggression as an indispensable requisite. Relate to Art 69, RPC
ii. People vs Toring
b. Incomplete JC of performance of duty
i. People vs Oanis, in relation to Art 69, RPC
c. Incomplete EC on Minority in relation to RA 9344
d. Incomplete EC on accident
i. See effects of one or two requisites
e. Incomplete EC on uncontrollable fear
i. People v Magpantay
4. Minority (see RA 9344)
a. Intervention vs Diversion
5. So grave a wrong committed
a. Praeter intentionem
b. Tests indetermining the intention of the accused
c. When rule on praetem intentionem would not be applicable
6. Provocation
a. Requisites; see relatives included
b. Sufficiency of the provocation
c. People vs Court of Appeals, G.R. No 103613, Feb 23, 2001
d. Difference between sufficient provocation as a requisite of incomplete self-defense and as a mitigating
circumstance
7. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
a. Requistes
b. Meaning of grave offense
c. People v Parana; People v Diokno
d. Distinguish provocation from vindication
8. Passion or Obfuscation
a. Requisites
b. US vs. Hicks; US vs. De la Cruz; US vs Engay; US vs Yuman; People vs Bello; People vs Bates;
c. passion/obfuscation vs provocation vs irresistible force
9. Voluntary Surrender and Plea of Guilt
a. Requisites; spontaneous
b. People vs Gervacio; People vs Jereza; People vs Salvilla; People vs Brana;
c. The law does not require that the surrender be prior to the order of arrest; see cases cited
d. Time and place of surrender; see cited cases
e. Withdrawal of plea of not guilty and pleading guilty before presentation of evidence by prosecution is still
mitigating
f. Effect of plea to an amended info and to a lesser offense
10. Deaf and Dumb
11. Illness vs Art 12, par 1
a. Requisites
12. Analogous; see examples cited

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES (ACS):

1. Definition, basis and kinds (in other books, the 5th kind is special AC)
2. Generic vs Qualifying ACs
3. Whether there is a need to allege generic/qualifying ACs in the information? What is the effect if not alleged? See
Rule 110, Section 9, Rules of Criminal Procedure.
4. Different effects of ACs:
a. ACs which do not have the effect of increasing the penalty:
b. ACs which are personal to the offenders
c. ACs which depend for their application upon the knowledge of the offenders
d. People vs Fabros, G.R. No. 90603, 19 October 1992
5. Par. 1
a. Basis; requisites
b. See Article 62(1)(a), RPC
c. Meaning of "advantage be taken by the offender of his public position" - Influence, prestige and ascendency
d. US vs Torrida vs US vs Dacuycuy
e. Instances when it is an integral element or inherent in = not aggravating
f. US vs Cagayan
g. People vs Villamor
6. Par 2
a. Basis; requisites
b. Meaning of public authority; person in authority vs agent of a person in authority
c. People vs Magdueno, GR No L-68699, 22 September 1986
7. Par 3
a. Basis
b. Specific AC? People vs Pagal, L-32040, 25 October 1977
c. Meaning of "with insult or in disregard"
d. Meaning of rank; age and sex
e. People vs Ibanez; People v Valencia; People vs Lopez
f. Meaning of dwelling; People vs Magnaye; People vs Ompaid; People vs Talay; US vs Lastimosa
g. See cases when dwelling is not aggravating;
h. Dwelling in case of adultery; US vs Ibanez;
i. Provocation in dwelling; requisites
8. Par 4
a. Requisites for abuse of confidence
b. People vs Luchico; People vs Arthur Crumb
c. Obvious Ungratefulness
d. People vs Bautista
9. Par 5
a. Par 5, AC vs Par 2, AC
b. US vs Punzalan
c. People vs Anonuevo; People vs Dumol; People vs Jaurigue
10. Par 6
a. When agggravating - facilitate, specially sought for; took advantage of - read cases cited
b. Night time; definition
c. People vs Luchico; US vs Dowdell; US vs Paraiso; US vs Tampacan; People vs Bato
d. Uninhabited place; definition
e. People vs Fausto Damaso; People vs Ong; US vs Vitug
f. Band; definition; requisites
g. People vs Lungbos; Gamara vs Valero
h. Band is absorbed in abuse of superior strength; inherent in brigandage
11. Par 7
a. Calamity or misfortune: definition
b. People vs Arpa
12. Par 8
a. Basis; requisites
b.US vs Abaigarq; People vs Ilane
c. Band vs Aid of Armed Men
13. Par 9
a. Basis; requisites
b. People vs Lagarto; People vs Baldera
c. There is no recidivism if the second conviction is for an offense commiited before the offense subject of the first
conviction;
d. People vs Jaranilla
e. Effect of pardon vs amnesty
14. Par 10
a. requisites; see examples
b. People cs Villapando
c. Recidivism vs. Habituality vs Habitual delinquency vs quasi recidivism
15. Par 11.
a. Both the offeror and offeree
b. People vs Paredes
16. Par 12.
a. When generic, when qualifying
17. Par 13
a. Basis; Requisites
b. Essence of premedication
c. US vs Manalinde; People vs Renegado
d. Test for sufficient lapse of time; see cases cited
e. Compare People vs Guillen; People vs Timbol; US vs Caranto
f. Effect of conspiracy
18. Par 14
a. Definitions of craft, fraud and disguise
b. People vs Zea;People vs Guy
c. People vs Famador
d. Craft vs Fraud
e. People vs Cabato; People vs Cunanan
19. Par 15
a. Concept of "advantage taken";
b. US vs Devela; People vs Navarra; People vs Gatcho
c. Evidence of relative strength necessary - see cited cases
d. People vs Velez; People vs Penones
e. Band vs abuse of superior strength; People vs Apduhan
f. People vs Siaotong; People vs Ducusin

20. Par 16
a. Basis; Definition of treachery
b. See Rules regarding treachery and cases cited (Reyes' book)
c. Can treachery be presumed? See cited cases; exceptions
d. The mode of attack must be consciously adopted; see cited cases; when not present: see cited cases
e. Attack showing intention to eliminate risk; see cited cases
f. Requisites
g. Must treachery be present at the beginning of the assault? People vs Balagtas; People vs Canete; US vs Baluyot
h. What ACs are absorbed or inherent by or in tearchery?
i. Effect of conspiracy in treachery; see Article 62, paragraph 4; see also People vs Pareja
21. Par 17
a. Definition of ignomity
b. People vs Iglesia; People vs Camiloy; People vs Saylan; People vs Fernando; People vs Jose; People vs
Bumidang; People vs Carmina
22. Par 18
a. Unlawful entry - definition
b. People vs Sunga
23. Par 19
a. People vs Capillas
24. Par 20
a. People vs Cuadra; People vs Bardon; People vs Mil; People vs Real
25. Par 21
a. Definition of Cruelty; requisites
b. Cruelty refers to physical suffering of victim purposedly intended by the offender
c. People vs Mariquina;
d. People vs Curiano; People vs Pacris
26. ACs peculiar to certain felonies

Alternative Circumstances
1. Definition and basis
2. Relationship
a. What relationships are included; People vs Bersabal; People vs Lamberte
b. When is Relationship mitigating, exempting, aggravating; or not having effect at all; see cases cited
i. Crimes against property
ii. Crimes against persons
iii. Crimes against chastity
3. Intoxication:
a. When mitigating; when aggravating; see cited cases; People vs Boduso, GR No L-30450-51, 30 September 1974
b. Who is a habitual drunkard?
4. Degree of Instruction or Education
a. Concept; People vs Ripas; People vs Geronimo
b. When mitigating; exceptions; see cases cited
c. when aggravating
REPEAT: Memorize Articles 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES

1. Article 16 - Memorize
a. Rules on light felonies
b. Active vs passive subjects
c. Only natural persons can be subject of crime; qualifications
2. Article 17 - Memorize
a. Principal vs co-conspirator
 Principal – under any three caterhories enumerated in Art 17 of RPC; criminal liability is limited to
his own acts
 Con-conspirator – is also a principal is that while the former’s criminal liability, as a general rule,
includes the acts of his fellow conspirators.
3. Principal by direct participation – personally takes part in the execution of the act constituting the crime

a. Requisites to be considered as co-principals

1) Participated in the criminal resolution
2) That they carries out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts which directly
tended to the same end.

b. Proof of conspiracy - proof of formal agreement is not necessary; but conspiracy must be proven by
positive and conclusive evidence;
 It is sufficient that at the time of the aggression, all the accused manifested by their acts a
common intent or desire to attack so that the act of one becomes the act of all (People v. Gupo)

Guilty co-principal:
1) Either by actively participating in the actual commission of the crime
2) By lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being present at the scene of the
crime
3) By exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the conspirators as to move them to
executing the conspiracy

People vs Mateo; People vs Catubig; People vs Carcedo; People vs Furugganan; People vs

Cruz;
 c. When there is no conspiracy, each of the offenders is liable only for the acts performed by him - People
vs Castillo – there being no conspiracy or unity of purpose and intention among the four, only Castillo who
shot Guariño to death was found guilty of murder qualified by treachery.

d. Participation in criminal resolution essential – the cooperation which the law punishes is the assistance
which is knowingly or intentionally given and which is not possible without previous knowledge of the
criminal purpose.

People vs Ortiz and Zausa - the deceased asked for water from Ortiz and Zausa wounded the
deceased… Ortiz shall be acquitted because it appears that thre was no plan or agreement between Ortiz
and Zausa to carry out the attack;

Araneta Jr vs CA – the one who inflicted the mortal wound was convicted of murder while the
other, only of less serious physical injuries;

People vs Quiosay – Appellant flee after stabbing the deceased on the arm, while Mauricio,
brother or appellant, cut off the head of the deceased without the presence of appellant. The mere act of
the apeallant in stabbing the deceased once cannot conclusively prove conspiracy. It results that the
appellant should be answerable only for his individual act.

People vs Lacao – their respective liabilities shall be determined by the nature of their individual
participation in the felonious act.

e. Implied conspiracy – conspiracy shown by circumstances

People vs Manzano; - brothers and nephew has the common desire to avenge the wrong done to
their father (grandfather in the case of nephew), their going together at the victim;s house at lunchtime all
armed; their concerted beating of the victim act of bringing him to the yard of one of the borther’s house,
with said borther dragging the victim and the other two accused, thrsting their rifles t his bosy, thus
showing that he was their common captive.

People vs Saliling;
People vs Umbrero;
People vs Timbol (was Dalmacio Timbol convicted?)
f. Test of Unity of Purpose abd Unity of Intention. - People vs Damaso; People vs Delgado
g. See cited cases on the unity of purpose and unity of intention test - People vs Natividad
h. Effect when the crime is committed by a band.
i. Liability of participants when there is conspiracy - the act of one is the act of all, even if the acts are
radically and substantially different from that which they intended to commit. See cited cases
j. Rule: A conspirator is not liable for another's crime which is not an object of the conspiracy or which is
not a necessary and logical consequence thereof - see cited cases
k. In multiple rape, each rapist is equally liable for the other rapes; People vs Fernandez
l. Rule: the principals by direct participation must be at the scene of the crime petsonally taking part in its
execution; exception - People vs Santos; People vs Canumay; People vs Samano

4. Principals by induction
a. 2 ways of becoming principal by induction; 2 ways of forcing and 2 ways of inducing
b. Requisites; People vs Otadora; US vs Alcontin; US vs Indanan; People vs Castillo; People vs Canial;
c. Requisites on words of command; People vs Kiichi Omine; People vs Caimbre; People vs Lawas
d. Principal by inducement vs proposal
e. Effect of acquittal of principal by direct participation upon the liability of principal by inducement
5. Principal by indispensable cooperation (PIC)
a. Requisites
b. PIC vs Accomplice
c. Definition of "another act".
d. US vs Javier; US vs Lim Buanco
6. Article 18 - accomplices; memorize
a. Collective criminal responsibility vs quasi-collective criminal responsibility
b. Distinction between accomplice and conspirator - People vs Vera
c. Requisites
d. Meaning of Community of design - People vs Maliao; US vs Bello; People vs Lingad;
e. How an accomplice acquires knowledge of the criminal design of the principal - see instances and all cited cases
f. No knowledge - People vs Ibanez; People vs Flores; Carino vs People
g. US vs De Jesus; People vs De la Serna
h. Cooperation of accomplice is necessary (by previous or simultaneous acts) but not indispensable - People vs
Villegas; in case of doubt or of minor character - see cited cases; provided the wounds inflicted by the accomplice
should not have cause death to the victim (note the rules) - see cited cases
i. Relation between the acts of the principal and accomplice - People vs De la Cruz
j. Accomplice may be liable for a crime different from that which the principal committed
7. Article 19: Accessories - Memorize
a. People vs Verzola
b. Specific acts of accessories (3)
c. Par 3 - 2 classes
d. Public officers with abuse of his public functions; requisites
e. Private individuals; requisites
f. When the alleged principal is acquitted, may the accessory be convicted? See cited cases and discussion.
g. Accessory vs principal vs accomplice
7. Anti Fencing Law
a. See definition of terms; presumption on fencing
b. People vs Hon de Guzman, Dizon-Pamintuan vs People
8. Article 20 - memorize
a. Who are the relatives mentioned?
b. When exempt or not exempt even if principal is related?

Types of Criminal Responsibility

1) Collective Criminal Responsibility
2) Individual
3) Quasi-collective

Art 18. Accomplices

- Presupposes the commission of the crime by the principal by direct participation
- Not included in Art 17
- Exists when there is no conspiracy between or among the defendants but they were
animated by one and the same purpose to accomplish the criminal objective; those who
cooperated by previous or simultaneous acts but cannot be liable as principals
- In case of doubt to the participation of the offender, he will be considered as an accomplice
- Does not have previous agreement or understanding or is not in conspiracy with the
principal by direct participation but he participates to a certain point in the common criminal
design
- An accomplice gets one degree lower than that provided for the principal
- Wounds inflicted by the accomplice should not have inflicted a mortal wound, otherwise, he
becomes principal by direct participation
- Presence and company was not indispensable and essential to the perpetration of the
murder

Accomplice Conspirator
Knows and agrees with the criminal design
Come to know about it after the principals Knows the criminal intention because they
have reached the decision and only then, themselves have decided upon such course
they agree to cooperate in its execution of action
Merely concur; Do not decide whether the Decide that a crime should be committed
crime should be committed; merely assent to
the plan and cooperate in its
accomplishment
Merely instruments who perform acts not Authors of crime
essential to the perpetration of the offense
Requisites to be considered an accomplice:
1) That there be a community design: knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
participation and he concurs with the latter in his purpose
 The cooperation which the law punishes is the assistance which is knowingly or
intentionally given and which is not possible without previous knowledge of the criminal
purpose
2) That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with
the intention of supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an
efficacious way; and
 By previous acts: lending of the dagger or pistol to the murderer, knowing the latter’s
purpose
 By simultaneous acts: defendant who held one of the hands of the victim and tried to
take away the latter’s revolver, while his co-defendant was attacking him
 Degrees of moral aid:
o Moral – through advice, encouragement, agreement
o Material – through external acts
Except: moral aid is the determining cause of the commission of the crime

3) That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those attributed to the
person charged as accomplice

How an accomplice acquires knowledge of the criminal design of the principal

1) When the principal informs or tells the accomplice of the former’s criminal purpose
2) When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of the principal

Accomplice
 One who does not take a direct part in the commission of the act
 who does not force or induce others to commit it
 who does not cooperate in the commission of the crime by another act without
which it would have been accomplished,
YET COOPERATES IN THE EXECUTION OF THE ACT BY PREVIOUS OR
SIMULTAENEOUS ACTIONS

Accomplice Principal by direct participation

Community of criminal design
Cooperate in the execution of the offense by Commits the overt act directly to the
previous or simultaneous acts commission of crime
Between accomplice and principal: there is Between / among principals: there must be
no conspiracy conspiracy

Art. 19 – Accessories
- does not participate in criminal design nor cooperate in the commission of the felony
- has knowledge of the commission of the crime
- Does not take part or cooperate in, or induce, the commission of the crime
- Does not cooperate in the commission of the offense by acts either prior thereto or
simultaneous therewith
- The participation of the accessory in all cases always takes place after the commission of
the crime
- Subsequently takes part in 3 ways:
- By profiting from effect of the crime
- as
- By assisting in the escape or concealment of the principal of the crime, provided his
acts with abuse of his public functions or the principals

Two classes of accessories in par 3:

1) Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of
any crime (not light felony) with abuse of his public function ( eg. A mayor who
refused to prosecute offender)
Requisites:
1) The accessory is public officer
2) Harbors, conceals, or assists in the escape of the principal
3) Public officer acts with abuse of his public functions
4) The crime committed by the principal is any crime, provided it is not a light
felony

2) Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the author of the
crime – guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt against the life of the
president, or who is known to be habitually guilty of some other crime

Requisites:
1) Accessory is a private person
2) Harbors, conceals, or assist in the escape of the author of the crime; and
3) That the crime committed by the principal is either:
a. Treason
b. Parricide
c. Murder
d. An attempt against the life of the President, or
e. That the principal is known (to the accessory) to be habitually guilty
of some other crime

 Habitually guilty of some other crime – if the person was previously punished three
times for less serious physical injuries and now commits estafa, the one who helps in
his escape is liable as an accessory although the accessory is a private individual
 Silence does not make one an accessory because it is not harboring nor concealing in
the escape of principal

IMPORTANT WORDS IN ARTICLE 19

1. Having knowledge
2. Commission of the Crime
3. Without having participated therein either as principals or accomplices
4. Take part subsequent to its commission

 Knowledge and suspicion are different terms.

Suspicion – the imagination of existence of something without proof, or upon very slight
evidence, or upon no evidence at all.

 Conviction of an accessory is possible notwithstanding the acquittal of the principal, if

the crime was in fact committed, but the principal was not held criminally liable,
because of an exempting circumstance, such as insanity or minority
 Apprehension and conviction of the principal is not necessary for the accessory to be
held criminally liable provided that the requisites prescribed by law are present.
ANTI-FENCING LAW
 Fencing - act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself or for another, shall
buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell,
or in any other manner deal in any article, item, object or anything of value which he
knows, or should be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the
crime of robbery or theft
 Fence – includes any person, firm, association, corporation or partnership or other
organization who/which commits the act of fencing
 Presumption of fencing – mere possession of any goods, article, item, object or
anything of value which has been the subject of robbery or the thievery shall be prima
facie evidence of fencing
 Accessory in Robbery and Theft is a principal in fencing

Art 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability

- Exemption is based on the ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s
name, which compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives so near as those
mentioned in this article
- An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when the principal is his
- Spouse
- Ascendant
- Descendant
- Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother, sister
- Relative by affinity within the same degree
- EXCEPTIONS TO EXCEPTIONS
If such accessory
o Profited by the effects of the crime
o Assisted the offender to profit by the effects of the crime
BECAUSE SUCH ACTS ARE PROMPTED NOT BY AFFECTION BUT BY DETESTABLE
GREED.

 ONLY ACCESSORIES UNDER PARS. 2 AND 3 OF ART. 19 ARE EXEMPT FROM

CRIMINAL LIABILTY IF THEY ARE RELATED TO THE PRINCIPALS
PENALTIES

 Penalty – suffering that is inflicted by the State for the transgression of law

Different juridical conditions of penalty

1) Must be productive of suffering, without however affecting the integrity of the
human personality
2) Must be commensurate with the offense – different crimes must be punished with
different penalties
3) Must be personal – no one should be punished for the crime of another
4) Must be legal 0 it is the consequence of a judgment according to law
5) Must be certain – no one may escape its effects
6) Must be equal for all
7) Must be correctional

 To secure justice – purpose of penalty

Theories justifying penalty

1) Prevention – to prevent as suppress the danger
 2) Self-defense – to protect society from threat and wrong inflicted
3) Reformation – the object of punishment in criminal cases is to correct and reform the
offender
4) Exemplarity – to serve as an example to deter others from committing crimes
5) Justice – an act of retributive justice, a vindication of absolute right and moral law
violated by the criminal

Three-fold purpose of Penalty

1) Retribution or expiation – commensurate with the gravity of the offense
2) Correction or reformation – deprivation of liberty
3) Social defense

 Constitutional restriction on penalties

o Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment
inflicted

Art. 21 – Penalties that may be imposed (not a penal provision)

- It is a guaranty to the citizen of this country that no acts of his, will be considered criminal
until the Government has made it so by law and has provided a penalty
- Reason: an act or omission cannot be punished by the State if at the time it was committed
there was no law prohibiting it, because a law cannot be rationally obeyed unless it is first
shown, and a man cannot be expected to obey an order that has not been given

Art 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws

 Not applicable to civil liability – because the rights of the offended persons or innocent
third parties are not within the gift or arbitrary disposal of the state
 But new law increasing the civil liability cannot be given retroactive effect
General rule: to give criminal laws prospective effect
Exception: to give them retroactive effect when favorable to the accused
 Reason: the sovereign has recognized that the greater severity of the former law is
unjust

Ex-post facto law is one which:

 Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent
when done, and punishes such an act;
 Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed;
 Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to the
crime when committed
 Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense
 Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes penalty or
deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful;
 Deprives a person accused of a crime of some lawful protection to which he has
become entitled, such as protection of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty

Habitual Delinquent – if within a period of 10 years from the date of his release or last conviction of
the crimes of serious or less physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, he is found
guilty of any said crimes a thirds time or oftener
- Not entitled to the benefit of the provisions of the new favorable statute

RA. 9346 – prohibited the imposition of death penalty, enacted on June 24, 2006
- Given retroactive effect
Criminal liability under the repealed law subsists:
1) When the provisions of the former law are reenacted;
2) When the repeal is by implication
3) When there is saving clause

Art. 23 – Effect of Pardon by the offended party

- A pardon by the offended party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in
Art 344
- Reason: A crime committed is an offense against the State
- Compromise cannot extinguish criminal liability
- A contract stipulating for the renunciation of the right to prosecute an offense or waving the
criminal liability is void.
- But civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his
express waiver

Two classes of injuries:

1) Social injury – produced by the disturbance and alarm which are the outcome of the
offense; sought to be repaired through the imposition of penalty
2) Personal injury – caused to the victim of the crime who suffered damage either to his
person, to his property, to his honor or to her chastity; sought to be repaired through
indemnity, which is civil in nature; the offended party may waive it and the State has no
reason to insist in its payment

Art 344
 Adultery and Concubinage – cannot institute criminal prosecution if the offended party
consented or pardoned the offenders; may be implied pardon
 Seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness – no criminal prosecution if the
offense has been EXPRESSLY pardoned by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, as the case may be.
 Must be made before the institution of the criminal prosecution
 The only act that extinguishes the penal action after the institution of criminal action is
the marriage between the offender and the offended party

Art 24 – Measures of prevention or safety which are not considered penalties

CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES

Art 25 – Penalties which may be imposed

- A sentence of “5-year bilibid” is defective, because it does not specify the exact penalty
prescribed in the RPC
- Life imprisonment or cadena perpetua imposed by the trial court is erroneous designation.
The correct erm is reclusion perpetua.
- Under RA 7659, the duration of reclusion perpetua is now from 20 years and one day to 40
years.
- Reclusion perpetua is not the same as life imprisonment

Classification of penalties
1) Principal penalties - those expressly imposed by the court in the judgment of conviction
 a. Divisible – those that have fixed duration and are divisible into three periods
b. Indivisible – no fixed duration
i. Death
ii. Reclusion perpetua
iii. Perpetual absolute or special disqualification
iv. Public censure

2) Accessory penalties -those that are deemed included in the imposition of the principal
penalties

Classification of penalties accdg to subject matter:

1) Corporal (death)
2) Deprivation of freedom (reclusion, prision, arresto)
3) Restriction of freedom (destierro)
4) Deprivation of rights (disqualification and suspension)
5) Pecuniary (fine)

Classification of penalties acdg to their gravity:

1) Capital
2) Afflictive
3) Correctional
4) Light

Article 26 – Fines

 Afflictive - > 6000

 Correctional - 200 to 6000
 Light Penalty - < 200

Penalties cannot be imposed in the alternative

DURATION AND EFFECT OF PENALTIES

A. Duration of penalties
Reclusion perpetua 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
Reclusion temporal 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
Prision mayor and temporary 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
disqualification Except when disqualification is accessory
penalty, in which its duration is that of the
principal penalty
Prision correccional, suspension, and 6 months and 1 day to 6 years
destierro Except when suspension is an accessory
penalty, in which case its duration is that of
the principal penalty
Arresto mayor 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
Arresto menor 1 day to 30 days
Bond to keep the peace The period during which bond shall be
effective is discretionary on the court
Destierro is imposed on:
1) Serious physical injuries or death under exceptional circumstances
2) In case of failure to give bond for good behavior
3) As a penalty for the concubine in concubinage
 4) In cases where after reducing the penalty by one or more degrees destierro is the
proper penalty

 Bond to keep the peace is not specifically provided as a penalty for any felony and
therefore cannot be imposed by the court

Art. 28 – Computation of penalties

1) Offender be in prison – temporary penalty shall be computed from the day on which
the judgment of conviction shall have become final
Reason: Because under Art 24 the arrest and temporary detention of the
accused is not considered a penalty
2) Not be in prison – penalty consisting in deprivation of liberty shall be computed for
the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the
enforcement of penalty
3) Other penalties – shall be computed only from the day on which the defendant
commences to serve his sentence

If the accused, who was in custody, appealed, his service of sentence should commence from the
date of the promulgation of the decision of the appellate court and not from the trial court.

The accused could not be considered as committed or placed in jail by virtue of the decision of the
CA, although he was already in jail when that judgment was received.

If the offender is undergoing preventive imprisonment – rule 3 applies.

Art. 29 – Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment

 Preventive imprisonment – when the offense charged is nonbailable, or even if bailable,

he cannot furnish the required bail
o Agreed voluntarily in writing before or during the time of his temporary detention
to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners – full
period of offender’s preventive imprisonment shall be deducted from
promulgated duration of penalty
o Otherwise, only 4/5 of the duration of preventive imprisonment will be deducted
from the duration of penalty
 Offenders not entitled to the full time or 4/5 of the time of preventive imprisonment
1) Recidivists or those convicted previously twice or more times of any crime
2) Those who, upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence,
failed to surrender voluntarily
3) Habitual delinquents or those who, within a period of 10 years form the date
of his release or last conviction of the crimes or serious or less serious
physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, is found guilty of any
of said crimes a third time or oftener;
4) Escapees;
5) Persons charged with heinous crimes

B. Effects of the penalties according to their respective nature

Read Art 30 - 35 codal

 Restrictions upon right of suffrage – to preserve the purity of elections

 Presumption: one rendered infamous by conviction of felony, or other base offenses
indicative of moral turpitude, is unfit to exercise the privilege of suffrage or to hold office
 Bond to keep peace is not bail bond it is imposed as a penalty in threats
Art 36 – Pardon

Effects of pardon by the President

1) A pardon shall not restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage
Except: when any or both such rights is or are expressly restored by the terms of
the pardon
2) It shall not exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity. The pardon cannot
make an exception to this rule

Limitations upon the exercise of the pardoning power

1) That the power can be exercised only after conviction
2) That such power does not extend to cases of impeachment

Pardon by Chief Executive vs. Pardon by Offended party

Pardon by Chief Executive Pardon by Offended Party

Criminal liability Extinguishes criminal liability Does not extinguish the
of the offender criminal liability
Civil liability Cannot include civil liability Offended party can waive the
which the offender must pay civil liability which the offender
must pay
Time of grant Granted only after conviction Should be given before the
and may be extended to any institution of criminal
other offenders prosecution and must be
extended to both offenders
Art. 37 – Costs
 Fees
 Indemnities, in the course of judicial proceedings
- Costs or expenses of litigation are chargeable to the accused
- In case of acquittal, the costs are de officio, each party bearing his own expenses
- No costs shall be allowed against the ROP unless otherwise provided by law

Art 38 – Pecuniary liabilities – Order of Payment

Applicable when: in case the property of the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all
his pecuniary liabilities
 Reparation of damage caused
 Indemnification of consequential damages
 Fine
 Costs of proceedings
If the offender has sufficient or no property, Art 38 is not applicable

- There is reparation in the crime of rape when the dress of the woman was torn

Art. 39 – Subsidiary Penalty

- To be suffered by the convict who has no property with which to meet the fine, at the rate of
one day for each amount equivalent to the highest minimum wage rate prevailing in the
Philippines at the time of the rendition of judgment of conviction by the trial court
  An accused cannot be made to undergo subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency
to pay fine imposed upon him when the subsidiary imprisonment is not imposed in the
judgment of conviction

Rules as to subsidiary imprisonment:

Penalty imposed
1 Prision correccional or arresto and
fine
2 Fine only
3 Higher than prision correccional
4 Not to be executed by confinement,
but of fixed duration
5 In case financial circumstances of
the convict should improve
Subsidiary imprisonment/penalty
Subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed 1/3 of the term of the sentence,
and shall not continue for more than
one year. Fraction or part of a day, not
counted
Subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed six months, if the culprit is
prosecuted for grave or less grave
felony; shall not exceed 15 days, if
prosecuted for light felony
None
Subsidiary penalty shall consist in the
same deprivations as those of the
principal penalty, under the same rules
as in Nos. 1,2, and 3 above
He shall pay fine

C. Penalties in which other accessory penalties are inherent

Articles 40-44

Outline of accessory penalties inherent in principal penalties:

Death - when not executed by reason of 1) Perpetual absolute disqualification

commutation or pardon 2) Civil interdiction for 30 years, if not
expressly remitted in the parodn
Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal 1) Civil interdiction for time or during the
sentence
2) Perpetual absolute disqualification,
unless expressly remitted in the pardon
of the principal penalty
Prision mayor 1) Temporary absolute disqualification
2) Perpetual special disqualification from
suffrage, unless expressly remitted in
the pardon of the principal penalty
Prision correccional 1) Suspension from public office,
profession or calling, and
2) Perpetual special disqualification from
suffrage, if the duration of
imprisonment exceeds 18 months,
unless expressly remitted in the pardon
of the principal penalty
Arresto Suspension of the right to hold office
and the right to suffrage during the
term of the sentence
  Absolute pardon for any crime for which one year imprisonment or more was meted out
restores the prisoner to his political rights
 Where the penalty is less than one year, disqualification does not attach
Except: when the crime committed is one against property
 Accessory penalties need not to be imposed; they are deemed imposed
 Accessory penalties do not determine jurisdiction; what determines jurisdiction in
criminal cases is the extent of the principal penalty which the law imposes for the crime
charge in the information or complaint.
Art.45 – Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime
1) Every penalty imposed carries with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the
instruments or tools used in the commission of the crime
2) The proceeds and instruments or tools of the crime are confiscated and forfeited in favor of
the Government
3) Property of a third person not liable for the offense is not subject to confiscation and
forfeiture
4) Property not subject of lawful commerce (whether belongs to the accused or third person)
shall be destroyed

 No forfeiture of property where there is no criminal case because the ruling is based on
the phrase “every penalty imposed”. A penalty cannot be imposed unless there is a
criminal case filed.
 The forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the crime cannot be ordered if the
accused is acquitted, because no penalty is imposed
 Confiscation can be ordered only if the property is submitted in evidence or placed at
the disposal of the court
 Articles which are forfeited, when the order of forfeiture is already final, cannot be
returned in case of acquittal (Eg. PAL crew member case: Cm of Customs v.
Encarnacion)
 Confiscation and forfeiture are additional penalties

APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
I. Rules for the application of penalties to the persons criminally liable and for the
graduation of the same

Art 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general

General rule: The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be imposed:
1) Upon the principals
2) For the consummated felony

Exception: when the law fixes a penalty for the frustrated or attempted felony

Art 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed; Automatic review of death penalty
cases

 Death penalty shall not be imposed to those under 18 (at the time of the commission of
the crime) and over 70 years old, in such case, the penalty to be imposed shall be
reclusion perpetua
 Supreme court will review the death penalty cases
  1987 Constitution merely suspended the imposition of death penalty
 RA 7659, which took effect December 31, 1993, restored the death penalty for certain
heinous crimes
 RA 9346, enacted June 24, 2006, prohibited the imposition of death penalty and
provided the imposition of penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death.

Crimes death penalty is imposed:

1) Treason
2) Piracy
3) Qualified piracy
4) Qualified bribery
5) Parricide
6) Murder
7) Infanticide
8) Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
9) Robbery with homicide
10) Destructive arson
11) Rape with homicide
12) Plunder
13) Certain violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act
14) Carnapping

 Where the penalty of reclusion perpetua is imposed, in lieu of the death penalty, there
is a need to perfect an appeal

Art 48 – Penalty for b crimes

 Complex crime - although two or more crimes are actually committed, they constitute
only one crime in the eyes of law as well as in the conscience of the offender
 Two kinds of complex crimes:
1) When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies
(compound crime)

Requisites:
1) That only a single act is performed by the offender
2) That the single act produces
a. Two or more grave felonies, or
b. One or more grave and one or more less grave felonies, or
c. Two or more less grave felonies

2) When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other (complex

crime)

Requisites:
1) That at least two offenses are committed
2) That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other
3) That both or all offenses must be punished under the same statute
 Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished as separate
offenses or may be absorbed by the grave felony
 Rape with homicide is a special complex crime not covered by Article 48, Article 266-B
shall apply
 When in obedience to an order several accused simultaneously shot many persons,
without evidence how many each killed, there is only a single offense, there being a
single criminal impulse. (Lawas case)
 Ruling in Lawas case is not applicable where there was conspiracy to perpetuate the
killings
 When within the scope of possibility that the two victims were killed by one and the
same missile, the crime should be classified as a complex crime of double murder
 When two victims each received more than one bullet wound, they were not close to
each other when fired at, and their bodies were found in different places, the
presumption is they were killed by different shots, and therefore, the accused are liable
for two separate murders
 There is no complex crime of arson with homicide, Art 320 of RPC, as amended by RA
7659 having provided one penalty therefor
 Applicable to crimes through negligence because in view of the definition of felonies in
Article 3, “Acts and omissions punishable by law: committed either “by means of deceit”
or “by means of fault”, it is clear that Art 48 which speaks of felonies is applicable to
violations under Art 365 which defines and penalized criminal negligence

When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other

 Subsequent acts of intercourse, after forcible abduction with rape are separate acts of
rape.
o Reason: when the first act of rape was committed in the truck, the crime of
forcible abduction was already consummated so that each of the succeeding
rapes committed in the house cannot legally be considered as still connected
with the abduction.
 No complex crime
o when one offense is committed to conceal the other
o where one of the offense is penalized by a special law
o when two or more crimes are committed but (1) not by single act, or (2) one is
not a necessary means for committing the other
o when trespass to dwelling is a direct means to commit grave offense
o rebellion with murder, arson, robbery, or other common crimes
 Illegal possession of firearm is not necessary means to commit homicide
o Homicide and illegal possession of firearm are punished under different
statutes
 The use of unlicensed firearm in murder or homicide is now considered, pursuant to RA
8294 on June 6, 1997, special aggravating circumstance and not as a separate crime.
 Illegal possession of firearm absorbed in rebellion
 When two crimes produced by a single act are respectively within the exclusive
jurisdiction of two courts of different jurisdiction, the court of higher jurisdiction shall try
the complex crime
o People v Cano: Such splitting of action would work unnecessary inconvenience
to the administration of justice in general and to the accused in particular, for it
would require the presentation of substantially the same evidence before two
different courts.
 The CFI (now RTC) of Manila retained jurisdiction in a charge of abduction with rape,
although abduction, which was commenced in Manila, was not proven, and the rape
was committed in Cavite, was the only matter proved
 Article 48 is intended to favor the culprit
o When two or more crimes are the result of a single act, the offender is deemed
less perverse than when he commits said crimes through separate distinct acts.
  The penalty for the complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime, the same
to be applied in its maximum period
 But when one of the offenses, as a means to commit the other, was committed by one
of the accused by reckless imprudence, that accused who committed the offense by
reckless imprudence is liable for his act only
 When the homicide, physical injuries, and the burning of a house are the result of one
single act of negligence, there is only one penalty, but there are three civil liabilities
 When the penalty for one of the crimes resulting from a single act is beyond the
jurisdiction of the municipal court, there should be additional penalty
 When a single act constitutes two grave or less grave felonies, or one grave and
another less grave, and the penalty for one is imprisonment while that for the other is
fine, the severity of the penalty for the more serious crime should not be judged by the
classification of each of the penalties involved, but by the nature of the penalties
 Art 48 applies only to cases where the Code does not provide a definite specific penalty
for a complex crime. (read Art 265 par 2)
 When a complex crime is charge and the evidence is not proven, the accused can be
convicted of the other
 Art 48 does not apply when the law provides one single penalty for special complex
crimes
o Art 294 par 1 – robbery with homicide
o 294 par 2 – robbery with rape
o 267 par 3 – kidnapping with serious physical injuries
o 267 last par – kidnapping with murder or homicide
o 335 – rape with homicide

 Plurality of crimes- consists in the successive execution by the same individual of

different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet been declared

Kinds of plurality of crimes:

1) Formal or ideal plurality – one criminal liability
a. When the offender commits any of the complex crimes defined in Art 48
b. When the law specifically fixes a single penalty for the two or more
offenses committed
c. When the offender commits continued crime
2) Real or material plurality – offender shall be punished for each and every
offense that he committed
e.g. A stabbed B with a knife. Then, A also stabbed C. There are two
crimes committed. Note that there are two acts performed.

Plurality of crimes vs. Recividism

Plurality of crimes Recividism

There is no conviction of any of the crimes There must be conviction by final judgement of
committed the first prior offense

 Continued (continuous or continuing) crime – single crime, consisting of a series of acts

but all arising from one criminal resolution
 Continuing offense – is a continuous, unlawful act or series of acts set on foot by a
single impulse and operated by an unintermittent force, however long a time it may
occupy
o Although there is a series of acts, there is only one crime committed. Hence,
only one penalty shall be imposed
  When two acts are deemed distinct form one another although proceeding from the
same criminal impulse
o Slander with physical injuries
o Slander – an offense against honor, is defined and penalized in Article 358
o Physical injuries – an offense against persons, defined and penalized in Article
266
 A continued crime is not a complex crime
Continued crime
Offender does not perform a single act, but a series of acts, and one offense is not
necessary means for committing the other

Penalty is not to be imposed in the maximum period

No provision in RPC or any other penal law defining and specifically penalizing
continuing crime

 A continued crime is different from transitory crime

o Transitory crime or moving crime – is kidnapping a person for the purpose of
ransom, by forcibly taking the victim from Manila to Bulacan where ransom was
demanded.

Real or material plurality Continued crime

Series of acts performed by the offender
Each act performed by the offender constituted The different acts constitute only one crime
a separate crime, because each act is because all of the acts performed arise from
generated by a criminal impulse one criminal resolution

Art 49 – Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime committed is different from that
intended

Rules as to the penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is different from that intended

If the penalty for the felony committed is
HIGHER than the penalty for the offense which
the accused intended to commit
If the penalty for the felony committed be
LOWER than the penalty for the offense which
the accused intended to commit
If the act committed ALSO constitutes an
attempt or frustration of another crime, and the
law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the
latter
The LOWER penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period
The LOWER penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period
The penalty for attempted or frustrated crime
shall be imposed in its maximum period

 Art 49 applies only when there is:

o Mistake in the identity of the victim of the crime; and
o Penalty for the crime committed is different from that for the crime intended to
be continued
  Art 49 is applicable only when the intended crime and the crime actually committed are
punished with different penalties

Art 48 Art 49
The penalty for the more or most serious crime The lesser penalty is to be imposed, to be
shall be imposed, the same to be applied in applied in the maximum period
maximum period

Arts 50 – 57
Diagram
Consummated Frustrated Attempted
Principals 0 1 2
Accomplices 1 2 3
Accessories 2 3 4

Exceptions to the rules:

Articles 50-57 shall not apply to cases where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for a
frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories (Article 60)

 The penalty for the frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide may be two degrees lower;
and the penalty for attempted parricide, murder, or homicide may be three degrees
lower.
o The courts, in view of the facts of the case, may impose upon the person guilty
of the frustrated crime of parricide, murder, or homicide, a penalty lower by one
degree that that which should be imposed under Art 50.
 Bases for the determination of the extent of penalty
1) The stage reached by the crime in its development (either attempted, frustrated, or
consummated)
2) The participation therein of the persons liable
3) The aggravating or mitigating circumstance which attended the commission of the
crime

 Degree – is one entire penalty, one whole penalty or one unit of the penalties
enumerated in the graduated scales provided for in Art 71.
 Period of penalty – is one of the three equal portions, called minimum, medium, and
maximum of a divisible penalty

Art 58 - Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain accessories (only applicable to public
officers who abused their public functions)

Public officers who help the author of a crime by misusing their office and duties shall suffer
the additional penalties of:
1) Absolute perpetual disqualification, if the principal offender is guilty of a grave felony
2) Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal offender is guilty of less grave felony

Art 59 – Penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos.

Basis for imposition of proper penalty:

1) Social danger
2) Degree of criminality shown by the offender
Art 60.
General rule: accomplice is punished by a penalty one degree lower than the penalty imposed
upon the principal.

Exceptions: (Where Accomplice is punished as principal)

1) The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers, and any person who by abuse of authority
or confidential relationship, shall cooperate as accomplices in the crimes of:
a. Rape
b. Acts of lasciviousness
c. Seduction
d. Corruption of minors
e. White slave trade or abduction
2) One who furnished the place for the perpetration of crime of slight illegal detention

Accessory punished as Principal (Article 42) – knowingly concealing evil practices is ordinarily an
act of the accessory

Certain accessories are punished with a penalty one degree lower, instead of two degrees
1) Knowingly using counterfeited seal or forged signature or stamp of the President
(162)
2) Illegal possession and use of a false treasury or bank note (168)
3) Using a falsified document (173, par 3)
4) Using a falsified dispatch (173, par 2)

Art 61 – rules for graduating penalties

- Should also apply in determining the minimum of the indeterminate penalty under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law
- The lower penalty shall be taken form the graduated scale in Art 71
1) Death
2) Reclusion perpetua
3) Reclusion temporal
4) Prision mayor
5) Prision correccional
6) Arresto mayor
7) Destierro
8) Arresto menor
9) Public censure
10) Fine
 The indivisible penalties are:
o Death
o Reclusion perpetua
o Public censure
 The divisible penalties are
o Reclusion temporal
o Prision mayor
o Prision correccional
o Arresto mayor
o Destierro
o Arresto menor
 The divisible penalties are divided into three periods:
o Minimum
o Medium
 o Maximum
Penalty imposed to a felony
Single and indivisible
Two indivisible penalties, or of one or more
divisible penalties to be imposed their full
extent
One or two indivisible penalties and the
maximum period of another divisible penalty
Several periods, corresponding to different
divisible penalties
Penalty
Next lower in degree shall be that immediately
going that indivisible penalty
Next lower in degree shall be that immediately
following the lesser of the penalties prescribed
Next lower in degree shall be composed of the
medium and minimum periods of the proper
divisible penalty and the maximum period of
that immediately following
Next lower in degree shall be composed of the
period immediately following the minimum
prescribed and of the two next following

Simplified rules:
1) If the penalty prescribed by the code consists in three periods, next lower degree is the
penalty consisting in the three periods down in the scale
2) Two periods; two periods down the scale
3) One period; next period down the scale

 Mitigating and aggravating circumstances are disregarded in the application of the rules
for graduating penalties

Art 62 – Rules for the application of penalties with regard to the mitigating and aggravating
circumstance, and habitual delinquency

Effect of attendance of aggravating or mitigating circumstances or of habitual delinquency

1) Aggravating circumstances (generic/specific) have the effect of INCREASING THE
PENALTY, without, however, exceeding the maximum provided by law
2) Mitigating circumstances have the effect of DIMINISHING THE PENALTY
3) Habitual delinquency has the effect, NOT ONLY of INCREASING the penalty because of
recividism which is generally implied in habitual delinquency, but also of imposing an
ADDITIONAL penalty

Par 1. Rules regarding the aggravating and mitigating circumstances

 Shall not be taken into account
 When in themselves constitute a crime (“by means of fire” is not
aggravating in arson
 Which are included by law in defining a crime (committed at the
dwelling of the offended party is not aggravating in robbery)
 When maximum of the penalty shall be imposed
 When in the commission of crime, advantage was taken by the
offender of his public position;
 If the offense was committed by any person who belongs to an
organized/syndicated crime group - a group of two or more
persons collaborating confederating or mutually heling one
another for purposes of gain in the commission of any crim
Par 2. The same rule applies with respect to aggravating circumstances which are
INHERENT IN THE CRIME
Eg. Evident premeditation in robbery
 Par 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from: …serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as
to whom such circumstances are attendant

1) The moral attributes of the offender, or

Eg. - A acted with evident premeditation - aggravating
Circumstances relatingand
B acted with passion to obfuscation
the Circumstances
– mitigating consisting in the
persons participating in the crime material execution or means
employed
Do not affect all the participants in Have a direct bearing upon the
the crime, but only those who, they criminal liability of all the defendants
particularly apply who had knowledge thereof at the
time of the commission of the crime,
or of their cooperation therein
 The states of their minds are different

2) From his private relations with the offended party, or

a. A (son), C (father or B) inflicted physical injuries to B
b. A (son) relative of a lower degree – aggravating
c. C (father of B) – relative of higher degree - mitigating
3) From any other personal cause
a. A and B committed a crime. A was under 16 years of age and B
is a recidivist

Par 4. Circumstances which consist… shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of
those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the act or
their cooperation therein
1) In the material execution of act
A – principal by induction to kill D
B and C – principal by direct participation. Killed D with treachery
If with treachery is with knowledge of A – aggravating
If A has no knowledge – B & C only

2) Means to accomplish the crime

A ordered to B to kill C
B invited C to eat with him.
B mixed a poison with the food of C and died.
If the means employed by B is with knowledge of A – A & B will have
aggravating
If A has no knowledge of the means employed – B only is aggravating
 There is no mitigating circumstance relating to the means employed in the execution of
the crime
 Difference between:
o Circumstances relating to the persons participating in the crime
o Circumstances consisting in the material execution or means
Employed
  Proof of cooperation or participation with regard to the act of cruelty is necessary

Par 5. Habitual Delinquent – if within a period of 10 years from the date of his last
release or last conviction of the crimes of:
1) Serious or less serious physical injuries
2) Robo/robbery
3) Hurto/theft
4) Estafa
5) Falsification
..he is found guilty of any of said crimes a THIRD TIME OR OFTENER.
Requisites of Habitual Delinquency:
1) That the offender had been convicted of any of the crimes of serious or less
serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification
2) That after that conviction or after serving his sentence, he again committed, and
within 10 years from his release or first conviction, he was again convicted of
any of the said crimes for the second; and
3) That after his conviction of, or after serving sentence for, the second offense,
he again committed, and within 10 years from his last release or last conviction,
he was again convicted of any of said offenses, the third time or oftener
 The culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which
he be found guilty
 Additional penalty for habitual delinquency:
Third conviction Penalty provided by law to the last crime;
Additional penalty of PRISION CORRECCIONAL
in its medium and maximum periods
Fourth conviction Additional penalty of PRISION MAYOR in its
minimum and medium periods
Fifth or additional Additional penalty of PRISION MAYOR in its
conviction minimum period to RECLUSION TEMPORAL in
its minimum period
 Total of two penalties shall not exceed 30 years
o Penalty for the crime last committed of which he is found guilty
o The additional penalty for being a habitual delinquent
 Purpose of law in imposing additional penalty
o To render more effective social defense and the reformation of multirecidivists
 Subsequent crime must be committed AFTER CONVICTION of former crime
 In the information must be alleged
o The dates of the commission of the previous crimes
o The date of the last conviction or release
o The dates of the other previous convictions or releases
Date of
Previous offenses Date of Conviction Date of Release
Commission

 Effect of plea of guilty when allegations are insufficient is not an admission that the
offender is a habitual delinquent, but only a recidivist
  Failure to allege said dates in the information is deemed cured where the accused did
not object to the admission of decisions for previous offenses which show the dates of
his convictions
 If the preceding conviction is less than 10 years from the date of the conviction in the
offense complained of, the date of last release is not important, because the release
comes after conviction

As to Habitual Delinquency Recividism

Crimes committed Crimes are specified
Period of time the The offender is found guilty of
crimes are committed any of the crimes specified
within 10 years form his last
release or last conviction
Number of crimes The accused must be found
committed guilty the third time or oftener
of the crimes specified
Effects An additional penalty is also
imposed
It is sufficient that the
accused on the date of his
trial, shall have been
previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime
embraced in RPC
No period of time between
former conviction and last
conviction is fixed by law
Second conviction for an
offense embraced in RPC is
sufficient
If not offset by a mitigating
circumstance, serves to
increase the penalty only to
the maximum

 A convict can be a habitual delinquent without being a recidivist

o When NO two or more crimes committed are embraced in the same title of the
Code.

Art 63 – Rules for the application of indivisible penalties

1) When the penalty is SINGLE INDIVISIBLE, it shall be applied regardless of any
mitigating or aggravating circumstances
2) When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties, the ff rules shall be
observed:

Only one aggravating circumstance Greater penalty shall be imposed

Neither mitigating nor aggravating Lesser penalty shall be imposed
With Mitigating and no aggravating Lesser penalty shall be imposed
With mitigating and aggravating Court shall allow them to offset one another

 Applies only when the penalty prescribed by the Code is either one indivisible penalty or
two indivisible penalties
 When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties, the penalty cannot be
lowered by one degree, no matter how many mitigating circumstances are present
o Except: when a privileged mitigating circumstance under Art 68 or 69 is present
 Mitigating circumstance is not necessary to impose reclusion perpetua when the crime is
punishable with two indivisible penalties of reclusion perpetua to death
o Under Art 63, when the crime is penalized with two indivisible penalties,
reclusion perpetua to death, the lesser penalty should be imposed even when
there is no mitigating circumstance present
Art 64 – Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods
- Applies when the penalty prescribed by law for the offense is:
- Reclusion temporal
- Prision mayor
- Prision correccional
- Arresto mayor
- Arresto menor
- Prision correccional to reclusion temporal etc.
Because they are divisible into three periods

Outline of rules:
1) No aggravating and no mitigating – medium period
2) Only a mitigating – minimum period
3) Only an aggravating – maximum period
4) When there are aggravating and mitigating – the court shall offset of one class
against the other according to their relative weight
a. The mitigating must be ordinary, not privileged
b. Aggravating circumstance must be generic or specific, not qualifying or
inherent
5) Two or more mitigating and no aggravating - penalty next lower, in the period
applicable, according to the number and nature of such circumstances
6) No penalty greater than the maximum shall be imposed, no matter how many
aggravating circumstances are present
7) The court can determine the extent of the penalty “within the limits of each period,
according to the number” and “nature” of the aggravating and mitigating
circumstances and the greater or lesser “extent of the evil” produced by the crime
 RPC provides that when the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods, whether
it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different penalties, when neither
aggravating nor mitigating circumstances attend, the penalty prescribed by law shall be
imposed in its medium period
 When there are two aggravating circumstance, the penalty prescribed by law for the
crime should be imposed in its maximum period
 Under Art 248 – penalty for murder is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death
 A qualifying circumstance cannot be offset by a generic mitigating circumstance
(treachery vs voluntary surrender)
 The court has discretion to impose the penalty within the limits fixed by law
 Art 64 does not apply to:
o Indivisible penalties
o Penalties prescribed by special laws
o Fines
For nos 2 and 3 check People v. Ching Kuan 74 Phil 23
 Cases when aggravating and mitigating not considered in the imposition of penalty
1) When the penalty is single and indivisible
2) In felonies through negligence. The rules for the application of penalties prescribed
by Art 64 are not applicable to a case of reckless imprudence under Art 365
3) The penalty to be imposed upon a Moro or other non-Christian inhabitants. It lies in
the discretion of the trial court, irrespective of the attending circumstances
a. Non-Christian – refers not only to religious belief but in a way to
geographical area and, more particularly, directly to Philippine natives of a
low-grade civilization
4) When the penalty is only a fine imposed by an ordinance
5) When the penalties are prescribed by special laws
Art 65 – Rules in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods

Art 66 – imposition of fines

1) The court can fix any amount of the fine within the limits established by law
2) The court considers
a. The mitigating and aggravating circumstances
b. More particularly, the wealth or means of the culprit

 When the minimum fine is not fixed, the determination of the amount of the fine be
imposed upon the culprit is left to the sound discretion of the court, provided it shall not
exceed the maximum authorized by law

 Fines are not divided into three equal portions

 Wealth or means of culprit is main consideration in fine because the fixed amount of fine
for all offenders of a particular crime, will result in an inequality.

 Position and standing of accused considered aggravating in gambling

EG. Where a person found guilty of violation of the gambling law is a man of
station or standing in the community, the maximum penalty should be imposed
Art 67 – Penalty to be imposed when NOT all the requisites of exemption of the fourth
circumstance of Art 12 are present
1) That the act causing the injury be lawful that is, permitted no only by law but also by
regulations
2) That it be performed with due care
3) That the injury be caused by mere accident
4) That there be no fault or intention to cause injury

 Reckless imprudence – if all condition as are not present

 Simple imprudence – if it is mere lack of precaution in those cases where either the
threatened harm is not imminent or the danger is not openly visible

 Grave felony – arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period
 Less grave felony – arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods

Art 68 – Penalty to be imposed upon a person under 18 years of age

Par 1. Penalty upon a person under 18 years of age Repealed by RA 9344
o A child 15 years and under is exempt from criminal responsibility, and
o A child above 15 but below 18 years of age is exempt from criminal liability
unless he/she has acted with discernment

RA 9344 was further repealed by RA 10630, An Act Strengthening the Juvenile

Justice System in the Philippines and provides for the ff
1) Child under 15 years and under at the time of the commission of the offense is
exempt form criminal liability
a. Child shall be immediately released to the custody of his/her parents or
guardian, or the child’s nearest relative, and be subjected to a community-
based intervention program supervised by the local social welfare and
 development officer (LSWDO), unless best interest of child requires the
referral of the child to a youth care facility or “Bahay Pagasa”
2) Child above 12 but under 15 years of age who commits serious crimes shall be
deemed a NEGLECTED CHILD
a. Serious crimes:
i. Parricide
ii. Murder
iii. Infanticide
iv. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention where the victim is killed or
rapped
v. Robbery with homicide/rape
vi. Destructive arson
vii. Rape
viii. Carnapping where the driver or occupant is killed or raped
ix. Offense under RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002) punishable by more than 12 years
3) Child above 12 but under 15 years of age who commits another offense for the
second time or oftener who was previously subjected to a community-based
intervention program shall be deemed a NEGLECTED CHILD.
a. Shall undergo an intensive intervention program supervised by the LSQDO.
IF the best intereset of the child requires that he/she be placed in a youth
care facility or “Bahay Pagasa”, the child’s parents or guardians shall
execute a written authorization for the voluntary commitment of the child
b. If the child has no parents/guardians or if they refuse or fail to execute the
written authorization for coluntary commitment, the proper petition for
involuntary commitment shall be immediately filed by the DSWD or LSWDO
4) Child above 15 years of age but under 18 years of age
a. Shall be exempt from criminal liability and be subject to an intervention
program
b. If acted with discernment, he shall be subjected to DIVERSION
PROCEEDINGS

 If the court finds that the objective of the disposition measures imposed upon the child in
conflict with the law has not been fulfilled, or if not willfully complied, the child in conflict
with the law shall be brought before the court for execution of judgment
o The penalty shall be imposed as provided in par 2 of Art 68, that is, the penalty
lower that prescribed by law
 Exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption from civil liability
 Parents shall be liable for damages unless they prove, to satisfaction of the court, that
they are exercising reasonable supervision over the child at the time the child
committed the offense and exerted reasonable effort and utmost diligence to prevent or
discourage the child from committing another offense
 The court may, after it shall be convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the law,
and upon application at any time, place the child on probation in lieu of service of
his/her sentence taking into account the best interest of the child.
o For this purpose, Sec 4 of PD 968 otherwise known as Probation Law 1976 is
hereby amended accordingly

Art 69 – Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable (Privilege
mitigating circumstance)
 The privileged mitigating circumstance include the incomplete justifying and incomplete
exempting circumstance, provided the majority of their conditions are present
 Majority of such conditions are present
  When two of the essential requisites for justification are present, the penalty lower by
two degrees may be imposed
 Where only unlawful aggression is present, the penalty next lower may be imposed
 In imposing one or two degrees lower than that prescribed by the law for the offense, the
court must consider the number and nature of the conditions of exemption or
justification present or lacking
 When the majority of the requisites of self-defense and two mitigating without
aggravating circumstances are present – the penalty is THREE DEGREES LOWER

Art 70 – Successive service of sentences

1) When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall serve them
simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit
2) Otherwise, the order of their respective severity shall be followed
3) The respective severity of the penalties is as follows
a. Death
b. Reclusion perpetua
c. Reclusion temporal
d. Prision mayor
e. Prision correccional
f. Arresto mayor
g. Arresto menor
h. Destierro
i. Perpetual absolute disqualification
j. Temporary absolute disqualification
k. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right to
follow profession or calling
l. Public censure

 Penalties which can be simultaneously served are

a) Perpetual absolute disqualification
b) Perpetual special disqualification
c) Temporary absolute disqualification
d) Temporary special disqualification
e) Suspension
f) Destierro
g) Public censure
h) Fine and bond to keep the peace
i) Civil interdiction
j) Confiscation and payment of costs
The above penalties, except Destierro, can be served simultaneously with
imprisonment
 The order of the respective severity of the penalties shall be followed so that they may
be executed successively
 Three-fold rule – the maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than
three times the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties
imposed upon him
 Applies only when the convict has to serve at least for sentences
 Applies only when the total of the penalties imposed exceeds the
most severe multiplied by three
 “the most severe penalties” includes equal penalties
 If the sum total of all penalties does not exceed the most severe multiplied by three, the
3-fold penalty does not apply
  All the penalties, even if by different court at different times, cannot exceed three-fold
the most severe
o Rules of Court specifically provide that an information must not charge more
than one offense.
 Duration of the convict’s sentence refers to several penalties for different offense, not
yet served out
 If the sentence is indeterminate, the maximum term is to be considered
 Subsidiary imprisonment forms part of the penalty
o The subsidiary imprisonment for non-payment of the fine cannot be eliminated
so long as the principal penalty is not higher than six years of imprisonment
 Indemnity is a penalty although pecuniary in character
 Court must impose all the penalties for all crimes of which the accused is found guilty,
but in the service of the same, they shall not exceed three times the most severe and
shall not exceed 40 years

 Different systems of penalty to the execution of two or more penalties imposed on one
and the same accused

1) The material accumulation system

a. Par 1, 2 and 3 of Art 70 follow the material accumulation system
2) The juridical accumulation system
a. Par 4, 5 and 6 of Art 70
b. The service of the several penalties imposed on one and the same
culprit is limited to not more than 3-fold the length of time
corresponding to the most severe and in no case to exceed 40
years
3) The absorption system
a. Observed in the imposition of the penalty in complex crimes (Art
48), continuing crimes, and specific crimes like robbery with
homicide etc.

Art 71 – Graduated Scales

Scale No. 1 Scale No. 2

1) Death 1) Perpetual absolute disqualification
2) Reclusion perpetua 2) Temporary absolute disqualification
3) Reclusion temporal 3) Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be
4) Prision mayor voted for, and the right to follow a profession or calling
5) Prision correccional 4) Public censure
6) Arresto mayor 5) Fine
7) Destierro
8) Arresto menor
9) Public censure
10) Fine

 Death shall no longer form part of the equation in the graduation of penalties, pursuant
to RA 9346
 Penal or criminal laws are strictly construed against the state and liberally in favor of the
accused
 The metropolitan and municipal courts can impose Destierro
 Destierro – although coreccional penalty consisting in banishment with a
o
duration of 6 months and one day to 6 years is considered not higher than
arresto mayor which is imprisonment of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
 Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, BP Blg 129 as amended by RA 7691
o Metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts and municipal circuit trial courts
shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with
imprisonment not exceeding 6 years irrespective of the amount of fine, and
regardless of other imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil
liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind,
nature, value, or amount thereof:
Provided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property through
criminal negligence they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof
 Destierro may be imposed when it is the penalty next lower and the circumstances
require the imposition of a penalty one degree lower. Check pp 776
 Comparison of Arts 25, 70, and 71

Art 25 Art 70 Art 71

Penalties are 1) Principal According to Severity, Speaks of “lower or
classified into - Capital for the purpose of the higher penalty”
- Afflictive successive service of
- Correccional sentences Provides for the
- Light scales which should
be observed in
2) Accessory graduating the
penalties by degrees
in accordance with
Art 61

Art 72 – Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities

 The person guilty of two or more offenses has two or more civil liabilities
 The order of payment of civil liabilities is based on dates of final judgments and not on
the dates of the commission of the offense

PROVISION COMMON TO THE LAST TWO PRECEDING SECTIONS

Art 73 – Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory penalties

 Accessory penalties provided for in Arts 40-45 are deemed imposed by the courts
without necessity of making an express pronouncement of their imposition
 Subsidiary imprisonment is not an accessory penalty and therefore, the judgement of
conviction must expressly state that the offender shall suffer the subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency

Art 74 – Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases

 Death cannot be the penalty next higher in degree when not provided by law
 The judgment should provide that the convict should not be given the benefit of Art 27
(that should be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for 30 years) until 40 years have
elapsed; otherwise, there would be no difference at all between reclusion perpetua
when imposed as the penalty next higher in degree and when it is imposed as the
penalty fixed by law.

Art 75 – increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees

  Fines are also graduated into degrees for the imposition of the proper amount of the fine
on accomplices and accessories or on the principals n frustrated or attempted felonies
Eg. Reducing fine
o Consummated felony – 2000
o Frustrated – 1500 (1/4 of 2000 less 2000)
o Attempted – 1000 (1/4 of 2000 less 2000)

Increasing fine
o 200 – 6000 fine
o ¼ of 6000 = 1500
o Next higher fine is = 200 to 7500
 When the minimum is not fixed by law, the determination of the amount to be imposed is
left to the sound discretion of the courts, without exceeding the maximum authorized by
law
 When the law fixes the minimum of the fine, the court cannot change that minimum
 When the law does not state the minimum of the fine but only the maximum, the court
can impose any amount not exceeding the maximum
 When the law fixes both the minimum and the maximum, the court can impose an
amount higher than the maximum
 When only the maximum is fixed, it cannot impose an amount higher than the maximum
 Fines that do not consist of a fixed amount, but are made proportional
o Damage to property – equal to the value of the damage
o Direct bribery – three times the value of the bribe

Art 76 – Legal period of duration of divisible penalties pg 782

 Subtract the minimum to the maximum

 Divide the difference by three
 Then add the quotient to the minimum to get the maximum
 It is clear that the duration of each of the periods of the divisible penalties as fixed in the
table in Article 77 of the RPC is not controlling when the penalty prescribed is
composed of three periods corresponding to different divisible penalties

 Distinction between “period” and “degree”

o Period – each of the three equal parts of the divisible penalty

o Degree – the diverse penalties mentioned by name in the RPC

Art 77 – when the penalty is a complex one composed of three distinct penalties

 Complex penalty – a penalty prescribed by law composed of three distinct penalties,

each forming a period; the lightest of them shall be the minimum, the next the medium
and the most severe the maximum period.

Example: Reclusion temporal to death

Maximum – Death
Medium – Reclusion perpetua
Minimum – reclusion temporal

Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act No. 4103 as amended by Act No. 4225)
- The act shall not apply:
1) to persons convicted of offenses punished with death penalty or life-imprisonment
 2) convicted of:
a. treason
b. conspiracy or proposal to commit reason
c. misprision of treason
d. rebellion
e. sedition
f. espionage
g. piracy
3) those who are habitual delinquents
4) those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence
5) those who having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall have
violated the terms thereof
6) those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year
7) those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of approval of this act, except
as provided in Sec 5 hereof
8) those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension

 Board of Pardons and Parole

– authorized to adopt such rules and regulations may be necessary for carrying out its
function and duties
- Empowered to call upon any bureau, office, branch, subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality of the government for such assistance as it may need in connection
with the performance of its functions

 Board of Indeterminate Sentence

- Duty is to look into the physical, mental and moral record of the prisoners who shall
be eligible to parole and to determine the proper time of release of such prisoners
 When the crime is punished by special law, the court shall sentence the accused to an
indeterminate penalty, the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed
by said law and the minimum term shall not be less than the minimum prescribed by
the same

 When the crime is punished by the Code, the court shall sentence the accused to an
indeterminate penalty, the maximum term of which shall be that which, in view of the
attending circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of the RPC, and
the minimum term of which shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that
prescribed by the Code for the offense.

 The penalty next lower in degree should be the starting point for determining the
minimum of the indeterminate penalty
 When the accused is guilty of a complex crime, the penalty immediately lower is the next
below the penalty provided for the gravest offense
 The proper method is to start from the penalty imposed by RPC; then apply the
privileged mitigating circumstance; and finally apply the same in its maximum degree
 Not applicable when unfavorable to the accused
 Applicable to recidivist
 Purpose of Indeterminate Sentence Law:
o Is to uplift and redeem valuable human material, and prevent unnecessary and
excessive derivation of personal liberty and economic usefulness
o Aims to individualize the administration of our criminal law

Factors to be taken in consideration by the court in fixing the minimum penalty

 - Consider the criminal first, as an individual and, second, as a member of society
As an individual:
1) His age, especially with reference to extreme youth or old age
2) His general health and physical conditions
3) His mentality, heredity and personal habits
4) His previous conduct, environment and mode of life (and criminal record, if any)
5) His previous education, both intellectual and moral
6) His proclivities and aptitudes for usefulness or injury to society
7) His demeanor during trial and his attitude with regard to the crime committed
8) The manner and circumstances in which the crime was committed
9) The gravity of the offense

As a member of society:
1) His relationship:
a. Toward his dependents, family and associates
b. Society at large and the State

PROBATION SYSTEM
PD NO 968

Probation Law (PD 968, as amended)

a. Definition (Section 3a)
 Probation – is a disposition under which a defendant after conviction and sentence, is
released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a
probation officer.

b. Section 2 - Purpose of Probation

Sec 2 Purpose
a) To promote the correction and rehabilitation of an offender by providing him with
individualized treatment
b) Provide an opportunity for the reformation of a penitent offender which might be less
probable if he were to serve a prison sentence; and
c) Prevent the commission of offenses

c. Filing: Upon conviction and sentence by the court, the convict who seeks probation must file an
application within the period for perfecting an appeal:
o Section 9 (memorize) enumerates those who are disqualified from availing probation, in
addition - those convicted for drug trafficking and drug pushing and those convicted for
election offenses

 Sec 9 Disqualified Offenders

a) Sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years
b) Convicted of any crime against the national security
c) Who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by
imprisonment of more than 6 months and 1 day and/or fine of more than 1000
pesos.
d) Who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree
e) Who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of this
Decree became applicable pursuant to Sec 33 hereof
 o a convict who appealed is disqualified to apply for probation except that stated in Sec 4
(when the judgment imposing a non probationable penalty was appealed by the convict and
such judgment was modified on appeal through the imposition of a probationable penalty;
Colinares vs People)

o filing of the application for probation operates as a waiver of the right to appeal, except a
child in conflict with the law can apply anytime under RA 9344, Sec 42)

o upon filing of the application, the court is not required to immediately act on it and the convict
is not immediately placed on probation. Under Sec 5, there is a need for a post sentenced
investigation and a determination by the court.

o Pending submission of the investigation report by the probation officer (not later than 60 days
from the receipt of the order of said court to conduct investigation), convict may be allowed
bail or recognizance (Sec 7). Provided that in case where no bail was filed or that the
defendant is incapable of filing one, the court may allow the release of the defendant on
recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the community who shall guarantee
his appearance whenever required by the court

d. Upon receipt of the investigation report, the court will decide whether to grant or deny probation
(not later than 15 days after receipt of the report).

o Section 8 provides for the criteria for placing an offender on probation – memorize
The court shall consider (1) all information relative to the –
a) Character
b) Antecedents
c) Environment
d) Mental
e) Physical
Condition of the offender, and (2) available institutional and community resources

e. The decision of the court granting or denying the application for probation is not appealable.

f. In the event the court grants the probation, the court can impose conditions (mandatory or
discretionary) listed in Sec 10.
o nature of order granting probation
Even if a convicted person falls within the classes of those qualified for probation, the grant
is not automatic or ministerial. Probation is a privilege and its grants rests upon the
discretion of the court. The discretion is exercised primarily for the benefit of society as a
whole and only secondarily for the personal advantage of the accused

o (Baclayon vs Mutia) accessory penalties are deemed suspended once probation is

granted. However, it has no effect on the civil liability of the convict.

g. How long is the probation? See Section 14

If the convict is sentenced to a term of
imprisonment of NOT MORE THAN ONE
YEAR
In all other cases, if he is sentenced to MORE
THAN ONE YEAR
The period of probation SHALL NOT EXCEED
TWO YEARS
Period SHALL NOT EXCEED 6 YEARS
 When the sentence imposes a FINE ONLY Period shall be TWICE THE TOTAL NUMBER
and the offender is made to serve OF DAYS OF SUBSIDIARY IMPRISONMENT
SUBSIDIARY IMPRISONMENT

h. Effect of violation of the conditions of the probation - Section 15

 Upon the failure of the probationer to comply with any of the conditions prescribed in
the order, or upon his commission of another offense, he shall serve the penalty
imposed for the offense under which he was placed on probation

i. Termination of Probation - Section 16

 After the period of probation and upon consideration of the report and recommendation
of the probation officer, the court may order the final discharge of the petitioner a upon
finding that he has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his probation and thereupon the
case is deemed terminated.

 Effect of final discharge of the probationer: The final discharge of the probationer shall
operate to restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction
and to totally extinguish his criminal liability as to the offense for which the probation
was granted.

 The expiration of the probation period alone does not automatically terminate
probation. PROBATION IS NOT COTERMINUS WITH ITS PERIOD.

o There must be first order of final discharge on the report and recommendation
of the probation officer

EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

Article 78 – When and how a penalty is to be executed

Rule: No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment. This is because the
accused may still appeal within 15 days from its promulgation. But if the defendant has expressly
waived in writing his right to appeal, the judgment becomes final immediately.

Article 79 – Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity

 Rules regarding execution and services of penalties in case of insanity

1) When the convict becomes insane or imbecile after final sentence has been
pronounce, the execution of said sentence is suspended only as regards the
personal penalty
2) If he recovers his reason, his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty has
prescribed
3) Even if while serving his sentence, the convict becomes insane or imbecile, the
above provisions shall be observed
4) But the payment of his civil liability or pecuniary liabilities shall not be suspended

 Effect of insanity on the accused/convict in various stages

An accused person may become insane:

At the time of commission of the exempt from criminal liability

offense

At the time of trial the court shall suspended proceedings

and order his confinement in hospital
until he recovers his reason

At the time of final judgment The execution shall be suspended with

regard to the personal penalty only
While serving his sentence

Article 80 – Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents

 Article 80 was repealed by PD 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code), as amended
 RA 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006)
 RA 10630 ( An Act Strengthening the Juvenile Justice System in the Philippines

b. Correlate the discussion in the book of Reyes with the earlier discussions on minority (Pars 2
and 3, Exempting Circumstances, and Par 2, Mitigating Circumstances)

c. Rules:
1. 15 years and under - absolute irresponsibility, child immediately released but subject to
intervention program

2. 15 years and 1 day to under 18 years

 acted without discernment, child is exempt from criminal liability, but subject to
intervention program
 acted with discernment, child shall undergo diversion program.
 Study different situations in diversion program such as whether the penalty is not more
than 6 years; if more than 6 years

Imposable penalty Effect

Not more than 6 years imprisonment Law enforcement officer or punong

barangay, with the assistance of the
LSWDO, shall conduct mediation, family
conferencing and conciliation and, where
appropriate, adopt modes of conflict
resolution in accordance with the best
interest of the client.

Victimless crimes – not more than six The LSWDO shall meet with the child
years imprisonment and his/her parents or guardians for the
development of the appropriate diversion
and rehabilitation program

Over six years imprisonment Diversion measures may be resorted to

only by the court

 In what instances would the prosecutor conduct preliminary investigation and filing of
information
o When the child in conflict with the law does not qualify for diversion;
o When the child, his/her parents or guardian does not agree to diversion; and
o When considering the assessment and recommendation of LSWDO, the
prosecutor determines that diversion is not appropriate for the child in conflict
with the law
 if the child is found guilty, what will happen; suspended sentence; what will happen to
civil liability
o the court shall determine and ascertain any civil liability which may have
resulted from the offense committed. However, instead of pronouncing the
judgement of conviction, the court shall place the child in conflict with the law
under suspended sentence, without need of application” Provided, however,
that suspension of sentence shall be applied even if the juvenile is already 18
years of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of his/her guilt.
o The suspension of sentence lasts only until the child in conflict with the law
reaches 21 years of age
o The age of the child in conflict with the law at the time of the promulgation of
judgement of conviction is not material. What matters is that the offender
committed the offense when he/she was still of tender age.
o The parents shall be liable for damages unless they prove, to the satisfaction of
the court, that they were exercising reasonable supervision over the child at the
time the child committed the offense and exerted reasonable effort and utmost
diligence to prevent or discourage the child from committing another offense.
Articles 81-85 has no application as the death penalty is not allowed
- just read for academic purposes

Article 86 – reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional and arresto
mayor shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments provided by the
Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law in the future.
Article 87 – (memorize) Destierro. Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to
enter the place or places designated in the sentence, nor within the radius therein specified, which
shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place designated.

 In what instances is Destierro imposed?

1) When death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted under exceptional
circumstances (Art 247)
2) When a person fails to give bond for good behavior (Art 284)
3) As a penalty for the concubine in the crime of concubinage (Art 334)
4) When after lowering the penalty by degrees, destierro is the proper penalty

 What is the crime if a person violate the prohibition in destierro?

- Entering the prohibition area is evasion of the service of the sentence.

Article 88 – Arresto menor. The penalty of arresto menor shall be served in the municipal jail, or in
the house of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an officer of the law, when the court
so provides in its decision, taking into consideration the health of the offender and other reasons
which may seem satisfactory to it.

 How is the penalty arresto menor served?

o Municipal jail
o In the house under surveillance of an officer of the law (if the courts so
provides)

Article 89 – (memorize) How criminal liability is totally extinguished. Criminal liability is totally
extinguished:
1) By death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; and pecuniary penalties, liability
therefor is extinguished only when death of the offender occurs before final judgment;
2) By service of the sentence
3) By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects;
4) By absolute pardon;
5) By prescription of the crime;
6) By prescription of the penalty;
7) By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of this code

 Rules on Death
- Criminal liability is extinguished when the offender dies before OR after final
judgment.
 - Civil liability is extinguished when the offender dies before final judgment. Reason:
Civil liability exists only when the accused is convicted by final judgment

Exception: Civil liability survives if it is predicated on a source of obligation other than

delict (or a crime), such as law, contracts, quasi contracts and quasi delicts by filing a
separate civil action. The source of the obligation upon which the separate civil action
is premised determines against whom the same shall be enforced. See example in the
book of Reyes

Read: People vs Bayotas, GR No 102007, September 2, 1994. The Bayotas case

abandoned the People vs Sendaydiego case
- Death of the offended party does not extinguish the criminal liability of the offender.

 Service of sentence does not extinguish the civil liability

 Amnesty vs absolute pardon

Amnesty Pardon

Definition An act of the sovereign power An act of grace proceeding

granting oblivion or a general
pardon for a past offense, and
is rarely, if ever, exercised in
favor of a single individual, and
is usually exerted in behalf of
certain classes of persons, who
are subject to trial but have not
yet been convicted
from the power entrusted with
the execution of the laws which
exempts the individual on
whom it is bestowed from the
punishment the law inflicts for
the crime he has committed.
Kinds: Absolute and
Conditional

Effect to the penalty Completely extinguished the

penalty and all its effects

Time of grant May be granted even before Exercised when the person is
trial or investigation is had, or already convicted
even after conviction

Effect to civil liability Not extinguished Not extinguished

A blanket pardon to classes of Includes any crime and is

persons or communities who exercised individually by the
may be guilty of political president
offenses

Looks backward and abolishes Looks forward and relieves the

and puts into oblivion the
offense itself; it so overlooks
and obliterates the offense with
which he is charged that the
person released by amnesty
stands before the law precisely
as though he had committed no
offense
offender from the
consequences of an offense of
which he has been convicted,
that is, it abolishes or forgives
the punishment, and for that
reason it does “not work the
restoration of the rights to hold
public office or the right to
suffrage, unless such right be
expressly restored by the terms
of the pardon”.
 By Proclamation of the Chief
Executive with the concurrence
of Congress, is a public act of
which the service of the penalty
imposed
A private act of the President
which must be pleaded and
proved by the person pardoned

 Prescription of the crime – is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute
the offender after the lapse of a certain time
 Prescription of the penalty – is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the Government to
execute the final sentence after the lapse of a certain time
 Marriage - for crimes of rape, seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness - see
Article 344
Article 90- (memorize) Prescription of crimes – Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or
reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen years.
Those punishable by a correccional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with the exception
of those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in five years.
The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.
The offenses of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six months
Light offenses prescribe in two months
When penalty fixed by law is compound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of
the application of the rules contained in the first, second, and third paragraphs of this article.

 Prescription of the crime – is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute
the offender after the lapse of a certain time

 In computing the period of prescription, the first day is to be excluded and the last day
included.

 People vs Del Rosario; People vs Ramos; Yapdiangco vs Buencamino; People vs

Maceda. (pg 886)

 Rules for prescription of crimes punishable by fines, per Article 26; People vs Basalo
 Where the last day of the prescriptive period for filing an information falls on
a Sunday or legal holiday, the information can no longer be filed on the next
day as the crime has already prescribed.

 If the penalty is a compound penalty, what is the rule on prescription?

o When the penalty is a compound one, the highest penalty is the basis of the
application of the rules in Article 90

 Prescriptive periods of offenses punished under special laws and municipal ordinances
– memorize
Act no 3763, amending 3326, provides:

Imposable punishment Prescription

 By a fine or by imprisonment for not After 1 year
more than 1 month

By imprisonment for more than 1 After 4 years

month but less than 2 years

By imprisonment for 2 years or more After 8 years

but less than 6 years

By imprisonment for 6 years or more After 12 years

Offenses under Internal Revenue Law After 5 years

Violations of municipal ordinances After 2 months

Violations of the regulations or After 2 months

conditions of certificate of convenience
by the Public Service Commission

Act no. 3326 is not applicable where the special law provides for its own prescriptive period
 When prescription is deemed interrupted for violations of special laws (Section 2, Act
3326)
o Prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the
guilty person, and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for
reason not constituting jeopardy. (Sec 2, Act 3326)
 Defense of prescription may be raised during the trial or during the appeal
 Damasco vs Laqui – the accused cannot be convicted of an offense lesser than that
charged if the lesser offense had already prescribed at the time the information was
filed

Article 91 – (memorize) Computation of prescription of offenses. The period of prescription shall

commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party, authorities,
or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall
commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or
acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him.

 See outline in Reyes' book

1) The period of prescription commences to run from the day on which the crime is
discovered by the offended party, the authorities or their agents
2) It is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information
3) It commences to run again when such proceedings terminate without the convicted
or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him
4) The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippines

 Rule: Period of prescription commences to run from the date of the commission of the
crime, if known to the offended party, the authorities or their agents, otherwise, from
date of discovery of the crime.
o The offended party had constructive notice of forgery after the deed of sale,
where his signature had been falsified, was registered in the Office of the
Register of Deeds on August 26, 1948.
  Rule: Period of prescription of continuing crime never runs.
o The prescriptive period of continuing crime, cannot begin to run because there
could be no termination of continuity and the crime does not end.

 When is the period of prescription interrupted? See notes on Section 1, Rule 110,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure; People vs Olarte; People vs Abuy; People vs
Galano
 Sec. 1. Institution of criminal procedure – Criminal actions shall be instituted
as follows:
a) For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required pursuant
to Sec 1 of Rule 112, by filing the complaint with the proper officer
for the purposes of conducting the requisite preliminary investigation

b) For all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly

with the MTC and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts or the complaint with
the office of the prosecutor. In Manila and other chartered cities, the
complaint shall be filed with the office of the prosecutor unless
otherwise provided in their charters.

 The termination of a criminal case in Article 91 refers to a termination that is final as to

amount to a jeopardy that would bar a subsequent prosecution
 The term of prescription does not run when the offender is absent from the Philippines

Article 92 – (memorize) When and how penalties prescribe. The penalties imposed by final
sentence prescribe as follows:
1) Death and reclusion perpetua, in 20 years;
2) Other afflictive penalties, in 15 years;
3) Correctional penalties, in ten years, with the exception of the penalty of arresto mayor,
which prescribes in 5 years
4) Light penalties, in one year

 Rule: in prescription of crimes, it is the penalty PRESCRIBED by law that should be

considered; in prescription of penalties, it is the penalty IMPOSED that should be
considered
 See discussions on Fine

Article 93 – (memorize) Computation of prescription of penalties. The period of prescription of

penalties shall commence to run from the day when the culprit should evade the service of his
sentence, and it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be captured, should
go to some foreign country with which this Government has no extradition treaty, or should commit
another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.

 Read and memorize Outline in Reyes' book

1) The period of prescription of penalties commences to run from the date when the
culprit evaded the service of his sentence.
2) It is interrupted if the convict –
i. Gives himself up,
ii. Be captured,
 iii. Goes to foreign country with which we have no extradition treaty, or
iv. Commits another crime before the expiration of the period of prescription
The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run again when
the convict escapes again, after having been captured and returned to
prison.

 Elements:
1) That the penalty is imposed by final sentence
2) That the convict evaded the service of the sentence by escaping during the term of
his sentence
3) That the convict who escaped from the prison has not given himself up, or been
captured, or gone to a foreign country with which we have no extradition treaty, or
committed another crime;
4) That the penalty has prescribed, because of the lapse of time from the date of the
evasion of the service of the sentence by the convict

 First Requisite: Evasion of service of sentence is an essential element of prescription of

penalties. Infante vs Warden (pg 885)

 Period of prescription that run during the time the convict evaded service of sentence
IS NOT FORFEITED upon his capture

Article 94 – (memorize) Partial extinction of criminal liability – Criminal liability is extinguished

partially:
1) By conditional pardon;
2) By commutation of the sentence; and
3) For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is undergoing
preventive imprisonment or serving his sentence

 Conditional pardon – the exemption of an individual, within certain limits or conditions,

from the punishment which the law inflicts for the offense he had committed resulting in
the partial extinction of his criminal liability
 Usual Condition: he shall not again violate any of the penal laws of
the Philippines
 Commutation of sentence – refers to the reduction of a prison sentence of a prisoner; it
is a change of the decision of the court made by the Chief Executive by reducing the
degree of penalty inflicted upon the convict, or by decreasing the length of the
imprisonment or the amount of the fine.
o Specific cases where commutation is provided by the Code
1) When the convict sentence to death is over 70 years of age
2) When eight justices of the supreme court fail to reach a decision for the
affirmance of the death penalty
 In commutation of sentence, consent of the offender is not necessary. The public
welfare, not his consent, determines what shall be done.

 Parole should be included as No. 4 in the enumeration of causes of partial extinction of

criminal liability
 Parole- conditional release of an offender from a correctional institution after he has
served the minimum of his prison sentence
Art 95 (for conditional pardon) Obligation incurred by a person granted conditional pardon
1) He must comply strictly with the conditions imposed in the pardon
2) Failure to comply with the conditions shall result in the revocation of the pardon. Under Sec
64 of RAC, the Chief Executive may order his arrest and reincarnation
3) He becomes liable under Article 159. This is the judicial remedy.

Art 96 (for commutation of service of sentence) Effect of commutation of sentence

Art 97 (Allowance for good conduct)
Amendments introduced by RA 10592 to Art 97
1) Allowance for good conduct also granted to detention prisoners
2) Increase in deduction from period of sentence

5 – 20 days For first 2 years of imprisonment

8-23 days From 3rd to 5th year of imprisonment

10 – 25 days 6th to 10th year of imprisonment

15-30 days 11th and successive years of

imprisonment

3) Additional deduction granted

Aside from deduction of from 20 to 30 days per month of good behavior, an additional
deduction of 15 days is granted for each month of student teaching or mentoring
rendered
4) Effect of Appeal
An appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of entitlement to the above allowances
for good conduct

 No allowance for good conduct while prisoner is released under conditional pardon
 Allowance for good conduct is not an automatic right. It cannot be revoked once
granted.
 What is allowance for good conduct?

Article 98. Special time allowance for loyalty.

- A deduction in the period of the sentence of a prisoner who, having evaded the service of
his sentence during calamity or catastrophe resulting from a conflagration, earthquake,
explosion, or similar catastrophe, or during mutiny in which the convict has not participated,
gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation
announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe, or who chose to stay in the
place of confinement notwithstanding the existence of the calamity or catastrophe.

 A higher special time allowance is given to those who chose to stay in the place of
confinement (a deduction of 2/5 of the period of his sentence)
 Deduction of 1/5 of the period of his sentence shall be granted to a prisoner who,
having evaded the service of his sentence gives himself up to 48 hrs.
 Deduction is based on original sentence

Article 99 – Who grants time allowance

1) Director of the Bureau of Corrections
2) The Chief of BJMP
3) Warden of provincial, district, municipal or city jails