Prescription of Crimes/Action

Running of prescriptive Period Accdg to Art 91

In connection with the running of prescription period: Rule 110, Sec 1

Prosecutor’s Office Court

Filling Complaint

Preliminary Investigation Information

In Saldivia v Reyes: applies only to violation of city ordinances—reiterated in Jadewell Parking v Hon.
Lidua (GR No. 169588) October 7 2013. Filing of action in Pros Office does not interrupt Prescription
Period

People v Pangilinan: to apply in cases of violation of Special Laws (GR No. 152662) June 13, 2012 (Include
in Case book) For violation of Special Laws, filing in prosecutors office INTERRUPTS the running of
prescription Period, same as the RPC violations (FELONIES). Zaldivia does not apply

For cases punishable by special laws, the law on prescription should not be art 91 but ACT
No.3326—this act also governs violations of ordinances

Begins to run form the day of the violation of the law

Interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the person in Court!!!

-The violation of an ordinance does not estop the running of the prescriptive period, Saldivia v Reyes

Prescriptive Period ofor Ordinances 60 days only.

*For cases punishable by RPC follow Art 92-93

In Jugueta, if a victim is a child treachery is inherent same as old people. Defenseless

If there is treachery, killing is qualified as murder. As for civil liability can treachery be appreciated as a
generic aggravating circumstance to award exemplary damages? No, there must be other aggravating
circumstaces other than the qualifying circumstance to elevate the killing to murder: dwelling, to award
exemplary damages.

REVIEW

There are five titles in book one.

1. Felonies and circumstances which affect criminal Liability

2. Persons Criminally Liable

3. Penalties

4. Extinction of Criminal Liability

5. Civil Liability

General Principles on Criminal Law

Limitations of Congress to enact Penal Laws: Bill of Rights provision. Rights of a person: Due Process, No
torture, ex post facto law or bill of attainder, cruel or unusual

Lacson v Executive Secretary: Types of Ex post Facto Law

An executive order is not a penal law, at most it is only a mere order to implement already existing penal
laws

Double Jeopardy

Genreal Characteristics of a Penal law. Generality-- Art 14 of Civil Code, Territoriality-- Art 2 of RPC,
Prospectivity—art 21 and 22 of RPC

Positivist theory

Eclectic Theory

Utilitarian Theory Magno v CA 96132, June 26, 1992

Indubio Proreo-Penal Laws are to be interpreted liberally in favor of the accused

Equipoise Rule-Applies in criminal and civil action

In criminal prosecution-quantum of proof is guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the burden of proof
is carried by the State to prove beyond reasonable doubt

Inculpatory facts-facts introduced to impute criminial responsibility can be interpreted in two ways:
consistent with innocence of the accused, or consistent with the guilt of the accused. Evidence is in
complete Equipoise. The judge, in ruling, must favor the accused if evidence is in equipoise—equal
footing of the evidence. The party with the burden of proof loses. He who alleges must prove.

Delito either dolo or culpa

FII- Freedom, Intelligence, Intent (general intent)

General Intent-An element of intentional felony

Specific Intent-a specific element of a crime Animus Lucrandi-intent to gain In rape/ abduction-intent is
Lewd Design (a sexual intention)

Stages of execution:

Formal Felonies-no attempted or frustrated stage-adultery, physical injury,

Material Felonies-
Subjective and objecitive phase

Development of a crime – preparatory acts generally not punishable except for conspiracy and proposal,
and acts of lasciviousness,

Mere conspiracy is already punishable, however, if the conspirator commits the act conspired, charge
should be rebellion and others and conspiracy should be considered as means of committing the act

In conspiracy, no distinction is needed to be made as to principals, accomplices and whatnot, an act of

one is an act of all.

If no conspiracy, distinction must be made.

Principal

Direct

Inducement

Indispensible cooperation

Accomplice is not one who is not a principal by (only concurs)

Accessory participates after the commission of the crime either by :

Distinction between concurring and participation

Culpable felonies- Freedom, Intelligence, Negligence

Circumstances affecting Criminal Liability

JEMAA

Justifying-the act is lawful so it justifies, there is no civil liability except Par 4(accident)People v Narvaez

Exempting- when there is a crime but no criminal, there is civil liability correlate RA 9344 Complete lack
of intelligence, intent, freedom

J&E is in the manner of confession and avoidance, reverses the trial

People v Bunoan, exception to the presumption in favor of sanity

Privilege Mitigating Circumstance-may lower the penalty in the discretion of the court. Correlate with
Art 69

Mitgating-diminution of the freedom, intelligence and intent—lesser perversity of the accused

***Indeterminate Sentence Law and Probation Law