CRIMINAL LAW 1

I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES adoption of the aspects of the theory is

exemplified by the indeterminate
1. Definition of Criminal Law
sentence law. (Art.4 par 3 of RPC, Art. 68
Is the branch or division of law which defines
and Art. 11 to 14, Art. 63 of RPC)
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for
their punishment.
Philippine penal law looks at the convict
as a member of society. Among the
Crime is an act committed or omitted in
important factors to be considered in
violation of a public law forbidding or
determining the penalty to be imposed on
commanding it.
him (1) his relationship towards his
(Maxim: “Nullum Crimen, Nulla Peona sine
dependents, family and their relationship
lege” – there is no crime if there is no penal
with him; and (2) his relationship
law punishing it – Article 22)
towards society at the large and the State.

2. Sources of Philippine Criminal Law

The penalties imposed must not only be
1. RPC
retributive but must also be reformative, to
2. Special Laws passed by Legislative (ex.
give the convict an opportunity to live a
Batasang Pambansa)
new life and rejoin society as a productive
3. Presidential Decree issued during Marcos
and civic-spirited member of the
Era Martial Law
community.
3. Elective (mix of classical and positivist).
3. Theories of Criminal Law
This is what the Philippines is practicing.
1. Classical Theory
Basis of criminal liability is human free
4. The State; Police power; authority to
will and the purpose of the penalty is
define and punish crimes
retribution.
Man is essentially a moral creature with
The State through its police power has the
an absolutely free will to choose between
authority to define and punish crimes and
good and evil. When he commits a
to lay down the rules of criminal
felonious or criminal act (delito doloso),
procedure.
the act is presumed to have been done
voluntarily. Man, therefore should be
5. Limitations on enacting penal laws
adjudged or held accountable for
1. Ex post facto Law
wrongful acts so long as free will appears
This are laws when retroactively applied
unimpaired.
are prejudicial to the accused.
(Aggravates a crime, inflicts greater
2. Positivist Theory
punishment, alters the legal rules of
The positivity theory states that the basis
evidence)
for criminal liability is the sum total of
the social and economical phenomena to
which the offense is expressed, and the
1|Page
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
2. Bill of attainder
An act which will inflict punishment
without judicial trial
3. Criminal Due Process
Criminal laws must be of general
application and must clearly define the
acts and omissions punished as crimes.
6. Construction of Criminal Laws
1. Legal Maxim : “In dubio pro reo1”
The Penal laws are strictly construed
against the Government and liberally in
favor of the accused. (Only construed to
the Government when the law is
ambiguous and there is doubt as to its
interpretation.)
2. Spanish text > English Translation
In the construction or interpretation of
the provisions of the RPC, the Spanish
text is controlling, because it was
approved by the Philippine Legislature
in its Spanish Text.
7. Scope of Application and Characteristics of
Criminal Law
1. General
Criminal law is binding on all persons
who live and sojourns in the Philippine
Territory.
Person subject to military law, Articles
of war is applied and not the RPC.
(Refer to Sect 1 R.A. No. 7055 page 8)
General Rule: To punish persons for
offence committed within its territory,
regardless of the nationality of the
offender.
1
Means innocent until proven.
2|Page
XPN: As provided in the treaties and
laws of preferential application
 Sovereigns and other chief of state
 Ambassadors, ministers resident…
 Diplomatic Rep and their domestic
servants.
(Consul not entitled to the privileges
and immunities of an ambassador
and minister)
2. Territoriality
3. Prospective
*Generality- the criminal law is binding to all
persons who live and sojourns in the Philippine
territory, regardless of nationality of the offender.
Territoriality –penal laws of the Philippines are
enforceable only within the territory, including
its atmosphere, interior waters and maritime
zone.
Prospectively - penal laws cannot make an act
punishable in a manner in which it was not
punishable at the time of their commission,
except where the new law are more favorable the
accused as long as he is not a habitual delinquent
or the law otherwise expressly provides.
II.FELONIES
1. Art 3. Felonies
Felonies - are acts and omission punishable by
the RPC. This are committed by means of
deceit (dolo) and by means of fault (culpa).
Elements of felonies: (AOPDC)
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
a. There must be an act or omission (must be
voluntary)
b. That the act or omissions must be
punishable by the RPC.
c. That the act is performed and omission
incurred by means of dolo or culpa.
Note:
Crimes – is punishable by law in general.
Felonies – is punishable by the RPC
Offenses – is punishable by special laws
Felony by Omission
There must be a law requiring the doing or
performance of an act.
a. In Uninhabitable place when the person is
wounded and in danger of dying. – You can
be liable for abandonment of the person in
danger.
b. Officer of collection – voluntarily fails to
issue receipt – Guilty of illegal exaction
c. Every one owing allegiance to the
Philippines having knowledge of
conspiracy against the government- if not
disclose, you can be liable for misprision
or treason.
Classes of crimes:
1. Intentional Felonies
 The act or omission is malicious
 Performed with deliberate intent
 The act omission has the intention to
cause an injury
 The absence of criminal intent is a
defense
2. Culpable Felonies
 Not malicious
 Unintentional
3|Page
 The wrongful act results from
1 2
imprudence , negligence , lack of foresight
or lack of skill

3. Crimes penalized by special laws
2. Dolo or Malice (Intent to do an injury)
Requisites of Dolo or Malice: (to be considered
as having been performed or incurred with
deliberate intent)
a. Freedom (voluntary)
b. Intelligence
c. Intent (being purely mental process, is
presumed and the presumption arises from
the proof of the commission of an unlawful
act – killing/Death)
Criminal Intent is necessary in felonies
committed by means of dolo.
Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea – the
dact itself doest nt make a man guilty unless his
intentions were so.
Actus me invite factuse non est meus actus –
an act done by me against my will is not my act.
General Intent – element of voluntariness
Specific Intent – proof of particular specific intent
is required.
3. Mistake of fact (ignorantia facti excusat)
Ignorance of the fact relieves the accused of
the criminal liability.
An honest mistake of fact destroys the
presumption of criminal intent which arises
upon the commission of a felonious act.
1
Deficiency of action in avoiding an injury due to lack of skill.
2
Deficiency of perception or lack of foresight: the failure to
foresee impending injury, thoughtlessness, failure to use
ordinary care.
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
As a defense, requisite of mistake of fact:
a. That the act would have been lawful
had the facts been as the accused
believed them to be;
b. That the intention of the accuses in
performing the act should be lawful
and;
c. That the mistake must be without fault
or carelessness on the part of the
accused.
When Mistake of fact cannot be use as
defense:
a. Error in Personae (mistake in the
identity) - Mistake of fact cannot be use
as a defense. (When the act and
intention is unlawful)
b. When accused is negligent (culpable
felony)
4. Mistake of fact vs. Mistake of Law
Mistake of law excuses no one from
compliance. Mistake of fact is a  The only inquiry is, has the law been
misapprehension of fact on the part of the
person who caused injury to another. He is
not, however, criminally liable, because he did
not act with criminal intent.
5. Culpa or Fault
Criminal Intent is replaced by negligence and
imprudence.
Requisites of Culpa:
 Freedom
 Intelligence
 Imprudent, negligent or lack of foresight or
skill
6. Offenses punished by Special Laws
4|Page
As a rule, intent to commit the crime is not
necessary for crime punished by a special law. It
is sufficient that the offender has the intent to
perpetrate the act prohibited by the special law.
The act alone, irrespective of its motives,
constitutes the offense.
Good faith and absence of criminal intent is not a
valid defense in crimes punishable by special
laws.
7. Mala in se vs. Mala prohibita
Mala in se, or wrongful from their nature, such as
rapes, theft, homicide etc. Mala prohibita, or
wrong merely because prohibited by statute, such
as illegal possession of firearms.
Mala in se - the intent governs
Mala Prohibita
 are violations of mere rules of convenience
designed to secure a more orderly
regulation of the affairs of society.
violated?
When the acts are inherently immoral, they
are mala in se, even if punishes under special
law.
8. Motive and Intent
Motive is the moving power which impels one to
action for a definite result. Intent is the purpose
to use a particular means to affect such result.
Motive is not an essential element of crime, hence
need not be proved for purpose if conviction.
Motive when relevant and when need not to
established.
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
 Identity of accused (immaterial when the
accused has been positively identified)
 Antagonistic theories (2 theories or versions of
the killings- gives rise to variant crimes)
 No Eyewitnesses
 Circumstantial evidence or sufficient evidence
Motive is established by the testimony of
witnesses on the acts or statements of the
accused before or immediately after the
commission of the offense.
9. Art. 4
Par 1 – a person who performs a criminal act is
responsible for ALL the consequences of said act
regardless of his intention. (People vs. Mariano
No. L-45966)
Doctrine: “El que es causa de la causa es causa del
mal causado” - he who is the cause of the cause is
the casuse of the evil caused.
The act or omission should not be punished by a
special law, because the offender violating a
special law may not have the intent to do an
injury to another. In such cases the wrongful act
done could not be different as the offender did
not intend to do any other injury.
Committing Felony
- Not merely performing an act
- must be punishable by the RPC
- should be committed by means of dolo (deceit)
with malice
Although the wrongful act done be different
from that which he intended
 Mistake in the identity of the victim (error in
personae)
5|Page
 Mistake in the blow, when the offender
intending to do an injury to one person actually
inflicts it on another. (aberration ictus)
 The act exceeds the intent, that is the injuries
result is greater than that intended (praeter
intentionem)
d. Mistake in identity – error in personae
(People vs Oanis 74 Phil 257)
e. Mistake in the blow – aberratio ictus
(People vs Mabugat 51 Phil 967)
f. Injurious result is greater than what is
intended – praeter intentionem
(People vs Cagoco 58 Phil 524)
Par 1 Requisite:
1. That an intentional felony has been committed
2. Wrong done must be direct, natural and
logical consequence of felonious act.
- Blow was efficient cause of death
- Blow accelerated death
- Blow was proximate cause of death
No Felony committed:
 When act or omission not punishable by
the RPC
 When the act is covered by any of
justifying circumstance enumerated in Art
11.
** Act of defense or fulfillment of duty must be
exercised with due care, otherwise, the accused
will be liable for culpable felony.
Any person, who creates in another mind an
immediate sense of danger which causes the
latter to do something resulting in the latter
injuries, is liable for the resulting injuries.
Ex. Jeepney robbery, threats to shoots passengers
if they don’t bring out their money, (Felony is
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
committed) if one passenger escapes and the
escapes cause injury/ death the robber is liable
for attempted robbery with intimidation.
(PEOPLE VS PAGE 77 SCRA 348 355)
US VS VALDEZ, 41 PHIL 497 – page 69
10. Doctrine of Proximate Cause
Felony committed must be the proximate cause
of the resulting injury.
PROXIMATE CAUSE
That cause which in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
cause produces the injury and which the result
would not have occurred.
PROXIMATE LEGAL CAUSE
Is that acting first and producing the injury, either
immediately, or setting other events in motion all
constituting a natural and continuous chain of
events ,each having a close casual connection
with its immediate predecessor.
FELONY COMMITTED IS NOT THE PROXIMATE
CAUSE:
 Not direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed. – If
there is an active force that intervened
between the felonies and the result. That
active force is distinct or absolute foreign
from felonious act.
 The resulting injury is due to the
intentional act of the victim.
11. Impossible Crimes
Requisites:
 The act performed would be against
person and property
6|Page
 Act was done with evil intent
 Its accomplishment is inherently
impossible or that the means employed is
either inadequate or in effectual
 Act performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the
RPC.
(E.g. if there is a grave threats which is
punishable under Art 282 or attempted
felony)
If act performed against person or property
would be an offense there is no impossible
crimes.
Inherent impossibility of its accomplishment,
there must be:
 Legal impossibility
 Physical impossibility
Purpose of punishing impossible crimes
To suppress criminal propensity or criminal
tendencies objectively, the offender has not
committed a felony but subjectively he is a
criminal.
12. Art 5
“IN CONNECTION WITH ACTS WHICH SHOULD
BE REPRESSED BUT WHICH ARE NOT COVERED
BY THE LAW”
TRIAL OF A CRIMINAL CASE REQUIRES:
 The act committed by the accused appears
not punishable by any law
 But the court deems it proper to repress
such act.
 In that case the court must render the
proper decision by dismissing the case and
acquitting the accused
 The judge must them make a report to the
Chief Executive stating the reasons which
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
induce him too believe that the said act
should be made the subject of penal
legislation.
“IN CASE OF EXESSIVE PENALTY”, REQUIRES:
 The court after trial finds the accused
guilty
 Penalty provided by law and which the
court imposes for the crime committed
appear to be clearly excessive
o Accused acted with lesser degree of
malice
o There is no injury or the injury
caused is less gravity
 Court shall not suspend the execution of
the sentence
 Judge should submit a statement to Chief
Executive through the Secretary of Justice
recommending clemency
* Although the petitioner was convicted under
special law, the court is not precluded from giving
the RPC suppletory application in light of Art 10
and our ruling in PEOPLE VS SIMON, 234 SCRA
55, 574
13. Art 6 Stages of Execution
1. Consummated – when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment
are present.
2. Frustrated – when the offender performs all
the acts of execution which would produce the
felony as a consequence but which, do not
produce it by reason of causes independent of
the will of the perpetrator.
3. Attempted – when the offender commence
the commission of a felony directly by overt
acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony by
7|Page
reason of some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance.
Development Crime Stages (stage from
conceiving to realization):
1. Internal Act – Ideas (Intention and effects must
concur)
2. External Acts
a. Preparatory Act (ordinarily not punishable)
A proposal and Conspiracy to commit felony is
not punishable.
XPN:
 When the law provides for their
punishment in certain felonies ( Art 8)
 Preparatory act which are considered by
law independent crimes punishable
o Example: Possession of picklocks
under Art 304 is a preparatory act
to the commission of Robbery (Art
299 or 303)
b. Acts of Execution (punishable under the RPC)
Stages – Attempted, Frustrated and
Consummated
14. Attempted Stage
ELEMENTS:
 Commence the commission directly by
overt acts
 He does not perform all acts of execution
which should produce the felony
 Non-performance of all acts was due to
cause or accident other than his
spontaneous desistance
COMMENCE COMMISSION OF A FELONY
DIRECTLY BY OVERTACTS, REQUISITES:
 There be external acts
 Such external acts have direct connection
with the crime intended to be committed.
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
*To constitute ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE THE
PERSON USING FIREARMS – must first fire the
same without inflicting a mortal wound
NO blow was struck – Not an overt act
Can be the intent to kill
External acts must be a direct connection with
the crime intended. E.g. Attempted trespassing
(PEOPLE VS LAMAHANG 61 PHIL 703)
Intension
- Must be viewed from nature of the act
executed by him and not from his
admission
- Act susceptible to double interpretation
(in favor/against/innocent/ punishable
act) cannot furnish ground or attempted
crime.
OTHER THAN HIS OWN SPONTANEOUS
DESISTANCE
- One who takes part in planning s criminal
act but desists in its actual commission is
exempt from criminal liability
- It is not necessary that it be actuated by a
good motive, the code only requires that
the discontinuance of the crime comes
from the person who has begun it and he
stops at his own free will.
Attempted Felony – offender never passed
subjective phase of the offense.
SUBJECTIVE PHASE – it is the portion of the acts
constituting the crime starting from the point
where the offender begins the commission of
the crime to that point where he has still
control over his acts; including their natural
course.
8|Page
15. Frustrated Stage
Elements:
 Performs all acts f execution
 All acts performed would produced the
felony as a consequence
 But felony not produced
 By reason of causes independent of the
will of the perpetrator
Determining Felony:
 Nature of offense
 Elements constituting the felony
 Manner of committing the same
ARSON
Frustrated – having rags set to fire, socks soaked
in kerosene and placing it near wooden partition
Attempted – offender was about to strike a
match to set the house on fire when he was
apprehended.
ESTAFA
Frustrated – cashier receive sales which he put
in his pocket, instead of giving to the cashier.
Consummated – Abuse of confidence and
damage to the offended party must occur.
16. Frustrated Theft
THERE IS NO CRIME OF FRUSTRATED THEFT
Theft is produced when there is deprivation of
personal property due to its taking by one with
intent to gain.
Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the
moment the offender gains possession of the
thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of
the same. (People vs Obillom 411 Phil 139,
150[2001]; People vs Bernabe, 448 Phil 269,
 CRIMINAL LAW 1
280 [2003]; People vs Bustinera, G.R. No.
148233, June 8, 2004)
Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of one’s
personal property, is the element which produces
the felony in its consummated stage. At the same
time, without unlawful taking as an act of
execution, the offense could only be attempted
theft.
With this consideration, the court can only
conclude that under Article 308 of the RPC theft
cannot have a frustrated stage. Theft can only be
attempted or consummated. (Valenzuela vs
People, et al G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
17. Frustrated or Attempted Homicide
Frustrated Homicide- all the acts of execution is
performed, however there was an intervention
(example: medical intervention) the victim
survived.
Attempted Homicide- The accused intend to kill
his victim but was not able to perform all acts
necessary to consummate the killing. Could be
that wound inflicted did not affect vital organs
and before shooting he gives warning.
Manner of Committing the Crime:
1. Formal Crime – consummated in one instant
(e.g. slander - no attempt in formal crime)
2. Crime Consummated by mere attempt or
proposal or by overt acts
3. Felony omission (no attempted stage)
4. Crimes requiring the intervention of two
persons to commit them are consummated by
were agreement. (Bribery, Corruption of public
officer)
5. Material Crimes (three stages of execution, like
homicide, rape, etc)
9|Page
18. Consummated Stage
All elements of the felony for which the accused
is prosecuted must be present in order to hold
him liable therefore it its consummated stage.
19. Art 8 – Conspiracy and Proposal to commit
felony
Mere conspiracy or proposal is not a felony.
(Preparatory acts) Unless there s a specific
provision in the RPC providing penalty for
conspiracy or proposal to commit a felony.
(Treason, rebellion and sedition)
It is sufficient that two or more persons agree and
decide to commit treason, rebellion and sedition.
If they commit, say treason, they will be held
liable for treason and the conspiracy which
they had before committing treason is only a
manner of incurring criminal liability, it is not a
separate offense.
*Conspiracy to commit / is not punished in the
RPC.
Indication of conspiracy:
 Their act aimed at the same object
 Act must show a common design (there
must be unity of purpose and unity in the
execution of the unlawful objective)
Requisites of conspiracy:
 Two or more persons came to an
agreement
 That the agreement concerned the
commission of a felony
 That the execution of the felony be
decided upon
 CRIMINAL LAW 1

21. Art 9 (R.A. No. 10951)

Requisites of proposal: Grave Felonies (Afflictive penalties): R2P3
 That a person has decided to commit a  Reclusion Perpetua
felony  Reclusion Temporal
 That he proposes its execution to some  Perpetual or Temporary absolute
other person or persons disqualification
 Perpetual or Temporary special
CASE: disqualification
 When two or more persons aim their acts  Prision Mayor
towards the accomplishment of the same
unlawful object, each doing a part so that Less Grave Felonies (correctional penalties)
their acts, though apparently independent, PASD:
were in fact connected and cooperative  Prision Correccional
indicating closeness of personal  Arresto Mayor
association and a concurrence of  Suspension
sentiment, conspiracy may be inferred.  Destierro
And where there is conspiracy, the act of
one is deemed the act of all. (People vs Light Felonies:
Aleta G.R. No. 179708. April 16, 2009)  Arresto Menor
  Fine
20. Direct Proof of Conspiracy is not required
22. Art 10
Conspiracy can be presumed from and proven by
acts of the accused themselves when the said acts
point to a joint purpose and design, concerted III. CIRCUMSTANCES
action and community of interest. Conspiracy AFFECTING CRIMINAL
renders all the conspirators as co-principals
regardless of the extent and character of their LIABILITY
participation because in contemplation of law,
the act of one conspirator is the act of all. Article 11
Justifying Circumstances – matters of defense
Quantum of proof required to establish and is incumbent upon the accused.
conspiracy: This article recognizes the acts of such person as
- Evidence of actual cooperation rather justified. Such persons are not criminals, as
than cognizance or approval of an there is no crime committed.
illegal act is required.
- Must be established by positive and ART 11 PAR 1 Self- Defense
conclusive evidence
Self- Defense - The act lacks criminal intent

10 | P a g e
 CRIMINAL LAW 1

REQUISITES: (URL)
1. Unlawful Aggression- indispensable requisite
2. Reasonable necessity of the means to
employed to prevent or repel it
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of
the person defending himself

NOTE: If any of the last 2 requisite is lacking this

renders as incomplete self defense and can be
appreciated as mitigating circumstance rather
than justifying.

4 Subjects of self-defense:
1. Person
2. Rights
3. Property
4. Honor

UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION- is equivalent to

assault or at least threatened assault of an
immediate and imminent kind.
- Has physical force or actual use of weapon

Article 12

Study the different between instigation vs.

entrapment- Bar question page 346
-

IV. CIRCUMSTANCES
AFFECTING CRIMINAL
LIABILITY

11 | P a g e