A. In 2005, Akagi was a senior college student when he met Ayako, a transferee.

The
two fell in love and eventually became sweethearts.
Five years after, they got married. They were blessed with three children- Sakuragi,
Rokawa and Sendoh. They live a simple yet happy life until Akagi became an alcoholic
and got terminated from his job due to insubordination.
In 2010, Akagi met Wendy, a single mom who was working in a nightclub. They had an
extramarital relations and met in secret.
Two Years after, Akagi filed with the court an action for the declaration of nullity of his
marriage with Ayako on the ground of absence of a marriage license (a nullity case).
In 2014, during the pendency of the nullity case, Akagi married Wendy. When Ayako
found out about the second marriage of Akagi and Wendy, she filed a criminal case for
Bigamy before the courts.
However, while the Bigamy case is still ongoing, a judgment was rendered in the nullity
case granting Akagi’s action and declaring his marriage with Ayako as null and void
because they were married without a valid marriage license. The judgment became final
and executory.
Sakuragi and Rokawa became furious upon learning what their Father did. They
became drug addicts and engage in illegal activities like illegal gambling or kidnapping.
As their funds were running out, they conspire to abduct their neighbor.
When Sakuragi and Rokawa went to the house of Cring, an 85 years old widow, for the
purpose of abducting her, they found her lifeless lying on a couch. They nevertheless
carried her corpse and brought it to a safe house.
Later on, Sakuragi sent a text message to Cring’s rich daughter, Llana, and from whom
he demanded ransom supposedly in exchange for her release from captivity. Believing
that her mother was still alive and fearing that they would kill Cring, Llana, as instructed
by Sakuragi, deposited Ten Million to the latter’s bank account.

Question:
1. May Akagi be later on convicted of Bigamy in the criminal ces? Why? Answer with
legal basis.
Yes, Akagi may later be convicted of bigamy in the criminal case even if a judgment
was rendered in the nullity case granting Donald’s action for declaration of nullity of his
marriage with Olga. In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held that the
crime of bigamy is consummated from the time the accused contracts a second
marriage before the judicial declaration of nullity of his prior marriage, regardless
of the fact that the first marriage was eventually declared void. [Pimentel v.
Pimentel, 13 September 2010]
2. What crime(s) may Sakuragi and Rokawa be aptly charged of? If there is any.
Sakuragi and Rokawa may aptly be charged of grave threats.
Under the Revised Penal Code, one of the modes by which grave threats is committed
is when the offender threatens another of the infliction of any wrong amounting to a
crime, upon the person of the offended party or that of his family, coupled with a
demand for money and that the offender attains his purpose. Here Peter and John
threatened the infliction of a crime, that is murder, upon Maria’s mother whom she
believed to be still alive, they made a demand for money upon Maria, and they attained
their purpose when Maria gave them ₱5 million. Hence Peter and John may be aptly
charged with grave threats.

B. Joan, who is the mother-in-law of Letty, unknowingly left her handbag, containing
among other things, her ATM card, when she visited Letty at her house. After having
discovered the same, Letty took said card and with it, was able to withdraw, through an
ATM, P30,000.00 from Joan’s account with the issuing bank. Is Letty criminally liable
therefor? What is the liability, if any?
Answer: Letty is not criminally liable but she is civilly liable. Under the Revised Penal
Code, it is provided that no criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the
commission of theft committed or caused mutually by ascendants or relatives by affinity
in the same line.
In this case, Letty committed the crime of theft against her mother-in-law, Joan, her
relative by affinity in the same line as an ascendant. Hence Letty is exempt from
criminal liability therefor.
Under the said law, while Letty is not criminal liable for theft, she is however civilly
liable to Joan for the amount of money that she had stolen from her.

c. Zeus has been employed as messenger of HIRAM, an entity engaged in the delivery
of remittances from abroad to its clients. One day, Zeus was tasked by REMIT to deliver
cash money in the amount of P50,000.00 to Lexee. Instead of transmitting the money to
the recipient, Zeus used the same to redeem a set of jewelry which he pawned to
Aldrew. What is/are the crime/s committed, if any?
Answer: THEFT
The Supreme Court has held that a person who converts or takes personal property
belonging to another over which the accused has merely physical not juridical
possession is not liable for estafa but for theft. Here Pedro only had physical not
juridical possession of the cash as it was turned over to him by the employer for delivery
to another person. Thus Pedro only had physical not juridical possession since he had
no right to the cash as against the employer REMIT. Hence Pedro is liable for theft not
estafa.

D. Dennis, armed with a gun, stopped a van along a major thoroughfare in Cebu City,
pointed the gun at the driver and shouted: "Tigil! Kidnap ito!"
Terrified, the driver, Eugene, stopped the van and allowed Dennis to board. Inside the
van were Alfred, a 6-year-old child, son of a multi-millionaire, and Sharlene, the child’s
nanny. Dennis told Eugene to drive to a deserted subdivision, and there, ordered the
driver to alight. Before Eugene was allowed to go, Dennis instructed him to tell Alfred’s
parents that unless they give a ransom of P50-million within two (3) days, Alfred would
be beheaded. Sharlene was told to remain in the van and take care of Alfred until the
ransom is paid. Dennis then drove the van to his safehouse.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Dennis commit to Alfred, Sharlene and Eugene?
Explain. (5%)

Ans: The crime committed against Alfred, the 6 year-old child, is Kidnapping with
Serious Illegal Dtention under Art. 267(4), RPC. The evident criminal intent of the
offender, Virgilio, is to lock up the child to demand ransom. Whether or not the ransom
was eventually obtained will not affect the crime committed because the demand for
ransom is not an element of the crime; it only qualifies the penalty to death but the
imposition of the penalty is now prohibited by Rep. Act. No. 9346.

As to Sharlene, the nanny of the child who was told to remain in the van and take. care
of the child until the ransom is paid, the crime committed is Serious Illegal Detention
because the offended party deprived of liberty is a female (Art. 267, par.4, RPC).

As to Eugene, the driver of the van who was seriously intimidated with a gun pointed at
him and directed to stop the van and allow the gun-man to board the same, and
thereafter to drive to a deserted place, the crime committed by Virgilio I Grave
Coercion (Art. 286, RPC) and Slight Illegal Detention (Art. 268, RPC) for holding the
driver before he was allowed to go.
TRUE OR FALSE
F 1. The creditor who resorts to forced labor of a child under the pretext of reimbursing
himself for the debt incurred by the child’s father commits the crime of slavery.
False, the proper offense is exploitation of child labor (Art. 273, RPC). Exploitation of
child labor is committed by a person, who under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a
debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person entrusted with the custody of a
minor, shall against the minor‟s will, retain him in his services.
T2. An uninhabited place is based upon the possibility of a person receiving assistance
from another.
F 3. DWELLING as used in the RPC also includes places devoted to business or
offices.
T 4. The policemen in intercepting and recording of communications for surveillance of
suspects need to have a court order.
T 5. Crimes against chastity are all private crimes.
F 6. In the crime of Adultery, there must be a marriage between the offender and the
offended party at the time the crime was committed. (valid)
F 7. Concubinage is committed by a one night stand of a married man with another
woman.
T 8. Destierro is a form punishment.
F 9. In Acts of Lasciviousness, the victim is always a woman.
F 10. In qualified and simple seduction, the victim must be a virgin.