Pabustan, Mheryza D.

Crim 1

A. Yes, I will grant the motion to quash the motion for the reason that, under
the RPC we use the English Rule, therefore crimes committed aboard a
vessel within the territorial waters of another country are triable in that
country. In the case at bar, the stabbing did not happen within the
Philippines territory and the vessel is not registered in the Philippines.

B. A is the only one liable for the death of G because A is the object of the
conspiracy. B, C and D did not know of the stabbing of G by A so they
cannot be held criminally liable. E cannot also be held liable because he was
not aware of the killing. For the injuries of F, A , B and C are the only liable. E
is not also liable because he had no knowledge of the plan.

C. AA’s defense will not prosper because there is conspiracy. Under the RPC
the act of one is the act of all, therefore

D. Yes, Gaston is liable for the death of Belle. Even though he did not intend to
kill Belle, under Art. 4 of the RPC criminal liability shall be incurred by any
person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be di erent from
what is intended.

E. OZ is liable for an impossible crime. Under Art 4 of the RPC an impossible

crime is an act which would be an o ense against person or property, were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the
employment of inadequate or ine ectual means. In this case it was
impossible to kill YO because the substance contained water and sugar and
not arsenic but OZ’s intention was to kill him.

F. Both Jerry and Buddy are liable for the crime of impossible crime. Based on
the facts given, there is conspiracy, therefore the act of one is the act of all.

Jerry and Buddy will be liable for the crime of less serious physical injury
because Jun was hospitalized for 10 days because of the powdered milk that
they gave ti him

G. No, A will still be held liable because even though he is defending his
daughter, he should not have killed A, he should not have put the law into his
hands.

H. For him not to incure criminal liability, all requisites must be present, rst,
there must be an unlawful aggression, second reasonable necessity of the
means employed to prevent or repel it and that the person defending be not
induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive. In this case A is just
defending B not knowing that B was the aggressor.

I. Pat Reyes did not act in the ful llment of his duty, he acted beyond it. He
though did not intend to kill Jun-jun. Pat Reyes should have not shot Junjun
because he already fell down.

fi
ff
ff
ff
fi
J. He must not be convicted. In the case of people vs. oanis, the accused must
be acquitted because there no intent to kill.