TABLE OF CONTENTS 6.
Article 129 – Search Warrants
CRIMINAL LAW I ......................................... 1
I. REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC) BOOK I .... 2
A. Fundamental and General Principles In
Criminal Law ................................................... 2
1. Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita .............. 2
2. Suppletory Application of RPC to
Special Laws 3 10. Article 133 – Offending the Religious
3. Construction of Penal Laws ................. 4
4. Applicability and Effectivity of the
Penal Code 4 1. Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup d’etat,
5. Repeal and Amendment ........................ 8
B. Constitutional Limitations on the Power of
Congress to Enact Penal Laws ..................... 9
1. No Ex Post Facto Law or Bill of
Attainder 9 Associations
2. Equal Protection 9
3. Due Process 9 Resistance and Disobedience to,
4. Cruel or Inhuman Punishment ............ 9
C. FELONIES ................................................... 10
1. Felonies and Criminal Liability........... 10
2. Circumstances Affecting Criminal
Liability 25
3. Persons Liable and Degree of
Participation 72
D. PENALTIES................................................. 88
Principles 88
1. 88
2. Classification 89
3. Duration and Effects ........................... 90
4. Application 95
5. Graduation of Penalties ....................... 99
6. Accessory Penalties ............................ 101
7. Computation of Penalties.................. 104
8. Special Rules 106
9. Execution and Service of Penalties . 107
10. Suspension in Case of Insanity or
Minority 115
E. Criminal and Civil Liabilities .................... 117
1. Extinction of Criminal Liabilities..... 117
2. Civil Liabilities in Criminal Cases .... 121
CRIMINAL LAW II ................................... 129
II. REVISED PENAL CODE (BOOK II)........ 130
A. Title I. Crimes against National Security and
the Law of Nations .................................... 130
1. Crimes against National Security ..... 130
2. Crimes against the Law of Nations . 135
B. Title II. Crimes against Fundamental Laws
of the State ................................................... 140
1. Article 124 – Arbitrary Detention ... 140
2. Article 125 – Delay in the Delivery of
Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial
Authorities 142
3. Article 126 – Delaying Release ......... 142
4. Article 127 – Expulsion ..................... 142
5. Article 128 – Violation of Domicile 143
Maliciously Obtained, and Abuse in the
Service of Those Legally Obtained .. 143
7. Article 130 – Searching Domicile
without Witnesses ............................... 143
8. Article 131 – Prohibition, Interruption
and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
144
9. Article 132 – Interruption of Religious
Worship 144
Feelings 145
C. Title III. Crimes against Public Order ..... 148
Sedition and Disloyalty....................... 149
2. Chapter II: Crimes against Popular
Representation 153
3. Chapter III: Illegal Assemblies and
154
4. Chapter IV: Assault upon and
Persons in Authority and Their Agents
156
5. Chapter V: Public Disorders ............. 158
6. Chapter VI: Evasion of Service of
Sentence 160
7. Chapter VII: Commission of Another
Crime during Service of Penalty
Imposed for Another Previous Offense
161
D. Title IV. Crimes against Public Interest .. 168
1. Acts of Counterfeiting........................ 168
2. Acts of Forgery 171
3. Acts of Falsification ............................ 171
4. Other Falsities 176
E. Title V. Crimes Relative to Opium and
Other Prohibited Drugs............................. 183
F. Title VI. Crimes against Public Morals ... 189
1. Chapter I: Gambling and Betting ..... 189
2. Chapter II: Offenses against Decency
and Good Customs............................. 192
G. Title VII. Crimes Committed by Public
Officers ......................................................... 198
1. Chapter I: Preliminary Provisions .... 198
2. Chapter II: Malfeasance and
Misfeasance in Office ......................... 199
3. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal
Exactions and Transactions .............. 207
4. Chapter IV: Malversation of Public
Funds or Property ............................... 209
5. Chapter V: Infidelity of Public Officers
212
6. Chapter VI: Other Offenses or
Irregularities by Public Officers ........ 214
H. Title VIII. Crimes against Persons ........... 219
1. Chapter I: Destruction of Life .......... 219
2. Chapter II: Physical Injuries .............. 226
I. Title IX. Crimes against Personal Liberty
and Security .................................................. 240
1. Chapter I: Crimes against Liberty..... 240
 2. Chapter II: Crimes against Security . 245
3. Chapter III: Discovery and Revelation
of Secrets 251
J. Title X. Crimes against Property .............. 261
1. Chapter I: Robbery in General ......... 261
2. Chapter II: Brigandage....................... 267
3. Chapter III: Theft ............................... 268
4. Chapter IV: Usurpation ..................... 271
5. Chapter V: Culpable Insolvency ...... 272
6. Chapter VI: Swindling and Other
Deceits 272
7. Chapter VII: Chattel Mortgage ........ 281
8. Chapter VIII: Arson and Other Crimes
Involving Destruction........................ 282
9. Chapter IX: Malicious Mischief ....... 283
10. Chapter X: Exemption from Criminal
Liability 284
K. Title XI. Crimes against Chastity ............. 285
1. Article 333 – Adultery........................ 285
2. Article 334 – Concubinage ................ 286
3. Article 336 - Acts of Lasciviousness 287
4. Article 337 - Qualified Seduction..... 288
5. Article 338 - Simple Seduction ......... 290
6. Article 339 - Acts of Lasciviousness with
the Consent of the Offended Party . 290
7. Article 340 - Corruption of Minors . 290
8. Article 341 - White Slave Trade ....... 291
9. Article 342 - Forcible Abduction ..... 291
10. Article 343 - Consented Abduction. 292
11. Article 344 - Prosecution of Private
Offenses 292
12. Article 345: Civil Liability of Persons
Guilty of Crimes Against Chastity ... 294
13. Article 346 – Liability of Ascendants,
Guardians, Teachers and Other Persons
Entrusted with the Custody of the
Offended Party 294
L. Title XII. Crimes against the Civil Status of
Persons ......................................................... 296
1. Chapter I: Simulation of Births and
Usurpation of Civil Status ................. 296
2. Chapter II: Illegal Marriages ............. 297
M. Title XIII. Crimes against Honor ............ 299
1. Chapter I: Libel 299
2. Chapter II: Incriminatory Machinations
305
N. Title XIV. Quasi-Offenses ........................ 307
1. Article 365 - Imprudence and
Negligence 307
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

CRIMINAL LAW I
Criminal Law

Page 1 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
I. REVISED PENAL
CODE (RPC) BOOK I
*From here on, all Articles refer to the RPC, unless
otherwise indicated.
A. Fundamental and
General Principles In
Criminal Law
Definition of Criminal Law
That branch of public substantive law which defines
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their
punishment. [Reyes, citing cyc 129]
A crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of
a public law forbidding or commanding it. It a generic
term used to refer to a wrongdoing punished by
either the RPC or a special law. [Ortega]
Felonies are crimes punished under the RPC, while
offenses are crimes punished under the special law.
The Philippines does not have common law crimes.
Therefore, even though an act or omission is wrong
per se, there is no criminal liability if the act is not
punishable by a particular provision in penal law or
special penal law. There is no crime when there is no
law punishing the same (Nullum crimen nulla poena sine
lege).
However, not every law punishing an act or omission
may be valid as a criminal law. If the law punishing
an act is ambiguous, it is null and void on its face.
Sources of Criminal Law:
a. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) –
enacted January 1, 1932; based on the Spanish
Penal Code, US Penal Code, and Philippine
Supreme Court decisions.
b. Special penal laws
c. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial
Law.
Page 2 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Mala in Se and Mala
Prohibita
MALA IN SE (“evil in itself”)
A crime or an act that is inherently immoral, such as
murder, arson or rape. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Ed.]
When the acts are inherently immoral, they are mala
in se, even if punished under special law, like plunder
which requires proof of criminal intent. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560 (2001); Garcia v. Court
of Appeals, G.R. No. 157171 (2006); Ysidoro v. People,
G.R. No. 192330 (2012)]
Where malice is a factor, good faith is a defense.
MALA PROHIBITA (“prohibited evil”)
An act that is a crime merely because it is prohibited
by statute, although the act itself is not necessarily
immoral. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th Ed.]
General Rule: Performance of the act itself will
constitute the offense. Dolo is not required in crimes
mala prohibita.
In those crimes which are mala prohibita, the act alone
irrespective of the intent, constitutes the offense.
Good faith and absence of criminal intent are not
valid defenses in crimes mala prohibita.
Exceptions:
a. People v. Landicho [G.R. No. 116600 (1996)] – If
the act is done in order to comply with
government policies.
An individual is not criminally liable despite a law
prohibiting carrying of firearms if he was
authorized to buy and collect guns, then sell to
authorities later on.
b. US v. Samson [G.R. No. 5807 (1910)] – Civilian
guards acting in good faith in carrying firearms
with no intention of committing an offense were
able to claim lack of intent as a defense.
c. People v. Mallari [G.R. No. L-58886 (1988)] – A
pending application for permanent permit to
possess a firearm, and did not hide possession of
firearms in front of authorities was also free from
liability because of good faith.
d. People v. Lucero [G.R. No. 97936 (1995)]– When
the accused was given authority to carry a
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

revolver in order to capture or kill a wanted Mala in Se Mala Prohibita

person. There are three stages:
e. Cuenca v. People [G.R. No. L-27586 (1970)] – The No such stages of
attempted, frustrated &
accused had assumed that his employer had the execution
consummated
necessary license to possess firearm which was As to persons criminally liable
turned over to him while he was on duty as one The principal,
of the security guards of the licensed security accomplice & Generally, only the
agency. accessory. principal is liable.
A crime in the RPC can absorb a crime punishable by Penalty is computed on Penalty of offenders is
a special law if the latter is a necessary element of the the basis of whether he same whether they
felony defined in the Code; but a special law can is a principal offender acted as mere
never absorb a crime punishable under the RPC, or merely an accomplices or
because violations of the Revised Penal Code are accomplice or accessories
more serious than a violation of a special law. [People accessory
v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 13981 (1960)] As to what laws are violated
Generally, the RPC. Generally, special laws.
Mala in Se Mala Prohibita
As to division of penalties
As to nature
Penalties may be
Wrong from its very There is no such
divided into degrees
nature; So serious in division of penalties.
and periods.
their effects on society Wrong because it is
as to call for prohibited by law;
condemnation of 2. Suppletory Application of
members. RPC to Special Laws
As to use of good faith as a defense
Good faith a valid General Rule: RPC provisions supplement the
defense, unless the Good faith is not a provisions of special laws. [Art. 10]
crime is the result of defense.
culpa The Revised Penal Code supplies what is lacking in
As to criminal intent as an element special laws.
Criminal intent is
Criminal intent is an immaterial, BUT still Examples
element. requires intelligence & a. Art. 39 – Imprisonment in case the person
voluntariness convicted cannot pay fine (Subsidiary
As to degree of accomplishment of crime Imprisonment)
Degree of b. Art. 45 – Confiscation of instruments used in the
The act gives rise to a
accomplishment is commission of the crime
crime only when
taken into account for
consummated.
the punishment. Exceptions:
As to mitigating and aggravating a. Where the special law provides otherwise. [Art
circumstances 10]
They are taken into b. When the provisions of the Code are impossible
They are not taken into of application, either by express provision or by
account in imposing
account. necessary implication, as in those instances
penalty
As to degree of participation where the provisions in question are peculiar to
When there is more Degree of participation the Code. [Regalado]
than one offender, the is generally not taken
degree of participation into account. All who Provisions of the RPC on penalties cannot be applied
of each in the participated in the act to offenses punishable under special laws. Special
commission is taken are punished to the laws do not provide a scale of penalties where a given
into account. same extent. penalty can be lowered by one or two degrees. Special
As to stages of execution laws use the term “imprisonment” instead. [Reyes]

Page 3 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

The stages of commission of the RPC (Attempted, c. Spanish Text of the RPC
Frustrated, Consummated) cannot be applied to
offenses punished by special laws. An accused may Prevails over its English
be acquitted because mere attempt to commit a crime Translation
is not punishable under the special law. [US v. Basa,
G.R. No. L-3540 (1907)] In the construction or interpretation of the provision
of the RPC, the Spanish text is controlling, because it
In the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, was approved by the Philippine Legislature in its
the general provisions of the RPC which, by their Spanish text. [People v. Manaba, G.R. No. L-38725
nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied (1933)]
suppletorily. [Ladonga v. People, G.R. No. 141066
(2005)] d. Retroactive Application if
Favorable to the Accused
3. Construction of Penal Laws
See Characteristics of Criminal Law, Prospectivity and
Strict construction against the State and liberally in Art. 22.
favor of the accused
4. Applicability and Effectivity
a. Pro Reo Doctrine
of the Penal Code
Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied
and the law admits of two interpretations – one a. General
lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, b. Territorial
that interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the c. Prospective
offender will be adopted.
a. Generality
Basis: The fundamental rule that all doubts shall be
construed in favor of the accused and presumption 1. General Rule:
of innocence of the accused. [Art III, Section 14(2),
1987 Constitution] Penal laws are obligatory on all persons who live or
sojourn in Philippine territory, regardless of
Penal statutes should be strictly construed against the nationality, gender, or other personal circumstances,
State only when the law is ambiguous and there is subject to the principles of public international law
doubt as to its interpretation. Where the law is clear and to treaty stipulations. [Art. 14, NCC]
and unambiguous, there is no room for the
application of the rule. [People v. Gatchalian, G.R. No. 2. Excepstions:
90301 (1998)]
a. Treaty Stipulations
b. Equipoise Rule
Art. 2. – “Except as provided in the treaties or
When the evidence of the prosecution and the laws of preferential application …”
defense are equally balanced, the scale should be
tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the
constitutional presumption of innocence. [Ursua v. Art. 14, Civil Code. – “… subject to the
CA, G.R. No. 112170 (1996); Corpuz v. People, G.R. principles of public international law and to treaty
No. 74259 (1991)] stipulations.”

Example:
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) is an agreement
between the Philippine and US Government
regarding the treatment of US Armed Forces visiting
the Philippines. It was signed on Feb. 10, 1998.

Page 4 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic

The US and Philippines agreed that: representatives in the Philippines.
1. US shall have the right to exercise within the General Rule: The following persons are exempt from
Philippines all criminal and disciplinary arrest and imprisonment, and their properties are
jurisdiction conferred on them by the military exempt from distraint, seizure and attachment:
law of the US over US personnel in RP; [AMS]
2. US authorities exercise exclusive jurisdiction 1. Ambassadors
over US personnel with respect to offenses, 2. Public Ministers
including offenses relating to the security of the 3. Domestic servant of ambassadors or ministers
US punishable under the law of the US, but not
under the laws of RP; Exceptions:
3. US military authorities shall have the primary 1. The person is a citizen or inhabitant of the
right to exercise jurisdiction over US personnel Philippines
subject to the military law of the US in relation 2. The writ or process issued against him is
to: founded upon a debt contracted before he
4. Offenses solely against the property or security entered upon such service or the domestic
of the US or offenses solely against the property servant is not registered with the Department of
or person of US personnel; and Foreign Affairs.
5. Offenses arising out of any act or omission done
in performance of official duty. [Reyes] Note: RA 75 is not applicable when the foreign
country adversely affected does not provide similar
Rule On Jurisdiction Under The VFA protection to our diplomatic representatives.
Crimes Jurisdiction
Crime punishable b. Warship Rule
Philippines has
under Philippine laws,
exclusive jurisdiction. A warship of another country, even though docked
but not under US laws
Crime punishable in the Philippines, is considered an extension of the
US has exclusive territory of its respective country. This also applies to
under US laws, but not
jurisdiction. embassies.
under Philippine laws
There is concurrent
Crime is punishable Offenses committed in warships or embassies,
jurisdiction, but the
under both US and though in the Philippines, are therefore not covered
Philippines has
Philippine laws by the generality principle.
primary jurisdiction.
Crime is committed by
a US personnel against c. Principles of Public International Law
US has exclusive
the security and
jurisdiction. The following persons are exempt from the
property of the US
alone provisions of the RPC: [SCAMMP]
1. Sovereigns and other heads of state
Generally, the Philippines cannot refuse the request 2. Charges d’ affaires.
of the US for waiver of jurisdiction and has to 3. Ambassadors
approve the request for waiver except if the crime is 4. Ministers
of national importance: 5. Minister resident
1. Those crimes defined under RA 7659 (Heinous 6. Plenipotentiary
crimes) [Article 31, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations]
2. Those crimes defined under RA 7610 (Child
Abuse cases) Consuls, vice-consuls, and other commercial
3. Those crimes defined under RA 9165 representatives of foreign nations do not possess the
(Dangerous Drugs cases) status of, and cannot claim the privileges and
immunities accorded to ambassadors and ministers.
Laws of Preferential Application [Wheaton, International Law, Sec. 249]
R.A. No. 75 penalizes acts which would impair the
proper observance by the Republic and inhabitants of
the Philippines of the immunities, rights, and

Page 5 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
b. Territoriality
1. General Rule:
Penal laws of the country have force and effect only
within its territory.
It cannot penalize crimes committed outside its
territory.
The territory of the country is not limited to the land
where its sovereignty resides but includes also its
maritime and interior waters as well as its atmosphere. [Art.
2]
2. Exceptions:
a. Extraterritorial crimes
Punishable even if committed outside the Philippine
territory. [Art. 2]
Crimes committed aboard a Philippine ship or
airship [Art 2, Par. 1]
The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels if the crime
is committed while the ship is treading:
1. Philippine waters (intraterritorial), or
2. The high seas (extraterritorial)
Requisites:
1. The ship or airship must not be within the
territorial jurisdiction of another country
2. The ship or airship must be registered in the
Philippines under Philippine laws
Merchant Vessels
Two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes committed
aboard merchant vessels while in the territorial waters of
another country (i.e. a foreign vessel treading Philippine
waters OR Philippine vessels treading foreign
waters):
1. FRENCH RULE: It is the flag or nationality of the
vessel which determines jurisdiction UNLESS the
crime violates the peace and order of the host
country.
2. ENGLISH RULE: the location or situs of the crime
determines jurisdiction UNLESS the crime
merely relates to internal management of the
vessel.
The Philippines adheres to the ENGLISH RULE.
Page 6 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
The general rule will create a presumption of
jurisdiction, and identifies upon whom the burden of
proving a contrary jurisdiction belongs to.
Thus, when a felony is committed on a merchant ship
within Philippine territory, Philippine jurisdiction is
presumed, and the accused must prove lack of
jurisdiction because the felony relates to the internal
management of the ship.
b. Foreign warships
When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a
foreign country, the nationality of the vessel will always
determine jurisdiction because war vessels are part of the
sovereignty of the country to whose naval force they
belong.
Note: The country of registry determines the
nationality of the vessel, not its ownership. Thus,
Filipino-owned vessel registered in China must fly the
Chinese flag.
International Theories on Aerial Jurisdiction
Free Zone Theory
The atmosphere over the country is free and not
subject to the jurisdiction of the subjacent state,
except for the protection of its national security
and public order.
Relative Theory
The subjacent state exercises jurisdiction over the
atmosphere only to the extent that it can
effectively exercise control thereof.
Absolute Theory
The subjacent state has complete jurisdiction over
the atmosphere above it subject only to the
innocent passage by air craft of a foreign country.
Under this theory, if the crime is committed in an
aircraft, no matter how high, as long as it can be
established that it is within the Philippine
atmosphere, Philippine criminal law (See Anti-
Hijacking Law) will govern.
Note: The Philippines adopts the Absolute
Theory.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
c. Forging/Counterfeiting of Coins or
Currency Notes in the Philippines [Art 2,
Par. 2]
Forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank
note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order
the appearance of a true genuine document or by
erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering, by any
means, the figures, letters, words, or signs contained
therein.
If forgery is committed abroad, it must refer only to
Philippine coin, currency note, obligations and
securities.
d. Should introduce into the country the
above-mentioned obligations and
securities. [Art 2, Par. 3]
The introduction of forged or counterfeited
obligations and securities into the Philippines is as
dangerous as the forging or counterfeiting of the
same, to the economic interest of the country.
Those who introduced the counterfeit items are
criminally liable even if they were not the ones who
counterfeited the obligations and securities. On the
other hand, those who counterfeited the items are
criminally liable even if they did not introduce the
counterfeit items.
e. When public officers or employees
commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions. [Art 2, Par. 4]
The crimes which may be committed are:
1. Direct bribery (Art.210)
2. Qualified Bribery (Art. 211-A)
3. Indirect bribery (Art.211)
4. Corruption (Art.212)
5. Frauds against the public treasury (Art.213)
6. Possession of prohibited interest (Art.216)
7. Malversation of public funds or property (Art.
217)
8. Failure to render accounts (Art.218)
9. Illegal use of public funds or property (Art. 220)
10. Failure to make delivery of public funds or
property (Art.221)
11. Falsification by a public officer or employee
committed with abuse of his official position
(Art.171)
12. Those having to do with the discharge of their
duties in a foreign country. The functions
Page 7 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
contemplated are those, which are, under the
law:
a. Performed by the public officer;
b. In the foreign service of the Philippine
government;
c. In a foreign country.
A crime committed within the grounds of a
Philippine embassy on foreign soil shall be subject to
Philippine penal laws, although it may or may not
have been committed by a public officer in relation
to his official duties. Embassy grounds are considered
as extensions of the sovereignty of the country
occupying them. [See Minucher v. Court of Appeals, G.R.
No. 142396 (1992)]
f. Commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations
defined in Title One, Book 2, RPC [Art 2,
Par. 5]
Crimes against national security
1. Treason [Art.114]
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
[Art.115]
3. Misprision of treason [Art.116]
4. Espionage [Art.117]
Crimes against the law of nations
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
[Art.118]
2. Violation of neutrality [Art.119]
3. Correspondence with hostile country (Art.120)
4. Flight to enemy’s country [Art.121]
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or
in Philippine waters [Art.122]
Note: Crimes against public order (e.g., rebellion,
coup d’etat, sedition) committed abroad is under the
jurisdiction of the host country.
Terrorism is now classified as a crime against
national security and the law of nations.
R.A. 9372, Human Security Act of 2007 has
extraterritorial application.
Section 58 provides that the Act shall apply to
individual persons who, although physically outside
the territorial limits of the Philippines shall:
1. Conspire or plot to commit any of the crimes in
the Act;
2. Commit any of said crimes on board a Philippine
ship or airship;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
3. Commit any of said crimes within the embassy,
consulate, or diplomatic premises belonging to
or occupied by the Philippine government in an
official capacity;
4. Commit said crimes against Philippine citizens or
persons of Philippine descent where their
citizenship or ethnicity was a factor in the
commission of the crimes;
5. Commit said crimes directly against the
Philippine government.
c. Prospectivity
General rule: Acts or omissions will only be subject
to a penal law if they are committed AFTER a penal law
has taken effect. [Art. 21]
Conversely, acts or omissions which have been
committed before the effectivity of a penal law could
not be penalized by such penal law.
Exception: Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect
in so far as they favour the person guilty of a felony.
[Art. 22]
Exception to the Exception:
1. The new law is expressly made in applicable to pending
actions or existing cause of actions; or
2. The offender is a habitual criminal. [Art. 22]
5. Repeal and Amendment
KINDS OF REPEAL
a. Absolute or Total Repeal – A repeal is absolute
when the crime punished under the repealed law
has been decriminalized by the subsequent law.
If the new law totally repeals the existing law
so that the act which was penalized under
the old law is no longer punishable, the crime
is obliterated. [Reyes]
1. Pending cases are dismissed, regardless of
whether the accused is a habitual criminal.
2. Unserved penalties imposed are remitted.
3. The offender already serving sentence is
entitled to be released unless the repealing
law is expressly made inapplicable to those
who are serving sentence at the time of
repeal.
Page 8 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Note: Habitual criminals will continue serving
their sentence.
Habitual Criminal
Pending case Serving sentence
Continue serving
Case is dismissed
sentence
b. Partial or Relative Repeal – A repeal is partial
when the crime punished under the repealed law
continues to be a crime in spite of the repeal.
[Ortega]
If the case is still pending in court and the
repeal is favorable to the accused, the
repealing law must be applied, regardless of
whether he is a habitual criminal or not,
EXCEPT when there is reservation in said law
that it does not apply to pending cases.
For offenders already serving sentence, the
repealing law which is more lenient must be
applied, EXCEPT when there is reservation to that
effect or when he is a habitual criminal.
EFFECTS OF AMENDMENT OF PENAL
LAW
If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the new
law, the new law shall be applied, EXCEPT when the
offender is a habitual delinquent or when the new law is
made not applicable to pending action or existing causes
of action.
If the new law imposes a heavier penalty, the law
in force at the time of the commission of the offense
shall be applied.
If the fine is increased but the penalty of
imprisonment is decreased, it is not ex post facto
law and the penalty is retroactively applied. [Cruz]
Rule of prospectivity also applies to judicial decisions,
administrative rulings and circulars. [Art. 8, Civil Code]
Rationale for the prospectivity rule: the
punishability of an act must be reasonably known for
the guidance of society. [People v. Jabinal, G.R. No. L-
30061 (1974)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
B. Constitutional
Limitations on the Power
of Congress to Enact
Penal Laws
1. No Ex Post Facto Law or
Bill of Attainder
Sec. 22, Art. III, Constitution. No ex post facto
law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex Post Facto Law
An ex post facto law is one which:
a. makes criminal an act done before the passage of
the law and which was innocent when done, and
punishes such an act;
b. aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it
was, when committed;
c. changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime
when committed;
d. 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;
e. assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation of
a right for something which when done was
lawful; and
f. deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful
protection to which he has become entitled, such
as the protection of a former conviction or
acquittal, or a proclamation of amnesty [In re: Kay
Villegas Kami, Inc., G.R. No. L-32485 (1970)]
Bill of Attainder
A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts
punishment without trial. Its essence is the
substitution of a legislative act for a judicial
determination of guilt. [People v. Ferrer, G.R. No. L-
32613-14 (1972)]
2. Equal Protection
Sec. 1, Art. III, Constitution. No person shall be
deprived of life, liberty or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the
equal protection of the laws.
Page 9 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Penal laws must apply generally to all people who are
under the same class. Such acts and omissions
punished as crimes must be clearly defined.
3. Due Process
Sec. 14 (1), Art. III, Constitution. No person
shall be held to answer for a criminal offense
without due process of law.
4. Cruel or Inhuman
Punishment
Sec. 19, Art. III, Constitution. Excessive fines
shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or
inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death
penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling
reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress
hereafter provides for it. Any death penalty already
imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
Under RA 9364, An Act Prohibiting the
Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines,
RA 8177 (Act Designating Death by Lethal
Injection), RA 7659 (Death Penalty Law), and other
acts imposing the death penalty were repealed or
amended accordingly.
In lieu thereof,
a. Reclusion perpetua shall be imposed when the law
violated makes use of the nomenclature of the
penalties of the RPC.
b. Life imprisonment shall be imposed when the law
violated does not make use of the nomenclature
of the penalties of the RPC.
The death penalty is still in the statutes but the law
prohibits its imposition.
Persons convicted of crimes punished by reclusion
perpetua shall not be eligible for parole under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law.
U.P. LAW BOC
C. FELONIES
1. Felonies and Criminal
Liability
Crime
Whether the wrongdoing is punished under the
Revised Penal Code or under a special law, the
generic word “crime” can be used.
Felony
Refers only to violations of the Revised Penal Code.
A crime punishable under a special law is not referred
to as a felony. “Crime” or “offense” is the proper
term.
Provisions in the RPC that use the term “felony” do
not extend to crimes under special laws.
How committed
Art. 3. Definitions. – Acts and omissions
punishable by law are felonies (delitos).
Felonies are committed not only be means of
deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent and there is fault when the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
GENERAL ELEMENTS OF FELONIES:
a. An act or omission
1. Act – Any kind of body movement which
tends to produce some effect in the external
world; includes possession
2. Omission – The failure to perform a
positive duty which one is bound to do
under the law. It is important that there is a
law requiring the performance of an act; if
there is no positive duty, there is no liability.
a. Misprision of Treason (Art 116) –
Failure to report knowledge of treason
despite allegiance to the Philippines
b. Disloyalty of Public Officers (Art
137) – Failure of Public Officers to act
properly upon a rebellion
c. Prosecution of Offenses; negligence
and tolerance (Art 208) – Maliciously
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
refraining from prosecuting violators of
law
d. Conniving with or consenting to
evasion (Art 223) – Failure to act on
the responsibility to take charge of a
prisoner
e. Refusal to Discharge Elective Office
(Art 234) – Refusal to discharge one’s
duties
f. Abandonment of person in danger
and abandonment of one’s own
victim – Failure to render assistance
when required by law to do so
g. PD 1153 – Requiring the planting of
one tree every month for five
consecutive years by every citizen of the
Philippines
b. Comitted by means of:
1. Dolo (i.e. willfully) or
2. Culpa (i.e. negligently)
c. Punished by the Code
Offense
A crime punished under a special law is called a
statutory offense.
Misdemeanor
A minor infraction of the law, such as a violation of
an ordinance.
a. Classification of Felonies
Purpose. To bring about proportionate penalty and
equitable punishment.
1. According to Gravity of Penalties
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and
light felonies. - Grave felonies are those to which
the law attaches the capital punishment or
penalties which in any of their periods are
afflictive, in accordance with Art. 25 of this Code.
Grave felonies
Those to which the law attaches the capital punishment
or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive.
Reclusion perpetua
a. Reclusion temporal
b. Perpetual or Absolute DQ
c. Perpetual or Temporary Special DQ
d. Prision mayor
Page 10 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
e. Fine more than P6,000
Less grave felonies
Those which the law punishes with penalties which
in their maximum period is correctional.
a. Prision correccional
b. Arresto mayor
c. Suspension
d. Destierro
e. Fines equal to or more than P200
Light felonies
Those infractions of law for the commission of
which the penalty is arresto menor, or a fine not
exceeding P200, or both.
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable –
Light felonies are punishable only when they have
been consummated, with the exception of those
committed against person or property.
Why punishable only when consummated
They produce light, insignificant moral, and material
injuries that public conscience is satisfied with
providing a light penalty for their consummation.
Who are punished
Principals and accomplices only.
Examples (MATHS)
a. Malicious mischief when the value of the damage
does not exceed two hundred pesos or cannot be
estimated
b. Alteration of boundary marks
c. Theft when the value of the thing stolen is less
than 5 pesos and theft is committed under the
circumstances enumerated under Art. 308 par. 3
d. Intriguing against Honor
e. Slight physical injuries
Importance of Classification
a. to determine whether these felonies can be
complexed or not;
b. to determine the prescription of the crime and the
prescription of the penalty.
Take note that when the Revised Penal Code speaks
of grave and less grave felonies, the definition makes
a reference specifically to Art. 25 of the Revised Penal
Code (Penalties which may be imposed).
PHP-200 fine. A fine of exactly PHP-200 is for light
felony under art. 9; but is correctional penalty
under art. 26.
Page 11 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
In determining prescription of crimes, apply Art. 9.
In determining the prescription of penalty, apply Art.
26.
If the penalty is exactly P200.00, apply Art. 26 (with
respect to prescription of penalties). It is considered as a
correctional penalty and it prescribes in 10 years.
2. According to Stages of Execution
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated and
attempted felonies – Consummated felonies as
well as those which are frustrated and attempted,
are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment
are present; and it is frustrated when the offender
performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender
commences the commission of a felony directly or
over acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony by
reason of some cause or accident other than this
own spontaneous desistance.
The three stages are:
a. Attempted – When the offender commences
the commission of a felony directly by overt
acts but does not produce the felony by reason
of some cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance
b. Frustrated – When the offender performs all
the acts of execution which would produce the
felony but does not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator
c. Consummated – When all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment
are present; the felony is produced
The classification of stages of a felony in Article 6 is
true only to crimes under the Revised Penal
Code. It does NOT apply to crimes punished under
special laws.
However, even certain crimes which are punished
under the Revised Penal Code do not admit of these
stages.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
a. Attempted
Elements:
1. The offender commences the commission
of the felony directly by overt acts;
2. He does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony;
3. The non-performance of all acts of
execution was due to cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.
Overt Act
Some physical activity or deed, indicating the
intention to commit a particular crime
More than a mere planning or preparation, which if
carried to its complete termination following its
natural course, without being frustrated by external
obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the
perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a
concrete offense. (Reyes, 2008)
Marks the commencement of the subjective phase
Subjective phase
That portion of the acts constituting a crime, starting
from the point where the offender begins the commission
of the crime to that point where he still has control over
his acts including their (act’s) natural course
If between those two points, the offender is stopped
by reason of any cause outside of his own voluntary
desistance, the subjective phase has not been passed
and it is merely an attempt.
Desistance
An absolutory cause which negates criminal liability
because the law encourages a person to desist from
committing a crime.
Does not negate all criminal liability, if the desistance
was made when acts done by him already resulted in a
felony, the offender will still be criminally liable for the
felony brought about by his act.
What is negated is only the attempted stage, but there
may be other felonies arising from his act.
Example: An attempt to kill that results in physical
injuries leads to liability for the injuries inflicted
Note: Desistance is recognized only in the attempted
stage of the felony.
Page 12 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
If the felony is already in its frustrated stage,
desistance will NOT negate criminal liability.
People v. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433(2000):
The mother of the 4-year-old victim caught the
houseboy Campuhan in the act of almost raping
her daughter.
The hymen of the victim was still intact. However,
since it was decided in People v. Orita that entry
into labia is considered rape even without rupture
and full penetration of the hymen, a question
arises whether what transpired was attempted or
consummated rape.
Held: There was only attempted rape.
• Mere touching of external genitalia by the
penis is already rape.
• Touching should be understood as inherently
part of entry of penis penetration and not
mere touching, in the ordinary sense, of the
pudendum.
• Requires entry into the labia, even if there be
no rupture of the hymen or laceration of the
vagina, to warrant a conviction for
consummated rape.
• Where entry into the labia has not been
established, the crime amounts to an
attempted rape.
• The prosecution did not prove that
Campuhan’s penis was able to penetrate
victim’s vagina because the kneeling position
of the accused obstructed the mother’s view
of the alleged sexual contact. The testimony
of the victim herself claimed that penis grazed
but did not penetrate her organ.
• There was only a shelling of the castle but no
bombardment of the drawbridge yet.
b. Frustrated
Elements:
1. The offender performs all the acts of execution;
2. All the acts performed would produce the felony
as a consequence;
3. But the felony is not produced;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of
the perpetrator.
The end of the subjective phase and the beginning of
the objective phase.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Objective phase
The result of the acts of execution, that is, the
accomplishment of the crime.
If the subjective and objective phases have been
passed there is a consummated felony.
People v. Listerio, G.R. No. 122099 (2000):
Brothers Jeonito and Marlon were walking when
they met a group composed of men who blocked
their path and attacked them with lead pipes and
bladed weapons. One stabbed Jeonito from
behind. Marlon was hit on the head.
Held:
• The crime is a frustrated felony not an
attempted offense considering that after being
stabbed and clubbed twice in the head as a
result of which Marlon lost consciousness and
fell. His attackers apparently thought he was
already dead and fled.
• A crime cannot be held to be attempted unless
the offender, after beginning the commission
of the crime by overt acts, is prevented,
against his will, by some outside cause from
performing all of the acts which should
produce the crime.
• In other words, to be an attempted crime, the
purpose of the offender must be thwarted by
a foreign force or agency which intervenes
and compels him to stop prior to the moment
when he has performed all of the acts which
should produce the crime as a consequence,
which acts it is his intention to perform.
• If he has performed all the acts which should
result in the consummation of the crime and
voluntarily desists from proceeding further, it
cannot be an attempt, but is a frustrated
felony.
Crimes which do not admit of frustrated stage
1. Rape
• The essence of the crime is carnal
knowledge.
• No matter what the offender may do to
accomplish a penetration, if there was no
penetration yet, it cannot be said that the
offender has performed all the acts of
execution.
Page 13 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
• We can only say that the offender in rape has
performed all the acts of execution when he
has effected a penetration.
• Once there is penetration, no matter how
slight it is, the offense is consummated. For
this reason, rape admits only of the
attempted and consummated stages, no
frustrated stage. [People v. Orita, G.R. No.
88724 (1990)]
2. Arson
• One cannot say that the offender, in the
crime of arson, has already performed all the
acts of execution which could produce the
destruction of the premises through the use
of fire, unless a part of the premises has
begun to burn.
• The crime of arson is therefore
consummated even if only a portion of the
wall or any part of the house is burned. The
consummation of the crime of arson does
not depend upon the extent of the damage
caused. [People v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-
31770 (1929)]
3. Bribery and Corruption of Public Officers
• The manner of committing the crime
requires the meeting of the minds between
the giver and the receiver.
• If there is a meeting of the minds, there is
consummated bribery or consummated
corruption.
• If there is none, it is only attempted.
4. Adultery
• This requires the sexual contact between
two participants.
• If that link is present, the crime is
consummated.
5. Physical Injuries
• Under the Revised Penal Code, the crime of
physical injuries is penalized on the basis of
the gravity of the injuries. There is no simple
crime of physical injuries. There is the need
to categorize because there are specific
articles that apply whether the physical
injuries are serious, less serious or slight.
Thus, one could not punish the attempted
or frustrated stage because one does not
know what degree of physical injury was
committed unless it is consummated.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

6. Theft
• Once there is unlawful taking, theft is
consummated.
• Either the thing was taken or not.
• It does not matter how long the property
was in the possession of the accused; it does
not matter whether the property was
disposed or not
DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME
1. Internal Acts
• Intent, ideas and plans; generally not
punishable, even if, had they been carried
out, they would constitute a crime
• The intention and act must concur.
• Illustration: Ernie plans to kill Bert

Rule of thumb: Felonies that do not require any 2. External Acts

result do not have a frustrated stage. a. Preparatory Acts
• Acts tending toward the crime.
Attempted and Frustrated Felonies • Ordinarily not punished except when
The difference between the attempted stage and the considered by law as independent crimes
frustrated stage lies in whether the offender has (i.e. Art. 304 – possession of picklocks)
performed all the acts of execution for the • These acts do not yet constitute even
accomplishment of a felony. the first stage of the acts of execution.
• Intent not yet disclosed.
Attempted Frustrated
Felony Felony • Illustration: Ernie goes to the kitchen to
get a knife.
Overt acts of All acts of
b. Acts of Execution
execution are execution are
1. Usually overt acts with a logical relation
started finished
Acts to a particular concrete offense.
BUT BUT
Performed 2. Punishable under the RPC.
Not all acts of Crime sought to
3. Illustration: Ernie stabs Bert.
execution are be committed is
present not achieved
Felony is commenced when:
Due to
1. There are external acts.
reasons other Due to
2. Such external acts have a direct connection with
than the intervening causes
the crime intended to be committed.
Why spontaneous independent of
desistance of the will of the
Indeterminate Offense
the perpetrator
It is one where the intent of the offender in
perpetrator
performing an act is not certain. The accused may be
Offender is
convicted of a felony defined by the acts performed
already in the
Offender still by him up to the time of desistance.
objective phase
in subjective
because all acts of
phase because The intention of the accused must be viewed
Position in execution are
from the nature of the acts executed by him and
he still has
the already present
the attendant circumstances, and not from his
control of his
Timeline and the cause of
acts, including admission
its non-
their natural
accomplishment
cause. People v. Lamahang, G.R. No. L-43530 (1935):
is other than the
Aurelio Lamahang was caught opening with an
offender’s will
iron bar a wall of a store of cheap goods in Fuentes
St. Iloilo. He broke one board and was unfastening
c. Consummated another when a patrolling police caught him. The
owners of the store were sleeping inside store as it
If the subjective and objective phases have been was early dawn. Lamahang was then convicted of
completed. attempted robbery.

Held: The crime committed was only attempted

trespass to dwelling. Attempt should have logical

Page 14 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
relation to a particular and concrete offense which
would lead directly to consummation. It is
necessary to establish an unavoidable connection
& logical & natural relation of cause and effect. It’s
also important to show clear intent to commit
crime. In the case at bar, we can only infer that his
intent was to enter by force, other inferences
are not justified by facts. Groizard: infer only from
nature of acts executed. Acts susceptible of double
interpretation can’t furnish ground for themselves.
The mind should not directly infer intent.
d. CONTINUING CRIMES
Definition
Single crime consisting of a series of acts arising from
a single criminal resolution or intent not susceptible
of division.
Real or material
Continuing crime
plurality
There is a series of acts performed by the offender.
The different acts
Each act performed
constitute only one
constitutes a separate
crime because all of the
crime because each act
acts performed arise
is generated by a
from one criminal
criminal impulse
resolution.
Requisites
1. Plurality of acts;
2. Unity of penal provision infringed upon; and
3. Unity of criminal intent and purpose.
Two or more violations of the same penal provision
are united in one and the same intent leading to the
perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim
[Gamboa v. CA, G.R. No. L-41054 (1975)]
Transitory Crime
Criminal action may be instituted and tried in the
court of the municipality, city or province wherein
any of the essential ingredients thereof took place
The necessary elements of the crime may separately
take place in different territorial jurisdictions until the
crime itself is consummated.
Old Jurisprudence
To make Article 48 applicable to continuing crimes,
there must be singularity of criminal act;
singularity of criminal impulse is not written into the
law. [Gamboa v. CA, supra] For example, the act of
taking the two roosters, in response to the unity of
Page 15 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
thought in the criminal purpose on one occasion,
constitutes a single crime of theft.
Gamboa v. CA, supra.: There is plurality of
crimes or "concurso de delitos" when the actor
commits various delictual acts of the same or
different kind. "Ideal plurality" or "concurso ideal"
occurs when a single act gives rise to various
infractions of law. This is illustrated by the very
article under consideration: (a) when a single act
constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies (described as "delito compuesto" or
compound crime); and (b) when an offense is a
necessary means for committing another offense
(described as "delito complejo" or complex
proper). "Real plurality" or "concurso real", on the
other hand, arises when the accused performs an
act or different acts with distinct purposes and
resulting in different crimes which are juridically
independent. Unlike "ideal plurality", this "real
plurality" is not governed by Article 48.
Apart and isolated from this plurality of crimes
(ideal or real) is what is known as "delito
continuado" or "continuous crime". This is a
single crime consisting of a series of acts arising
from a single criminal resolution or intent not
susceptible of division.
Recent Jurisprudence
Crimes committed by means of separate acts were
held to be complex on the theory that they were the
product of a single criminal impulse or intent [People
v. Pincalin, G.R. No. L-38755 (1981)]
One Larceny Doctrine
The current prosecution of theft cases is more in line
with the Gamboa understanding of delito continuado.
The trend is to follow the single larceny doctrine:
1. taking of several things,
2. whether belonging to the same or different
owners,
3. at the same time and place, constitutes one
larceny only.
As long as single criminal impulse. The Supreme
Court has extended this class of complex crime to
those cases when the offender performed not a single
act but a series of acts as long as it is the product of a
single criminal impulse.
People v. Garcia, G.R. No. L401-06 (1980):
The accused were convicts who were members of
a certain gang and they conspired to kill the other
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
gang. Some of the accused killed their victims in
one place within the same penitentiary, some killed
the others in another place within the same
penitentiary.
Held: This case is covered by the rule that when for
the attainment of a single purpose, which
constitutes an offense, various acts are executed,
such acts must be considered as only one offense,
a continuing one.
In other words, when a conspiracy animates
several persons with a single purpose, their
individual acts in pursuance of that purpose are
treated as a single act, the act of execution, which
gives rise to a complex offense. The felonious
agreement produces a sole and solidary liability
How Applied
Whenever the Supreme Court concludes that the
criminals should be punished only once, because they
acted in conspiracy or under the same criminal
impulse:
1. It is necessary to embody these crimes under one
single information.
2. It is necessary to consider them as complex
crimes even if the essence of the crime does not
fit the definition of Art 48, because there is no
other provision in the RPC.
People v. Sabbun, G.R. No. L-18150 (1964):
There was illegal charging of fees for service
rendered by a lawyer every time he collected
veteran’s benefits on behalf of a client who agreed
that attorney’s fees shall be paid out of such
benefits. The collections of legal fees were
impelled by the same motive, that of collecting
fees for services rendered, and all acts of collection
were made under the same criminal impulse.
Application to special laws
The concept of delito continuado has been applied to
crimes under special laws since in Art. 10, the RPC
shall be supplementary to special laws, unless the
latter provides the contrary.
3. According to Manner of Commission
Art. 3. Definitions – Acts and omissions
punishable by law are felonies (delitos).
Felonies are committed not only be means of
deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
Page 16 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent and there is fault when the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
1. Intentional felonies. Those committed with
deliberate intent; and
2. Culpable felonies. Those resulting from
negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of
foresight or lack of skill; performed without
malice.
Intentional v. culpable felonies, distinguished.
Note that both felonies are done with freedom and
intelligence. Freedom is voluntariness, while
intelligence is the capacity to know and understand
the consequences of an act or omission. The act or
omission which is done must be freely done and must
not have been forced by an external force.
Their difference is that intentional felonies are
committed with criminal intent, while culpable
felonies are committed through negligence or
imprudence.
Intentional Culpable
Act is malicious. Not malicious.
With deliberate Injury caused is unintentional,
intent. being just an incident of
another act performed
without malice.
Has intention to Wrongful act results from
cause an injury. imprudence, negligence, lack
of foresight, or lack of skill.
a. Felonies by Dolo
Requisites
If any of the elements is absent, there is no dolo. If
there is no dolo, there could be no intentional felony.
[Visbal v. Buban, AM MTJ-03-1471 (2003)]
1. Freedom. Voluntariness on the part of the
person who commits the act or omission.
2. Intelligence. Capacity to know and understand
the consequences of one’s act.
3. Dolo. Deliberate intent otherwise referred to as
criminal intent. It is the purpose to use a
particular means to effect a result.
a. Intent which is a mental process
presupposes the exercise of freedom and the
use of intelligence.
b. Such intent is not a requisite in:
i. Culpable felonies
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

ii. Crimes mala prohibita intent must be alleged in the information and proved
by the prosecution. The specific intent of the
CRIMINAL INTENT malefactors as disclosed in the information or
criminal complaint is determinative of what crime the
Actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea. accused is charged with. [People v. Delim, G.R. No.
An act does not make a defendant guilty without a 142773 (2003)]
guilty mind.
How proven
Mens rea – a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful Specific intent may be proved by direct evidence or by
purpose or criminal intent, and essential for criminal circumstantial evidence. It may be inferred from the
liability. [People v Valenzuela, G.R. No. 160188 (2007)] circumstances of the actions of the accused as
established by the evidence on record. [People v. Delim,
The criminal statute must also provide for the overt supra.]
acts that constitute the crime. For a crime to exist in
our legal law, it is not enough that mens rea be shown; Intent to commit the crime v. intent to perpetrate
there must also be an actus reus. the act
When the statute plainly forbids an act to be done
When presumed (General Rule) (mala prohibita), and it is done by some person, the law
1. If an act is proven to be unlawful, then intent will conclusively implies the guilty intent, despite the
be presumed prima facie. [U.S. v. Apostol] honest mistake of the offender as to the meaning of
2. Such presumption arises from the proof of the law he violates. x x x Care must be exercised in
commission of an unlawful act. distinguishing the difference between the intent to
commit the crime and the intent to perpetrate the act.
When not presumed (Exception) The accused did not consciously intend to commit a
1. In some crimes, intent cannot be presumed as an crime; but he did intend to commit an act, and that
integral element thereof; so it has to be proven. act is, by the very nature of things, the crime itself—
2. In frustrated homicide, specific intent to kill is intent and all. The wording of the law is such that the
not presumed but must be proven; otherwise it intent and the act are inseparable. The act is the
is merely physical injuries. crime. The accused intended to put the device in his
window. Nothing more is required to commit the
Degree of proof crime. [U.S. v. Go Chico, G.R. No. 4963 (1909)]
In these cases when intent has to be proven, the law
requires proof beyond reasonable doubt of the b. Culpable Felonies
existence of malicious intent or dolus malus before an
accused can be adjudged liable for committing an Culpa
intentional felony. [Villareal v. People, G.R. No. 1. Injury caused being simply the incident of
151258 (2012)] another act performed without malice
2. Criminal intent is replaced by negligence or
General Criminal Specific Criminal imprudence
Intent Intent
The intention to do The intention to Reason
something wrong. commit a definite act. 1. A man must use his common sense and exercise
Presumed from the Existence is not reflection in all his acts
mere doing of a wrong presumed. 2. It is one’s duty to be cautious, careful and
act. prudent, and not to expose other people’s lives
The burden is upon the Since the specific intent and property at risk of injury or damage
wrongdoer to prove is an element of the 3. The law penalizes thus the negligent or careless
that he acted without crime, the burden is act, not the result thereof. (Ivler v. Modesto-San
such criminal intent. upon the prosecution to Pedro, G.R. No. 172716 (2010)]
establish its existence.
Requisites
Must be alleged in Information 1. Freedom
Where the specific intent of the malefactor is 2. Intelligence
determinative of the crime charged, such specific 3. Negligence or Imprudence

Page 17 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
a. Negligence – Deficiency of perception
i. Failure to pay proper attention and to
use diligence in foreseeing the injury
or damage impending to be caused
ii. Lack of foresight
b. Imprudence – Deficiency of action
i. Failure to take the necessary
precaution to avoid injury to person
or damage to property
ii. Lack of skill
Resulting harm or injury
Unless the negligent or imprudent act results in harm
or injury to another, there is no criminal liability.
No matter how reckless one drives his car, he does
not incur criminal liability for culpa if no one is killed
or injured, or property is damaged.
DOCTRINES ON CULPABLE CRIMES
1. Emergency Rule. A person who is confronted
with a sudden emergency may be left no time for
thought so he must make a speedy decision
based largely upon impulse or instinct [Gan v.
CA, G.R. No. L-44264 (1988)].
Importance
Said person cannot be held to the same conduct as
one who has had an opportunity to reflect, even
though it later appears that he made the wrong
decision.
2. Doctrine of “Last Clear Chance.” Clear
Chance is a defense by the defendant in a damage
suit against liability by transferring it to the
plaintiff.
Exceptions
a. The contributory negligence of the party
injured will NOT defeat the action if it be
shown that the accused might, by the
exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the
negligence of the injured party.
b. The doctrine is not applicable in criminal
cases because the liability is penal in nature
and thus liability cannot be transferred to
the other party. [Anuran v. Buno, G.R. Nos.
L-21353-54 (1966)]
c. It is not a case between two parties involved
in an incident but rather between an
individual and the State.
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
3. Rule of Negative Ingredient. This rule states
that:
a. The prosecution must first identify what the
accused failed to do.
b. Once this is done, the burden of evidence
shifts to the accused.
c. The accused must show that the failure did
not set in motion the chain of events leading
to the injury [Carillo v. People, G.R. No. 86890
(1994)].
When results are not identifiable
This is related to the doctrine of proximate cause and
applicable when certain causes leading to the result
are not identifiable.
4. As to Plurality of Crimes
Plurality
Actor commits various delictual acts.
Real or material plurality
Different crimes in law as well as in the conscience of
the offender.
Offender shall be punished for each and every
offense that he committed.
Three groups:
a. Complex Crimes in Art. 48
b. Special Complex Crimes
c. Continuous Crimes
5. As to Nature
a. Mala in se
• Wrong from its very nature
• Criminal Intent is an element
b. Mala prohibita
• Wrong because it is prohibited by law
• Criminal Intent is immaterial
b. Factors in Determining Stage of
Execution of a Felony
These three factors are helpful in trying to pinpoint
whether the crime is still in its attempted, frustrated
or consummated stage.
Page 18 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
1. Manner of Committing the Crime
a. Formal Crimes - consummated in one instant,
no attempt
Example: Slander and false testimony
There can be no attempt, because between the
thought and the deed, there is no chain of acts that
can be severed.
b. Crimes consummated by mere attempt or
proposal by overt act
Example:. Flight to enemy’s country (Art. 121) and
corruption of minors (Art. 340)
c. Felony by omission
There can be no attempted stage when the felony is
by omission, because the offender does not execute
acts, rather he omits to perform an act which the law
requires him to do.
d. Crimes requiring the intervention of two
persons to commit them are consummated
by mere agreement
In bribery, the manner of committing the crime
requires the meeting of the minds between the giver
and the receiver.
In betting in sports contests and corruption of public officer
(Art. 197 and Art. 212), the manner of committing
the crime requires the meeting of the minds between
the giver and the receiver.
When the giver delivers the money to the supposed
receiver, but there is no meeting of the minds, the
only act done by the giver is an attempt.
e. Material Crimes – have three stages of
execution
Thus, in determining the stage of some crimes, the
manner of execution becomes pivotal in determining
the end of the subjective phase, i.e. once the offender
performs the act in the manner provided for in the
law, he is already deemed to have performed
every act for its execution.
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
2. Elements of the Crime
Along with the manner of execution, there are crimes
wherein the existence of certain elements becomes
the factor in determining its consummation.
Examples:
a. Estafa – damage is essential before
consummated
b. Theft – on the other hand, damage or intent to
cause damage is not necessary; only intent to
gain.
c. Abduction – taking away with lewd designs is
the crucial element
3. NATURE OF CRIME ITSELF
Crimes involving the taking of human life
Indispensable that the victim be mortally wounded to
reach the objective phase
A fatal injury must be inflicted, because only then that
death will follow
Robbery v. Theft
Both crimes are committed by taking personal
property with intent to gain. But in robbery, there is
use of force or violence
Rape
Consummated by mere penetration, no matter how
slight
MISTAKE OF FACT V. MISTAKE OF LAW
a. Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Mistake
of Law)
In civil actions, a difficult question of law may
sometimes be considered a defense. This is because
knowledge of a legal provision does not necessarily
mean knowledge of its true meaning and scope, or of
the interpretation which the courts may place upon
it. [Kasilag v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 46623 (1939)]
In criminal actions, ignorance of the law excuses no
one. Nevertheless, the lack of or a low degree of
education may be appreciated as mitigating
circumstance in some instances. See Art. 15, RPC.
b. Ignorantia facti excusat (Mistake of Fact)
A mistake of fact is a misapprehension of a fact
which, if true, would have justified the act or
Page 19 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
omission which is the subject of the prosecution. It
may be a defense even if the offense charged requires
proof of only general intent. [Yapyuco v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 120744-46 (2012); U.S. v. Ah Chong, G.R.
No. L-5272 (1910)]
Application
An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption
of criminal intent which arises from the commission
of a felonious act. [People v. Oanis, G.R. No. L-47722
(1943)]. This defense does not avail, however, when
there is no intent to consider, such as in culpable
felonies and crimes mala prohibita.
Requisites
a. Act done would have been lawful, had the facts
been as the accused believed them to be
b. Intention of the accused in performing the act is
lawful
c. Mistake must be without fault or carelessness on
the part of the accused
1. The accused had believed that his roommate
was somebody else and that he had no
alternative but to kill said roommate, hence
his act of killing is justified [US v. Ah Chong,
supra.]
2. When the accused is negligent, such as when
the police shot the victim without
ascertaining first whether or not he was the
fugitive, mistake of fact is not a defense.
[People v. Oanis, supra.]
Yapyuco v. Sandiganbayan, supra.: The inquiry
is into the mistaken belief of the defendant, and it
does not look at all to the belief or state of mind
of any other person. A proper invocation of this
defense requires (a) that the mistake be honest and
reasonable; (b) that it be a matter of fact; and (c)
that it negate the culpability required to commit
the crime or the existence of the mental state
which the statute prescribes with respect to an
element of the offense.
Motive
Moving power which impels one to action to achieve
a definite result (Reyes, 2008)
DIFFERENCE WITH SPECIFIC INTENT.
[People v Delim, supra.]
Specific Intent
Particular purpose or specific intention in doing the
prohibited act.
Page 20 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Must be alleged in the Information and proved by the
state in a prosecution for a crime requiring specific
intent.
Examples where specific intent are necessary:
Kidnapping and murder
Motive
Reason which prompts the accused to engage in a
particular criminal activity.
Not an essential element of a crime and hence the
prosecution need not prove the same.
General Rule: Proof of motive for the commission
of the offense charged does not show guilt and
absence of proof of such motive does not establish
the innocence of accused for the crime charged such
as murder.
When motive should be proven
a. When the act brings about variant crimes (e.g.
kidnapping v. robbery [People v. Puno, G.R. No.
97471 (1993)]
b. When there is doubt as to the identity of the
assailant. [People v. Hassan, G.R. No. L-68969
(1988)]
c. When there is the need to ascertain the truth
between two antagonistic versions of the crime.
[People v. De Los Santos, G.R. No. 131588 (2001)]
d. When the identification of the accused proceeds
from an unreliable source and the testimony is
inconclusive and not free from doubt.
e. When there are no eyewitnesses to the crime, and
when suspicion is likely to fall upon a number of
persons.
f. When the evidence on the commission of the
crime is purely circumstantial.
g. When the act is alleged to be committed in
defense of a stranger because it must not be
induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive.
How motive is proven
Generally, the 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, deeds, or words that may express it or from
which his motive or reason for committing it may be
inferred. [Barrioquinto v. Fernandez (1949)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
c. Criminal Liability and
Impossible Crimes
Art. 4. Criminal Liability – Criminal liability
shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be different from
that which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would
be an offense against persons or property, were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or an account of the employment
of inadequate or ineffectual means.
1. Wrongful Act Different from that
Intended
Rationale – El que es causa de la causa es cause
del mal causado.
“He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused.” The presumption is that a person
intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary
act. [People v. Toling, G.R. No. L-27097 (1975)]
One who commits an intentional felony is
responsible for all the consequences which may
naturally and logically result therefrom, whether
foreseen or intended or not.
Requisites
a. An intentional felony has been committed.
• Felony is one committed by means of dolo
(malice)
• No intentional felony when:
▪ Act or omission is not punishable by
RPC
▪ Act is covered by a justifying
circumstance in Article 11
b. The wrong done to the aggrieved party be the
direct, natural and logical consequence of
the felony committed by the offender.
• Proximate Cause – Cause which, in a
natural and continuous sequence, unbroken
by any efficient intervening cause, produces
the injury without which the result would
not have occurred.
• Relation of cause and effect must be shown:
▪ Unlawful act is the efficient cause
▪ Accelerating cause
• Not the proximate cause when:
Page 21 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
▪ There is an active force between the felony
and resulting injury
▪ Resulting injury is due to the intentional act
of victim
• Efficient intervening cause – cause which
interrupts the natural flow of events leading
to one’s death
May relieve offender from liability
2. Kinds
a. Error in Personae
Mistake in identity. A felony is intended, but there
is a mistake in the identity of the victim; injuring one
person mistaken for another.
Mistake in killing of man instead of another, with
proof of acting maliciously and willfully, does not
relieve him of criminal responsibility. (People v Gona,
G.R No. L-32066 (1930)]
b. Abberratio Ictus
Mistake in blow. When offender intending to do an
injury to one person actually inflicts it on another.
Treachery can apply in a case of aberration ictus,
applying the Flora doctrine [People v Samson, G.R. No.
205228 (2015)]
c. Praeter intentionem
Mitigating circumstance of did not intend to
commit a grave so wrong
The fact that he did not intend to cause so great an
injury does not relieve him from the consequences of
his unlawful act—it is merely a mitigating
circumstance. (People v Cagoco)
Penalty to be imposed
There is still criminal liability.
a. Error in Personae – Penalty for lesser crime in
its maximum period (Art. 49)
b. Abberratio Ictus – Penalty for graver offense in
its maximum period (Art. 48 on complex crimes)
c. Praeter intentionem – Mitigating circumstance
of not intending to commit a grave so wrong
(Art. 13)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Examples of when not criminally liable
a. If A, in attempting a suicide, jumped out the
window to kill himself, but when he dropped to
the ground he fell on an old woman who died as
a consequence, A is not criminally liable for
intentional homicide. A was not committing a
felony when he attempted a suicide.
b. If B, who was being fired at with a gun by C to
kill him, fired a pistol at the latter in self-defense,
but missed him and instead hit and killed D, a
bystander, B is not criminally liable for the death
of D. One acting in self-defense is not
committing a felony. [Reyes]
Wrongful act done different from that intended,
but not praeter intentionem
People v. Sales, G.R. No. 177218(2011):
In order that a person may be criminally liable for
a felony different from that which he intended to
commit, it is indispensable (a) that a felony was
committed and (b) that the wrong done to the
aggrieved person be the direct consequence of the
crime committed by the perpetrator. Here, there is
no doubt appellant in beating his son Noemar and
inflicting upon him physical injuries, committed a
felony. As a direct consequence of the beating
suffered by the child, he expired. Appellant’s
criminal liability for the death of his son, Noemar,
is thus clear. Appellant is guilty of parricide.
However, there was error when the trial court
appreciated the mitigating circumstance of lack of
intention to commit so grave a wrong. Appellant
adopted means to ensure the success of the savage
battering of his sons. He tied their wrists to a
coconut tree to prevent their escape while they
were battered with a stick to inflict as much pain
as possible. Noemar suffered injuries in his face,
head and legs that immediately caused his death.
The mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to
commit so grave a wrong as that actually
perpetrated cannot be appreciated where the acts
employed by the accused were reasonably
sufficient to produce and did actually produce the
death of the victim.
3. Impossible Crime
Purpose
To suppress criminal propensity or criminal
tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not
committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.
Page 22 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites
a. That the act performed would be an offense
against persons or property.
b. That the act was done with evil intent.
c. That its accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is either
inadequate or ineffectual.
d. That the act performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the RPC.
Inadequate
Insufficient (e.g. small quantity of poison).
Ineffectual
Means employed did not produce the result expected
(e.g. pressed the trigger of the gun not knowing that
it is empty).
Inherent Impossibility
a. Legal impossibility. – where the intended acts,
even if completed, do not amount to a crime
[Intod v CA, G.R. No. 103119 (1992)]
1. Killing a person who is already dead
2. Stealing property that belongs to himself
[Carreon v Flores]
b. Physical or factual impossibility. –Extraneous
circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond
his control prevent the consummation of the
intended crime. Impossibility of accomplishing
the criminal intent is not a defense but an act
penalized in itself.
No attempted or frustrated impossible crime
Since the offender in an impossible crime has already
performed the acts for the execution of the same,
there could be no attempted impossible crime.
There is no frustrated impossible crime either,
because the acts performed by the offender are
considered as constituting a consummated offense.
Jacinto v. People , G.R. No. 162540 (2009):
Appellant was a former collector for her employer-
corporation. After her resignation, she managed to
collect postdated checks from her employer’s
clients and appropriated these for herself.
However, the checks were dishonored by the
banks. The issue is whether or not appellant
should be charged with qualified theft for the theft
of worthless checks.
Held: As may be gleaned from the art. 308 of the
RPC, in rel. to art. 310, the personal property
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
subject of the theft must have some value, as the
intention of the accused is to gain from the thing
stolen. This is further bolstered by Article 309,
where the law provides that the penalty to be
imposed on the accused is dependent on the value
of the thing stolen. In this case, petitioner
unlawfully took the postdated check belonging to
Mega Foam, but the same was apparently without
value, as it was subsequently dishonored.
In Intod, the Court went on to give an example
of an offense that involved factual
impossibility, i.e., a man puts his hand in the coat
pocket of another with the intention to steal the
latter's wallet, but gets nothing since the pocket is
empty.
Herein petitioner's case is closely akin to the above
example of factual impossibility given in Intod. In
this case, petitioner performed all the acts to
consummate the crime of qualified theft, which is
a crime against property. Petitioner's evil intent
cannot be denied, as the mere act of unlawfully
taking the check meant for Mega Foam showed
her intent to gain or be unjustly enriched. Were it
not for the fact that the check bounced, she would
have received the face value thereof, which was
not rightfully hers. Therefore, it was only due to
the extraneous circumstance of the check being
unfunded, a fact unknown to petitioner at the
time, that prevented the crime from being
produced. As such, she should be charged for
impossible crime, and not with consummated
qualified theft.
d. Complex Crimes
Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes – When a
single act constitutes two or more grave or less
grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary
means for committing the other, the penalty for
the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same
to be applied in its maximum period.
Ideal plurality (complex crime). A single act gives
rise to various infractions of law.
1. Compound crime (delito compuesto) – a
single act constitutes two or more grave or less
grave felonies (Art. 48).
2. Complex crime proper (delito complejo) – an
offense is a necessary means to commit another
offense (Art. 48).
Page 23 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Special complex crime (delito especial
complejo) – the law fixes one penalty for two or
more crimes committed.
Why only one penalty is imposed. They constitute
only one crime in the eyes of the law, and in the
conscience of the offender. Hence, there is only one
penalty imposed for the commission of a complex
crime.
COMPOUND CRIME
Requisites
1. That only a single act is performed by the
offender
2. That the single acts produces:
a. 2 or more grave felonies, or
b. 1 or more grave and 1 or more less grave
felonies, or
2 or more less grave felonies
Single Act Several Acts
Submachine gun – because of
Throwing a hand
the number of bullets
grenade
released
A single bullet Firing of the revolver twice in
killing two person succession
Light felonies
Light felonies produced by the same act should be
treated and punished as separate offenses or may be
absorbed by the grave felony.
Examples of compound crime
The victim was killed while discharging his duty as
barangay captain to protect life and property and
enforce law and order in his barrio. The crime is a
complex crime of homicide with assault upon a
person in authority.
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.
No complex crime of criminal negligence.
Article 48 does not apply to acts penalized under
Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code. Article 48 is a
procedural device allowing single prosecution of
multiple felonies falling under either compound
crimes or complex crime proper. The legislature
crafted this procedural tool to benefit the accused
who, in lieu of serving multiple penalties, will only
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
serve the maximum of the penalty for the most
serious crime.
In contrast, Article 365 is a substantive rule
penalizing not an act defined as a felony but "the
mental attitude behind the act, the dangerous
recklessness, lack of care or foresight, a single mental
attitude regardless of the resulting consequences.
Thus, Article 365 was crafted as one quasi-crime
resulting in one or more consequences. [Ivler v.
Modesto-San Pedro, supra.]
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
• Does not need to be “indispensable means”
3. That both or all the offenses must be punished
under the same statute.
When no complex crime proper
1. Subsequent acts of intercourse, after forcible
abduction with rape, are separate acts of rape.
2. Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is
a direct means to commit a grave offense.
3. No complex crime, when one offense is
committed to conceal the other.
4. When the offender already had in his possession
the funds which he misappropriated, the
subsequent falsification of a public or official
document involving said offense is a separate
offense.
5. Where one of the offenses is penalized by a
special law.
6. There is no complex crime of rebellion with
murder, arson, robbery, or other common
crimes [People v. Hernandez, G.R. Nos. L-6025-26
(1956); Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 (1990)]
7. In case of continuous crimes.
8. When the other crime is an indispensable
element of the other offense.
General rules in complexing crimes
1. 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.
2. The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for
the most serious crime, to be applied in its
maximum period.
3. When two felonies constituting a complex crime
are punishable by imprisonment and fine
Page 24 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment
should be imposed.
4. Art. 48 applies only to cases where the Code does
not provide a definite specific penalty for a
complex crime.
5. One information should be filed when a
complex crime is committed.
6. When a complex crime is charged and one
offense is not proven, the accused can be
convicted of the other.
When rules in Article 48 are NOT applicable.
1. When the crimes subject of the case have
common elements;
2. When the crimes involved are subject to the rule
of absorption of one crime by the other;
3. Where the two offenses resulting from a single
act are specifically punished as a single crime,
such as less serious physical injuries with serious
slander of deed, since this is punished under
Article 265 par. 2, as the single crime of less
serious physical injuries with ignominy;
4. In special complex crimes or composite crimes.
Special Complex Crimes
In substance, there is more than one crime; but
from in the eyes of the law, there is only one. The
law treats it as a single crime for which it prescribes a
single penalty. It is also called a composite crime.
A special complex crime in the eyes of the law:
1. A single indivisible offense.
2. Acts constituting a single crime
Common special complex crimes.
1. Robbery with Homicide (Art. 294 (1))
2. Robbery with Rape (Art. 294 (2))
3. Robbery with Arson
4. Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art.
267 (3))
5. Kidnapping with rape
6. Rape with Homicide (Art. 335)
7. Arson with homicide
When crimes involved cannot be legally
complexed.
1. Malicious obtention or abusive service of search
warrant (Art. 129) with perjury;
2. Bribery (Art. 210) with infidelity in the custody
of prisoners;
3. Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235) with serious
physical injuries;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

4. Usurpation of real rights (Art. 312) with serious 5. Abandonment of persons in danger (Art. 275)
physical injuries; and and crimes against minors (Art. 276 to 278) with
any other felony.

Elements of
Impossible
criminal Attempted Frustrated Consummated
crime
liability
Actus Reus ✓ Intervention other than ✓ ✓
own desistance; some but
not all acts of execution
Mens Rea ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Concurrence ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Result Lacking due to:   Not produced by reason ✓
inherent of causes independent of
impossibility or the will of the perpetrator
employment of
inadequate
means
Causation    ✓

2. Circumstances Affecting Except

Par. 4 &
Criminal Liability 7
Decreased
Imputability Mitigating Criminal
The quality by which an act may be ascribed to a Liability
person as its author or owner. It implies that the act Increased
committed has been freely and consciously done and Aggravating There Criminal With
may, therefore, be put down to the doer as his very Is a Liability Civil
own. Felony Increased Liability
or
Responsibility Alternative Decreased
The obligation of suffering the penal and civil Criminal
consequences of crime. Liability

Imputability distinguished from responsibility a. Justifying Circumstances [Art.

While imputability implies that a deed may be
imputed to a person, responsibility implies that the
person must take the consequences of such a deed.
Guilt
Is an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be
made to answer for the consequences of a crime
unless he is guilty. [Reyes]
11]
Justifying circumstances
Where the act of the person is said to be in
accordance with the law, so that such person is
deemed not to have transgressed the law. Lack of dolo
is basis.

No Civil Criminal and civil liability

No Liability, There is NO crime committed, the act being justified.
Justifying Thus, such persons cannot be considered criminals.
Wrong No Except
Criminal Par. 4 There is no civil liability EXCEPT in par. 4, Art. 11
There Liability With (avoidance of greater evil), where the civil liability is
Exempting Is A Civil borne by the persons benefited by the act in
Wrong Liability,

Page 25 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

proportion to the benefit they may have received Justifying

(Art. 101).
Burden of proof
The burden of proof rests on the accused, who must
prove the circumstance by clear and convincing
evidence.
Justifying and exempting circumstances,
distinguished
Justifying Exempting
It affects the act, not It affects the actor, not
the actor. the act.
The act is considered to
have been done within
The act complained of
the bounds of law;
is actually wrongful, but
hence, legitimate and
the actor is not liable.
lawful in the eyes of the
law.
Since the act
complained of is
actually wrong, there is
Since the act is
a crime but since the
considered lawful, there
actor acted without
is no liability.
voluntariness or
negligence, there is no
dolo or culpa.
There is a crime, but
there is no criminal
There is no criminal or liability. Civil liability
civil liability. exists (EXCEPT:
accident; insuperable
cause).
Requisites of Each Circumstance (D3afs)
Justifying
Requisites
circumstance
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of means employed to
Defense of person,
prevent or repel it;
right, property, or
3. Lack of sufficient
honor (URL)
provocation on the part
of the person defending
himself.
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of means employed to
Defense of relatives prevent or repel it;
(URL) 3. Lack of sufficient
provocation on part of
relative, or, in case of
provocation, the one
Requisites
circumstance
making the defense had
no part therein.
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity
of the means employed
Defense of strangers to prevent or repel it;
(URN) 3. The person defending
was not induced by
revenge, resentment or
other evil motive.
1. Evil sought to be
avoided actually exists.
2. The evil or injury
sought to be avoided
must not have been
produced by the one
invoking the justifying
Avoidance of greater
circumstances.
evil (ENIM)
3. Injury feared be
greater than that done
to avoid it.
4. There is no other
practical and less
harmful means of
preventing it.
1. Offender acted in
performance of duty or
in the lawful exercise of
a right or office;
2. That the injury caused
Fulfillment of duty or
or the offense
lawful exercise of right
committed be the
(PN)
necessary consequence
of the due performance
of duty or the lawful
exercise of such right or
office.
1. Order must have
been issued by a
superior;
Obedience to superior 2. The order is for some
order (OPM) lawful purpose;
3. The means used to
carry it out must be
lawful.

Page 26 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
1. Defense of Person, Rights, Property,
and Honor (Self-Defense)
Why self-defense is lawful.
a. Impulse of self-preservation;
b. State cannot provide protection for each of
its constituents.
REQUISITES
a. Unlawful Aggression
When peril to one’s life, limb, or right is
1. Actual and
2. Imminent
Presupposes actual, sudden, and unexpected attack or
imminent danger thereof, not merely threatening or
intimidating attitude [People v Colinares, G.R. No.
182748 (2011)]
To consider the existence of unlawful aggression:
1. Physical & objective circumstance (E.g. Wound
receive by deceased)
2. Lack of motive of person defending himself
3. Conduct of accused immediately after the
incident
The single indispensable element in self-defense,
defense of relatives, and defense of strangers is
unlawful aggression.
When in retaliation
When the killing of the deceased by the accused was
after the attack made by the former, the accused must
have no time nor occasion for deliberation and cool
thinking. When unlawful aggression ceases, the
defender has no longer any right to kill or wound the
former aggressor, otherwise, retaliation and not self-
defense is committed. [People v. Bates, G.R. No.
139907 (2003)].
Continuing unlawful aggression
Unlawful aggression must be a continuing
circumstance or must have been existing at the time
the defense is made. Once the unlawful aggression is
found to have ceased, the one making the defense
would likewise cease to have any justification for
killing, or even just wounding, the former aggressor.
[People v. Dijan, G.R. No. 142682 (2002)]
But when the aggressor retreats to obtain a more
advantageous position to ensure the success of the
Page 27 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
initial attack, unlawful aggression is deemed to
continue.
Picking up a weapon
Picking up a weapon is sufficient unlawful aggression
if preceded by circumstances indicating the intention
of the deceased to use it in attacking the defendant.
Nacnac v. People, G.R. No. 191913 (2012):
The Supreme Court acquitted the accused-police
officer for shooting on the head another police
officer. Accused was supposed to use the patrol
tricycle to go the police station but the victim
prevented him, saying he needed the tricycle to
settle an issue with the local bar. (The victim has a
history of drunkenness and violence.) When the
accused insisted on using the tricycle, the victim
insulted the accused and touched his gun. The
accused fired a warning shot, but the victim drew
out his gun. Here the accused the victim, who died
on the spot.
Held: Jurisprudence distinguishes between the act
of drawing one’s gun and the act of pointing one’s
gun at a target. GENERALLY, the latter is the one
considered as unlawful aggression. The former
does not put in real peril the life or personal safety
of another.
HOWEVER, in the case at bar, the aggressor is a
police officer. A policeman IS PRESUMED to be
quick in firing. Hence, the drawing of the gun is
considered unlawful aggression as an exemption to
the general rule.
Mistake of fact
Mere belief of an impending attack is not sufficient.
BUT in relation to “mistake of fact,” the belief of the
accused may be considered in determining the
existence of unlawful aggression.
Lawful aggression
1. Fulfillment of a duty
2. Exercise of a right in a more or less violent
manner
The law does not require a person to retreat where he
has a right to be and his assailant is rapidly advancing
upon him with a deadly weapon. [US v. Domen, G.R.
No. L-12964 (1917)]
U.P. LAW BOC
Agreement to fight
1. General Rule: No unlawful aggression when there
was an agreement to fight and the challenge to
fight was accepted
2. Exception: Aggression which is ahead of an
agreed time or place is unlawful aggression.
Paramour kills the offended husband
Paramour surprised in the act of adultery cannot
invoke self-defense if he killed the offended husband
who was assaulting him because the husband’s
aggression was lawful (Art. 247).
b. Reasonable necessity of means employed
Two elements:
1. Necessity for the course of action
2. Necessity of the means employed
Does not depend on harm done, but the imminent
danger of such injury
Doctrine of rational equivalence
Rational equivalence presupposes the consideration
not only of the nature and quality of the weapons
used by the defender and the assailant, but of the
totality of circumstances surrounding the defense vis-à-
vis the unlawful aggression.
It considers:
1. The emergency
2. The imminent danger to which the person
attacked is exposed
3. The instinct, more than the reason, that moves
or impels the defense
4. The proportionate-ness of the defense does not
depend upon the harm done, but rests upon the
imminent danger of such injury. [Espinosa v.
People, G.R. No. 181701 (2010)]
Perfect equality between the weapon used by the one
defending himself and that of the aggressor is not
required, nor is the material commensurability
between the means of attack and defense. Rational
equivalence is enough.
Test of reasonableness
The reasonableness depends upon:
1. Nature and quality of the weapon used by the
aggressor
2. Aggressor’s physical condition, character, size,
and other circumstances
3. And those of the person defending himself
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
4. The place and occasion of the assault
When contestants are in the open
It is undoubtedly well established in jurisprudence
that a man is not, as a rule, justified in taking the life
of one who assaults him with his fist only, without
the use of a dangerous weapon. The person assaulted
must, in such case, either resist with the arms that
nature gave him or with other means of defense at his
disposal, short of taking life.
But that rule contemplates the situation where the
contestants are in the open and the person assaulted
can exercise the option of running away. It can have
no binding force in the case where the person
assaulted has retreated to the wall, as the saying is,
and uses in a defensive way the only weapon at his
disposal.
One is not required, when hard pressed, to draw fine
distinctions as to the extent of the injury which a
reckless and infuriated assailant might probably inflict
upon him. [People v. Sumicad, G.R. No. 35524 (1932)]
When the attacker has been disarmed
If the attacker is already disarmed, there is no need to
further use violence. If the attacker was disarmed but
struggled to re-obtain the weapon, violence may be
justified.
Further, in repelling/preventing unlawful aggression,
the one defending must aim at the defendant, and not
indiscriminately fire his deadly weapon.
In favor of the law-abiding citizen
This element should be interpreted liberally in favor
of the law-abiding citizen.
c. Lack of sufficient provocation
The accused who claims self-defense must not have
provoked the aggression of the victim
Provocation is sufficient when it is proportionate to
the aggression [People v. Boholst-Caballero, G.R. No. L-
23249 (1974)]
Not enough that the provocative act be unreasonable
or annoying to be provocation considered
This requisite is present when:
1. No provocation at all was given
2. Even if provocation was given, it was not
sufficient
Page 28 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
3. Even if the provocation was sufficient, it was not
given by the person defending himself
4. Even if the provocation was given by the person
defending himself, it was not proximate and
immediate to the act of aggression. [Cano v. People
(2003)]
Insults
1. General Rule: Verbal argument is not considered
sufficient provocation
2. Exception: Insults in vulgar language are
People v. Toledo, G.R. No. L-28655 (2004):
The appellant claims that he should not be
convicted because of accidental self-defense. He said
that he accidentally hit the victim with a bolo,
eventually killing the latter.
Held: There is no such defense as accidental self-
defense in the realm of criminal law. Self-defense
under Article 11, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal
Code necessarily implies a deliberate and positive
overt act of the accused to prevent or repel an
unlawful aggression of another with the use of
reasonable means. The accused has freedom of
action. He is aware of the consequences of his
deliberate acts. The defense is based on necessity
which is the supreme and irresistible master of
men of all human affairs, and of the law. From
necessity, and limited by it, proceeds the right of
self-defense. The right begins when necessity does,
and ends where it ends. Although the accused, in
fact, injures or kills the victim, however, his act is
in accordance with law so much so that the
accused is deemed not to have transgressed the law
and is free from both criminal and civil liabilities.
How can the prosecution attack this justifying
circumstance?
1. The number of wounds of the victim.
2. If the accused surrendered to the policemen, he
declined to give any statement, i.e., protestation
of innocence or justification.
3. When unlawful aggressor runs away, but the
accused runs after him him nonetheless
(EXCEPT when retreat is taken to get a more
advantageous position).
4. Flight of the accused.
People v. Alconga, G.R. No. L-162 (1947):
Barion went to the guardhouse where accused
Alconga was doing his duties as “home guard.”
While the accused was seated, the deceased swung
at him with his pingahan (piece of bamboo). The
Page 29 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
accused was able to avoid the blow however, by
falling to the ground under the bench. The accused
was able to go out of the guardhouse by crawling,
and when the deceased was delivering the third
blow, the accused (still in his crawling position),
fired at the deceased with his revolver. The
deceased got up and drew his dagger this time,
while the accused used his bolo and hand-to-hand
fight commenced.
The deceased obtained several wounds and ran
away, only to be followed by the accused, and another
fight happened. The deceased sustained more
injuries including the mortal bolo blow, and he fell
to the ground.
Held: In the initial stage of the fight, the accused
was acting in self-defense. However, when he
chose to run after the deceased, he was no longer
acting in self-defense for there was no more
aggression to defend against and he could have
chosen to stay where he was. The unlawful
aggression had already ceased and therefore, his
right to self-defense had ceased as well.
SUBJECTS OF SELF-DEFENSE
1. Defense of person
2. Defense of rights
3. Defense of property
The defense of property rights can be invoked if there
is an attack upon the property although it is not
coupled with an attack upon the person of the owner
of the premises. All the elements for justification
must however be present. [People v. Narvaez, G.R. No.
L-33466-67 (1983)]
People v. Narvaez, supra.:
Narvaez was taking his rest inside his house when
he heard that the wall of his house was being
chiseled. He saw that Fleischer and Rubia, were
fencing the land of the father of the deceased
Fleischer. He asked the group to stop but they
refused. The accused got mad so he got his
shotgun and shot Fleischer. Rubia ran towards the
jeep and knowing there is a gun on the jeep, the
accused fired at Rubia as well. Narvaez claimed he
acted in defense of his person and rights.
Held: There was aggression by the deceased not on
the person of the accused but on his property
rights when Fleischer angrily ordered the
continuance of the fencing. The third element of
self-defense is also present because there was no
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
sufficient provocation on the part of Narvaez
since he was sleeping when the deceased where
fencing.
However, the second element was lacking.
Shooting the victims from the window of his
house is disproportionate to the physical
aggression by the victims. Thus, there is
incomplete self-defense. Accused is entitled to
mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-
defense, because one can defend oneself, but
cannot immediately kill.
Defense of home
Violent entry to another’s house at nighttime; by a
person who is armed with a bolo; and forcing his way
into the house, shows he was ready and looking for
trouble.
Defense of honor and reputation
Placing of hand by a man on the woman’s upper thigh
is unlawful aggression.
Slap on the face
A slap on the face is considered as unlawful
aggression since the face represents a person and his
dignity. [Rugas v. People]
Attempt to rape
A woman-accused who stabbed someone who
attempted to rape her is afforded the exemption from
criminal liability. The killing cannot be considered a
crime from the moment it became the only means left
for her to protect her honor from so great an outrage.
[People v Luage, G.R. No. L-43588 (1935)]
It is also justified for a woman to stab a man who
followed her when she was on her way home one
night, kissed and embraced her, and touched per
private parts. There was no other means of self-
defense. [People v Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-41674 (1935)]
No imminent danger to warrant self-defense
People v. Jaurigue, supra.:
Amado (deceased) has been courting the accused
Avelina in vain. On the day of the crime, Avelina
and Amado were in Church. Amado sat beside
Avelina and placed his hand on her thigh.
Thereafter, Avelina took out her knife and stabbed
Amado in the neck, causing the death of Amado.
Held: Although the defense of one’s honor
exempts one from criminal liability, it must be
proved that there is actual danger of being raped.
In this case, 1) the church was well-lit, 2) there
Page 30 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
were several people in the church, including the
father of the accused and other town officials. In
light of these circumstances, accused could not
have possibly been raped. The means employed in
defense of her honor was evidently excessive.
Stand your ground principle
In certain jurisdictions in the United States, most
notably in Florida, a person is justified in the use of
deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if he
reasonably believes that such force is necessary to
prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to
himself or herself.
ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004 (RA NO.
9262)
People v. Genosa doctrine [G.R. No. 135981
(2004)]
The battered woman syndrome (BWS) is
characterized by a “cycle of violence”, which is made
up of three phases. For the BWS to be available as a
defense, it must be proven that there has been more
than one cycle.
Battered woman syndrome
Scientifically defined pattern of psychological and
behavioral symptoms found in women living in
battering relationships as a result of cumulative
abuse.
Battery
Any act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman
or her child resulting in physical and psychological or
emotional distress.
Battered woman
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.”
First Phase: Tension Building Phase
1. Where minor battering occurs, it could be a
verbal or slight physical abuse or another
form of hostile behavior.
2. The woman tries to pacify the batterer
through a show of kind, nurturing behavior,
or by simply staying out of the way.
3. But this proves to be unsuccessful as it only
gives the batterer the notion that he has the
right to abuse her.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Second Phase: Acute Battering Incident
1. Characterized by brutality, destructiveness,
and sometimes death.
2. The battered woman has no control; only the
batterer can stop the violence.
3. The battered woman realizes that she cannot
reason with him and resistance would only
worsen her condition.
Third Phase: Tranquil Period
1. Characterized by guilt on the part of the
batterer and forgiveness on the part of the
woman.
2. The batterer may show a tender and nurturing
behavior towards his partner and the woman
also tries to convince herself that the battery
will never happen again and that her partner
will change for the better.
Characteristics of BWS
The BWS has four characteristics:
1. The woman believes that the violence was her
fault;
2. She has an inability to place the responsibility for
the violence elsewhere;
3. She fears for her life and/or her children’s life
4. She has an irrational belief that the abuser is
omnipresent and omniscient.
RA 9262
The Genosa ruling states that BWS is valid as a defense
when all the requisites of self-defense are present.
Sec. 26 abandons the precedent set by Genosa case.
Sec. 26, RA 9262. Battered Woman Syndrome as a
Defense. – Victim-survivors who are found by the
courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil
liability notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of self-
defense under the Revised Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the
woman who was suffering from battered woman
syndrome at the time of the commission of the
crime, the courts shall be assisted by expert
psychiatrists/ psychologists.
3. Defense of Relatives
Requisites
a. Unlawful Aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of means employed
Page 31 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
c. In case there was provocation by the person
being defended, the one making the defense had
no part in such
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.
Basis
The law acknowledges the possibility that a relative,
by virtue of blood, will instinctively come to the aid
of their relatives.
This justifying circumstance is found not only upon
a humanitarian sentiment, but also upon the impulse
of blood which impels men to rush, on the occasion
of great perils, to the rescue of those close to them
by ties of blood.
Relatives for self-defense (SAD-SiR)
a. Spouse
b. Ascendants
c. Descendants
d. Legitimate, natural, or adopted Siblings, or
relatives by affinity in the same degrees (parents-
in-laws, children-in-law, siblings-in-law)
e. Relatives by consanguinity within 4th civil degree
US v. Esmedia, G.R. No. L-5740 (1910):
The two accused are exempt from criminal
responsibility for having caused the death of
Santiago Abando because it was shown that they
inflicted wounds upon him in defense of their
father who was fatally wounded at the time of their
attack. They honestly believed, and had good
grounds upon which to found their belief, that
Santiago would continue his attack upon their
father.
They are, however, guilty of having caused the
death of the old man, Ciriaco Abando [the father
of Santiago]. When they attacked and killed him
the other trouble had terminated and they were
not in danger of bodily harm from him. Ciriaco
was merely near the scene.
4. Defense of Strangers
Stranger
Any person not included in the enumeration of
relatives under [par. 2 of Art. 11]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Requisites
a. Unlawful Aggression
b. Reasonable necessity of means employed
c. Person defending was not induced by revenge,
resentment or other evil motive
▪ Motive is relevant only in this kind of
defense
Basis
What one may do in his defense, another may do for
him. The ordinary man would not stand idly by and
see his companion killed without attempting to save
his life
5. State of Necessity (Avoidance of a
Greater Evil)
Requisites
a. Evil to be avoided actually exists
b. Evil or injury sought to be avoided is not
produced by the one invoking the justifying
circumstance
c. Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid
it
d. No other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it
With Civil Liability
It is only in this paragraph that the person accused
incurs civil liability despite the justifying
circumstance. Said liability is borne by the person
benefitted by the act.
People v. Retubado, G.R. No. 1203058 (2003):
Art. 11(4) provides “in order to avoid evil or
injury” but the official Spanish text actually
provides el estado de necessidad (state of necessity).
There is state of necessity when the situation is of
grave peril, actual or imminent. It is indispensable
that the state of necessity is NOT brought about
by intentional provocation on the part of the party
invoking the same.
Kind of evil
The evil contemplated includes injurty to persons and
damage to property. This greater evil must not be
brought about by the negligence or imprudence of
the accused.
Ty v. People, G.R. No. 149275 (2004):
Ty’s mother and sister were confined at the Manila
Doctors’ Hospital. Ty signed the
“Acknowledgment of Responsibility for Payment”
in the Contract of Admission. The total hospital
Page 32 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
bills of the two patients amounted to
P1,075,592.95. Ty executed a promissory note
wherein she assumed payment of the obligation in
installments. To assure payment of the obligation,
she drew 7 postdated checks against Metrobank
payable to the hospital which were all dishonored
by the drawee bank due to insufficiency of funds.
As defense, Ty claimed that she issued the checks
because of “an uncontrollable fear of a greater
injury.” She averred that she was forced to issue
the checks to obtain release for her mother who
was being inhumanely treated by the hospital. She
alleged that her mother has contemplated suicide
if she would not be discharged from the hospital.
Ty was found guilty by the lower courts of 7
counts of violation of BP22.
Held: The court sustained the findings of the lower
courts. The evil sought to be avoided is merely
expected or anticipated. So the defense of “an
uncontrollable fear of a greater injury” is not
applicable. By her own admission, she had the
choice to give jewelry or other forms of security
instead of postdated checks to secure her
obligation.
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity to
be availing, the greater injury feared should not
have been brought about by the negligence or
imprudence, more so, the willful inaction of the
actor. In this case, the issuance of the bounced
checks was brought about by Ty’s own failure to
pay her mother’s hospital bills.
6. Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful
Exercise of Right or Office
Requisites
a. The accused acted in the performance of a duty
or oin the lawful exercise of a right or office
• The law does not clothe police officers with
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to
kill, but must be within reasonable limits
[People v Ulep, G.R. No. 132547 (2000)]
• A policeman who shot an escaping prisoner
was done in performance of duty and was
justified to use extreme means (People v
Delima)
• But shooting a thief who refused to be
arrested is not justified
b. The injury caused or offense committed be the
necessary consequence of the due performance
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
of duty or the lawful exercise of such right or
office
Mamangun v. People, G.R. No. 149152 (2007):
A policeman in pursuit of a snatcher accidentally
shot one of the bystanders who were actually
helping him chase the snatcher.
Held: To be sure, acts in the fulfillment of a duty,
without more, do not completely justify the
petitioner’s firing the fatal gunshot at the victim.
True, petitioner was performing his duty as a
police officer as well as when he was trying to
effect the arrest of the suspected robber and in the
process, fatally shoot said suspect, albeit the wrong
man.
However, in the absence of the equally necessary
justifying circumstance that the injury or offense
committed be the necessary consequence if the
due performance of such duty, there can only be
incomplete justification, a privilege mitigating
circumstance under Art. 13 and 69 of the RPC.
There can be no quibbling that there was no
rational necessity for the killing of Contreras.
Petitioner could have first fired a warning shot
before pulling the trigger against Contreras who
was one of the residents chasing the suspected
robber.
People v. Cabanlig, G.R. No. 148431 (2005):
The victim was with certain police officers inside
a patrol jeep which was crossing a bridge around 7
PM. The victim suddenly grabbed an M16 from
one of the police officers and ran away. The
accused fired one shot, and when the victim
turned around and face the jeep, the accused fired
four shots which killed the victim.
Held: The Supreme Court declared the accused as
conducting himself in the lawful exercise of a right.
In People v. Delima, the police officer was running
after a fugitive with a bamboo lance. The police
man shot and killed the fugitive, but the SC
acquitted the police from any charge. At the case
at bar, M16 is deadlier than a bamboo lance.
Further, in Pomoy v. People, the Court held that the
petitioner exercised his duty as law enforcer when
he tried to defend his possession of the weapon
when the victim suddenly tried to remove it from
his holster.
Page 33 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Although the accused here did not issue a warning
shot, the said directive to issue a warning
contemplates a situation where several options are
available to the officers. Here the threat to the life
of the law enforcer is imminent, and there is no
other option but to use force.
7. Obedience to an Order Issued for
Some Lawful Purpose
Requisites
1. An order has been issued by a superior
2. Such order must be for some lawful purpose
A subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal
order of his superior if he is not aware of the illegality
of the order and he is not negligent.
3. The means used by the subordinate to carry out
said order is lawful
People v. Beronilla, G.R. L-4445 (1955):
Held: Where the accused acted upon orders of
superior officers that they, as military
subordinates, could not question, and obeyed in
good faith, without being aware of their illegality,
without any fault or negligence on their part, the
act is not accompanied by criminal intent. A crime
is not committed if the mind of the person
performing the act be innocent.
b. Exempting Circumstances [Art.
12]
Exempting circumstances
Grounds for exemption from punishment because
the agent of the crime is wanting any of the
conditions which make the act voluntary or negligent.
The reason for the exemption lies on the complete
absence of intelligence, freedom of action, or intent,
or on the absence of negligence on the part of the
accused.
REQUISITES OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE
(IM-DAI-UI)
Exempting
Requisites Basis
circumstance
An imbecile or
insane who
Insanity or Absence of
did not act
imbecility intelligence
during lucid
interval
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Exempting Exempting
Requisites Basis Requisites Basis
circumstance circumstance
a. Accused is failure to
15 years old perform such
and below act was due to
Minority; b. Accused is some lawful or
Absence of
Without between 15 insuperable
intelligence
Discernment and 18 years cause
old, and he
acted without 1. Insanity or Imbecility
discernment
1. A person is Imbecile
performing a One who, while advanced in age, has a mental
lawful act; development comparable to that of a child between
2. With due 2 and 7 years of age. Exempt in all cases from criminal
care; liability
3. He causes Lack of
Accident an injury to negligence and Feeblemindedness is not imbecility, hence not
another by intent exempting. It is necessary that there is a complete
mere accident; deprivation of intelligence in committing the act. It may,
4. Without however, be considered mitigating. [People v.
fault or Formigones (1950)]
intention of
causing it. Insanity
1. That the A complete deprivation of intelligence in committing
compulsion is the act, but capable of having lucid intervals. Mere
by means of abnormality of mental faculties is not enough
physical force; especially if the offender has not lost consciousness
2. That the of his acts.
physical force
Irresistible Absence of
must be During a lucid interval, the insane acts with
force freedom
irresistible; intelligence and thus, is not exempt from criminal
3. That the liability.
physical force
must come Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and
from a third avoidance and must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
person.
1. Threat is In remission of symptoms, not lucid interval
greater than or People v. Antonio, Jr., G.R. No. 144266 (2002):
equal to the Dr. Cosca explained that a person suffering from
Uncontrollable act required to Absence of psychosis may have varying degrees of symptoms
fear commit. freedom within a specified period. Hence it was possible
2. Gravity and that his active symptoms of psychosis, e.g.,
imminence of auditory hallucinations or persecutory delusions,
evil. may be present for the period that he did not take
1. That an act his medication and drank alcohol. She asserted
is required by that in psychiatry, they did not use the phrase “lucid
law to be interval” but what they called “in remission of symptoms,”
done; meaning, there was no active phase of the
Insuperable or
2. That a Lack of intent symptoms of psychosis.
lawful cause
person fails to
perform such
act;
3. That his

Page 34 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
Presumption
The presumption is always in favor of sanity and the
burden of proof of insanity is on the defense. [People
v. Aquino, G.R. No. 87084 (1990)]
When should be insane
It has long been settled that the period to which the
inquiry into the mental state of the accused should be
directed is that transpiring immediately before
and/or at the very moment of the act or acts under
prosecution. [People v. Aquino, supra]
Insanity subsequent to commission of crime is not
exempting.
How proven
People v. Madarang, G.R. No. 132319 (2000):
In the Philippines, the courts have established
a more stringent criterion for insanity to be
exempting as it is required that there must be
a complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing the act, i.e., the accused is deprived of
reason; acted without the least discernment because there
is a complete absence of the power to discern,
or that there is a total deprivation of the will.
Mere abnormality of the mental faculties will not
exclude imputability.
The issue of insanity is a question of fact for
insanity is a condition of the mind, not susceptible
of the usual means of proof. As no man can know
what is going on in the mind of another, the state
or condition of a person’s mind can only be
measured and judged by his behavior.
Establishing the insanity of an accused requires
opinion testimony which may be given by a
witness who is intimately acquainted with the
accused, by a witness who has rational basis to
conclude that the accused was insane based on the
witness’ own perception of the accused, or by a
witness who is qualified as an expert, such as a
psychiatrist. The testimony or proof of the
accused’s insanity must relate to the time
preceding or coetaneous with the commission
of the offense with which he is charged.
Two tests
a. The test of COGNITION, or whether the
accused acted with complete deprivation of
intelligence in committing the said crime;
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
b. The test of VOLITION, or whether the accused
acted in total deprivation of freedom of will.
[People v. Rafanan, G.R. No. L-54135 (1991)]
Both cognition and volition tests are applied. There
must be complete deprivation of the intellect or will
or freedom.
People v. Tabugoca, G.R. No. 125334 (1998):
Accused-appellant has utterly failed to overthrow
the presumption of sanity. The defense did not
present any expert witness, any psychiatric
evaluation report, or any psychological findings or
evidence regarding his mental condition at the
time of the commission of the offenses. Accused-
appellant’s charade of amnesia is evidently a
desperate gambit for exculpation.
Yet, amnesia, in and of itself, is no defense to a
criminal charge unless it is shown by competent
proof that the accused did not know the nature
and quality of his action and that it was
wrong. Failure to remember is no proof of the
mental condition of the accused when the crime
was performed.
Mental illnesses covered
Cases covered under this article: (MaKE P SleD)
a. Malignant malaria: which affects the nervous
system [People v. Lacena, G.R. No. 46836 (1940)]
b. Kleptomania with irresistible impulse;
exempting when it only diminishes will-power
c. Epilepsy
d. Psychosis or schizophrenia, except when in
remission of symptoms [People v. Antonio, Jr.]
e. Somnambulism: Sleep-walking [People v. Taneo,
G.R. No. L-37673 (1933)]
f. Dementia praecox [People v. Bonoan, G.R. No. L-
45130 (1937)]
Note: Cited in old cases, but is a term no longer used
by mental health practitioners
Juridical effects of insanity
a. If present at the time of the commission of the
crime – EXEMPT from liability.
b. If present during trial – proceedings will be
SUSPENDED and accused is committed to a
hospital.
c. After judgment or while serving sentence –
Execution of judgment is SUSPENDED, the
accused is committed to a hospital. The period
of confinement in the hospital is counted for the
purpose of the prescription of the penalty.
Page 35 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
2. Minority
Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 12, as well as art. 80 of
the RPC, have been amended/repealed by PD 603,
as amended, and RA 9344.
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT
OF 2006 (RA 9344)
Child
A person under 18 years.
Child in conflict with the law
A child who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as,
having committed an offense under Philippine laws.
[Sec. 4(e), RA 9344]
Juvenile Justice and Welfare System
Refers to a system dealing with children at risk and
children in conflict with the law, which provides
child-appropriate proceedings including programs
and services for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation,
re-integration and aftercare to ensure their normal
growth and development. [Title V: Juvenile Justice and
Welfare System of RA 9344]
Does not include civil liability
The exemption from criminal liability herein
established does not include exemption from civil
liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with
existing laws. [Sec. 6, RA 9344]
3. Accident
Definition
Something that happens outside the sway of our will
and, although coming about through some act of our
will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences.
Requisites
a. A person is performing a lawful act
• The act of firing a shotgun at another is not
a lawful act. [People v. Agliday, G.R. No.
140794 (2001)]
b. Done with due care
• It is uniformly held that if life is taken by
misfortune or accident while in the
performance of a lawful act executed with
due care and without intention of doing
harm, there is no criminal liability. [US v.
Tanedo, G.R. No. L-5418 (1910)]
c. He causes injury by mere accident
d. Without fault or intention of causing it
Page 36 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Burden of proof
Well settled is the rule in criminal cases, that the
prosecution has the burden of proof to establish the
guilt of the accused. However, once the defendant
admits the commission of the offense charged, but
raises an exempting circumstance as a defense, the
burden of proof is shifted to him. [People v. Concepcion, G.R.
No. 148919 (2002)]
Comparison with Article 11(4)
Article 11(4) is a justifying circumstance because the
offender deliberately caused damage, whereas in
Article 12(4), the offender accidentally caused
damage.
4. Irresistible Force
Definition
The duress, force, fear or intimidation must be
present, imminent and impending, and of such nature
as to induce a well-grounded apprehension of death
or serious bodily harm if the act is not done.
Requisites
a. Compulsion is by means of physical force
b. Physical force must be irresistible
The person invoking this circumstance must
show that the force exerted was such that it
reduced him to a mere instrument who acted not only
without his will but against it [People v. Lising, G.R.
No. 106210-11 (1998)]
c. Physical force comes from a third person
No opportunity for escape or self-defense
A threat of future injury is not enough. The
compulsion must be of such a character as to leave
no opportunity for the accused for escape or self-
defense in equal combat. [People v. Del Rosario, G.R.
No. 127755 (1999)]
5. Uncontrollable Fear
Requisites
a. Threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater
than, or at least equal to, that which he is required
to commit
b. Threat promises an evil of such gravity and
imminence that the ordinary man would have
succumbed to
Actus me invite factus non est meus actus. An act
done by me against my will is not my act.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Not uncontrollable fear when it is speculative,

fanciful, or remote fear. Such compulsion must leave People v. Bandian, G.R. No. 45186 (1936):
no opportunity to the accused for escape or self- A woman cannot be held liable for infanticide
defense in equal combat. when she left her newborn child in the bushes
without being aware that she had given birth at all.
In treason Severe dizziness and extreme debility made it
The only possible defense here is fear of death. [Reyes] physically impossible for Bandian to take home
the child plus the assertion that she didn’t know
Uncontrollable fear and irresistible force, that she had given birth.
distinguished
Irresistible Force Uncontrollable Fear c. Mitigating Circumstances [Art.
Uncontrollable fear
may be generated by a 13]
Irresistible force must
threatened act directly
operate directly upon If present in the commission of the crime, these
to a third person such
the person of the circumstances do not entirely free the actor from
as the wife of the
accused and the injury criminal liability, but serve only to reduce the penalty.
accused, but the evil
feared may be a lesser
feared must be greater
degree than the damage Ordinary v. privileged mitigating circumstance,
or at least equal to the
caused by the accused. distinguished
damage caused to avoid
it. Privileged
Ordinary MC
Offender uses physical Offender employs MC
force or violence to intimidation or threat in May be offset
compel another person compelling another to by any Cannot be
As to offset
to commit a crime. commit a crime. aggravating offset
circumstance
6. Insuperable or Lawful Cause If not offset by
aggravating Reduces the
Insuperable means insurmountable. A cause which circumstance, penalty by
has lawfully, morally or physically prevented a person reduces the one to two
to do what the law commands. penalty degrees than
As to effect
provided by law that
Requisites to its min provided by
a. An act is required by law to be done
period provided law for the
b. The person fails to perform such act
the penalty is crime.
c. His failure to perform such act was due to some
divisible.
lawful or insuperable cause

REQUISITES OF EACH CIRCUMSTANCE (ICN-SIP-VDIA)

Mitigating circumstance Elements (when possible) Basis
Incomplete justification/ A majority, but not all, elements of justifying and
exemption exempting circumstances are present
Diminution of
Conditional minority
intelligence
No intention to commit so
Diminution of intent
grave a wrong
1. Provocation must be sufficient
2. Must originate from the offended party
3. That the provocation must be personal and
Diminution of
Sufficient provocation or threat directed to the accused
intelligence and intent
4. That the provocation must be immediate to
the act, i.e., to the commission of the crime by
the person who is provoked

Page 37 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Mitigating circumstance Elements (when possible) Basis

1. That there be a grave offense done to the one
committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity
within the same degree.
Immediate vindication of a 2. That the felony is committed in vindication of Diminution of
grave offense such grave offense. A lapse of time is allowed voluntariness
between the vindication and the doing of the
grave offense.
3. The vindication need not be done by the
person upon whom the grave offense was
committed
1. The accused acted upon an impulse.
2. The impulse must be so powerful that it
naturally produces passion or obfuscation in
him.
3. That there be an act, both unlawful and
sufficient to produce such condition of mind; Diminution of
Passion or obfuscation
and intelligence and intent
4. That said act which produced the obfuscation
was not far removed from the commission of
the crime by a considerable length of time,
during which the perpetrator might recover his
normal equanimity.
1. Offender had not been actually arrested.
2. Offender surrendered himself to a person in
authority or to the latter’s agent.
3. Surrender was voluntary.
Voluntary surrender or Plea of Lesser perversity of the
1. Offender spontaneously confessed his guilt.
Guilt offender
2. Confession of guilt was made in open court, that
is, before the competent court that is to try the
case; and
3. Confession of guilt was made prior to the
presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
Diminution of
Physical defects
voluntariness
1. Illness of the offender must diminish the
exercise of his will-power. Diminution of
Illness
2. Illness should not deprive the offender of intelligence and intent
consciousness of his acts.
Analogous mitigating
circumstances

Page 38 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
1. Incomplete Justification or Exemption
Art. 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime
committed is not wholly excusable. – A penalty
lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed
by law shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly
excusable by reason of the lack of some of the
conditions required to justify the same or to
exempt from criminal liability in the several cases
mentioned in Article 11 and 12, provided that the
majority of such conditions be present. The courts shall
impose the penalty in the period which may be
deemed proper, in view of the number and nature
of the conditions of exemption present or lacking.
For this mitigating circumstance, the courts have the
discretion of imposing the penalty lower by one or
two degrees than that prescribed by law.
Coverage
Not all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to
exempt from criminal liability under articles 11 and
12 are attendant.
In cases when the justifying or exempting
circumstance has only two requisites, the presence of
one element makes art. 69 applicable.
People v. Ulep, supra.: Incomplete justification
is a special or privileged mitigating circumstance, which,
not only cannot be offset by aggravating
circumstances but also reduces the penalty by one
or two degrees than that prescribed by law.
Incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives and
strangers
Unlawful aggression should always be present to be
appreciated as mitigating. It is an ordinary
mitigating circumstance if only unlawful
aggression is present. When two of the three
requisites are present, it is a privileged mitigating
circumstance.
Accident
If the “accident” is attended with fault (cf. fourth
element of accident) and without due care (second
element), then the act becomes punishable under art.
365.
If the “accident” is intended (cf. fourth element) and
unlawful (first element), then the act is covered by art.
4, par. 1 of the RPC – intentional felony.
Page 39 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Under 18 or Over 70 Years Old
(Conditional Minority)
Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person
under eighteen years of age. – When the
offender is a minor under eighteen years and his
case is one coming under the provisions of the
paragraphs next to the last of Article 80 of this
Code, the following rules shall be observed:
1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine
years of age, who is not exempted from
liability by reason of the court having declared
that he acted with discernment, a
discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but
always lower by two degrees at least than that
prescribed by law for the crime which he
committed.
2. Upon a person over fifteen and under
eighteen years of age the penalty next lower
than that prescribed by law shall be imposed,
but always in the proper period.
People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239 (2011):
Under Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code, when
the offender is a minor under 18 years, the penalty
next lower than that prescribed by law shall be
imposed, but always in the proper period.
The age of the offender at the time of the
commission of the crime is considered in lowering
the penalty.
As for suspending the sentence, it is the age of the
offender at the time the sentence is to be
promulgated.
15 and below
Considered as an exempting circumstance.
Above 15 but under 18
Exempting, unless acted with discernment. If acted
with discernment, it is a mitigating circumstance,
lowering the penalty by one degree.
The sentence is suspended until the minor turns 21
years old.
When over 70
Appreciated as mitigating circumstance.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

3. No Intention to Commit So Grave A 4. Sufficient Provocation or Threat

Wrong (Praeter Intentionem)
Provocation
Only applicable to offense resulting in death, physical Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
injuries, or material harm (including property offended party capable of exciting, inciting, or
damage). It is not applicable to defamation or slander. irritating anyone.

When not applicable Threat

a. Crime results from criminal negligence or culpa Threat must not be offensive and positively strong,
b. The offender employed brute force otherwise may result to unlawful aggression justifying
c. The victim does not die as a result of the assault self-defense. See discussion on self-defense.
in cases of crimes against persons
d. Murder qualified by treachery Requisites
a. Provocation must be sufficient
People v. Sales, G.R. No. 177218 (2011): • “Sufficient” means adequate to excite a
The mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to person to commit a wrong and must
commit so grave a wrong as that actually accordingly be proportionate to its gravity.
perpetrated cannot be appreciated where the acts [People v. Nabora, G.R. No. L-48101 (1941)]
employed by the accused were reasonably • Depends upon:
sufficient to produce and did actually produce ▪ Social standing of person provoked
the death of the victim. ▪ Act constituting provocation
▪ Time and place where the provocation
There must be a notable disproportion between the is made
means employed to execute the criminal act and its b. It must originate from the offended party
consequences. [People v. Amit, G.R. No. L-29066 c. The provocation is immediate to the act, or
(1970)] the commission of the crime
• When there is an interval of time between
The intention, as an internal act, is judged not only by the provocation and the commission of the
the proportion of the means employed by him to the crime, the perpetrator has time to regain his
evil produced by his act, but also by: reason [People v Pagal, G.R. No. L-32040
a. The weapon used (1977)]
b. The part of the body injured
c. The injury inflicted Sufficient Provocation as a
d. The manner it is inflicted. provocation as a mitigating
requisite of circumstance
Intention can also be inferred from the subsequent incomplete self-
acts of the accused immediately after committing the defense
offense, such as when the accused helped his victim It pertains to its
to secure medical treatment. absence on the part of
It pertains to its
the person defending
People v. Ural, G.R. No. L-30801 (1974): presence on the part of
himself. [People v. CA,
The intention, as an internal act, is judged not the offended party.
G.R. No. 103613
only by the proportion of the means employed (2001)]
by him to the evil produced by his act, but also
by the fact that the blow was or was not aimed BAR TIP. The common set-up given in a bar
at a vital part of the body. problem is that of provocation given by somebody
against whom the person provoked cannot retaliate;
Thus, it may be deduced from the proven facts thus the person provoked retaliated on a younger
that the accused had no intent to kill the victim, brother or on the father. Although in fact, there is
his design being only to maltreat him, such that sufficient provocation, it is not mitigating because the
when he realized the fearful consequences of his one who gave the provocation is not the one against
felonious act, he allowed the victim to secure whom the crime was committed.
medical treatment at the municipal dispensary.

Page 40 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

However, this circumstance cannot be considered

Look at two criteria
a. If from the element of time,
• material lapse of time stated in the problem
and
• there is nothing stated in the problem that
the effect of the threat of provocation had
prolonged and affected the offender at the
time he committed the crime then you use
the criterion based on the time element.
b. If there is that time element and at the same time,
facts are given indicating that at the time the
offender committed the crime, he is still
suffering from outrage of the threat or
provocation done to him, then he will still get the
benefit of this mitigating circumstance.
Provocation and passion/obfuscation,
considered together
Romera v. People, G.R. No. 151978 (2004):
Provocation and passion or obfuscation are not
two separate mitigating circumstances. It is well-
settled that if these two circumstances are based
on the same facts, they should be treated
together as one mitigating circumstance. It is
clear that both circumstances arose from the same
set of facts.
where sufficient time has elapsed for the accused to
regain his composure. [People v Ventura, G.R. No. 148145-
46 (2004)]
Gravity of personal offense
The question whether or not a certain personal
offense is grave must be decided by the court, having
in mind: [TimPlaS]
a. the Time when the insult was made;
b. the Place; and
c. the Social standing of the person.
Vindication and passion/obfuscation,
considered together
Vindication of a grave offense and passion or
obfuscation cannot be counted separately and
independently.
People v. Torpio, G.R. No. 138984 (2004):
The mitigating circumstance of sufficient
provocation cannot be considered apart from the
circumstance of vindication of a grave offense.
These two circumstances arose from one and the
same incident, i.e., the attack on the appellant by
the accused, so that they should be considered as
only one mitigating circumstance.

Hence, they should not be treated as two separate Vindication and provocation, distinguished
mitigating circumstances. Provocation Vindication
The grave offense may
It is made directly only
5. Immediate Vindication of A Grave be committed against
to the person
Offense the offender’s relatives
committing the felony.
mentioned by law.
Requisites The offended party
a. There be a grave offense done to the one The offense need not must have done a grave
committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants, be a grave offense. offense to the offender
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted or his relatives.
brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within The provocation or The grave offense may
the same degree threat must be proximate, which
b. Felony is committed in vindication of such immediately precede admits of an interval of
grave offense the act. time
It is a mere spite against
• A lapse of time is allowed between It concerns the honor
the one giving the
vindication and the doing of a grave offense of the person.
provocation or threat.
The Spanish text uses “proxima.” Although the
grave offense which engendered the perturbation of 6. Passion or Obfuscation (Arrebato Y
mind was not so immediate, it was held that the Obcecacion)
influence thereof, by reason of its gravity, lasted until the
moment the crime was committed. [People v. Parana, Requisites
G.R. No. L-45373 (1937)] a. That there be an act, both unlawful and
sufficient, to produce such condition of mind

Page 41 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

• Circumstance is not applicable when the act Cannot give rise to

Physical force is a
is committed in a spirit of: physical force because it
condition sine qua
a. Lawlessness does not involves
non.
b. Revenge physical force.
• If the cause of loss of self-control is trivial Passion/obfuscation Irresistible force
and slight, obfuscation is not mitigating. comes from the offender comes from a third
b. The said act was not far removed from the himself. person.
commission of the crime by a considerable Must arise from lawful
Irresistible force is
length of time sentiments to be
unlawful.
• The perpetrator must not have been able to mitigating.
recover his normal equanimity
c. Act causing obfuscation was committed by the Passion/obfuscation v. provocation,
victim himself distinguished
Passion/Obfuscation Provocation
People v. Bates, G.R. No. 139907 (2003): Passion/obfuscation is
To consider passion and obfuscation as a produced by an impulse Provocation comes
mitigating circumstance, such must arise from which may be caused by from the injured party.
lawful sentiments and not from a spirit of provocation.
lawlessness or revenge or from anger and The offense which
resentment. engenders the
perturbation of mind Must immediately
In the present case, clearly, Marcelo was infuriated need not be immediate. precede the
upon seeing his brother, Carlito, shot by Jose. It is only required that commission of the
However, a distinction must be made between the the influence thereof crime.
first time that Marcelo hacked Jose and the second lasts until the moment
time that the former hacked the latter. When the crime is committed.
Marcelo hacked Jose right after seeing the latter In both, the effect is the loss of reason and self-
shoot at Carlito, and if appellant refrained from control on the part of the offender.
doing anything else after that, he could have validly
invoked the mitigating circumstance of passion 7. Voluntary Surrender and Plea Of Guilt
and obfuscation. But when, upon seeing his
brother Carlito dead, Marcelo went back to Jose, VOLUNTARY SURRENDER
who by then was already prostrate on the ground
and hardly moving, hacking Jose again was a clear Surrender is voluntary if spontaneous showing the
case of someone acting out of anger in the spirit interest of the accused to surrender unconditionally
of revenge. to the authorities, either because (1) he acknowledges
his guilt or (2) wishes to save them the trouble and
Cannot coexist with treachery expenses that would be necessarily incurred in his
Passion cannot co-exist with treachery because in search and capture. [Andrada v. People, G.R. No.
passion, the offender loses his control and reason 135222 (2005)].
while in treachery the means employed are
consciously adopted. One who loses his reason and If none of these two reasons impelled the accused to
self-control could not deliberately employ a particular surrender, the surrender is not spontaneous and
means, method or form of attack in the execution of therefore not voluntary. [People v. Laurel, G.R. No.
the crime. [People v. Germina, G.R. No. 120881 (1998)] 120353 (1998)].

Passion/obfuscation v. irresistible force, The accused must actually surrender his own person
distinguished to the authorities, admitting complicity of the crime.
Passion/Obfuscation Irresistible force
Exempting
Mitigating Circumstance
circumstance

Page 42 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Requisites
a. Offender has not been actually arrested
Exceptions:
a. Where a person, after committing the
offense and having opportunity to escape,
voluntarily waited for the agents of the
authorities and voluntarily gave up, he is
entitled to the benefit of the circumstance,
even if he was placed under arrest by a
policeman then and there. [People v. Parana,
G.R. No. L-45373 (1937)]
b. Where the arrest of the offender was after
his voluntary surrender or after his doing an
act amounting to a voluntary surrender to
the agent of a person in authority. [People v.
Babiera, G.R. No. 28871 (1928); People v.
Parana, supra.]
b. Offender surrendered himself to a person in
authority or to the latter’s agent
Person in authority – one directly vested with
jurisdiction. [Art. 152]
Agent of person in authority – person, who, by direct
provision of law, or by election or by competent
authority, is charged with the maintenance of public
order and the protection and security of life and
property and any person who comes to the aid of
persons in authority. [Art. 152]
c. The surrender was voluntary
If the only reason for the supposed surrender is to
ensure the safety of the accused whose arrest is
inevitable, the surrender is not spontaneous and
hence not voluntary. [People v. Pinca, G.R. No. 129256
(1999)]
The surrender must be unconditional
Merely requesting a policeman to accompany the
accused to the police headquarters is not voluntary
surrender. [People v. Flores, G.R. No. 137497 (1994)]
People v. Pinca, supra.:
Appellant’s actions after the incident are not marks
of voluntary surrender. Denying to the police any
personal knowledge of the crime, he even tried to
distance himself from the place of the incident by
going to Tagbilaran City.
Page 43 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
It was only when he learned that he had become a
suspect and that the police were looking for him
even in Tagbilaran that he finally went to the police
station, but only “to clear his name.” Such acts do
not show any intent to surrender unconditionally
to the authorities.
Whether or not a warrant of arrest had been issued is
immaterial and irrelevant. The RPC does not
distinguish among the various moments when the
surrender may occur. [Reyes].
The fact that a warrant of arrest had already been
issued is no bar to the consideration of that
circumstance because the law does not require that
the surrender be prior the arrest. [People v. Yecla, G.R.
Nos. 46526-27(1939)]. What is important is that the
surrender be spontaneous.
People v. Dulos, G.R. No. 107328 (1994):
In order that voluntary surrender may be
appreciated, it is necessary that “it must be
spontaneous and made in such manner that it
shows the intent of the accused to surrender
unconditionally to the authorities, either because
he acknowledges his guilt or because he wishes to
save them the trouble and expenses necessarily
incurred in his search and capture.”
8. Plea of Guilt
Requisites
a. Offender spontaneously confessed his guilt
b. Confession was made in open court, that is,
before the competent court that is to try the case
c. Made prior to the presentation of evidence for
the prosecution
d. Confession of guilt was to the offense charged in
the information
Legal effects
While the plea of guilty is mitigating, it is also
considered an admission of all material facts alleged
in the information, including aggravating
circumstances. The admission covers both the crime
and its attendant circumstances qualifying and/or
aggravating. [People v Jose, G.R. No. L-28232 (1971)]
However, t is also an established rule that a plea of
guilty cannot be held to include treachery and evident
premeditation where the evidence adduced does not
adequately disclose its existence. [People v Gravino,
G.R. No. L-31327-29 (1983)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Extrajudicial confession
The extrajudicial confession made by the accused is
not voluntary confession because it was made outside
the court. [People v. Pardo, G.R. No. L-562 (1947)]
When still mitigating
The change of plea should be made at the first
opportunity when his arraignment was first set.
a. Withdrawal of plea of not guilty before
presentation of evidence by prosecution is still
mitigating. All that the law requires is voluntary
plea of guilty prior to the presentation of the
evidence by the prosecution.
b. A plea of guilty on an amended information will
be considered as an attenuating circumstance if
no evidence was presented in connection with
the charges made therein. [People v. Ortiz]
When no longer mitigating
a. A conditional plea of guilty is not mitigating.
b. Plea of guilt on appeal is not mitigating.
Plea to a lesser offense
Sec. 2, Rule 116, ROC – At arraignment, the
accused, with the consent of the offended party
and prosecutor, may be allowed by the trial court
to plead guilty to a lesser offense which is
necessarily included in the offense charged. After
arraignment but before trial, the accused may still
be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser offense
after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No
amendment of the complaint or information is
necessary.
9. Physical Defects
The physical defect must have a relation to the
commission of the crime. Such defect restricts or
limits his means to act, defend himself, or
communicate with others. Here, there is no
distinction between educated and uneducated deaf-
mute or blind persons.
Estafa
Where the offender is deaf and dumb and he
misappropriated property entrusted to him, the crime
committed was estafa. The fact that he was deaf and
dumb is not mitigating since that does not bear any
relation to the crime committed.
Physical injuries
If a person is deaf and dumb and has been slandered,
he cannot talk so instead he got a piece of wood and
struck the fellow on the head. The crime committed
Page 44 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
was physical injuries. The Supreme Court held that
being a deaf and dumb is mitigating because the only
way is to use his force because he cannot strike back
in any other way.
People v. Doepante, G.R. No. 102772 (1996):
The appellant was convicted of murder. He claims
that the mitigating circumstance of physical defect
should be appreciated in his case because he has
no left arm.
Held: The fact that appellant suffers from a
physical defect, a severed left hand, does not mean
that he should automatically be credited with the
mitigating circumstance. In order for this
condition to be appreciated, it must be shown that
such physical defect limited him to such an extent
that he did not have complete freedom of action,
consequently resulting in diminution of the
element of voluntariness.
Such cannot be appreciated in the case at bar
where the appellant’s physical condition clearly did
not limit his means of action, defense or
communication, nor affect his free will. In fact,
despite his handicap, appellant nevertheless
managed to attack, overcome and fatally stab his
victim.
10. Illness
Requisites
a. The illness of the offender must diminish the
exercise of willpower
b. Such illness should not deprive the offender of
consciousness of his acts
It is said that this paragraph refers only to diseases of
pathological state that trouble the conscience or will. If a
psychological disease does not lead someone to
experience insanity (i.e., complete deprivation of
intelligence) during the commission of a crime, it may
be appreciated as mitigating provided there is
diminution of will power.
11. Analogous Mitigating Circumstances
Any other circumstance of similar nature and
analogous to the nine mitigating circumstances
enumerated in art. 13 may be mitigating.
a. Offender leading the law enforcers to the place
where he buried the instrument of the crime has
been considered as equivalent to voluntary
surrender
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b. Stealing driven to do so out of extreme poverty There is no similar provision (analogous

is considered as analogous to incomplete state of
necessity
c. Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to
over 70 years of age mentioned in par. 2. [People
v. Reantillo, G.R. No L-45685 (1938)]
d. Voluntary restitution of stolen goods similar to
voluntary surrender [People v. Luntao, 50 O.G.
1182]
e. Impulse of jealous feelings, similar to passion
and obfuscation. [People v. Libria, G.R. No. L-
6585 (1954)]
f. Extreme poverty and necessity, similar to
incomplete justification based on state of
necessity. [People v. Macbul, G.R. No. L-48976
(1943)]
g. Testifying for the prosecution, without previous
discharge, analogous to a plea of guilty. [People v.
Navasca, G.R. No. L-29107 (1977)]
Canta v. People, G.R. No. 140937 (2001):
Canta stole a cow but alleges that he mistook the
cow for his missing cow. He made a calf suckle the
cow he found and when it did, Canta thought that
the cow he found was really his. However, he
falsified a document describing the said cow’s
cowlicks and markings. After getting caught, he
surrendered the cow to the custody of the
authorities in the municipal hall.
Held: Canta’s act of voluntarily taking the cow to
the municipal hall to place it in the custody of
authorities (to save them the time and effort of
having to recover the cow) was an analogous
circumstance to voluntary surrender.
circumstances) in Art. 14 for aggravating
circumstances.
d. Aggravating Circumstances [Art.
14]
BASIC PRINCIPLES
Raises the penalty for a crime to its maximum period
provided by law for that crime, but never beyond
such maximum period. The list in this Article is
EXCLUSIVE – there are no analogous aggravating
circumstances.
Degree of proof
The aggravating circumstances must be established
with moral certainty, with the same degree of proof
required to establish the crime itself.
Must be alleged in Information
BOTH generic and qualifying aggravating
circumstances must be alleged in the Information in
order to be considered by the Court in imposing the
sentence. [Rule 110, Sec. 9, Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure]. This new rule took effect on December
1, 2000, but applies retroactively to pending cases
since it is favorable to the accused.
Even if not alleged in the information, aggravating
circumstances may still be considered as bases for the
award of exemplary damages. [People v. Esugon, G.R.
No. 195244 (2015)]

Paragraph
Aggravating circumstance Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
The public officer must:
Personal circumstance
1. Use the influence, prestige
of the offender and the
Taking advantage of public or ascendancy which his
1 means to secure the
office office gives him
commission of the
2. As means by which he
crime
realizes his purpose.
1. That the public authority is
engaged in the exercise of
his functions.
In contempt of or with insult to Lack of respect for the
2 2. That the public authority is
public authorities public authorities
not the person against
whom the crime is
committed.

Page 45 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
Aggravating circumstance
With insult or lack of regard
due to offended party by reason
of rank, age, or sex
Dwelling
Abuse of confidence
Obvious ungratefulness
In the palace of the Chief
Executive or in his presence, or
where public authorities are
engaged in the discharge of
their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship
Nighttime
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
Paragraph
Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
3. The offender knows him to
be a public authority.
4. His presence has not
prevented the offender
from committing the
criminal act.
Rank: Difference between social
condition or position between
offender and offended party
Personal circumstances
3
of the offended party Age: Either old age or tender age of
the victim
Sex: Female
1. Building or structure,
Place of the exclusively used for rest
3 commission of the and comfort.
crime 2. The offended party must
not give provocation.
1. That the offended party
had trusted the offender.
2. That the offender abused
Means and ways such trust by committing a
4 employed in commission crime against the offended
of the crime party.
3. That the abuse of
confidence facilitated the
commission of the crime.
1. That the offended party
had trusted the offender;
2. That the offender abused
such trust by committing a
crime against the offended
Means and ways
party;
4 employed in commission
3. That the act be committed
of the crime
with obvious
ungratefulness.
The ungratefulness must be
obvious: (1) manifest and (2) clear.
Committed:
1. In the palace of the Chief
Executive, or
Place of the 2. In his presence, or
5 commission of the 3. Where public authorities
crime are engaged in the
discharge of their duties, or
4. In a place dedicated to
religious worship
Time and place of the
1. It is specially sought by the
6 commission of the
offender
crime
Page 46 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Paragraph
Aggravating circumstance Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
2. The offender purposely
took advantage of
nighttime; or
3. It facilitated the
commission of the offense.
The offenders must choose the
place as an aid either:
1. to an easy and uninterrupted
accomplishment of their
Time and place of the criminal designs, or
Uninhabited place 6 commission of the 2. to insure concealment of the
crime offense, that he might
thereby be better secured
against detection and
punishment. [U.S. v. Vitug,
G.R. No.5430 (1910) ]
There should:
Means and ways 1. Be at least be four persons.
employed in 2. At least 4 of them should
Cuadrilla or with a band 6
commission of the be armed;
crime 3. And are principals by direct
participation.
Time and place of the The offender must take advantage
On occasion of a calamity 7
commission of the crime of the calamity or misfortune
1. That the armed men or
persons took part in the
Means and ways commission of the crime,
Aid of armed men or means to employed in directly or indirectly.
8
ensure impunity commission of the 2. That the accused availed
crime himself of their aid or relied
upon them when the crime
was committed.
1. That the offender is on trial
for an offense;
2. That he was previously
convicted by final
judgment of another crime;
Inclination to commit 3. That both the first and the
Recidivism 9
crime second offenses are
embraced in the same title
of the Code;
4. That the offender is
convicted of the new
offense.
1. That the accused is on trial
for an offense;
2. That he previously served
Inclination to commit sentence for another
Reiteracion or habituality 10
crime offense to which the law
attaches:
a. an equal or
b. greater penalty, or

Page 47 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Paragraph
Aggravating circumstance Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
c. for 2 or more crimes to
which it attaches
lighter penalty than
that for the new
offense; and
3. That he is convicted of the
new offense.
There must be two or more
principals:
1. The one who gives or
offers the price or
promise; and
2. The one who accepts it.

Both of whom are principals to the

former, because he directly induces
the latter to commit the crime, and
the latter because he commits it.

Price, reward, or promise 11 Motivating power The price, reward or promise need
not:
1. Consist of or refer to
material things; or
2. That the same were
actually delivered, it being
sufficient that the offer
made by the principal by
inducement was accepted
by the principal by direct
participation before the
commission of the
offense.
Means and ways
The wasteful means were used by
Inundation, fire, poison, employed in
12 the offender to accomplish a
explosion, etc. commission of the
criminal purpose
crime
1. The time when the
offender determined to
commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly
indicating that the culprit
has clung to his
Means and ways determination; and
Evident premeditation 13 employed in commission 3. A sufficient lapse of time
of the crime between the determination
and execution, to allow him
to reflect upon the
consequences of his act
and to allow his conscience
to overcome the resolution
of his will.

Page 48 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Paragraph
Aggravating circumstance Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
Craft: intellectual trickery and
cunning on the part of the accused

Fraud: insidious words or

Means and ways machinations used to induce the
Craft, fraud, or disguise 14 employed in commission victim to act in a manner which
of the crime would enable the offender to carry
out his design

Disguise: any device to conceal

identity
To TAKE ADVANTAGE of
superior strength means to use
purposely excessive force out of
proportion to the means of defense
available to the person attacked.

Superiority may arise from:

1. Aggressor’s sex, build,
weapon or number
Means and ways
Superior strength or means to 2. As compared to that of the
15 employed in commission
weaken defense victim (e.g. accused
of the crime
attacked an unarmed girl
with a knife; 3 men stabbed
to death the female victim).

For the means employed to weaken

defense: The means used must
NOT totally eliminate possible
defense of the victim, otherwise it
will fall under treachery.
1. The employment of means
of execution that gave the
person attacked no
opportunity to defend
Means and ways
himself or retaliate; and
Alevosia (treachery) 16 employed in commission
2. That the offender
of the crime
consciously adopted the
particular means, method
or form of attack employed
by him
The means employed or the
circumstances brought about must
Means and ways
tend to make the effects of the crime
Ignominy 17 employed in commission
MORE HUMILIATING or TO
of the crime
PUT THE OFFENDED PARTY
TO SHAME
1. There is unlawful entry
Means and ways
when an entrance is effected
Unlawful entry 18 employed in commission
by a way NOT intended for
of the crime
the purpose.

Page 49 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Paragraph
Aggravating circumstance Basis Requisites
in Art. 14
2. Unlawful entry must be a
means to effect entrance
and NOT for escape.
1. Breaking the wall, floor,
roof, etc., is a means to the
Means and ways commission of the crime.
Breaking wall, floor, roof 19 employed in commission 2. Breaking the wall, floor,
of the crime roof, etc., must be a means
to effect entrance and
NOT for escape.
1. Means and ways
employed in
commission of the
crime The commission of the crime is
With aid of persons under 15 20 2. Repress practice of committed with the aid of children
criminals to avail of under 15 years of age
minors and take
advantage of their
irresponsibility
1. Means and ways
1. The use of motor vehicle is a
employed in
means to the commission of
commission of the
the crime, and not merely to
crime
facilitate escape
By motor vehicles, airships, or 2. To counteract the
20 2. Must be (a) motorized
other similar means great facilities found
vehicles or (b) other efficient
by modern criminals
means of transportation
as means to commit
similar to automobile or
crime, and flee and
airplane [Reyes]
abscond
1. That the injury caused be
deliberately increased by
Means and ways
causing other wrong;
Ensañamiento (cruelty) 21 employed in commission
2. That the other wrong be
of the crime
unnecessary for the execution
of the purpose of the offender.

Absorbed by the
Aggravating
Specific to Inherent element of aggravating
circumstance
circumstance of
1. Accessories under Art. 19,
par. 3 (harboring, concealing
or assisting in the escape of
the principal of the crime);
Taking 2. Title VII of Book Two of
advantage of the RPC [Crimes committed
public office by public officers
3. Malversation under Art. 217
4. Falsification of document by
public officers under Art.
171

Page 50 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Absorbed by the
Aggravating
Specific to Inherent element of aggravating
circumstance
circumstance of
With insult or
PARaS
lack of regard
1. Parricide
due to offended Crime against persons or
2. Abduction
party by reason honor
3. Rape
of rank, age, or
4. Seduction
sex
Dwelling Robbery with force upon things
STEM
1. Qualified seduction under
Art. 337
2. Qualified theft under Art.
Abuse of
310
confidence
3. Estafa by conversion or
misappropriation under Art.
315
4. Malversation under Art. 217
Treachery [People v.
Nighttime Kintuan, G.R. No.
74100 (1987)]
Uninhabited
Treachery
place
Pro-TIP:
1. Crimes against
PROperty
2. Treason [People v.
Manayao, G.R. No. L- Treachery [People v.
Cuadrilla or with
322 (1947)] Brigandage Ampo-an, G.R. No.
a band
3. Illegal detention [US 75366 (1990)]
v. Santiago, G.R. No.
1000 (1903)]
4. Crimes against
Persons
Aid of armed With a band; treachery
men or means to [People v. Ferrera, G.R.
ensure impunity No. 145727 (2002)]
1. Fire: arson
2. Explosion: destruction under
Inundation, fire, Art. 324
poison, 3. By means of derailment of
explosion, etc. locomotive: damages and
obstruction to means of
communication under Art. 330
Robbery with violence against
persons; treason [People v. Racaza G.R.
No. L-365 (1949)]; adultery, estafa,
and falsification. However, it may be
Evident
aggravating in robbery with homicide
premeditation
if the premeditation included the
killing of the victim. [People v.
Valeriano, G.R. Nos. 103604-05
(1993)]

Page 51 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Absorbed by the
Aggravating
Specific to Inherent element of aggravating
circumstance
circumstance of
Craft: Qualified theft [People v.
Tiongson, 59 O.G. 4521]

Fraud:
1. Preventing the meeting of
Congress and similar bodies [Art.
143]
2. Violation of parliamentary
immunity [Art. 145]
Craft and fraud:
3. Crimes against public interest
Craft, fraud, or Absorbed by treachery
under Chapt. 3
disguise [People v. Malig, G.R.
4. Crimes committed by public
No. L-2083 (1949)]
officers under Chapt. 3
5. Execution of deeds by means of
violence or intimidation [Art.
298]
6. Crimes against property under
Chapts. 5 and 6
7. Marriage contracted against
provisions of the law [Art. 350]
8. Rape through fraudulent
machination
For superior strength:
For means employed to Absorbed by cuadrilla
weaken defense: or by a band [People v.
1. specific to crimes Escabarte, G.R. No. L-
Superior
against persons; 42964]; treachery
strength or For use of superior strength: inherent
2. and sometimes against
means to weaken in treason [People v. Racaza, supra.]
person and property For means employed to
defense
[e.g., robbery with weaken defense:
physical injuries, or absorbed by treachery
homicide] [People v. Siatong, G.R.
No. L-9242 (1957)]
Murder by poisoning [People v. Caliso,
Alevosia
Crimes against persons G.R. No. 131475-76 (2002)]; treason
(treachery)
[People v. Racaza, supra.]
C MaRia ClaRa:
1. Coercion (light or
grave)
2. Murder
3. “Wanton Robbery for
personal gain” [People
Ignominy v. Racaza, supra.]

4. Crimes against
chastity
5. Less serious physical
injuries
6. Rape

Page 52 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Absorbed by the
Aggravating
Specific to Inherent element of aggravating
circumstance
circumstance of
Rape; Murder; Robbery Trespass to dwelling under Art. 280;
Unlawful entry with violence against or Robbery with force upon things
intimidation of persons under Art. 299(a) and Art. 302
Breaking wall, Robbery with force upon things
floor, roof under Art. 299(a) and Art. 302
(Excludes crimes which
By motor cannot be committed by
vehicles, means of motor vehicle,
airships, or other such as estafa [People v.
similar means Bagtas, CA-G.R. No. 10823
(1955)])
Rape; wanton robbery for
personal gain; crimes
where par. 17 also apply
Ensañamiento [People v. Racaza, supra.];
(cruelty) robbery with homicide
[People v. Basca, G.R. No. L-
11485 (1958)]; other
crimes against persons

Page 53 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

KINDS OF AGGRAVATING the enumerated circumstances as the attendant

CIRCUMSTANCES circumstances.
1. GENERIC. Those that can generally apply to
all crimes. Nos. 1, 2, 3 (dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, In the instant case, the Information specifically
14, 18, 19, and 20 except “by means of motor alleges that evident premeditation, treachery, and
vehicles”. A generic aggravating circumstance abuse of superior strength attended the
may be offset by a generic mitigating commission of the offense. This is more than
circumstance. sufficient to comply with the requirements of
Article 248.
2. SPECIFIC. Those that apply only to particular
crimes. Nos. 3 (except dwelling), 15, 16, 17 and 4. INHERENT. Those that must accompany the
21. commission of the crime and is therefore not
considered in increasing the penalty to be
3. QUALIFYING. Those that change the nature imposed such as evident premeditation in theft,
of the crime (i.e. Art. 248 enumerate the robbery, estafa, adultery and concubinage.
qualifying AC which qualifies the killing of
person to murder). If two or more possible 5. SPECIAL. Those which arise under special
qualifying circumstances were alleged and conditions to increase the penalty of the offense
proven, only one would qualify the offense and and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstances
the others would be generic aggravating. such as:
a. quasi-recidivism [Art. 160]
Qualifying b. complex crimes [Art. 48]
Generic aggravating
aggravating c. error in personae [Art. 49]
circumstances
circumstances d. taking advantage of public position and
Does not only give the membership in an organized/syndicated
Increases the penalty crime its proper and crime group [Art. 62]
which should be exclusive name but also e. sec. 4, PD 1613
imposed upon the places the author thereof
accused to the in such a situation as to Aggravating circumstances which do not
MAXIMUM deserve no other penalty increase the penalty:
PERIOD. than that specially a. Aggravating circumstances which in
prescribed by law for themselves constitute a crime especially
said crime. punishable by law.
The circumstance affects b. Aggravating circumstances which are
It is not an ingredient the nature of the crime included by the law in defining a crime and
of the crime. It only itself such that the prescribing the penalty. [Art. 62, par. 1].
affects the penalty to offender shall be liable c. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
be imposed but the for a more serious crime. aggravating circumstance inherent in the
crime remains the The circumstance is crime to such a degree that it must of
same actually an ingredient of necessity accompany the commission
the crime thereof. [Art. 62, par. 2].
The circumstance can Being an ingredient of
be offset by an the crime, it cannot be Aggravating circumstances which are personal
ordinary mitigating offset by any mitigating to the offenders
circumstance circumstance Aggravating circumstances which arise from (1)
moral attributes of offender (evident premeditation);
People v. Lab-eo, G.R. No. 133438 (2002): (2) from his private relations with offended party
The fact that the circumstances were described as (consanguinity and affinity); and (3) from any other
aggravating instead of qualifying does not take the personal cause (recidivism), shall only serve to
Information out of the purview of Article 248 of aggravate the liability of the principals, accomplices, and
the Revised Penal Code. Article 248 does not use accessories as to whom such circumstances. [Art. 62, par. 3].
the word qualifying or aggravating in enumerating
the circumstances that raise a killing to the Aggravating circumstances which depend for
category of murder. Article 248 merely refers to their application upon the knowledge of
offenders

Page 54 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
Circumstances which consists (1) in the material
execution of the act; (2) in the means employed to
accomplish it (nighttime), shall serve to aggravate the
liability of only the persons who had knowledge of them at
the time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.
[Art. 62, par. 4]
LIST OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. “That advantage be taken by the
offender of his public position.”
This is applicable only when the offender is a public
officer. To realize his purpose, the offender must use:
a. Influence
b. Prestige or
c. Ascendency
The essence of the matter is presented in the inquiry,
“did the accused abuse his office in order to commit the crime?”
[U.S. v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. L-3774 (1907)] If the
accused could have perpetrated the crime even
without occupying his position, there is no abuse of
public position. [People v. Villamor, G.R. Nos. 140407-
08 (2002)]
When a public officer commits a common crime
independent of his official functions and does acts
that are not connected with the duties of his office,
he should be punished as a private individual without
this aggravating circumstance.
When in the commission of the crime, advantage was
taken by the offender of his public position, the
penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum
regardless of mitigating circumstances. [RA 7659]
People v. Gapasin, G.R. No. 73489 (1994):
The defendant was issued a mission order to
investigate the alleged presence of unidentified
armed men in a certain barrio in Isabela. The
defendant claimed that he acted in self-defense
when he killed the victim, who the former said was
one of the men who illegally possessed firearms in
the area.
Held: The aggravating circumstance of taking
advantage of public position was appreciated. The
defendant, a member of the Philippine
Constabulary, committed the crime with an
armalite which was issued to him when he received the
mission order.
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
2. “That the crime be committed in
contempt or with insult to the public
authorities.”
Requisites.
a. The public authority is engaged in the
exercise of his functions
b. The public authority is not the person
against whom the crime is committed
If the crime is committed against the public
authority while in the performance of his duty,
the offender commits direct assault instead.
c. Offender knows him to be a public authority
Lack of such knowledge indicates lack of
intention to insult public authority
d. His presence has not prevented the offender
from committing the criminal act.
Failure to allege knowledge in Information
Failure to expressly allege in the information that the
accused had the knowledge that the person attacked
was a person in authority does not render the
information defective so long as there are facts
therein from which it can be implied that the accused
knew that the person attacked was a person in
authority [People v. Balbar, G.R. Nos. L-20216-17
(1967)]
3. “That the act be committed with
insult or in disregard of the respect
due the offended party on account of
his rank, age, or sex, or that is be
committed in the dwelling of the
offended party, if the latter has not
given provocation.”
Four circumstances are enumerated in this paragraph,
which can be considered singly or together. If all the four
circumstances are present, they have the weight of
one aggravating circumstance only.
a. Insult or disregard on account of
1. Rank – designation or title used to fix the
relative position of the offended party in
reference to others.
• There must be a difference in the
social condition of the offender and
offended party
2. Age
Page 55 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
• May refer to old age or tender age of the
victim
3. Sex
• Refers to the female sex
b. Act committed in dwelling of offended party,
if latter has not given provocation
1. Dwelling
• Building or structure, exclusively used
for rest and comfort
• A market stall where the victim is
sleeping is not a dwelling [People v
Magnaye, G.R. No. L-3510 (1951)]
• Dwelling need not be owned by the
offended party. It is enough that he
used the place for his peace of mind,
rest, comfort and privacy.
2. Provocation is understood as
• Given by offended party
• Sufficient
• Immediate to the commission of the
crime
INSULT OR DISREGARD
Deliberately intended
There must be evidence that in the commission of
the crime, the accused deliberately intended to offend
or insult the sex or age of the offended party. [People
v. Mangsat, G.R. No. L-34675]
People v. Nismal, G.R. No. L-51257 (1982):
The accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
robbery with homicide as alleged in the information.
The accused being the security guard of the bank
while the victim was the former’s superior. Indeed,
it was his duty precisely to defend the victim from
any aggressor. But in disregard of the respect he
owed to the victim, on account of superior rank to
him, he assaulted the latter. Such disregard of
respect is an aggravating circumstance.
Guidelines to prove age
The Court established the guidelines in appreciating
age, either as an element of the crime or as a
qualifying circumstance, as follows:
a. The best evidence to prove the age of the
offended party is an original or certified true
copy of the certificate of live birth of such party.
b. In the absence of a certificate of live birth, similar
authentic documents such as baptismal
certificate and school records which show the
date of birth of the victim would suffice to prove
age.
Page 56 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
c. If the certificate of live birth or authentic
document is shown to have been lost or
destroyed or otherwise unavailable, the
testimony, if clear and credible, of the victim's
mother or a member of the family either by
affinity or consanguinity who is qualified to
testify on matters respecting pedigree such as the
exact age or date of birth of the offended party
pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130 of the Rules on
Evidence shall be sufficient under the following
circumstances:
1. If the victim is alleged to be below 3 years of
age and what is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 7 years old;
2. If the victim is alleged to be below 7 years of
age and what is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 12 years old;
3. If the victim is alleged to be below 12 years
of age and what is sought to be proved is
that she is less than 18 years old.
4. In the absence of a certificate of live birth,
authentic document, or the testimony of the
victim's mother or relatives concerning the
victim's age, the complainant's testimony
will suffice provided that it is expressly and
clearly admitted by the accused.
5. It is the prosecution that has the burden of
proving the age of the offended party. The
failure of the accused to object to the
testimonial evidence regarding age shall not
be taken against him. [People v. Arpon, G.R.
No. 183563 (2011)]
The aggravating circumstance is NOT to be
considered in the following cases:
a. When the offender acted with passion and
obfuscation. [People v. Ibañez, G.R. No. 197813]
b. When there exists a relationship between the
offended party and the offender. [People v.
Valencia, G.R. No. L-39864 (1993)]
c. When the condition of being a woman is
indispensable in the commission of the crime.
Thus, in rape, abduction, or seduction, sex is not
aggravating.
In crimes against persons or honor only
This aggravating circumstance may be taken into
account only in crimes against persons or honor,
when in the commission of the crime there is some
insult or disrespect shown to rank, age, or sex. lt is
not proper to consider this aggravating circumstance
in crimes against property. [People v. Pagal, G.R. No.
L-32040 (1977)]
Dwelling
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
It is not necessary that the victim owns where she
lives or dwells. A lessee, boarder, or bedspacer can
consider such place as his home, the sanctity of which
the law seeks to uphold. [People v Daniel, G.R. No. L-
40330 (1978)]
People v. Tao, G.R. No. 133872 (2000):
Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance in this case because the rape was
committed in the ground floor of a two-story
structure, the lower floor being used as a video
rental store and not as a private place of abode or
residence.
This is considered an AC because in certain cases,
there is an abuse of confidence which the offended
party reposed in the offender by opening the door to
him.
Not domicile
Dwelling should not be understood in the concept of
a domicile: A person has more than one dwelling.
So, if a man has so many wives and he gave them
places of their own, each one is his own dwelling. If
he is killed there, dwelling will be aggravating,
provided that he also stays there once in a while.
If a crime of adultery was committed, dwelling is
considered aggravating on the part of the paramour.
However, if the paramour was also residing in the
same dwelling, it will not be aggravating.
Even without entry to dwelling
It is not necessary that the accused entered the
dwelling of the victim to commit the offense: it is
enough that the victim was attacked inside his own
house. [People v. Ompaid, G.R. No. L-23513 (1969)]
When killing outside the dwelling
Dwelling is till aggravating if the commission of the
crime began inside the dwelling.
Includes dependencies
The word dwelling includes every dependency of the
house that forms an integral part thereof and
therefore it includes the staircase of the house and
much more, its terrace. [People v. Rios, G.R. No.
132632 (2000)]
People v. Arizobal, G.R. Nos. 135051-52 (2000):
Generally, dwelling is considered inherent in the
crimes which can only be committed in the abode
of the victim, such as trespass to dwelling and
robbery in an inhabited place.
Page 57 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
However, in robbery with homicide the authors
thereof can commit the heinous crime without
transgressing the sanctity of the victim's domicile.
In the case at bar, the robbers demonstrated an
impudent disregard of the inviolability of the
victims' abode when they forced their way in,
looted their houses, intimidated and coerced their
inhabitants into submission, disabled Laurencio
and Jimmy by tying their hands before dragging
them out of the house to be killed.
Dwelling is not aggravating in the following
cases:
a. When both offender and offended party are
occupants of the same house [U.S. v. Rodriguez,
supra.], and this is true even if offender is a
servant of the house. [People v. Caliso, supra.]
b. When the robbery is committed by the use of
force upon things, dwelling is not aggravating
because it is inherent. But dwelling is aggravating
in robbery with violence or intimidation of
persons because this class or robbery can be
committed without the necessity of trespassing
the sanctity of the offended party’s house. [People
v. Cabato, G.R. No. L-37300 (1988)]
c. In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent
or included by law in defining the crime.
d. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient
and immediate provocation. [Art. 14 par. 3]
The presence of the aggravating circumstance of
dwelling warrants the imposition of exemplary
damages against the appellant. [People v. Rios, supra.]
4. “That the act be committed with
abuse of confidence or obvious
ungratefulness.”
Par. 4 provides two aggravating circumstances –
abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness. If
both are present in the same case, they must be
independently appreciated.
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE (ABUSO DE
CONFIANZA)
Requisites
a. Offended party trusted the offender
• The confidence between the offender and
the offended party must be immediate and
personal. If two persons just met for the first
time, there can be no personal or immediate
relationship upon which confidence might
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

rest between them. [People v. Mandolado, G.R.

No. L-51304-05 (1983)] Offender must have intended
b. Offender abused such trust Offender must have the intention to commit a crime
c. Abuse of confidence facilitated the when he entered the place. [People v. Jaurigue, C.A. No.
commission of the crime 384 (1946)]
• The confidence must be a means of
facilitating the commission of the crime, the Par. 5
culprit taking advantage of the offended Where public
Par. 2
party's belief that the former would not authorities are
Contempt or insult to
abuse said confidence. [People v Arrojado, engaged in the
public authorities
G.R. No. 130492 (2001)] discharge of their
duties.
OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS Public authorities are engaged in the performance
of their duties.
Requisites Public duty is Public duty is
a. Offended party trusted the offender performed in their performed outside of
b. Offender abused such trust office their office
c. Act committed with obvious ungratefulness The offended party The public authority
may or may not be the should not be the
5. “That the crime be committed in the public authority offended party
palace of the chief executive or in his
presence, or where public authorities As regards the place where the public authorities are
engaged in the discharge of their duties, there must
are engaged in the discharge of their
be some performance of public functions.
duties, or in a place dedicated to
religious worship.” 6. “That the crime be committed (1) in
the night time, or (2) in an
If it is the Malacañang Palace or a church it is
aggravating regardless of whether State or official or uninhabited place, or (3) by a band,
religious functions are being held. The President need whenever such circumstances may
not be in the palace. facilitate the commission of the
offense.”
Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious
worship. When considered separately
If they concur in the commission of the crime, they
An electoral precinct during election day is a place are considered as one aggravating circumstance.
“where public authorities are engaged in their official These three may be considered separately:
duties.” a. when their elements are distinctly perceived and
b. can subsist independently.
Presence alone of the Chief Executive c. revealing a greater degree of perversity.
His presence alone in any place where the crime is
committed is enough to constitute the AC. It also General requisites
applies even if he is not engaged in the discharge of a. When it facilitated the commission of the crime;
his duties in the place where the crime was or
committed. b. When especially sought for by the offender to
insure the commission of the crime or for the
purpose of impunity; or
c. When the offender took advantage thereof for
the purpose of impunity.

Nighttime (Nocturnidad)
The commission of the crime must begin and be
accomplished in the nighttime (after sunset and before
sunrise, cf. Art. 13, Civil Code).

Page 58 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Well-lighted place
When the place is illuminated by light, nighttime is 7. “That the crime be committed on the
not aggravating. occasion of a conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or
Two tests for nocturnity
In determining nocturnity, two tests are employed in
other calamity or misfortune.”
the alternative:
a. the objective test, under which nighttime is
The rationale for this AC is the debased form of
aggravating because the darkness facilitated the criminality of one who, in the midst of a great
commission of the offense; and calamity, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds
b. the subjective test, under which nighttime is
to their suffering by taking advantage of their
aggravating because the darkness was purposely misfortune and despoiling them.
sought by the offender. [People v. Ventura, supra.]
The offender must take advantage of the calamity or
Nighttime and treachery misfortune.
General Rule: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery
Exception: Where both the treacherous mode of “Or other calamity or misfortune.” Refers to other
attack and nocturnity were deliberately chosen upon conditions of distress similar to “conflagration,
the same case. Both may be perceived distinct from shipwreck, earthquake or epidemic.”
one another. [People v Berdida, G.R. No. L-20183
(1966)] 8. “That the crime be committed with
the aid of armed men or persons who
Uninhabited place insure or afford impunity.”
It is determined not by the distance of the nearest
house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in Armed men.
the place of the commission of the offense, there was Also covers armed women. [People v. Licop, G.R. No.
a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help. [People L06061 (1954)]
v. Desalisa, G,R No. 95262 (1994)]
Requisites.
Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal a. That the armed men or persons took part in the
purpose. [People v. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 33843 (1931)] commission of the crime, directly or indirectly
b. The accused availed himself of their aid or relied
When place of crime could be seen and the voice of upon them while the crime was committed
the victim could be heard from a nearby house, the
place of the crime is not “uninhabited.” Not applicable
a. When both the attacking party and the party
Band attacked were equally armed.
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall b. When the accused as well as those who
have acted together in the commission of an offense, cooperated with him in the commission of the
it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. crime acted under the same plan and for the
All four persons must be principals by direct same purpose.
participation. c. Casual presence, or when the offender did not
avail himself of their aid nor knowingly count
Abuse of superior strength and use of firearms are upon their assistance in the commission of the
absorbed by the aggravating circumstance of by a crime.
band. [People v. Escabarte, G.R. No. L-42964 (1988)]
Par. 6 Par. 8
By a band With aid of armed
men
Requires more than 3
At least two armed men
armed malefactors
Requires that more This circumstance is
than three armed present even if one of
malefactors shall have the offenders merely
acted together in the relied on their aid, for

Page 59 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
commission of an actual aid is not
offense necessary
Band members are all Armed men are mere
principals accomplices
9. “That the accused is a recidivist.”
See Recidivism under Multiple Offenders.
10. “That the offender has been previously
punished by an offense to which the
law attaches an equal or greater penalty
or for two or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.”
See Reiteracion under Multiple Offenders.
11. “That the crime be committed in
consideration of a price, reward, or
promise.”
When this AC is present, it affects not only the
person who received the price or reward, but also the
person who gave it.
The evidence must show that one of the accused used
money or valuable consideration for the purpose of
inducing another to perform the deed. [U.S. v.
Gamao, supra.]
Voluntarily giving such price or reward without
previous promise, as an expression of appreciation
for the sympathy and aid, is not taken into
consideration to increase the penalty.
12. “That the crime be committed by
means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, stranding of a vessel or
international damage thereto,
derailment of a locomotive, or by the
use of any other artifice involving great
waste and ruin.”
When qualifying and when generic aggravating
Unless used by the offender as a means to accomplish
a criminal purpose, any of the circumstances in
paragraph 12 cannot be considered to increase the
penalty or to change the nature of the offense.
When another AC already qualifies the crime, any of
these AC’s shall be considered as generic aggravating
circumstance only.
Page 60 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
When arson and when homicide/murder
If the intent is to kill, there is murder even if the
house is burned in the process. If the intent is to
destroy property, the crime is arson even if someone
dies as a consequence.
13. “That the act be committed with
evident premeditation.”
Evident premeditation implies:
a. a deliberate planning of the act
b. before executing it.
Essence of premeditation
a. An opportunity to coolly and serenely think and
deliberate
a. on the meaning and
b. consequences of what he planned to do.
b. An interval long enough for his conscience and
better judgment to overcome his evil desire and
scheme. [People v. Durante, G.R. No. L-31101
(1929)]
Degree of proof
Evident premeditation must be proven as
convincingly as the crime itself. [People v. Bibat, G.R.
No. 124319 (1998)]
For the circumstance of evident premeditation to be
appreciated, the prosecution must present clear and
positive evidence of the planning and preparation
undertaken by the offender prior to the commission
of the crime. [People v. Mondijar, G.R. No. 141914
(2002)]
Anger or grudge
There is no evident premeditation when the fracas
was the result, not of a deliberate plan but of rising
tempers, or when the attack was made in the heat of
anger. [People v. Torpio (2004)] The mere existence of
ill-feeling or grudge between the parties is not
sufficient to establish premeditated killing. There
must be an outward act showing or manifesting
criminal intent. [People v. Bernal, G.R. No. 113685
(2002)]
People v. Biso, G.R. No. 111098-99 (2003):
Dario, a black belt in karate, entered an eatery,
seated himself beside Teresita and made sexual
advances to her in the presence of her brother,
Eduardo. Eduardo contacted his cousin, Biso, an
ex-convict and a known toughie in the area, and
related to him what Dario had done to Teresita.
Eduardo, Pio, and 2 others decided to confront
Dario. They positioned themselves in the alley
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
near the house of Dario. When Dario arrived on
board a taxicab, the four assaulted Dario. Eduardo
held, with his right hand, the wrist of Dario and
covered the mouth of Dario with his left hand.
The 2 others held Dario's right hand and hair. Pio
then stabbed Dario near the breast with a fan
knife. Eduardo stabbed Dario and fled with his
three companions from the scene.
Held: There was no evident premeditation. The
prosecution failed to prove that the four intended
to kill Dario and if they did intend to kill him, the
prosecution failed to prove how the malefactors
intended to consummate the crime. Except for the
fact that the appellant and his three companions
waited in an alley for Dario to return to his house,
the prosecution failed to prove any overt acts on
the part of the appellant and his cohorts showing
that that they had clung to any plan to kill the
victim.
Other notes on evident premeditation
a. The premeditation must be based upon external
facts, and must be evident, not merely suspected
indicating deliberate planning.
b. The date and time when the offender determined
to commit the crime is essential, because the
lapse of time for the purpose of the third
requisite is computed from that date and time. It
may not be appreciated absent any proof as to
how and when the plan to kill was hatched, OR
what time elapsed before it was carried out.
c. After the offenders had determined to commit
the crime, there must be a manifest indication
that they clung to their determination.
Premeditation occurs when crime is deliberately
planned and PERSISTENTLY and
CONTINUOUSLY followed the plan.
d. Where conspiracy is directly established, with
proof of the attendant deliberation and selection
of the method, time and means of executing the
crime, the existence of evident premeditation can
be taken for granted. [U.S. v. Cornejo, G.R. No.
9773 (1914)] Conspiracy presupposes
premeditation, EXCEPT, when conspiracy is
merely IMPLIED.
e. In order that premeditation may exist, it is not
necessary that the accused premeditated the
killing of a particular individual. If the offender
premeditated on the killing of any person
(general attack), it is proper to consider against
the offender the aggravating circumstance of
evident premeditation, because whoever is killed
by him is contemplated in the premeditation.
[US v. Manalinde, G.R. No. L-5292 (1909)]
Page 61 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
f. Mere threats without the second element does
not show evident premeditation.
14. “That the craft, fraud or disguise be
employed.”
Craft. It is employed as a scheme in the execution of
the crime.
People v. Labuguen, G.R. No. 127849 (2000):
Craft involves intellectual trickery and cunning on
the part of the offender. When there is a direct
inducement by insidious words or machinations,
fraud is present. By saying that he would
accompany the victim to see the cows which the
latter intended to buy, appellant was able to lure
the victim to go with him.
Distinguished from fraud
Craft Fraud
Done for DIRECT
Done in order to
INDUCEMENT by
NOT AROUSE
insidious words and
SUSPICION
machinations
Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery if they
have been deliberately adopted as the means,
methods or forms for the treacherous strategy.
Otherwise, they may co-exist independently where
they are adopted for a different purpose in the
commission of the crime. [People v. Lab-eo, supra.]
Disguise
Resorting to any device to conceal identity.
Test
The test of disguise is whether the device or
contrivance resorted to by the offender was intended
to or did make identification more difficult, such as
the use of a mask, false hair or beard.
When still recognized
But if in spite of the use of handkerchief to cover
their faces, the culprits were recognized by the victim,
disguise is not considered aggravating.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

The prosecution should still prove that the assailants

People v. Empacis, G.R. No. 95756 (1993): purposely used excessive force out of proportion to
The appellants were convicted of robbery with the means of defense available to the persons
homicide, which the Supreme Court affirmed. The attacked. [People v. Sansaet, G.R. No. 139330 (2002)].
appellants pretended to be bona fide customers of
the victim's store and on his pretext gained entry There must be a deliberate intent on the part of the
into the latter's store and later, into another part of malefactors to take advantage of their greater
his dwelling. This Court has held stratagems and number. The prosecution must clearly show the
ruses of this sort to constitute the aggravating offenders' deliberate intent to do so. [People v.
circumstance of fraud or craft, e.g., where the Lobrigas, G.R. No. 147649 (2002)]
accused —
1. pretended to be constabulary soldiers and by No advantage of superior strength
that ploy gained entry into the residence of a. one who attacks is overcome with passion and
their prey whom they thereafter robbed and obfuscation
killed; b. when quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal
2. pretended to be needful of medical treatment, blow was struck while victim and accused were
and through this artifice, entered the house of struggling.
the victim whom they thereupon robbed and
killed; Abuse of superior
By a band
3. pretended to be wayfarers who had lost their strength
way and by this means gained entry into a The gravamen of abuse
When the offense is
house, in which they then perpetrated the of superiority is the
committed by more
crime of robbery with homicide; taking advantage by the
than 3 armed
4. pretended to be customer wanting to buy a culprits of their
malefactors regardless
bottle of wine; collective strength to
of the comparative
5. pretended to be co-passengers of the victim in overpower their weaker
strength of the victim.
a public utility vehicle; victims.
6. posed as customers wishing to buy cigarettes;
and as being thirsty, asking for drink of water. Weaken defense
An example is when the accused intentionally
15. “That advantage be taken of superior intoxicated the victim.
strength, or means be employed to
weaken the defense.” 16. “That the act be committed with
treachery (alevosia).”
Superior strength
The aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior Treachery
strength depends on the age, size and strength of the When the offender commits any of the crimes against
parties. the person, employing means, methods, or forms in
the execution thereof which tend directly and
It is considered whenever there is a notorious specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself
inequality of forces between the victim and the arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
aggressor, assessing a superiority of strength
notoriously advantageous for the aggressor which is The essence of treachery is that by virtue of the
selected or taken advantage of by him in the means, method or form employed by the offender,
commission of the crime. [People v. Barcelon, G.R. No. the offended party was not able to put up any defense.
144308 (2002)].
When offended party was able to self-defend
Abuse of superior strength is present when the If the offended party was able to put up a defense,
offender uses a powerful weapon which is out of proportion even only a token one, there is no treachery. Instead,
to the defense available to the offended party. [People some other aggravating circumstance may be present
v. Padilla, G.R. No. G.R. No. 126124 (1999)] but it is no longer treachery.

More in number The treacherous character of the means employed in

Mere superiority in number would not necessarily the aggression does not depend upon the result
indicate the attendance of abuse of superior strength.

Page 62 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
thereof but upon the means itself. Thus, frustrated
murder could be aggravated by treachery.
People v. Escote Jr., G.R. No. 140756 (2003):
Art. 14, par. 16 of the RPC is a reproduction of the
1850 Penal Code of Spain and the Codigo Penal
Reformado de 1870 with a slight difference. In the
latter law, the words los delitos contra las personas (the
persons) are used, whereas in Article 14, paragraph
6, of the Revised Penal Code, the words “crimes
against the person” are used.
Going by the letter of the law, treachery is
applicable only to crimes against persons as
enumerated in Title Eight, Chapters One and
Two, Book II of the Revised Penal Code.
However, the Supreme Court of Spain has
consistently applied treachery to robbery with
homicide, classified as a crime against property.
In its Sentencia dated March 14, 1877, the Supreme
Court of Spain declared that treachery is a generic
aggravating circumstance not only in crimes
against persons but also in robbery with
homicide. This is so, the high tribunal ruled,
because when robbery is coupled with crimes committed
against persons, the crime is not only an assault (ataca) on
the property of the victims but also of the victims themselves
(ofende).
In fine, in the application of treachery as a generic
aggravating circumstance to robbery with
homicide, the law looks at the constituent crime of
homicide which is a crime against persons and not
at the constituent crime of robbery which is a
crime against property. Treachery is applied to the
constituent crime of homicide and not to the
constituent crime of robbery of the special
complex crime of robbery with homicide.
The crime of robbery with homicide does not lose
its classification as a crime against property or as a
special complex and single and indivisible crime
simply because treachery is appreciated as a
generic aggravating circumstance. Treachery
merely increases the penalty for the crime
conformably with Article 63 of the Revised Penal
Code absent any generic mitigating circumstance.
Preparation versus sudden attack
The mode of attack must be consciously adopted.
The accused must make some preparation to kill the
deceased in such manner as to insure the execution
of the crime or to make it impossible or hard for the
Page 63 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
person attacked to defend himself or retaliate. [People
v. Tumaob, G.R. Mo. 125690 (1998)]
However, a sudden attack by the assailant, whether
frontally or from behind, is treachery if he
deliberately adopted such mode of attack with the
purpose of depriving the victim of a chance to either
fight or retreat. [People v. Lab-eo, supra.]
Examples of attacks showing intention to
eliminate risk
a. Victim asleep
b. Victim half-awake or just awakened
c. Victim grappling or being held.
d. Attacked from behind
Use of guns
There is treachery when the victim is shot, albeit
frontally, with his hands raised to show that he would
not fight, or because of fright, or to try to ward off
the shots that were to come. This circumstance
constitutes treachery because the victim was clearly in
a defenseless position. [People v. Dulos, G.R. No.
107328 (1994)]
Once a gun is drawn against a person, the means
methods and forms employed for its execution is
already conceived. And once it is tended directly and
specifically to insure its execution, it consequently
produces the conscious and deliberate intention.
Finally if all the acts of execution had been effectively
done without risk on the part of the offender arising
from any defense coming from the offended party,
treachery results. [People v. Gonzales, Jr., G.R. No.
139542 (2001)]
Continuous and non-continuous aggression
a. When the aggression is CONTINUOUS,
treachery must be present in the BEGINNING
of the assault.
b. When the assault WAS NOT CONTINUOUS,
in that there was an interruption, it is sufficient
that treachery was present AT THE MOMENT
THE FATAL BLOW WAS GIVEN.
People v. Malejana, G.R. No. 145002 (2006):
Treachery may still be appreciated even when the
victim was forewarned of danger to his person.
What is decisive is that the execution of the attack
made it impossible for the victim to defend
himself or to retaliate. Thus, even a frontal attack
could be treacherous when unexpected and on an
unarmed victim who would be in no position to
repel the attack or avoid it.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Degree of proof f. When victim was already defending himself.

Treachery cannot be presumed. The suddenness of g. When victim had a chance to prepare.
the attack does not, of itself, suffice to support a h. When attack preceded by a warning.
finding of alevosia, even if the purpose was to kill, so i. When attack was preceded by heated discussion.
long as the decision was made all of a sudden and the
victim’s helpless position was accidental. [People v. 17. “That means be employed or
Lubreo, G.R. No. 74146 (1991)]. It must be proved by circumstances brought about which
clear and convincing evidence. [People v. Santos, G.R. add ignominy to the natural effects of
No. 122935 (2000)].
the act.” (ignominy)
People v. Oandasan, Jr., G.R. No. 194605
It is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order,
(2016):
which adds disgrace to the material injury caused by the
Treachery as an aggravating or attendant
crime.
circumstance must be established beyond
reasonable doubt. This quantum is hardly achieved
Raping a woman from behind is ignominious because
if there is no testimony showing how the accused
that is not the normal form of intercourse, it is
actually commenced the assault against the victim.
something which offends the morals of the offended
But to absolutely require such testimony in all
woman. This is how animals do it. [People v. Siao, G.R.
cases would cause some murders committed
No. 126021 (2000)]
without eyewitnesses to go unpunished by the law.

To avoid that most undesirable situation, the Rules
of Court permits a resort not only to direct
evidence but also to circumstantial evidence.
Conspiracy
When there is conspiracy in the commission of a
crime, treachery can be appreciated against all
conspirators. [People v. Ong, G.R. No. L-34497 (1975)]
There is murder even if there is no intent to kill if the
homicide is accompanied by treachery.
People v. Cagoco, G.R. No. L-38511 (1933):
The appellant boxed the victim’s head from
behind and ran away. The blow caused the victim
to fall and his head to hit the asphalt road. The
victim died after. The Supreme Court ruled that
even if there was no intent to kill, the appellant
remains liable for the death of the victim as a direct
consequence of the appellant’s fist-blow against
the victim’s head.
Since the accused struck the deceased from behind
and without warning, he acted with treachery. This
then qualifies the crime to murder.
People v. Cachola, G.R. No. 135047 (2004):
For ignominy to be appreciated, it is required that
the offense be committed in a manner that tends
to make its effect more humiliating, thus adding to
the victim's moral suffering.
Where the victim was already dead when his body
or a part thereof was dismembered, ignominy
cannot be taken against the accused.
In this case, the information states that Victorino's
sexual organ was severed after he was shot and
there is no allegation that it was done to add
ignominy to the natural effects of the act. We
cannot, therefore, consider ignominy as an
aggravating circumstance.
People v. Bumidang, G.R. No. 130630 (2000):
The aggravating circumstance of ignominy shall be
taken into account if means are employed or
circumstances brought about which add ignominy
to the natural effects of the offense; or if the crime
was committed in a manner that tends to make its
effects more humiliating to the victim, that is, add
to her moral suffering.

It was established that Baliwang used the flashlight

When not aggravating.
and examined the genital of Gloria before he
a. When meeting is incidental.
ravished her. He committed his bestial deed in the
b. When no other witness in the offense.
presence of Gloria's old father. These facts clearly
c. Witness could not provide full details of the
show that Baliwang deliberately wanted to further
attack.
humiliate Gloria, thereby aggravating and
d. When attack is frontal.
compounding her moral sufferings.
EXCEPT: When victims was tied.
e. When a child is attacked.

Page 64 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

18. “that the crime be committed after an 20. “That the crime be committed (a)
unlawful entry.” with the aid of persons under fifteen
years of age or (b) by means of motor
There is no unlawful entry when the door was already vehicles, motorized watercraft,
broken and thereafter the accused made an entry thru airships, or other similar means.”
the broken door. The breaking of the door is covered
by paragraph 19. With the aid of persons under 15 years of age;
basis
19. “That as a means to the commission To repress, so far as possible, the frequent practice
of the crime, a wall, roof, floor, door, resorted to by professional criminals of availing
or window be broken.” themselves of minors taking advantage of their lack
of criminal responsibility (remember that minors are
For entrance, not escape/exit given leniency when they commit a crime)
This circumstance is aggravating only when the
offender resorted to any means in order to enter the By means of a motor vehicle; basis
place. To counteract the great facilities found by modern
criminals in said means to commit crime and flee and
Unlawful entry and breaking of wall, roof, etc., abscond once the same is committed. This
distinguished. circumstance is aggravating only when used in the
Breaking of commission of the offense.
Unlawful
wall, roof,
entry
etc. Motor vehicles in escape
There must be a If motor vehicles are used only in the escape of the
breaking of the No Yes offender, it is not aggravating. It must have been used
entrance to facilitate the commission of the crime to be
Entrance aggravating.
actually Yes No
happened 21. “That the wrong done in the
Must be a means commission of the crime be
to the commission No Yes deliberately augmented by causing
of the crime other wrong not necessary for its
commissions.” (cruelty)
When breaking of door or window is lawful
Requisites
Sec. 11, Rule. 113. Right of officer to break into a. That the injury caused be deliberately increased
building or enclosure – Right of officer to break into by causing the other wrong
building or enclosure. — An officer, in order to make b. The other wrong be unnecessary for the
an arrest either by virtue of a warrant, or without execution of the purpose of the offender
a warrant as provided in section 5, may break into
any building or enclosure where the person to be For it to exist, it must be shown that the accused
arrested is or is reasonably believed to be, if he is enjoyed and delighted in making his victim
refused admittance thereto, after announcing his suffer.
authority and purpose.
Not cruelty, but outraging the corpse
Sec. 7, Rule 126. Right to break door or If the victim was already dead when the acts of
window to effect search – The officer, if refused mutilation were being performed, this would also
admittance to the place of directed search after qualify the killing to murder due to outraging of his
giving notice of his purpose and authority, may corpse.
break open any outer or inner door or window of
a house or any part of a house or anything therein There must be proof that the wounds inflicted on the
to execute the warrant or liberate himself or any victim were done while he was still alive in order to
person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully be considered cruelty.
detained therein.
Ignominy Cruelty

Page 65 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Shocks the moral
Physical
conscience of man
Refers to the moral
effect of a crime and it
Refers to the physical
pertains to the moral
suffering of the victim
order, whether or not
so he has to be alive
the victim is dead or
alive
People v. Catian, G.R. No. 139693 (2002):
Catian repeatedly struck Willy with a "chako" on
the head, causing Willy to fall on his knees.
Calunod seconded by striking the victim with a
piece of wood on the face. When Willy finally
collapsed, Sumalpong picked him up, carried him
over his shoulder, and carried Willy to a place
where they burned Willy.
Held: The circumstance of cruelty may not be
considered as there is no showing that the victim
was burned while he was still alive. For cruelty to
exist there must be proof showing that the accused
delighted in making their victim suffer slowly and
gradually, causing him unnecessary physical and
moral pain in the consummation of the criminal
act. No proof was presented that would show that
accused appellants deliberately and wantonly
augmented the suffering of their victim.
22. Special aggravating and qualifying
circumstances
Art. 62 of RPC has been revised by RA 7659 to
include the following:
Art. 62. – The maximum penalty shall be imposed
if the offense was committed by any group who
belongs to an organized/syndicated crime
group.
An organized/syndicated crime group means a
group of two or more persons collaborating,
confederating or mutually helping one another for
purposes of gain in the commission of any crime.
Hence, an organized or syndicated crime group
committing a crime is also another aggravating
circumstance.
Murder
Article 248. Murder – Any person who, not
falling within the provisions of Article 246 shall
kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be
punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum
Page 66 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
period to death, if committed with any of the
following attendant circumstances:
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense or of
means or persons to insure or afford
impunity.
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or
promise.
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a street car or
locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of
motor vehicles, or with the use of any other
means involving great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of
an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity.
5. With evident premeditation.
6. 6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.
In order to qualify a killing into murder, the crime
must be attended by the enumerated qualifying
circumstances of Article 248. If it is not, the killing is
homicide.
Rape
Art. 266-B. Penalty – Rape under paragraph 1 of
the next preceding article shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua.
xxx
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the
crime of rape is committed with any of the
following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years
of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant,
step-parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree, or the common-law spouse of the
parent of the victim; [See alternative
circumstance]
2. When the victim is under the custody of the
police or military authorities or any law
enforcement or penal institution;
3. When the rape is committed in full view of
the spouse, parent, any of the children or
other relatives within the third civil degree of
consanguinity; [See ignominy]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
4. When the victim is a religious engaged in
legitimate religious vocation or calling and is
personally known to be such by the offender
before or at the time of the commission of the
crime;
5. When the victim is a child below seven (7)
years old;
6. When the offender knows that he is afflicted
with the Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus
(HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
transmissible disease and the virus or disease
is transmitted to the victim;
7. When committed by any member of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines or para-
military units thereof or the Philippine
National Police or any law enforcement
agency or penal institution, when the offender
took advantage of his position to facilitate the
commission of the crime; [See taking
advantage of public position]
8. When by reason or on the occasion of the
rape, the victim has suffered permanent
physical mutilation or disability;
9. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of
the offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime; and
10. When the offender knew of the mental
disability, emotional disorder and/or physical
handicap of the offended party at the time of
the commission of the crime.
The ten qualifying circumstances of rape aggravates
the crime of rape, and increases its penalty death.
Other felonies in the RPC
The following are other felonies in the Revised Penal
Code with qualifying and/or special aggravating
circumstances. [GRo VIDS]
a. Grave threats [Art. 282]
b. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an
uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use
of firearm on a street, road or alley [Art. 295]
c. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band
[Art. 300 in rel. to Art. 299]
d. Violation of domicile [Art. 128, par. 2]
e. Interruption of religious worship [Art. 132, par.
2]
f. Direct assault [Art. 148]
g. Slavery [Art. 272, par. 2]
Other special aggravating and qualifying
circumstances
Use of explosives
Page 67 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal/ Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or
Disposition, of Firearms, Ammunition or Explosives
[P.D. 1866, as amended by R.A. No. 8294] as an
aggravating circumstance. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of
Section 3 state:
Sec. 3. Unlawful manufacture, sale,
acquisition, disposition or possession of
explosives. – The penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum period to reclusion temporal and a fine
of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000)
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully manufacture, assemble, deal in, acquire,
dispose or possess hand grenade(s), rifle
grenade(s), and other explosives, including
but not limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail
bombs,' 'fire bombs,' or other incendiary
devices capable of producing destructive
effect on contiguous objects or causing injury
or death to any person.
When a person commits any of the crimes
defined in the Revised Penal Code or special
laws with the use of the aforementioned
explosives, detonation agents or incendiary
devices, which results in the death of any
person or persons, the use of such explosives,
detonation agents or incendiary devices shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
Use of “loose firearms.”
RA 10591 or the Comprehensive Firearms and
Ammunition Regulation Act (2013) expressly
repealed Sec. 1 of PD 1866 as amended:
(v) Loose firearm refers to an unregistered firearm,
an obliterated or altered firearm, firearm
which has been lost or stolen, illegally
manufactured firearms, registered firearms in
the possession of an individual other than the
licensee and those with revoked licenses in
accordance with the rules and regulations. [Sec.
3(v), RA 10591]
(Note: Loose firearms are UP SOLAR: Unregistered;
Possessed by non-licensee; Stolen; Obliterated; Lost;
Altered; with Revoked license)
Sec. 29, RA 10591. Use of Loose Firearm in the
Commission of a Crime – The use of a loose
firearm, when inherent in the commission of
a crime punishable under the Revised Penal
Code or other special laws, shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance:
Provided, That if the crime committed with the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law with

a maximum penalty which is lower than that
prescribed in the preceding section for illegal
possession of firearm, the penalty for illegal
possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of
the penalty for the crime charged: Provided,
further, That if the crime committed with the use
of a loose firearm is penalized by the law with a
maximum penalty which is equal to that imposed
under the preceding section for illegal possession
of firearms, the penalty of prision mayor in its
minimum period shall be imposed in addition to
the penalty for the crime punishable under the
Revised Penal Code or other special laws of which
he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’
etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an
element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection,
or attempted coup d’ etat.
Arson under PD 1613 [BAHaGS: Benefit of
Another; Hatred towards owner/occupant; intent to
Gain; Syndicate]
Sec. 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances in
Arson –The penalty in any case of arson shall be
imposed in its maximum period;
1. If committed with intent to gain;
2. If committed for the benefit of another;
3. If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred
towards the owner or occupant of the
property burned;
4. If committed by a syndicate.
The offense is committed by a syndicate if it is
planned or carried out by a group of three (3) or more
persons.
Under art. 62 of RPC, a syndicate needs at least TWO
persons. Under PD 1613, a syndicate needs at least
THREE persons.

If the crime is committed by the person without e. Alternative Circumstances [Art.

using the loose firearm, the violation of this Act
shall be considered as a distinct and separate 15]
offense.
Alternative Circumstances
RA 8294 does not specify whether or not the use of Are circumstances which must be taken in
an unlicensed firearm in murder or homicide is consideration as aggravating or mitigating according
generic or special aggravating. It merely states that the to the nature and effects of the crime.
use of the unlicensed firearm is appreciated as
“aggravating.” Types under art. 15. (RIE)
1. Relationship
In Palaganas v. People, G.R. No. 165483 (2006), the 2. Intoxication
Court interpreted this as making the use of 3. Degree of Education/instruction
unlicensed firearm in murder or homicide as
SPECIAL aggravating. Applying the logic of
Palaganas by analogy, Section 29 in RA 10591 should
be interpreted as assigning the use of loose firearm as
SPECIAL aggravating as well.

Use of dangerous drugs

Cf. The Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002 [R.A. No. 9165]:
Sec. 25 Qualifying Aggravating
Circumstances in the Commission of a Crime
by an Offender Under the Influence of
Dangerous Drugs. – Notwithstanding the
provisions of any law to the contrary, a positive
finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a
qualifying aggravating circumstance in the
commission of a crime by an offender, and the
application of the penalty provided for in the
Revised Penal Code shall be applicable.

Page 68 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
1. Relationship
Covers: (SAD SiR)
a. Spouse
b. Ascendant
c. Descendant
d. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister
(Siblings)
e. Relative by affinity in the same degree of the
offender [People v Marco, G.R. No. 132392 (2001)]
When exempting
a. When accessory
• An accessory who is related to the principal
within the relationship prescribed in Art. 20
except if accessory falls within Par. 1 of Art.
19;
b. Death under exceptional circumstance
• A legally married person who having surprised
his spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person who shall
inflict upon them physical injuries of any
other kind (i.e. less serious and slight
physical injuries). [Art. 247, RPC]
c. Select crime against relatives
• For crimes of theft, malicious mischief or
swindling (estafa) but there is civil liability.
[Art. 332, RPC]
When mitigating
a. In crimes against property
• Robbery (Arts. 294-302)
• Usurpation (Art. 312)
• Fraudulent insolvency (Art. 314)
• Arson (Arts. 321-322, 325-326).
b. When the crime is less serious or slight physical injuries
• If the offended party is a relative of a lower
degree than the offender.
When aggravating
a. In crimes against persons
• Where the offended party is a relative of a
higher degree than the offender (grandson
kills grandfather), or
• When the offender and the offended party are
relatives of the same level, as killing a
brother, a brother-in law, a half-brother or
adopted brother
b. When the crime is Serious Physical Injuries [Art. 263]
• Aggravating even if the offended party is a
descendant of the offender
c. When the crime is Less Serious Physical Injuries or
Slight Serious Physical Injuries
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
•If the offended party is a relative of a higher
degree than the offender
d. When the crime is Homicide OR Murder
• Relationship is aggravating regardless of
degree
e. In Crimes Against Chastity
• Relationship is always aggravating. [People v
Orilla, G.R. Nos. 148949-40 (2004)]
f. When the crime is Rape
• Relationship is always aggravating in rape.
[People v Delen, G.R. No. 194446 (2014)]
When not appreciated
a. When relationship is an element of the offense
• Parricide
• Adultery
• Concubinage
b. For persons attached by common-law relations
• The law cannot be stretched to include such
relations. [People v Atop, G.R. Nos. 124303-
05 (1998)]
People v. Atop, supra.:
11-year-old Regina lives with her grandmother.
Atop is the common-law husband of her
grandmother. Atop was found guilty of 4 counts
of rape which was committed in 1993 (2x), 1994
and 1995. The lower court took into account the
Aggravating Circumstance of relationship.
Held: In this case, there is no blood relationship or
legal bond that links Atop to his victim.
2. Intoxication
People v. Bernal, G.R. No. 132791 (2002):
It is only the circumstance of intoxication which:
(a) if not mitigating, (b) is automatically
aggravating.
Appellant’s intoxication cannot be considered
mitigating because accused-appellant failed to
show that his intoxication impaired his will power
or his capacity to understand the wrongful nature
of his acts. The person pleading intoxication
must prove that he took such quantity of
alcoholic beverage, prior to the commission of
the crime, as would blur his reason. This the
accused-appellant failed to do. No proof was
presented by accused-appellant that the amount of
liquor he had taken was of such quantity as to
affect his mental faculties. The mere claim of
intoxication does not entitle him to the mitigating
circumstance of intoxication.
Page 69 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
When mitigating
a. There must be an indication that:
• because of the alcoholic intake of the
offender,
• he is suffering from diminished self-control.
• It is not the quantity of alcoholic drink.
• Rather it is the effect of the alcohol upon
the offender which shall be the basis of
the mitigating circumstance.
b. That offender is
• not a habitual drinker and
• did not take alcoholic drink with the
intention to reinforce his resolve to commit
crime.
When aggravating
a. If intoxication is habitual
b. If it is intentional to embolden offender to
commit crime
3. Degree of Education or Instruction
Low Degree of Education
Refers to the lack of sufficient intelligence of and
knowledge of the full significance of one’s act.
General Rule
• Low degree of education is mitigating.
• To be considered mitigating, degree of
instruction must have some reasonable
connection to the offense.
Exceptions
• If the crime committed is one which one
inherently understands as wrong (e.g. parricide).
• Lack of education is not mitigating in murder or
homicide; crimes against property; and crimes against
chastity.
High degree of education
May be appreciated as aggravating when offender
availed himself or took advantage of it in committing
the crime.
For instance, a doctor who took advantage of his
knowledge to make a poison to kill his victim in such
a way as to avoid suspicion. [Reyes]
f. Absolutory Causes
Absolutory causes
Those where the act committed is a crime but for
reasons of public policy and sentiment there is no
Page 70 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
penalty imposed. [People v. Talisic, G.R. No. 97961
(1997)]
Types
There are FOUR TYPES of absolutory
circumstances: [IPON]
1. Instigation
2. Pardon by the offended party
3. Other absolutory causes
4. Acts Not covered by law and in case of excessive
punishment. [Art. 5]
1. Instigation
When a lawbreaker has been induced into
committing the crime, he or she is not imposed a
penalty.
Instigation
The involvement of a law officer in the crime itself in
the following manner:
a. He induces a person to commit a crime for
personal gain.
b. He doesn’t take the necessary steps to seize the
instrument of the crime & to arrest the offenders
before he obtained the profits in mind.
c. He obtained the profits in mind even though
afterwards does take the necessary steps to seize
the instrument of the crime and to arrest the
offenders.
Example: A, leader of an anti-narcotics team,
approached and persuaded B to act as a buyer of
shabu and transact with C, a suspected pusher. B was
given marked money to pay C for a sachet of shabu.
After the sale was consummated, the cops closed in
and arrested both B and C.
Entrapment
Trapping persons into crime for the purpose of
instituting criminal prosecutions. It is a scheme or
technique ensuring the apprehension of the criminals
by being in the actual crime scene.
The law officers shall not be guilty to the crime if they
have done the following:
a. He does not induce a person to commit a crime
for personal gain or is not involved in the
planning of the crime.
b. Does take the necessary steps to seize the
instrument of the crime and to arrest the
offenders before he obtained the profits in mind.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Example: A, a government anti-narcotics agent, acted

as a poseur buyer of shabu and negotiated with B, a Entrapment Instigation
suspected drug pusher who is unaware that A is a Ways and means are The instigator
police officer. A then paid B in marked money and resorted to for the practically induces the
the latter handed over a sachet of shabu. Upon signal, purpose of trapping and would-be accused into
the cops closed in on B. capturing the the commission of the
lawbreaker in the offense and himself
People v. Pacis, G.R. No. 146309 (2002): execution of his becomes a co-
Yap, an NBI agent, received information that a criminal plan principal.
Pacis was offering to sell ½ kg of "shabu." A buy- The law enforcer
bust operation was approved. The informant conceives the
introduced Yap to Pacis as an interested buyer. The means originate commission of the
They negotiated the sale of ½ kg of shabu. Pacis from the mind of the crime and suggests to
handed to Yap a paper bag with the markings criminal. the accused who
"Yellow Cab". While examining it, Pacis asked for carries it into
the payment. Yap gave the "boodle money" to execution.
Pacis. Upon Pacis's receipt of the payment, the A public officer or a
officers identified themselves as NBI agents and A person has planned or private detective
arrested him. is about to commit a induces an innocent
crime and ways and person to commit a
Held: The operation that led to the arrest of means are resorted to by crime and would arrest
appellant was an entrapment, not instigation. In a public officer to trap him upon or after the
entrapment, ways and means are resorted to for and catch the criminal. commission of the
the purpose of trapping and capturing lawbreakers crime by the latter.
in the execution of their criminal plan. In The accused must be
instigation, instigators practically induce the Not a bar to the
acquitted because the
would-be defendant into the commission of the prosecution and
offender simply acts as
offense and become co-principals themselves. conviction of the
a tool of the law
Entrapment is sanctioned by law as a legitimate lawbreaker.
enforcers
method of apprehending criminal elements
engaged in the sale and distribution of illegal drugs. 2. Pardon by The Offended Party
US v. Phelps, G.R. No. L-5728 (1910): See discussion on Art. 344.
Phelps was charged and found guilty for violating
the Opium Law (Act No. 1761). Phelps was 3. Other Absolutory Causes
induced by Smith, an employee of the Bureau of
Internal Revenue, into procuring opium, (DALE’S 89 ARTS)
providing for a venue and making arrangements a. Death under exceptional circumstances [Art.
for the two of them to smoke opium. 247]
b. Accessories in light felonies
Held: Smith not only suggested the commission of c. Light felonies not consummated
the crime but also expressed his desire to commit d. Exemption from criminal liability in crimes
the offense in paying the amount required for the against property
arrangements. Such acts done by employees of e. Spontaneous desistance [Art. 6]
government in encouraging or inducing persons to f. Ways on how criminal liability is extinguished
commit a crime in order to prosecute them are under Art 89
most reprehensible. g. Accessories exempt under Art. 20
h. Under Article 332, exemptions from criminal
liability for cases of theft, swindling and
malicious mischief. It limits the responsibility of
the offender to civil liability and frees him from
criminal liability by virtue of his Relationship to
the offended party. [Intestate estate of Gonzales
Vda. De Carungcong v. People, G.R. No. 181409
(2010)]

Page 71 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
i. Trespass to dwelling to prevent serious harm to
self [Art. 280]
j. Discovering secrets through Seizure of
correspondence of the ward by their guardian
[Art. 219]
4. Acts Not Covered by Law and in Case
Of Excessive Punishment
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with
acts which should be repressed but which are
not covered by the law, and in cases of
excessive penalties. –
1. Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and
which is not punishable by law, it shall render
the proper decision, and shall report to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of
Justice, the reasons which induce the court to
believe that said act should be made the
subject of legislation.
2. In the same way, the court shall submit to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of
Justice, such statement as may be deemed
proper, without suspending the execution of
the sentence, when a strict enforcement of the
provisions of this Code would result in the
imposition of a clearly excessive penalty,
taking into consideration the degree of malice
and the injury caused by the offense.
Coverage
1. Where the court cannot convict the accused
because the act he committed is not punishable
under the law, but the court deems it proper to
repress such act.
• The proper judgment is acquittal. The judge
must report to the Chief Executive that said
act be made subject of penal legislation and
the reasons therefore.
2. Where the court after trial finds the accused
guilty, and the penalty prescribed for the crime
appears too harsh considering the conditions
surrounding the commission of the crime
• The judge should impose the law (not
suspend the execution of the sentence).
• The most that he could do is recommend to
the Chief Executive to grant executive
clemency.
Page 72 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
People v. Veneracion, G.R. Nos. 119987-88
(1995)
Held: The law plainly and unequivocally provides
that “when by reason or on the occasion of rape,
a homicide is committed, the penalty shall be
death. Courts are not concerned with wisdom,
efficacy or morality of law. The discomfort faced
by those forced by law to impose death penalty is
an ancient one, but it is a matter upon which
judges have no choice. The Rules of Court
mandates that after an adjudication of guilt, the
judges should impose the proper penalty and civil
liability provided for by the law on the accused.
3. Persons Liable and Degree
of Participation
a. Conspiracy and Proposal
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
felony. – Conspiracy and proposal to commit
felony are punishable only in the cases in which
the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission
of a felony and decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has
decided to commit a felony proposes its execution
to some other person or persons.
CONSPIRACY
Exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony
and decide to commit it. (Art. 8, RPC).
Agreement may be oral or written, express or implied.
Requisites of conspiracy.
1. Two or more persons come to an agreement.
2. Agreement presupposes meeting of the minds of
two or more persons
3. The agreement pertains to a commission of a
felony.
4. Agreement to effect what has been conceived
and determined.
5. The execution of the felony was decided upon.
There must be participation in the criminal resolution
because simple knowledge thereof by a person may
only make him liable as an accomplice.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Rationale: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a
crime are only preparatory acts and the law regards
them as innocent or at least permissible except in
exceptional cases.
Rules
1. Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are
not punishable.
• Exception: They are punishable only in the
cases in which the law specially provides a
penalty therefore.
2. When the conspiracy is established, all who
participated therein, irrespective of the quantity
or quality of his participation is liable equally,
whether conspiracy is pre-planned or
instantaneous.
• Exception – Unless one or some of the
conspirators committed some other crime
which is not part of the intended crime.
• Exception to the Exception – When the
act constitutes a “single indivisible offense.”
Mere presence of a person at the scene of the crime
does not make him a conspirator for conspiracy
transcends companionship. [People v. Comadre, G.R.
No. 153559 (2004)]
On malversation
By reason of conspiracy, the feloneious act of the
accountable public officer is also imputable to his co-
conspirators, although the latter were not similarly
situated with the former in relation to the object of
the crime. [People v Peralta, G.R. No. L-19069 (1968)]
Conspiracy can make accountable those who
conspired and aided the public officer envisioned by
the Article.
On robbery with a band
Conspiracy need not be proved if the existence of the
band is clearly established. The law presumes the
attendance of conspiracy so much so that "any
member of a band who is present at the commission
of a robbery by the band, shall be punished as
principal of any of the assaults committed by the
band, unless it be shown that he attempted to prevent
the same." [People v. Peralta, supra.]
Page 73 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
On homicide or rape “on occasion” of robbery
People v. Pecato, G.R. No. L-41008 (1987):
Four people engaged in a robbery, killing victim
Felix Larong in the process. Only one of the
robbers actually fired the gun, but all of the
arrested accused (one robber evaded arrest) were
sentenced as principals.
Held: Whenever a homicide has been committed
as a consequence of or on the occasion of a
robbery, ALL those who took part as principals in
the commission of the crime are also guilty as
principals in the special complex crime of robbery
with homicide although they did NOT actually
take part in the homicide unless it clearly appeared
that they endeavored to prevent the homicide.
People v. Evangelio, G.R. No. 181902 (2011):
Once conspiracy is established between several
accused in the commission of the crime of
robbery, they would ALL be equally culpable for
the rape committed by ANYONE of them on the
occasion of the robbery, unless anyone of them
proves that he endeavored to prevent the others
from committing rape.
The above jurisprudence abandons the old rule,
where a conspirator in robbery is liable only for such
other crimes which could be foreseen and which are
the natural and logical consequences of the
conspiracy.
Conspiracy as a felony, distinguished from
conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal
liability
Conspiracy punishable by law refers to the mere
agreement to commit the said acts and NOT the
actual execution thereof.
While the rule is that a mere conspiracy to commit a
crime without doing any overt act is not punishable,
the exception is when such is specifically penalized by law.
[People v. Fabro (2000)]
Examples of felonious conspiracy [METRICS
DATA]:
1. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of
trade (Art. 186)
2. Espionage (Sec. 3, C.A. 616)
3. Treason (Art. 115)
4. Rebellion (Art. 136)
5. Insurrection (Art. 136)
6. Coup d’état, (Art. 136)
7. Sedition (Art. 141)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
8. Selected acts under the Dangerous Drugs Act
(Sec. 26, R.A. 9165)
9. Arson (P.D. 1613, Sec. 7)
10. Terrorism (R.A. 9372, Sec. 4)
11. Access device fraud (R.A. 8484, sec. 11)
Degree of proof
Conspiracy must be established by positive and
conclusive evidence, not by conjectures or
speculations. [People v. Laurio, G.R. No. 181539
(1991)]
To establish conspiracy, evidence of actual
cooperation rather than mere cognizance or approval
of an illegal act is required. It must be shown to exist
as clearly and convincingly as the commission of the
crime itself. [People v. Escober, G.R. No. L-69564
(1988)]
Circumstantial evidence may be used
While it is mandatory to prove conspiracy by
competent evidence, direct proof is not essential to
show it – it may be deduced from the mode, method,
and manner by which the offense was perpetrated, or
inferred from the acts of the accused themselves
when such acts point to a joint purpose and design,
concerted action and community of interest. [People v.
Cenahono, G.R. No. 169962 (2007)]
It may be established through the collective acts of
the accused before, during and after the commission
of a felony that all the accused aimed at the same
object, one performing one part and the other
performing another for the attainment of the same
objective; and that their acts, though apparently
independent, were in fact concerted and cooperative,
indicating closeness of personal association,
concerted action and concurrence of sentiments.
[People v. Talaogan, G.R. No. 178198 (2008)]
Spontaneity does not preclude conspiracy
Spontaneity alone does not preclude the
establishment of conspiracy, which after all, can be
consummated in a moment’s notice — through a
single word of assent to a proposal or an
unambiguous handshake. Yet it is more difficult to
presume conspiracy in extemporaneous outbursts of
violence; hence, the demand that it be established by
positive evidence. [Li v. People, G.R. No. 127962
(2004)]
For conspiracy to exist, it does not require an
agreement for an appreciable period prior to the
occurrence. From the legal standpoint, conspiracy
exists if, at the time of the commission of the offense,
Page 74 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
the accused had the same purpose and were united in its
execution. [People v. Listerio, supra.]
Doctrine of implied conspiracy
Conspiracy may be inferred from the conduct of the
parties, their joint purpose, community of interest
and in the mode and manner of commission of the
offense. [People v. Pangilinan, G.R. Nos. 134823-25
(2003)].
In determining whether there is an implied
conspiracy, it must be based on:
1. Overt acts done before, during, or after the
commission of the crime;
2. Words, remarks or language used before, during
or after the commission of the crime
• They must be distinct from each other,
independent or separate.
• They must be closely associated, closely related,
closed linked, and coordinated.
• They must be for the common criminal design,
joint criminal interest, unity of criminal purpose,
or concerted action, geared towards the
attainment of the felony.
People v. Ramos, G.R. No. 118570 (2004):
In determining the existence of conspiracy, it is
not necessary to show that all the conspirators
actually hit and killed the victim. The presence of
conspiracy among the accused can be proven by
their conduct before, during or after the
commission of the crime showing that they
acted in unison with each other, evincing a
common purpose or design.
There must be a showing that appellant
cooperated in the commission of the offense,
either morally, through advice, encouragement or
agreement or materially through external acts
indicating a manifest intent of supplying aid in the
perpetration of the crime in an efficacious way.
In such case, the act of one becomes the act of all,
and each of the accused will thereby be deemed
equally guilty of the crime committed.
Proposals punishable by law [ReCIT]:
1. Rebellion (Art. 136)
2. Coup d’ etat (Art. 136)
3. Inducement not to answer summons, appear or
be sworn in Congress, etc. (Art. 150)
4. Treason (Art. 115)
Legal effects of implied conspiracy
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

1. Not all those present at the crime scene will be
considered conspirators;
2. Mere acquiescence to or approval of the
commission of the crime, without any act of
criminal participation, shall not render one
criminally liable as co-conspirator.
a chain conspiracy, there is successive
communication and cooperation in much the same
way as with legitimate business operaitons between
manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler and
retailer, and then retailer and consumer. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965 (2002)]

In the absence of any previous plan or agreement to PROPOSAL

commit a crime, the criminal responsibility arising
from different acts directed against one and the same When the person who has decided to commit a
person is individual and not collective, and that each felony proposes its execution to some other person
of the participants is liable only for his own acts. or persons.
[People v. Bagano, G.R. No. 139531 (2002)]
Requisites
One who desisted is not criminally liable 1. That a person has decided to commit a felony; and
Desistance is true only in the attempted stage. Before 2. That he proposes its execution to some other
this stage, there is only a preparatory stage. person or persons.
Conspiracy is only in the preparatory stage.
No criminal proposal when:
Exceptions: Having community of design with the 1. The person who proposes is not determined to
principal does not prevent a malefactor from being commit the felony;
regarded as an accomplice if his role in the 2. There is no decided, concrete and formal
perpetration of the homicide or murder was, proposal;
relatively speaking, of a minor character. [People v. 3. It is not the execution of the felony that is
Nierra, G.R. No. L-32624 (1980)] proposed.

Wheel or circle conspiracy v. chain conspiracy It is not necessary that the person to whom the
In a wheel or circle conspiracy, there is a single proposal is made agrees to commit treason or
person or group (the hub) dealing individually with rebellion.
two or more other persons or groups (the spokes). In

Two Concepts of How

Stage Legal requirements Illustration
Conspiracy incurred
A, B, C and D came to
an agreement to commit
rebellion. Their
agreement was to bring
about the rebellion on a
The RPC must specifically certain date.
punish the act of conspiring
(and proposing) Even if none of them
The act must not be has performed the act of
accomplished, else the rebellion, there is already
AS A FELONY Preparatory Mere conspiracy is absorbed and criminal liability arising
IN ITSELF acts agreement the act itself is punished. from the conspiracy to
commit the rebellion.
Quantum of proof: But if anyone of them
Conspiracy as a crime must has committed the overt
be established beyond act of rebellion, the
reasonable doubt crime of all is no longer
conspiracy but rebellion
itself.

This is true even though

the other co-

Page 75 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Two Concepts of How

Stage Legal requirements Illustration
Conspiracy incurred
conspirators do not
know that one of them
had already performed
an act of rebellion.
Participants acted in
concert or simultaneously
or in any way which is
indicative of a meeting of
the minds towards a
common criminal goal or Three persons plan to
criminal objective. rob a bank. For as long
The act of meeting together as the conspirators
is not necessary as long as a merely entered the bank
common objective can be there is no crime yet. But
discerned from the overt when one of them draws
acts. a gun and disarms the
AS A BASIS FOR Commission The act must be security guard, all of
Executory acts
LIABILITY of overt act accomplished, if there is them shall be held liable,
only conspiracy or unless a co-conspirator
proposal, there is no crime was absent from the
to be punished. scene of the crime or he
showed up, but he tried
Quantum of proof: to prevent the
Reasonably inferred from commission of the
the acts of the offenders crime.
when such acts disclose or
show a common pursuit of
the criminal objective.
[People v. Pinto, G.R. No.
39519 (1991)]

Page 76 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Persons
b. Persons Criminally Liable criminally Requisites
liable
Under the Revised Penal Code, when more than one in its execution by acts which
person participated in the commission of the crime, directly tended to the same
the law looks into their participation because in end.
punishing offenders, the Revised Penal Code 1. That the inducement be made
classifies them as: directly with the intention of
procuring the commission of
1. Principal the crime;
2. Accomplice Principal by 2. That such inducement be the
3. Accessory inducement determining cause of the
commission of the crime by
This classification is true only under the RPC and is the material executor. [People v.
not applied under special laws, because the penalties Yanson-Dumancas, G.R. No.
under the latter are never graduated. 133527-28 (1999)]
1. Participating in the criminal
Do not use the term “principal” when the crime resolution, that is, there is
committed is a violation of special law (use the term either anterior conspiracy or
“offender/s, culprit/s, accused). unity of criminal purpose and
intention immediately before
Principal by
Grave and less felonies v. light felonies the commission of the crime
indispensable
1. When the felony is grave, or less grave, all charged; and
cooperation
participants are criminally liable. 2. Cooperation in the
2. When the felony is only light, only the principal commission of the offense by
and the accomplice are liable. performing another act
without which it would not
In the commission of light felonies, the social wrong have been accomplished.
as well as the individual prejudice is so small that penal 1. That there be community of
sanction is deemed not necessary. design; that is, knowing the
criminal design of the
Who are liable principal by direct
Only natural persons can be held criminally liable participation, he concurs with
because only natural persons are capable of acting by the latter in his purpose;
means of deceit (dolo) or fault (culpa) and only natural 2. That he cooperates in the
persons can commit crime with personal malice and execution of the offense by
negligence. previous or simultaneous acts,
Accomplice with the intention of
Also, only natural persons can suffer imprisonment or supplying material or moral
deprivation of liberty as a form of punishment. aid in the execution of the
[Amurao (2013)] crime in an efficacious way;
and
Officers of corporation are liable 3. That there be a relation
Only officers of corporations acting in their official between the acts done by the
duties can be punishable. He answers for his acts, for principal and those attributed
a juridical person cannot be prosecuted criminally. to the person charged as
EXCEPT: in special laws where corporations are accomplice.
expressly penalized for their violations. Those who
1. having knowledge of the
Persons commission of the crime and
criminally Requisites 2. Without having participated
Accessories
liable therein, either as principals or
1. That they participated in the accomplices,
Principal by 3. take part subsequent to its
criminal resolution; and
direct commission in any of the
2. That they carried out their
participation
plan and personally took part

Page 77 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Persons
criminally Requisites Crime through negligence
liable There is no conspiracy when offense is through
manners provided by the Art. negligence
19, RPC.
1. The accessory is a public Exception: Under special laws that expressly provide
officer. how failure to prevent an act makes one co-principal.
2. He conceals, harbors, or
Public officer as assists (CHA) in the a. By direct participation
accessory under principal's escape.
Art. 19(3) 3. The public officer acts with Those who are liable (participated in the criminal
abuse of his public functions. resolution): [MAP]
4. The crime committed by the 1. Materially execute the crime;
principal is not a light felony. 2. Appear at the scene of the crime;
1. The accessory is a private 3. Perform acts necessary in the commission of the
person offense.
2. He conceals, harbors, or
assists (CHA) in the escape of Why one who does not appear at the scene of the
the author of the crime crime is not liable:
3. The crime committed by the 1. His non-appearance is deemed desistance which
Private person is favored and encouraged.
principal is either (PM's
as accessory 2. Conspiracy is generally not a crime unless the law
HAT):
under art. specifically provides a penalty therefore.
a. Parricide
19(3) 3. There is no basis for criminal liability because
b. Murder
c. Principal is Habitually guilty there is no criminal participation.
of some other crime
d. Attempt against the b. By inducement
President's life
e. Treason Inducer must have: [PET]
1. Most positive resolution
1. Principals 2. Most persistent effort to secure the commission
of the crime,
Art. 17. Principals – The following are 3. Presentation to the induced the very strongest
considered principals: kind of temptation.
1. Those who take a direct part in the execution
of the act; When not by inducement
2. Those who directly force or induce others to 1. Thoughtless expression, without any expectation
commit it; or intention it would produce a result.
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of 2. When the principal by direct participation had
the offense by another act without which it personal reason to commit the crime without
would not have been accomplished. inducement of another.
3. When a price is given to principal by direct
participation AFTER the crime but was not
promise BEFORE the commission of the crime.

Two ways of inducement; by force

1. Using irresistible force. Such physical force as
would produce an effect upon the individual that
despite all his resistance, it reduces him to a mere
instrument.
2. Causing uncontrollable fear. Such fear that
must be grave, actual, serious and of such kind
that majority of men would succumb to such
moral compulsion. The fear must be both grave
and imminent and not speculative, fanciful or
remote.

Page 78 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Criminal liability pertains to both the inducer and the
induced.
People v. Agapinay, supra.:
The one who uttered “kill him, we will bury him”
while the felonious aggression was taking place
cannot be held liable as principal by inducement.
Utterance was said in the excitement of the hour,
not a command to be obeyed.
By giving of price, or offering of reward or
promise
The one giving the price or offering the reward or
promise is a principal by inducement while the one
committing the crime in consideration thereof is a
principal by direct participation.
Using words of command
The person who used the words of command is a
principal by inducement while the person who
committed the crime because of the words command
is a principal by direct participation.
Other characteristics
1. That the one uttering the words of command
must have the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime;
2. That the one who made the command must have
an ascendancy or influence over the person who
acted;
3. That the words used must be so direct, so
efficacious, so powerful as to amount to physical
or moral coercion;
4. That the words of command must be uttered
prior to the commission of the crime; and
5. The material executor of the crime has no
personal reason to commit the crime.
People v. Balderama, G.R. Nos. 89587-98
(1993):
Ernesto shouted to his younger brother Oscar,
“Birahin mo na, birahin mo na!” Oscar stabbed the
victim. Considering that Ernesto had great moral
ascendancy and influence over Oscar, being much
older (35 years old) than the latter, who was 18
years old, and it was Ernesto who provided his
allowance, clothing as well as food and shelter,
Ernesto is principal by inducement.
PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT, IN
RELATION TO PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT
PARTICIPATION
When principal by inducement is liable
Page 79 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
1. When the principal by direct participation
committed the act induced.
2. The inducement must precede the act induced
and must be so influential in producing the
criminal act that without it, the act would not
have been performed.
When principal by direct participation is
acquitted
Conspiracy is negated by acquittal of co-defendant.
Exception: when principal actor is acquitted because he
acted WITHOUT malice or criminal intent, his
acquittal is not ground for acquittal of principal by
inducement.
c. By indispensable cooperation
Requisites
1. Anterior conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose
and intention immediately before the
commission of the crime charged.
a. Requires participation in the criminal
resolution.
b. There must be conspiracy.
c. Concurrence is sufficient.
2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense
by performing another act, without which it
would not have been accomplished.
a. Cooperation must be indispensable
b. If dispensable, accused is only an accomplice
c. If cooperation is necessary in the execution
of the offense, accused is considered as a
principal by direct participation.
People v. Tolentino, G.R. No. 139179 (2002):
A certain Tolentino attacked Hernan Sagario. The
assault was carried out without the participation of
appellant, who did not personally hit or stab the
victim, but only subsequently helped carry the
latter from the house to the nearby creek.
It must be emphasized that Tolentino’s plan to kill
the victim was concocted in the absence of
appellant. In fact, appellant, showing clearly his
lack of support for the criminal intent of
Tolentino, even tried to prevent the latter from
hacking the victim, according to the eyewitness.
In his testimony, appellant stated that because he
was afraid his co-accused would hurt him if he
refused, he agreed to assist the latter in carrying the
victim towards the river. Verily, he adequately
explained his conduct prior to the stabbing
incident as one born of fear for his own life.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Held: Because of the lack of a united purpose,
appellant cannot be considered a principal by
indispensable cooperation. Absent a conspiracy,
his responsibility, as well as that of his co-accused,
is individual -- not collective -- and each is to be
punished only for his own separate acts.
People v. Fronda, G.R. Nos. 102361-62 (1993):
Appellant was convicted as principal by
indispensable cooperation for the murders of two
farmers. Records show that appellant's
participation in the commission of the crime
consisted of: (1) leading the members of the NPA
to the house where the victims were found; (2)
tying the victims' hands and (3) digging the grave
where the victims were buried.
Held: We note that the prosecution failed to present
any evidence tending to establish appellant's
conspiracy with the evil designs of the members of
the armed group. Neither was it established that
appellant's acts were of such importance that the
crime would not have been committed without
him or that he participated in the actual killing.
However, appellant's act of joining the armed men
in going to the mountains, and his failure to object
to their unlawful orders, or show any reluctance in
obeying the same, may be considered as
circumstances evincing his concurrence with the
objectives of the malefactors and had effectively
supplied them with material and moral aid, thereby
making him as an accomplice.
Principal by indispensable cooperation v. co-
principal by direct participation
For the former, act done is different from the felony
intended by the principal by direct participation. In
the latter, the act done by the person is necessary in
the execution of the crime committed.
For instance, the person who held the hands of the
victim while another stabbed the victim is principal by
direct participation. (There are instances where SC
nevertheless held that the person who held the hand
is principal by indispensable cooperation.)
2. Accomplices
Persons who, not acting as principals, cooperate in
the execution of the offense by previous and
simultaneous acts, which are not indispensable to the
commission of the crime.
They are mere instruments that perform acts not
essential to the perpetration of the offense.
Page 80 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
An accomplice cooperates in the execution of the offense by
previous or simultaneous acts, provided he has no direct
participation in its execution or does not force or
induce others to commit it, or his cooperation is not
indispensable to its accomplishment. [People v.
Mandolado, supra.]
Accomplice even without knowledge of actual
crime
One can be an accomplice even if he did not know of
the actual crime intended by the principal provided he
was aware that it was an illicit act. [People v. Doctolero,
G.R. No. 34386 (1991)]
Where the accomplices therein consented to help in
the commission of forcible abduction, they were
responsible for the resulting homicide even if the
purpose of the principal to commit homicide was
unknown to the accomplices. [US v. De Jesus, G.R. No.
5003 (1909)]
People v. Gambao, supra.:
In this case of kidnapping for ransom, appellant
avers that she cannot be held as a principal to the
crime given that she had no knowledge that a crime
was being committed. She claims that she thought
that she merely attended a swimming party. Given
that she had no knowledge of the crime, should
have no criminal liability imputed to her.
Held: The Court is not persuaded that she did not
acquire knowledge of the criminal design of the
principals. A rational person would have sensed
that something was wrong and reported it to the
police. However, she chose to remain quiet; and to
add to that, she even spent the night at the cottage.
It must be noted that her presence and company
were not indispensable for the commission of the
crime. Also, the Court stressed that where there is
doubt as to the participation of the offender to the
crime, he/she shall be considered as an accomplice
rather than a principal to the crime.
Accomplice do not decide the crime
Accomplices come to know about the criminal
resolution of the principal by direct participation after
the principal has reached the decision to commit the
felony and only then does the accomplice agree to
cooperate in its execution.
Accomplices do not decide whether the crime should
be committed; they merely assent to the plan of the
principal by direct participation and cooperate in its
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

accomplishment. [People v. PIlola, G.R. No. 121828 2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
(2003)] crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery.
Accomplice and conspirator, distinguished 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
Conspirator Accomplice escape of the principals of the crime, provided
They know of and join the accessory acts with abuse of his public
They know and agree
in the criminal functions or whenever the author of the crime
with the criminal design
design is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an
Conspirators know Accomplices come to attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive,
the criminal intention know about it after the or is known to be habitually guilty of some
because principals have reached other crime.
they themselves have the decision and only
decided upon such then do they agree to Examples:
course of action cooperate in its execution a. In kidnapping with ransom, couriers or runners
Accomplices merely in obtaining ransom money.
Conspirators decide
assent to the plan and b. In homicide or murder, those who assist in burial
that a crime should be
cooperate in its of the victim. Mere act of carrying the cadaver of
committed
accomplishment one unlawfully killed, when it was buried to
Accomplices are merely prevent discovery of the crime, is SUFFICIENT
instruments who to make him accessory.
perform acts that are c. Those who make it appear that deceased was
Conspirators are the
useful for, but not armed, and that it was necessary to kill him on
authors of a crime
essential to, the account of his resistance; making it appear that
perpetration of the the deceased who had been arrested ran away.
offense. d. Refusal of mayor to prosecute the crime of
homicide and made it possible for principal to
Accomplice and principal by direct participation, escape. He refused to make an investigation of
distinguished the serious occurrence, of which complaint was
Principal by direct Accomplice made to him. Mayor is guilty as accessory.
participation e. If a person reported to the police false
Cooperation is not information, after witnessing a crime by another
Cooperation is whom he knew.
indispensable to the
indispensable in the
commission of the act
commission of the Concealing or destroying the corpus delicti
[Garces v. People, G.R.
crime a. Do not overlook the purpose which must be to
No. 173858 (2007)]
prevent discovery of the crime.
Accomplice in bigamy b. The corpus delicti is not the body of the person who
A person, whether man or woman, who knowingly is killed.
consents or agrees to be married to another already c. Even if the corpse is not recovered, as long as
bound in lawful wedlock is guilty as an accomplice in that killing is established beyond reasonable
the crime of bigamy. [Santiago v. People (2015)] doubt, criminal liability will arise.
d. If there is someone who destroys the corpus
3. Accessories delicti to prevent discovery, he becomes an
accessory.
When one becomes an accessory
Participation of all accessories is AFTER the When accessories are not criminally liable
commission of the crime. a. When crime is light felony.
b. Exemption under art. 20.
Art. 19. Accessories – Accessories are those who,
having knowledge of the commission of the crime, The exemption provided in this article is based on the
and without having participated therein, either as ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness
principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to of one’s name, which compels one to conceal crimes
its commission in any of the following manners: committed by relatives so near as those mentioned in
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the this article.
offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

Page 81 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Even if only two of the principals guilty of murder are
the brothers of the accessory and the others are not
related to him, such accessory is exempt from criminal
liability.
When accessory is not exempted from criminal
liability
a. Profited by the effects of the crime, or
b. Assisted the offender to profit by the effect of
the crime.
c. The punishable acts in PD 1829, compared to
RPC Art. 20 are prompted by a detestable greed,
not by affection. The benefits of the exception in
Art. 20 do not apply to PD 1829.
COLLECTIVE VERSUS INDIVIDUAL
CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY.
Collective criminal responsibility
This is present when the offenders are criminally
liable in the same manner and to the same extent. The
penalty to be imposed must be the same for all.
The same penalty is imposed for the following
combination of principals:
a. All principals by direct participation
b. Principal by direct participation + Principal by
induction (except those who directly forced
another to commit a crime)
c. Principal by direct participation + principal by
indispensable cooperation
Individual criminal responsibility
In the absence of any previous conspiracy, unity of
criminal purpose and intention immediately before
the commission of the crime, or community of
criminal design, the criminal responsibility arising
from different acts directed against one and the same
person is individual and not collective, and each of the
participants is liable only for the act committed by
him.
When principal v. when accomplice
The basis is the importance of the cooperation to the
consummation of the crime.
a. If the crime could hardly be committed without
such cooperation, then such cooperator would be
a principal.
b. If the cooperation merely facilitated or hastened
the consummation of the crime, the cooperator
is merely an accomplice.
In case of doubt, favor the lesser penalty or liability.
Apply the doctrine of pro reo.
People v. Dela Cerna, G.R. No. L-29811 (1967):
Page 82 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Several individuals were convicted for the murder
of father Rafael and son Casiano. One of the
appellants shot the Rafael and abandoned him.
Rafael was saved and brought to his hut for
treatment of the wounds. The shooter, together
with several others, went to Rafael’s house armed
with firearms, bolos, and canes. They stoned the
house and trust their bolos thru the bamboo walls
and flooring. The shooter then climbed the house
and shot Rafael, finally killing him. Someone from
the group saw Rafael’s son, Casiano, running away
from the hut; the former gunned down the latter.
Held: The rule has always been that co-
conspirators are liable only for acts done pursuant to
the conspiracy. For other acts done outside the
contemplation of the co-conspirators or which are
not the necessary and logical consequence of the
intended crime, only the actual perpetrators are
liable.
Rafael’s shooter cannot be held liable for the death
of Casiano, even though the latter’s killer acted in
conspiracy with the former. The conspiracy was to
kill Rafael only and no one else. Nothing was said
or agreed upon about the members of Rafael's
family. Their target was solely Rafael.
4. In Other Special Penal Laws
a. PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1612
[ANTI- FENCING LAW].
One who knowingly profits or assists the principal to
profit by the effects of robbery or theft (i.e. a fence)
is not just an accessory to the crime, but principally
liable for fencing. PD 1612 has, therefore, modified
Art. 19 of the RPC.
Mere possession
Mere possession of any article of value which has
been the subject of robbery or theft brings about the
presumption of “fencing”.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Penalty
The penalty is higher than that of a mere accessory to
the crime of robbery or theft.
b. PRESIDENTIAL DECREE 532 [ANTI-
PIRACY AND HIGHWAY ROBBERY
LAW OF 1974].
Section 4 of PD 532 provides that any person who
knowingly and in any manner acquires or receives
property taken by such pirates or brigands or in any
manner derives benefit therefrom, shall be considered
as an accomplice of the principal offenders, not just
as an accessory, in accordance with the Rules
prescribed by the Revised Penal Code.
Presumption of knowledge
It shall be presumed that any person who does any
acts provided in this section has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.
c. HUMAN SECURITY ACT [R.A. NO.
9372].
Sec. 4. Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism –
Persons who conspire to commit the crime of
terrorism shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years
of imprisonment.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission
of the crime of terrorism as defined in Section 3
hereof and decide to commit the same.
Sec. 5. Accomplice – Any person who, not being
a principal under Article 17 of the Revised Penal
Code or a conspirator as defined in Section 4
hereof, cooperates in the execution of either the
crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism by previous or simultaneous acts shall
suffer the penalty of from seventeen (17) years,
four months one day to twenty (20) years of
imprisonment.
Sec. 6. Accessory - Any person who, having
knowledge of the commission of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, and
without having participated therein, either as
principal or accomplice under Articles 17 and 18
of the Revised Penal Code, takes part subsequent
to its commission in any of the following manner:
(a) by profiting himself or assisting the offender to
profit by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing
or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects,
or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its
Page 83 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
discovery; (c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting
in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the
crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and
one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment.
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the
penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be
imposed upon those who are such with respect to
their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with
the single exception of accessories falling within
the provisions of subparagraph (a).
d. DECREE PENALIZING
OBSTRUCTION OF APPREHENSION
AND PROSECUTION OF CRIMINAL
OFFENDERS [P.D. 1829]
What is imposed
Upon any person who knowingly or willfully
obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the
apprehension of suspects and the investigation and
prosecution of criminal cases.
1. Prision correccional in its maximum period, or
2. Fine ranging from PhP 1,000 – 6,000, or
3. Both
Punishable acts [Section 1]
1. Preventing witnesses from testifying in any
criminal proceeding or from reporting the
commission of any offense or the identity of any
offender/s by means of bribery,
misrepresentation, deceit, intimidation, force or
threats;
2. Altering, destroying, suppressing or concealing
any paper, record, document, or object with
intent to impair its veracity, authenticity,
legibility, availability, or admissibility as evidence
in any investigation of or official proceedings in
criminal cases, or to be used in the investigation
of, or official proceedings in, criminal cases;
3. Harboring or concealing, or facilitating the
escape of, any persons he knows, or has
reasonable ground to believe or suspect, has
committed any offense under existing penal
laws in order to prevent his arrest,
prosecution and conviction;
4. Publicly using a fictitious name for the purpose
of concealing a crime, evading prosecution or the
execution of a judgment, or concealing his true
name and other personal circumstances for the
same purpose or purposes;
5. Delaying the prosecution of criminal cases by
obstructing the service of process or court orders
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

or disturbing proceedings in the fiscals’ offices, in Accessory under RPC and principal by
Tanodbayan, or in the courts; obstruction of justice, distinguished
6. Making, presenting or using any record, Law Penalizing
document, paper or object with knowledge of its Revised Penal Code “Obstruction of
falsity and with intent to affect the course or Justice” (PD 1829)
outcome of the investigation of, or official Specifies the crimes No specification of the
proceedings in criminal cases; that should be crime to be committed by
7. Soliciting, accepting, or agreeing to accept any committed in case a the offender in order that
benefit in consideration of abstaining from, civilian aids in the criminal liability be
discontinuing, or impeding the prosecution of a escape incurred
criminal offender; The offender is the The offender need not
8. Threatening directly or indirectly another with principal or must be even be the principal or
the infliction of any wrong upon his person, convicted of the crime need not be convicted of
honor or property or that of any immediate charged the crime charged
member or members of his family in order to An offender of any crime
prevent such person from appearing in the The one who is no longer an accessory
investigation of, or official proceedings in, harbored or concealed but is simply an offender
criminal cases, or imposing a condition, whether an offender is still an without regard to the
lawful or unlawful, in order to prevent a person accessory crime of the person
from appearing in the investigation of, or in assisted to escape
official proceedings in criminal cases;
9. Giving a false or fabricated information to
mislead or prevent the law enforcement agencies c. Multiple offenders
from apprehending the offender or from
protecting the life or property of the victim; or The four forms of repetition:
fabricating information from the data gathered in 1. recidivism (par. 9, Art. 14)
confidence by investigating authorities for 2. reiteracion (par. 10, Art. 14)
purposes of background information and not for 3. multi-recidivism/habitual delinquency (par. 5,
publication and publishing or disseminating the Art. 62)
same to mislead the investigator or the court. 4. quasi-recidivism (Art. 160)

Kinds of aggravating circumstance.

The first two are generic aggravating circumstances.
The third one is extraordinary aggravating; the fourth
one; special aggravating.

The special aggravating circumstance of quasi-

recidivism cannot be offset by any ordinary mitigating
circumstance.

Recidivism/ Quasi- Habitual

Habituality/Reiteracion/
Reincindencia; Recidivism; Delinquency;
Repetition; Art. 14 (10)
Art. 14 (9) Art. 160 Art. 62 (5)
Crimes Sufficient at the time of Necessary that the offender Before serving Specified felonies:
committed the trial that the offender shall have served out his or while less serious or serious
has been previously sentence for the first serving physical injuries
convicted by final offense sentence, the robbery
judgment for another offender theft
crime embraced in the commits a estafa
same title of the Code on felony (NOT a falsification
the date of his trial crime)
Period of time No period of time Before serving Within 10 years from
the crimes are or while his last release or
committed serving conviction
sentence

Page 84 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Recidivism/ Quasi- Habitual

Habituality/Reiteracion/
Reincindencia; Recidivism; Delinquency;
Repetition; Art. 14 (10)
Art. 14 (9) Art. 160 Art. 62 (5)
Number of The second conviction The previous and Offender Guilty the third time
crimes for an offense embraced subsequent offenses must commits a or oftener
committed in the same title of RPC NOT be embraced in the felony
same title of the RPC
Their effects If not offset by any Not always an aggravating Imposes the An additional penalty
mitigating circumstance, circumstance maximum of shall be imposed
increase the penalty only the penalty for
to the maximum the new
offense, and
cannot be
offset by any
mitigating
circumstance

1. RECIDIVISM
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances –The
following are aggravating circumstances:
xxx
9. That the accused is a recidivist.
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for
one crime, shall have been previously convicted by
final judgment of another crime embraced in the
same title of this Code.
Requisites
a. Offender is on trial for a felony
b. He was previously convicted by final judgment of
another crime
• Both the first and second felonies are
embraced in the same title of the RPC
• Offender is convicted of the new offense
Offender is on trial for an offense
What is controlling is the time of trial, not the time of
commission of the crime. [Reyes]
Coverage
It is meant to include everything that is done in the
course of the trial, from arraignment until after
sentence is announced by the judge in open court.
He was previously convicted
It is sufficient that the succeeding offense be
committed after the commission of the preceding
offense provided that at the time of his trial for the
second offense, the accused had already been
convicted of the first offense.
Judgments handed on the same day
If both offenses were committed on the same date,
they shall be considered as only one, hence, they
cannot be separately counted in order to constitute
recidivism. Also, judgments of conviction handed
down on the same day shall be considered as only one
conviction.
Proof
To prove recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same
in the information and to attach thereto certified copy
of the sentences rendered against the accused.
People v. Molina, G.R. Nos. 14777-78 (2000)
Held: To prove recidivism, it is necessary to
allege the same in the information and to
attach thereto certified copies of the sentences
rendered against the accused. Nonetheless, the
trial court may still give such AC credence if the
accused does not object to the presentation.
People v. Dacillo, G.R. No. 149368 (2004)
Held: The Court finds that the trial court erred in
imposing the death penalty on the ground that
appellant admitted during re-cross examination that he
had a prior conviction for the death of his former
live-in partner. The aggravating circumstance of
recidivism was not alleged in the information and
therefore cannot be appreciated against appellant.
When final judgment
a. After lapse of period for perfecting appeal;
b. When sentence has been partially or totally
served;
c. Accused waived in writing his right to appeal;
d. Accused has applied for probation.

Page 85 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Effect of pardon on first felony Par. 9 Recidivism Par. 10 Reiteracion

Even if the accused was granted a pardon for the first It is enough that a final It is necessary that the
offense, but he commits another felony embraced in judgment has been offender shall have
the same title of the Code, the first conviction is still rendered in the first served out his sentence
counted to make him a recidivist, since pardon does offense. for the first offense.
not obliterate the fact of his prior conviction. The previous and
Requires that the
subsequent offenses
Effect of amnesty on first felony offenses be included in
must not be embraced
However, if a person was granted an amnesty, and the same title of the
in the same title of the
thereafter he is convicted of another crime of the Code
Code
same class as the former crimes, his former conviction Always to be taken into
would not be aggravating. According to Art. 89, consideration in fixing Not always an
amnesty extinguishes not only the penalty but also its the penalty to be aggravating
effects. imposed upon the circumstance
accused
No prescription Rationale is the proven Rationale is the proven
No matter how long ago the offender was convicted, tendency to commit a resistance to
if he is subsequently convicted of a crime embraced similar offense rehabilitation
in the same title of the Revised Penal Code, it is taken
into account as aggravating in imposing the penalty. If the same set of facts constitutes recidivism and
reiteracion, the liability of the accused should be
Should be felonies aggravated by recidivism which can be easily proven.
In recidivism, the crimes committed should be
felonies. There is no recidivism if the crime 3. Multi-Recidivism/Habitual
committed is a violation of a special law.
Deliquency
2. Habituality (Reiteracion) Requisites
a. Offender had been convicted of any of the
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. –The crimes of [T-FIRE]: theft; falsification; serious
following are aggravating circumstances: or less serious physical injuries; robbery; estafa.
xxx b. After that conviction or after serving his
10. That the offender has been previously sentence, he again committed, and, within 10
punished by an offense to which the law attaches years from his release or first conviction, he was
an equal or greater penalty or for two or more again convicted of any of the said crimes for the
crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. second time
c. After his conviction of, or after serving sentence
Requisites for, the second offense, he again committed, and,
a. Accused is on trial for an offense within 10 years from his last release or last
b. He previously served sentence conviction, he was again convicted of any of said
• for another offense to which the law attaches offenses, the third time or oftener. [Art. 62, RPC]
an equal or greater penalty, OR for two or
more crimes to which it attaches lighter Coverage
penalty than that for the new offense It applies to all participants (principals, accomplices,
• He is convicted of the new offense accessories) because it reveals persistence in them of
the inclination to wrongdoing and of the perversity of
For another offense with equal or greater penalty character that led them to commit the previous crime.
attached
Penalty attached to offense, not the one actually Habitual delinquency applies at any stage of the
imposed. execution (attempt, frustration, or consummation)
because subjectively, the offender reveals the same
Convicted of new offense degree of depravity or perversity as the one who
If the second offense or crime is punishable under a commits a consummated crime.
special law, it cannot be considered under reiteracion
because Articles 13, 14, and 15 of the RPC are not Purpose
applicable to special law crimes. To render more effective social defense and the
reformation of habitual delinquents [Reyes, quoting

Page 86 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

People v. Abuyen (G.R. No. L-30664, 1929)]. The

imposition of such additional penalties is mandatory Computation to check whether within “10 years.”
and is not discretionary. The starting date is either the conviction OR release
of the accused in his previous crime; the end date is
Not ex post facto law his conviction in the subsequent crime.
The imposition of the additional penalty on habitual
delinquents are CONSTITUTIONAL because such Must be after previous conviction
law is neither an EX POST FACTO LAW nor an Subsequent crime must be committed AFTER
additional punishment for future crimes. It is simply CONVICTION of former crime.
a punishment on future crimes on account of the
criminal propensities of the accused. How to count the convictions [Reyes]
a. Convictions on the same day are counted as one.
Art. 62 par. 5 b. Crimes committed on the same date, although
Art. 14, Par. 9
Habitual convictions are on different dates, are counted as
Recidivism
Delinquency one.
At least three c. Crime committed during the minority of the
Two convictions are offender is not considered.
convictions are
enough d. Commission of any of the crime need not be
required
The crimes are limited consummated.
and specified to:
a. serious physical Information
The crimes are not Must contain dates for: (1) commission of previous
injuries,
specified; it is enough crimes; (2) last conviction or release; (3) other
b. less serious physical
that they may be previous convictions or releases.
injuries,
embraced under the
c. robbery,
same title of the Revised Plea of guilty
d. theft,
Penal Code Plea of guilty which fails to allege the DATES of the
e. estafa or swindling
and commission of previous offences, convictions, and of
f. falsification releases is not an admission of habitual delinquency,
There is a time limit of but recidivism.
not more than 10 years
between every Failure to object
conviction computed Failure to object admission of decision showing dates
There is no time limit of previous convictions cures the failure to allege said
from the first
between the first dates in the information.
conviction or release
conviction and the
from punishment
subsequent conviction. Penalties
thereof to conviction
Recidivism is Nth
computed from the Penalty Plus
imprescriptible. Conviction
second conviction or
release therefrom to prision
the third conviction correccional in
and so on 3rd its medium and
maximum
Recidivism inherent in habitual delinquency periods
A habitual delinquent is necessarily a recidivist, and in prision mayor in
imposing the principal penalty upon him the 4th Prescribed its minimum and
aggravating circumstance of recidivism has to be penalty on medium periods
taken into account. However, for the purpose of the last crime prision mayor in
fixing the additional penalty, recidivism cannot be its maximum
taken as an aggravating circumstance for the reason period to
5th and
that it is inherent in habitual delinquency. [People v. reclusion
succeeding
Tolentino, G.R. No. L-48740 (1942)] temporal in its
minimum
period

Page 87 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Not exceed 30 years. In no case shall the total of the
2 penalties imposed upon the offender exceed 30
years.
4. QUASI-RECIDIVISM
Art. 160. Commission of another crime during
service of penalty imposed for another offense;
Penalty. – Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of
Article 62, any person who shall commit a felony
after having been convicted by final judgment,
before beginning to serve such sentence, or while
serving the same, shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law
for the new felony.
Requisites
1. That the offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense.
2. That he committed a new felony before
beginning to serve such sentence or while serving
the same.
Offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense
The second crime must be a felony (punished by the
RPC and not by special law/s) but the first crime for
which the offender is serving sentence need not be a
felony. [Reyes]
Reiteracion and quasi-recidivism, not possible to
be simultaneous
Since reiteracion provides that the accused has duly
served the sentence for previous conviction/s, or is
legally considered to have done so, quasi-recidivism
cannot at the same time constitute reiteracion, hence
the latter cannot apply to a quasi-recidivist.
Proof
Quasi-recidivism, like recidivism and reiteracion,
necessitates the presentation of a certified copy of the
sentence convicting an accused. The fact that
appellant was an inmate of a penal colony does not
prove that final judgment had been rendered against
him. [People v. Gaorana, G.r. Nos. 109138-39 (1998)]
Page 88 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
D. PENALTIES
Penalty
The suffering that is inflicted by the State for the
transgression of a law.
Juridical condition
1. Must be PRODUCTIVE OF SUFFERING,
without affecting the integrity of the human
personality.
2. Must be COMMENSURATE to 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 – 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.
Must be personal and definite. Penalties must be
individual, i.e., not shared, and definite, e.g.,
imprisonment, fine, imprisonment and fine,
imprisonment or fine; but not imprisonment and/or
fine.
1. Principles
a. Capital Punishment and Death
Penalty
Some pertinent RPC provisions on death penalty.
See also Arts. 81-85, RPC.
Art. 40. Death; Its accessory penalties – The
death penalty, when it is not executed by reason of
commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil
interdiction during thirty years following the date
sentence, unless such accessory penalties have
been expressly remitted in the pardon.
Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall
not be imposed – The death penalty shall be
imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed
under existing laws, except in the following cases:
1. When the guilty person be more than seventy
years of age.
2. When upon appeal or revision of the case by
the Supreme court, all the members thereof
are not unanimous in their voting as to the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
propriety of the imposition of the death
penalty. For the imposition of said penalty or
for the confirmation of a judgment of the
inferior court imposing the death sentence,
the Supreme Court shall render its decision
per curiam, which shall be signed by all justices
of said court, unless some member or
members thereof shall have been disqualified
from taking part in the consideration of the
case, in which even the unanimous vote and
signature of only the remaining justices shall
be required.
Is death penalty a cruel, degrading, and
inhumane punishment?
People v. Echegaray, G.R. No. 117472 (1997):
Punishments are cruel when they involve torture or
a lingering death, but the punishment of death is
not cruel, within the meaning of that word as used
in the constitution. It implies there something
inhuman and barbarous, something more than the
mere extinguishment of life.
Abolition of death penalty
The first two sections of RA 9346 provide:
Sec. 1. – The imposition of the penalty of death is
hereby prohibited. Accordingly, Republic Act No.
Eight Thousand One Hundred Seventy-Seven
(R.A. No. 8177), otherwise known as the Act
Designating Death by Lethal Injection is hereby
repealed. Republic Act No. Seven Thousand Six
Hundred Fifty-Nine (R.A. No. 7659), otherwise
known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other
laws, executive orders and decrees, insofar as they
impose the death penalty are hereby repealed or
amended accordingly.
Sec. 2. – In lieu of the death penalty, the following
shall be imposed.
a. the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the
law violated makes use of the nomenclature
of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code;
or
b. the penalty of life imprisonment, when the
law violated does not make use of the
nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised
Penal Code.
Distinguished from the constitutional
prohibition
In the constitutional prohibition on death penalty, the
latter is placed in a “suspensive condition” or in a
“state of hibernation.” It is included in the
computation of penalty but not imposed. Unlike the
Constitution, Rep. Act No. 9346 does expressly
Page 89 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
stipulate the amendment of all extant laws insofar as
they called for the imposition of the penalty of death.
Henceforth, "death," as utilized in Article 71 of the
Revised Penal Code, shall no longer form part of the
equation in the graduation of penalties. For example,
in the case of appellant, the determination of his
penalty for attempted rape shall be reckoned not from
two degrees lower than death, but two degrees lower
than reclusion perpetua. [People v. Bon, G.R. No.
166401 (2006)]
Note that the death penalty remains in the Revised
Penal Code. R.A. No. 9346 merely prohibits the
imposition of the death penalty.
Heinous crimes remain “heinous.”
It should be understood that the debarring of the
death penalty through Rep. Act No. 9346 did not
correspondingly declassify those crimes previously
catalogued as "heinous" (in RA 7659). The
amendatory effects of Rep. Act No. 9346 extend only
to the application of the death penalty but not to the
definition or classification of crimes. Accordingly,
Rep. Act No. 9346 does not serve as basis for the
reduction of civil indemnity and other damages that
adhere to heinous crimes. [People v. Bon, supra.]
But see computation of penalty for privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority, under minority as exempting
circumstance.
2. Classification
a. Major Classification
1. PRINCIPAL PENALTIES. Those expressly
imposed by the court in the judgment of
conviction.
2. ACCESSORY PENALTIES. Those that are
deemed included in the imposition of the
principal penalties.
3. SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES. Those imposed
in lieu of principal penalties, i.e., imprisonment in
case of inability to pay the fine.
Principal and accessory penalty, distinguished
A principal penalty is expressly imposed by the court,
while an accessory penalty is deemed included in the
imposition of the principal penalty.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Either principal or accessory 3. Duration and Effects

1. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
2. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification
SCALE OF PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
(e.g., Arts. 226-228, RPC)
3. Suspension (e.g., Art. 236, RPC)
a. Capital Punishment: Death
b. Afflictive Penalties (RP, RT, PAD, TAD, PSD,
These may be principal or accessory penalties,
TSD, PM)
because they are formed in the two general classes.
1. Reclusion perpetua,
2. Reclusion temporal,
Art. 58. Additional penalty to be imposed upon 3. Perpetual or temporary absolute
certain accessories –Those accessories falling disqualification,
within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of 4. Perpetual or temporary special
this Code who should act with abuse of their disqualification,
public functions, shall suffer the additional penalty 5. Prision mayor.
of absolute perpetual disqualification if the a. Correctional Penalties (PC, AM, S, Des)
principal offender shall be guilty of a grave felony, 1. Prision correccional
and that of absolute temporary disqualification if 2. Arresto mayor
he shall be guilty of a less grave felony. 3. Suspension
4. Destierro
b. Other Classifications of Penalties b. Light Penalties (Am,Pc)
1. Arresto menor
1. According to divisibility 2. Public censure
c. Penalties Common to the Three Preceding
Divisible. (a) Those that have fixed duration. (b) Classes (F, Bond)
Those that can be divided into three periods. 1. Fine
2. Bond to keep the peace.
Indivisible. Those that have no fixed duration
(e.g., Reclusion perpetua; perpetual absolute or SCALE OF ACCESSORY PENALTIES
special disqualification; public censure)
(PAD, TAD, PSD, TSD, S, CI, I, F, Pay)
2. According to subject-matter
a. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
Corporal. Death. b. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification
Deprivation of freedom. Reclusion, prision, arresto. c. Suspension from public office, the right to vote
Restriction of freedom. Destierro. and be voted for, the profession or calling
Deprivation of rights. Disqualification, d. Civil interdiction,
suspension. e. Indemnification,
Pecuniary. Fine. f. Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and
proceeds of the offense,
3. According to gravity g. Payment of costs

Capital; afflictive; correctional; light. See Arts.

25 and 26.

Penalty Duration Effects Accessories

Death (REPEALED) Indivisible
1. Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case
Death, when not
may be
executed due to
2. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
pardon or
which the offender shall suffer even
commutation
though pardoned as to the principal
(REPEALED)
penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon

Page 90 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Penalty Duration Effects Accessories

1. Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case
may be
20 years & 1
2. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
Reclusion perpetua day to 40 years Deprivation of freedom
which the offender shall suffer even
(Indivisible)
though pardoned as to the principal
penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon
1. Deprivation of public
office, even if by
election
2. Deprivation of right
Perpetual absolute
to vote & be voted
disqualification For life
for
(PAD)
3. Disqualification from
public office held
4. Loss of retirement
rights
1. Deprivation of office,
employment,
Perpetual special profession, or calling
disqualification For life affected
(PSD) 2. Disqualification from
similar offices or
employments
1. Civil interdiction for life or during the
period of the sentence as the case
may be.
2. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
12 years & 1
Reclusion temporal Deprivation of freedom which the offender shall suffer even
day to 20 years
though pardoned as to the principal
penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the
pardon.
1. Temporary Absolute Disqualification
2. Perpetual Special Disqualification
from the right to suffrage which the
6 years & 1 day
Prision mayor Deprivation of freedom offender shall suffer although
to 12 years
pardoned as to the principal penalty
unless the same shall have been
expressly remitted in the pardon.
1. Deprivation of public
office, even if by
election
2. Deprivation of right
Temporary absolute to vote & be voted
6 years & 1 day
disqualification for during sentence
to 12 years
(TAD) 3. Disqualification from
public office held
during sentence
4. Loss of retirement
rights
Temporary special
6 years & 1 day 1. Deprivation of office,
disqualification
to 12 years employment,
(TSD)

Page 91 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Penalty Duration Effects Accessories

profession, or calling
affected
2. Disqualification from
similar offices or
employment
1. Suspension from public office
2. Suspension from the right to follow a
profession or calling
6 months & 1
Prision correccional Deprivation of freedom 3. Perpetual Special Disqualification for
day to 6 years
the right of suffrage, if the duration
of the imprisonment shall exceed 18
months
1. Public office
6 months & 1
Suspension 2. Profession or calling
day to 6 years
3. Suffrage
Prohibition to enter w/in
6 months & 1
Destierro 25-250 km radius from
day to 6 years
the designated place
1 month & 1 1. Suspension of right to hold office
Arresto mayor day to 6 Deprivation of freedom 2. Suspension of the right of suffrage
months during the term of the sentence
1. Suspension of right to hold office
1 day to 30
Arresto menor Deprivation of freedom 2. Suspension of the right of suffrage
days
during the term of the sentence
Public censure
Fine Pecuniary
Bond to keep peace Not imposable. Violates Art. 21, RPC.

a. Capital Punishment clarification in the Lucas case that Republic Act

See discussion on death penalty.
b. Afflictive Penalties
1. Reclusion Perpetua
Indivisibility. Reclusion perpetua remains an
indivisible penalty despite the duration provided for
it.
People v. Gatward, G.R. Nos. 119772-73
(1997): In RA 7659, the penalty of reclusion
perpetua is now accorded a defined duration
ranging from twenty (20) years and one (1) day to
forty (40) years, through the amendment
introduced by it to Article 27 of the Revised Penal
Code. This led the trial court to believe that
reclusion perpetua has become a divisible penalty.
Held: Article 70 of RPC provides that the
maximum period in regard to service of the sentence
shall not exceed 40 years. Under these accepted
propositions, the Court ruled in the motion for
No. 7659 had simply restated existing
jurisprudence when it specified the duration
of reclusion perpetua at 20 years and 1 day to 40 years.
No need to specify length of imprisonment. In
imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua, it is
unnecessary for the court to specify the length of
imprisonment.
People v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 138261 (2001):
Reclusion perpetua is imprisonment for life but the
person sentenced to suffer it shall be pardoned
after undergoing the penalty for thirty (30) years,
unless by reason of his conduct or some other
serious cause, he shall be considered by the Chief
Executive as unworthy of pardon (Art. 27).
Reclusion perpetua and life imprisonment,
distinguished. [People v. Ballabare, G.R. No. 108871
(1996)]
Cadena perpetua
Reclusion perpetua
(Life imprisonment)
Imposed for serious
Prescribed under the
offenses penalized by
RPC
special laws

Page 92 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

Cadena perpetua
Reclusion perpetua
(Life imprisonment) c. Correctional Penalties
With accessory
No accessory penalties
penalties 1. Prision Correctional
Entails imprisonment
for at least 30 years after
Article 39. Subsidiary Penalty –If the convict
which the convict
Does not appear to has no property with which to meet the fine
becomes eligible for
have any definite extent mentioned in paragraph 3 of the next preceding
pardon although the
or duration article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal
maximum period shall
liability at the rate of one day for each amount
in no case exceed 40
equivalent to the highest minimum wage rate
years
prevailing in the Philippines at the time of the
rendition of judgment of conviction by the trial
AM No. 15-08-02-SC, in rel. to sec. 3 of RA No. court, subject to the following rules:
9346.
Sec. 3. Persons convicted of offenses punished 1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision
with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will correctional or arresto and fine, he shall remain under
be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of this confinement until his fine referred in the preceding
Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary
4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the
Sentence Law, as amended. term of the sentence, and in no case shall it
continue for more than one year, and no fraction
(1) In cases where the death penalty is not or part of a day shall be counted against the
warranted, there is no need to use the phrase prisoner.
"without eligibility for parole" to qualify the
penalty of reclusion perpetua; it is understood that
convicted persons penalized with an
2. Arresto Mayor
indivisible penalty are not eligible for parole;
and See Art. 39(1).

(2) When circumstances are present warranting the 3. Destierro

imposition of the death penalty, but this penalty is
not imposed because of R.A. 9346, the Destierro applies [Reyes] (F, ICE)
qualification of "without eligibility for parole" shall a. In case of Failure to give bond for good behavior
be used to qualify reclusion perpetua in order to (Art. 284)
emphasize that the accused should have been b. Serious physical Injuries
sentenced to suffer the death penalty had it not c. Penalty of Concubine in concubinage (Art. 334)
been for R.A. No. 9346. d. Death under Exceptional circumstances (Art.
247)
e. In cases where after reducing the penalty by one
People v. Buca, G.R. No. 209587 (2015): The
or more degrees, destierro is the proper penalty
CA, in the dispositive portion of its Decision,
sentenced accused-appellant to suffer the penalty
of reclusion perpetua, without the benefit of d. Light Penalties
parole. A.M. No. 15-08-02-SC31 is instructive on
the matter of using the phrase without eligibility for 1. Arresto Menor
parole to qualify indivisible penalties. In the instant
case, since the accused-appellant committed simple See Art. 39(1).
rape, a crime penalized by reclusion
perpetua only, the dispositive portion of this 2. Public Censure
decision should plainly state that he is sentenced to
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without
any qualification.

2. Reclusion Temporal

3. Prision Mayor

Page 93 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
e. Penalties Common to Afflictive,
Correctional, and Light Penalties
1. Fine
Article 26—Classification of PENALTIES
Afflictive More than 6,000
Correctional 200 to 6,000
Light Below 200
Classification of penalty, not felony
This article merely classifies fine and has nothing to
do with the definition of light felony.
What to consider
The court can fix any amount of the fine within the
limits established by law. It must consider (1) the
mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and more
particularly, (2) the wealth or means of the culprit.
[Art. 66]
When the law does not fix the minimum of the
fine, the determination of the amount of the fine to
be imposed upon the culprit is left to the sound
discretion of the court, provided it shall not exceed
the maximum authorized by law.
Not divisible
Fines are not divided into three equal portions.
2. Bond to Keep The Peace
Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. – No
felony shall be punishable by any penalty not
prescribed by law prior to its commission.
Cannot be imposed
This bond is not provided as a penalty for any felony
and therefore cannot be imposed by the court.
Not bail bond
Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bond
which is posted for the provisional release of a person
arrested for or accused of a crime.
f. Measures Not Considered
Penalties
Art. 24
Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which
are not considered penalties. – The following
shall not be considered as penalties:
Page 94 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
1. The arrest and temporary detention of
accused persons, as well as their detention by
reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness
requiring their confinement in a hospital.
2. The commitment of a minor to any of the
institutions mentioned in Article 80 and for
the purposes specified therein.
3. Suspension from the employment of public
office during the trial or in order to institute
proceedings.
4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in
the exercise of their administrative disciplinary
powers, superior officials may impose upon
their subordinates.
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations
which the civil laws may establish in penal
form.
Number 2 is not a penalty because the court does not
impose it in a judgment of conviction. Numbers 3 and
4 are preventive measures. The rest are not penalties
because they are not imposed as a result of judicial
proceedings.
Art. 229, Family Code
Article 229, Family Code. – Unless subsequently
revived by a final judgment, parental authority also
terminates: xxx
(3) Upon judicial declaration of
abandonment of the child in a case filed for the
purpose;
(4) Upon final judgment of a competent
court divesting the party concerned of parental
authority; xxx
g. When the Duration of Penalty
Begins
Penalty begins (Art. 28)
1. (Rule 1) When the offender is in prison—the
duration of temporary penalties is from the day
on which the judgment of conviction becomes
final.
2. (Rule 2) When the offender is not in prison—the
duration of penalty consisting in deprivation of
liberty, is from the day that the offender is placed
at the disposal of judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty.
3. (Rule 3) The duration of other penalties—the
duration is from the day on which the offender
commences to serve his sentence.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Rules in cases of temporary penalties
If offender is under detention, as when he is
undergoing preventive imprisonment, Rule No. 1
applies.
If not under detention, because the offender has been
released on bail, Rule No. 3 applies.
Examples of temporary penalties
1. Temporary absolute disqualification
2. Temporary special disqualification
3. Suspension
Rules in cases of deprivation of liberty
When the offender is not in prison, Rule No. 2
applies.
If the offender is undergoing preventive
imprisonment, Rule No. 3 applies but the offender is
entitled to a deduction of full time or 4/5 of the time
of his detention.
Examples of penalties consisting in deprivation
of liberty:
1. Imprisonment
2. Destierro
Rules in preventive imprisonment
Art. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment
deducted from term of imprisonment. –
Offenders who have undergone preventive
imprisonment shall be credited in the service of
their sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty,
with the full time during which they have
undergone preventive imprisonment, if the
detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in writing to
abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
1. When they are recidivists or have been
convicted previously twice or more times of
any crime; and
2. When upon being summoned for the
execution of their sentence they have failed to
surrender voluntarily.
If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide
by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the
service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time
during which he has undergone preventive
imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act
6127, June 17, 1970).
Whenever an accused has undergone preventive
imprisonment for a period equal to or more than
the possible maximum imprisonment of the
Page 95 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
offense charged to which he may be sentenced and
his case is not yet terminated, he shall be released
immediately without prejudice to the continuation
of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if
the same is under review. In case the maximum
penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is
destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days
of preventive imprisonment. (As amended by E.O.
No. 214, July 10, 1988).
When preventive imprisonment applies
The accused undergoes preventive imprisonment
when the offense charged is nonbailable, or even if
bailable, he cannot furnish the required bail.
Immediate release
The convict is to be released immediately if the
penalty imposed after trial is less than the full time or
four-fifths of the time of the preventive
imprisonment.
Look at maximum possible penalty
The accused shall be released immediately whenever
he has undergone preventive imprisonment for a
period equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment for the offense charged.
4. Application
a. Indeterminate Sentence Law (RA
4103, as Amended)
Purpose
To uplift and redeem valuable human material and
prevent unnecessary and excessive deprivation of
liberty and economic usefulness.
The law is intended to favor the defendant,
particularly to shorten his term of imprisonment,
depending upon his behavior and his physical, mental
and moral record as a prisoner, to be determined by
the Board of Indeterminate Sentence.
It is necessary to consider the criminal first as an
individual, and second as a member of the society.
Excluded from coverage
The following are excluded from coverage: (PH
LENDS TRES TV)
1. Those convicted of piracy
2. Those who are habitual delinquents (but
applies to recidivists)
3. Those convicted of offenses punished with death
penalty or life imprisonment
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

4. Those who shall have escaped from confinement b. The minimum penalty is the penalty next lower
or evaded service of sentence than the prescribed penalty
5. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment
does not exceed one year People v. Saley, G.R. No. 121179 (1998): The fact
6. Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or that the amounts involved in the instant case of
suspension [DS] estafa exceed P22,000.00 should not be considered
7. Those convicted of misprision of treason, in the initial determination of the indeterminate
rebellion, sedition or espionage penalty; instead, the matter should be so taken
8. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or as analogous to modifying circumstances in
proposal to commit treason the imposition of the maximum term of the full
9. Those who violated the terms of conditional indeterminate sentence. This interpretation of
pardon granted to them by the Chief Executive the law accords with the rule that penal laws should
10. Those who, upon the approval of the law, had be construed in favor of the accused. Since the
been sentenced by final judgment penalty prescribed by law for the estafa charge
against accused-appellant is prision
On those who escaped confinement correccional maximum to prision mayor minimum, the
A minor who escaped from confinement in the penalty next lower would then be prision
reformatory is entitled to the benefits of the ISL correccional minimum to medium. Thus, the
because his confinement is not considered minimum term of the indeterminate sentence
imprisonment. should be anywhere within six (6) months and one
(1) day to four (4) years and two (2) months.
See reclusion perpetua and A.M. No. 15-08-02-SC
Why “indeterminate sentence”
1. Application of ISL After serving the minimum, the convict may be
released on parole, OR if he is not fitted for release,
Some definitions [People v. Temporada, G.R. No. he shall continue serving his sentence until the end of
173473 (2008)] the maximum.
An initial penalty
as a general For special laws
prescription for If the crime is a violation of a special law, ISL merely
Prescribed the felonies For homicide: requires that the maximum term thereof shall not exceed
penalty defined therein reclusión temporal the maximum fixed by the special law while the
which consists minimum shall not be less than the minimum prescribed
of a range of therein.
period of time.
For homicide However, where the penalty in the special law adopts
with one the technical nomenclature and signification of the
ordinary penalties under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), such
Penalty after the aggravating as “prision mayor”, “prision correccional maximum”, etc.,
attending or circumstance the ascertainment of the indeterminate sentence will
Imposable modifying and no be based on the rule intended for those crimes
penalty circumstances mitigating punishable under the RPC.
have been circumstances:
appreciated reclusion temporal Imbo v. People, G.R. No. 206513 (2015)
penalty in its Held: For an offense punished by the Code, the
maximum minimum shall be within the range of the penalty
period next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the
A single fixed offense. If the offense is punished by any other
17 years, 4 law, the minimum shall not be less than the
Penalty penalty (also
months and 1 minimum specified by said law. The correct
actually called a straight
day of reclusión application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law
imposed penalty) chosen
temporal has long been clarified in People v. Simon which
by the court
ruled that the underscored portion of Section 1 of
Maximum and minimum terms. [People v. the Indeterminate Sentence Law, i.e. the "offense
Temporada, supra] is punished by any other law," indubitably
a. The maximum penalty is the penalty actually imposed refers to an offense under a special law where

Page 96 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
the penalty imposed was not taken from and
is without reference to the RPC.
2. Conditions for Parole
Sec. 6, RA 4103. Every prisoner released from
confinement on parole by virtue of this Act shall,
at such times and in such manner as may be
required by the conditions of his parole, as may be
designated by the said Board for such purpose,
report personally to such government officials or
other parole officers hereafter appointed by the
Board of Indeterminate Sentence for a period of
surveillance equivalent to the remaining portion of
the maximum sentence imposed upon him or until
final release and discharge by the Board of
Indeterminate Sentence as herein provided. The
officials so designated shall keep such records and
make such reports and perform such other duties
hereunder as may be required by said Board. The
limits of residence of such paroled prisoner during
his parole may be fixed and from time to time
changed by the said Board in its discretion. If
during the period of surveillance such paroled
prisoner shall show himself to be a law-abiding
citizen and shall not violate any of the laws of the
Philippine Islands, the Board of Indeterminate
Sentence may issue a final certificate of release in
his favor, which shall entitle him to final release
and discharge.
Sec. 8, RA 4103. Whenever any prisoner released
on parole by virtue of this Act shall, during the
period of surveillance, violate any of the conditions
of his parole, the Board of Indeterminate Sentence
may issue an order for his re-arrest which may be
served in any part of the Philippine Islands by any
police officer. In such case the prisoner so re-
arrested shall serve the remaining unexpired
portion of the maximum sentence for which he
was originally committed to prison, unless the
Board of Indeterminate Sentence shall, in its
discretion, grant a new parole to the said prisoner.
b. Three-Fold Rule
Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. – When
the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he
shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following
rules shall be observed:
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of
their respective severity shall be followed so that
they may be executed successively or as nearly as
Page 97 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
may be possible, should a pardon have been
granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed,
or should they have been served out.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the
next preceding paragraph the respective severity of
the penalties shall be determined in accordance
with the following scale:
1. Death,
2. Reclusion perpetua,
3. Reclusion temporal,
4. Prision mayor,
5. Prision correccional,
6. Arresto mayor,
7. Arresto menor,
8. Destierro,
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
10 Temporal absolute disqualification.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote
and be voted for, the right to follow a profession
or calling, and
12. Public censure.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next
preceding, the maximum duration of the
convict's sentence shall not be more than
three-fold the length of time corresponding to
the most severe of the penalties imposed upon
him. No other penalty to which he may be liable
shall be inflicted after the sum total of those
imposed equals the same maximum period.
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed
forty years.
In applying the provisions of this rule the duration
of perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be
computed at thirty years.
Simultaneous service
1. When the culprit has to serve 2 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.
What can be simultaneously served with one
another [Ka-DDS Bond Fine in CCP]
1. Perpetual absolute Disqualification
2. Perpetual special Disqualification
3. Temporary absolute Disqualification
4. Temporary special Disqualification
5. Destierro
6. Suspension
7. Bond to keep the peace and Fine
8. Civil interdiction
9. Confiscation and payment of costs
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
10. Public censure
Simultaneous with imprisonment
All of the above can be served simultaneously with
imprisonment, except destierro.
Deprivation of liberty
Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty cannot
be served simultaneously by reason of the nature of
such penalties. [In re: Pete Lagran, G.R. No. 14770
(2001)]
“The most severe of penalties”
The phrase “the most severe of the penalties”
includes equal penalties.
Not “imposition of penalty,” but “service”
Court must impose all the penalties for all the 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. [Mejorada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-51065-72 (1987)
c. Subsidiary Imprisonment
Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment
– In case the property of the offender should not
be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities, the same shall be met in the following
order:
1. The reparation of the damage caused.
2. Indemnification of consequential
damages.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings.
Art. 39. Subsidiary Penalty. – If the convict has
no property with which to meet the fine
mentioned in paragraph 3 of the next preceding
article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal
liability 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, subject to the following rules:
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision
correctional or arresto and fine, he shall remain
under confinement until his fine referred in
the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-
third of the term of the sentence, and in no
case shall it continue for more than one year,
and no fraction or part of a day shall be
counted against the prisoner.
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a
fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not
Page 98 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
exceed six months, if the culprit shall have
been prosecuted for a grave or less grave
felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for
a fight felony.
3. When the principal penalty imposed is higher
than prision correctional, no subsidiary
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the
culprit.
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be
executed by confinement in a penal
institution, but such penalty is of fixed
duration, the convict, during the period of
time established in the preceding rules, shall
continue to suffer the same deprivations as
those of which the principal penalty consists.
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the
convict may have suffered by reason of his
insolvency shall not relieve him from the fine
in case his financial circumstances should
improve."
Subsidiary penalty
It is personal liability 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, subject to the rules
provided for in Article 39.
When not in judgment of conviction
An accused cannot be made to undergo subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency to pay the fine
imposed upon him when the subsidiary imprisonment
is not imposed in the judgment of conviction. [Ramos
v. Gonong, G.R. No. L-42010 (1976)]
Not alternative
A convict—who has property (a) not exempt from
execution and (b) sufficient enough to meet the
fine—cannot choose to serve the subsidiary penalty.
NOT included in COMPUTATION of the
threefold rule
In cases where pecuniary liabilities are applied, follow
these steps:
1. Multiply the highest principal penalty by three.
2. If the result of Step 1 EXCEEDS 6 years, there
can be no subsidiary imprisonment despite the
nonsatisfaction of pecuniary liabilities.
3. If the result of Step 1 is 6 years and below, the
culprit has to:
a. Serve the aggregate principal penalties until
he reaches the ceiling imposed by the
threefold rule.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

b. Serve the subsidiary imprisonment if he

becomes insolvent. [Bagtas v. Director of Arts. 50-57, summarized
Prisons, G.R. No. L-3215 (1949)] Consummat Frustrat Attempt
ed ed ed
5. Graduation of Penalties Principal 0 1 2
Accompli 1 2 3
DEGREES AND PENALTIES, ce
DISTINGUISHED Accessory 2 3 4

Degree “0” represents the penalty prescribed by law in

The whole of the penalty prescribed by the law, the
“next lower” as computed through art. 61, or one unit
of the penalties enumerated in the graduated scales
provided for in Art. 71.
How affected
Graduation of penalties by degrees considers the
following:
a. Stages of execution (consummated, frustrated,
attempted)
b. Extent of participation (principal, accomplice,
accessory)
c. Privileged mitigating circumstances alleged in the
Information
d. Qualifying circumstances alleged in the
Information
defining a crime, which is to be imposed on the
PRINCIPAL in a CONSUMMATED OFFENSE, in
accordance with the provisions of Art. 46.
Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals
in general. . – The penalty prescribed by law for
the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon
the principals in the commission of such felony.
Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a
felony is general terms, it shall be understood
as applicable to the consummated felony.
The other figures represent the degrees to which the
penalty must be lowered, according to the stage of
execution and extent of participation of the accused.

Period Exceptions: Arts. 50 to 57 shall not apply to cases

The one-third portion of a divisible penalty, called where the law expressly prescribes the penalty for
either minimum, medium, or maximum. frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon
accomplices or accessories. (Art. 60)
Indivisible and divisible penalties
The INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES are: Penalty imposed upon an accomplice.
a. Death a. The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and
b. Reclusion perpetua any person who, by abuse of authority or
c. Public censure confidential relationship, shall cooperate as
accomplices in the crimes of rape, acts of
The DIVISIBLE PENALTIES are: lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of minors,
a. Reclusion temporal white slave trade or abduction (Art. 346)
b. Prision mayor b. One who furnished the place for the perpetration
c. Prision correccional of the crime of slight illegal detention (Art. 268)
d. Arresto mayor
e. Destierro Penalty imposed upon an accessory.
f. Arresto menor a. When accessory is punished as principal:
• Knowingly concealing certain evil practices
How affected enumerated in Art. 142
Graduation of penalties by periods considers the • Obstruction of justice — See discussion under
ordinary aggravating circumstances alleged in the accomplices.
Information and the attendant ordinary mitigating b. When accessories are punished with a penalty
circumstances. one degree lower:
• Knowingly using counterfeited seal or
forged signature or stamp of the President
(Art. 162).
• Illegal possession and use of a false treasury
or bank note (Art. 168).

Page 99 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

• Using falsified document (Art. 173 par.3)

• Using falsified dispatch (Art. 173 par. 2) Paragraphs 1 to 3.
The next lower
Scenario
Defining “next lower” by Art. 61 degree is
Art. 61. Rules for graduating penalties. – For The penalty that
When the
the purpose of graduating the penalties which, follows the single
Art. 61(1) penalty is single
according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57, and indivisible
and indivisible
inclusive, of this Code, are to be imposed upon penalty in art. 71
persons guilty as principals of any frustrated or reclusion
e.g. reclusion temporal
attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories, perpetua
the following rules shall be observed: When the
The penalty that
1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is penalty is
follows the lesser
single and indivisible, the penalty next lower Art. 61(2) composed of
of the two in art.
in degrees shall be that immediately following two indivisible
71
that indivisible penalty in the respective penalties
graduated scale prescribed in Article 71 of this reclusion
Code. e.g. perpetua to reclusion temporal
2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is death
composed of two indivisible penalties, or of When the
one or more divisible penalties to be impose penalty is The penalty
to their full extent, the penalty next lower in composed of immediately
degree shall be that immediately following the one or more following the
Art. 61(2)
lesser of the penalties prescribed in the divisible lesser of the
respective graduated scale. penalties to be divisible penalties
3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is imposed to in art. 71
composed of one or two indivisible penalties their full extent
and the maximum period of another divisible prision
penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall e.g. correccional to arresto mayor
be composed of the medium and minimum prision mayor
periods of the proper divisible penalty and the The MEDIUM
When the
maximum periods of the proper divisible and MINIMUM
penalty is
penalty and the maximum period of that period of the
composed of
immediately following in said respective divisible penalty
two indivisible
graduated scale. Art. 61(3) and the
penalties and
4. when the penalty prescribed for the crime is MAXIMUM of
the maximum
composed of several periods, corresponding that
period of a
to different divisible penalties, the penalty immediately
divisible penalty
next lower in degree shall be composed of the following penalty
period immediately following the minimum reclusion prision mayor in its
prescribed and of the two next following, temporal in its maximum to
e.g.
which shall be taken from the penalty MAXIMUM reclusion temporal
prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the period to death in its medium
penalty immediately following in the above The MEDIUM
When the
mentioned respective graduated scale. and MINIMUM
penalty is
5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime period of the
composed of
in some manner not especially provided for in divisible penalty
one indivisible
the four preceding rules, the courts, Art. 61(3) and the
penalty and the
proceeding by analogy, shall impose MAXIMUM of
maximum
corresponding penalties upon those guilty as that
period of a
principals of the frustrated felony, or of immediately
divisible penalty
attempt to commit the same, and upon following penalty
accomplices and accessories. reclusion prision mayor in its
temporal in its maximum to
e.g.
MAXIMUM reclusion temporal
period to in its medium

Page 100 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
The next lower
Scenario
degree is
reclusion
perpetua
Pars. 4 and 5
The rules prescribed in pars. 4 and 5 of Art. 61 may
be simplified as follows:
a. If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
3 periods, corresponding to different divisible
penalties, the penalty next lower in degree is the
penalty consisting in the 3 periods down in the
scale.
b. If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
2 periods, the penalty next lower in degree is the
penalty consisting in 2 periods down in the scale.
c. If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in
only 1 period, the penalty next lower in degree is
the next period down in the scale.
Minimum of ISL
The rules provided for in Art. 61 should also apply in
determining the MINIMUM of the indeterminate
penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The
MINIMUM of the indeterminate penalty is within the
range of the penalty next lower than that prescribed by
the RPC for the offense.
Privileged mitigating circumstance
Those rules also apply in lowering the penalty by one
or two degrees by reason of the presence of privileged
mitigating circumstance (Arts. 68 and 69), or when the
penalty is divisible and there are two or more
mitigating circumstances (generic) and no aggravating
circumstance (Art. 64).
6. Accessory Penalties
a. Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification
Effects
1. Deprivation of any public office or employment
of offender;
2. Deprivation of the right to vote in any election or
to be voted upon;
3. Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension.
Duration
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification is effective
during the lifetime of the convict and even after
the service of the sentence.
2. Temporary absolute disqualification lasts during
the term of the sentence except (1) deprivation of
Page 101 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
the public office or employment; and (2) loss of
all rights to retirement pay or other pension for
any office formerly held. (See Art. 30, par. 3).
Exclusion
A plebiscite is not mentioned or contemplated in the
deprivation of the right to vote; hence, the offender
may vote in that exercise, subject to the provisions of
pertinent election laws at the time.
b. Perpetual or Temporary Special
Disqualification
EFFECTS
For public office, profession or calling
1. Deprivation of the office, employment,
profession or calling affected;
2. Disqualification for holding similar offices or
employments during the period of
disqualification.
For the exercise of right to suffrage
1. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected
in an office;
2. Cannot hold any public office during the period
of disqualification. (Art. 31).
Notes:
1. The penalty for disqualification if imposed as an
accessory penalty is imposed for PROTECTION
and NOT for the withholding of a privilege.
2. If temporary disqualification or suspension is
imposed as an accessory penalty, the duration is
the same as that of the principal penalty.
c. Suspension from Public Office,
the Right to Vote and be Voted
for, the Right to Practice a
Profession or Calling
Effects
1. Disqualification from holding such office or the
exercise of such profession or right of suffrage
during the term of the sentence;
2. Cannot hold another office having similar
functions during the period of suspension. (Art.
32).
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
d. Civil Interdiction
Effects
Deprivation of the following rights:
1. Parental authority
2. Guardianship over the ward
3. Marital authority
4. Right to manage property and to dispose of the
same by acts inter vivos. (Note: The convict can
still dispose his property mortis causa).
From the New Civil Code
Art. 1323, CC. – An offer becomes ineffective
upon the death, civil interdiction, insanity, or
insolvency of either party before acceptance is
conveyed.
Art. 1830, CC. – Dissolution [of partnership] is
caused:
Xxx (7) By the civil interdiction of any partner; xxx
Art. 1860, CC. – The retirement, death,
insolvency, insanity or civil interdiction of a
general partner dissolves the partnership, unless
the business is continued by the remaining general
partners:
1. Under a right so to do stated in the certificate,
or
2. With the consent of all members.
Art. 1919, CC.. – Agency is extinguished:
Xxx (3) By the death, civil interdiction, insanity or
insolvency of the principal or of the agent; xxx
Note: Civil interdiction is an accessory penalty to the
following principal penalties:
1. Death if commuted to life imprisonment;
2. Reclusion perpetua
3. Reclusion temporal
e. Indemnification or Confiscation
of Instruments or Proceeds of the
Offense
Effects
Forfeiture in favor of the Government of the
proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools
with which it was committed.
Page 102 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Notes:
1. This is included in every penalty for the
commission of the crime. The confiscation is in
favor of the government.
2. Property of a third person not liable for the
offense is not subject to confiscation.
3. If the trial court did not order any confiscation of
the proceeds of the crime, the government
cannot appeal from the confiscation as that
would increase the penalty already imposed.
RA 1379—An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor
of the State Any Property Found To Have Been
Unlawfully Acquired By Any Public Officer or
Employee and Providing for the Proceedings
Therefor.
Sec. 1. Definitions. – xxx
(b) "Other legitimately acquired property" means
any real or personal property, money or securities
which the respondent has at any time acquired by
inheritance and the income thereof, or by gift inter
vivos before his becoming a public officer or
employee, or any property (or income thereof)
already pertaining to him when he qualified for
public office or employment, or the fruits and
income of the exclusive property of the
respondent's spouse. It shall not include:
1. Property unlawfully acquired by the
respondent, but its ownership is concealed by
its being recorded in the name of, or held by,
the respondent's spouse, ascendants,
descendants, relatives, or any other person.
2. Property unlawfully acquired by the
respondent, but transferred by him to another
person or persons on or after the effectivity of
this Act.
3. Property donated to the respondent during his
incumbency, unless he can prove to the
satisfaction of the court that the donation is
lawful.
Sec. 6. Judgment. If the respondent is unable to
show to the satisfaction of the court that he has
lawfully acquired the property in question, then the
court shall declare such property, forfeited in favor
of the State, and by virtue of such judgment the
property aforesaid shall become property of the
State: Provided, That no judgment shall be rendered
within six months before any general election or
within three months before any special election.
The Court may, in addition, refer this case to the
corresponding Executive Department for
administrative or criminal action, or both.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
RA 7080 or the Plunder Law
Sec. 2. Definition of the Crime of Plunder;
Penalties. – Any public officer who, by himself or
in connivance with members of his family,
relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business
associates, subordinates or other persons, amasses,
accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through
a combination or series of overt or criminal acts as
described in Section 1(d) hereof, in the aggregate
amount or total value of at least Seventy-five
million pesos (P75,000,000.00), shall be guilty of
the crime of plunder and shall be punished by life
imprisonment with perpetual absolute
disqualification from holding any public office.
Any person who participated with said public
officer in the commission of plunder shall likewise
be punished. In the imposition of penalties, the
degree of participation and the attendance of
mitigating and extenuating circumstances shall be
considered by the court. The court shall declare
any and all ill-gotten wealth and their interests and
other incomes and assets including the properties
and shares of stock derived from the deposit or
investment thereof forfeited in favor of the State.
(As amended by RA 7659, approved Dec. 13,
1993.)
Private person cannot be charged with plunder
without public officer
Plunder is defined as a crime committed by a public
officer by himself or in connivance with others.
RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act
Sec. 9. Penalties for violations. – (a) Any public
officer or private person committing any of the
unlawful acts or omissions enumerated in Sections
3, 4, 5 and 6 of this Act shall be punished with
imprisonment for not less than six years and one
month nor more than fifteen years, perpetual
disqualification from public office, and
confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the
Government of any prohibited interest and
unexplained wealth manifestly out of proportion
to his salary and other lawful income.
Any complaining party at whose complaint the
criminal prosecution was initiated shall, in case of
conviction of the accused, be entitled to recover in
the criminal action with priority over the forfeiture
in favor of the Government, the amount of money
or the thing he may have given to the accused, or
the fair value of such thing.
Page 103 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002, as
amended
Sec. 20. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the
Proceeds or Instruments of the Unlawful Act,
Including the Properties or Proceeds Derived
from the Illegal Trafficking of Dangerous
Drugs and/or Precursors and Essential
Chemicals.. – Every penalty imposed for the
unlawful importation, sale, trading, administration,
dispensation, delivery, distribution, transportation
or manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical, the
cultivation or culture of plants which are sources
of dangerous drugs, and the possession of any
equipment, instrument, apparatus and other
paraphernalia for dangerous drugs including other
laboratory equipment, shall carry with it the
confiscation and forfeiture, in favor of the
government, of all the proceeds and properties
derived from the unlawful act, including, but not
limited to, money and other assets obtained
thereby, and the instruments or tools with which
the particular unlawful act was committed, unless
they are the property of a third person not liable
for the unlawful act, but those which are not of
lawful commerce shall be ordered destroyed
without delay pursuant to the provisions of
Section 21 of this Act.
After conviction in the Regional Trial Court in the
appropriate criminal case filed, the Court shall
immediately schedule a hearing for the
confiscation and forfeiture of all the proceeds of
the offense and all the assets and properties of the
accused either owned or held by him or in the
name of some other persons if the same shall be
found to be manifestly out of proportion to
his/her lawful income: Provided, however, That if the
forfeited property is a vehicle, the same shall be
auctioned off not later than five (5) days upon
order of confiscation or forfeiture.
During the pendency of the case in the Regional
Trial Court, no property, or income derived
therefrom, which may be confiscated and
forfeited, shall be disposed, alienated or
transferred and the same shall be in custodia
legis and no bond shall be admitted for the release
of the same.
The proceeds of any sale or disposition of any
property confiscated or forfeited under this
Section shall be used to pay all proper expenses
incurred in the proceedings for the confiscation,
forfeiture, custody and maintenance of the
property pending disposition, as well as expenses
for publication and court costs. The proceeds in
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
excess of the above expenses shall accrue to the
Board to be used in its campaign against illegal
drugs.
Sec. 84. Powers and Duties of the PDEA. –
The PDEA shall:
xxx (g) Recommend to the DOJ the forfeiture of
properties and other assets of persons and/or
corporations found to be violating the provisions
of this Act and in accordance with the pertinent
provisions of the Anti-Money-Laundering Act of
2001; xxx
2016 Revised Implementing Rules and
Regulations of RA No. 9160, or the Anti-Money
Laundering Act, as amended.
B. Asset Forfeiture in Money Laundering
Cases. - Where there is conviction for money
laundering, the court shall issue a judgment of
forfeiture in favor of the Government of the
Philippines with respect to the monetary
instrument or property found to be proceeds of an
unlawful activity.
C. Claim on Forfeited Assets. - Where the
court has issued an order of forfeiture of the
monetary instrument or property in a criminal
prosecution for any money laundering offense, the
offender or any other person claiming an interest
therein may apply, by verified petition, for a
declaration that the same legitimately belongs to
him and for segregation or exclusion of the
monetary instrument or property corresponding
thereto. The verified petition shall be filed with the
court which rendered the judgment of forfeiture,
within fifteen (15) days from the date of the finality
of the order of forfeiture, in default of which the
said order shall become final and executory. This
provision shall also apply in civil forfeiture.
D. Payment in Lieu of Forfeiture. - Where the
court has issued an order of forfeiture of the
monetary instrument or property subject of a
money laundering offense, and said order cannot
be enforced because any particular monetary
instrument or property cannot, with due diligence,
be located, or it has been substantially altered,
destroyed, diminished in value or otherwise
rendered worthless by any act or omission, directly
or indirectly, attributable to the offender, or it has
been concealed, removed, converted, or otherwise
transferred to prevent the same from being found
or to avoid forfeiture thereof, or it is located
outside the Philippines or has been placed or
brought outside the jurisdiction of the court, or it
has been commingled with other monetary
Page 104 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
instruments or property belonging to either the
offender himself or a third person or entity,
thereby rendering the same difficult to identify or
be segregated for purposes of forfeiture, the court
may, instead of enforcing the order of forfeiture of
the monetary instrument or property or part
thereof or interest therein, accordingly order the
convicted offender to pay an amount equal to the
value of said monetary instrument or property.
This provision shall apply in both civil and criminal
forfeiture.
f. Payment of Costs
Effects
1. If the accused be convicted, the costs may be
charged against him.
2. If he be acquitted, costs are de officio, i.e., each
party will bear his/her own expense.
Coverage
1. Fees, and
2. Indemnities, in the course of judicial
proceedings.
Expenses of litigation
Costs or costs of suit are the expenses of litigation
allowed and regulated by the Rules of Court to be
assessed against or to be recovered by a party in
litigation.
Fixed or otherwise
Costs may be fixed amounts already determined by
law or regulations or amounts subject to a schedule.
Exclusion
Not allowed against the Republic of the Philippines.
(Rule 142, Sec. 1).
7. Computation of Penalties
a. Mitigating and Aggravating
Circumstances
Sec. 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating
or aggravating circumstances and of habitual
delinquency. – Mitigating or aggravating
circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be
taken into account for the purpose of diminishing
or increasing the penalty in conformity with the
following rules:
1. Aggravating circumstances which in
themselves constitute a crime specially
punishable by law or which are included by the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

law in defining a crime and prescribing the 4. Two or more mitigating—one DEGREE
penalty therefor shall not be taken into LOWER
account for the purpose of increasing the 5. BOTH aggravating and mitigating are present—
penalty. OFFSET each other
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
aggravating circumstance inherent in the When prescribed penalty is not made of three
crime to such a degree that it must of necessity periods
accompany the commission thereof.
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances 1. Let X be
which arise from the moral attributes of the 𝑋 = (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 −
offender, or from his private relations with the (𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 − 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦))/3
offended party, or from any other personal
cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate Suppose the prescribed penalty for a felony is
the liability of the principals, accomplices and prision mayor, which ranges from 6 years (minimum
accessories as to whom such circumstances of prescribed penalty) and 1 day to 12 years
are attendant. (maximum of the prescribed penalty). Then:
4. The circumstances which consist in the
material execution of the act, or in the means (𝑚𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦)
employed to accomplish it, shall serve to 𝑋=
− (𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 − 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦)
aggravate or mitigate the liability of those 3
persons only who had knowledge of them at 12 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 − (6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 − 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦)
=
the time of the execution of the act or their 3
cooperation therein. 12𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 − (6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)
=
3
When attendant circumstances are not 𝑋 = 2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
appreciated in computing the penalty. (Fine SIN)
1. fines 2. For the minima and maxima of the minimum,
2. penalties prescribed by special laws that do not medium, and maximum periods, use the
follow the RPC nomenclature following formulae:
3. indivisible penalties
Minimum Maximum
4. crimes committed by negligence
Minimum 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓
period ( )
𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦
When prescribed penalty is single and indivisible +𝑋
Apply the prescribed penalty regardless of attendant
circumstances. Medium 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓
period 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 (𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦)
+𝑋 −1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
When prescribed penalty is made of two +2𝑋
indivisible penalties Maximu 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓
1. At least one aggravating circumstance is m period 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦 ( 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑡𝑦)
present—apply HIGHER penalty +2𝑋 −1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
2. No aggravating is present—apply LOWER +3𝑋
penalty
3. BOTH aggravating and mitigating are present— Using the example of prision mayor, with X = 2 years
• Aggravating exceeds mitigating—apply as computed in Step 1, and applying these numbers to
HIGHER penalty the formulae in the above table, we have:
• Mitigating exceeds aggravating—apply
LOWER penalty Minimum Maximum
Minimum 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
period ( )
1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 −1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
When prescribed penalty is made of divisible + 2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
penalties
Medium 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
1. NO aggravating and mitigating—apply period ( )
1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 −1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
MEDIUM period +(2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠) + 2(2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)
2. Aggravating circumstances, regardless of
Maximum 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
number—apply MAXIMUM period period 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
(
−1 𝑑𝑎𝑦
)
3. One mitigating—apply MINIMUM period +2(2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠) + 3(2 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠)

Page 105 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC
Which can be simplified as:
Minimum Maximum
Minimum 6 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 8 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
Medium 8 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 10 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
Maximum 10 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑑 1 𝑑𝑎𝑦 12 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
period
3. To check if the computation is correct, the
maximum of the maximum period (as computed in
Step 2) should be equal to the maximum of the
prescribed penalty.
Maximum of the maximum period in Step 2 = 12
years
Maximum of prision mayor = 12 years
See prescribed penalty and imposable penalty, distinguished.
See special aggravating and qualifying circumstances.
Ladines v. People, G.R. No. 167333 (2016)
Held: Homicide is punished with reclusion
temporal. Taking the absence of any modifying
circumstances into consideration, the RTC fixed
the indeterminate penalty of 10 years and one day
of prision mayor, as minimum, to 17 years and
four months of the medium period of reclusion
temporal, as maximum. The CA affirmed the
penalty fixed by the RTC.
We declare that the lower courts could not impose
17 years and four months of the medium period
of reclusion temporal, which was the ceiling of
the medium period of reclusion temporal, as the
maximum of the indeterminate penalty without
specifying the justification for so imposing. They
thereby ignored that although Article 64 of
the Revised Penal Code, which has set the rules
"for the application of penalties which contain
three periods," requires under its first rule that the
courts should impose the penalty prescribed by
law in the medium period should there be
neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances,
its seventh rule expressly demands that "[w]ithin
the limits of each period, the courts shall
determine the extent of the penalty 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." By not specifying the justification for
imposing the ceiling of the period of the
imposable penalty, the fixing of the
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
indeterminate sentence became arbitrary, or
whimsical, or capricious. In the absence of the
specification, the maximum of the
indeterminate sentence for the petitioner
should be the lowest of the medium period
of reclusion temporal, which is 14 years, eight
months and one day of reclusion temporal.
No “incomplete” accident
Art. 67 is impossible to impose. See discussion on
incomplete justification and exemption.
Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all the
requisites of exemption of the fourth
circumstance of Article 12 are present. . –
When all the conditions required in circumstances
Number 4 of Article 12 of this Code to exempt
from criminal liability are not present, the penalty
of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon the culprit if he shall have been
guilty of a grave felony, and arresto mayor in its
minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave
felony
8. Special Rules
a. Complex Crime and Continuing
Crimes
See earlier discussion.
b. Absorption Doctrine
Rebellion and other crimes
Enrile v. Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 (1990)
JPE was arrested on an information charging him
with the crime of rebellion and murder and
multiple frustrated murder.
Held: Hernandez remains binding doctrine operating
to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with
any other offense committed on the occasion
thereof, either as a means necessary to its
commission or as an unintended effect of an
activity that constitutes rebellion.
RA 10591, or the Comprehensive Firearms and
Ammunition Act of 2013
Sec. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the
Commission of a Crime. – If the violation of this
Act is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in
connection with the crime of rebellion of
insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat, such
Page 106 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC
violation shall be absorbed as an element of the
crime of rebellion or insurrection, or
attempted coup d’ etat.
See crimes against public order.
c. Impossible Crimes
Art. 59. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure
to commit the crime because the means
employed or the aims sought are impossible. .
– When the person intending to commit an
offense has already performed the acts for the
execution of the same but nevertheless the crime
was not produced by reason of the fact that the act
intended was by its nature one of impossible
accomplishment or because the means employed
by such person are essentially inadequate to
produce the result desired by him, the court,
having in mind the social danger and the degree of
criminality shown by the offender, shall impose
upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from
200 to 500 pesos.
d. Crime Different from that
Intended
See discussion on art. 4(1) and on the mitigating circumstance
of no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
e. When Offender is Below 18
See minority as exempting circumstance and as privileged
mitigating circumstance.
9. Execution and Service of
Penalties
a. Execution of Penalties
Art. 78. When and how a penalty is to be
executed. –No penalty shall be executed except
by virtue of a final judgment.
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form
than that prescribed by law, nor with any other
circumstances or incidents than those expressly
authorized thereby.
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special
regulations prescribed for the government of the
institutions in which the penalties are to be
Page 107 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
suffered shall be observed with regard to the
character of the work to be performed, the time of
its performance, and other incidents connected
therewith, the relations of the convicts among
themselves and other persons, the relief which
they may receive, and their diet.
The regulations shall make provision for the
separation of the sexes in different institutions, or
at least into different departments and also for the
correction and reform of the convicts.
Art. 78; must be final
The judgment must be final before it can be executed,
because the accused may still appeal within 15 days
from its promulgation.
May be waived
But if the defendant has expressly waived in writing
his right to appeal, the judgment becomes final and
executory.
Art. 86. Reclusion perpetua, reclusion
temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional
and arresto mayor. – The penalties of 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.
Art. 87. 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.
Destierro, distinguished from permanent
protection order
Sec. 8, RA 9262. Protection Orders. – A
protection order is an order issued under this act
for the purpose of preventing further acts of
violence against a woman or her child specified in
Sec. 5 of this Act and granting other necessary
relief. The relief granted under a protection order
serve the purpose of safeguarding the victim from
further harm, minimizing any disruption in the
victim's daily life, and facilitating the opportunity
and ability of the victim to independently regain
control over her life. The provisions of the
protection order shall be enforced by law
enforcement agencies. The protection orders that
may be issued under this Act are the barangay
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
protection order (BPO), temporary protection
order (TPO) and permanent protection order
(PPO). The protection orders that may be issued
under this Act shall include any, some or all of the
following reliefs:
xxx
(d) Directing the respondent to stay away from
petitioner and designated family or household
member at a distance specified by the court, and to
stay away from the residence, school, place of
employment, or any specified place frequented by
the petitioner and any designated family or
household member
Sec. 16, RA 9262. Permanent Protection
Orders. – Permanent Protection Order (PPO)
refers to protection order issued by the court after
notice and hearing.
Respondents non-appearance despite proper
notice, or his lack of a lawyer, or the non-
availability of his lawyer shall not be a ground for
rescheduling or postponing the hearing on the
merits of the issuance of a PPO. If the respondents
appears without counsel on the date of the hearing
on the PPO, the court shall appoint a lawyer for
the respondent and immediately proceed with the
hearing. In case the respondent fails to appear
despite proper notice, the court shall allow ex parte
presentation of the evidence by the applicant and
render judgment on the basis of the evidence
presented. The court shall allow the introduction
of any history of abusive conduct of a respondent
even if the same was not directed against the
applicant or the person for whom the applicant is
made.
The court shall, to the extent possible, conduct the
hearing on the merits of the issuance of a PPO in
one (1) day. Where the court is unable to conduct
the hearing within one (1) day and the TPO issued
is due to expire, the court shall continuously
extend or renew the TPO for a period of thirty (30)
days at each particular time until final judgment is
issued. The extended or renewed TPO may be
modified by the court as may be necessary or
applicable to address the needs of the applicant.
The court may grant any, some or all of the reliefs
specified in Sec. 8 hereof in a PPO. A PPO shall
be effective until revoked by a court upon
application of the person in whose favor the order
was issued. The court shall ensure immediate
personal service of the PPO on respondent.
Page 108 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
The court shall not deny the issuance of protection
order on the basis of the lapse of time between the
act of violence and the filing of the application.
Regardless of the conviction or acquittal of the
respondent, the Court must determine whether or
not the PPO shall become final. Even in a
dismissal, a PPO shall be granted as long as there
is no clear showing that the act from which the
order might arise did not exist.
Art. 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.
b. Effects of Probation Law [PD
986, as amended by RA 10707]
Llamado v. CA, G.R. No. 99032 (1989):
Turning to petitioner's invocation of "liberal
interpretation" of penal statutes, we note at the
outset that the Probation Law is not a penal
statute. We, however, understand petitioner's
argument to be really that any statutory language
that appears to favor the accused in a criminal case
should be given a "liberal interpretation." Courts,
however, have no authority to invoke "liberal
interpretation' or "the spirit of the law" where the
words of the statute themselves, and as illuminated
by the history of that statute, leave no room for
doubt or interpretation.
DEFINITION OF TERMS [SEC. 3]
Probation
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.
Probationer
A person placed on probation
Probation officer
One who investigates for the court a referral for
probation or supervises a probationer or both.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
PURPOSE [SEC 2.]
1. Promote the correction and rehabilitation of
an offender by providing him with
individualized treatment
2. Provide an opportunity for the reformation
of a penitent offender which might be less
probable if he were to serve a prison
sentence
3. Prevent the commission of offenses
Office of the Court Administrator v. Librado,
AM P-94-1089 (1996): Unlike pardon, probation
does not obliterate the crime of which the person
under probation has been convicted.
Note: Probation does not extinguish civil liability.
GRANT, MANNER, AND CONDITIONS
[SEC. 4]
Sec. 4. Grant of Probation. – Subject to the
provisions of this Decree, the trial court may, after
it shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant
for a probationable penalty and upon application
by said defendant within the period for perfecting
an appeal, suspend the execution of the sentence
and place the defendant on probation for such
period and upon such terms and conditions as it
may deem best. No application for probation shall
be entertained or granted if the defendant has
perfected the appeal from the judgment of
conviction: Provided, That when a judgment of
conviction imposing a non-probationable
penalty is appealed or reviewed, and such
judgment is modified through the imposition
of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall
be allowed to apply for probation based on the
modified decision before such decision
becomes final. The application for probation
based on the modified decision shall be filed in the
trial court where the judgment of conviction
imposing a non-probationable penalty was
rendered, or in the trial court where such case
has since been re-raffled. In a case involving
several defendants where some have taken further
appeal, the other defendants may apply for
probation by submitting a written application and
attaching thereto a certified true copy of the
judgment of conviction.
The trial court shall, upon receipt of the
application filed, suspend the execution of the
sentence imposed in the judgment.
This notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the
benefit of probation should he seek a review of
Page 109 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
the modified decision which already imposes
a probationable penalty.
Probation may be granted whether the sentence
imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only.
The filing of the application shall be deemed a
waiver of the right to appeal.
An order granting or denying probation shall not
be appealable.
The Dimakuta doctrine. Note that the Dimakuta
decision was issued on October 2015, but
RA10707—which amended the Probation Law—was
signed into law on November 2015.
Dimakuta v. People, G.R. No. 206513 (2015)
Held: It must be categorically stated that such
appeal must be limited to the following grounds:
1. When the appeal is merely intended for
the correction of the penalty imposed by
the lower court, which when corrected would
entitle the accused to apply for probation; and
2. When the appeal is merely intended to review
the crime for which the accused was
convicted and that the accused should only be
liable to the lesser offense which is
necessarily included in the crime for which
he was originally convicted and the proper
penalty imposable is within the
probationable period.
In addition, before an appeal is filed based on the
grounds enumerated above, the accused should
first file a motion for reconsideration of the
decision of the trial court anchored on the above-
stated grounds and manifest his intent to apply for
probation if the motion is granted. The motion for
reconsideration will give the trial court an
opportunity to review and rectify any errors in its
judgment, while the manifestation of the accused
will immediately show that he is agreeable to the
judgment of conviction and does not intend to
appeal from it, but he only seeks a review of the
crime and/or penalty imposed, so that in the event
that the penalty will be modified within the
probationable limit, he will immediately apply for
probation. Without such motion for
reconsideration, the notice of appeal should be
denied outright.
The notice of appeal should contain the following
averments:
1. that an earlier motion for reconsideration was
filed but was denied by the trial court;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
2. that the appeal is only for reviewing the
penalty imposed by the lower court or the
conviction should only be for a lesser crime
necessarily included in the crime charged in
the information; and
3. that the accused-appellant is not seeking
acquittal of the conviction.
On the other hand, probation should not be
granted to the accused in the following instances:
1. When the accused is convicted by the trial
court of a crime where the penalty imposed is within
the probationable period or a fine, and the accused
files a notice of appeal; and
2. When the accused files a notice of appeal
which puts the merits of his conviction in issue, even
if there is an alternative prayer for the
correction of the penalty imposed by the trial
court or for a conviction to a lesser crime,
which is necessarily included in the crime in
which he was convicted where the penalty is
within the probationable period.
Conditions
Sec. 10 lists conditions of the probation. The two
conditions quoted below are mandatory conditions;
the rest in sec. 10 are discretionary conditions. The
conditions enumerated under Sec. 10 of the Probation
Law are not exhaustive. Courts are allowed to impose
practically any term it chooses, the only limitation
being that it does not jeopardize the constitutional
rights of the accused. After all, Sec. 4 states that “the
trial court may… place the defendant on probation
for such period and upon such terms and
conditions as it may deem best.” [Salgado v. CA,
G.R. No. 89606 (1990)]
Sec. 10. Conditions of Probation. – Every
probation order issued by the court shall contain
conditions requiring that the probationer shall:
a. present himself to the probation officer
designated to undertake his supervision at
such place as may be specified in the order
within seventy-two hours from receipt of said
order;
b. report to the probation officer at least once a
month at such time and place as specified by
said officer.
CRITERIA FOR PLACING OFFENDER
UNDER PROBATION [SEC. 8]
Criteria
The following should be considered in deciding to
place an offender under probation: [AM CHEAP]
1. Available institutional and community resources
Page 110 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Mental condition of the offender
3. Character,
4. Antecedents,
5. Environment,
6. Physical condition of the offender
May be extended to children in conflict with the
law
Sec. 42. Probation as an Alternative to
Imprisonment. - The court may, after it shall
have 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. For this purpose, Section 4 of
Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as
the "Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended
accordingly.
Reasons for denying probation
Sec. 8 – x x x
a. the offender is in need of correctional
treatment that can be provided most
effectively by his commitment to an
institution; or
b. there is undue risk that during the period of
probation the offender will commit another
crime; or
c. probation will depreciate the seriousness of
the offense committed.
THOSE DISQUALIFIED FROM
PROBATION
Sec. 9. Disqualified Offenders. — The benefits
of this Decree shall not be extended to those:
a. sentenced to serve a maximum term of
imprisonment of more than six (6) 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 six (6) months
and one (1) day and/or a fine of more than
one thousand pesos (P1,000.00);
d. who have been once on probation under the
provisions of this Decree; and
e. who are already serving sentence at the time
the substantive provisions of this Decree
became applicable pursuant to Section 33
hereof. [Probation Law, as amended by RA
10707]
Sec. 24. Non-Applicability of the Probation
Law for Drug Traffickers and Pushers. – Any
person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
under this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed
by the Court, cannot avail of the privilege granted
by the Probation Law or Presidential Decree No.
968, as amended. [Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
of 2002]
PERIOD OF PROBATION [SEC. 14]
When sentenced to Probation shall not
imprisonment of not exceed 2 years
more than 1 year
When sentenced to Shall not exceed 6 years
more than 1 year
When sentenced to a Shall be twice the total
fine and made to suffer days of subsidiary
subsidiary imprisonment
imprisonment
ARREST OF PROBATION [SEC. 15]
Sec. 15. Arrest of Probationer; Subsequent
Disposition.- At any time during probation, the
court may issue a warrant for the arrest of a
probationer for any serious violation of the
conditions of the pardon. The probationer, once
arrested and detained, shall immediately be
brought before the court for a hearing of the
violation charged. The defendant may be
admitted to bail pending such hearing. In such
case, the provisions regarding release on bail of
persons charged with a crime shall be applicable to
probationers arrested under this provision.
In the hearing, which shall be summary in nature,
the probationer shall have the right to be informed
of the violation charged and to adduce evidence in
his favor. The court shall not be bound by the
technical rules of evidence but may inform itself
of all facts which are material and relevant to
ascertain the veracity of the charge. The State
shall be represented by a prosecuting officer in any
contested hearing. If the violation is established,
the court may revoke or continue his probation
and modify the conditions thereof. If revoked,
the court shall order the probationer to serve
the sentence originally imposed. An order
revoking the grant of probation or modifying the
terms and conditions thereof shall not be
appealable.
TERMINATION OF PROBATION [SEC. 16]
Sec. 16. Termination of Probation. — 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 probationer upon finding that he has fulfilled
Page 111 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
the terms and conditions of his probation and
thereupon the case is deemed terminated.
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 probation was granted.
The probationer and the probation officer shall
each be furnished with a copy of such order.
Termination of period not the same as expiration
of probation period
Probation is not coterminous with its period. There
must first be issued by the court, an order of final
discharge based on the report and recommendation
of the probation officer. Only from such issuance can
the case of the probationer be deemed terminated.
[Bala v. Martinez (1990)]
c. Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act
(RA 9344, as amended)
Development of a comprehensive juvenile
intervention program per LGU
1. A comprehensive juvenile intervention program
covering at least a 3-year period shall be instituted
in LGUs from the barangay to the provincial
level.
2. The LGUs shall set aside an amount necessary to
implement their respective juvenile intervention
programs in their annual budget.
3. The LGUs, in coordination with the LCPC, shall
call on all sectors concerned to participate in the
planning process and implementation of juvenile
intervention programs. The implementation of
the comprehensive juvenile intervention
program shall be reviewed and assessed annually
by the LGUs in coordination with the LCPC.
Results of the assessment shall be submitted by
the provincial and city governments to the JJWC
not later than March 30 of every year. [Sec. 18,
RA9344]
Community-based programs on juvenile justice
and welfare
Community-based programs on juvenile justice and
welfare shall be instituted by the LGUs through the
LCPC, school, youth organizations and other
concerned agencies.
The LGUs shall provide community –based services
which respond to the special needs, problems,
interests and concerns of children and which offer
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
appropriate counselling and guidance to them and
their families.
These programs shall consist of three levels
1. Primary intervention includes general measures
to promote social justice and equal opportunity,
which tackle perceived root causes of offending;
2. Secondary intervention includes measures to
assist children at risk; and
3. Tertiary intervention includes measures to avoid
unnecessary contact with the formal justice
system and other measures to prevent re-
offending. [Sec. 19, RA 9344]
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 resulting to formal
court proceedings.
Diversion program
Refers to the program that the child in conflict with
the law is required to undergo after he/she is found
responsible for an offense without resorting to formal
court proceedings. [Sec. 4(j), RA 9344]
System of diversion [Sec. 23, RA 9344]
Children in conflict with the law shall undergo
diversion programs without undergoing court
proceedings subject to the conditions herein
provided:
1. Where the imposable penalty for the crime
committed is not more than six (6) years
imprisonment
• The law enforcement officer or Punong
Barangay, with the assistance of the local
social welfare and development officer or
other members of the LCPC, shall conduct
mediation, family conferencing and
conciliation
• Where appropriate, indigenous modes of
conflict resolution are adopted in accordance
with the best interest of the child with a view
to accomplishing the objectives of
restorative justice and the formulation of a
diversion program.
• The child and his/her family shall be present
in these activities.
2. In victimless crimes where the imposable penalty
is not more than six (6) years imprisonment
• The local social welfare and development
officer shall meet with the child and his/her
parents or guardians for the development of
Page 112 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
the appropriate diversion and rehabilitation
program, in coordination with the BCPC;
3. Where the imposable penalty for the crime
committed exceeds six (6) years imprisonment
Diversion measures may be resorted to only by
the court.
Treatment of child below age of responsibility
[Sec. 20, RA 9344]
If it has been determined that the child taken into
custody is fifteen (15) years old or below, the authority
which will have an initial contact with the child has
the duty to:
1. Immediately release the child to the custody of
his/her parents or guardian, or in the absence
thereof, the child’s nearest relative.
2. Shall give notice to the local social welfare and
development officer who will determine the
appropriate programs in consultation with the
child and to the person having custody over the
child.
3. If the parents, guardians or nearest relatives
cannot be located, or if they refuse to take
custody, the child may be released to any of the
following:
a. a duly registered nongovernmental or
religious organization;
b. a barangay official or a member of the
Barangay Council for the Protection of
Children (BCPC);
c. a local social welfare and development
officer; or when and where appropriate, the
DSWD.
If the child referred to herein has been found by the
Local Social Welfare and Development Office to be
abandoned, neglected or abused by his parents, or in
the event that the parents will not comply with the
prevention program, the proper petition for
involuntary commitment shall be filed by the DSWD
or the Local Social Welfare and Development Office
pursuant to Presidential Decree No. 603.
DETERMINATION OF AGE [SEC. 7, RA
9344]
Presumption
There is a presumption of minority. S/he shall enjoy
all the rights of a child in conflict with the law until
s/he is proven to be 18 years old or older.
People v. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641 (2009):
When accused appellant testified on March 14,
2002, he admitted that he was 24 years old, which
means that in 1996, he was 18 years of age. As
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

found by the trial court, the rape incident could

have taken place “in any month and date in the year PD 603, AS AMENDED, AND RA 9344,
1996.” Since the prosecution was not able to prove DISTINGUISHED.
the exact date and time when the rape was
committed, it is not certain that the crime of rape 1. Minimum age of criminal responsibility
was committed on or after he reached 18 years of
age in 1996. PD 603 RA 9344
Sec. 189. EXEMPT
In assessing the attendance of the mitigating circumstance of from criminal Child 15 years of age or
minority, all doubts should be resolved in favor of the liability: under shall be exempt
accused, it being more beneficial to the latter. In fact, in 1. Child 9 years of age from criminal liability,
several cases, this Court has appreciated this or under at time of regardless of whether or
circumstance on the basis of a lone declaration of commission of not s/he acted with
the accused regarding his age. offense discernment
2. 9 ≤ Age of child at
Proof time of commission (HOWEVER: child is
The age of the child shall be determined according to of offense ≤ 15 subject to intervention
the rules established by Section 5 of RA 9344: (UNLESS s/he acted program)
1. Best evidence is an original or certified true copy with discernment)
of certificate of live birth
2. In its absence, similar authentic documents such 2. Discernment
as baptismal certificates and school records
showing the date of birth may be used Discernment
3. In the absence of documents under 1 and 2 due Mental capacity to understand the difference between
to loss, destruction or unavailability, the right and wrong as determined by the child’s
testimony of the child, a member of the family appearance, attitude, comportment and behavior not
related by affinity or consanguinity, of other only before and during the commission of the offense
persons, the physical appearance of the child, or but also after and during the trial. It is manifested
other relevant evidence shall suffice. through:
a. Manner of committing crime
The person alleging the age of the child in conflict b. Conduct of the offender
with the law has the burden to prove such age. In all
cases involving a child, the court shall make a Discernment and intent, distinguished
categorical finding as to the age of the child. [Section 6] Intent is design, or determination to do certain things.
Discernment is mental capacity to understand the
Offenses not applicable to children under Sec. 58 difference between right and wrong.
of RA 9344
Persons below eighteen (18) years of age shall be Hence a person may not intend to shoot another but
exempt from prosecution for the crime of: may be aware of the consequences of his negligent act
1. vagrancy and prostitution under Section 202 of which may cause injury to the same person in
the Revised Penal Code, negligently handling an air rifle. [Guevarra v. Almodovar,
2. mendicancy under Presidential Decree No. 1563, G.R. No. 75256 (1989]
and PD 603 RA 9344
3. sniffing of rugby under Presidential Decree No. Child over 9 years and
1619, under 15 years of age
who acted w/ Child above 15 years
Such prosecution being inconsistent with the United discernment – court but below 18 years of
Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. shall determine age who acted with
However, said persons shall undergo appropriate imposable penalty, discernment shall be
counseling and treatment program. including any civil subjected to the
liability chargeable appropriate
against him. proceedings in
accordance with the
However, instead of Act.
pronouncing judgment
of conviction, the court

Page 113 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

PD 603 RA 9344 PD 603 RA 9344

may suspend all considering the various
further proceedings circumstances of the
and shall commit such child, the court shall
minor to the custody or impose the appropriate
care of the DSWD or to disposition measures as
any training institution provided in the
operated by the Supreme Court Rule on
government, or duly Juveniles in Conflict
licensed agencies or any with the Law. (Sec. 38)
other responsible
person, until he shall If the accused is already beyond 21 at the time of
have reached 21 years of his conviction
age or, for a shorter Suspension of sentence no longer avails when the age
period as the court may of the accused is more than 21 years old by the time
deem proper. [Secs. 189 of the pronouncement of his guilt. The court must
and 192] render judgment. He nonetheless may avail of sec. 51
of RA 9344. [People v Gambao, G.R. No. 172705
3. Suspension of sentence (2013)]
PD 603 RA 9344
No automatic Suspension of sentence Discharge of the Child in Conflict with the Law
suspension of sentence. is automatic. [sec. 39, RA 9344]
The youthful offender Upon the recommendation of the social worker who
should apply for a Once the child under 18 has custody of the child, the court shall dismiss the
suspended sentence and is found guilty of the case against the child whose sentence has been
it is discretionary on the offense charged, the suspended and against whom disposition measures
court to approve the court shall determine have been issued, and shall order the final discharge
application. The order and ascertain any civil of the child if it finds that the objective of the
of the court denying an liability. disposition measures have been fulfilled.
application for
suspension of sentence However, instead of The discharge of the child in conflict with the law
shall not be appealable. pronouncing the shall not affect the civil liability resulting from the
(Sec. judgment of conviction, commission of the offense, which shall be enforced
193) the court shall place the in accordance with law.
child in conflict with
law under suspended Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to
sentence, without need Court [sec. 40, RA 9344]
of application. If the court finds that the objective of the disposition
measures imposed upon the child in conflict with the
Suspension of sentence law have not been fulfilled, or if the child in conflict
shall be applied even if with the law has willfully failed to comply with the
the juvenile is already 18 conditions of his/her disposition or rehabilitation
years of age or more at program, the child in conflict with the law shall be
the time of the brought before the court for execution of judgment.
pronouncement of
his/her guilt. (Sec. 38, Agricultural Camps and other Training Facilities
RA 9344) [Sec. 51, RA 9344]
A child in conflict with the law may, after conviction
The suspension of and upon order of the court, be made to serve his/her
sentence lasts only until sentence, in lieu of confinement in a regular penal
the child in conflict with institution, in an agricultural camp and other training
law reaches the facilities that may be established, maintained,
maximum age of 21. supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in
coordination with the DSWD.
Upon suspension of
sentence and after

Page 114 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

People v. Gamboa, supra.: As regards the Payment of his civil

appellant’s possible confinement in an agricultural or pecuniary
camp or other training facility in accordance with liabilities shall not be
Section 51 of R.A. 9344, this Court held in People v. suspended.
Jacinto that the age of the child in conflict with
the law at the time of the promulgation of the b. Minors
judgment is not material. What matters is that
the offender committed the offense when he/she See minority as exempting circumstance and as privileged
was still of tender age. mitigating circumstance. Take note of the definition of
“diversion.”

10. Suspension in Case of Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002.

Insanity or Minority Sec. 66. Suspension of Sentence of a First-
Time Minor Offender. – An accused who is over
fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the
a. Insane commission of the offense mentioned in Section
11 of this Act, but not more than eighteen (18)
Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and years of age at the time when judgment should
service of the penalties in case of insanity. - have been promulgated after having been found
When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile guilty of said offense, may be given the benefits of
after final sentence has been pronounced, the a suspended sentence, subject to the following
execution of said sentence shall be suspended only conditions:
with regard to the personal penalty, the provisions a. He/she has not been previously convicted of
of the second paragraph of circumstance number violating any provision of this Act, or of the
1 of Article 12 being observed in the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as amended; or
corresponding cases. of the Revised Penal Code; or of any special
penal laws;
If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, b. He/she has not been previously committed to
his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty a Center or to the care of a DOH-accredited
shall have prescribed in accordance with the physician; and
provisions of this Code. c. The Board favorably recommends that
The respective provisions of this section shall also his/her sentence be suspended.
be observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs
while the convict is serving his sentence. While under suspended sentence, he/she shall be
under the supervision and rehabilitative
When an accused becomes insane surveillance of the Board, under such conditions
At the time of the He is exempt from that the court may impose for a period ranging
commission of the criminal liability. from six (6) months to eighteen (18) months.
crime
The Court shall Upon recommendation of the Board, the court
suspend the may commit the accused under suspended
proceedings and order sentence to a Center, or to the care of a DOH-
At the time of the trial accredited physician for at least six (6) months,
his confinement in a
hospital until he with after-care and follow-up program for not
recovers his reason. more than eighteen (18) months.
Execution is suspended
with regard to the In the case of minors under fifteen (15) years of
personal penalty only. age at the time of the commission of any offense
If he recovers his penalized under this Act, Article 192 of
At the time of final Presidential Decree No. 603, otherwise known as
reason, his sentence
judgment or while the Child and Youth Welfare Code, as amended by
shall be executed,
serving sentence Presidential Decree No. 1179 shall apply, without
unless the penalty has
prescribed. prejudice to the application of the provisions of
this Section.

Page 115 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Sec. 67. Discharge After Compliance with
Conditions of Suspended Sentence of a First-
Time Minor Offender. – If the accused first time
minor offender under suspended sentence
complies with the applicable rules and regulations
of the Board, including confinement in a Center,
the court, upon a favorable recommendation of
the Board for the final discharge of the accused,
shall discharge the accused and dismiss all
proceedings.
Upon the dismissal of the proceedings against the
accused, the court shall enter an order to expunge
all official records, other than the confidential
record to be retained by the DOJ relating to the
case. Such an order, which shall be kept
confidential, shall restore the accused to his/her
status prior to the case. He/she shall not be held
thereafter to be guilty of perjury or of concealment
or misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure
to acknowledge the case or recite any fact related
thereto in response to any inquiry made of him for
any purpose.
Sec. 68. Privilege of Suspended Sentence to be
Availed of Only Once by a First-Time Minor
Offender. – The privilege of suspended sentence
shall be availed of only once by an accused drug
dependent who is a first-time offender over fifteen
(15) years of age at the time of the commission of
the violation of Section 15 of this Act but not more
than eighteen (18) years of age at the time when
judgment should have been promulgated.
Sec. 69. Promulgation of Sentence for First-
Time Minor Offender. – If the accused first-time
minor offender violates any of the conditions of
his/her suspended sentence, the applicable rules
and regulations of the Board exercising
supervision and rehabilitative surveillance over
him, including the rules and regulations of the
Center should confinement be required, the court
shall pronounce judgment of conviction and
he/she shall serve sentence as any other convicted
person.
Sec. 70. Probation or Community Service for a
First-Time Minor Offender in Lieu of
Imprisonment. – Upon promulgation of the
sentence, the court may, in its discretion, place the
accused under probation, even if the sentence
provided under this Act is higher than that
provided under existing law on probation, or
impose community service in lieu of
imprisonment. In case of probation, the
Page 116 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
supervision and rehabilitative surveillance shall be
undertaken by the Board through the DOH in
coordination with the Board of Pardons and
Parole and the Probation Administration. Upon
compliance with the conditions of the probation,
the Board shall submit a written report to the court
recommending termination of probation and a
final discharge of the probationer, whereupon the
court shall issue such an order.
The community service shall be complied with
under conditions, time and place as may be
determined by the court in its discretion and upon
the recommendation of the Board and shall apply
only to violators of Section 15 of this Act. The
completion of the community service shall be
under the supervision and rehabilitative
surveillance of the Board during the period
required by the court. Thereafter, the Board shall
render a report on the manner of compliance of
said community service. The court in its discretion
may require extension of the community service or
order a final discharge.
In both cases, the judicial records shall be covered
by the provisions of Sections 60 and 64 of this Act.
If the sentence promulgated by the court requires
imprisonment, the period spent in the Center by
the accused during the suspended sentence period
shall be deducted from the sentence to be served.
Sec. 71. Records to be kept by the Department
of Justice. – The DOJ shall keep a confidential
record of the proceedings on suspension of
sentence and shall not be used for any purpose
other than to determine whether or not a person
accused under this Act is a first-time minor
offender
Sec. 98. Limited Applicability of the Revised
Penal Code. – Notwithstanding any law, rule or
regulation to the contrary, the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3814), as amended,
shall not apply to the provisions of this Act, except
in the case of minor offenders. Where the offender
is a minor, the penalty for acts punishable by life
imprisonment to death provided herein shall
be reclusion perpetua to death.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
E.Criminal and Civil
Liabilities
1. Extinction of Criminal
Liabilities
a. Total Extinction
1. By Prescription of Crime
Definition
The forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to
prosecute the offender, after the lapse of a certain
period of time.
General Rule: Prescription of the crime begins on the
day the crime was committed.
Exception: The "blameless ignorance" doctrine,
incorporated in Section 2 of Act No. 3326, under
which "the statute of limitations runs only upon
discovery of the fact of the invasion of a right which
will support a cause of action. The courts would
decline to apply the statute of limitations where the
plaintiff does not know or has no reasonable means
of knowing the existence of a cause of action." xxx
Thus, we held in a catena of cases, that if the violation
of the special law was not known at the time of its
commission, the prescription begins to run only from
the discovery thereof, i.e., discovery of the unlawful
nature of the constitutive act or acts. [Presidential Ad-
Hoc Fact Finding Committee on Behest Loans v. Ombudsman
Desierto, G. R. No. 130140 (2011)]
Recebido v. People, G.R. No. 141931 (2000):
While the defense of prescription of the crime was
raised only during the motion for reconsideration
of the decision of the Court of Appeals, there was
no waiver of the defense. Under the Rules of
Court, the failure of the accused to assert the
ground of extinction of the offense, inter alia, in a
motion to quash shall not be deemed a waiver of
such ground. The reason is that by prescription, the
State or the People loses the right to prosecute the
crime or to demand the service of the penalty
imposed. Accordingly, prescription, although not
invoked in the trial, may, as in this case, be invoked
on appeal. Hence, the failure to raise this defense
in the motion to quash the information does not
give rise to the waiver of the petitioner-accused to
raise the same anytime thereafter including during
appeal.
Page 117 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Prescription of crimes
Art. 90. Prescription of crime. - 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 correctional 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 crime of oral defamation and slander by
deed shall prescribe in six months.
Light offenses prescribe in two months.
When the penalty fixed by law is a 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. (As
amended by RA 4661, approved June 19, 1966).
Crime punishable by fines
Fine is afflictive 15 years
Fine is correctional 10 years
Fine is light 2 months
Notes:
a. Subsidiary penalty for nonpayment not considered
in determining the period
b. When fine is an alternative penalty higher than
the other penalty which is by imprisonment,
prescription of the crime is based on the fine.
Prescription for special laws and municipal
ordinances
a. 12 years = offenses punished by imprisonment
for six years and more
b. 8 years = offenses punished by imprisonment of
two years and more, but less than 6 years
c. 5 years = offenses under International Revenue
Law
d. 4 years = offenses punished by imprisonment for
more than one month, but less than two years
e. 1 year = offenses punished by a fine OR
imprisonment of not more than 1 month
f. 2 months = violations of municipal ordinances
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
g. 2 months = violations f regulations or conditions
of certificate of convenience by the Public
Service Commission
Note: Not applicable where the special law provides
for its own prescriptive period.
Computation of prescription of offenses (Art. 91)
a. Commences to run from the day on which the
crime is discovered by the offended party, the
authorities or their agents.
b. Interrupted by the filing of complaint or
information
c. It shall commence to run again when such
proceedings terminate without the accused being
convicted or acquitted, or unjustifiably stopped for any
reason not imputable to the accused.
d. (Note: Termination must be FINAL as to
amount to a jeopardy that would bar a
subsequent prosecution.)
e. The term of prescription shall not run when the
offender is absent from the Philippine archipelago.
f. For continuing crimes, prescriptive period
cannot begin to run because the crime does not
end.
2. By Prescription of Penalty
Definition
The loss or forfeiture of the right of the government
to execute the final sentence after the lapse of a
certain period of time.
Distinguished from prescription of crime
Prescription of crime is the forfeiture to prosecute a
crime; prescription of penalty is the forfeiture to
execute a sentence.
Prescriptive periods
Death and reclusion
20 years
perpetua
Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Correctional penalties 10 years
Note: If arresto mayor 5 years
Light penalties 1 year
Computation of prescription. [Art. 93]
a. Penalty is imposed by final judgment
b. Convict evaded service of sentence by escaping
during the term of his sentence
c. The convict who has escaped from 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
Page 118 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
d. The penalty has prescribed because of the lapse
of time from the date of the evasion of service of
the sentence by the convict.
Del Castillo v. Torrecampo, G.R. No. 139033
(2002): "Escape" in legal parlance and for
purposes of Articles 93 and 157 of the RPC means
unlawful departure of prisoner from the limits of
his custody. Clearly, one who has not been
committed to prison cannot be said to have
escaped therefrom.
When commenced
Period commences to run from the date when the
culprit evaded the service of sentence.
When interrupted
a. The convict gives himself up.
b. The convict is captured.
c. The convict goes to a foreign country with which
the Philippines has no extradition treaty.
d. The convict commits any crime before the
expiration of the period of prescription.
Question: What happens in cases where our
government has extradition treaty with another
country but the crime is not included in the treaty?
Answer: It would interrupt the running of the
prescriptive period.
Question: What is the effect of the acceptance of
the convict of a conditional pardon?
Answer: It would interrupt the running of the
prescriptive period.
Question: What happens if the culprit is captured
but he evades again the service of his sentence?
Answer: The period of prescription that ran during
the evasion is not forfeited. The period of
prescription that has run in his favor should be
taken into account.
3. By The Death of The Convict
Death of the accused pending appeal of his
conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as
the civil liability based solely thereon. However, the
claim of civil liability survives notwithstanding the
death of the accused, if the same may also be
predicated on a source of obligation other than delict,
such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-
delicts. [People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007 (1994)]
4. By Service of Sentence
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

such that there is no more service of sentence to

5. By Amnesty be executed. The pardon then shall be
understood as intended to erase the effects of
An act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or the conviction.
general pardon for a past offense. Erases not only the
conviction but the crime itself. 6. By Absolute Pardon
It is granted to classes of persons or communities who It is an act of grace, proceeding from the power
may be guilty of political offenses, generally before or entrusted with the execution of the laws. It exempts
after the institution of the criminal prosecution and the individual from the penalty of the crime he has
sometimes after conviction. [People v. Casido , G.R. No. committed.
116512 (1997)]
Monsanto v. Factoran, G.R. No. 78239 (1989):
Amnesty and absolute pardon, distinguished 1. Absolute pardon does not ipso facto entitle the
Amnesty Absolute pardon convict to reinstatement to the public office
Blanket pardon to forfeited by reason of his conviction.
classes of persons Includes any crime and 2. Although pardon restores his eligibility for
guilty of political is exercised individually appointment to that office, the pardoned convict
offenses must reapply for a new appointment.
May still be exercised
The person is already
before trial or Effects of pardon
convicted
investigation Art. 36. Pardon; its effect. - A pardon shall not
Looks forward. He is work the restoration of the right to hold public
relieved from the office, or the right of suffrage, unless such rights
Looks backward. It is consequences of the be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.
as if he has committed offense, but rights are
no offense. not restored unless A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from
explicitly provided by the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon
the terms of the pardon. him by the sentence.
Private act of the
Public act which the
President and must be Limitations on pardoning power
court shall take judicial
pleaded and proved by 1. That the power can be exercised only after
notice of
the person pardoned conviction.
Valid if given either
Valid only when there
before or after final Thus in applying for pardon, the convict must
is final judgment
judgment not appeal the judgment of conviction or the
appeal must be abandoned.
Recidivism
An offender who was convicted of rebellion, given 2. That such power does not extend to cases of
an amnesty, and who subsequently rebelled and impeachment. [Cristobal v. Labrador, G.R. No.
was convicted again is not a recidivist. He is not a 47941 (1940)]
recidivist because the amnesty granted to him
erased not only the conviction but also the effects Legislature cannot limit pardoning power
of the conviction itself. The pardoning power of the President cannot be
limited by legislative action. Article 36-41 only
Suppose, instead of amnesty, what was given was operates as a procedural proscription. [Risos-Vidal v.
absolute pardon, then years later, the offender was COMELEC, G.R. No. 206666 (2015)]
again captured and charged for rebellion, he was
convicted, is he a recidivist?

Generally, yes. Pardon, although absolute, does not

erase the effects of conviction. Pardon only
excuses the convict from serving the sentence.

The exception is when the pardon was granted

after the convict had already served the sentence

Page 119 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC
7. By the marriage of the offended
woman and the offender in the crimes
of rape, abduction, seduction and acts
of lasciviousness (art. 344)
People v. De Guzman, G.R. No. 185843 (2010):
In relation to Article 266-C of the RPC, Article 89
of the same Code reads:
ART. 89. How criminal liability is totally
extinguished. Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
xxxx
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as
provided in Article 344 of this Code.
Article 344 of the same Code also provides
ART. 344. Prosecution of the crimes of adultery,
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of
lasciviousness. x x x.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness, and rape, the marriage of the
offender with the offended party shall extinguish
the criminal action or remit the penalty already
imposed upon him. x x x.
On several occasions, we applied these provisions
to marriages contracted between the offender and
the offended party in the crime of rape, as well as
in the crime of abuse of chastity, to totally
extinguish the criminal liability of and the
corresponding penalty that may have been
imposed upon those found guilty of the felony.
Parenthetically, we would like to mention here that
prior to the case at bar, the last case bearing similar
circumstances was decided by this Court in 1974,
or around 36 years ago.
Based on the documents, including copies of
pictures taken after the ceremony and attached to
the motion, we find the marriage between
appellant and private complainant to have been
contracted validly, legally, and in good faith, as an
expression of their mutual love for each other and
their desire to establish a family of their
own. Given public policy considerations of respect
for the sanctity of marriage and the highest regard
for the solidarity of the family, we must accord
appellant the full benefits of Article 89, in relation
to Article 344 and Article 266-C of the RPC.
Pardon of offended party in offenses other than
those in art. 344
Only civil liability is extinguished. A crime committed
is an offense against the State. Only the Chief
Executive can pardon the offenders.
CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended
party. - A pardon of the offended party does not
extinguish criminal action except as provided in
Article 344 of this Code; but civil liability with
regard to the interest of the injured party is
extinguished by his express waiver.
b. Partial Extinction
1. By Conditional Pardon (Art. 95)
Conditions
If delivered and accepted, it is a contract between the
executive and the convict that the former will release
the latter upon compliance with the condition. One
usual condition is “not again violate any of the penal
laws of the country”.
Where are conditions stipulated
Pardon itself must explicitly impose. A “whereas” in
the preamble of the pardon stating that “Joseph
Ejercito Estrada has publicly committed to no longer
seek any elective position or office” does not make
the pardon conditional. [Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC,
supra.]
Art. 95. Obligation incurred by person granted
conditional pardon. - Any person who has been
granted conditional pardon shall incur the
obligation of complying strictly with the
conditions imposed therein otherwise, his non-
compliance with any of the conditions specified
shall result in the revocation of the pardon and the
provisions of Article 159 shall be applied to him.
2. By Commutation Of Sentence (Art. 96)
Art. 96. Effect of commutation of sentence. -
The commutation of the original sentence for
another of a different length and nature shall have
the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place
of the former.
3. For Good Conduct, Allowances which
The Culprit May Earn while He is
Serving Sentence (Art. 97)
Art. 97. Allowance for good conduct. - The
good conduct of any prisoner in any penal
institution shall entitle him to the following
deductions from the period of his sentence:
Page 120 of 310
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
1. During the first two years of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction
of five days for each month of good behavior;
2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
deduction of eight days for each month of
good behavior;
3. During the following years until the tenth year,
inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be
allowed a deduction of ten days for each
month of good behavior; and
4. During the eleventh and successive years of
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
deduction of fifteen days for each month of
good behaviour.
4. Special Time Allowance (Arts. 98-99)
Article 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. -
A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his
sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who,
having evaded the service of his sentence under the
circumstances mentioned in Article 58 of this
Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48
hours following the issuance of a proclamation
announcing the passing away of the calamity or
catastrophe to in said article.
Article 99. Who grants time allowances. -
Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of
Prisons shall grant allowances for good conduct.
Such allowances once granted shall not be
revoked.
5. By Parole
6. By Probation
c. Compromise and Affidavit of
Desistance
Trinidad v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 166038
(2007): Petitioner is charged for violating the Anti-
Graft and Corrupt Practices Act for knowingly
granting a license, permit, privilege, or benefit to an
unqualified person. Petitioner contends that
AEDC is barred from filing a criminal case against
him due to the dismissal previously by the RTC of
a civil case filed by AEDC. The case was dismissed
upon the parties’ joint motion with a mutual
quitclaim and waiver.
Held: It is a firmly recognized rule that criminal
liability cannot be the subject of a compromise. For
a criminal case is committed against the People,
Page 121 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
and the offended party may not waive or extinguish
the criminal liability the law imposes for its
commission. Compromise therefore is not one of
the grounds prescribed by the RPC for the
extinction of criminal liability.
People v. Orje, G.R. No. 189579 (2011): AAA
was the daughter of the accused. During trial, AAA
presented that she earlier executed an affidavit of
desistance in which she expressed desire to desist
from pursuing the sham case against her father.
She claims that her aunt compelled her to falsely
accuse her father of rape.
Held: Courts look with disfavor at affidavits of
desistance and/or retraction. Those can be easily
secured from poor or ignorant witnesses, usually
for monetary considerations or threats of violence.
There must be other circumstances which, when
coupled with the retraction or desistance, creates
doubts as to the truth of the testimony of the
plaintiff. In this case, there was overwhelming
proof that the father did in fact rape AAA on
multiple occasions.
d. Re-Election of Public Officer
Ombudsman v. CA and Binay, Jr., G.R. Nos.
217126-27 (2015): The SC abandoned the
condonation doctrine. The doctrine is bereft of
legal basis based on the 1987 Constitution and the
Local Government Code. Public office is a public
trust, and the corollary requirement of
accountability to the people at all times is
inconsistent with the idea that his past sins can be
wiped away by reelection.
2. Civil Liabilities in Criminal
Cases
a. General Rule
Relevant RPC provision
Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of
felony. - Every person criminally liable for a
felony is also civilly liable.
Basis
Chua v. CA, G.R. No. 150793 (2004)
Held: Generally, the basis of civil liability arising
from crime is the fundamental postulate that every
man criminally liable is also civilly liable. When a
person commits a crime he offends two entities
namely (1) the society in which he lives in or the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
political entity called the State whose law he has
violated; and (2) the individual member of the
society whose person, right, honor, chastity or
property has been actually or directly injured or
damaged by the same punishable act or omission.
An act or omission is felonious because it is
punishable by law, it gives rise to civil liability
not so much because it is a crime but because
it caused damage to another. Additionally,
what gives rise to the civil liability is really the
obligation and the moral duty of everyone to
repair or make whole the damage caused to
another by reason of his own act or omission,
whether done intentionally or negligently. The
indemnity which a person is sentenced to pay
forms an integral part of the penalty imposed by
law for the commission of the crime. The civil
action involves the civil liability arising from the
offense charged which includes restitution,
reparation of the damage caused, and
indemnification for consequential damages.
Effect of acquittal in criminal action
The court may acquit an accused on reasonable doubt
and still order payment of civil damages already
proved in the same case without need for a separate
civil action. The reason for this is that the accused has
already been accorded due process.
Exception:
1. When the defendant did not act with negligence;
2. facts from which the civil action might arise do
not exist (e.g., the defendant was acquitted
because he was not the perpetrator of the felony).
[Tolentino]
Test of negligence
People v. De Los Santos, G.R. No. 131588
(2001): The test for determining whether a person
is negligent in doing an act whereby injury or
damage results to the person or property of
another is this: Could a prudent man, in the
position of the person to whom negligence is
attributed, foresee harm to the person injured as a
reasonable consequence of the course actually
pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty on the actor
to refrain from that course or to take precautions
to guard against its mischievous results, and the
failure to do so constitutes negligence. Reasonable
foresight of harm, followed by the ignoring of the
admonition born of this prevision, is always
necessary before negligence can be held to exist.
Page 122 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Relevant Civil Code provisions
Art. 20, CC. Every person who, contrary to law,
wilfully or negligently causes damage to another,
shall indemnify the latter for the same.
Art. 1161, CC. Civil obligations arising from
criminal offenses shall be governed by the penal
laws, subject to the provisions of article 2177, and
of the pertinent provisions of Chapter 2,
Preliminary Title, on Human Relations, and of
Title XVIII of this Book, regulating damages.
Art. 2176, CC. Whoever by act or omission causes
damage to another, there being fault or negligence,
is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault
or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict
and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
Art. 2177, CC. Responsibility for fault or
negligence under the preceding article is entirely
separate and distinct from the civil liability arising
from negligence under the Penal Code. But the
plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the
same act or omission of the defendant.
Also see: Rule 111, 2000 Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Determination of civil liability, general rule and
exception
Civil liability arises from the commission of the
felony. It is determined in the criminal action except:
1. the offended party waives his right to file a civil
action
2. the offended party reserves his right to institute
it separately, or
3. the offended party institutes the civil action prior
to the criminal action.
Quinto v. Andres, G.R. No. 155791
(2005): When a criminal action is instituted, the
civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising
from the offense charged shall be deemed
instituted with the criminal action unless the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the
right to institute it separately or institutes the civil
action prior to the criminal action. With the
implied institution of the civil action in the criminal
action, the two actions are merged into one
composite proceeding, with the criminal
action predominating the civil.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Reservation of the right to file
A reservation of the right to file a separate civil action
only gives the party aggrieved the right to choose
under which body of laws he must bring the civil
action, either under the:
1. RPC – where the recovery may be defeated by
proof that the acts on which the action is based
do not exist, or
2. New Civil Code – where the same proof is
required to preclude recovery, or proof of
diligence in the selection and employment of the
employee.
No independent civil action
Commencement of criminal action is not a condition
precedent to the filing of civil action arising from a
crime. However, the civil action arising from crime
cannot be instituted when: (a) the criminal action has
already commenced, in which case the separate civil
action arising therefrom cannot be instituted until
final judgment of the criminal case; or (b) if the
criminal action is filed after the civil action, in which
case the latter shall be suspended at whatever stage
before judgment on the merits.
The rule is that when the criminal action is instituted,
a separate civil action cannot be instituted or if already
instituted, it is to be suspended. Said rule applies only
when the plaintiff in the civil action is the offended
party in the criminal action and both cases arise from
the same offense.
Exceptions
Independent civil actions may be filed for
1. Violations of fundamental rights (Art. 32)
2. Defamation, fraud and physical injuries (Art. 33)
3. Failure or refusal of a member of the police force
to render aid or protection to any person in case
of danger to life or property (Art. 34)
b. Special Cases
1. Insanity, imbecility, and those over 9
and below 15
General Rule: Exemption from criminal liability
does not include exemption from civil liability.
Exception: The only exceptions to this rule are: (a)
when the injury caused was by mere accident as
provided for in Art 12, paragraph 2; and (b) when the
civil liability was caused by the failure to perform an
act required by law when prevented by some lawful or
insuperable cause.
Page 123 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Civil liability of parents
A minor over 15 years of age who acts with
discernment is not exempt from criminal liability that
is why the RPC is silent as to the subsidiary liability of
his parents. The particular law that governs is Art.
2180 of the Civil Code which provides, “the father
and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother is
responsible for damages caused by the minor children
who live in their company.”
Civil liability of guardians
The persons having the insane or minor under their
legal authority or control are primarily liable to pay the
civil liability. If it is proven that there was no fault or
negligence on their part, those exempted from the
crime shall respond with their own property not
exempt from execution.
2. State of necessity
There is no civil liability in justifying circumstances
except in par. 4 of Art. 11 wherein the person who
was benefited by the act which causes damage to
another is the one civilly liable.
3. Irresistible force and uncontrollable
fear
The persons using violence or causing the fear are
primarily liable. If there be no such persons, those
doing the act shall be liable secondarily.
4. Innkeepers and similar persons
Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of
innkeepers, tavernkeepers and proprietors of
establishments. - In default of the persons
criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and
any other persons or corporations shall be civilly
liable for crimes committed in their
establishments, in all cases where a violation of
municipal ordinances or some general or special
police regulation shall have been committed by
them or their employees.
Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
within their houses from guests lodging therein, or
for the payment of the value thereof, provided that
such guests shall have notified in advance the
innkeeper himself, or the person representing him,
of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and
shall furthermore have followed the directions
which such innkeeper or his representative may
have given them with respect to the care and
vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
in case of robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons unless committed by the
innkeeper's employees.
Elements under Paragraph 1
a. That the innkeeper, tavernkeeper, or proprietor of
establishment or his employee committed a
violation of municipal ordinance or some general
or special police regulation.
b. That a crime is committed in such inn, tavern or
establishment.
c. That the person criminally liable is insolvent.
d. When all the above elements are present, the
innkeeper, tavernkeeper or any other person or
corporation is civilly liable for the crime
committed in his establishment.
Elements under Paragraph 2
a. The guests notified in advance the innkeeper or
the person representing him of the deposit of
their goods within the inn or house.
b. The guest followed the directions of the
innkeeper or his representative with respect to
the care of the vigilance over such goods.
c. Such goods of the guests lodging therein were
taken by robbery with force upon things or theft
committed within the inn or house.
When robbers are not the employees
The statement “No liability shall attach in case of
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons unless committed by the innkeeper's
employees” should be read together with art. 2001,
NCC. If there is robbery, the management should
prove that first that the robbery was done (a) with the
use of arms or (b) through irresistible force before the
establishment be exempted from civil liability.
Art. 2001, CC. The act of a thief or robber, who
has entered the hotel is not deemed force majeure,
unless it is done with the use of arms or through
an irresistible force.
5. Subsidiary Liability of Other Persons
Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other
persons. - The subsidiary liability established in
the next preceding article shall also apply to
employers, teachers, persons, and corporations
engaged in any kind of industry for felonies
committed by their servants, pupils, workmen,
apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their
duties.
Page 124 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
a. The employer, teacher, person or corporation is
engaged in any kind of industry.
b. Any of their servants, pupils, workmen,
apprentices or employees commits a felony while
in the discharge of his duties.
c. The said employee is insolvent and has not
satisfied his civil liability.
Subsidiary liability
Only arises after conviction of employee in the
criminal action. This can be enforced only upon a
motion for subsidiary writ of execution against the
employer and upon proof that the employee is
insolvent.
Proceeding for enforcement of subsidiary liability
and criminal action, considered together.
Vda. De Paman v. Señeris, G.R. No. L-37632
(1982)
Held: Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court
provides, however, that "when a criminal action is
instituted, the civil action for recovery of civil
liability arising from the offense charged is
impliedly instituted with the criminal action, unless
the offended party expressly waives the civil action
or reserves his right to institute it separately." That
means as if two actions are joined in one as twins,
each one complete with the same completeness as
any of the two normal persons composing the
twins. It means that the civil action may be tried
and prosecuted, with all the ancillary processes
provided by law. Said provision will be rendered
meaningless if the subsidiary civil liability is not
allowed to be enforced in the same proceeding.
In the case at bar, the apparent drawback in the
enforcement of the subsidiary liability in the same
criminal proceeding is the lack of due process to
the alleged employer. Not being a party to the case,
he is not heard as to whether he is indeed the
employer. To remedy the situation and thereby
afford due process to the alleged employer, this
Court directed the court a quo in Pajarito v.
Señeris (supra) to hear and decide in the same
proceeding the subsidiary liability of the alleged
owner and operator of the passenger bus. It was
explained therein that the proceeding for the
enforcement of the subsidiary liability may be
considered as part of the proceeding for the
execution of the judgment. A case in which an
execution has been issued is regarded as still
pending so that all proceedings on the execution
are proceedings in the suit.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Philippine Rabbit v. People, G.R. No. 147703
(2004)
Held: Only the civil liability of the accused arising
from the crime charged is deemed impliedly
instituted in a criminal action, that is, unless the
offended party waives the civil action, reserves the
right to institute it separately, or institutes it prior
to the criminal action. Hence, the subsidiary
civil liability of the employer under Article 103
of the Revised Penal Code may be enforced by
execution on the basis of the judgment of
conviction meted out to the employee.
What is deemed instituted in every criminal
prosecution is the civil liability arising from the
crime or delict per se (civil liability ex delicto), but
not those liabilities arising from quasi-delicts,
contracts or quasi-contracts. In fact, even if a civil
action is filed separately, the ex delicto civil liability
in the criminal prosecution remains, and the
offended party may -- subject to the control of the
prosecutor -- still intervene in the criminal action,
in order to protect the remaining civil interest
therein.
The cases dealing with the subsidiary liability of
employers uniformly declare that, strictly speaking,
they are not parties to the criminal cases
instituted against their employees. Although in
substance and in effect, they have an interest
therein, this fact should be viewed in the light of
their subsidiary liability. While they may assist
their employees to the extent of supplying the
latter’s lawyers, as in the present case, the
former cannot act independently on their own
behalf, but can only defend the accused.
Industry
Any department or branch of art, occupation or
business; especially, one which employs so much
labor and capital and is a distinct branch of trade.
[Telleria v. Garcia]
Other notes
a. Private persons without business or industry are
not subsidiarily liable, but may be primarily liable
under culpa aquiliana.
b. Employer has the right to take part in the defense
of his employee.
c. What Civil Liability Includes
Art. 104. What is included in civil liability. -
The civil liability established in Articles 100, 101,
102, and 103 of this Code includes:
Page 125 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Restitution;
2. Reparation of the damage caused;
3. Indemnification for consequential damages.
Art. 105. Restitution; How made. - The
restitution of the thing itself must be made
whenever possible, with allowance for any
deterioration, or diminution of value as
determined by the court.
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be
found in the possession of a third person who has
acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his
action against the proper person, who may be
liable to him.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which
the thing has been acquired by the third person in
the manner and under the requirements which, by
law, bar an action for its recovery.
Art. 106. Reparation; How made. - The court
shall determine the amount of damage, taking into
consideration the price of the thing, whenever
possible, and its special sentimental value to the
injured party, and reparation shall be made
accordingly.
Art. 107. Indemnification; What is included. -
Indemnification for consequential damages shall
include not only those caused the injured party, but
also those suffered by his family or by a third
person by reason of the crime.
Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration,
reparation for damages, or indemnification for
consequential damages and actions to
demand the same; Upon whom it devolves. -
The obligation to make restoration or reparation
for damages and indemnification for consequential
damages devolves upon the heirs of the person
liable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and
indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of
the person injured.
Art. 104 and Art. 38, distinguished
Civil liabilities Pecuniary liabilities
(Art. 104) (Art. 38)
Reparation, Reparation,
indemnification indemnification
Restitution NONE
Fine, costs of
NONE
proceedings
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
Restitution
Return of the VERY THING TAKEN. Further, if
taken thing is damaged, the court may order the
offender to pay amount representing deterioration.
Restitution should apply when OFFENSE is proven
even if accused is ACQUITTED.
If the possessor of lost property acquired it in
good faith in a PUBLIC SALE
The said property cannot be given to the offended
party/original owner without reimbursement to the
good-faith possessor.
Exceptions
1. Innocent purchaser for value of property covered
by a Torrens title
2. When a sale is authorized by the original owner
of the property.
3. When liability to return a thing arises from a
contract, not from a criminal act, the court
cannot order its return in the criminal case.
Reparations
Applies when restitution is not possible.
Computation
REPARATION = actual value of lost item which
cannot be recovered + sentimental value to
original owner
Indemnity distinguished from restitution
Restitution is crime against property; indemnity,
crime against persons.
When injuries are sustained
Actual damage from injuries = whatever he
spent to treat wounds + doctor’s fees + medicine
+ salary/wages unearned because of inability to
work + damages due to loss of limb/etc.
Lost earnings
People v. Wahiman, G.R. No. 200942 (2015):
Wahiman was convicted for murder. RTC imposed
upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua and
directed him to pay the heirs the sum of Php75,000
as moral damages, P75,000 as civil indemnity, and
actual damages as follows: Php59-million as lost
earning capacity, Php25,000 actual damages,
Php1,500 appearance fee, and Php50,000
attorney’s fee.
Held: Regarding the award for lost earnings, the
general rule is that there must be documentary
proof to support the indemnity for loss of earning
Page 126 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
capacity. Admittedly, there are exceptions to this
rule: (1) when the deceased is self-employed and
earning less than minimum wage or (2) deceased
was employed as a daily wage worker earning less
than minimum wage. Notably, this case does not
fall under these exceptions. Nevertheless, the
Court is inclined to award lost earnings to the
widow because she testified that deceased was the
manager of Stanfilco-Dole and was receiving a
monthly salary of Php95,000. This was not
objected to by the appellant during cross-
examination or appeal.
J. Leonen’s concurring opinion: The formula for lost
earnings is:
Net Earning Capacity = Life Expectancy ×
[Gross Annual Income – Reasonable and
Necessary Living Expenses]
The necessary living expense is often estimated at
50% of gross annual income.
The Regional Trial Court used a simplified formula
to compute for loss of earning capacity citing People
v. Reanzares.
Loss of Earning Capacity = [2/3 x (80 – age of
the deceased)] x 1/2 annual gross income
The simplification of the formula is correct.
However, the trial court’s computation was
erroneous.
This is a step-by-step guide to compute an award
for loss of earning capacity.
1. Subtract the age of the deceased from 80.
2. Multiply the answer in (1) by 2, and divide
it by 3 (these operations are
interchangeable).
3. Multiply 50% to the annual gross income
of the deceased.
4. Multiply the answer in (2) by the answer in
(3). This is the loss of earning capacity to
be awarded.
Temperate damages
Given when pecuniary losses were suffered but
amount cannot be proven with certainty. Also, when
income of victim is not sufficiently proven.
Moral damages
May be recovered in the following:
1. crime resulting to physical injuries
2. seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious
acts
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I
3. adultery/concubinage
4. illegal/arbitrary detention/arrest
5. illegal search
6. libel, slander, or any other form of defamation
7. malicious prosecution
For rape, moral damages may additionally be awarded
without need for pleading or proof of the basis
thereof.
Exemplary damages
Corrective damages are deterrent to serious
wrongdoings, and vindication of undue sufferings.
This is attendant with at LEAST ONE aggravating
circumstance. Or when crime is extremely
reprehensible or outrageous.
How to obtain
Plaintiff must first show he is entitled to moral,
temperate, or compensatory damages before
exemplary damages are awarded.
Attorney’s fees
When defendant’s act or omission has compelled the
plaintiff to litigate with third persons or incur
expenses to protect his interest.
Interest
6% per annum.
Heirs of Raymundo Castro v. Bustos, G.R. No.
L-25913 (1969):
When death occurs as a result of a crime, the heirs
of the deceased are entitled to the following items
of damages:
1. As indemnity for the death of the victim of
the offense — P12,000.00, without the need
of any evidence or proof of damages, and even
though there may have been mitigating
circumstances attending the commission of
the offense.
2. As indemnity for loss of earning capacity of
the deceased — an amount to be fixed by the
Court according to the circumstances of the
deceased related to his actual income at the
time of death and his probable life expectancy,
the said indemnity to be assessed and awarded
by the court as a matter of duty, unless the
deceased had no earning capacity at said time
on account of permanent disability not caused
by the accused. If the deceased was obliged to
give support, under Art. 291, Civil Code, the
recipient who is not an heir, may demand
support from the accused for not more than
five years, the exact duration to be fixed by the
court.
Page 127 of 310
CRIMINAL LAW
3. As moral damages for mental anguish, — an
amount to be fixed by the court. This may be
recovered even by the illegitimate descendants
and ascendants of the deceased.
4. As exemplary damages, when the crime is
attended by one or more aggravating
circumstances, — an amount to be fixed in the
discretion of the court, the same to be
considered separate from fines.
5. As attorney's fees and expresses of
litigation, — the actual amount thereof, (but
only when a separate civil action to recover
civil liability has been filed or when exemplary
damages are awarded).
6. Interests in the proper cases.
It must be emphasized that the indemnities for loss
of earning capacity of the deceased and for moral
damages are recoverable separately from and in
addition to the fixed sum of P12,000.00
corresponding to the indemnity for the sole fact of
death, and that these damages may, however, be
respectively increased or lessened according to the
mitigating or aggravating circumstances, except
items 1 and 4 above, for obvious reasons.
People v. Oandasan, G.R. No. 194605
(2016): Following People v. Jugueta, in the case of
murder where the appropriate penalty is reclusion
perpetna, the Court has thereby fixed P75,000.00
for moral damages, P75,000.00 for exemplary
damages, and P75,000.00 for civil indemnity as the
essential civil liabilities,- in addition to others as the
records of each case will substantiate. Incidentally,
the civil indemnity for homicide remained pegged
at P50,000.00 for almost two decades.
Also in accordance with People v. Jugueta,
supra, temperate damages of P50,000.00 should
further be granted to the heirs of the victims
considering that they were presumed to have spent
for the interment of each of the deceased.
d. Persons Civilly Liable
Art. 108. Obligation to make restoration,
reparation for damages, or indemnification for
consequential damages and actions to
demand the same; Upon whom it devolves. -
The obligation to make restoration or reparation
for damages and indemnification for consequential
damages devolves upon the heirs of the person
liable.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW I CRIMINAL LAW

The action to demand restoration, reparation, and

indemnification likewise descends to the heirs of
the person injured.
Art. 109. Share of each person civilly liable. - If
there are two or more persons civilly liable for a
felony, the courts shall determine the amount for
which each must respond.
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of
principals, accomplices and accessories of a
felony; Preference in payment. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of the next
preceding article, the principals, accomplices, and
accessories, each within their respective class, shall
be liable severally (in solidum) among themselves
for their quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the
other persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first
against the property of the principals; next, against
that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that of
the accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary
liability has been enforced, the person by whom
payment has been made shall have a right of action
against the others for the amount of their
respective shares.
Art. 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. -
Except in case of extinction of his civil liability as
provided in the next preceding article the offender
shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil
liability resulting from the crime committed by
him, notwithstanding the fact that he has served
his sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or
other rights, or has not been required to serve the
same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation
of sentence or any other reason.
Art. 1231, CC. Obligations are extinguished:
1. By payment or performance;
2. By the loss of the thing due;
3. By the condonation or remission of the debt;
4. By the confusion or merger of the rights of
creditor and debtor;
5. By compensation;
6. By novation.
Loss of the thing due
Loss of the thing due does not extinguish civil liability
because if the offender cannot make restitution, he is
obliged to make reparation.

Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in

certain cases. - Any person who has participated
gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be
bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent
to the extent of such participation.

Notes on RPC art. 108

1. The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if
restoration is not possible and the deceased left
no property.
2. Civil liability is possible only when the offender
dies after final judgment.
3. The action to demand restoration, reparation and
indemnification descends to the heirs of the
person injured.

e. Extinction of Civil Liability

Pertinent RPC provisions

Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. - Civil

liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and
103 of this Code shall be extinguished in the same
manner as obligations, in accordance with the
provisions of the Civil Law.

Page 128 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

CRIMINAL LAW II
Criminal Law

Page 129 of 310

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
II. REVISED PENAL
CODE (BOOK II)
A. Title I. Crimes against
National Security and the
Law of Nations
Crimes against National Security:
1. Art. 114: Treason
2. Art. 115: Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit
Treason
3. Art. 116: Misprision of Treason
4. Art. 117: Espionage
Crimes against the Law of Nations
1. Art. 118: Inciting to War or Giving Motives for
Reprisals
2. Art. 119: Violation of Neutrality
3. Art. 120: Correspondence with Hostile Country
4. Art. 121: Flight to Enemy’s Country
5. Art. 122: Piracy in General and Mutiny on the
High Seas or in Philippine Waters
6. Art. 123: Qualified Piracy
The crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if
the criminal act or acts were committed outside of
Philippine territorial jurisdiction.
This is one of the instances where the RPC may be
given extraterritorial application under Article 2 (5)
thereof. However, prosecution can proceed only if
the offender is:
1. within Philippine territory, or
2. brought to the Philippines pursuant to an
extradition treaty.
Crimes against national security can be tried only
in the Philippines, as there is a need to bring the
offender here before he can be made to suffer the
consequences of the law.
In the case of crimes against the law of nations, the
offender can be prosecuted wherever he may be
found because the crimes are regarded as committed
against humanity in general. However if they are to be
charged with violations of any or more of Arts. 118 to
123, their prosecution should be in the Philippines. A
distinction should be made between criminal liability
and prosecution. In the first, criminal liability attaches
even if the act was committed outside of the
Philippine territory while in the second, prosecution
should necessarily be before Philippine courts. The
second involves the matter of jurisdiction.
Page 130 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
The acts against national security may be committed
abroad and still be punishable under our law.
General rule: Almost all of these are crimes committed
only in times of war.
Exceptions: The following can be committed in times
of peace:
1. Espionage [Art 117] – This is also covered by
Commonwealth Act No. 616 which punishes
conspiracy to commit espionage.
2. Inciting to War or Giving Motives for Reprisals
[Art 118] – This can be committed even if the
Philippines is not a participant.
3. Violation of Neutrality [Art. 119] – The
Philippines is not a party to an on-going war.
1. Crimes against National
Security
a. Art. 114-Treason
Mode 1: Levying War
Elements:
1. Offender is a Filipino or resident alien
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
3. The offender levies war against the government
Mode 2: Adherence to the Enemy and Giving of
Aid or Comfort
Elements:
1. Offender is a Filipino or resident alien
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
3. That the offender adheres to the enemies, giving
them aid or comfort
Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government,
committed by a person who owes allegiance to it. It
cannot be committed in times of peace. There are two
ways of committing treason:
1. By levying war against the Government; and
2. By adhering to the enemies of the Philippines,
giving them aid or comfort. [Reyes]
Allegiance
This is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which
the individuals owe to the government under which
they live or to their sovereign, in return for the
protection they receive. [Reyes, citing 52 Am. Jur. 797]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
It can be either permanent or temporary. Permanent
allegiance consists in the obligation of fidelity and
obedience which a citizen or subject owes to his
government or sovereign. Temporary allegiance is the
obligation of fidelity and obedience which a residen
alien owes to his government. [Laurel v. Misa, G.R.
No. L-409 (1947)]
Extent of Aid or Comfort
To be treasonous, the extent of aid and comfort given
to the enemies must be to render assistance to them
as enemies and not as individuals, in the furtherance
of the enemies’ hostile designs. [People v. Perez, G.R.
No. L-856 (1949)]
Intent of disloyalty is a vital ingredient in the crime of
treason, which in the absence of admission may be
gathered from the nature and circumstances of each
particular case. [People v. Perez, supra.]
Mode 1: Levying War
There must be an actual assembling of men. The mere
acceptance of the commission from the secretary of
war of the Katipunan by the accused, nothing else
having been done, was not an overt act of treason
within the meaning of the law. [U.S. v. De los Reyes,
G.R. No. 1434 (1904)]
The levying of war must be directed against the
government. It must be with intent to overthrow the
government as such, not merely to resist a particular
statute or to repel a particular officer. [Reyes, citing 3
Wharton’s Criminal Law, 12th Ed.]
The levying of war must be in collaboration with a
foreign enemy. If the levying of war is merely a civil
uprising, without any intention of helping an external
enemy, the crime is not treason. The offenders maybe
held liable for rebellion under Article 135 in relation
to Article 134 of the RPC. [Reyes]
Mode 2: Adherence to the Enemy
Adherence and giving aid or comfort to the enemy
must concur. Adherence to the enemy means an
intent to betray. There is adherence to the enemy
when a citizen intellectually or emotionally favors the
enemy and harbors sympathies or convictions disloyal
to his own country’s policy or interest. Aid or
comfort means an act which strengthens or tends to
strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war against
the traitor’s country and an act which weakens or
tends to weaken the power of the traitor’s country to
resist or to attack the enemy. [Cramer v. US, 65 Sup.
Ct. 918 (1945)]
Page 131 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
When there is no adherence to the enemy, the act
which may do aid or comfort to the enemy does not
amount to treason. [Reyes]
The aid and comfort must be given to the enemy by
some kind of action. It must be a deed or physical
activity, not merely a mental operation. What aid and
comfort constitute treason must depend upon their
nature, degree, and purpose. It is not essential that the
effort to aid be successful, provided that over acts are
done, which, if successful, would advance the interest
of the enemy. [Reyes]
Examples of Specific Acts of Aid or Comfort
Constituting Treason
1. Serving as informer and active member of the
Japanese Military Police, arresting guerilla
suspects to suppress the underground movement
[People v. Fernando, G.R. No. L-1138 (1947)]
2. Serving in the Japanese Army as agent or spy and
participating in the raid of guerrilla hideout [People
v. Muñoz, G.R. L-880 (1947)]
3. Acting as “finger woman” when a barrio was
“zonified” by the Japanese, pointing out to the
Japanese several men whom she accused as
guerrillas [People v. Nuñez, G.R. No. L-2321
(1950)]
4. Taking active part in the mass killing of civilians
by the Japanese soldiers by personally tying the
hands of the victims [People v. Canibas, G.R. No.
L-2193 (1950)]
5. Mere fact of having joined a Makapili
organization is evidence of both adherence to the
enemy and giving him aid and comfort. Unless
forced upon one against his will, membership in
the Makapili organization imports treasonable
intent, considering the purpose for which the
organization was created [People v. Adriano, G.R.
No. L-477 (1947)]
Acts not constituting treason
1. “Commandeering" of women to satisfy the lust
of Japanese officers or men or to enliven the
entertainments held in their honor, even though
the women and the entertainments helped to
make life more pleasant for the enemies and
boost their spirit. Sexual and social relations with
the Japanese did not directly and materially tend
to improve their war efforts or to weaken the
power of the US. [People v. Perez, supra.]
2. Acceptance of public office and discharge of
official duties under the enemy [People v. Sison,
P.C. 42 O.G. 748]
The overt act of aid and comfort to the enemy must
be intentional, as distinguished from merely negligent
or undesigned ones. [Cramer v. US, supra.]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
General Rule: When the killings and other common
crimes are charged as overt acts of treason, they
cannot be regarded: (a) as separate crimes, or (b) as
complexed with treason.
Exception: But this rule would not preclude the
punishment of murder or other common crimes as
such, if the prosecution should elect to prosecute the
culprit specifically for these crimes, instead of relying
on them as an element of treason. [People v. Prieto,
G.R. No. L-399 (1948)]
Treason by a Filipino citizen can be committed
outside of the Philippines.
Treason by an alien must be committed in the
Philippines.
The crime of treason is of such a nature that it may be
committed by one single act, by a series of acts, or by
several series thereof, not only in a single time, but in
different times, it being a continuous crime. [People v.
Victoria, G.R. No. L-369 (1947)]
There is no treason through negligence. The overt act
of aid and comfort to the enemy must be intentional.
[Cramer v. US, supra.]
Two Ways of Proving Treason
1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to the same
overt act; or
2. Confession of accused in open court. [Art. 114,
par.2, RPC]
The Two-Witness Rule
The testimony of two witnesses is required to prove
the overt act of giving aid or comfort, but it is not
necessary to prove adherence. Each of the witnesses
must testify to the whole overt act; or if it is separable,
there must be two witnesses to each part of the overt
act. [People v. Escleto, G.R. No. L-1006 (1949)]
Membership as a Makapili, as an overt act, must be
established by the deposition of two witnesses. Where
two or more witnesses give oaths to an overt act and
only one of them is believed by the court or jury, the
defendant is entitled to discharge. [People v. Adriano,
supra.]
Adherence may be proved:
1. By one witness;
2. From the nature of the act itself; or
3. From the circumstances surrounding the act.
Adherence need not be proven by two witness
testimonies. It may be inferred from one witness, or
Page 132 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
from the nature of the act itself or other
circumstances. [People v. Adriano, supra]
Aggravating Circumstance in treason
✓ Cruelty and ignominy
 Evident premeditation – since adherence
and the giving of aid and comfort to the enemy is
usually a long continued process requiring reflective
and persistent determination and planning [People v.
Racaza, supra.]
 Superior strength & treachery – since they
are inherent in treason [People v. Adlawan, G.R. No. L-
456 (1949)]
 Treachery, aid of armed persons to insure or
afford impunity, and deliberately augmenting the
crimes by causing other wrongs not necessary in the
commission thereof – since they are inherent in the
crime of treason [People v. Victoria, supra.]
Suspended Allegiance and Change of
Sovereignty
These defenses are not accepted because:
1. A citizen owes an absolute and permanent
allegiance to his Government;
2. The sovereignty of the Government is not
transferred to the enemy by mere occupation;
3. The subsistence of the sovereignty of the
legitimate Government in a territory occupied by
the military forces of the enemy during the war is
one of the rules of International Law; and
4. What is suspended is the exercise of the rights of
sovereignty. [Laurel v. Misa, supra.]
In addition to the defense of duress or uncontrollable
fear, lawful obedience to a de facto Government is a
good defense in treason. The Philippine Executive
Commission, as well as the Republic established by
the Japanese occupation army in the Philippines, had
all the characteristics of a de facto Government. [Go
Kim Cham v. Valdez, G.R. No. L-5 (1945)]
Defense of loss of citizenship by joining the army of
the enemy is not valid. The accused cannot divest
himself of his Philippine citizenship by the simple
expedient of accepting a commission in the military,
naval or air service of such country. If his contention
is sustained, his very crime would be the shield that
would protect him from punishment. [People v.
Manayao, G.R. No. L-322 (1947)]
b. Article 115 – Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Treason
Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. At least two persons come to an agreement to
a. Levy war against the government; or
b. Adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort
3. They decide to commit it
Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
2. At least one person decides to –
a. Levy war against the government; or
b. Adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or
comfort
3. That person proposes its execution to other
persons
General rule: Conspiracy and proposal to commit a
felony is not punishable under Article 8.
Exception: Under Article 115, mere conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason is punishable. This is
because, in treason, the very existence of the state is
endangered. [Reyes]
The two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason because this is a separate
and distinct offense from that of treason. [US v.
Bautista, G.R. No. L-2189 (1906)]
c. Article 116 – Misprision of
Treason
Elements:
1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, and
is not a foreigner
2. He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit
treason against the government
3. He conceals or does not disclose and make
known the same as soon as possible to the
governor or fiscal of the province in which he
resides, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which
he resides
This is a crime that may be committed only by citizens
of the Philippines. It cannot be committed by a
resident alien.
Essence: There are persons who conspire to commit
treason and the offender knew this and failed to make
the necessary report to the government within the
earliest possible time.
Article 116 does not apply when the crime of treason
is already committed by someone and the accused
does not report its commission to the proper
authority. The provision only speaks of “knowledge
Page 133 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
of any conspiracy against” the Government of the
Philippines, not knowledge of treason actually
committed by another. In the latter case, the
implication is that the government is already aware of
it.
The offender in misprision of treason is punished as
an accessory to treason. Note that Article 116 does
not provide for a penalty. However, the offender is a
principal in the crime of misprision of treason.
Blood relationship is always subservient to national
security. Article 20 of the RPC regarding accessories
who are exempt from criminal liability does not apply
in this case because persons found liable for this crime
are not considered accessories, but as principals.
Article 116 is an exception to the rule that mere
silence does not make a person criminally liable. [US
v. Caballeros, G.R. No. 1352 (1905)]
d. Article 117 – Espionage
Mode 1: By entering, without authority therefor,
a warship, fort, or naval or military establishment
or reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photographs, or other data of a confidential
nature relative to the defense of the Philippines
Elements:
1. Offender enters a warship, fort, or naval or
military establishment or reservation;
2. He has no authority therefor;
3. His purpose is to obtain information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential
nature relative to the defense of the Philippines.
Mode 2: Disclosing by public officer of
confidential information to a foreign
representative
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he has in his possession the articles, data or
information of a confidential nature relative to
the defense of the Philippines, by reason of the
public office he holds;
3. That he discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
Under paragraph 1, the offender may be any person,
but under paragraph 2, the offender must be a public
officer who has in his possession the information by
reason of the public office he holds.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
To be liable under paragraph 1, the offender must
have the intention to obtain information relative to
the defense of the Philippines. It is not necessary that
the information is obtained. It is sufficient that the
offender has the purpose to obtain such.
Espionage Treason
Not conditioned on the Not conditioned on the
citizenship of the citizenship of the
offender offender
May be committed both
Committed only in times
in times of war and in
of war
times of peace
Limited only to two ways
of committing the crime:
May be committed in
levying of war and
many ways
adhering to the enemy
giving him aid or comfort
Commonwealth act NO. 616
An Act to Punish Espionage and Other Offenses
against the National Security
[Note: Not in 2018 Bar Syllabus]
Punishable Acts
Sec. 1. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting to be
obtained information affecting national defense.
— photograph, photographic negative, blue print,
(a) going upon, entering, flying over, or
otherwise obtaining information concerning any
vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval
station, submarine base, coaling station, fort,
battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad,
arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone,
wireless, or signal station, building, office, or other
place connected with the national defense, xxx or
any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms,
munitions, or other materials or instruments for
the use in time of war are being made, prepared,
repaired, or stored, for the purposes of obtaining
information respecting the national defense with
intent or reason to believe that the information to
be obtained is to be used to the injury of the
Philippines or of the United States, or to the
advantage of any foreign nation
(b) copying, taking, making, or obtaining, or
attempting, or inducing or aiding another to copy,
take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph,
photographic negative, blue print, plan, map,
model, instrument, appliance, document, writing,
or note of anything connected with the national
defense for the same purpose and with like intent
as in paragraph (a)
(c) receiving or obtaining or agreeing or
attempting or inducing or aiding another to
Page 134 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
receive or obtain from any person, or from any
source whatever, any document, writing, code
book, signal book, sketch, photograph,
photographic negative, blue print, plan, map,
model, instrument, appliance, or note of anything
connected with the national defense, knowing or
having reason to believe, at the time he receives or
obtains, or agrees or attempts or induces or aids
another to receive or obtain it, that it has been or
will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by
any person contrary to the provisions of this Act;
or
(d) wilfully communicating or transmitting or
attempting to communicate or transmit any
document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch,
photograph, photographic negative, blue print,
plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note
relating to the national defense to any person not
entitled to receive it, or wilfully retaining the same
and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or
employee of the Philippines or of the United States
entitled to receive it; the offender having lawful or
unlawful possession of, access to, control over, or
being intrusted with the same; or
(e) permitting, through gross negligence, to be
removed from its proper place of custody or
delivered to anyone in violation of this trust or to
be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed any
document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch,
plan, map, model, note or information, relating to
the national defense, the offender being intrusted
with or having lawful possession or control of the
same
Sec. 2. Unlawful disclosing information affecting
national defense. —
(a) communicating, delivering, or
transmitting, or attempting to, or aiding or
inducing another to, communicate, deliver,
or transmit to any foreign government, or any
faction or party or military or naval force
within a foreign country, whether recognized
or unrecognized by the Philippines, or to any
representative, officer, agent, employee,
subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or
indirectly, any document, writing, code book,
signal book, sketch, photograph,
photographic negative, blue print, plan, map,
model, instrument, appliance, or information
relating to the national defense, with the intent
or reason to believe that it is to be used to the
injury of the Philippines or to the advantage of
a foreign nation
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
*Punishable by death or imprisonment for not
more than 30 years, if committed in time of war.
(b) in time of war, by collecting, recording,
publishing, or communicating, or
attempting to elicit any information with
respect to the movement, number,
description, condition, or disposition of any of
the armed forces, ships, aircraft, or war
materials of the Philippines, or with respect to
the plans or conduct, or supposed plans or
conduct of any military, naval, or air
operations, or with respect to any works or
measures undertaken for or connected with,
or intended for the fortification or defense of
any place, or any other information relating to
the public defense which might be useful to
the enemy
Sec. 3. Disloyal acts or works in time of peace. —
It shall be unlawful for any person, with intent to
interfere with, impair, or influence the loyalty,
morale, or discipline of the military, naval, or air
forces of the Philippines
(a) advising, counseling, urging, or in any
manner causinginsubordination, disloyalty,
mutiny, or refusal of duty by any member of
the military, naval, or air forces of the
Philippines or of the United States; or
(b) distributing any written or printed matter
which advises, counsels, or urges
insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal
of duty by any member of the military, naval,
or air forces of the Philippines.
Sec. 4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war. —
wilfully making or conveying false reports or false
statements with the intent to interfere with the
operation or success of the military, naval, or air
forces of the Philippines, or
To promote the success of its enemies, by wilfully
causing or attempting to cause insubordination,
disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military,
naval, or air forces of the Philippines, or
Willfully obstructing the recruiting or enlistment
service of the Philippines to the injury of the
service of the Philippines
Sec. 5. Conspiracy to violate preceding sections. —
(1) two or more persons conspire to violate the
provisions of sections 1, 2, 3, or 4 of this Act, (2)
one or more of such persons does any act to effect
the object of the conspiracy
Each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be
punished for the doing of the act the
Page 135 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
accomplishment of which is the object of such
conspiracy.
Section 6. Harboring or concealing violators of the
law. — harboring or concealing any person who he
knows, or has reasonable ground to believe or
suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an
offense under this Act.
Other Acts
(a) Making any photograph, sketch, picture,
drawing, map, or graphical representation of
vital military, naval, and air installations or
equipment of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines without first obtaining permission
of the commanding officer[Sec. 8]
(b) Using or permitting or procuring the use of an
aircraft for the purpose of making a
photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or
graphical representation of vital military, naval
or air installations or equipment, in violation
of Sec. 8 [Sec. 9]
(c) Reproducing, publishing, selling, etc.,
uncensored copies any photograph, sketch,
picture, drawing, map or graphical
representation of the vital military, naval, or air
installations or equipment so defined, without
first obtaining permission of the commanding
officer [Sec. 10]
(d) Destroying or injuring or attempting to injure
or destroy war material in time of war [Sec. 11]
(e) Making or causing war material to be made in
defective manner when the Philippines is at
war [Sec. 12]
(f) Injuring or destroying national defense
material, premises, or utilities [Sec. 13]
(g) Making or causing to be made in a defective
manner, or attempting to make or cause to be
made in a defective manner, national defense
material [Sec. 14]
2. Crimes against the Law of
Nations
a. Article 118 – Inciting to War or
Giving Motives for Reprisals
Elements:
1. Offender performs unlawful or unauthorized
acts
2. The acts provoke or give occasion for
a. A war involving or liable to involve the
Philippines; or
b. Exposure of Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
This crime is committed in times of peace.
The intention of the offender is immaterial. The law
considers the effects produced by the acts of the
accused. [Reyes]
Examples: The public destruction of the flag or seal
of a foreign state or the public manifestations of
hostility to the head or ambassador of another state.
b. Article 119 – Violation of
Neutrality
Elements
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is not
involved
2. There is a regulation issued by a competent
authority to enforce neutrality
3. Offender violates the regulation
Neutrality
This is defined as a nation or power which takes no
part in a contest of arms going on between other
countries.
c. Article 120 – Correspondence
with Hostile Country
Elements:
1. It is a time of war in which the Philippines is
involved
2. Offender makes correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by enemy troops
3. The correspondence is either –
a. Prohibited by the government, or
b. Carried on in ciphers or conventional signs,
or
c. Containing notice or information which
might be useful to the enemy.
Correspondence
This is communication by means of letters which pass
between those who have friendly or business
relations.
Even if the correspondence contains innocent
matters, if the correspondence has been prohibited by
the Government, it is punishable.
Prohibition by the Government is not essential in
instances (b) and (c).
Qualifying Circumstances under Instance (c)
The following must concur:
Page 136 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
1. That the notice or information might be useful to
the enemy, and
2. That the offender intended to aid the enemy.
If the offender intended to aid the enemy by giving
such notice or information, the crime amounts to
treason; hence, the penalty is the same as that for
treason. [Reyes]
d. Article 121 – Flight to Enemy's
Country
Elements:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved
2. Offender must be owing allegiance to the
government
3. Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country
4. Going to the enemy country is prohibited by
competent authority
An alien resident may be guilty of flight to enemy
country. The law does not say “not being a foreigner.”
Hence, the allegiance contemplated in this article is
either natural or temporary allegiance. [Reyes]
Mere attempt to flee or to go to enemy country when
prohibited by competent authority consummates the
felony. [Reyes]
e. Article 122 – Piracy in General
and Mutiny on the High Seas or
in Philippine Waters
Elements:
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters
2. Offenders are neither members of its
complement nor passengers of the vessel
3. Offenders either –
a. Attack or seize that vessel; or
b. Seize the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its
complement or passengers
4. There is intent to gain
High Seas
This term refers to the parts of the seas that are not
included in the exclusive economic zone, in the
territorial seas, or in the internal waters of a state, or
in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic state.
[Convention on the Law of the Sea]
Piracy
This is robbery or forcible depredation on the high
seas, without lawful authority and done with animo
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

furandi and in the spirit and intention of universal punished in accordance with the Revised Penal
hostility. [People v. Lol-lo and Saraw, G.R. No. 17958 Code.
(1922)]
This provision of PD No. 532 with respect to
Jurisdiction piracy in Philippine waters has not been
The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes has incorporated into the RPC. Neither may it be
no territorial limits. Pirates are in law hostes humani considered repealed by RA 7659 (An Act to
generis. Piracy is a crime not against any particular State Impose the Death Penalty on Certain Heinous
but against all mankind. It may be punished in the Crimes) since there is nothing in the amendatory
competent tribunal of any country where the offender lawwhich is inconsistent with said section.
may be found or into which he may be carried. [People
v. Lol-lo and Saraw, supra.] REPUBLIC ACT 9372
An Act to Secure the State and Protect Our
Mutiny People from Terrorism (Human Security Act of
This is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer, or 2007)
the raising of commotions and disturbances on board
a ship against the authority of its commander. A person who commits an act punishable as piracy
and mutiny under Article 122 thereby sowing and
Mutiny is usually committed by the other members of creating a condition of widespread and
the complement and may be committed by the extraordinary fear and panic among the populace,
passengers of the vessel. in order to coerce the government to give in to an
unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
Piracy Mutiny terrorism.
Persons who attack the Persons who attack the
vessel or seize its cargo vessel or seize its cargo f. Article 123 – Qualified Piracy
are strangers to said are members of the crew
vessels or passengers Elements:
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters
Intent to gain is not
2. Offenders are neither members of its
essential. The offenders
complement, or passengers of the vessel
may only intend to ignore
Intent to gain is essential 3. Offenders either –
the ship’s officers or they
a. Attack or seize the vessel; or
may be prompted by a
b. Seize the whole or part of its cargo, its
desire to commit plunder.
equipment, or personal belongings of its
crew or passengers
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 532 4. The preceding were committed under any of the
Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of following circumstances:
1974 a. Whenever they have seized a vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same;
Abetting Piracy b. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their
In Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 532, the act victims without means of saving themselves;
of aiding pirates or abetting piracy is penalized as a or
crime distinct from piracy. c. Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape
Said section penalizes any person who knowingly
and in any manner aids or protects pirates, such as Paragraph 2 (Item 2 in letter D) specifically mentions
giving them information about the movement of “pirates” thereby excluding mutineers from said
the police or other peace officers of the paragraph. It would seem, however, that it should be
government, or acquires or receives property taken in paragraph 1 (Item 1 in letter D) where the word
by such pirates, or in any manner derives any “pirates” should be specifically mentioned and not in
benefit therefrom; or who directly or indirectly paragraph 2, because in paragraph 1, the mutineers,
abets the commission of piracy. being already in the vessel, cannot seize the vessel by
boarding or firing upon the same. [Reyes]
Also, the offender shall be considered as an
accomplice of the principal offenders and Murder, rape, homicide, physical injuries are mere
circumstances qualifying piracy and cannot be

Page 137 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
punished as separate crimes, nor can they be
complexed with piracy.
PD NO. 532: ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-
HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF 1974
Punishable Acts
1. Piracy
Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the
taking away of the whole or part thereof or its
cargo, equipment, or the personal belongings of
its complement or passengers, irrespective of the
value thereof, by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things,
committed by any person, including a passenger
or member of the complement of said vessel, in
Philippine waters. [Sec 2(d), PD 532]
Philippine Waters
All bodies of water, such as but not limited to,
seas, gulfs, bays around, between and connecting
each of the Islands of the Philippine Archipelago,
irrespective of its depth, breadth, length or
dimension, and all other waters belonging to the
Philippines by historic or legal title, including
territorial sea, the sea-bed, the insular shelves,
and other submarine areas over which the
Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction[Sec
2(a), PD 532]
Vessel
Any vessel or watercraft used for transport of
passengers and cargo from one place to another
through Philippine Waters. It shall include all
kinds and types of vessels or boats used in fishing
[Sec 2(b), PD 532]
Penalty
Reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum
periods
Reclusion perpetua – if physical injuries or other
crimes are committed as a result or on the
occasion thereof
Death – if rape, murder or homicide is
committed as a result or on the occasion of
piracy, or when the offenders abandoned the
victims without means of saving themselves, or
when the seizure is accomplished by firing upon
or boarding a vessel [Sec 3(a), PD 532]
2. Highway Robbery/Brigandage
The seizure of any person for ransom, extortion
or other unlawful purposes, or the taking away
of the property of another by means of violence
Page 138 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
against or intimidation of person or force upon
things of other unlawful means, committed by
any person on any Philippine Highway. [Sec 2
(e),PD 532]
Philippine Highway
Any road, street, passage, highway and bridges
or other parts thereof, or railway or railroad
within the Philippines used by persons, or
vehicles, or locomotives or trains for the
movement or circulation of persons or
transportation of goods, articles, or property or
both [Sec 2 (c),PD 532]
Penalty
Reclusion temporal in its minimum period
Reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum
periods — If physical injuries or other crimes
are committed during or on the occasion of the
commission of robbery or brigandage
Death — If kidnapping for ransom or extortion,
or murder or homicide, or rape is committed as
a result or on the occasion thereof [Sec 3(b), PD
532]
3. Aiding pirates or highway robbers/brigands
or abetting piracy or highway
robbery/brigandage
a. Any person who knowingly and in any
manner aids or protects pirates or highway
robbers/brigands, such as giving them
information about the movement of police
or other peace officers of the government, or
b. Acquires or receives property taken by such
pirates or brigands or in any manner derives
any benefit therefrom; or
c. Any person who directly or indirectly abets
the commission of piracy or highway
robbery or brigandage
They shall be considered as an accomplice of the
principal offenders.
It shall be presumed that any person who does any of
the acts provided in this Section has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.[Sec 4,PD
532]
RA 6235: AN ACT PROHIBITING CERTAIN
ACTS INIMICAL TO CIVIL AVIATION, AND
OTHER PURPOSES (ANTI-HIJACKING
LAW)
PUNISHABLE ACTS
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
1. To compel a change in the course or
destination of an aircraft of Philippine
registry or to seize or usurp the control
thereof, while it is in flight.
An aircraft is in flight from the moment all its external
doors are closed following embarkation until any of
such doors is opened for disembarkation. [Sec 1,
RA 6235]
2. To compel an aircraft of foreign registry to
land in Philippine territory or to seize or
usurp the control thereof while it is within the
said territory. [Sec 1, RA 6235]
3. To ship, load or carry in any passenger
aircraft operating as a public utility within
the Philippines, an explosive, flammable,
corrosive or poisonous substance or
material. [Sec 3, RA 6235]
The offender may be a natural or juridical person.
The shipping, loading or carrying of any
substance or material mentioned in the preceding
section in any cargo aircraft operating as a public
utility within the Philippines shall be in
accordance with regulations issued by the Civil
Aeronautics Administration. [Sec 4, RA 6235]
PENALTY
Imprisonment of not less than 12 years but not more
than 20 years, or by a fine of not less than 20,000
pesos but not more than 40,000 pesos[Sec 2,
RA 6235]
The penalty of imprisonment of 15 years to death, or
a fine of not less than 25,000 pesos but not more than
50,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person
committing such violation under any of the following
circumstances:
1. Whenever he has fired upon the pilot, member of
the crew or passenger of the aircraft;
2. Whenever he has exploded or attempted to
explode any bomb or explosive to destroy the
aircraft; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, serious physical injuries or rape.[Sec
2,RA 6235]
RA 9372: AN ACT TO SECURE THE STATE
AND PROTECT OUR PEOPLE FROM
TERRORISM (HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF
2007)
TERRORISM
Page 139 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
1. Offender commits an act punishable under any
of the following provisions of the Revised Penal
Code:
a. Art. 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the
High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
b. Art.134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
c. Art. 134-a (Coup d’état), including acts
committed by private persons;
d. Art. 248 (Murder);
e. Art. 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
f. Art. 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction),
or under
a. P.D. No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
b. R.A. No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act
of 1990);
c. R.A. No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory
and Liability Act of 1968);
d. R.A. No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
e. Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy
and Anti-highway Robbery Law of 1974);
and,
f. P.D. No. 1866, as amended (Decree
Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms,
Ammunitions or Explosives)
2. Thereby sowing and creating a condition of
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace
3. In order to coerce the government to give in to
an unlawful demand[Sec 3, RA 9372]
Penalty
Forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the benefit
of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103,
otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law,
as amended [Sec 3, RA 9372]
Who Are Liable
1. Conspirator – Persons who conspire to commit
the crime of terrorism shall suffer the penalty of
forty (40) years of imprisonment.
There is conspiracy when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the
commission of the crime of terrorism as defined
in Section 3 hereof and decide to commit the
same.[Sec 4, RA 9372]
2. Accomplice – Any person who, not being a
principal under Art. 17 of the Revised Penal Code
or a conspirator as defined in Section 4 hereof,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
cooperates in the execution of either the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism by
previous or simultaneous acts shall suffer the
penalty of from seventeen (17) years, four (4)
months one day to twenty (20) years of
imprisonment. [Sec 5, RA 9372]
3. Accessory – Any person who, having knowledge
of the commission of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, and without
having participated therein, either as principal or
accomplice under Art.17 and 18 of the RPC takes
part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manner:
a. by profiting himself or assisting the offender
to profit by the effects of the crime;
b. by concealing or destroying the body of the
crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof,
in order to prevent its discovery;
c. by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
escape of the principal or conspirator of the
crime, shall suffer the penalty of ten (10)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment. [Sec 6, RA 9372]
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the penalties
prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon
those who are such with respect to their spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
within the same degrees, with the single exception of
accessories falling within the provisions of
subparagraph (a). [Sec 6, RA 9372]
Double Jeopardy
When a person has been prosecuted under a
provision of this Act, upon a valid complaint or
information or other formal charge sufficient in form
and substance to sustain a conviction and after the
accused had pleaded to the charge, the acquittal of the
accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to
another prosecution for any offense or felony which
is necessarily included in the offense charged under
this Act. [Sec 49, RA 9372]
Page 140 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
B. Title II. Crimes against
Fundamental Laws of the
State
1. Art. 124: Arbitrary Detention
2. Art. 125: Delay in the Delivery Of Detained
Persons to the Proper Judicial Authorities
3. Art. 126: Delaying Release
4. Art. 127: Expulsion
5. Art. 128: Violation of Domicile
6. Art.129: Search Warrants Maliciously Obtained
and Abuse in the Service of those Legally
Obtained
7. Art. 130: Searching Domicile Without Witnesses
8. Art. 131: Prohibition, Interruption and
Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
9. Art. 132: Interruption of Religious Worship
10. Art. 133: Offending the Religious Feelings
Crimes under this title are those that violate certain
provisions of the Bill of Rights.
All offenses under this title can only be committed by
public officers; except offending the religious feelings
under Article 133, which can also be committed by a
private person.
A private person may be liable under these articles
only when he:
1. Conspires with a public officer; or
2. He becomes an accomplice or accessory to said
crimes.
1. Article 124 – Arbitrary
Detention
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He detains a person
c. Detention is without a legal ground
The crime of Arbitrary Detention assumes several
forms:
a. Detaining a person without legal grounds [Article
124];
b. Having arrested the offended party for legal
grounds but without warrant of arrest, and the
public officer does not deliver the arrested
person to the proper judicial authority within the
period of 12, 18, or 36 hours, as the case may be
[Article 125]; or
c. Delaying release by competent authority with the
same period mentioned in number 2 [Article 126].
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Detention
This refers to the actual confinement of a person in
an enclosure, or in any manner detaining and
depriving him of his liberty.
The detention of a person is without legal ground:
a. when he has not committed any crime or, at least,
there is no reasonable ground for suspicion that
he has committed a crime, or
b. when he is not suffering from violent insanity or
any other ailment requiring compulsory
confinement in a hospital.
A public officer is deemed such when he is acting
within the bounds of his official authority or function.
If the offender falsely imputes a crime against a
person to be able to arrest him and appear not
determined to file a charge against him, the crime is
arbitrary detention through unlawful arrest. [Boado]
In a case where a DENR team was invited to a
mayor’s house from 5:30pm to 2:30am for dinner and
drinks, the mayor was absolved of the charges of
Arbitrary Detention. The determinative factor in
Arbitrary Detention, in the absence of actual physical
restraint, is fear. No record on evidence showed that
the mayor instilled fear into the minds of the DENR
team while they were in the Mayor’s house. [Astorga v.
People, G.R. No. 154130 (2004)]

A police officer who employs force in excess of what
is necessary is acting outside the bounds of his duties
and is considered acting in his private capacity. [Boado]
Although the offender must be a public officer in the
crime of arbitrary detention, not all public officers can
commit it. Only those public officers whose official
duties carry with it the authority to make an arrest and
detain persons can be guilty of this crime.
In a case decided by the Supreme Court, a Barangay
Chairman who unlawfully detains another was held to
be guilty of the crime of arbitrary detention. This is
because he is a person in authority vested with
jurisdiction to maintain peace and order within his
barangay. [Milo v. Salanga, G.R. No L-37007 (1987)]
There must be an actual restraint of liberty of the
offended party.
The crime committed is only grave or light threats if
the offended party may still go to the place where he
wants to go, even though there have been warnings.
Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of arbitrary
detention.
Sec. 5, Rule 113. Arrest without warrant; when
lawful. — A peace officer or a private person may,
without a warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be arrested
has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed, and
he has probable cause to believe based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the
person to be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner
who has escaped from a penal establishment or
place where he is serving final judgment or is
temporarily confined while his case is pending, or
has escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another.
In cases falling under paragraph (a) and (b) above,
the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or
jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance
with section 7 of Rule 112.

Difference between Arbitrary Detention, Illegal Detention and Unlawful Arrest

Arbitrary Detention
Public officer who has authority 2.
Offender to make arrests and detain
persons
Violate the offended party’s
Criminal
constitutional freedom against
Intent
warrantless arrest
Illegal Detention Unlawful Arrest
1. Private person; or
Public officer who is acting
in a private capacity or Any person
beyond the scope of his
official duty
Accuse the offended party of a
crime he did not commit, deliver
Deprive the offended party of his
him to the proper authority, and
personal liberty
file the necessary charges to
incriminate him

Page 141 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Article 125 – Delay in the
Delivery of Detained Persons
to the Proper Judicial
Authorities
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He detains a person for some legal ground
c. He fails to deliver such person to the proper
judicial authorities within –
1. 12 hours for light penalties
2. 18 hours for correctional penalties
3. 36 hours for afflictive or capital penalties
This is applicable only when the arrest is without a
warrant, but the arrest must be lawful.
At the beginning, the detention is legal since it is in
the pursuance of a lawful arrest. Detention becomes
arbitrary when the:
a. Applicable period lapses
b. Without the arresting officer filing a formal
charge with the proper court.
The periods stated are counted only when the
prosecutor’s office is ready to receive the complaint
or information. Nighttime is not included in the
period.
Delivery
This means the filing of correct information with the
proper court. It may also mean constructive delivery
or the turning over the person arrested to the
jurisdiction of the court. The purpose is to determine
whether the offense is bailable or not. Upon delivery,
the court acquires jurisdiction to issue an order of
release or of commitment of prisoner. [Sayo v. Chief of
Police, G.R. No. L-2128 (1948)]
The elements of custodial investigation are:
a. The suspect is deprived of liberty in any
significant manner;
b. The interrogation is initiated by law enforcement
authorities;
c. The interrogation is inculpatory in character.
[People v. Tan, G.R. No. 117321 (1998)]
Where the invitation comes from a powerful group
composed predominantly of ranking military officers
and the designated interrogation site is a military
camp, the same can be easily taken not as a strictly
voluntary invitation. It is an authoritative command
Page 142 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
that one can only defy at one’s peril. [Sanchez v.
Demetriou, G.R. Nos. 111771-77 (1993)]
Where a judge is not available, the arresting officer is
duty-bound to release a detained person, if the
maximum hours for detention provided under Article
125 of the Revised Penal Code had already expired.
[Albior v. Auguis, A.M. No. P-01-1472 (2003)]
Waiver of the Provisions of Article 125
Before the complaint or information is filed, the
person arrested may ask for a preliminary
investigation in accordance with Rule 112 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, but he must
sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the
RPC in the presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding
the waiver, he may apply for bail and the investigation
must be terminated within fifteen days from its
inception. [par. 2, Sec. 7, Rule 112]
3. Article 126 – Delaying
Release
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. There is a:
1. Judicial or executive order for the release of a
prisoner or detention prisoner, or
2. A proceeding upon a petition for the liberation of
such person
c. Offender without good reason delays –
1. The service of the notice of such order to the
prisoner
2. The performance of such judicial or
executive order for the release of the
prisoner; or
3. The proceedings upon a petition for the
release of such person
Wardens and jailers are the public officers most likely
to violate Article 126.
4. Article 127 – Expulsion
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He either –
1. Expels any person from the Philippines; or
2. Compels a person to change residence
c. Offender is not authorized to do so by law
The city mayor of Manila committed the crime of
expulsion when he ordered certain prostitutes to be
transferred to Davao WITHOUT observing due
process since they have not been charged with any
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
crime. [Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L-14639
(1919)]
5. Article 128 – Violation of
Domicile
Acts punished:
a. Entering any dwelling against the will of the
owner thereof
b. Searching papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner, or
c. Refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after
having been required to leave the same
Elements common to the three acts:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He is not authorized by judicial order –
1. To enter the dwelling;
2. To make a search therein for papers or other
effects; or
3. He refuses to leave, after having surreptitiously
entered such dwelling and having been
required to leave the same.
Qualifying circumstances:
a. Nighttime
b. Papers or effects not constituting evidence of a
crime are not returned immediately after the
search made by the offender
Rule 113: A public officer who breaks into the
premises incurs no liability when aperson to be
arrested enters said premises and closes it thereafter,
provided that the officer first gives a notice of arrest.
According to People v. Doria [G.R. No. 125299 (1999)]
and People v. Elamparo [G.R. No. 121572 (2000)], the
following are the accepted exceptions to the warrant
requirement:
a. Search incidental to an arrest;
b. Search of moving vehicles;
c. Evidence in plain view;
d. Stop and frisk;
e. Customs searches; and
f. Consented warrantless search.
[M]ere suspicion or a hunch will not validate a "stop
and frisk." A genuine reason must exist, in light of the
police officer's experience and surrounding
conditions, to warrant the belief that the person
detained has weapons concealed about him.
A "stop-and-frisk" serves a two-fold interest:
a. The general interest of effective crime prevention
and detection, which underlies the recognition
Page 143 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
that a police officer may, under appropriate
circumstances and in an appropriate manner,
approach a person for purposes of investigating
possible criminal behavior even without probable
cause; and
b. The more pressing interest of safety and self-
preservation which permit the police officer to
take steps to assure himself that the person with
whom he deals is not armed with a deadly
weapon that could unexpectedly and fatally be
used against the police officer. [Malacat v. CA,
G.R. No. 123595 (1997)]
“Against the will” means that the offender ignored
the prohibition of the owner which may be express or
implied as when the door is closed even though not
locked. [Boado]
The offender must be a public officer or employee. If
the offender is a private individual then the crime is
trespass to dwelling under Article 280.
6. Article 129 – Search Warrants
Maliciously Obtained, and
Abuse in the Service of
Those Legally Obtained
Procuring a search warrant without just cause:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He procures a search warrant
c. There is no just cause
Exceeding authority or using unnecessary
severity in executing a search warrant legally
procured:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He has legally procured a search warrant
c. He exceeds his authority or uses unnecessary
severity in executing the same
7. Article 130 – Searching
Domicile without Witnesses
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He is armed with search warrant legally procured
c. He searches the domicile, papers or other
belongings of any person
d. The owner, or any members of his family, or two
witnesses residing in the same locality are not
present
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
To “search” means to go over or look through for
the purpose of finding something; to examine. Note
that it must be done to a person’s domicile, papers, or
other belongings only. [Reyes]
Rule 126: Search and Seizure
A search warrant is an order in writing:
a. Signed by a judge
b. Directed to a peace officer, commanding him to
search for personal property described therein
and bring it before the court
Requisites for issuing a search warrant:
a. Probable cause, in connection with one specific
offense, to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of
the complainant and the witness he may produce
b. Particular description of:
1. Place to be searched; and
2. Things to be seized which may be anywhere
in the Philippines
An officer may break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house or any part of a house or anything
therein when these circumstances concur:
a. He is refused admittance to the place of directed
search;
b. His purpose is to execute the warrant to liberate
himself or any person lawfully aiding him when
unlawfully detained therein; and
c. He has given notice of his purpose and authority.
The warrant must direct that it be served in the
daytime. However, it can be served at any time of the
day or night when the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to
be searched.
A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days from
its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
The officer seizing the property under the warrant
must give a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful
occupantof the premises in whose presence the
search and seizure were made.
In the absence of such occupant, the officer must:
a. Leave a receipt in the place in which he found the
seized property;
b. In the presence of at least two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality.
Page 144 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
8. Article 131 – Prohibition,
Interruption and Dissolution
of Peaceful Meetings
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. He performs any of the following acts:
1. Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal
ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or
by dissolving the same
2. Hindering any person from joining any
lawful association, or from attending any of
its meetings
3. Prohibiting or hindering any person from
addressing, either alone or together with
others, any petition to the authorities for the
correction of abuses or redress of grievances
The government has a right to require a permit before
any gathering can be made. However, the
government only has regulatory, not prohibitory,
powers with regard to such requirement.
The permit should state the day, time, and place of
the gathering.
If the permit is denied arbitrarily, OR the officer
dictates the place where the meeting is to be held, this
article is violated.
If in the course of the assembly, which started out
peacefully, the participants committed illegal acts like
oral defamation or inciting to sedition, a public officer
or law enforcer can stop or dissolve the meeting.
Two criteria to determine whether this article would
be violated:
a. Dangerous tendency rule – applied during
times of national unrest such as to prevent coup
d’état.
b. Clear and present danger rule – applied during
times of peace. Stricter rule.
9. Article 132 – Interruption of
Religious Worship
Elements:
a. Offender is a public officer or employee
b. Religious ceremonies or manifestations of any
religion are about to take place or are going on
c. Offender prevents or disturbs the same
Qualifying circumstance: if the crime is committed
with violence or threats.
U.P. LAW BOC
10. Article 133 – Offending the
Religious Feelings
Elements:
a. Acts complained of were performed
1. in a place devoted to religious worship, or
2. during the celebration of any religious
ceremony
b. The acts must be notoriously offensive to the
feelings of the faithful
In the phrase “in a place devoted to religious
worship,” it is not necessary that there is a religious
ceremony going on when the offender performs acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
The phrase “during the celebration” is separated by
the word “or” from the phrase “place devoted to
religious worship,” which indicates that the “religious
ceremony” need not be celebrated in a place of
worship. [Reyes]
An act is notoriously offensive to the religious
feelings when a person:
a. Ridicules or makes light of anything
constituting religious dogma
b. Works or scoffs at anything devoted to religious
ceremonies
c. Plays with or damages or destroys any object
of veneration of the faithful
Whether or not an act is offensive to the religious
feelings is a question of fact which must be adjudged
only according to the feelings of the Catholics and not
those of other faithful ones. [People v. Baes, G.R. No.
L-46000 (1939)]
Laurel Dissent in People v. Baes: Offense to
religious feelings should not be made to depend upon
the more or less broad or narrow conception of any
given particular religion, but should be gauged having
in view the nature of the acts committed and after
scrutiny of all the facts and circumstance which
should be viewed through the mirror of an unbiased
judicial criterion. [Note: This later became the majority
decision in People v. Tengson, (CA) 67 O.G. 1552
(1971)]
The crime is only unjust vexation when the act is not
directed at the religious belief itself and there is no intention
of causing so serious a disturbance as to interrupt a
religious ceremony. [People v. Nanoy, 69 O.G. 8043
(1975)]
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
RA 9372: AN ACT TO SECURE THE STATE
AND PROTECT OUR PEOPLE FROM
TERRORISM (HUMAN SECURITY ACT OF
2007)
Note: RA 9372 was specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus)
Period of Detention
Period of Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest
The provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal
Code to the contrary notwithstanding, any police or
law enforcement personnel, who, having been duly
authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council
has taken custody of a person charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or the crime of
conspiracy to commit terrorism shall, without
incurring any criminal liability for delay in the delivery
of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities,
deliver said charged or suspected person to the proper
judicial authority within a period of three (3) days
counted from the moment the said charged or
suspected person has been apprehended or arrested,
detained, and taken into custody by the said police, or
law enforcement personnel: Provided, That the arrest
of those suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism must result from the
surveillance under Section 7 and examination of bank
deposits under Section 27 of this Act.
The police or law enforcement personnel concerned
shall, before detaining the person suspected of the
crime of terrorism, present him or her before any
judge at the latter’s residence or office nearest the
place where the arrest took place at any time of the
day or night. It shall be the duty of the judge, among
other things, to ascertain the identity of the police or
law enforcement personnel and the person or persons
they have arrested and presented before him or her,
to inquire of them the reasons why they have arrested
the person and determine by questioning and
personal observation whether or not the suspect has
been subjected to any physical, moral or psychological
torture by whom and why. The judge shall then
submit a written report of what he/she had observed
when the subject was brought before him to the
proper court that has jurisdiction over the case of the
person thus arrested. the judge shall forthwith submit
his/her report within three (3) calendar days from the
time the suspect was brought to his/her residence or
office.
Immediately after taking custody of a person charged
with or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, the police or law
enforcement personnel shall notify in writing the
judge of the court nearest the place of apprehension
Page 145 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
or arrest: Provided, That where the arrest is made
during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or after office
hours, the written notice shall be served at the
residence of the judge nearest the place where the
accused was arrested.
The penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve
(12) years of imprisonment shall be imposed upon
the police or law enforcement personnel who fails to
notify any judge as provided in the preceding
paragraph. [Sec. 18 RA 9372]
Period of Detention in the Event of an Actual or Imminent
Terrorist Attack
In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack,
suspects may not be detained for more than three (3)
days without the written approval of a municipal, city,
provincial or regional official of a Human Rights
Commission or judge of the municipal, regional trial
court, the Sandiganbayan or a justice of the Court of
Appeals nearest the place of the arrest. If the arrest
is made during Saturdays, Sundays, holidays or
after office hours, the arresting police or law
enforcement personnel shall bring the person
thus arrested to the residence of any of the
officials mentioned above that is nearest the
place where the accused was arrested. The
approval in writing of any of the said officials shall be
secured by the police or law enforcement personnel
concerned within five (5) days after the date of the
detention of the persons concerned: Provided,
however, That within three (3) days after the
detention the suspects, whose connection with the
terror attack or threat is not established, shall be
released immediately. [Sec. 19 RA 9372]
RA 9745: An Act Penalizing Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or
Punishment and Prescribing Punishment
Therefor (Anti-Torture Act)
Torture refers to an act by which severe pain or
suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally
inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining
from him/her or a third person information or a
confession; punishing him/her for an act he/she or a
third person has committed or is suspected of having
committed; or intimidating or coercing him/her or a
third person; or for any reason based on
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or
suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with
the consent or acquiescence of a person in authority
or agent of a person in authority. It does not include
pain or Buffering arising only from, inherent in or
incidental to lawful sanctions. [Sec. 3a RA 9745]
Page 146 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment refers to a deliberate and aggravated
treatment or punishment not enumerated under
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority
or agent of a person in authority against a person
under his/her custody, which attains a level of
severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or
debasement to the latter. [Sec. 3b RA 9745]
PUNISHABLE ACTS
Acts of Torture
For purposes of this Act, torture shall include, but not
be limited to, the following:
a. Physical torture is a form of treatment or
punishment inflicted by a person in authority or
agent of a person in authority upon another in
his/her custody that causes severe pain,
exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
more parts of the body, such as:
1. Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,
kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt
or other similar objects, and jumping on the
stomach;
2. Food deprivation or forcible feeding with
spoiled food, animal or human excreta and
other stuff or substances not normally eaten;
3. Electric shock;
4. Cigarette burning; burning by electrically
heated rods, hot oil, acid; by the rubbing of
pepper or other chemical substances on
mucous membranes, or acids or spices
directly on the wound(s);
5. The submersion of the head in water or
water polluted with excrement, urine, vomit
and/or blood until the brink of suffocation;
6. Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
stressful bodily position;
7. Rape and sexual abuse, including the
insertion of foreign objects into the sex
organ or rectum, or electrical torture of the
genitals;
8. Mutilation or amputation of the essential
parts of the body such as the genitalia, ear,
tongue, etc.;
9. Dental torture or the forced extraction of the
teeth;
10. Pulling out of fingernails;
11. Harmful exposure to the elements such as
sunlight and extreme cold;
12. The use of plastic bag and other materials
placed over the head to the point of
asphyxiation;
• The administration or drugs to induce
confession and/or reduce mental
competency; or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
• The use of drugs to induce extreme pain
or certain symptoms of a disease; and
13. Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
b. "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to
acts committed by a person in authority or agent
of a person in authority which are calculated to
affect or confuse the mind and/or undermine a
person's dignity and morale, such as:
1. Blindfolding;
2. Threatening a person(s) or his/her relative(s)
with bodily harm, execution or other
wrongful acts;
3. Confinement in solitary cells or secret
detention places;
4. Prolonged interrogation;
5. Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial",
public display or public humiliation of a
detainee or prisoner;
6. Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
deprived of liberty from one place to
another, creating the belief that he/she shall
be summarily executed;
7. Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
8. Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed
by the person's family, relatives or any third
party;
9. Denial of sleep/rest;
10. Shame infliction such as stripping the person
naked, parading him/her in public places,
shaving the victim's head or putting marks
on his/her body against his/her will;
11. Deliberately prohibiting the victim to
communicate with any member of his/her
family; and
12. Other analogous acts of
mental/psychological torture. [Sec. 4, RA
9745]
Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment
or Punishment
Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment refers to a deliberate and aggravated
treatment or punishment not enumerated under
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority
or agent of a person in authority against another
person in custody, which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation or
debasement to the latter. The assessment of the level
of severity shall depend on all the circumstances of
the case, including the duration of the treatment or
punishment, its physical and mental effects and, in
some cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health
of the victim. [Sec. 5, RA 9745]
Page 147 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, An Absolute Right
Torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment as criminal acts shall apply
to all circumstances. A state of war or a threat of war,
internal political instability, or any other public
emergency, or a document or any determination
comprising an "order of battle" shall not and can
never be invoked as a justification for torture and
other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment. [Sec. 6, RA 9745]
Prohibited Detention
Secret detention places, solitary confinement,
incommunicado or other similar forms of detention,
where torture may be carried out with impunity are
hereby prohibited.
In which case, the Philippine National Police (PNP),
the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and other
law enforcement agencies concerned shall make an
updated list of all detention centers and facilities
under their respective jurisdictions with the
corresponding data on the prisoners or detainees
incarcerated or detained therein such as, among
others, names, date of arrest and incarceration, and
the crime or offense committed. This list shall be
made available to the public at all times, with a copy
of the complete list available at the respective national
headquarters of the PNP and AFP. A copy of the
complete list shall likewise be submitted by the PNP,
AFP and all other law enforcement agencies to the
Commission on Human Rights (CHR), such list to be
periodically updated, by the same agencies, within the
first five (5) days of every month at the minimum.
Every regional office of the PNP, AFP and other law
enforcement agencies shall also maintain a similar list
far all detainees and detention facilities within their
respective areas, and shall make the same available to
the public at all times at their respective regional
headquarters, and submit a copy, updated in the same
manner provided above, to the respective regional
offices of the CHR. [Sec. 7, RA 9745]
Who are Criminally Liable
Any person who actually participated or induced
another in the commission of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment or
who cooperated in the execution of the act of torture
or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal.
Any superior military, police or law enforcement
officer or senior government official who issued an
order to any lower ranking personnel to commit
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
torture for whatever purpose shall be held equally
liable as principals.
The immediate commanding officer of the unit
concerned of the AFP or the immediate senior public
official of the PNP and other law enforcement
agencies shall be held liable as a principal to the
crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment for any act or
omission, or negligence committed by him/her that
shall have led, assisted, abetted or allowed, whether
directly or indirectly, the commission thereof by
his/her subordinates. If he/she has knowledge of or,
owing to the circumstances at the time, should have
known that acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment or punishment shall be
committed, is being committed, or has been
committed by his/her subordinates or by others
within his/her area of responsibility and, despite such
knowledge, did not take preventive or corrective
action either before, during or immediately after its
commission, when he/she has the authority to
prevent or investigate allegations of torture or other
cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment but failed to prevent or investigate
allegations of such act, whether deliberately or due to
negligence shall also be liable as principals.
Any public officer or employee shall be liable as an
accessory if he/she has knowledge that torture or
other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment is being committed and without having
participated therein, either as principal or accomplice,
takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manner:
1. By themselves profiting from or assisting the
offender to profit from the effects of the act of
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment;
2. By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
and/or destroying the effects or instruments
thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or (c) By
harboring, concealing or assisting the escape of
the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or
punishment: Provided, That the accessory acts
are done with the abuse of the official's public
functions. [Sec. 13, RA 9745]
Page 148 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
C. Title III. Crimes against
Public Order
The following are Crimes Against Public Order:
1. Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup d’etat, Sediction, and
Disloyalty
a. Article 134: Rebellion or Insurrection
b. Article 134-A: Coup d’état
c. Article 136: Conspiracy and Proposal to
Commit Coup d’état, Rebellion or
Insurrection
d. Article 137: Disloyalty of Public Officers or
Employees
e. Article 138: Inciting to Rebellion or
Insurrection
f. Article 139: Sedition
g. Article 141: Conspiracy to Commit Sedition
h. Article 142: Inciting to Sedition
2. Chapter II: Crimes against Popular
Representation
a. Article 143: Acts Tending to Prevent the
Meeting of the Congress of the Philippines
and Similar Bodies
b. Article 144: Disturbance of Proceedings
c. Article 145: Violation of Parliamentary
Immunity
3. Chapter III: Illegal Assemblies and Associations
a. Article 146: Illegal Assemblies
b. Article 147: Illegal Associations
4. Chapter IV: Assault upon and Resistance and
Disobedience to, Persons in Authority and Their
Agents
a. Article 148: Direct Assault
b. Article 149: Indirect Assault
c. Article 150: Disobedience to Summons
Issued by Congress, Its Committees or
Subcommittees, by the Constitutional
Commissions, Its Committees,
Subcommittees or Divisions
d. Article 151: Resistance and Disobedience to
a Person in Authority or the Agents of Such
Persons
5. Chapter V: Public Disorders
a. Article 153: Tumults and Other
Disturbances of Public Order
b. Article 154: Unlawful Use of Means of
Publication and Unlawful Utterances
c. Article 155: Alarms and Scandals
d. Article 156: Delivering Persons from Jail
6. Chapter VI: Evasion of Service of Sentence
a. Article 157: Evasion of Service of Sentence
b. Article 158: Evasion of Service of Sentence
on the Occasion of Disorders,
Conflagrations, Earthquakes, or Other
Calamities
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

c. Article 159: Other Cases of Evasion of
Service of Sentence
7. Chapter VII: Commission of Another Crime
during Service of Penalty Imposed for Another
Previous Offense
a. Article 160: Quasi-Recidivism
1. Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup
Rebellion is not covered by Art. 2 on extraterritorial
jurisdiction. [People v. Lovedioro, G.R. No. 112235
(1995)]
An actual clash of arms with the forces of the
Government is not absolutely necessary. It is also not
necessary that the purpose of the rebellion be
accomplished. [Reyes]

d’etat, Sedition and Rebellion v. Insurrection

Disloyalty Rebellion Insurrection
A movement seeking to
effect some change of
a. Article 134 – Rebellion or Object is to completely minor importance or to
Insurrection overthrow and supplant prevent the exercise of
the existing governmental authority
Elements: government with respect to
1. There is a public uprising and taking arms against particular matters or
the government; subjects
2. The purpose of the uprising or movement is:
a. To remove from the allegiance to the Rebellion v. Treason
government or its laws the Philippine Rebellion Treason
territory or any part thereof, or any body of
The levying of war
land, naval, or other armed forces; or
against the government
b. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, The levying of war
would constitute treason
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or against the government
when performed to aid
prerogatives. during peace time for any
the enemy; it would also
purpose mentioned in
constitute adherence to
Rule on Complexing of Rebellion: Rebellion Art. 134
the enemy, giving him aid
cannot be complexed with, but absorbs other crimes
and comfort
committed in furtherance of rebellion. There is no
complex crime of rebellion with murder and other Always involves taking Mere adherence to the
common crimes. up arms against the enemy giving him aid and
government. comfort
The doctrine laid down in People v. Hernandez [G.R.
No. 6025 (1964)] remains good law. This prohibits the Note: There is no crime of misprision of rebellion.
complexing of rebellion with any other offense
committed in the occasion thereof, either as a means Rebellion v. Sedition
to its commission or as an unintended effect of an Rebellion Sedition
activity that constitutes rebellion. [Enrile v. Salazar,
G.R. No. 92163 (1990)] There must be taking up It is sufficient that the
of arms against the public uprising be
All crimes, whether punishable under special or government. tumultuous.
general law, which are mere components or The purpose is always The purpose may be
ingredients, or committed in furtherance thereof, political. political or social.
become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and cannot
be isolated and charged as separate crimes themselves. Note: When any of the objectives of rebellion is
[Enrile v. Amin, G.R. No. 93335 (1990)] pursued but there is no public uprising in the legal
sense, the crime is direct assault of the first form.
Both motive and overt acts are essential components
of the crime of rebellion. If the political motive of a
supposedly rebellious act cannot be sufficiently b. Article 134-A – Coup d’État
proven, the accused should be convicted of the
common crime (e.g. murder) and not of rebellion. Elements:
1. Offender is a person or persons belonging to the
military or police or holding any public office or
employment;

Page 149 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. It is committed by means of a swift attack It is not a defense in rebellion that the accused never
accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, took the oath of allegiance to, or that they never
strategy or stealth; recognized the Government. [US v. del Rosario, G.R.
3. The attack is directed against the duly constituted No. 1106 (1903)]
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or
any military camp or installation, communication Mere silence or omission is not punishable in
networks, public utilities or other facilities rebellion. [US v. Ravidas, G.R. No. 1503 (1903)]
needed for the exercise and continued possession
of power; d. Article 136 – Conspiracy and
4. The purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish
state power. Proposal to Commit Coup d’
État, Rebellion or Insurrection
Persons who may commit coup d’état:
1. It may be committed singly or collectively Mode 1: Conspiracy to Commit Coup d’état,
2. It requires as a principal offender a member of Rebellion or Insurrection
the AFP, PNP, or a public officer with or without
civilian support Elements:
1. Two or more persons come to an agreement to
Coup d’état, when considered as Terrorism swiftly attack or to rise publicly and take arms
A person who commits an act punishable as coup against the Government for any of the purposes
d’état under Article 134-A of the Revised Penal Code, of rebellion or insurrection;
including acts committed by private persons, thereby 2. They decide to commit it.
sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in Mode 2: Proposal to Commit Coup d’état,
order to coerce the government to give in to an Rebellion or Insurrection
unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of
terrorism. Elements:
1. A person has decided to swiftly attack or to rise
c. Article 135 – Penalty for publicly and take arms against the Government
for any of the purposes of rebellion or
Rebellion, Insurrection or Coup insurrection;
d’État 2. Such person proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.
Persons liable for rebellion, insurrection or coup
d’état Conspiracy Proposal
1. The leaders: When two or more When the person who
a. Any person who promotes, maintains or persons come to an has decided to rise
heads a rebellion or insurrection; or agreement to rise publicly and take arms
b. Any person who leads, directs or commands publicly and take arms against the government
others to undertake a coup d’état; against government for for any of the purposes
2. The participants: any of the purposes of of rebellion proposes its
a. Any person who participates or executes the rebellion and decide to execution to some other
commands of others in rebellion or commit it person or persons
insurrection;
b. Any person in the government service who e. Article 137 – Disloyalty of Public
participates or executes directions or
commands of others in undertaking a coup Officers or Employees
d’état;
c. Any person not in the government service Elements:
who participates, supports, finances, abets or 1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
aids in undertaking a coup d’état. 2. Offender commits any of the following acts:
d. If under the command of unknown leaders, a. Failing to resist a rebellion by all the means
any person who directed the others, spoke in their power;
for them, signed receipts and other b. Continuing to discharge the duties of their
documents issued in their name on behalf of offices under the control of the rebels
the rebels shall be deemed a leader. c. Accepting appointment to office under
them.

Page 150 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The crime presupposes rebellion committed by other
persons. Offender must not be in conspiracy with the
rebels, otherwise, he is himself guilty of rebellion.
f. Article 138 – Inciting to
Rebellion or Insurrection
Elements:
1. Offender does not take arms or is not in open
hostility against the government;
2. He incites others to the execution of any of the
acts of rebellion;
3. The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or
other representations tending to the same end.
Note: There is no crime of inciting to treason.
Inciting to Rebellion v. Proposal to Commit
Rebellion
Proposal to Commit
Inciting to Rebellion
Rebellion
The offender induces another to commit rebellion.
Rebellion should not be actually committed by the
persons to whom it is proposed or who are incited.
Otherwise, they become principals by inducement in
the crime of rebellion.
The person who There is no need that the
proposes has decided to offender has decided to
commit rebellion. commit rebellion.
The person who The act of inciting is done
proposes the execution publicly.
of the crime uses secret
means.
g. Article 139 – Sedition
Elements:
1. Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously;
2. Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other
means outside of legal methods;
3. Purpose is to attain any of the following objects:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of
any law or the holding of any popular
election;
b. To prevent the national government or any
provincial or municipal government or any
public officer from exercising its or his
functions, or prevent the execution of an
administrative order;
c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
Page 151 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
d. To commit, for any political or social end,
any act of hate or revenge against private
persons or any social classes;
e. To despoil for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the
national government of all its property or
any part thereof
Tumultuous
If caused by more than three persons (i.e., at least four)
who are armed or provided with the means of
violence. [Art. 163]
The purpose of this crime is not the overthrowing of
the government but the violation of public peace.
Public uprising and an object of sedition must concur. The
lack of one means there is no sedition.
Under R.A. 8294 (Act Amending PD No. 1866 or the
Firearms Law), sedition absorbs the use of unlicensed
firearm as an element thereof; hence, it is not an
aggravating circumstance, and the offender can no
longer be prosecuted for illegal possession of firearm.
[Boado, Comprehensive Reviewer in Criminal Law]
If the violation of RA 10591 (Comprehensive Firearms
and Ammunition Regulation Act) is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’état, such
violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime
of rebellion or insurrection, or attempted coup d’état.
[Sec. 29, RA 10591]
Sedition v. Rebellion
Sedition Rebellion
There must be a public uprising.
It is sufficient that the There must be taking up
public uprising is of arms against the
tumultuous. government.
The purpose of the The purpose of the
offenders may be political offenders is always
or social. political.
Note: The distinction between sedition and rebellion
lies in the object at which the uprising aims, not the extent
of the territory covered by the uprising. [League v.
People, G.R. No. L-47357 (1941)]
Sedition v. Coup d’état
Sedition Coup d’état
There is no distinction as Offender belongs to the
to who may commit; a military or police or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
private individual may holding any public office
commit the offense or employment
Primary purpose is to To seize or to diminish
disturb public peace state power
Sedition v. Treason
Sedition Treason
It is the raising of It is the violation by a
commotions or subject of his allegiance
disturbances in the State. to his sovereign.
In one case, a friction between the Philippine
constabulary and the Manila police escalated and
resulted in the deaths of 6 policemen and 2 civilians
and in the serious injuries of 3 civilians. The Court
held that unlike the crime of rebellion, common
crimes committed in the occasion of sedition are to
be appreciated as separate crimes. [People v. Cabrera,
G.R. No. L-17748 (1922)]
h. Article 140 – Persons Liable for
Sedition
1. The leader of the sedition;
2. Other person participating in the sedition
i. Article 141 – Conspiracy to
Commit Sedition
Elements:
1. Two or more persons come to an agreement and
a decision to rise publicly and tumultuously to
attain any of the objects of sedition;
2. They decide to commit it.
Note: There is no proposal to commit sedition.
j. Article 142 – Inciting to Sedition
Mode 1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of
any of the acts which constitute sedition by
means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, etc.
Elements:
1. Offender does not take direct part in the crime of
sedition;
2. He incites others to the accomplishment of any
of the acts which constitute sedition;
3. The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons,
banners, or other representations tending
towards the same end.
Page 152 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Mode 2. Uttering seditious words or
speeches which tend to disturb the public peace;
Mode 3. Writing, publishing, or
circulating scurrilous libels against the
government or any of the duly constituted
authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the
public peace.
Elements:
1. Offender does not take any direct part in the
crime of sedition.
2. He uttered words or speeches and writing,
publishing or circulating scurrilous libels and that
a. Tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful
officer in conducting the functions of his
office;
b. Tend to instigate others to cabal and meet
together for unlawful purposes;
c. Suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or
riots; or
d. Lead or tend to stir up the people against the
lawful authorities or to disturb the peace of
the community, the safety and order of the
government
Considering that the objective of sedition is to express
protest against the government and in the process
creating hate against public officers, any act that will
generate hatred against the government or a public
officer concerned or a social class may amount to
Inciting to Sedition.
The essence of seditious libel is its immediate
tendency to stir up general discontent to the pitch of
illegal courses or to induce people to resort to illegal
methods in order to redress the evils which press
upon their minds. [Espuelas v. People, G.R. No. L-2990
(1951)]
“Scurrilous” means low, vulgar, mean or foul.
A published writing which calls the government one
of crooks and dishonest persons ("dirty") infested
with Nazis and Fascists i.e.dictators, and which
reveals a tendency toproduce dissatisfaction or a
feeling incompatible with the disposition to remain
loyal to the government, is a scurrilous libel against
the Government.
Any citizen may criticize his government and
government officials and submit his criticism to the
"free trade of ideas." However, such criticism should
be specific and therefore constructive specifying
particular objectionable actuations of the
government; it must be reasoned or tempered, and
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
not a contemptuous condemnation of the entire
government setup. [Espuelas v. People, supra.]
Constitutional Tests relative to seditious words:
1. Clear and Present Danger Rule: The words
must be of such nature that by uttering them
there is a danger of a public uprising and that
such danger should be both clear and imminent.
The danger must not only be probable but very
likely inevitable.
2. Dangerous Tendency Rule: If the words used
tend to create a danger of public uprising, then
those words could properly be the subject of a
penal clause.
2. Chapter II: Crimes against
Popular Representation
a. Article 143 – Acts Tending to
Prevent the Meeting of the
Congress of the Philippines and
Similar Bodies
Elements:
1. There is a projected or actual meeting of
Congress or any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional committees or
divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or
city or municipal council or board;
2. Offender, who may be any person, prevents such
meetings by force or fraud.
Nobody has the right to dissolve by means of violence
the meeting of a municipal council, under the pretext
that said meeting is legally defective, when the defect
is not manifest, and requires an investigation before
its existence can be determined. Where a municipal
council is holding a meeting, a presumption arises that
the meeting is not legally defective [People v. Alipit and
Alemus, G.R. No. L-18853 (1922)]
b. Article 144 – Disturbance of
Proceedings
Elements:
1. There is a meeting of Congress or any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof,
or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board;
2. Offender does any of the following acts:
a. He disturbs any of such meetings;
Page 153 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
b. He behaves while in the presence of any such
bodies in such a manner as to interrupt its
proceedings or to impair the respect due it.
The complaint may be filed by a member of the
legislative body. One who disturbs may also be
punished for contempt by Congress. It may also be
the subject of criminal prosecution.
c. Article 145 – Violation of
Parliamentary Immunity
Mode 1: Using force, intimidation,
threats, or frauds to prevent any member of
Congress from attending the meetings of
Congress or of any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof, or from
expressing his opinion or casting his vote;
Elements:
1. Offender uses force, intimidation, threats or
fraud;
2. The purpose of the offender is to prevent any
member of Congress from:
a. Attending the meetings of the Congress or
of any of its committees or constitutional
commissions;
b. Expressing his opinion; or
c. Casting his vote.
Note: The offender in mode 1 may be any person.
Mode 2: Arresting or searching any
member thereof while Congress is in regular or
special session, except in case such member has
committed a crime punishable under the Code by
a penalty higher than prision mayor.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer of employee;
2. He arrests or searches any member of Congress;
3. Congress, at the time of arrest or search, is in
regular or special session;
4. The member arrested or searched has not
committed a crime punishable under the Code by
a penalty higher than prision mayor.
Parliamentary immunity does not protect members of
Congress from responsibility in accordance with the
disciplinary rules of Congress itself.
Members of Congress cannot be arrested for offenses
punishable by a penalty less than prision mayor (6 years
and 1 day to 12 years), while Congress is in session.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

They can be prosecuted after Congress adjourns. 2. He is considered a leader or organizer of the
[Constitution] meeting.

To be consistent with the 1987 Constitution, the Note: Not all persons present at the meeting of the
phrase by “a penalty higher than prision mayor” in first form of illegal assembly must be armed.
Article 145 should be amended to read “by the penalty
of prision mayor or higher.” [Reyes] b. Article 147 – Illegal Associations
3. Chapter III: Illegal The following are illegal associations:
1. Associations totally or partially organized for the
Assemblies and Associations purpose of committing any of the crimes
punishable under the Code;
a. Article 146 – Illegal Assemblies 2. Associations totally or partially organized for
some purpose contrary to public morals.
Mode 1: Any meeting attended by armed persons
for the purpose of committing any of the crimes Persons liable:
punishable under the Code. 1. Founders, directors and president of the
association;
Elements: 2. Mere members of the association.
1. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of
persons, whether in a fixed place or moving; Public Morals – matters which affect the interest of
2. The meeting is attended by armed persons; society and public convenience, not limited to good
3. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of customs
the crimes punishable under the Code.
Illegal Assemblies v. Illegal Associations
Mode 2: Any meeting in which the audience, Illegal Assembly Illegal Association
whether armed or not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or There must be an actual Actual meeting not
insurrection, sedition, or assault upon person in meeting or assembly necessary
authority or his agents. What is punished is the
What is punished are the
act of forming or
meeting and the
Elements: organizing the
attendance therein
1. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of association
persons, whether in a fixed place or moving; Persons liable:
2. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to 1. organizers or leaders Persons liable:
the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion of the meeting 1. founders, directors,
or insurrection, sedition or direct assault. Organizers or president
leaders of the Founders,
Persons liable for illegal assembly: meeting directors, president
1. The organizer or leaders of the meeting; 2. persons present at 2. members The
2. Persons merely present at the meeting, who must the meeting members
have a common intent to commit the felony of Persons present
illegal assembly.

In the first form of illegal assembly, the persons BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 880/ Public
present at the meeting must be armed. The law does Assembly Act of 1985
not require that all the persons present must be
armed. The unarmed persons present at the meeting Non-interference by law enforcement
are also liable. authorities
Law enforcement agencies shall not interfere with the
Presumptions if a person carried an unlicensed holding of a public assembly. However, to adequately
firearm: ensure public safety, a law enforcement contingent
1. The purpose of the meeting insofar as he is under the command of a responsible police officer
concerned is to commit acts punishable under the may be detailed and stationed in a place at least one
RPC hundred (100) meters away from the area of activity
ready to maintain peace and order at all times. [Sec. 9,
B.P. Blg. 880]

Page 154 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Police assistance when requested
It shall be imperative for law enforcement agencies,
when their assistance is requested by the leaders or
organizers, to perform their duties always mindful
that their responsibility to provide proper protection
to those exercising their right peaceably to assemble
and the freedom of expression is primordial. Towards
this end, law enforcement agencies shall observe the
following guidelines:
1. Members of the law enforcement contingent
who deal with the demonstrators shall be in
complete uniform with their nameplates and
units to which they belong displayed prominently
on the front and dorsal parts of their uniform and
must observe the policy of "maximum tolerance"
as herein defined;
2. The members of the law enforcement contingent
shall not carry any kind of firearms but may be
equipped with baton or riot sticks, shields, crash
helmets with visor, gas masks, boots or ankle
high shoes with shin guards;
3. Tear gas, smoke grenades, water cannons, or any
similar anti-riot device shall not be used unless
the public assembly is attended by actual violence
or serious threats of violence, or deliberate
destruction of property. . [Sec. 10, B.P. Blg. 880]
Dispersal of public assembly with permit
No public assembly with a permit shall be dispersed.
However, when an assembly becomes violent, the
police may disperse such public assembly as follows:
1. At the first sign of impending violence, the
ranking officer of the law enforcement
contingent shall call the attention of the leaders
of the public assembly and ask the latter to
prevent any possible disturbance;
2. If actual violence starts to a point where rocks or
other harmful objects from the participants are
thrown at the police or at the non-participants, or
at any property causing damage to such property,
the ranking officer of the law enforcement
contingent shall audibly warn the participants
that if the disturbance persists, the public
assembly will be dispersed;
3. If the violence or disturbances prevailing as
stated in the preceding subparagraph should not
stop or abate, the ranking officer of the law
enforcement contingent shall audibly issue a
warning to the participants of the public
assembly, and after allowing a reasonable period
of time to lapse, shall immediately order it to
forthwith disperse;
4. No arrest of any leader, organizer or participant
shall also be made during the public assembly
unless he violates during the assembly a law,
statute, ordinance or any provision of this Act.
Page 155 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Such arrest shall be governed by Article 125 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended:
5. Isolated acts or incidents of disorder or branch of
the peace during the public assembly shall not
constitute a group for dispersal. [Sec. 11, B.P. Blg.
880]
Dispersal of public assembly without permit
When the public assembly is held without a permit
where a permit is required, the said public assembly
may be peacefully dispersed. [Sec. 12, B.P. Blg. 880]
Prohibited acts
The following shall constitute violations of this Act:
1. The holding of any public assembly as defined in
this Act by any leader or organizer without
having first secured that written permit where a
permit is required from the office concerned, or
the use of such permit for such purposes in any
place other than those set out in said permit:
Provided, however, That no person can be
punished or held criminally liable for
participating in or attending an otherwise
peaceful assembly;
2. Arbitrary and unjustified denial or modification
of a permit in violation of the provisions of this
Act by the mayor or any other official acting in
his behalf.
3. The unjustified and arbitrary refusal to accept or
acknowledge receipt of the application for a
permit by the mayor or any official acting in his
behalf;
4. Obstructing, impeding, disrupting or otherwise
denying the exercise of the right to peaceful
assembly;
5. The unnecessary firing of firearms by a member
of any law enforcement agency or any person to
disperse the public assembly;
6. Acts in violation of Section 10 hereof;
7. Acts described hereunder if committed within
one hundred (100) meters from the area of
activity of the public assembly or on the occasion
thereof:
a. the carrying of a deadly or offensive weapon or
device such as firearm, pillbox, bomb, and the
like;
b. the carrying of a bladed weapon and the like;
c. the malicious burning of any object in the streets
or thoroughfares;
d. the carrying of firearms by members of the law
enforcement unit;
e. the interfering with or intentionally disturbing the
holding of a public assembly by the use of a
motor vehicle, its horns and loud sound systems.
[Sec. 13, B.P. Blg. 880]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
4. Chapter IV: Assault upon
and Resistance and
Disobedience to, Persons in
Authority and Their Agents
a. Article 148 – Direct Assault
Mode 1. Without public uprising, by employing
force or intimidation for the attainment of any of
the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes
of rebellion and sedition;
Elements:
1. Offender employs force or intimidation;
2. The aim of the offender is to attain any of the
purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of the
objects of the crime of sedition;
3. There is no public uprising.
Mode 2. Without public uprising, by attacking,
by employing force or by seriously intimidating
or by seriously resisting any person in authority
or any of his agents, while engaged in the
performance of official duties, or on occasion of
such performance.
Elements:
1. Offender makes an attack, employs force, makes
a serious intimidation, or makes a serious
resistance;
2. The person assaulted is a person in authority or
his agent;
3. At the time of the assault, the person in authority
or his agent is engaged in the actual performance
of official duties, or that he is assaulted by reason
of the past performance of official duties;
4. Offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a
person in authority or his agent in the exercise of
his duties.
5. There is no public uprising.
The first form of direct assault is tantamount to
rebellion or sedition, except that there is no public
uprising.
Classifications of direct assault:
1. Simple assault
2. Qualified assault.
Assault is qualified when:
1. There is a weapon employed in the attack
2. The offender is a public officer
3. The offender lays hands on a public authority
Page 156 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
A “person in authority” is any person directly vested
with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a
member of some court or governmental corporation,
board, or commission, shall be deemed a person in
authority.
It is not necessary that the person in authority who
was assaulted be actually performing official duties. If
the person in authority or his agent is attacked in the
performance of his official duty, the motive of the offender
is immaterial. If such person is attacked when not in
the actual performance of his official duty, evidence of
motive of the offender is important.
One “directly vested with jurisdiction” has the
power or authority to govern and execute the laws.
Teachers, professors and persons in charge with the
supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities shall be deemed
persons in authority, in applying the provisions of
Articles 148 and 151. For other purposes, such as to
increase the penalty by reason of the aggravating
circumstances where a person in authority is involved,
the teachers and professors are not persons in
authority. [Art. 152 RPC as amended by B.P. Blg.
873]
When the assault results in the killing of that agent or
of a person in authority, the offense committed is
complex crime of direct assault with murder or
homicide. The only time when it is not complexed is
when material consequence is a light felony, that is,
slight physical injury. Direct assault absorbs the
lighter felony.
The force employed need not be serious when the
offended party is a person in authority.
Intimidation or resistance must be serious whether
the offended party is a person in authority or an agent
of a person in authority. The resistance must be
active.
If the public officer is not a person in authority, the
assault on him is an aggravating circumstance in Art.
14, no. 3 (rank). There must be, however, intent to
disregard the victim’s rank. [Boado]
Gabutero was acting in the performance of his duties
[as he was trying to pacify Dollantes who was causing
trouble] as barangay captain when he was stabbed to
death. Thus, the crime committed was murder with
assault upon a person in authority. [People v. Dollantes,
G.R. No. 70639 (1987)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

b. Article 152 – Persons in Authority

Any assault on him on the occasion of his aiding a
and Agents of Persons in person in authority or his agent is indirect assault.
Authority
d. Article 150 – Disobedience to
Agents of a
Public Persons in
Person in
Summons Issued by Congress,
Officer Authority Its Committees or
Authority
(Art. 203) (Art. 152)
(Art. 152) Subcommittees, by the
Any person
Any person who, by direct
Constitutional Commissions, Its
directly vested provision of law Committees, Subcommittees or
Any person
with or by election or Divisions
jurisdiction, by appointment
who takes part
whether as an by competent Mode 1: By refusing, without legal excuse, to
in the
individual or authority, is obey summons of Congress, its special or
performance
as a member charged with standing committees and subcommittees, the
of public
of some court the Constitutional Commissions and its committees,
functions in
or maintenance of subcommittees or divisions, or by any
the
governmental public order commission or committee chairman or member
government.
corporation, and the authorized to summon witnesses;
board or protection and
commission. security of life Mode 2: By refusing to be sworn or placed under
and property. affirmation while being before such legislative or
constitutional body or official;
A person in authority includes a barangay chairman
and members of the Lupong Tagapagkasundo as Mode 3: By refusing to answer any legal inquiry
provided under the Local Government Code. [Boado] or to produce any books, papers, documents, or
records in his possession, when required by them
The status as a person in authority being a matter of to do so in the exercise of their functions;
law, ignorance thereof is no excuse.
Mode 4: By restraining another from attending as
Where a barangay chief tanod was a mere bystander at a witness in such legislative or constitutional
the crime scene, he not acting, and had no occasion body;
to act, in the performance of his official duties, the
attack on him did not amount to direct assault. [People Mode 5: By inducing disobedience to a summons
v. Recto, supra] or refusal to be sworn by any such body or
official.
c. Article 149 – Indirect Assault
The testimony of a person summoned must be upon
Elements: matters into which the legislature has jurisdiction to
1. A person in authority or his agent is the victim of inquire.
any of the forms of direct assault defined in
Article 148; e. Article 151 – Resistance and
2. A person comes to the aid of such authority or
his agent;
Disobedience to a Person in
3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation Authority or the Agents of Such
upon such person coming to the aid of the Persons
authority or his agent.
Mode 1: Resistance and serious disobedience
Indirect assault can only be committed when a direct
assault is also committed. Elements:
1. A person in authority or his agent is engaged in the
Art. 152 clothes any person who comes to the aid of performance of official duty or gives a lawful
a person in authority with the fiction of an agent of a order to the offender;
person in authority.

Page 157 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. Offender resists or seriously disobeys such

person in authority or his agent;
3. The act of the offender is not included in the
provision of Articles 148, 149 and 150.
Mode 2: Simple disobedience
Elements:
1. An agent of a person in authority is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful
order to the offender;
2. Offender disobeys such agent of a person in
authority;
3. Such disobedience is not of a serious nature.
5. Chapter V: Public Disorders
a. Article 153 – Tumults and Other
Disturbances of Public Order
Mode 1: Causing any serious disturbance in a
public place, office or establishment;
Mode 2: Interrupting or disturbing
performances, functions or gatherings, or
peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in
Arts. 131 and 132;

Resistance and Serious Disobedience Mode 3: Making any outcry tending to incite
The accused must have knowledge that the person rebellion or sedition in any meeting, association
giving the order is a peace officer. [US v. Bautista, or public place;
supra.]
Mode 4: Displaying placards or emblems which
The disobedience contemplated consists in the failure provoke a disturbance of public order in such
or refusal to obey a direct order from the authority or place;
his agent.
Mode 5: Burying with pomp the body of a person
Simple Disobedience who has been legally executed.
In simple disobedience, the offended party must be
only an agent of a person in authority. The order must Serious disturbance must be planned or intended.
be lawful. The disobedience should not be of a serious This article applies if the disturbance is not caused by
nature. a public officer; or, if it is committed by a public
officer, he is a participant therein.
Serious Disobedience v. Direct Assault
Serious Disobedience Direct Assault Outcry – to shout subversive or provocative words
Person in authority or his tending to stir up the people to obtain by means of
agent must be engaged in force or violence any of the objects of rebellion or
Person in authority or his the performance of sedition.
agent must be in actual official duties or he is
performance of his duties assaulted by reason of the If done unconsciously or without intent to incite the
past performance of listeners to rise to sedition or rebellion, this article
official duties applies.
If done with intent to commit rebellion or sedition:
Committed only by The crime is inciting to rebellion or sedition.
Committed in four ways
resisting or seriously
(see Art. 148, Mode 2
disobeying a person in Tumultuous – if caused by more than 3 persons (at
above)
authority or his agent least four) who are armed or provided with the means
Use of force in resistance of violence
There is force employed
is not so serious
Burying with pomp the body of a person –
ostentatious display of a burial

b. Article 154 – Unlawful Use of

Means of Publication and
Unlawful Utterances
Mode 1: Publishing or causing to be published,
by means of printing, lithography or any other

Page 158 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
means of publication, as news any false news
which may endanger the public order, or cause
damage to the interest or credit of the State;
Mode 2: Encouraging disobedience to the law or
to the constituted authorities or praising,
justifying or extolling any act punished by law, by
the same means or by words, utterances or
speeches;
Mode 3: Maliciously publishing or causing to be
published any official document or resolution
without proper authority, or before they have
been published officially;
Mode 4: Printing, publishing or distributing (or
causing the same) books, pamphlets, periodicals,
or leaflets which do not bear the real
printer’sname, or which are classified as
anonymous.
To be liable, the offender must know that the news is
false. If he does not know that the news is false, he is
not liable, there being no criminal intent.
Actual public disorder or actual damage to the credit
of the State is not necessary. The mere possibility of
causing such danger or damage is sufficient.
c. Article 155 – Alarms and
Scandals
Mode 1: Discharging any firearm, rocket,
firecracker, or other explosive within any town or
public place, calculated to cause (which
produces) alarm or danger;
Mode 2: Instigating or taking an active
part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting
offensive to another or prejudicial to public
tranquility;
Mode 3: Disturbing the public peace
while wandering about at night or while engaged
in any other nocturnal amusements;
Mode 4: Causing any disturbances or
scandal in public places while intoxicated or
otherwise, provided Art. 153 is not applicable.
The crime “alarms and scandal” is only one crime.
Scandal here does not refer to moral scandal; that
refers to grave scandal in Article 200.
The essence of the crime is disturbance of public
tranquility and public peace. Disturbance of a serious
Page 159 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
nature falls under Article 153, not under paragraph 4
of this article.
Any kind of disturbance of public order where the
circumstance at the time renders the act offensive to
the tranquility prevailing, the crime is committed.
Charivari – includes a medley of discordant voices, a
mock serenade of discordant noises made on kettles,
tin, horns, etc. designed to annoy or insult
Note: “Calculated to cause” should be “which
produces” alarm and danger according to the correct
translation of the RPC. Hence, the result, and not the
intent, that counts. [Reyes]
d. Article 156 – Delivering Prisoners
from Jail
Elements:
1. There is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment;
2. Offender removes therefrom such person, or
helps the escape of such person.
If the prisoner who escapes is only a detention
prisoner, he does not incur liability from escaping if
he does not know of the plan to remove him from jail.
But if such prisoner knows of the plot to remove him
from jail and cooperates therein by escaping, he
himself becomes liable for delivering prisoners from
jail as a principal by indispensable cooperation.
If the prisoner removed or whose escape is made
possible by the commission of the crime of delivering
prisoner from jail is a detention prisoner, such
prisoner is not criminally liable. A prisoner is
criminally liable for leaving the penal institution only
when there is evasion of the service of his sentence
which can be committed only by a convict by final
judgment.
Offender is usually an outsider. The violation of
Article 156 is committed by a public officer when he
is not the custodian of the prisoner at the time the
prisoner was made to escape. If the offender is a
public officer who had the prisoner in his custody or
charge, he is liable for infidelity in the custody of a
prisoner under Article 223.
If three persons are involved – a stranger, the
custodian and the prisoner – three crimes are
committed:
1. Infidelity in the custody of prisoners [public
officer-custodian];
2. Delivery of the prisoner from jail [stranger]; and
3. Evasion of service of sentence [prisoner].
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Cledera, as the governor, is the jailer of the Province.
Esmeralda is the Assistant Provincial Warden. As
public officials who have the custody or charge of the
prisoner, they cannot be prosecuted under Art. 156.
Art 223 would have applied; however, there is no
sufficient evidence to warrant their prosecution for
infidelity in the custody of prisoner. It is necessary
that the public officer had consented to, or connived
in, the escape of the prisoner under his custody or
charge. [Alberto v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-31839
(1980)]
6. Chapter VI: Evasion of
Service of Sentence
a. Article 157 – Evasion of Service
of Sentence
Elements:
1. Offender is a convict by final judgment;
2. He is serving sentence which consists in the
deprivation of liberty;
3. He evades service of his sentence by escaping
during the term of his imprisonment.
Qualifying circumstances as to penalty imposed
if such evasion or escape takes place:
1. By means of unlawful entry (this should be “by
scaling” – Reyes);
2. By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs
or floors;
3. By using picklock, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence or intimidation; or
4. Through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution.
Evasion of service of sentence has three forms:
1. Article 157 - By simply leaving or escaping from
the penal establishment
2. Article 158 - By failing to return within 48 hours
after having left the penal establishment because
of a calamity, conflagration or mutiny and such
calamity, conflagration or mutiny has been
announced as already passed
3. Article 159 - By violating one’s conditional
pardon
That the prisoner immediately returned after leaving
or escaping from jail or prison is immaterial. It may
be mitigating, but it will not absolve his criminal
liability.
Page 160 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Not applicable to sentence executed by deportation
because the convict was not sentenced to
imprisonment and thereafter broke jail.
Applicable to sentence of destierro - Inasmuch as the
Revised Penal Code was originally approved and
enacted in Spanish, the Spanish text governs. The
word "imprisonment" used in the English text is a
wrong or erroneous translation of the phrase "sufriendo
privacion de libertad" used in the Spanish text. Although
destierro does not constitute imprisonment, it is a
deprivation of liberty, though partial, in the sense that
as in the present case, the appellant by his sentence of
destierro was deprived of the liberty to enter the City
of Manila.
One who, sentenced to destierro by virtue of final
judgment, and prohibited from entering the City of
Manila, enters said city within the period of his
sentence, is guilty of evasion of sentence under Article
157. [People v. Abilong, supra]
b. Article 158 – Evasion of Service
of Sentence on the Occasion of
Disorders, Conflagrations,
Earthquakes, or Other
Calamities
Elements:
1. Offender is a convict by final judgment, who is
confined in a penal institution;
2. There is disorder, resulting from –
a. conflagration;
b. earthquake;
c. explosion;
d. similar catastrophe; or
e. mutiny in which he has not participated;
3. He evades the service of his sentence by leaving
the penal institution where he is confined, on the
occasion of such disorder or during the mutiny;
4. He fails to give himself up to the authorities
within 48 hours following the issuance of a
proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing
the passing away of such calamity.
5. Leaving the penal establishment is not the basis
of criminal liability. What is punished is the
failure to return within 48 hours after the
passing of the calamity, conflagration or
mutiny had been announced.
Under Article 158, those who return within 48 hours
are given credit or deduction from the remaining
period of their sentence equivalent to 1/5 of the
original term of the sentence.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

If the prisoner fails to return within said 48 hours,

there will be an additional penalty of 1/5 of the time 7. Chapter VII: Commission of
still remaining to be served under the original
sentence. In no case shall that penalty exceed six Another Crime during
months.
Service of Penalty Imposed
Mutiny is one of the causes which may authorize a for Another Previous Offense
convict serving sentence in the penitentiary to leave
the jail provided he has not taken part in the mutiny. a. Article 160 – Quasi-Recidivism
c. Article 159 – Other Cases of Elements:
Evasion of Service of Sentence 1. Offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense;
Elements: 2. He committed a new felony before beginning to
1. Offender was a convict; serve such sentence or while serving the same.
2. He was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive; Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating
3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon. circumstance where a person, after having been
convicted by final judgment, shall commit a new
A conditional pardon is a contract between the felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or
Chief Executive, who grants the pardon, and the while serving the same. He shall be punished by the
convict, who accepts it. Since it is a contract, the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law for
pardoned convict is bound to fulfill its conditions and the new felony.
accept all its consequences according to its strict
terms. [People v. Pontillas, G.R. No. L-45267 (1938)] The first crime for which the offender is serving
sentence need not be a felony. [People v. Peralta, G.R.
Violation of conditional pardon is a distinct crime. In No. L-19069 (1968)]
violation of conditional pardon, as a rule, the violation
will amount to this crime only if the condition is The word “another” does not mean that the new
violated during the remaining period of the sentence. felony be different from the one for which the
offender is serving sentence [People v. Yabut, 58 Phil.
Offender must be found guilty of subsequent offense 499 (1933)]
before he can be prosecuted under Article 159. [Torres
v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872 (1987)] Quasi-Recidivism Recidivism
The 2 offenses need not The 2 offenses must be
If the condition of the pardon is violated when the be embraced in the embraced in the same
remaining unserved portion of the sentence has same title of the Code title of the Code
already lapsed, there will be no more criminal liability
for the violation. However, the convict maybe Quasi-Recidivism Reiteracion
required to serve the unserved portion of the Offender committed a Offender must have
sentence, that is, continue serving original penalty. new felony before served out the sentence
beginning to serve such for the prior offense
Violation of Conditional Pardon v. Evasion of sentence or while
Service of Sentence by Escaping serving the same
Violation of Conditional Evasion of Service of
Pardon Sentence PD 1866 (AS AMENDED BY RA 8294):
ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS
Does not cause harm or An attempt at least to
injury to the right of evade the penalty inflicted
Sec. 1. Unlawful manufacture, sale,
another person nor does it by the courts upon
acquisition, disposition or possession of
disturb the public order; criminals and thus defeat
firearms or ammunition or instruments used
merely an infringement of the purpose of the law of
or intended to be used in the manufacture of
the stipulated terms in either reforming or
firearms or ammunition.— The penalty of prision
conditional pardon punishing them for having
correccional in its maximum period and a fine of not
disturbed the public order.
less than Fifteen thousand pesos (P15,000) shall be
imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully

Page 161 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
manufacture, deal in, acquire, dispose, or possess
any low powered firearm, such as rimfire handgun,
.380 or .32 and other firearm of similar firepower,
part of firearm, ammunition, or machinery, tool or
instrument used or intended to be used in the
manufacture of any firearm or ammunition:
Provided, That no other crime was committed.
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period and a fine of Thirty thousand pesos
(P30,000) shall be imposed if the firearm is
classified as high powered firearm which includes
those with bores bigger in diameter than .38 caliber
and 9 millimeter such as caliber .40, .41, .44, .45
and also lesser calibered firearms but considered
powerful such as caliber .357 and caliber .22
center-fire magnum and other firearms with firing
capability of full automatic and by burst of two or
three: Provided, however, That no other crime was
committed by the person arrested.
If homicide or murder is committed with the use
of an unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed
firearm shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance.
If the violation of this section is in furtherance of
or incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or attempted
coup d’état, such violation shall be absorbed as an
element of the crime of rebellion, or insurrection,
sedition, or attempted coup d’état.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the
owner, president, manager, director or other
responsible officer of any public or private firm,
company, corporation or entity, who shall willfully
or knowingly allow any of the firearms owned by
such firm, company, corporation or entity to be
used by any person or persons found guilty of
violating the provisions of the preceding
paragraphs or willfully or knowingly allow any of
them to use unlicensed firearms or firearms
without any legal authority to be carried outside of
their residence in the course of their employment.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon
any person who shall carry any licensed firearm
outside his residence without legal authority
therefor. (Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 2. Presumption of Illegal Manufacture of
Firearms or Ammunition.— The possession of
any machinery, tool or instrument used directly in
the manufacture of firearms or ammunition, by
any person whose business or employment does
Page 162 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
not lawfully deal with the manufacture of firearms
or ammunition, shall be prima facie evidence that
such article is intended to be used in the
unlawful/illegal manufacture of firearms or
ammunition. (Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 3. Unlawful manufacture, sale,
acquisition, disposition or possession of
explosives. — The penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum period to reclusion temporal and a fine
of not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000)
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
unlawfully manufacture, assemble, deal in, acquire,
dispose or possess hand grenade(s), rifle
grenade(s), and other explosives, including but not
limited to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire
bombs,' or other incendiary devices capable of
producing destructive effect on contiguous objects
or causing injury or death to any person.
When a person commits any of the crimes defined
in the Revised Penal Code or special laws with the
use of the aforementioned explosives, detonation
agents or incendiary devices, which results in the
death of any person or persons, the use of such
explosives, detonation agents or incendiary devices
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
If the violation of this Sec. is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion, insurrection, sedition or attempted coup
d'etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an
element of the crimes of rebellion, insurrection,
sedition or attempted coup d'etat.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the
owner, president, manager, director or other
responsible officer of any public or private firm,
company, corporation or entity, who shall willfully
or knowingly allow any of the explosives owned by
such firm, company, corporation or entity, to be
used by any person or persons found guilty of
violating the provisions of the preceding
paragraphs
Sec. 3-A. Unlawful Manufacture, Sales,
Acquisition, Disposition, Importation or
Possession of a Part, Ingredient, Machinery,
Tool or Instrument Used or Intended to be
Used for the Manufacture, Construction,
Assembly, Delivery or Detonation.— The
penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed
upon any person who shall willfully and unlawfully
manufacture, assemble, deal in, acquire, dispose,
import or possess any part, ingredient, machinery,
tool or instrument of any explosive or incendiary
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
device, whether chemical, mechanical, electronic,
electrical or otherwise, used or intended to be used
by that person for its manufacture, construction,
assembly, delivery or detonation, where the
explosive or incendiary device is capable or is
intended to be made capable of producing
destructive effect on contiguous objects or causing
injury or death to any person.
Provided, That the mere possession of any part,
ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument directly
used in the manufacture, construction, assembly,
delivery or detonation of any explosive or
incendiary device, by any person whose business
activity, or employment does not lawfully deal with
the possession of such article shall be prima facie
evidence that such article is intended to be used by
that person in the unlawful/illegal manufacture,
construction, assembly, delivery or detonation of
an explosive or incendiary device.
Provided, however, That a temporary incidental,
casual, harmless or transient possession or control
of any part, machinery, tool or instrument directly
used in the manufacture, construction, assembly,
delivery or detonation of any explosive or
incendiary device, without the knowledge of its
existence or character as part, ingredient,
machinery, tool or instrument directly used in the
manufacture, construction, assembly, delivery or
detonation of any explosive or incendiary device,
shall not be a violation of this Section.
Provided, further, That the temporary, incidental,
casual, harmless, or transient possession or control
of any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or
instrument directly used in the manufacture,
construction, assembly, delivery or detonation of
any explosive or incendiary device for the sole
purpose of surrendering it to the proper authorities
shall not be a violation of this Section.
Provided, finally, That in addition to the instances
provided in the two (2) immediately preceding
paragraphs, the court may determine the absence
of the intent to possess, otherwise referred to as
“animus possidendi”, in accordance with the facts and
circumstances of each case and the application of
other pertinent laws, among other things, Articles
11 and 12 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
Sec. 3-B. Penalty for the Owner, President,
Manager, Director or Other Responsible
Officer of Any Public or Private Firm,
Company, Corporation or Entity.— The
penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed
Page 163 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
upon the owner, president, manager, director or
other responsible officer of any public or private
firm, company, corporation or entity, who shall
willfully or knowingly allow any explosive or
incendiary device or parts thereof owned or
controlled by such firm, company, corporation or
entity to be used by any person or persons found
guilty of violating the provisions of the preceding
paragraphs.
Sec. 3-C. Relationship of Other Crimes with a
Violation of this Decree and the Penalty
Therefor.— When a violation of Section 3, 3-A or
3-B of this Decree is a necessary means for
committing any of the crimes defined in the
Revised Penal Code or special laws, or is in
furtherance of, incident to, in connection with, by
reason of, or on occasion of any of the crimes
defined in the Revised Penal Code or special laws,
the penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine ranging
from One hundred Thousand pesos (P100,000.00)
to One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be
imposed.
Sec. 3-D. Former Conviction or Acquittal;
Double Jeopardy.— Subject to the provisions of
the Rules of Court on double jeopardy, if the
application thereof is more favorable to the
accused, the conviction or acquittal of the accused
or the dismissal of the case for violation of this
Decree shall be a bar to another prosecution of the
same accused for any offense where the violation
of this Decree was a necessary means for
committing the offense or in furtherance of which,
incident to which, in connection with which, by
reason of which, or on occasion of which, the
violation of this Decree was committed, and vice
versa.
Sec. 4. Responsibility and liability of Law
Enforcement Agencies and Other
Government Officials and Employees in
Testifying as Prosecution Witnesses.— Any
member of law enforcement agencies or any other
government official and employee who, after due
notice, fails or refuses, intentionally or negligently,
to appear as a witness for the prosecution of the
defense in any proceeding, involving violations of
this Decree, without any valid reason, shall be
punished with reclusion temporal and a fine of
Five hundred Thousand pesos (P500,000.00) in
addition to the administrative liability he/she may
be meted out by his/her immediate superior
and/or appropriate body.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The immediate superior of the member of the law
enforcement agency or any other government
employee mentioned in the preceding paragraph
shall be penalized with prision correccional and a fine
of not less than Ten Thousand pesos (P10,000.00)
but not more than Fifty thousand pesos
(P50,000.00) and in addition, perpetual absolute
disqualification from public office if despite due
notice to them and to the witness concerned, the
former does not exert reasonable effort to present
the latter to the court.
The member of the law enforcement agency or any
other government employee mentioned in the
preceding paragraphs shall not be transferred or
reassigned to any other government office located
in another territorial jurisdiction during the
pendency of the case in court. However, the
concerned member of the law enforcement agency
or government employee may be transferred or
reassigned for compelling reasons: Provided, That
his/her immediate superior shall notify the court
where the case is pending of the order to transfer
or reassign, within twenty-four (24) hours from its
approval: Provided, further, That his/her
immediate superior shall be penalized with prision
correccional and a fine of not less than Ten thousand
pesos (P10,000.00) but not more than Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) and in addition,
perpetual absolute disqualification from public
office, should he/she fail to notify the court of
such order to transfer or reassign.
Prosecution and punishment under this Section
shall be without prejudice to any liability for
violation of any existing law.
Sec. 4-A. Criminal Liability for Planting of
Evidence.— Any person who is found guilty of
“planting” any explosive or incendiary device or
any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or instrument
of any explosive or incendiary device, whether
chemical, mechanical, electronic, electrical or
otherwise, shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua.
Planting of evidence shall mean the willful act by
any person of maliciously and surreptitiously
inserting, placing, adding or attaching, directly or
indirectly, through any overt or covert act,
whatever quantity of any explosive or incendiary
device or any part, ingredient, machinery, tool or
instrument of any explosive or incendiary device,
whether chemical, mechanical, electronic,
electrical or otherwise in the person, house, effects
or in the immediate vicinity of an innocent
Page 164 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
individual for the purpose of implicating,
incriminating or imputing the commission of any
violation of this Decree.
Sec. 5. Tampering of Firearm’s Serial
Number.— The penalty of prision correccional shall
be imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully
tamper, change, deface or erase the serial number
of any firearm. (Repealed by RA 10591)
Sec. 6. Repacking or Altering the Composition
of Lawfully Manufactured Explosives.— The
penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon
any person who shall unlawfully repack, alter or
modify the composition of any lawfully
manufactured explosives.
Sec. 7. Unauthorized Issuance of Authority to
Carry Firearm and/or Ammunition Outside of
Residence.— The penalty of prision correccional
shall be imposed upon any person, civilian or
military, who shall issue authority to carry firearm
and/or ammunition outside of residence, without
authority therefor. (Repealed by RA 10591)
RA 10591: COMPREHENSIVE FIREARMS
AND AMMUNITION REGULATION ACT
This Act repeals Sections 1, 2, 5 and 7 of Presidential
Decree No. 1866, as amended, and Section 6 of
Republic Act No. 8294 and all other laws, executive
orders, letters of instruction, issuances, circulars,
administrative orders, rules or regulations that are
inconsistent herewith (Sec. 45)
Penal Provisions
Sec. 28. Unlawful Acquisition, or Possession
of Firearms and Ammunition. – The unlawful
acquisition, possession of firearms and
ammunition shall be penalized as follows:
(a) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a
small arm;
(b) The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed if three (3) or
more small arms or Class-A light weapons
are unlawfully acquired or possessed by
any person;
(c) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a
Class-A light weapon;
(d) The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed upon any person who shall,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
unlawfully acquire or possess a Class-B
light weapon;
(e) The penalty of one (1) degree higher than
that provided in paragraphs (a) to (c) in
this section shall be imposed upon any
person who shall unlawfully possess any
firearm under any or combination of the
following conditions:
(1) Loaded with ammunition or inserted
with a loaded magazine;
(2) Fitted or mounted with laser or any
gadget used to guide the shooter to
hit the target such as thermal weapon
sight (TWS) and the like;
(3) Fitted or mounted with sniper
scopes, firearm muffler or firearm
silencer;
(4) Accompanied with an extra barrel;
and
(5) Converted to be capable of firing full
automatic bursts.
(f) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a
major part of a small arm;
(g) The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess
ammunition for a small arm or Class-A
light weapon. If the violation of this
paragraph is committed by the same
person charged with the unlawful
acquisition or possession of a small arm,
the former violation shall be absorbed by
the latter;
(h) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a
major part of a Class-A light weapon;
(i) The penalty of prision mayor in its medium
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess
ammunition for a Class-A light weapon.
If the violation of this paragraph is
committed by the same person charged
with the unlawful acquisition or
possession of a Class-A light weapon, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the
latter;
(j) The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum
period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall unlawfully acquire or possess a
major part of a Class-B light weapon; and
(k) The penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum period shall be imposed upon
any person who shall unlawfully acquire
Page 165 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
or possess ammunition for a Class-B light
weapon. If the violation of this paragraph
is committed by the same person charged
with the unlawful acquisition or
possession of a Class-B light weapon, the
former violation shall be absorbed by the
latter.
Sec. 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the
Commission of a Crime. – The use of a loose
firearm, when inherent in the commission of a
crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or
other special laws, shall be considered as an
aggravating circumstance: Provided, That if the
crime committed with the use of a loose firearm is
penalized by the law with a maximum penalty
which is lower than that prescribed in the
preceding section for illegal possession of firearm,
the penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be
imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged: Provided, further, That if the crime
committed with the use of a loose firearm is
penalized by the law with a maximum penalty
which is equal to that imposed under the preceding
section for illegal possession of firearms, the
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall
be imposed in addition to the penalty for the crime
punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other
special laws of which he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or
incident to, or in connection with the crime of
rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup
d’etat, such violation shall be absorbed as an
element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection,
or attempted coup d’etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without
using the loose firearm, the violation of this Act
shall be considered as a distinct and separate
offense.
Sec. 30. Liability of Juridical Person. – The
penalty of prision mayor in its minimum to prision
mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon
the owner, president, manager, director or other
responsible officer of/any public or private firm,
company, corporation or entity who shall willfully
or knowingly allow any of the firearms owned by
such firm, company, corporation or entity to be
used by any person or persons found guilty of
violating the provisions of the preceding section,
or willfully or knowingly allow any of them to use
unregistered firearm or firearms without any legal
authority to be carried outside of their residence in
the course of their employment.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Sec. 31. Absence of Permit to Carry Outside of
Residence. – The penalty of prision correccional and
a fine of Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00) shall be
imposed upon any person who is licensed to own
a firearm but who shall carry the registered firearm
outside his/her residence without any legal
authority therefor.
Sec. 32. Unlawful Manufacture, Importation,
Sale or Disposition of Firearms or
Ammunition or Parts Thereof, Machinery,
Tool or Instrument Used or Intended to be
Used in the Manufacture of Firearms,
Ammunition or Parts Thereof. – The penalty
of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed upon any person who shall unlawfully
engage in the manufacture, importation, sale or
disposition of a firearm or ammunition, or a major
part of a firearm or ammunition, or machinery,
tool or instrument used or intended to be used by
the same person in the manufacture of a firearm,
ammunition, or a major part thereof.
The possession of any machinery, tool or
instrument used directly in the manufacture of
firearms, ammunition, or major parts thereof by
any person whose business, employment or
activity does not lawfully deal with the possession
of such article, shall be prima facie evidence that
such article is intended to be used in the unlawful
or illegal manufacture of firearms, ammunition or
parts thereof.
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period
to prision mayor in its medium period shall be
imposed upon any laborer, worker or employee of
a licensed firearms dealer who shall unlawfully
take, sell or otherwise dispose of parts of firearms
or ammunition which the company manufactures
and sells, and other materials used by the company
in the manufacture or sale of firearms or
ammunition. The buyer or possessor of such
stolen part or material, who is aware that such part
or material was stolen, shall suffer the same penalty
as the laborer, worker or employee.
If the violation or offense is committed by a
corporation, partnership, association or other
juridical entity, the penalty provided for in this
section shall be imposed upon the directors,
officers, employees or other officials or persons
therein who knowingly and willingly participated in
the unlawful act.
Sec. 33. Arms Smuggling. – The penalty
of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any
Page 166 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
person who shall engage or participate in arms
smuggling as defined in this Act.
Sec. 34. Tampering, Obliteration or Alteration
of Firearms Identification. – The penalty
of prision correccional to prision mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person who shall
tamper, obliterate or alter without authority the
barrel, slide, frame, receiver, cylinder, or bolt
assembly, including the name of the maker, model,
or serial number of any firearm, or who shall
replace without authority the barrel, slide, frame,
receiver, cylinder, or bolt assembly, including its
individual or peculiar identifying characteristics
essential in forensic examination of a firearm or
light weapon.
The PNP shall place this information, including its
individual or peculiar identifying characteristics
into the database of integrated firearms
identification system of the PNP Crime
Laboratory for future use and identification of a
particular firearm.
Sec. 35. Use of an Imitation Firearm. – An
imitation firearm used in the commission of a
crime shall be considered a real firearm as defined
in this Act and the person who committed the
crime shall be punished in accordance with this
Act: Provided, That injuries caused on the occasion
of the conduct of competitions, sports, games, or
any recreation activities involving imitation
firearms shall not be punishable under this Act.
Sec. 36. In Custodia Legis. – During the
pendency of any case filed in violation of this Act,
seized firearm, ammunition, or parts thereof,
machinery, tools or instruments shall remain in the
custody of the court. If the court decides that it has
no adequate means to safely keep the same, the
court shall issue an order to turn over to the PNP
Crime Laboratory such firearm, ammunition, or
parts thereof, machinery, tools or instruments in
its custody during the pendency of the case and to
produce the same to the court when so ordered.
No bond shall be admitted for the release of the
firearm, ammunition or parts thereof, machinery,
tool or instrument. Any violation of this paragraph
shall be punishable by prision mayor in its minimum
period to prision mayor in its medium period.
Sec. 37. Confiscation and Forfeiture. – The
imposition of penalty for any violation of this Act
shall carry with it the accessory penalty of
confiscation and forfeiture of the firearm,
ammunition, or parts thereof, machinery, tool or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
instrument in favor of the government which shall
be disposed of in accordance with law.
Sec. 38. Liability for Planting Evidence. – The
penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period shall
be imposed upon any person who shall willfully
and maliciously insert; place, and/or attach,
directly or indirectly, through any overt or covert
act, any firearm, or ammunition, or parts thereof
in the person, house, effects, or in the immediate
vicinity of an innocent individual for the purpose
of implicating or incriminating the person, or
imputing the commission of any violation of the
provisions of this Act to said individual. If the
person found guilty under this paragraph is a
public officer or employee, such person shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Sec. 39. Grounds for Revocation, Cancellation
or Suspension of License or Permit. – The
Chief of the PNP or his/her authorized
representative may revoke, cancel or suspend a
license or permit on the following grounds:
(a) Commission of a crime or offense
involving the firearm, ammunition, of
major parts thereof;
(b) Conviction of a crime involving moral
turpitude or any offense where the
penalty carries an imprisonment of more
than six (6) years;
(c) Loss of the firearm, ammunition, or any
parts thereof through negligence;
(d) Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or
major parts thereof outside of residence
or workplace without, the proper permit
to carry the same;
(e) Carrying of the firearm, ammunition, or
major parts thereof in prohibited places;
(f) Dismissal for cause from the service in case
of government official and employee;
(g) Commission of any of the acts penalized
under Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise
known as the “Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002″;
(h) Submission of falsified documents or
misrepresentation in the application to
obtain a license or permit;
(i) Noncompliance of reportorial
requirements; and
(j) By virtue of a court order.
Sec. 40. Failure to Notify Lost or Stolen
Firearm or Light Weapon. – A fine of Ten
thousand pesos (P10,000.00) shall be imposed
upon any licensed firearm holder who fails to
report to the FEO of the PNP that the subject
Page 167 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
firearm has been lost or stolen within a period of
thirty (30) days from the date of discovery.
Likewise, a fine of Five thousand pesos
(P5,000.00) shall be imposed upon any person
holding a valid firearm license who changes
residence or office address other than that
indicated in the license card and fails within a
period of thirty (30) days from said transfer to
notify the FEO of the PNP of such change of
address.
SEC. 41. Illegal Transfer/Registration of
Firearms. – It shall be unlawful to transfer
possession of any firearm to any person who has
not yet obtained or secured the necessary license
or permit thereof.
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed
upon any person who shall violate the provision of
the preceding paragraph. In addition, he/she shall
be disqualified to apply for a license to possess
other firearms and all his/her existing firearms
licenses whether for purposes of commerce or
possession, shall be revoked. If government-issued
firearms, ammunition or major parts of firearms or
light weapons are unlawfully disposed, sold or
transferred by any law enforcement agent or public
officer to private individuals, the penalty
of reclusion temporal shall be imposed.
Any public officer or employee or any person who
shall facilitate the registration of a firearm through
fraud, deceit, misrepresentation or submission of
falsified documents shall suffer the penalty
of prision correccional.
See again: RA 9372 (Human Security Act)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
D. Title IV. Crimes
against Public Interest
1. Acts of Counterfeiting
a. Article 161: Counterfeiting the Great Seal of
the Government of the Philippine Islands,
Forging the Signature or Stamp of the Chief
Executive
b. Article 162: Using Forged Signature or
Counterfeit Seal or Stamp
c. Article 163: Making and Importing and
Uttering False Coins
d. Article 164: Mutilation of Coins
e. Article 165: Selling of False or Mutilated
Coin, Without Connivance
f. Article 167: Counterfeiting, Importing, and
Uttering Instruments Not Payable to Bearer
g. Article 166: Forging Treasury or Bank Notes
or Other Documents Payable to Bearer;
Importing and Uttering Such False or
Forged Notes and Documents
2. Acts of Forgery
a. Article 168: Illegal Possession and Use of
False Treasury or Bank Notes and Other
Instruments of Credit
b. Article 169: How Forgery is Committed
3. Acts of Falsification
a. Article 170: Falsification of Legislative
Documents
b. Article 171: Falsification by Public Officer,
Employee or Notary or Ecclesiastical
Minister
c. Article 172: Falsification by Private
Individual and Use of Falsified Documents
d. Article 173: Falsification of Wireless, Cable,
Telegraph and Telephone Messages, and Use
of Said Falsified Messages
e. Article 174: False Medical Certificates, False
Certificates of Merits or Service, etc.
f. Article 175: Using False Certificates
g. Article 176: Manufacturing and Possession
of Instruments or Implements for
Falsification
4. Other Falsities
a. Article 177: Usurpation of Authority or
Official Functions
b. Article 178: Using Fictitious and Concealing
True Name
c. Article 179: Illegal Use of Uniforms and
Insignia
d. Article 180: False Testimony Against a
Defendant
Page 168 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
e. Article 181: False Testimony Favorable to
the Defendant
f.
g.
Article 182: False Testimony in Civil Cases
Article 183: False Testimony in Other Cases
and Perjury in Solemn Affirmation
h. Article 184: Offering False Testimony in
Evidence
i. Article 185: Machinations in Public Auctions
j. Article 186: Monopolies and Combinations
in Restraint of Trade
k. Article 187: Importation and Disposition of
Falsely Marked Articles or Merchandise
Made of Gold, Silver, or other Precious
Metals or their Alloys
The crimes in this title are in the nature of fraud or
falsity to the public. Deceit perpetrated upon the
public is the act being punished.
1. Acts of Counterfeiting
a. Article 161 – Counterfeiting the
Great Seal of the Government of
the Philippine Islands, Forging
the Signature or Stamp of the
Chief Executive
Acts punished: Forging the
1. Great Seal of the Government of the Philippines;
2. Signature of the President;
3. Stamp of the President.
When the signature of the president is forged, the
crime committed is covered by this provision and not
falsification of public document.
Intent to use is necessary. Actual use, however, is not
required, as long as the forger intended to use it.
b. Article 162 – Using Forged
Signature or Counterfeit Seal or
Stamp
Elements:
1. The Great Seal of the Republic was counterfeited
or the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive
was forged by another person;
2. Offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
3. He used the counterfeit seal or forged signature
or stamp.
Note: Offender under this article should not be the
forger. Otherwise, he will be penalized under Article
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

161. The participation of the offender is in effect that 2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins, with
of an accessory. the further requirement that there must be
connivance with the mutilator or importer in case
Although the general rule is that he should be of uttering.
punished by a penalty of two degrees lower, under
Article 162 he is punished by a penalty only one The first acts of falsification or falsity include:
degree lower. 1. Counterfeiting
2. Forgery
c. Article 163 – Making and 3. Falsification
Importing and Uttering False In so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there
Coins are two crimes that may be committed:
1. Counterfeiting coins
Elements: 2. Mutilation of coins
1. There be false or counterfeited coins;
2. Offender either made, imported or uttered such Requisites of Mutilation under The RPC:
coins; 1. Coin mutilated is of legal tender;
3. In case of uttering such false or counterfeited 2. Offender gains from the precious metal dust
coins, he connived with the counterfeiters or abstracted from the coin;
importers. 3. It has to be a coin.

To utter is to pass counterfeited coins. It includes
delivery or the act of giving them away. A
counterfeited coin is uttered when it is paid, when the
offender is caught counting the counterfeited coins
preparatory to the act of delivering them, even though
the utterer may not obtain the gain he intended
[Decisions of the Supreme Court of Spain]
To import fake coins means to bring them into port.
The importation is complete before entry at the
Customs House. [US v. Lyman, 26 Fed. Cas. 1024]
“Mutilation” means to take off part of the metal
either by filling it or substituting it for another metal
of inferior quality.
Since the coins before were made of silver and/or
other precious metal, shaving the metal from the
coins became a practice. Hence, the coin’s intrinsic
value is diminished.
This is the only article that requires that the mutilated
coin be legal tender.

Kinds of coins the counterfeiting of which is Foreign coins are not covered in this article. [Reyes]
punished
1. Silver coins of the Philippines or coins of the Deliberate intent arises only when the offender
Central Bank of the Philippines; collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated
2. Coins of the minor coinage of the Philippines or coin.
of the Central Bank of the Philippines;
3. Coin of the currency of a foreign country. Making and
Importing and Mutilitating
The counterfeiting of foreign currency is punishable, Uttering (Article 164)
regardless of whether or not it is still in official (Article 163)
circulation. The reason behind this is not only the Counterfeiting of Mutilating foreign coins
harm that it may cause to the public in case it goes foreign currency is is not punishable under
into circulation again, but also the possibility that the punishable this article
counterfeiter may later apply his trade to the making
of coins in actual circulation. [People v. Kong Leon, C.A., PD 247: Prohibiting and Penalizing Defacement,
48 O.G. 664] Mutilation, Tearing, Burning or Destruction of
Central Bank Notes and Coins
d. Article 164 – Mutilation of Coins
It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully deface,
Acts punished mutilate, tear, burn or destroy, in any manner
1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with the whatsoever, currency notes and coins issued by the
further requirement that there be intent to Central Bank of the Philippines.
damage or to defraud another;

Page 169 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
e. Article 165 – Selling of False or
Mutilated Coin, without
Connivance
Mode 1: Possession of coin, counterfeited or
mutilated by another person, with intent to utter
the same, knowing that it is false or mutilated;
Elements:
1. Possession;
2. With Intent to utter; and
3. Knowledge.
Mode 2: Actually uttering such false or mutilated
coin, knowing the same to be false or mutilated.
Elements:
1. Actually uttering; and
2. Knowledge.
Possession prohibited in this article is not only actual
and physical possession, but also that of a
constructive one, or the subjection of the thing to
one’s control. The possessor should not be the
counterfeiter, mutilator or importer of the coins.
As long as the offender has knowledge that the coin
is false or mutilated, there is no need for him to
connive with the counterfeiter or mutilator.
f. Article 166 – Forging Treasury or
Bank Notes or Other Documents
Payable to Bearer; Importing and
Uttering Such False or Forged
Notes and Documents
Acts punished
1. Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes
or other documents payable to bearer;
2. Importation of such false or forged obligations
or notes;
3. Uttering of such false or forged obligations or
notes in connivance with the forgers or
importers.
“Forging” – By giving any treasury or bank note, or
any instrument payable to bearer, or to order the
appearance of a true and genuine document.
“Falsification” – By erasing, substituting,
counterfeiting or altering by any means, the figures,
letters, words, or signs contained therein.
Page 170 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
The instrument is payable to bearer:
1. When expressed to be so payable
2. When payable to a person named therein or
bearer
3. When payable to the order of a fictitious or non-
existing person, and such fact was known to the
person making it so payable
4. When the name of the payee does not purport to
be the name of any person
5. When the only or last endorsement is an
endorsement in blank.
The reason for this is that the forging tends to bring
such documents into discredit and the offense
produces a lack of confidence on the part of the
holders of said documents to the prejudice of society
and of the State.
g. Article 167 – Counterfeiting,
Importing, and Uttering
Instruments Not Payable to
Bearer
Elements:
1. There is an instrument payable to order or other
document of credit not payable to bearer;
2. Offender either forged, imported or uttered such
instrument;
3. In case of uttering, he connived with the forger
or importer.
An instrument is payable to order where it is drawn
payable to the order of a specified person or to him
or his order.
This covers instruments or other documents of credit
issued by a foreign government or bank.
Forgery of currency is punished so as to maintain
integrity of the currency and thus insure the credit
standing of the government.
Connivance is not required in uttering if the utterer is
the forger.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Acts of Forgery
a. Article 168 – Illegal Possession
and Use of False Treasury or
Bank Notes and Other
Instruments of Credit
Elements:
1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other
obligation and security:
a. Payable to bearer, or any instrument payable
to order or other document of credit not
payable to bearer is
b. Forged or falsified by another person;
2. Offender knows that any of those instruments is
forged or falsified;
3. He either –
a. Uses any of such forged or falsified
instruments; or
b. Possesses with intent to use any of such
forged or falsified instruments
The rule is that if a person had in his possession a
falsified document and he made use of it, taking
advantage of it and profiting thereby, the
presumption is that he is the material author of the
falsification. [People v. Sendaydiego, G.R. No. L-33254
(1978)]
Possession of false treasury or bank notes alone is not
a criminal offense.
Intent to use is sufficient to consummate the crime
when the offender is in possession of false or falsified
notes or obligations.
The accused must have knowledge of the forged
character of the note.
b. Article 169 – How Forgery is
Committed
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and
genuine document;
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or
altering by any means the figures, letters, words,
or sign contained therein.
Forgery includes falsification and counterfeiting.
Page 171 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
For possession of false treasury or bank note to
constitute a criminal offense, it must be with intent to
use.
The essence of forgery is giving a document the
appearance of a true and genuine document.
Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or design
would amount to forgery. At most, it would only be
frustrated forgery.
Possession of genuine treasury notes of the
Philippines any of “the figures, letters, words or signs
contained” in which had been erased and/or altered,
with knowledge of such erasure and alteration, and
with the intent to use such notes in enticing another
to advance funds for the avowed purpose of financing
the manufacture of counterfeit treasury notes of the
Philippines, is punishable under Art. 168 in relation to
Art. 166 (1). [Del Rosario v. People, G.R. No. L-16806
(1961)]
Forgery can be committed through the use of genuine
paper bills that have been withdrawn from circulation,
by giving them the appearance of some other true and
genuine document. [People v. Galano, C.A. 54 O.G.
5899]
3. Acts of Falsification
a. Article 170 – Falsification of
Legislative Documents
Elements:
1. There is a bill, resolution or ordinance enacted or
approved or pending approval by either House of
the Legislature or any provincial board or
municipal council;
2. Offender alters the same;
3. He has no proper authority therefor;
4. The alteration has changed the meaning of the
documents.
The writing must be:
1. complete in itself; and
2. either:
a. capable of extinguishing an obligation or
creating rights; or
b. capable of becoming evidence of the facts
stated therein.
Five classes of falsification:
1. Falsification of legislative documents;
2. Falsification of a document by a public officer,
employee or notary public;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

3. Falsification of a public or official, or commercial 1st Element: Persons Liable under this Article
documents by a private individual; Under this article, only a public officer, employee or
4. Falsification of a private document by any notary public, or ecclesiastical minister can be the
person; offender.
5. Falsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone
messages. The ecclesiastical minister is liable with respect to any
record or document that its falsification may affect
Falsification v. Forgery the civil status of persons.
Forgery Falsification
2nd Element: Offender Take Advantage of his
As used in Article 169, The commission of any of Official Position
forgery refers to the the 8 acts mentioned in Offender takes advantage of his official position in
falsification and Article 171 on legislative falsifying a document when:
counterfeiting of (only the act if making 1. He has the duty to make or prepare, or intervene
treasury or bank notes alteration) public or in the preparation of the document; or
or any instruments official, commercial or 2. He has the official custody of the document he
payable to bearer or to private documents or falsifies.
order wireless or telegraph
messages. 3rd Element: Offender Falsifies a Document
A document is any written statement by which a right
b. Article 171 – Falsification by or status is established or an obligation is
extinguished.
Public Officer, Employee or
Notary or Ecclesiastical Minister Par. 1: Counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric.
Elements: 2 ways of committing falsification under this
1. Offender is a Public officer, employee, or notary paragraph:
public; 1. Counterfeiting, which is imitating any
2. He takes advantage of his official position; handwriting, signature or rubric
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the a. There should be an intent to imitate, or an
following acts: attempt to imitate
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, b. Two signatures, the genuine and the forged,
signature or rubric; should bear some resemblance.
b. Causing it to appear that persons have 2. Feigning, which is simulating a signature,
participated in any act or proceeding when handwriting or rubric out of one which does not
they did not in fact so participate; actually exist.
c. Attributing to persons who have participated
in an act or proceeding statements other than Par. 2: Causing it to appear that persons have
those in fact made by them; participated in any act or proceeding when they
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration did not in fact so participate.
of facts;
e. Altering true dates; Requisites:
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a 1. Offender caused it to appear in a document that
genuine document which changes its a person/s participated in an act or proceeding.
meaning; 2. Such person/s did not in fact participate.
g. Issuing in an authenticated form:
• A document purporting to be a copy of Par. 3: Attributing to persons who have
an original document participated in an act or proceeding statements
• When no such original exists, or other than those in fact made by them
• Including in such a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of Requisites:
the genuine original; 1. Person/s participated in an act or proceeding
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative 2. Such person/s made statements in that act or
to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, proceeding
or official book. 3. Offender, in making a document, attributed to
such person/s statements other than those they
in fact made.

Page 172 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Par 7: Issuing in an authenticated form a

Par. 4: Making untruthful statements in a
narration of facts
Requisites:
1. Offender makes in a document statements in a
narration of facts
2. He has a legal obligation to disclose truth of facts
3. Facts narrated are absolutely false
4. Perversion of truth in the narration was made
with the wrongful intent of injuring a third
person.
There must be narration of facts, not conclusion of
law. There should be a legal obligation to disclose the
truth. [Beradio v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-49483-86 (1981)]
The person making the narration of facts must be
aware of the falsity of facts narrated by him. The
narration of facts must be absolutely false. If there is
some colorable truth in such statements, crime of
falsification is not deemed to have been committed.
document purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or
including in such a copy a statement contrary to,
or different from, that of the genuine original
Falsification in this paragraph cannot be committed
by a private individual, or by a notary public, or by a
public officer, who does not take advantage of his
official position.
This is because authentication of a document can only
be made by the custodian or the one who prepared
and retained a copy of the original.
1. Purporting to be a copy of the original when no
such original exists.
2. Including in a copy a statement contrary to, or
different from, that of the genuine original.
A private person who cooperates with a public officer
in the falsification of a public document is guilty of
the crime and incurs the same liability and penalty.

The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third Par 1 Par 2 Par 3 Par 4
person is immaterial in falsification of a public
document. [Siquian v. People, G.R. No. 82197 (1989)] May be a May be a May be a May be a
genuine genuine genuine genuine
There can be falsification by omission. An assistant (later (later (later (later
bookkeeper is guilty of falsification by intentionally falsified) or falsified) or falsified) or falsified) or
not putting a record in his personal account of chits an entirely an entirely an entirely an entirely
and destroyed them so he could avoid paying the fabricated fabricated fabricated fabricated
same. [People v. Dizon, G.R. No. 144026 (2006)] document document document document
Par 5 Par 6 Par 7 Par 8
Par. 5: Altering true dates May be a
genuine
1. The date must be essential There must There must There must
(later
2. The alteration of the date must affect the veracity be a be a be a
falsified) or
of the documents or the effects thereof (such as genuine genuine genuine
an entirely
dates of birth, marriage, or death). document document document
fabricated
document
Par. 6: Making any alteration or intercalation in a
genuine document which changes its meaning
Four Kinds of Documents
Requisites: 1. Public document in the execution of which, a
1. There be an alteration (change) or intercalation person in authority or notary public has taken
(insertion) on a document. part;
2. It was made on a genuine document. a. A document created, executed or issued
3. Alteration or intercalation has changed the b. By a public official
meaning of the document. c. In response to the exigencies of the public
4. Change made the document speak something service,
false. d. Or in execution of w/c public official
intervened.
Change or insertion must affect the integrity or effects 2. Official document in the execution of which a
of the document. Furthermore, the alteration should public official takes part;
make the document speak something false. a. A document issued by a public official in the
Otherwise, it would merely be a correction. exercise of the functions of his office. It falls

Page 173 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
within the larger class called public
documents.
b. A document required by a bureau to be filled
by its officers for purposes of record and
information is a public document.
3. Commercial document or any document
recognized by the Code of Commerce or any
commercial law; and
4. A deed or instrument executed by a private
person without the intervention of a notary
public or other persons legally authorized. -
Private document in the execution of which only
private individuals take part.
The element of damage is not necessary because it is
the interest of the community which is intended to be
guaranteed.
The character of the offender and his faithfulness to
his duty is mainly taken into consideration.
Public and Private Writings under The Rules Of
Court:
1. Written official acts, or records, of the official
acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies and
tribunals, and public officers
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public
except last will and testaments
3. Public records kept in the Philippines, of private
documents required by law to be entered therein.
All other writings are private.
After an investigation, a group of public officers were
caught and convicted of falsifying cash vouchers. On
appeal the SC held that cash vouchers are NOT
commercial documents because they are not
documents used by merchants or businessmen to
promote or facilitate credit transactions nor are they
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or
other commercial law. Rather, they are private
documents which have been defined as:
1. Deeds or instruments executed by a private
person
2. Without the intervention of a public notary or of
other person legally authorized,
3. By which some disposition or agreement is
proved, evidenced or set forth. [People v.
Batulanon, G.R. No. 13985 (2006)]
Page 174 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Article 172 – Falsification by
Private Individual and Use of
Falsified Documents
Mode 1: Falsification of public, official or
commercial document by a private individual;
Elements:
1. Offender is a Private individual OR Public officer
or employee who did not take advantage of his
official position;
2. He committed any act of Falsification (Art. 171);
3. The falsification was committed in a public,
official, or commercial document or letter of
exchange.
Mode 2: Falsification of private document by any
person;
Elements:
1. Offender committed any of the acts of
Falsification except Article 171(7), that is:
a. Issuing in an authenticated form a document
purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or
b. Including in such a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from, that of the
genuine original;
2. Falsification was committed in any Private
document;
3. Falsification causes Damage to a third party or at
least the falsification was committed with intent
to cause such damage.
Mode 3: Use of falsified document.
Elements in introducing in a judicial proceeding
1. Offender knew that the document was falsified
by another person;
2. The False document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1
or 2);
3. He Introduced said document in evidence in any
judicial proceeding.
Elements in use in any other transaction –
1. Offender Knew that a document was falsified by
another person;
2. The False document is embraced in Articles 171
or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He Used such document;
4. The use caused Damage to another or at least
used with intent to cause damage.
In the falsification of public or official documents, it
is not necessary that there be present the idea of gain
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
or the intent to cause damage. This is because the
principal thing punished is the violation of public faith
and destruction of the truth as therein solemnly
proclaimed.
The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third
person is not necessary when the falsified document
is a public document. [Siquian v. People, supra.]
Note: This statement applies as well to commercial
documents, because as to this kind of document, a
credit is sought to be protected. [Reyes]
Since damage is not an element of falsification of a
public document, it could be complexed with estafa,
theft or malversation as a necessary means to commit
the latter crimes.
There is no crime of falsification of private document
through negligence or imprudence.
If the document is intended by law to be part of the
public or official record, the falsification, although it
was private at the time of falsification, it is regarded
as falsification of a public or official document.
Falsification through imprudence implies lack of such
intent, thus there is no crime of falsification of a
private document through negligence or imprudence.
The possessor of a falsified document is presumed to
be the author of the falsification. [People v. Manansala,
G.R. No. L-38948 (1933)]
The presumption also holds if the use was so closely
connected in time with the falsification and the user
had the capacity of falsifying the document. [People v.
Sendaydiego, supra]
There is no crime of estafa through falsification of a
private document. Both crimes, separately, require the
element of damage, which each of the two should
have its own.
The fraudulent gain obtained through deceit should
not be the very same damage caused by the
falsification of the private document.
In the crime of falsification of a public document, the
prescriptive period commences from the time the
offended party had constructive notice of the alleged
forgery after the document was registered with the
Register of Deeds [People v. Villalon, G.R. No. 43659
(1990)]
Page 175 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
d. Article 173 – Falsification of
Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and
Telephone Messages, and Use of
Said Falsified Messages
Mode 1: Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph or
telephone message;
Elements:
1. Offender is an officer or employee of the
government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of
sending or receiving wireless, cable or telephone
message;
2. He utters fictitious wireless, cable, telegraph or
telephone message.
Mode 2: Falsifying wireless, telegraph or
telephone message;
Elements:
1. Offender is an officer or employee of the
government or an officer or employee of a
private corporation, engaged in the service of
sending or receiving wireless, cable or telephone
message;
2. He falsifies wireless, cable, telegraph or telephone
message.
Mode 3: Using such falsified message.
Elements:
1. Offender knew that wireless, cable, telegraph, or
telephone message was falsified by an officer or
employee of the government or an officer or
employee of a private corporation engaged in the
service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or
telephone message;
2. He used such falsified dispatch;
3. The use resulted in the prejudice of a third party
or at least there was intent to cause such
prejudice.
The public officer, to be liable, must be engaged in
the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable,
telegraph or telephone message.
A private individual cannot be a principal by direct
participation in falsification of telegraphic dispatches
under Article 173, unless he is an employee of a
corporation engaged in the business of sending or
receiving wireless, telegraph or telephone messages.
But a private individual can be held criminally liable
as principal by inducement.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
e. Article 174 – False Medical
Certificates, False Certifcates of
Merits of Service, Etc.
Persons liable
1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the
practice of his profession, issues a false certificate
(it must refer to the illness or injury of a person);
Note: The crime here is false medical certificate by
a physician.
2. Public officer who issues a false certificate of
merit of service, good conduct or similar
circumstances;
Note: The crime here is false certificate of merit
or service by a public officer.
3. Private person who falsifies a certificate falling
within the classes mentioned in the two
preceding subdivisions.
Note: The crime here is false medical certificate by
a private individual or false certificate of merit or
service by a private individual.
f. Article 175 – Using False
Certificates
Elements:
1. The following issues a false certificate:
a. Physician or surgeon, in connection with the
practice of his profession, issues a false
Medical certificate;
b. Public officer issues a false certificate of
Merit of service, good conduct or similar
circumstances;
c. Private Person falsifies a certificate falling
within the 2 preceding subdivisions.
2. Offender knows that the certificate was false;
3. He uses the same.
When any of the false certificates mentioned in Article
174 is used in a judicial proceeding, Article 172 does
not apply, because the use of false document in
judicial proceeding under Article 172 is limited to
those false documents embraced in Articles 171 and
172.
Page 176 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
g. Article 176 – Manufacturing and
Possession of Instruments or
Implements for Falsification
Acts punished:
1. Making or introducing into the Philippines any
stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification;
2. Possession with intent to use the instruments or
implements for counterfeiting or falsification
made in or introduced into the Philippines by
another person.
As in Article 165, the possession contemplated here
is constructive possession. The implements
confiscated need not form a complete set.
4. Other Falsities
a. Article 177 – Usurpation of
Authority or Official Functions
Mode 1: Usurpation of authority. (no connection
with the office represented)
The mere act of knowingly and falsely representing
oneself to be an officer is sufficient. It is not necessary
that he perform an act pertaining to a public officer.
Elements:
1. Offender knowingly and falsely Represents
himself;
2. As an Officer, agent or representative of any
department or agency of the Philippine
government or of any foreign government.
Mode 2: Usurpation of official functions. (excess
of authority)
In usurpation of official functions, it is essential that
the offender should have performed an act pertaining
to a person in authority or public officer, in addition
to other requirements.
Elements
1. Offender performs any act;
2. Pertaining to any person in authority or public
officer of the Philippine government or any
foreign government, or any agency thereof;
3. Under pretense of official position;
4. Without being lawfully entitled to do so
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

The offender should have: Exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary;

1. represented himself to be an officer, agent or a colorable resemblance calculated to deceive the
representative of any agency of the government; common run of people is sufficient.
or
2. performed an act pertaining to a person in d. Article 180 – False Testimony
authority or public officer.
Against a Defendant
Article 177 may be violated by a public officer.
Elements:
1. There is a criminal proceeding;
b. Article 178 – Using Fictitious and 2. Offender testifies falsely under oath against the
Concealing True Name defendant therein;
3. Offender who gives false testimony Knows that
Mode 1: Using fictitious name it is false.
4. Defendant against whom the false testimony is
Elements: given is either acquitted or convicted in a final
1. Offender uses a name other than his real name; judgment.
2. He uses the fictitious name publicly;
3. Purpose of use is to conceal a crime, to evade the The witness who gave the false testimony is liable
execution of a judgment or to cause damage [to even if his testimony was not considered by the court.
public interest – Reyes].
False Testimony – committed by a person who,
Mode 2: Concealing true name being under oath and required to testify as to the truth
of a certain matter at a hearing before a competent
Elements: authority, shall deny the truth or say something
1. Offender conceals his true name and other contrary to it.
personal circumstances;
2. Purpose is only to conceal his identity. False testimony is punished because of its tendency to
prejudice defendant.
Use of Fictitious Concealing True
Name Name Three forms of false testimony:
1. False testimony in criminal cases under Article
Element of Publicity Publicity not necessary 180 and 181;
Purpose is to conceal a 2. False testimony in civil case under Article 182;
Merely to conceal
crime, evade execution of 3. False testimony in other cases under Article 183.
identity.
judgment, cause damage)
Articles 180-184 punish the acts of making false
If the purpose is for causing damage, it must be testimonies because such acts seriously expose society
damage to public interest. to miscarriage of justice.

If it is damage to private interest, the crime will be
estafa under Art 315 2(a).
c. Article 179 – Illegal Use of
Uniforms and Insignia
Elements:
1. Offender makes use of insignia, uniforms or
dress;
2. The insignia, uniforms or dress pertains to an
office not held by such person or a class of
persons of which he is not a member;
3. Said insignia, uniform or dress is used publicly
and improperly.
e. Article 181 – False Testimony
Favorable to the Defendant
Elements:
1. A person gives false testimony;
2. In favor of the defendant;
3. In a criminal case.
The testimony need not in fact be beneficial to the
defendant. It is not necessary that the testimony
should directly influence the decision of acquittal, it
being sufficient that it was given with the intent to
favor the accused.
Conviction or acquittal of defendant in the principal
case is not necessary.

Page 177 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the

Rectification made spontaneously after realizing the falsity is Required by law, that is, it is made for a
mistake is not false testimony. legal purpose.

Penalty for false testimony against the accused is The statement should be outside the coverage of Art
based on the sentence imposed or if accused is 180-181.
acquitted; that for testimony favorable to the accused
is based on the imposable penalty. The rationale for Oath – any form of attestation by which a person
the difference is the measure of the wrong occasioned signifies that he is bound by conscience to perform an
by the injustice in each case, i.e. the undeserved act faithfully and truthfully.
sentence and the imposable penalty avoided,
respectively. Affidavit – sworn statement in writing; declaration in
writing, made upon oath before an authorized
f. Article 182 – False Testimony in magistrate or officer.
Civil Cases There could be no perjury through negligence or
imprudence. This is because of the requirement that
Elements: the assertion of a falsehood be made willfully and
1. Testimony given in a civil case; deliberately. Hence, good faith or lack of malice is a
2. Testimony relates to the issues presented in said defense in perjury.
case;
3. Testimony is false; It is not necessary that there be a law requiring the
4. Offender knows that testimony is false; statement to be made under oath, as long as it is made
5. Testimony is malicious for a legal purpose.
6. And given with an intent to affect the issues
presented in said case. Perjury is a crime other than false testimony in
criminal cases or false testimony in civil cases, which
Falsity of testimony must first be established. are perversions of truth in judicial proceedings.
Perjury is an offense which covers false oaths other
Art. 182 does not apply in special proceedings. These than those taken in the course of judicial proceedings.
are covered by Art. 183 under “other cases”. [US v. Estraña, G.R. No. 5751 (1910)]
Pending the determination of the falsity of the subject Subornation of perjury is committed by a person who
testimonies in the civil case, the criminal action for knowingly and willfully procures another to swear
false testimony must perforce be suspended. falsely and the witness suborned does testify under
circumstances rendering him guilty of perjury. [US v.
g. Article 183 – False Testimony in Ballena, 18 Phil. 382] Subornation of perjury is not
Other Cases and Perjury in expressly penalized in the RPC; but the direct
induction of a person by another to commit perjury
Solemn Affirmation may be punished under Article 183 in relation to
Article 17.
Acts Punished
1. By falsely Testifying under oath;
2. By Making a false affidavit. Material Relevant Pertinent
Tends in any Concerns
Note: The false testimony should not be in a judicial reasonable collateral
Directed to
proceeding. [Diaz v. People, G.R. No. L-65006 (1990)] degree to matters which
prove a fact in
establish make more or
issue
Elements of perjury: probability or less probable
1. Offender Makes a statement under oath or improbability of the proposition
executes an affidavit upon a material matter; a fact in issue at issue
2. The statement or affidavit is made Before a
competent officer, authorized to receive and
administer oaths;
3. Offender makes a Willful and deliberate assertion
of a falsehood in the statement or affidavit;

Page 178 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
h. Article 184 – Offering False
Testimony in Evidence
Elements:
1. Offender fffers in evidence a false witness or
testimony;
2. He knows that the witness or the testimony was
false;
3. The offer is made in any judicial or official
proceeding.
Offer of evidence begins at the moment a witness is
called to the stand and interrogated by counsel. The
witness must testify.
i. Article 185 – Machinations in
Public Auctions
Mode 1: Soliciting any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking part in
any public auction;
Elements:
1. There is a Public auction;
2. Offender Solicits any gift or a promise from any
of the bidders;
3. Such gift or promise is the Consideration for his
refraining from taking part in that public auction;
4. Offender has the Intent to cause the reduction of
the price of the thing auctioned.
Mode 2: Attempting to cause bidders to stay away
from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or any
other artifice.
Elements:
1. There is a public auction;
2. Offender attempts to cause the bidders to stay
away from that public auction;
3. It is done by threats, gifts, promises or any other
artifice;
4. Offender had the Intent to cause the reduction
of the price of the thing auctioned
The crime is consummated by:
1. Mere solicitation of gift or promise as
consideration for not bidding, or
2. By mere attempt to cause prospective bidders to
stay away from an auction.
Page 179 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
j. Article 186 – Monopolies and
Combinations in Restraint of
Trade
Note: This article has been repealed by the Philippine
Competition Act, which was signed into law on July
21, 2015.
Mode 1: Combination to prevent free competition
in the market
Elements:
1. Entering into any contract or agreement; or
taking part in any conspiracy or combination in
the form of a trust or otherwise;
2. In restraint of trade or commerce or to prevent
by artificial means free competition in the market
Mode 2: Monopoly to restrain free competition in
the market
Elements:
1. Monopolizing any merchandise or object of trade
or commerce; or
2. Combining with any other person or persons to
monopolize said merchandise or object in order
to alter the prices thereof by spreading false
rumors or making use of any other artifice to
restrain free competition in the market
Mode 3: Manufacturer, producer, or processor or
importer combining, conspiring or agreeing with
any person to make transactions prejudicial to
lawful commerce or to increase the market price
of merchandise
Elements:
1. Person liable: (1) manufacturer, (2) producer, (3)
processor, or (4) importer of any merchandise or
object of commerce
2. Crime committed by: (1) combining, (2)
conspiring, or (3) agreeing with any person
3. Purpose: (1) to make transactions prejudicial to
lawful commerce, or (2) to increase the market
price of any merchandise or object of commerce
manufactured, produced, processed, assembled,
or imported into the Philippines
Theory of the law: Competition, not combination,
should be the law of trade
Mere conspiracy or combination is punished.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If the offense affects any food substance or other
article of prime necessity, it is sufficient that initial
steps are taken.
When offense is committed by a corporation or
association, the president and directors or managers
are liable.
k. Article 187 – Importation and
Disposition of Falsely Marked
Articles or Merchandise Made of
Gold, Silver, or other Precious
Metals or their Alloys
Elements:
1. Offender imports, sells or disposes of any of
those articles or merchandise (i.e. gold, silver,
other precious metals or their alloys)
2. The stamps, brands, or marks of those articles of
merchandise fail to indicate the actual fineness or
quality of said metals or alloys
3. Offender knows that the stamps, brands, or
marks fail to indicate the actual fineness or quality
of the metals or alloys
Selling the misbranded articles is not necessary.
Article 187 does not apply to manufacturer of
misbranded articles – he would be liable for estafa
under Art. 315(2)(b).
RA 10175: An Act Defining Cybercrime,
Providing for the Prevention, Investigation,
Suppression and the Imposition of Penalties
Thereefor and for Other Purposes (Cybercrime
Prevention Act of 2012)
Note: RA 10175 is specifically mentioned in the 2018
Bar Syllabus
PUNISHABLE ACTS
1. Offenses against the confidentiality, integrity
and availability of computer data and
systems:
a. Illegal Access. – The access to the whole or
any part of a computer system without right.
Access refers to the instruction,
communication with, storing data in,
retrieving data from, or otherwise making
use of any resources of a computer system or
communication network. [Sec. 3(a), R.A.
10145]
Page 180 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Without right refers to either: (i) conduct
undertaken without or in excess of authority;
or (ii) conduct not covered by established
legal defenses, excuses, court orders,
justifications, or relevant principles under
the law. [Sec. 3(h), R.A. 10145]
b. Illegal Interception. – The interception
made by technical means without right of
any non-public transmission of computer
data to, from, or within a computer system
including electromagnetic emissions from a
computer system carrying such computer
data.
Interception refers to listening to, recording,
monitoring or surveillance of the content of
communications, including procuring of the content of
data, either directly, through access and use of a
computer system or indirectly, through the use of
electronic eavesdropping or tapping devices, at the
same time that the communication is occurring. [Sec.
3(m), R.A. 10145]
c. Data Interference. — The intentional or
reckless alteration, damaging, deletion or
deterioration of computer data, electronic
document, or electronic data message,
without right, including the introduction or
transmission of viruses.
d. System Interference. — The intentional
alteration or reckless hindering or
interference with the functioning of a
computer or computer network by inputting,
transmitting, damaging, deleting,
deteriorating, altering or suppressing
computer data or program, electronic
document, or electronic data message,
without right or authority, including the
introduction or transmission of viruses.
e. Misuse of Devices.
1. The use, production, sale, procurement,
importation, distribution, or otherwise
making available, without right, of:
o A device, including a computer
program, designed or adapted
primarily for the purpose of
committing any of the offenses
under this Act; or
o A computer password, access code,
or similar data by which the whole
or any part of a computer system is
capable of being accessed with
intent that it be used for the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
purpose of committing any of the
offenses under this Act.
2. The possession of an item referred to in
paragraphs 5(i)(aa) or (bb) above with
intent to use said devices for the
purpose of committing any of the
offenses under this section.
f. Cyber-squatting. – The acquisition of a
domain name over the internet in bad faith
to profit, mislead, destroy reputation, and
deprive others from registering the same, if
such a domain name is:
1. Similar, identical, or confusingly similar
to an existing trademark registered with
the appropriate government agency at
the time of the domain name
registration:
2. Identical or in any way similar with the
name of a person other than the
registrant, in case of a personal name;
and
3. Acquired without right or with
intellectual property interests in it.
2. Computer-related Offenses:
Computer refers to an electronic, magnetic,
optical, electrochemical, or other data processing
or communications device, or grouping of such
devices, capable of performing logical,
arithmetic, routing, or storage functions and
which includes any storage facility or equipment
or communications facility or equipment directly
related to or operating in conjunction with such
device. It covers any type of computer device
including devices with data processing
capabilities like mobile phones, smart phones,
computer networks and other devices connected
to the internet. [Sec. 3(d), R.A. 10145]
a. Computer-related Forgery. —
1. The input, alteration, or deletion of any
computer data without right resulting in
inauthentic data with the intent that it be
considered or acted upon for legal
purposes as if it were authentic,
regardless whether or not the data is
directly readable and intelligible;
Alteration refers to the modification or
change, in form or substance, of an existing
computer data or program. [Sec. 3(b), R.A.
10145]
2. The act of knowingly using computer
data which is the product of computer-
Page 181 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
related forgery as defined herein, for the
purpose of perpetuating a fraudulent or
dishonest design.
b. Computer-related Fraud. — The
unauthorized input, alteration, or deletion of
computer data or program or interference in
the functioning of a computer system,
causing damage thereby with fraudulent
intent: Provided, That if no damage has yet
been caused, the penalty imposable shall be
one (1) degree lower.
c. Computer-related Identity Theft. – The
intentional acquisition, use, misuse, transfer,
possession, alteration or deletion of
identifying information belonging to
another, whether natural or juridical, without
right: Provided, That if no damage has yet
been caused, the penalty imposable shall be
one (1) degree lower.
3. Content-related Offenses:
a. Cybersex. — The willful engagement,
maintenance, control, or operation, directly
or indirectly, of any lascivious exhibition of
sexual organs or sexual activity, with the aid
of a computer system, for favor or
consideration.
b. Child Pornography. — The unlawful or
prohibited acts defined and punishable
by Republic Act No. 9775 or the Anti-Child
Pornography Act of 2009, committed
through a computer system: Provided, That
the penalty to be imposed shall be (1) one
degree higher than that provided for in
Republic Act No. 9775.
c. Unsolicited Commercial
Communications. — The transmission of
commercial electronic communication with
the use of computer system which seek to
advertise, sell, or offer for sale products and
services are prohibited unless:
1. There is prior affirmative consent from
the recipient; or
2. The primary intent of the
communication is for service and/or
administrative announcements from the
sender to its existing users, subscribers
or customers; or
3. The following conditions are present:
• The commercial electronic
communication contains a simple,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
valid, and reliable way for the
recipient to reject. receipt of further
commercial electronic messages
(opt-out) from the same source;
• The commercial electronic
communication does not purposely
disguise the source of the electronic
message; and
• The commercial electronic
communication does not purposely
include misleading information in
any part of the message in order to
induce the recipients to read the
message.
d. Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited acts of
libel as defined in Article 355 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, committed
through a computer system or any other
similar means which may be devised in the
future. [Sec. 4, R.A. 10145]
Other Offenses
1. Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of
Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully abets or
aids in the commission of any of the offenses
enumerated in this Act shall be held liable.
2. Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime. —
Any person who willfully attempts to commit any
of the offenses enumerated in this Act shall be
held liable. [Sec. 5 R.A. 10145]
Coverage of the law; aggravating circumstance
All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, as
amended, and special laws, if committed by, through
and with the use of information and communications
technologies shall be covered by the relevant
provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to
be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that
provided for by the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
and special laws, as the case may be. [Sec. 6 R.A.
10145]
Double jeopardy
A prosecution under this Act shall be without
prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision
of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special
laws. [Sec. 7 R.A. 10145]
Disclosure of Computer Data
Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a court
warrant, shall issue an order requiring any person or
service provider to disclose or submit subscriber’s
information, traffic data or relevant data in his/its
possession or control within seventy-two (72) hours
from receipt of the order in relation to a valid
Page 182 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
complaint officially docketed and assigned for
investigation and the disclosure is necessary and
relevant for the purpose of investigation. [Sec. 14,
R.A. 10145]
Search, Seizure and Examination of Computer
Data
Where a search and seizure warrant is properly issued,
the law enforcement authorities shall likewise have
the following powers and duties. [Sec. 15, R.A. 10145]
Within the time period specified in the warrant, to
conduct interception, as defined in this Act, and:
1. To secure a computer system or a computer data
storage medium;
2. To make and retain a copy of those computer
data secured;
3. To maintain the integrity of the relevant stored
computer data;
4. To conduct forensic analysis or examination of
the computer data storage medium; and
5. To render inaccessible or remove those
computer data in the accessed computer or
computer and communications network.
Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement authorities
may order any person who has knowledge about the
functioning of the computer system and the measures
to protect and preserve the computer data therein to
provide, as is reasonable, the necessary information,
to enable the undertaking of the search, seizure and
examination.
Law enforcement authorities may request for an
extension of time to complete the examination of the
computer data storage medium and to make a return
thereon but in no case for a period longer than thirty
(30) days from date of approval by the court. [Sec. 15,
R.A. 10145]
Custody of Computer Data
All computer data, including content and traffic data,
examined under a proper warrant shall, within forty-
eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period
fixed therein, be deposited with the court in a sealed
package, and shall be accompanied by an affidavit of
the law enforcement authority executing it stating the
dates and times covered by the examination, and the
law enforcement authority who may access the
deposit, among other relevant data. The law
enforcement authority shall also certify that no
duplicates or copies of the whole or any part thereof
have been made, or if made, that all such duplicates
or copies are included in the package deposited with
the court. The package so deposited shall not be
opened, or the recordings replayed, or used in
evidence, or then contents revealed, except upon
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
order of the court, which shall not be granted except
upon motion, with due notice and opportunity to be
heard to the person or persons whose conversation or
communications have been recorded. [Sec. 16, R.A.
10145]
Destruction of Computer Data
Upon expiration of the periods as provided in
Sections 13 and 15, service providers and law
enforcement authorities, as the case may be, shall
immediately and completely destroy the computer
data subject of a preservation and examination. [Sec.
17, R.A. 10145]
Exclusionary Rule
Any evidence procured without a valid warrant or
beyond the authority of the same shall be inadmissible
for any proceeding before any court or tribunal. [Sec.
18, R.A. 10145]
Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data
When a computer data is prima facie found to be in
violation of the provisions of this Act, the DOJ shall
issue an order to restrict or block access to such
computer data. . [Sec. 19, R.A. 10145]
Liability under P.D. 1829
Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter IV
(Sec. 10-19) hereof specifically the orders from law
enforcement authorities shall be punished as a
violation of Presidential Decree No. 1829 with
imprisonment of prision correctional in its
maximum period or a fine of One hundred thousand
pesos (Php100,000.00) or both, for each and every
noncompliance with an order issued by law
enforcement authorities. [Sec. 20, R.A. 10145]
Page 183 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
E. Title V. Crimes Relative
to Opium and Other
Prohibited Drugs
Note: Arts. 190-194 were repealed by R.A. 6425,
known as the “Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972.” R.A.
No. 9165, known as the “Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002” in turn repealed RA
No. 6425.
Definition of Important Terms
Dangerous drugs – those listed in:
1. The Schedules annexed to the 1961 Single
Convention on Narcotic Drugs, as amended by
the 1972 Protocol, and
2. The Schedules annexed to the 1971 Single
Convention on Psychotropic Substances as
enumerated in the attached annex which is an
integral part of this Act. [Sec. 3(j), RA 9165]
Chemical Diversion – The sale, distribution, supply
or transport of legitimately imported, in-transit,
manufactured or procured controlled precursors and
essential chemicals, in diluted, mixtures, or in
concentrated form, to any person or entity engaged in
the manufactured of any dangerous drugs, and shall
include packaging, labelling, or concealment of such
transaction.
Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals –
Include those listed in Tables I and II of the 188 UN
Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotics Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Importation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemical [Sec. 4]
2. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation,
Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of
Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals [Sec. 5]
Elements of sale
What determines if there was, indeed, a sale of
dangerous drugs is proof of the concurrence of
all the elements of the offense, to wit:
a. the identity of the buyer and the seller, the
object, and the consideration; and
b. the delivery of the thing sold and the
payment therefor. [People v. Partoza, G.R. No.
182418 (2009)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
There must be proof that the transaction or sale
actually took place and that the corpus delicti be
presented in court as evidence. [People v. Musa, G.R.
No. 96177 (1993)]
3. Maintenance of a Den, Dive or Resort. [Sec.
6]
4. Employees and Visitors of a Den, Dive or
Resort [Sec. 7]
5. Manufacture of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals [Sec. 8]
6. Illegal Chemical Diversion of Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals. [Sec. 9]
7. Manufacture or Delivery of Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus, and Other
Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals. [Sec. 10]
8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 11]
Elements of possession
For an accused to be convicted of illegal
possession of prohibited or regulated drugs, the
following elements must concur:
a. the accused is in possession of an item or
object which is identified to be a prohibited
drug;
b. such possession is not authorized by law; and
c. the accused freely and consciously possesses
the said drug.[People v. Partoza, supra]
9. Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 12]
10. Possession of Dangerous Drugs During
Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings [Sec.
13]
a. the accused was in possession of the
dangerous drug,
b. such possession is not authorized by law
c. the accused freely and consciously possessed
the dangerous drug
d. the possession of the dangerous drug must
have occurred during a party, or at a social
gathering or meeting, or in the proximate
company of at least two (2) persons [People v.
Martinez, G.R. No. 191366 (2010)]
11. Possession of Equipment, Instrument,
Apparatus and Other Paraphernalia for
Dangerous Drugs During Parties, Social
Gatherings or Meetings [Sec. 14]
12. Use of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 15]
13. Cultivation or Culture of Plants Classified as
Dangerous Drugs or are Sources Thereof.
[Sec. 16]
Page 184 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
14. Maintenance and Keeping of Original
Records of Transactions on Dangerous
Drugs and/or Controlled Precursors and
Essential Chemicals [Sec. 17]
15. Unnecessary Prescription of Dangerous
Drugs [Sec. 18]
16. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous Drugs
[Sec. 19]
Penalties for Unlawful Acts
1. The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a
fine ranging from P500,000 to P10,000,000 -
Those acts which include or involve any
dangerous drugs [Secs. 4, 5, 6, 8, 11, 16 and 19]
2. The penalty of 12 years and 1 day to 20 years of
imprisonment and a fine ranging from
P100,000.00 to P500,000
a. Those acts which involve any controlled
precursor and essential chemical [Secs. 4, 5, 6,
8, 9 and 10]
b. Anyone who acts as a "protector/ coddler"
of any violator of the provisions under
sections 4, 5, 6, 8 and 16
c. Sections 7, 10, 16, 17.
3. The maximum penalty provided for under
sections 4, 5, 6, 8 and 16 shall be imposed upon
any person, who organizes, manages or acts as a
"financier" of any of the illegal activities
prescribed in those sections.
4. Any person charged under any provision of this
Act regardless of the imposable penalty shall not
be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-
bargaining. [Sec. 23, Art. II, RA 9165]
Any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing
under this Act, regardless of the penalty imposed by
the Court, cannot avail of the privilege granted by the
Probation Law or Presidential Decree No. 968, as
amended. [Sec. 24, Art. II, RA 9165]
Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the
contrary, a positive finding for the use of dangerous
drugs shall be a qualifying aggravating circumstance in
the commission of a crime by an offender, and the
application of the penalty provided for in the Revised
Penal Code shall be applicable. [Sec. 25, Art. II, RA
9165]
Any attempt or conspiracy to commit the following
unlawful acts shall be penalized by the same penalty
prescribed for the commission of the same as
provided under this Act [Sec. 26, Art. II, RA 9165]:
1. Importation of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical;
2. Sale, trading, administration, dispensation,
delivery, distribution and transportation of any
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical;
3. Maintenance of a den, dive or resort where any
dangerous drug is used in any form;
4. Manufacture of any dangerous drug and/or
controlled precursor and essential chemical;
5. Cultivation or culture of plants which are sources
of dangerous drugs.
The maximum penalties of the unlawful acts provided
for in this Act shall be imposed, in addition to
absolute perpetual disqualification from any public
office, if those found guilty of such unlawful acts are
government officials and employees. [Sec. 28, Art. II,
RA 9165]
Any person who is found guilty of "planting" any
dangerous drug and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical, regardless of quantity and purity,
shall suffer the penalty of death. [Sec. 29, Art. II, RA
9165]
In case any violation of this Act is committed by a
partnership, corporation, association or any juridical
entity, the partner, president, director, manager,
trustee, estate administrator, or officer who consents
to or knowingly tolerates such violation shall be held
criminally liable as a co-principal. [Sec. 30, Art. II, RA
9165]
In addition to the penalties prescribed in the unlawful
act committed, any alien who violates such provisions
of this Act shall, after service of sentence, be deported
immediately without further proceedings, unless the
penalty is death. [Sec. 31, Art. II, RA 9165]
Accessory Penalties: A person convicted under this
Act shall be disqualified to exercise his/her civil rights
such as but not limited to:
1. the rights of parental authority or guardianship,
either as to the person or property of any ward;
2. the rights to dispose of such property by any act
or any conveyance inter vivos, and
3. political rights such as but not limited to the right
to vote and be voted for.
Such rights shall also be suspended during the
pendency of an appeal from such conviction. [Sec. 35,
Art. II, RA 9165]
Possession of marijuana is absorbed in the sale
thereof, except where the seller is further
apprehended in possession of another quantity of the
prohibited drugs not covered by or included in the
sale and which are probably intended for some future
Page 185 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
dealings or use by the seller.[People v. Lacerna, G.R. No.
109250 (1997)]
The crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs
necessarily includes the crime of illegal possession of
dangerous drugs. The same ruling may also be
applied to the other acts penalized under Article II,
Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165 because for the
accused to be able to trade, administer, dispense,
deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in
transit, or transport any dangerous drug, he must
necessarily be in possession of said drugs. [People v.
Maongco, G.R. No. 196966 (2013)]
IMMUNITY FROM PROSECUTION AND
PUNISHMENT
Requisites:
1. Any person who has violated Sections 7, 11, 12,
14, 15, and 19, Article II of this Act;
2. Who voluntarily gives information about any
violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 13, and 16,
Article II of this Act as well as any violation of
the offenses mentioned if committed by a drug
syndicate, or any information leading to the
whereabouts, identities and arrest of all or any of
the members thereof;
3. Who willingly testifies against such persons as
described above, shall be exempted from
prosecution or punishment for the offense with
reference to which his/her information of
testimony were given, and may plead or prove the
giving of such information and testimony in bar
of such prosecution: Provided the following
conditions concur:
a. The information and testimony are necessary
for the conviction of the persons described
above;
b. Such information and testimony are not yet
in the possession of the State;
c. Such information and testimony can be
corroborated on its material points;
d. The informant or witness has not been
previously convicted of a crime involving
moral turpitude, except when there is no
other direct evidence available for the State
other than the information and testimony of
said informant or witness;
e. The informant or witness shall strictly and
faithfully comply without delay, any
condition or undertaking, reduced into
writing, lawfully imposed by the State as
further consideration for the grant of
immunity from prosecution and
punishment.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Provided, further, That this immunity may be enjoyed
by such informant or witness who does not appear to
be most guilty for the offense with reference to which
the information or testimony were given: Provided,
finally, That there is no direct evidence available for
the State except for the information and testimony of
said informant or witness. [Sec. 33, Art. II, RA 9165]
Termination of Grant of Immunity [Sec. 34, Art. II,
RA 9165]:
1. The immunity granted to the informant or
witness, as prescribed in Section 33 of this Act,
shall not attach should it turn out subsequently
that the information and/or testimony is false,
malicious or made only for the purpose of
harassing, molesting or in any way prejudicing the
persons described in the preceding Section
against whom such information or testimony is
directed. In such case, the informant or witness
shall be subject to prosecution and the enjoyment
of all rights and benefits previously accorded him
under this Act or any other law, decree or order
shall be deemed terminated.
2. In case an informant or witness under this Act
fails or refuses to testify without just cause, and
when lawfully obliged to do so, or violate any
condition accompanying such immunity as
provided above, his/her immunity shall be
removed and he/she shall likewise be subject to
contempt and/or criminal prosecution, as the
case may be, and the enjoyment of all rights and
benefits previously accorded him under this Act
or in any other law, decree or order shall be
deemed terminated.
Custody and Disposition of Seized Substances
The PDEA shall take charge and have custody of all
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous drugs,
controlled precursors and essential chemicals, as well
as instruments/paraphernalia and/or laboratory
equipment so confiscated, seized and/or surrendered,
for proper disposition in the following manner [Sec.
21, Art. II, RA 9165]:
1. The apprehending team shall physically inventory
and photograph the same in the presence of the
accused, his representative or counsel, a
representative from the media or the DOJ, and
any elected public official who shall be required
to sign the copies of the inventory and be given a
copy thereof; (as amended by RA NO. 10640; see
also People v Oliva, G.R. No. 234156, Jan. 7, 2019)
2. Within 24 hours upon confiscation/seizure of
dangerous drugs, plant sources of dangerous
drugs, controlled precursors and essential
chemicals, as well as paraphernalia and/or
laboratory equipment, the same shall be
Page 186 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
submitted to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory for
a qualitative and quantitative examination;
3. A certification of the results, done under oath by
the forensic laboratory examiner, shall be issued
within 24 hours after receipt of the subject items.
When the volume of the subject does not allow
the completion of testing within 24 hours, a
partial report shall be issued stating therein the
quantity of dangerous drugs still to be examined
by the forensic laboratory; and a final certification
shall be issued on the completed forensic
laboratory examination on the same within the
next 24 hours;
4. Filing of the criminal case in court.
5. The Court shall, within 72 hours, conduct an
ocular inspection of the confiscated, seized
and/or surrendered items, including the
instruments and/or laboratory equipment;
6. The PDEA shall then within 24 hours proceed
with the destruction or burning of the same, in
the presence of the accused, his his/her
representative or counsel, a representative from
the media and the DOJ, civil society groups and
any elected public official.
7. The Board shall then issue a sworn certification
to the fact of destruction or burning of the
subject items which, together with the
representative samples in the custody of the
PDEA, shall be submitted to the court having
jurisdiction over the case. In all instances, the
representative sample/s shall be kept to a
minimum quantity as determined by the Board;
8. After the promulgation and judgment in the
criminal case wherein the representative
sample/s was presented as evidence in court, the
trial prosecutor shall inform the Board of the
final termination of the case and, in turn, shall
request the court for leave to turn over the said
representative sample/s to the PDEA for proper
disposition and destruction within 24 hours from
receipt of the same.
Chain of Custody – the duly recorded authorized
movements and custody of subject items at each
stage, from the time of seizure to presentation to the
court for destruction. Such record of movements and
custody of seized items shall include the identity and
signature of the person who held temporary custody
of the seized items, the date and time when such
transfer of custody was made in the course of
safekeeping and use in court as evidence, and the final
disposition. [Sec. 1b, DDB Resolution No. 1, Series of
2002, implementing RA 9165]
Non-compliance with these requirements under
justifiable grounds, as long as the integrity and the
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
preserved by the apprehending officer/team, shall not
render void and invalid such seizures of and custody
over said items. [Sec. 21(a), IRR of RA 9165]
Any person apprehended or arrested for violating the
provisions of the Act shall be subjected to screening
laboratory examination or test within 24 hours, if the
apprehending or arresting officer has reasonable
ground to believe that the person apprehended or
arrested, on account of physical signs or symptoms or
other visible or outward manifestation, is under the
influence of dangerous drugs. If found to be positive,
the results of the screening laboratory examination or
test shall be challenged within 15 days after receipt of
the result through a confirmatory test conducted in
any accredited analytical laboratory equipped with a
gas chromatograph/mass spectrometry equipment or
some such modern and accepted method, and if
confirmed, the same shall be prima facie evidence that
such person has used dangerous drugs, which is
without prejudice for the prosecution for other
violations of the provisions of the Act: Provided, that
a positive screening laboratory test must be confirmed
for it to be valid in court of law. [Sec. 38, IRR of RA
9165]
Non-presentation of the forensic chemist in illegal
drug cases is an insufficient cause for acquittal. The
corpus delicti (the body of the crime) in dangerous
drugs cases constitutes the dangerous drug itself.
[People v. Quebral, G.R. NO. 185379 (2009)]
The presumption of regularity of official acts does not
apply when police officers have failed to comply with
the standard of procedure set by law in a way that
compromises the integrity and evidentiary value of
the thing seized. In such case, the indispensable
element of corpus delicti would not be proven.
[Fajardo v. People, G.R. No. 185460 (2012)]
OTHER IMPORTANT POINTS
Authorized Drug Testing
The following shall be subjected to undergo drug
testing: [Sec. 36, Art. III, RA 9165]
1. Applicants for driver’s license
2. Applicants for firearm’s license and permit to
carry firearms outside of residence.
All persons who by the nature of their profession
carry firearms shall undergo drug testing.
3. Students of secondary or tertiary schools.
4. Officers and employees of public and private
offices, whether domestic or overseas, as
contained in the company’s work rules and
regulations. Any officer or employee found
positive for use of dangerous drugs shall be dealt
with administratively which shall be a ground for
Page 187 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
suspension or termination, subject to the
provisions of Article 282 of the Labor Code and
pertinent provisions of the Civil Service Law.
5. Officers and members of the military, police and
other law enforcement agencies
6. All persons charged before the prosecutor's
office with a criminal offense having an
imposable penalty of imprisonment of not less
than six (6) years and one (1) day shall have to
undergo a mandatory drug test.*
7. All candidates for public office whether
appointed or elected both in the national or local
government shall undergo a mandatory drug test.
The testing requirement as to national officials whose
qualification requirements have been set forth in the
Constitution is unconstitutional. Where the
Constitution has expressly set out the qualifications,
these are exclusive and may not be broadened or
circumscribed by legislative fiat. [SJS v. DDB and
PDEA, G.R. No. 157870 (2008)]
The operative concepts in the mandatory drug testing
are “randomness” and “suspicionlessness.” In the
case of persons charged with a crime before the
prosecutor’s office, a mandatory drug testing can
never be random or suspicionless. It violates their
right to privacy and self-incrimination, and is thus
unconstitutional. [SJS v. DDB and PDEA, supra.]
May a drug dependent who is found guilty of the
use of dangerous drugs voluntarily submit
himself for treatment and rehabilitation?
Yes. The drug dependent may, by himself/herself or
through his/her parent, spouse, guardian or relative
within the fourth degree of consanguinity or affinity,
apply to the Board or its duly recognized
representative, for treatment and rehabilitation of the
drug dependency.
Upon such application, the Board shall bring forth the
matter to the Court which shall order that the
applicant be examined for drug dependency. [Sec. 54,
Art. VIII, RA 9165]
Is there also compulsory confinement?
Yes. Notwithstanding any law, rule and regulation to
the contrary, any person determined and found to be
dependent on dangerous drugs shall, upon petition by
the Board or any of its authorized representative, be
confined for treatment and rehabilitation in any
Center duly designated or accredited for the purpose.
A petition for the confinement of a person alleged to
be dependent on dangerous drugs to a Center may be
filed by any person authorized by the Board with the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Regional Trial Court of the province or city where

such person is found. [Sec. 61, Art. VIII, RA 9165]
Any parent, spouse or guardian who, without valid
reason, refuses to cooperate with the Board or any
concerned agency in the treatment and rehabilitation
of a drug dependent who is a minor, or in any manner,
prevents or delays the after-care, follow-up or other
programs for the welfare of the accused drug
dependent, whether under voluntary submission
program or compulsory submission program, may be
cited for contempt by the court. [Sec. 73, Art. VIII,
RA 9165]
What is the PDEA?
The PDEA is the Philippine Drug Enforcement
Agency. It serves as the implementing arm of the
Dangerous Drugs Board. It shall be responsible for
the efficient and effective law enforcement of all the
provisions on any dangerous drug and/or controlled
precursor and essential chemical as provided in this
Act. [Sec. 82, Art. IX, RA 9165]

How long will the drug dependent be confined

for treatment and rehabilitation?
Confinement in a Center for treatment and
rehabilitation shall not exceed one (1) year, after
which time the Court, as well as the Board, shall be
apprised by the head of the treatment and
rehabilitation center of the status of said drug
dependent and determine whether further
confinement will be for the welfare of the drug
dependent and his/her family or the community. [Sec.
54, Art. VIII, RA 9165]

How will a drug dependent who is under the

voluntary submission program and is finally
discharged from confinement in the Center be
exempt from criminal liability?
1. He/she has complied with the rules and
regulations of the center, the applicable rules and
regulations of the Board, including the after-care
and follow-up program for at least eighteen (18)
months following temporary discharge from
confinement in the Center
2. He/she has never been charged or convicted of
any offense punishable under this Act, the
Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972 or Republic Act
No. 6425, as amended; the Revised Penal Code,
as amended; or any special penal laws
3. He/she has no record of escape from a Center
4. He/she poses no serious danger to
himself/herself, his/her family or the community
by his/her exemption from criminal liability [Sec.
55, Art. VIII, RA 9165]

What are the functions of the Dangerous Drugs

Board?
1. Be the policy-making and strategy-formulating
body in the planning and formulation of policies
and programs on drug prevention and control.
2. Develop and adopt a comprehensive, integrated,
unified and balanced national drug abuse
prevention and control strategy.
3. Be under the Office of the President. [Sec. 77, Art.
IX, RA 9165]

Page 188 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC
F. Title VI. Crimes against
Public Morals
Chapter I: Gambling and Betting
1. Art. 195: Gambling
2. Art. 196: Importation, sale and possession of
lottery tickets or advertisements
3. Art. 197: Betting in sports contests
4. Art. 198: Illegal betting on horse races
5. Art. 199: Illegal cockfighting
Note: these laws were repealed by PD 1602
Chapter II: Offenses against Decency and Good
Customs
1. Art. 200: Grave Scandal
2. Art. 201: Immoral doctrines, obscene
publications and exhibitions
3. Art. 202: Vagrancy and prostitution
1. Chapter I: Gambling and
Betting
Gambling – any game or scheme, whether upon
chance or skill, wherein wagers consisting of money,
articles of value or representative of value are at stake
or made.
Note: The following special laws were not listed in the
2018 Bar Syllabus.
a. PD 1602: Prescribing stiffer
penalties on illegal gambling
(Anti-Gambling Act)
PD 1602, which repealed Articles 195-199 insofar as
they are inconsistent with said Act, punishes:
1. Any person who, in any manner, shall directly or
indirectly take part in any illegal or unauthorized
activities or games of—
a. Cockfighting, jueteng, jai alai or horse racing
to include bookie operations and game
fixing, numbers, bingo and other forms of
lotteries;
b. Cara y cruz, pompiang and the like;
c. 7-11 and any game using dice;
d. Black jack, lucky nine, poker and its
derivatives, monte, baccarat, cuajo,
pangguigue and other card games;
e. Paik que, high and low, mahjong, domino
and other games using plastic tiles and the
like;
f. Slot machines, roulette, pinball and other
mechanical contraptions and devices;
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
g. Dog racing, boat racing, car racing and other
forms of races;
h. Basketball, boxing, volleyball, bowling,
pingpong and other forms of individual or
team contests to include game fixing, point
shaving and other machinations;
i. Banking or percentage game, or any other
game scheme, whether upon chance or skill,
wherein wagers consisting of money, articles
of value or representative of value are at
stake or made;
2. Any person who shall knowingly permit any form
of gambling referred to in the preceding
subparagraph to be carried on in an inhabited
place or in any building, vessel or other means of
transportation owned or controlled by him.
3. Any person who shall knowingly permit any form
of gambling to be carried on in a place which has
a reputation of a gambling place or that
prohibited gambling is frequently carried on
therein, or the place is a public or government
building or barangay hall;
4. The maintainer or conductor of the above
gambling schemes.
a. Maintainer: a person who sets up and
furnishes the means with which to carry on
the gambling game or scheme.
b. Conductor: a person who manages or
carries on the gambling game or scheme.
5. A government official who is a maintainer,
conductor or banker of said gambling schemes,
or the player, promoter, referee, umpire, judge or
coach in case of game fixing, point shaving and
machination.
6. Any person who shall, knowingly and without
lawful purpose in any hour of any day, possess
any lottery list, paper or other matter containing
letters, figures, signs or symbols pertaining to or
in any manner used in the games of jueteng, jai-
alai or horse racing bookies, and similar games of
lotteries and numbers which have taken place or
about to take place.
7. Any barangay official who, with knowledge of the
existence of a gambling house or place in his
jurisdiction fails to abate the same or take action
in connection therewith.
8. Any security officer, security guard, watchman,
private or house detective of hotels, villages,
buildings, enclosures and the like which have the
reputation of a gambling place or where gambling
activities are being held.
Any person who shall disclose information that will
lead to the arrest and final conviction of the
malefactor shall be rewarded twenty percent of the
cash money or articles of value confiscated or
forfeited in favor of the government. (Section 3)
Page 189 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
b. RA 9287: Increasing the penalty
for illegal numbers games
Illegal Numbers Game – any form of illegal
gambling activity which uses numbers or
combinations thereof as factors in giving out jackpots.
The law punishes any person who participates in any
illegal numbers game: (Section 3)
1. If such person acts as a bettor;
2. If such person acts as a personnel or staff of an
illegal numbers game operation;
3. If such person allows his vehicle, house, building
or land to be used in the operation of the illegal
numbers games;
4. If such person acts as a collector or agent;
5. If such person acts as a coordinator, controller or
supervisor;
6. If such person acts as a maintainer, manager or
operator;
7. If such person acts as a financier or capitalist;
8. If such person acts as protector or coddler.
The possession of any gambling paraphernalia and
other materials used in the illegal numbers game
operation shall be deemed prima facie evidence of any
offense covered by this Act. (Section 4)
c. Letter of Instruction No. 816
The games of domino, bingo, poker when not played
with five cards stud, cuajo, pangguingue and mahjong,
provided that they are played as parlor games or for
home entertainment, and provided further, that they
are not played in places habitually used for gambling
and the betting is not disguised to defeat the intent of
Presidential Decree No. 1602, are hereby exempted.
Lottery is a scheme for the distribution of prices by
chance among persons who have paid, or agreed to
pay, a valuable consideration for the chance to obtain
a prize. It has 3 elements: 1) Consideration, 2) Chance,
3) Prize or some advantage or inequality in amount or
value which is in the nature of a prize [U.S. v Filart,
G.R. No. L-10263 (1915)]
d. PD 449: Cockfighting Law of
1974
Section 4. Definition of Terms. As used in this law,
the following terms shall be understood, applied
and construed as follows:
(a) Cockfighting shall embrace and mean the
commonly known game or term "cockfighting
Page 190 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
derby, pintakasi or tupada", or its equivalent
terms in different Philippine localities.
(b) Zoning Law or Ordinance. Either both national or
local city or municipal legislation which
logically arranges, prescribes, defines and
apportions a given political subdivision into
specific land uses as present and future
projection of needs warrant.
(c) Bet Taker of Promoter. A person who calls and
takes care of bets from owners of both
gamecocks and those of other bettors before
he orders commencement of the cockfight and
thereafter distributes won bets to the winners
after deducting a certain commission.
(d) Gaffer (Taga Tari). A person knowledgeable in
the art of arming fighting cocks with gaff or
gaffs on either or both legs.
(e) Referee (Sentenciador). A person who watches
and oversees the proper gaffing of fighting
cocks, determines the physical condition of
fighting cocks while cockfighting is in
progress, the injuries sustained by the cocks
and their capability to continue fighting and
decides and make known his decision by work
or gestures and result of the cockfight by
announcing the winner or declaring a tie or no
contest game.
(f) Bettor.A person who participates in cockfights
and with the use of money or other things of
value, bets with other bettors or through the
bet taker or promoter and wins or loses his bet
depending upon the result of the cockfight as
announced by the Referee or Sentenciador. He
may be the owner of fighting cock.
Section 5. Cockpits and Cockfighting: In General:
(1) Ownership, Operation and Management of Cockpits.
Only Filipino citizens not otherwise inhibited
by existing laws shall be allowed to own,
manage and operate cockpits. Cooperative
capitalization is encouraged.
(2) Establishment of Cockpits. Only one cockpit
shall be allowed in each city or municipality,
except that in cities or municipalities with a
population of over one hundred thousand,
two cockpits may be established, maintained
and operated.
(3) Cockpits Site and Construction. Cockpits shall be
constructed and operated within the
appropriate areas as prescribed in Zoning
Law or Ordinance. In the absence of such law
or ordinance, the local executives shall see to
it that no cockpits are constructed within or
near existing residential or commercial areas,
hospitals, school buildings, churches or other
public buildings. Owners, lessees, or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
operators of cockpits which are now in
existence and do not conform to this
requirement are given three years from the
date of effectivity of this Decree to comply
herewith. Approval or issuance of building
permits for the construction of cockpits shall
be made by the city or provincial engineer in
accordance with their respective building
codes, ordinances or engineering laws and
practices.
(4) Holding of Cockfights. Except as provided in
this Decree, cockfighting shall be allowed
only in licensed cockpits during Sundays and
legal holidays and during local fiestas for not
more than three days. It may also be held
during provincial, city or municipal,
agricultural, commercial or industrial fair,
carnival or exposition for a similar period of
three days upon resolution of the province,
city or municipality where such fair, carnival
or exposition is to be held, subject to the
approval of the Chief of Constabulary or his
authorized representative: Provided, that, no
cockfighting on the occasion of such fair,
carnival or exposition shall be allowed within
the month of a local fiesta or for more than
two occasions a year in the same city or
municipality: Provided, further, that no
cockfighting shall be held on December 30
(Rizal Day), June 12 (Philippine
Independence Day) November 30 (National
Heroes Day), Holy Thursday, Good Friday,
Election or Referendum Day and during
Registration Days for such election or
referendum.
(5) Cockfighting for Entertainment of Tourists
or for Charitable Purposes. Subject to the
preceding subsection hereof, the Chief
Constabulary or his authorized representative
may also allow the holding of cockfighting
for the entertainment of foreign dignitaries or
for tourists, or for returning Filipinos,
commonly known as "Balikbayan", or for the
support of national fund-raising campaigns
for charitable purposes as may be authorized
by the Office of the President, upon
resolution of a provincial board, city or
municipal council, in licensed cockpits or in
playgrounds or parks: Provided, that this
privilege shall be extended for only one time,
for a period not exceeding three days, within
a year to a province, city, or municipality.
(6) Other games during cockfights prescribed.
No gambling of any kind shall be permitted
on the premises of the cockpit or place of
cockfighting during cockfights. The owner,
Page 191 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
manager or lessee off such cockpit and the
violators of this injunction shall be criminally
liable under Section 8 hereof.
Section 6. Licensing of Cockpits. City and municipal
mayors are authorized to issue licenses for the
operation and maintenance of cockpits subject to
the approval of the Chief of Constabulary or his
authorized representatives. For this purpose,
ordinances may be promulgated for the imposition
and collection of taxes and fees not exceeding the
rates fixed under Section 13, paragraphs (a) and
(b); and 19; paragraph (g) 16 of Presidential Decree
No. 231, dated June 28, 1973, otherwise known as
the Local Tax Code, as amended.
Section 7. Cockfighting Officials. Gaffers, referees or
bet takers or promoters shall not act as such in any
cockfight herein authorized, without first securing
a license renewable every year on their birthmonth
from the city or municipality where such
cockfighting is held. Cities and municipalities may
charge a tax of not more than twenty pesos. Only
licensed gaffers, referees, bet takers or promoters
shall officiate in all kinds of cockfighting
authorized in this Decree.
Section 8. Penal Provisions. Any violation of the
provisions of this Decree and of the rules and
regulations promulgated by the Chief of
Constabulary pursuant thereto shall be punished as
follows:
(a) By prision correccional in its maximum period and
a fine of two thousand pesos, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, when the
offender is the financer, owner, manger or
operator of cockpit, or the gaffer, referee or
bet taker in cockfights; or the offender is guilty
of allowing, promoting or participating in any
other kind of gambling in the premises of
cockfights during cockfights.
(b) By prision correccional or a fine of not less than six
hundred pesos nor more than two thousand
pesos or both, such imprisonment and fine at
the discretion of the court, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency, in case of
any other offender.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Chapter II: Offenses against
Decency and Good Customs
a. Article 200 – Grave Scandal
Elements:
1. Offender performs an act or acts;
2. Such act or acts be highly scandalous as offending
against decency or good customs;
3. The highly scandalous conduct is not expressly
falling within any other article of this Code; and
4. The act or acts complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or
view.
Decency – means proprietary of conduct; proper
observance of the requirements of modesty, good
taste, etc.
Customs – established usage, social conventions
carried on by tradition and enforced by social
disapproval of any violation thereof.
Grave Scandal – consists of acts which are offensive
to decency and good customs which, having been
committed publicly, have given rise to public scandal
to persons who have accidentally witnessed the same.
The acts must be performed in a public place or
within the public knowledge or view. If it is
committed in a private place, the crime of grave
scandal is not committed.
In conducts involving lasciviousness, it is grave
scandal only where there is mutual consent. (Boado)
Any act which is notoriously offensive to decency
may bring about criminal liability for the crime of
grave scandal, Provided such act does not constitute
some other crime under the Revised Penal Code.
Grave scandal is a crime of last resort.
b. Article 201 – Immoral Doctrines,
Obscene Publications and
Exhibitions and Indecent Shows
Acts punished (as amended by PD 960 and PD
969)
1. Those who shall publicly expound or proclaim
doctrines openly contrary to public morals;
2. The authors of obscene literature, published with
their knowledge in any form, the editors
Page 192 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
publishing such literature; the owners/operators
of the establishment selling the same;
3. Those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, or
any other place, exhibit indecent or immoral
plays, scenes, acts, or shows, it being understood
that the obscene literature or indecent or immoral
plays, scenes, acts or shows, whether live or in
film, which are proscribed by virtue hereof, shall
include those which:
a. glorify criminals or condone crimes;
b. serve no other purpose but to satisfy the
market for violence, lust or pornography;
c. offend any race, or religion;
d. tend to abet traffic in and use of prohibited
drugs; and
e. are contrary to law, public order, morals,
good customs, established policies, lawful
orders, decrees and edicts;
4. Those who shall sell, give away or exhibit films,
prints, engravings, sculpture or literature which
are offensive to morals.
Morals – imply conformity with the generally
accepted standards of goodness or rightness in
conduct or character, sometimes, specifically, to
sexual conduct.
Offense in any of the forms mentioned in the article
is committed only when there is publicity
The test of obscenity:
1. The test is objective.
2. It is more on the effect upon the viewer and not
alone on the conduct of the performer.
3. If the material has the tendency to deprave and
corrupt the mind of the viewer then the same is
obscene and where such obscenity is made
publicly, criminal liability arises.
4. As long as the pornographic matter or exhibition
is made privately, there is no crime committed
under the Revised Penal Code because what is
protected is the morality of the public in general.
Postcards of Philippine inhabitants in native attire
were not obscene because the aggregate judgment of
the community, and the moral sense of the people
were not shocked by those pictures. They were not
offensive to chastity but merely depicted persons as
they actually lived. [People v. Kottinger, G.R. No. L-
20569 (1923)]
The reaction of the public during the performance of
a dance by one who had nothing to cover herself with,
except nylon patches over her breasts and too
abbreviated pair of nylon panties to interrupt her stark
nakedness should be made the gauge in the
determination of whether the dance or exhibition was
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
indecent or immoral. [People v. Aparici, C.A. 52 O.G.
249 (1955)]
An actual exhibition of the sexual act can have no
redeeming feature—no room for art. Therefore, it is
a clear and unmitigated obscenity. [People v. Padan,
G.R. No. L-7295 (1957)]
Miller Test of Obscenity:
[From Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) – adopted
in Fernando v. CA, G.R. No. 159751 (2006)]
1. Whether the average person, applying
contemporary standards, would find the work,
taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interest;
2. Whether the work depicts, in a patently offensive
way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the
applicable state law;
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious
literary, artistic, political or scientific value.
Mere possession of obscene materials, without intent
to sell, exhibit or distribute, is not punishable under
Article 201. The offense is committed only where
there is publicity. So long as the materials are
offered for sale, displayed, or exhibited to the public,
one may be liable. [Fernando v. CA, supra.]
c. Article 202 – Prostitution
(Amended by R.A. 10158)
Elements:
1. The offender is a woman;
2. She habitually indulges in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct;
3. Such indulgence is for money or profit
The term prostitution is applicable to a woman who
for profit or money habitually engages in sexual or
lascivious conduct. A man who engages in the same
conduct – sex for money – is not a prostitute, but a
vagrant.
In law, the mere indulging in lascivious conduct
habitually because of money or gain would amount to
prostitution, even if there is no sexual intercourse.
Virginity is not a defense.
Habituality is the controlling factor; it has to be more
than one time.
There cannot be prostitution by conspiracy. One who
conspires with a woman in the prostitution business
like pimps, taxi drivers or solicitors of clients are guilty
of the crime under Article 341 for white slavery.
Page 193 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Before RA 10158, which decriminalized vagrancy, the
following were liable under Article 202:
1. Any person, having no apparent means of
subsistence, who has the physical ability to work
and who neglects to apply himself to some lawful
calling;
2. Any person found loitering about public or
semipublic buildings or places or tramping or
wandering about the country or the streets
without visible means of support;
3. Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in
houses of ill-fame, ruffians or pimps and those
who habitually associate with prostitutes;
4. Any person who, not being included in the
provisions of other articles in this Code, shall be
found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited
place belonging to another without any lawful or
justifiable purpose;
5. Prostitutes.
All pending cases under the provisions of Article 202
of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy prior to its
amendment by this Act shall be dismissed upon
effectivity of this Act. [Section 2, RA 10158]
All persons serving sentence for violation of the
provisions of Article 202 on Vagrancy prior to its
amendment by this Act shall be immediately released
upon effectivity of this Act: Provided, That they are
not serving sentence or detained for any other offense
or felony. (Section 3, RA 10158)
Under the Mendicancy Law of 1978 (PD 1563), the
following persons are liable:
1. The mendicant himself—one who has no visible
and legal means of support, or lawful
employment, and who is physically able to work
but neglects to apply himself to some lawful
calling and instead uses begging as a means of
living.
2. Any person who abets mendicancy by giving
alms directly to mendicants, exploited infants and
minors on public roads, sidewalks, parks and
bridges shall be punished by a fine.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
RA 9208: AN ACT TO INSTITUTE POLICIES
TO ELIMINATE TRAFFICKING IN
PERSONS ESPECIALLY WOMEN AND
CHILDREN, ESTABLISHING THE
NECESSARY INSTITUTIONAL
MECHANISMS FOR THE PROTECTION
AND SUPPORT OF TRAFFICKED PERSONS,
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR ITS
VIOLATIONS (ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN
PERSONS ACT)
Trafficking in Persons – recruitment,
transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of
persons with or without the victim's consent or
knowledge, within or across national borders by
means of threat or use of force, or other forms of
coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power
or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of
the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having
control over another person for the purpose of
exploitation which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring
or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation
shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons"
even if it does not involve any of the aforementioned
means.
Acts of Trafficking in Persons
It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical,
to commit any of the following acts (Section 4, RA
9208):
1. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, provide, or
receive a person by any means, including those
done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
2. To introduce or match for money, profit, or
material, economic or other consideration, any
person or, as provided for under Republic Act
No. 6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign
national, for marriage for the purpose of
acquiring, buying, offering, selling or trading
him/her to engage in prostitution, pornography,
sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
3. To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated,
for the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering,
selling, or trading them to engage in prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor or
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
Page 194 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
4. To undertake or organize tours and travel plans
consisting of tourism packages or activities for
the purpose of utilizing and offering persons for
prostitution, pornography or sexual exploitation;
5. To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
6. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
7. To recruit, hire, adopt, transport or abduct a
person, by means of threat or use of force, fraud,
deceit, violence, coercion, or intimidation for the
purpose of removal or sale of organs of said
person; and
8. To recruit, transport or adopt a child to engage in
armed activities in the Philippines or abroad.
RA 10364: THE EXPANDED ANTI-
TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT OF 2012
This amended Sec. 4 of RA 9208 as follows:
Acts of Trafficking in Persons
It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or juridical,
to commit any of the following acts:
1. To adopt persons by any form of consideration
for exploitative purposes or to facilitate the same
for purposes of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
2. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
3. To recruit, hire, adopt, transport, transfer, obtain,
harbor, maintain, provide, offer, receive or
abduct a person, by means of threat or use of
force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or
intimidation for the purpose of removal or sale
of organs of said person;
4. To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor,
maintain, offer, hire, provide, receive or adopt a
child to engage in armed activities in the
Philippines or abroad;
5. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain,
maintain, offer, hire, provide or receive a person
by means defined in Section 3 of this Act for
purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
and involuntary servitude, including a scheme,
plan, or pattern intended to cause the person
either:
a. To believe that if the person did not perform
such labor or services, he or she or another
person would suffer serious harm or physical
restraint; or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
b. To abuse or threaten the use of law or the
legal processes; and
6. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain,
maintain, offer, hire, provide or receive a person
by means defined in Section 3 of this Act for
purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
and involuntary servitude, including a scheme,
plan, or pattern intended to cause the person
either:
a. To believe that if the person did not perform
such labor or services, he or she or another
person would suffer serious harm or physical
restraint; or
b. To abuse or threaten the use of law or the
legal processes; and
7. To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, transfer,
maintain, hire, offer, provide, adopt or receive a
child for purposes of exploitation or trading
them, including but not limited to, the act of
baring and/or selling a child for any
consideration or for barter for purposes of
exploitation. Trafficking for purposes of
exploitation of children shall include:
a. All forms of slavery or practices similar to
slavery, involuntary servitude, debt bondage
and forced labor, including recruitment of
children for use in armed conflict;
b. The use, procuring or offering of a child for
prostitution, for the production of
pornography, or for pornographic
performances;
c. The use, procuring or offering of a child for
the production and trafficking of drugs; and
d. The use, procuring or offering of a child for
illegal activities or work which, by its nature
or the circumstances in which it is carried
out, is likely to harm their health, safety or
morals; and
8. To organize or direct other persons to commit
the offenses defined as acts of trafficking under
this Act."
Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons
The following acts which promote or facilitate
trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful (Section 5, RA
9208):
1. To knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to
be used any house, building or establishment for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
2. To produce, print and issue or distribute
unissued, tampered or fake counseling
certificates, registration stickers and certificates
of any government agency which issues these
certificates and stickers as proof of compliance
with government regulatory and pre-departure
requirements for the purpose of promoting
trafficking in persons;
Page 195 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
3. To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or
distribute, or cause the advertisement,
publication, printing, broadcasting or distribution
by any means, including the use of information
technology and the internet, of any brochure,
flyer, or any propaganda material that promotes
trafficking in persons;
4. To assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud for purposes of facilitating the acquisition
of clearances and necessary exit documents from
government agencies that are mandated to
provide pre-departure registration and services
for departing persons for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
5. To facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of
persons from/to the country at international and
local airports, territorial boundaries and seaports
who are in possession of unissued, tampered or
fraudulent travel documents for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
6. To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport,
travel documents, or personal documents or
belongings of trafficked persons in furtherance
of trafficking or to prevent them from leaving the
country or seeking redress from the government
or appropriate agencies;
7. To knowingly benefit from, financial or
otherwise, or make use of, the labor or services
of a person held to a condition of involuntary
servitude, forced labor, or slavery.
8. To tamper with, destroy, or cause the destruction
of evidence, or to influence or attempt to
influence witnesses, in an investigation or
prosecution of a case under this Act;
9. To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or
possess, or attempt to destroy, conceal, remove,
confiscate or possess, any actual or purported
passport or other travel, immigration or working
permit or document, or any other actual or
purported government identification, of any
person in order to prevent or restrict, or attempt
to prevent or restrict, without lawful authority,
the person’s liberty to move or travel in order to
maintain the labor or services of that person; or
10. To utilize his or her office to impede the
investigation, prosecution or execution of lawful
orders in a case under this Act."
Qualified Trafficking in Persons (Section 6, RA
9208, as amended by RA 10364):
1. When the trafficked person is a child;
2. When the adoption is effected through RA 8043,
otherwise known as the "Inter-Country
Adoption Act of 1995" and said adoption is for
the purpose of prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3. When the crime is committed by a syndicate, or
in large scale. Trafficking is deemed committed
by a syndicate if carried out by a group of 3 or
more persons conspiring or confederating with
one another. It is deemed committed in large
scale if committed against 3 or more persons,
individually or as a group;
4. When the offender is a spouse, an ascendant,
parent, sibling, guardian or a person who
exercises authority over the trafficked person or
when the offense is committed by a public officer
or employee;
5. When the trafficked person is recruited to engage
in prostitution with any member of the military
or law enforcement agencies;
6. When the offender is a member of the military or
law enforcement agencies;
7. When by reason or on occasion of the act of
trafficking in persons, the offended party dies,
becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is afflicted
with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) or
the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
(AIDS);
8. When the offender commits one or more
violations of Section 4 over a period of sixty (60)
or more days, whether those days are continuous
or not; and
9. When the offender directs or through another
manages the trafficking victim in carrying out the
exploitative purpose of trafficking.
Any person who buys or engages the services of
trafficked persons for prostitution shall be
penalized as follows (Section 11, RA 9208):
1. First offense - 6 months of community service as
may be determined by the court and a fine of
P50,000;
2. Second and subsequent offenses - imprisonment
of 1 year and a fine of P100,000.
Use of Trafficked Persons (Sec. 11, RA 9208, as
amended by RA 10364) – Any person who buys or
engages the services of a trafficked person for
prostitution shall be penalized with the
following: Provided, That the Probation Law
(Presidential Decree No. 968) shall not apply:
1. Prision Correccional in its maximum period
to prision mayor or six (6) years to twelve (12) years
imprisonment and a fine of not less than Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00) but not more than
One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000.00): Provided, however, That the
following acts shall be exempted thereto:
a. If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with
a child, the penalty shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period to reclusion
Page 196 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
perpetua or seventeen (17) years to forty (40)
years imprisonment and a fine of not less
than Five hundred thousand pesos
(P500,000.00) but not more than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00);
b. If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
carnal knowledge of, or sexual intercourse
with, a male or female trafficking victim and
also involves the use of force or intimidation,
to a victim deprived of reason or to an
unconscious victim, or a victim under twelve
(12) years of age, instead of the penalty
prescribed in the subparagraph above the
penalty shall be a fine of not less than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more
than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00) and
imprisonment of reclusion perpetua or forty
(40) years imprisonment with no possibility
of parole; except that if a person violating
paragraph (a) of this section knows the
person that provided prostitution services is
in fact a victim of trafficking, the offender
shall not be likewise penalized under this
section but under Section 10 as a person
violating Section 4; and if in committing such
an offense, the offender also knows a
qualifying circumstance for trafficking, the
offender shall be penalized under Section 10
for qualified trafficking. If in violating this
section the offender also violates Section 4,
the offender shall be penalized under Section
10 and, if applicable, for qualified trafficking
instead of under this section;
2. Deportation. – If a foreigner commits any offense
described by paragraph (1) or (2) of this section
or violates any pertinent provision of this Act as
an accomplice or accessory to, or by attempting
any such offense, he or she shall be immediately
deported after serving his or her sentence and be
barred permanently from entering the country;
and
3. Public Official. – If the offender is a public official,
he or she shall be dismissed from service and
shall suffer perpetual absolute disqualification to
hold public, office, in addition to any
imprisonment or fine received pursuant to any
other provision of this Act."
Trafficked persons shall be recognized as victims of
the act or acts of trafficking and as such shall not be
penalized for crimes directly related to the acts of
trafficking enumerated in this Act or in obedience to
the order made by the trafficker in relation thereto. In
this regard, the consent of a trafficked person to the
intended exploitation set forth in this Act shall be
irrelevant. (Section 17, RA 9208)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Note on Section 17: Persons trafficked (including
prostitutes) are exempt from criminal liability.
Note also: Under RA 9208, persons who hire trafficked
persons are criminally liable (Section 11). Not so in
Art 202 RPC.
Under RA 10364, it is provided that victims of
trafficking for purposes of prostitution as defined
under Section 4 of this Act are not covered by Article
202 of the Revised Penal Code and as such, shall not
be prosecuted, fined, or otherwise penalized under
the said law. Prostitution is definedas any act,
transaction, scheme or design involving the use of a
person by another, for sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct in exchange for money, profit or any other
consideration.
RA 10364 also added new sections on attempted
trafficking of persons (Sec. 4-A), accomplice liability
(Sec. 4-B) and accessories (Sec. 4-C).
Accomplice – knowingly aids, abets, cooperates in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
acts defined in this Act
Accessories – Whoever has the knowledge of the
commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principal or as
accomplices, take part in its commission in any of the
following manners:
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime;
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime or effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery;
3. By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime,
provided the accessory acts with abuse of his
or her public functions or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime.

Attempted Trafficking in Persons. – Where there are acts

to initiate the commission of a trafficking offense but
the offender failed to or did not execute all the
elements of the crime, by accident or by reason of
some cause other than voluntary desistance, such
overt acts shall be deemed as an attempt to commit
an act of trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt
to commit any of the offenses enumerated in Section
4 of this Act shall constitute attempted trafficking in
persons.

In cases where the victim is a child, any of the

following acts shall also be deemed as attempted
trafficking in persons:
1. Facilitating the travel of a child who travels alone
to a foreign country or territory without valid
reason therefor and without the required
clearance or permit from the Department of
Social Welfare and Development, or a written
permit or justification from the child’s parent or
legal guardian;
2. Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit of
consent or a written consent for adoption;
3. Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the
purpose of selling the child;
4. Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling the
child; and
5. Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody
thereof through any means from among
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers,
refugee or evacuation centers, and low-income
families, for the purpose of selling the child.

Page 197 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
G.Title VII. Crimes
Committed by Public
Officers
1. Chapter I: Preliminary Provisions
a. Art. 203: Who Are Public Officers
2. Chapter II: Malfeasance and Misfeasance in
Office
a. Art. 204: Knowingly Rendering Unjust
Judgment
b. Art. 205: Judgment Rendered Through
Negligence
c. Art. 206: Unjust Interlocutory Order
d. Art. 207: Malicious Delay in the
Administration of Justice
e. Art. 208: Prosecution of Offenses;
Negligence and Tolerance
f. Art. 209: Betrayal of Trust by an Attorney or
a Solicitor - Revelation of Secrets
g. Art. 210: Direct Bribery
h. Art. 211: Indirect Bribery
i. Art. 211-A: Qualified Bribery
j. Art. 212: Corruption of Public Officials
k. Art. 214: Other Frauds
3. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal Exactions and
Transactions
a. Art. 213: Fraud against the Public Treasury
and Similar Offenses
b. Art. 215: Prohibited Transactions
c. Art. 216: Possession of Prohibited Interest
by a Public Officer
4. Chapter IV: Malversation of Public Funds and
Properties
a. Art. 217: Malversation of Public Funds or
Property - Presumption of Malversation
b. Art. 218: Failure of Accountable Officer to
Render Accounts
c. Art. 219: Failure of a Responsible Public
Officer to Render Accounts Before Leaving
the Country
d. Art. 220: Illegal Use of Public Funds or
Property
e. Art. 221: Failure to Make Delivery of Public
Funds or Property
f. Art. 222: Officers Included in the Preceding
Provisions
5. Chapter V: Infidelity of Public Officers
a. Art. 223: Conniving With or Consenting to
Evasion
b. Art. 224: Evasion through Negligence
Page 198 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Art. 225: Escape of Prisoner under the
Custody of a Person Not a Public Officer
d. Art. 226: Removal, Concealment, or
Destruction of Documents
e. Art. 227: Officer Breaking Seal
f. Art. 228: Opening of Closed Documents
g. Art. 229: Revelation of Secrets by an Officer
h. Art. 230: Public Officers Revealing Secrets
of Private Individuals
6. Chapter VI: Other Offenses and Irregularities by
Public Officers
a. Art. 231: Open Disobedience
b. Art. 232: Disobedience to the Order of
Superior Officer When Said Order Was
Suspended by Inferior Officer
c. Art. 233 - Refusal of Assistance
d. Art. 234: Refusal to Discharge Elective
Office
e. Art. 235: Maltreatment of Prisoners
f. Art. 236: Anticipation of Duties of a Public
Officer
g. Art. 237: Prolonging Performance of Duties
and Powers
h. Art. 238: Abandonment of Office or
Position
i. Art. 239: Usurpation of Legislative Powers
j. Art. 240: Usurpation of Executive Functions
k. Art. 241: Usurpation of Judicial Functions
l. Art. 242: Disobeying Request for
Disqualification
m. Art. 243: Orders or Request by Executive
Officer to Any Judicial Authority
n. Art. 244: Unlawful Appointments
o. Art. 245: Abuses against Chastity
Note: This is one of the instances where the Revised
Penal Code may be given extra-territorial
application under Article 2 (5) thereof.
Crimes under this title can be committed by public
officers or a non-public officer, when the latter
becomes a conspirator with a public officer, or an
accomplice, or accessory to the crime. The public
officer has to be the principal.
1. Chapter I: Preliminary
Provisions
a. Art. 203 – Who Are Public
Officers
Requisites:
1. Taking part in the performance of public
functions in the government;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Performing in said government or in any of its
branches public duties as an employee, agent or
subordinate official, of any rank or class;
3. His authority to take part in the performance of
public functions or to perform public duties must
be –
a. By direct provision of the law;
b. By popular election; or
c. By appointment by competent authority
“Public official” includes elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in career or non-career service, including
military and police personnel, whether or not they
receive compensation, regardless of amount. (Sec.
3(b), RA 6713)
"Public officer" includes elective and appointive
officials and employees, permanent or temporary,
whether in the classified or unclassified or exempt
service receiving compensation, even nominal, from
the government. (Sec. 2(c), RA 3019)
The term “public officers” embraces every public
servant from the highest to lowest.
Dacumos v. Sandiganbayan [G.R. No. 95000 (1991)]
expanded the meaning of “official duties”. It included
those which may be in one’s capacity to perform by
reason of his office.
Officers and employees of government owned and
controlled corporations included but not those of a
sequestered corporation.
The better rule is that GOCCs created by law are
covered while GOCCs registered with the SEC
(including sequestered companies) are not. [Macalino
v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 140199-200 (2002)]
The more recent case of People v. Sandiganbayan [G.R.
No. 167304 (2009)] held that, based on RA 8249,
presidents, directors, trustees, and managers of all
GOCCs, regardless of type, are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan when they are
involved in graft and corruption.
2. Chapter II: Malfeasance and
Misfeasance in Office
Malfeasance The performance of an act
(Direct Bribery and which ought not to be
Indirect Bribery) done
Page 199 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Misfeasance Improper performance of
(see Arts 204-207: some act which might
acts by a judge) lawfully be done
Omission of some act
Nonfeasance
which ought to be
(Prosecution)
performed
a. Article 204 – Knowingly
Rendering Unjust Judgment
Elements:
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him
for decision;
3. Judgment is unjust;
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust.
Judgment – the final consideration and
determination of a court of competent jurisdiction
upon matters submitted to it, in an action or
proceeding.
An unjust judgment is one which is contrary to law or
is not supported by the evidence, or both.
Defense: Mere error in good faith.
There must be positive evidence imputing an unjust
judgment; presumption will not suffice.
The source of an unjust judgment may be either a)
error, b) ill will or revenge, or c) bribery.
The offense refers only to a judgment of an individual
judge in his court, and not to the judgment rendered
in a collegial court by the members thereof. [In Re:
Wenceslao Laureta, G.R. No. L-68635 (1987)]
Before a criminal action against a judge for violation
of Articles 204 and 205 can be entertained, there must
be a trial or authoritative judicial declaration that his
decision or order is really unjust which may result
from either an action of certiorari or prohibition in a
higher court. [De Vera v. Pelayo, G.R. No. 137354
(2000)]
Malice or bad faith on the part of the judge in
rendering an unjust decision must still be proved and
failure on the part of the complainant to prove the
same warrants the dismissal of the administrative
complaint [Alforte v. Santos, A.M. No. MTJ-94-914
(1995)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
b. Article 205 – Judgment Rendered
Through Negligence
Elements:
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him
for decision;
3. The judgment is manifestly unjust;
4. It is due to his inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.
A manifestly unjust judgment is one which is so
manifestly contrary to law that even a person having
basic knowledge of the law cannot doubt the injustice.
Abuse of discretion or mere error of judgment, not
punishable.
The Supreme Court held that a judgment is said to be
unjust when it is contrary to the standards of conduct
prescribed by law.
The test to determine whether an order or judgment
is unjust may be inferred from the circumstances that
it is contrary to law or is not supported by evidence.
[Louis Vuitton S.A. v. Judge Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-
92-643 (1992)]
c. Article 206 – Unjust Interlocutory
Order
Elements:
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He performs any of the following acts:
a. Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory
order or decree; or
b. Rendering a manifestly unjust interlocutory order
or decree through inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.
If the order leaves something to be done in the trial
court with respect to the merits of the case, it is
interlocutory. If it does not, it is final.
The unjust interlocutory order must have been issued
by the judge with deliberate intent to cause damage to
the party concerned.
d. Article 207 – Malicious Delay in
the Administration of Justice
Elements:
1. Offender is a judge;
2. There is a proceeding in his court;
3. He delays in the administration of justice;
Page 200 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
4. The delay is malicious, that is, with deliberate
intent to inflict damage on either party in the
case.
Malice must be proven. Malice is present where the
delay is sought to favor one party to the prejudice of
the other.
Mere delay without malice is not a felony under this
provision.
e. Article 208 – Prosecution of
Offenses; Negligence and
Tolerance
Modes
1. Maliciously refraining from instituting
prosecution against violators of the law;
2. Maliciously tolerating the commission of
offenses.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or officer of the law
who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, or to
prosecute, offenses;
2. There is a dereliction of the duties of his office,
that is, knowing the commission of the crime, he
does not cause the prosecution of the criminal, or
knowing that a crime is about to be committed,
he tolerates its commission;
3. Offender acts with malice and deliberate intent to
favor the violator of the law.
Public officer – officers of the prosecution
department, whose duty is to institute criminal
proceedings for felonies upon being informed of their
perpetration, i.e. city attorney, fiscal
Officer of the law – those who, by reason of the
position held by them, are duty-bound to cause
prosecution and punishment of offenders, i.e. chief of
police, barrio captain
Also known as prevaricacion.
“Negligence” in the title must be construed to mean
neglect of the duties of his office by maliciously failing
to move the prosecution and punishment of the
delinquent. The crime committed by the law violator
must be proved first. [US v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 7540
(1912)]
Liability of the public officer who, having the duty of
prosecuting the offender, harbored, concealed, or
assisted in the escape of the latter, is that of a principal
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
in the crime of dereliction of duty in the prosecution
of the offense.
f. Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by
an Attorney or a Solicitor –
Revelation of Secrets
Elements:
1. Causing damage to his client, either—
a. By any malicious breach of professional
duty;
b. By inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
2. Revealing any of the secrets of his client learned
by him in his professional capacity (damage is not
necessary);
3. Undertaking the defense of the opposing party in
the same case, without the consent of his first
client,
a. after having undertaken the defense of said
first client, or
b. after having received confidential
information from said client.
When the attorney acts with malicious abuse of his
employment or inexcusable negligence or ignorance,
there must be damage to his client.
Communications made with prospective clients to a
lawyer with a view to engaging his professional
services are already privileged even though the client-
lawyer relationship did not eventually materialize.
The confidential matters or information must be
confided to the lawyer in the latter’s professional
capacity.
Mere malicious breach without damage is not a
violation of Article 209; at most he will be liable
administratively as a lawyer, e.g., suspension or
disbarment under the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Modes of Commission:
1. Maliciously causing damage to his client through
a breach of his professional duty.
Note: The breach of professional duty must be
malicious. If it is just incidental, it would not give
rise to criminal liability, although it may be the
subject of administrative discipline;
2. Through gross ignorance, causing damage to the
client;
3. Inexcusable negligence;
4. Revelation of secrets learned in his professional
capacity;
Page 201 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
5. Undertaking the defense of the opposite party in
a case without the consent of the first client
whose defense has already been undertaken.
The Supreme Court held that not all information
received by counsel from the client is classified as
privileged.
A distinction must be made between confidential
communications relating to past crimes already
committed, and future crimes intended to be
committed by the client. The attorney-client privilege
only covers past crimes. [People v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
g. Article 210 – Direct Bribery
Modes
1. Agreeing to perform, or performing, in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or
present; an act constituting a crime, in connection
with the performance of his official duties;
2. Accepting a gift in consideration of the execution
of an act which does not constitute a crime, in
connection with the performance of his official
duty;
3. Agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing
something which is his official duty to do, in
consideration of gift or promise.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer within the scope of
Article 203;
2. Offender accepts an offer or a promise or
receives a gift or present by himself or through
another;
3. Such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or
present received by the public officer –
a. With a view to committing some crime; or
b. In consideration of the execution of an act which
does not constitute a crime, but the act must be
unjust; or
c. To refrain from doing something which it is his
official duty to do.
4. The act which offender agrees to perform or
which he executes be connected with the
performance of his official duties.
The crime of bribery has no frustrated stage. If one
party does not concur, then there is no agreement and
not all the acts necessary to commit the crime were
present.
Temporary performance of public functions is
sufficient to constitute a person a public officer.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Bribery exists when the gift is:
1. voluntarily offered by a private person;
2. solicited by the public officer and voluntarily
delivered by the private person;
3. solicited by the public officer but the private
person delivers it out of fear of the consequences
should the public officer perform his functions
(here the crime by the giver does not fall under
corruption of public officials due to the
involuntariness of the act).
In the FIRST MODE of bribery, actual receipt of
the gift is not necessary.
An accepted offer or promise of a gift is sufficient.
However, if the offer is not accepted, only the person
offering the gift is liable for attempted corruption of
a public officer.
In the SECOND MODE of bribery, the gift must
be accepted by the public officer.
The GIFT must have a value or capable of pecuniary
estimation. It could be in the form of money, property
or services. It cannot consist of a mere offer or
promise of a gift.
If the act required of the public officer amounts to a
crime and he commits it, he shall be liable for the
penalty corresponding to the crime.
The THIRD MODE of bribery and prevaricacion
(Art 208) are similar offenses, both consisting of
omission of an act required to be performed.
In direct bribery however, a gift or promise is given in
consideration of the omission. This is not necessary
in prevaricacion.
Direct bribery does not absorb Art. 208 (dereliction
of duty). See Qualified Bribery (211-A)
Police Sergeant Malfrosque asked and accepted
money in exchange for the recovery of the reported
stolen gas tanks to the owners. This made him liable
under the 2nd mode of Art 210 since the act of
returning the gas tanks to the owners does not
constitute a crime; he demanded money and said act
was in connection with the performance of his duty
as a policeman. [Marifosque v. People, G.R. No. 156685
(2004)]
Distinguished from Sec 3(b) of RA 3019
Whereas the mere request or demand of a gift,
present, share, percentage or benefit is enough to
constitute a violation of Section 3(b) of RA 3019,
Page 202 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
acceptance of a promise or offer or receipt of a gift or
present is required in direct bribery. Moreover, the
ambit of Section 3(b) of RA 3019 is specific. It is
limited only to contracts or transactions involving
monetary consideration where the public officer has
the authority to intervene under the law. Direct
bribery, on the other hand, has a wider and more
general scope: (a) performance of an act constituting
a crime; (b) execution of an unjust act which does not
constitute a crime and (c) agreeing to refrain or
refraining from doing an act which is his official duty
to do. [Merencillo v. People, G.R. No. 142369-70, (2007)]
h. Article 211 – Indirect Bribery
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He accepts gifts;
3. The gifts are offered to him by reason of his
office.
The principal distinction between direct and
indirect bribery is that in the former, the officer
agrees to perform or refrain from doing an act in
consideration of the gift or promise. In the latter case,
it is not necessary that the officer do any act. It is
sufficient that he accepts the gift offered by reason of
his office.
If after receiving the gift, the officer does any act in
favor of the giver which is unfair to the others, the
crime continues to be indirect bribery.
Precisely the evil of indirect bribery is in its tendency
to produce future, unspecified, and unwarranted
favors from the official.
This is always in the consummated stage. There is no
attempted much less frustrated stage in indirect
bribery.
There must be clear intention on the part of the public
officer:
1. to take the gift offered; and
2. consider the property as his own for that
moment.
Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any other
sign, circumstance or act to show such acceptance is
not sufficient to convict the officer.
“Gift" refers to a thing or a right to dispose of
gratuitously, or any act or liberality, in favor of
another who accepts it, and shall include a simulated
sale or an ostensibly onerous disposition thereof. It
shall not include an unsolicited gift of nominal or
insignificant value not given in anticipation of, or in
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
exchange for, a favor from a public official or
employee. [Sec. 3(c), RA 6713]
“Receiving any gift" includes the act of accepting
directly or indirectly a gift from a person other than a
member of the public officer's immediate family, in
behalf of himself or of any member of his family or
relative within the fourth civil degree, either by
consanguinity or affinity, even on the occasion of a
family celebration or national festivity like Christmas,
if the value of the gift is under the circumstances
manifestly excessive. [Section 2(c), RA 3019]
i. Article 211-A – Qualified Bribery
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer entrusted with law
enforcement;
2. He refrains from arresting or prosecuting an
offender who has committed a crime punishable
by reclusion perpetua and/or death;
3. Offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting
in consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or
present.
The crime of qualified bribery may be committed only
by public officers “entrusted with enforcement”
(those whose official duties authorize them to arrest
or prosecute offenders).
The penalty is qualified if the public officer is the one
who asks or demands such present.
If the penalty imposed is lower than reclusion
perpetua and/or death had the offender been arrested
or the crime prosecuted, the crime is direct bribery.
The dereliction of the duty punished under Article
208 of the Revised Penal Code is absorbed in
Qualified Bribery.
j. Article 212 – Corruption of Public
Officials
Elements:
1. Offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts
or presents to a public officer;
2. The offers or promises are made or the gifts or
presents given to a public officer, under
circumstances that will make the public officer
liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery.
The offender is the giver of the gift or the offeror of
the promise.
The act may or may not be accomplished.
Page 203 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Whenever any public officer or employee has
acquired during his incumbency an amount of
property which is manifestly out of proportion to his
salary as such public officer or employee and to his
other lawful income and the income from legitimately
acquired property, said property shall be presumed
prima facie to have been unlawfully acquired. If the
respondent is unable to show to the satisfaction of the
court that he has lawfully acquired the property in
question, then the court shall declare such property,
forfeited in favor of the State. [R.A. 1379]
The following shall be exempt from prosecution or
punishment for the offense with reference to which
his information and testimony was given:
1. Any person who voluntarily gives information
about any violation of
a. Articles 210, 211, and 212 of the RPC;
b. R.A. 3019, as amended;
c. Section 345 of the Internal Revenue Code
and Section 3604 of the Tariff and Customs
Code and other provisions of the said Codes
penalizing abuse or dishonesty on the part of
the public officials concerned;
d. Other laws, rules and regulations punishing
acts of graft, corruption and other forms of
official abuse;
2. Any person who willingly testifies against any
public official or employee for such violation.
(Section 1, PD 749)
RA 3019: ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT
PRACTICES ACT
CORRUPT PRACTICES OF PUBLIC
OFFICERS
Sec. 3(a)
Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of
rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent
authority or an offense in connection with the official
duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be
persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
Sec. 3(b)
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or
for any other person, in connection with any contract
or transaction between the Government and any
other party, wherein the public officer in his official
capacity has to intervene under the law.
Elements:
1. the offender is a public officer;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. who requested or received a gift, a present, a
share, a percentage, or benefit;
3. on behalf of the offender or any other person;
4. in connection with a contract or transaction with
the government;
5. in which the public officer, in an official capacity
under the law, has the right to intervene. [Cadiao-
Palacios v. People, G.R. No. 168544 (2009)]
Bar question: May a public officer charged under
Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 ["directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present,
share, percentage or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or
transaction between the government and any other
party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity
has to intervene under the law"] also be
simultaneously or successively charged with direct
bribery under Article 210 of the Revised Penal Code?
Suggested answer: Violation of Section (b) of RA 3019
(Graft) and Article 210 of RPC do not preclude each
other and may be simultaneously or successively
charged
Whether or not the public officer demanded for gifts
or benefits is immaterial, for the Act uses the words
“requesting or receiving”.
This section refers to a public officer whose official
intervention is required by law in a contract or
transaction. [Jaravata v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-
56170 (1984)]
Sec. 3(c)
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift,
present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for
himself or for another, from any person for whom the
public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured
or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government
permit or license, in consideration for the help given
or to be given.
Elements:
1. the offender is a public officer;
2. he has secured or obtained, or would secure or
obtain, for a person any government permit or
license;
3. he directly or indirectly requested or received
from said person any gift, present or other
pecuniary or material benefit for himself or for
another; and
4. he requested or received the gift, present or other
pecuniary or material benefit in consideration for
help given or to be given
Page 204 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Sec. 3(d)
Accepting or having any member of his family accept
employment in a private enterprise which has pending
official business with him during the pendency
thereof or within one year after its termination.
Sec. 3(e)
Causing any undue injury to any party, including the
Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad
faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision
shall apply to officers and employees of offices or
government corporations charged with the grant of
licenses or permits or other concessions.
Elements:
1. The accused is a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial or official functions;
2. he must have acted with manifest partiality,
evident bad faith, or inexcusable negligence; and
3. his action has caused any undue injury to any
party, including the Government, or has given
any party unwarranted benefit, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his functions.
[Fonacier v. Sandiganbayan G.R. No. L-50691
(1994)]
Manifest Partiality
"Partiality" is synonymous with "bias" which "excites
a disposition to see and report matters as they are
wished for rather than as they are."
Evident Bad Faith
"Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or
negligence; it imputes a dishonest purpose or some
moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong; a
breach of sworn duty through some motive or intent
or ill will; it partakes of the nature of fraud."
Inexcusable Negligence
“Gross negligence has been so defined as negligence
characterized by the want of even slight care, acting
or omitting to act in a situation where there is a duty
to act, not inadvertently but wilfully and intentionally
with a conscious indifference to consequences in so
far as other persons may be affected. It is the omission
of that care which even inattentive and thoughtless
men never fail to take on their own property."
These definitions prove all too well that the three
modes are distinct and different from each other.
Proof of the existence of any of these modes in
connection with the prohibited acts under Section
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3(e) should suffice to warrant conviction. [Fonacier v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-50691 (1994)]
The fact that the damage was caused when the
accused was no longer in the discharge his official
functions will not remove his classification as a public
officer. It is precisely the taking advantage of his
official position which showed evident bad faith and
caused undue injury.
The last sentence of paragraph (e) is intended to make
clear the inclusion of officers and employees of
offices or government corporations which, under the
ordinary concept of “public officers” may not come
within the term. It is a strained construction of the
provision to read it as applying exclusively to public
officers charged with the duty of granting licenses or
permits or other concessions [Mejorada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L-51065-72 (1987)]
Sec. 3(f)
Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request,
without sufficient justification, to act within a
reasonable time on any matter pending before him for
the purpose of obtaining, directly or indirectly, from
any person interested in the matter some pecuniary or
material benefit or advantage, or for the purpose of
favoring his own interest or giving undue advantage
in favor of or discriminating against any other
interested party.
Sec. 3(g)
Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby.
Sec. 3(h)
Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in
his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by
the Constitution or by any law from having any
interest.
A mayor who has divested himself of shares in a
corporation which had a contract with the
government before his assumption to office, even if
the divestment was to a relative, is not liable under 3
(h). What the law wants to prevent is actual
intervention in a transaction in which the public
official has financial or pecuniary interest. [Trieste v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 70332-43 (1986)]
Sec. 3(i)
Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, or having a material interest in any
Page 205 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
transaction or act requiring the approval of a board,
panel or group of which he is a member, and which
exercises discretion in such approval, even if he votes
against the same or does not participate in the action
of the board, committee, panel or group.
Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against
those public officers responsible for the approval of
manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular
transaction or acts by the board, panel or group to
which they belong.
Sec. 3(j)
Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit,
privilege or benefit in favor of any person not
qualified for or not legally entitled to such license,
permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere
representative or dummy of one who is not so
qualified or entitled.
Sec. 3(k)
Divulging valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on account
of his official position to unauthorized persons, or
releasing such information in advance of its
authorized release date.
Prohibition on private individuals (Sec. 4)
1. Taking advantage of family or close personal
relation with any public official, by directly or
indirectly requesting or receiving any present or
pecuniary advantage from any person having
some business, transaction, application, request
or contract with the government, in which such
public official has to intervene.
Family relation: includes the spouse or relatives
by consanguinity or affinity in the third civil
degree.
Close personal relation: includes close personal
friendship, social and fraternal connections, and
professional employment all giving rise to
intimacy which assures free access to such public
officer.
2. Knowingly inducing or causing any public official
to commit any of the offenses defined in Sec. 3.
Prohibition on certain relatives (Sec. 5)
The spouse or any relative, by consanguinity or
affinity, within the third civil degree, of the President,
Vice-President, President of the Senate, or Speaker of
the House of Representatives is prohibited from
intervening directly or indirectly, in any business,
transaction, contract or application with the
Government.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Exceptions:
1. Any person who, prior to the assumption of
office of those officials to whom he is related, has
been already dealing with the Government along
the same line of business, nor to any transaction,
contract or application already existing or
pending at the time of such assumption of public
office.
2. Any application filed by him the approval of
which is not discretionary on the part of the
official or officials concerned but depends upon
compliance with requisites provided by law, or
rules or regulations issued pursuant to law;
3. Any act lawfully performed in an official capacity
or in the exercise of a profession.
Prohibition on Members of Congress (Sec. 6)
1. A member of Congress during the term for which
he has been elected, to acquire or receive any
personal pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be directly and
particularly favored or benefited by any law or
resolution authored by him previously approved
or adopted by Congress during the same term.
2. Any other public officer who recommended the
initiation in Congress of the enactment or
adoption of any law or resolution, and acquires
or receives any such interest during his
incumbency.
3. A member of Congress or other public officer,
who, having such interest prior to the approval
of such law or resolution authored or
recommended by him, continues for thirty days
after such approval to retain such interest.
Exception
Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant
value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of
gratitude or friendship according to local customs or
usage, shall be excepted from the provisions of this
Act. [Sec. 14 RA 3019]
RA 7080: AN ACT DEFINING AND
PENALIZING THE CRIME OF PLUNDER
(ANTI-PLUNDER ACT)
DEFINITION OF TERMS
1. Public Officer – any person holding any public
office in the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines by virtue of an appointment, election
or contract.
2. Government – includes the National
Government, and any of its subdivisions,
agencies or instrumentalities, including GOCCs
and their subsidiaries.
Page 206 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Person – includes any natural or juridical person,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
4. Ill-gotten wealth – any asset, property, business
enterprise or material possession of any person
within the purview of Section 2 (Plunder),
acquired by him directly or indirectly through
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or series
of the following means or similar schemes:
a. Through misappropriation, conversion,
misuse, or malversation of public funds or
raids on the public treasury;
b. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any
commission, gift, share, percentage,
kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary
benefit from any person and/or entity in
connection with any government contract or
project or by reason of the office or position
of the public officer concerned;
c. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or
disposition of assets belonging to the
National Government or any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or
government-owned or -controlled
corporations and their subsidiaries;
d. By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly
or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or
any other form of interest or participation
including promise of future employment in
any business enterprise or undertaking;
e. By establishing agricultural, industrial or
commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation of
decrees and orders intended to benefit
particular persons or special interests; or
f. By taking undue advantage of official
position, authority, relationship, connection
or influence to unjustly enrich himself or
themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the
Republic of the Philippines. [Sec. 1, RA
7080]
RA 7659 (The Death Penalty Law) amended Section
2 of RA 7080, and lowered the amount to fifty million
pesos and increased the imposable penalty to death.
Rule of Evidence
For purposes of establishing the crime of plunder, it
shall not be necessary to prove each and every
criminal act done by the accused in furtherance of the
scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or acquire
ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish
beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or
criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme
or conspiracy. [Sec. 4, RA 7080]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Combination – refers to at least 2 acts falling under
different categories of enumeration in Sec. 1 (d) i.e.
raids on the public treasury under subpar. 1 and
fraudulent conveyance of assets belonging to the
National Government under subpar. 3. [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Series – refers to at least 2 or more overt or criminal
acts falling under the same category of enumeration
in Sec. 1 (d) i.e. misappropriation, malversation and
raids on the public treasury under subparagraph 1.
[Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Pattern – consists of at least a combination or series
of overt or criminal acts enumerated in subsections
(1) to (6) of Section 1(d). It is a general plan of action
or method which the principal accused and the public
officer and others conniving with him follow to
achieve the unlawful scheme or conspiracy to achieve
a common goal. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Plunder is a crime malum in se, and the element of
mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for
plunder. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
Difference between wheel conspiracy and chain
conspiracy
In the American jurisdiction, the presence of several
accused in multiple conspiracies commonly involves
two structures: (1) the so-called wheel or circle
conspiracy, in which there is a single person or group
(the hub) dealing individually with two or more other
persons or groups (the spokes); and (2) the chain
conspiracy, usually involving the distribution of
narcotics or other contraband, in which there is
successive communication and cooperation in much
the same way as with legitimate business operations
between manufacturer and wholesaler, then
wholesaler and retailer, and then retailer and
consumer. [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, supra.]
PD 46 : Making It Punishable for Public Officials
and Employees to Receive, and for Private
Persons to Give, Gifts on Any Occasion,
Including Christmas
It is punishable for any public official or employee,
whether of the national or local governments, to
receive, directly or indirectly, and for private persons
to give, or offer to give, any gift, present or other
valuable thing on any occasion, including Christmas,
when such gift, present or other valuable thing is
given by reason of his official position, regardless of
whether or not the same is for past favor or favors or
the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or better
treatment in the future from the public official or
employee concerned in the discharge of his official
Page 207 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
functions. Included within the prohibition is the
throwing of parties or entertainments in honor of the
official or employee or his immediate relatives.
3. Chapter III: Frauds and
Illegal Exactions and
Transactions
a. Article 213 – Fraud against the
Public Treasury and Similar
Offenses
Modes:
1. Entering into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or making use of any other
scheme, to defraud the government, in dealing
with any person with regard to furnishing
supplies, the making of contracts, or the
adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to
public property or funds;
2. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those
authorized by law, in collection of taxes, licenses,
fees, and other imposts;
3. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided
by law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially, in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees
and other imposts;
4. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by
way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of
a nature different from that provided by law, in
the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other
imposts.
Elements of Fraud against Public Treasury
(par.1):
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He should have taken advantage of his public
office, that is, he intervened in the transaction in
his official capacity
3. He entered into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or made use of any other
scheme with regard to:
a. Furnishing supplies
b. The making of contracts or
c. The adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds
4. Accused had intent to defraud the Government.
Consummated by merely entering into agreement
with any interested party or speculator or by merely
making use of other scheme to defraud the
government.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
It is not necessary that the Government is actually
defrauded by the reason of the transaction
Elements of Illegal Exactions (par.2.):
1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted
with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and
other imposts;
2. He is guilty of the following acts or omissions:
a. Demanding directly or indirectly, the
payment of sums different from or larger
than those authorized by law;
b. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt as
provided by law, for any sum of money
collected by him officially; or
c. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly,
by way of payment or otherwise, things or
object of a nature different from that
provided by law
This can only be committed principally by a public
officer whose official duty is to collect taxes, license
fees, import duties and other dues payable to the
government.
Mere demand of a larger or different amount is
sufficient to consummate the crime. The essence is
the improper collection (damage to government is not
required).
The act of receiving payment due the government
without issuing a receipt will give rise to illegal
exaction even though a provisional receipt has been
issued. What the law requires is a receipt in the form
prescribed by law, which means official receipt.
If sums are received without demanding the same, a
felony under this article is not committed. However,
if the sum is given as a sort of gift or gratification, the
crime is indirect bribery.
When there is deceit in demanding a greater fee than
those prescribed by law, the crime committed is estafa
and not illegal exaction.
Illegal exaction may be complexed with malversation
if illegal exaction was committed as a necessary means
to commit malversation.
Officers and employees of the BIR or Customs are
not covered by the article. The NIRC or the Revised
Administrative Code is the applicable law.
Page 208 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Article 214 – Other Frauds
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He takes advantage of his official position;
3. He commits any of the frauds or deceits
enumerated in Article 315 to 318 (estafa, other forms
of swindling, swindling a minor, other deceits).
Additional penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual
special disqualification, apart from the penalties
imposed in Arts 315-318.
c. Art. 215 – Prohibited
Transactions
Elements:
1. Offender is an appointive public officer;
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in
any transaction of exchange or speculation;
3. The transaction takes place within the territory
subject to his jurisdiction;
4. He becomes interested in the transaction during
his incumbency.
Examples of transactions of exchange or speculation
are: buying and selling stocks, commodities, land etc
wherein one hopes to take advantage of an expected
rise or fall in price.
Purchasing of stocks or shares in a company is simple
investment and not a violation of the article.
However, regularly buying securities for resale is
speculation.
The offender may also be held liable under RA 3019
Sec 3(i).
d. Article 216 – Possession of
Prohibited Interest by a Public
Officer
Persons liable:
1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became
interested in any contract or business in which it
was his official duty to intervene;
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants
who, in like manner, took part in any contract or
transaction connected with the estate or property
in the appraisal, distribution or adjudication of
which they had acted;
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the
property belonging to their wards or the estate.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Fraud is not necessary. Intervention must be by virtue
of the public office held.
The basis here is the possibility that fraud may be
committed or that the officer may place his own
interest above that of the government or party he
represents.
4. Chapter IV: Malversation of
Public Funds or Property
a. Article 217 – Malversation of
Public Funds or Property -
Presumption of Malversation
Modes:
1. Appropriating public funds or property;
2. Taking or misappropriating the same;
3. Consenting, or through abandonment or
negligence, permitting any other person to take
such public funds or property; and
4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.
Elements common to all modes:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He had the custody or control of funds or
property by reason of the duties of his office;
3. Those funds or property were public funds or
property for which he was accountable;
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or
consented or, through abandonment or
negligence, permitted another person to take
them.
Malversation is also called embezzlement.
Appropriation – Every attempt to dispose of public
funds or property without a right to do so.
The public officer must have official custody or the
duty to collect or receive funds due the government,
or the obligation to account for them, because this
provision presupposes abuse of office.
The nature of the duties of the public officer, not the
name of the office, is controlling. Thus, a clerk who
receives money or property belonging to the
government, in the course of his employment, for
which he is bound to account, may be liable under
Article 217.
If the public officer is not accountable for the funds
or property but someone else is, the crime committed
Page 209 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
is theft or qualified theft if there is an abuse of
confidence.
It is not necessary that the offender profited for as
long as the accountable officer was remiss in his duty
of safekeeping public funds or property. He is liable
for malversation if such funds were lost or otherwise
misappropriated by another.
Negligence – the omission of reasonable care and
caution which an ordinary prudent person would have
used in the same situation. The measure of negligence
is the standard of care commensurate with the
occasion.
It can be committed either with malice or through
negligence or imprudence. This is one crime in the
Revised Penal Code where the penalty is the same
whether committed with dolo or through culpa.
The funds or property must be received in an official
capacity. Otherwise, the crime committed is estafa.
Returning the malversed funds is not exempting, it is
only mitigating.
A person whose negligence made possible the
commission of malversation by another can be held
liable as a principal by indispensable cooperation.
Demand as well as damage to the government are not
necessary elements. Demand merely raises a prima
facie presumption that missing funds have been put
to personal use. Damage to the government is
immaterial because the penalty is based on the
amount involved.
An accountable public officer may be convicted of
malversation even in the absence of direct evidence
of personal misappropriation, where he has not been
able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the public
funds involved. [Estepa v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
59670 (1990)]
A private person may also commit malversation under
the following situations:
1. Conspiracy with a public officer in committing
malversation;
2. When he has become an accomplice or accessory
to a public officer who commits malversation;
3. When the private person is made the custodian in
whatever capacity of public funds or property,
whether belonging to national or local
government, and he misappropriates the same
(Article 222);
4. When he is constituted as the depositary or
administrator of funds or property seized or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

attached by public authority even though said There is a need for prior
funds or property belong to a private individual Demand not necessary.
demand.
(Article 222).
A routine government audit was conducted in Wa-
Technical malversation (Article 220) is not included
Acon’s office and it was discovered that the sacks of
in the crime of malversation.
rice entrusted to him for safekeeping were missing.
Art 217 no longer requires proof by the State that the
Presumption of Misappropriation
accused actually appropriated, took, or
When a demand is made upon an accountable officer
misappropriated public funds or property; instead, a
and he cannot produce the fund or property involved,
presumption, though disputable and rebuttable, was
there is a prima facie presumption that he had
installed upon demand by any duly authorized officer,
converted the same to his own use. There must be
the failure of a public officer to have duly
indubitable proof that thing unaccounted for exists.
forthcoming any public funds or property which said
officer is accountable for should be prima facie
Audit should be made to determine if there was
evidence that he had put such missing funds or
shortage. Audit must be complete and trustworthy. If
properties to personal use. [People v. Wa-Acon, G.R.
there is doubt, presumption does not arise.
No. 164575 (2006)]
The accused incurred shortage (P1.74) mainly because
When estafa not malversation
the auditor disallowed certain cash advances the
If petitioner, being a public officer, embezzled public
accused granted to employees. But on the same date
funds for which he is accountable, his crime would be
that the audit was made, the partly reimbursed the
malversation through falsification. But since he
amount and paid it in full three days later. The
misappropriated public funds for which he is not
Supreme Court considered the circumstances as
accountable, his crime is estafa through falsification.
negative of criminal intent. The cash advances were
[Ilumin v. Sandiganbayan, 241 SCRA 586 (1995)]
made in good faith and out of good will to co-
employees which was a practice tolerated in the office.
There was no negligence, malice, nor intent to b. Article 218 – Failure of
defraud. [Quizo v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 77120 Accountable Officer to Render
(1987)] Accounts
There is malversation even if there is no direct
Elements:
evidence of misappropriation and the only evidence is
1. Offender is public officer, whether in the service
unexplainable shortage. [Perez v People, 544 SCRA 532]
or separated therefrom by resignation or any
other cause;
Estafa with Abuse of 2. He is an accountable officer for public funds or
Malversation
Confidence property;
(Art. 217)
(Art. 315) 3. He is required by law or regulation to render
Funds or property usually Funds/property are account to the Commission on Audit, or to a
public always private provincial auditor;
4. He fails to do so for a period of two months after
Offender is a private such accounts should be rendered.
Offender is usually a
individual or even a
public officer who is
public officer who is not Demand for accounting is not necessary. It is also not
accountable for the
accountable for public essential that there be misappropriation because if
public funds/property
funds/property present, the crime would be malversation.
Crime is committed by
appropriating, taking, or c. Article 219 – Failure of a
Crime is committed by
misappropriating/consen
ting or through
misappropriating, Responsible Public Officer to
converting, or denying Render Accounts Before Leaving
abandonment or
having received money,
negligence, permitting the Country
goods or other personal
any other person to take
property
the public Elements:
funds/property 1. Offender is a public officer;
No element of damage. There is damage.

Page 210 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. He is an accountable officer for public funds or

property;
3. He unlawfully leaves or attempts to leave the
Philippine Islands without securing a certificate
from the Commission on Audit showing that his
accounts have been finally settled.
The act of leaving the country must be unauthorized
or not permitted by law.
The purpose of the law is to discourage responsible
or accountable officers from leaving without first
liquidating their accountability. It is not necessary that
they really misappropriated public funds.
e. Article 221 - Failure to Make
Delivery of Public Funds or
Property
Modes
1. Failing to make payment by a public officer who
is under obligation to make such payment from
government funds in his possession;
2. Refusing to make delivery by a public officer who
has been ordered by competent authority to
deliver any property in his custody or under his
administration.

d. Article 220 – Illegal Use of Public Elements:

1. Public officer has government funds in his
Funds or Property possession;
2. He is under obligation to either:
Elements: a. make payment from such funds;
1. Offender is a public officer; b. to deliver any property in his custody or
2. There are public funds or property under his under his administration
administration; 3. He maliciously fails to make the payment or
3. Such fund or property were appropriated by law refuses to make delivery.
or ordinance;
4. He applies such public fund or property to any
public use other than for which it was f. Article 222 – Officers Included in
appropriated for. the Preceding Provisions
Illegal use of public funds or property is also known These officers are include any:
as technical malversation. The term technical 1. Private individual who, in any capacity, have
malversation is used because in this crime, the fund charge of any national, provincial or municipal
or property involved is already appropriated or funds, revenue, or property
earmarked for a certain public purpose. Despite the 2. Administrator or depositary of funds or property
public purpose, the act is punished because it remains that has been attached, seized or deposited by
a violation of the appropriations law. public authority, even if owned by a private
individual.
Regardless of damage or embarrassment to the public
service. Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term
“administrator.” A judicial administrator in charge of
Malversation Technical settling the estate of the deceased is not covered by
(Art. 217) malversation (Art. 220) the article. Conversion of effects in his trust makes
him liable for estafa.
The offender The public officer applies
misappropriates public the public funds or Private property is included, provided it is (1)
funds or property for his property under his attached, (2) seized or (3) deposited by public
own personal use, or administration to authority.
allows any other person another public use
to take such funds or different from that for Technical malversation is malum prohibitum. This is
property for the latter’s which the public fund one exception to the rule that crimes defined in the
own personal use. was appropriated by law RPC are mala in se. Hence, good faith is not a defense
or ordinance. in technical malversation. (Ysidoro v. People, 685
SCRA 637). In contrast, see Garcia v. CA, 484 SCRA
617), where the SC held that tampering/falsification
of election returns is mala in se even if a special penal
law, Omnibus Election Code, penalizes it. The act of
cheating is inherently immoral.

Page 211 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
5. Chapter V: Infidelity of
Public Officers
SECTION ONE – INFIDELITY IN THE
CUSTODY OF PRISONERS
a. Article 223 – Conniving With or
Consenting to Evasion
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He had in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody;
4. He was in connivance with the prisoner in the
latter’s escape. (“shall consent to the escape”)
Classes of prisoners involved
1. Those who have been sentenced by final
judgment to any penalty;
2. Detention prisoners who are temporarily held in
legal custody, arrested for and charged with
violation of some law or municipal ordinance.
Leniency, laxity, and release of a detention prisoner
who could not be delivered to judicial authorities
within the time fixed by law is not infidelity in the
custody of a prisoner.
But there is real actual evasion of service of a sentence
when the custodian permits the prisoner to obtain a
relaxation in his imprisonment and to escape the
punishment of being deprived of his liberty, thus
making the penalty ineffectual, although the convict
may not have fled. This includes allowing prisoners to
sleep and eat in the officer’s house or utilizes the
prisoner’s services for domestic chores.
b. Article 224 – Evasion through
Negligence
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of
a detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment;
3. Such prisoner escapes through negligence
This covers only positive carelessness and definite
laxity which amounts to deliberate non-performance
of duties.
Page 212 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
The fact that the public officer recaptured the
prisoner who had escaped from his custody does not
afford complete exculpation.
The liability of an escaping prisoner:
1. If he is a prisoner by final judgment, he is liable
for evasion of service (Art. 157)
2. If he is a detention prisoner, he does not incur
criminal liability (unless cooperating with the
offender).
Policeman Rodillas escorted detained prisoner Sacris
to the court. After the court adjourned he let her eat
lunch with her family, permitted her to go to the ladies
washroom unescorted and after her escape, did not
report it immediately to his superiors, instead he went
around looking for her. SC held that he is guilty of the
crime in Art 224 for being negligent in the
performance of his duties which made the escape of
Sacris possible. [Rodillas v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-
58652 (1988)]
c. Article 225 – Escape of Prisoner
under the Custody of a Person
Not a Public Officer
Elements:
1. Offender is a private person;
2. The conveyance or custody of a prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him;
3. The prisoner or person under arrest escapes;
4. Offender consents to the escape, or that the
escape takes place through his negligence.
If the offender who aided or consented to the
prisoner’s escaping from confinement, whether the
prisoner is a convict or a detention prisoner, is not the
custodian, the crime is delivering prisoners from jail under
Article 156.
The party who is not the custodian but who conspired
with the custodian in allowing the prisoner to escape
does not commit infidelity in the custody of the
prisoner.
Art. 225 is not applicable if a private person was the
one who made the arrest and he consented to the
escape of the person he arrested.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. He is charged with the custody of papers or

SECTION TWO – INFIDELITY IN THE property;
CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS 3. These papers or property are sealed by proper
authority;
d. Article 226 – Removal, 4. He breaks the seal or permits them to be broken.
Concealment, or Destruction of In "breaking of seal", the word "breaking" should not
Documents be given a literal meaning. The custodian is liable
even if the seal was not actually broken because the
Elements: custodian managed to open the parcel without
1. Offender is a public officer; breaking the seal.
2. He abstracts, destroys or conceals a document or
papers; The element of damage is not required.
3. Said document or papers should have been
entrusted to such public officer by reason of his Removal,
office; Revelation Of Secrets Concealment or
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a third party By An Officer Destruction of
or to the public interest has been caused. (Art. 229) Documents (Art.
226)
Can only be committed by the public officer who is
The papers contain secrets
made the custodian of the document in his official
and therefore should not be The papers do not
capacity. If the offender is a private individual, estafa
published, and the public contain secrets but
is committed; if there is no damage, malicious
officer having charge thereof their removal is for
mischief.
removes and delivers them an illicit purpose.
wrongfully to a third person.
If the officer was placed in possession of the
document but it is not his duty to be the custodian
thereof, this crime is not committed. f. Article 228 – Opening of Closed
Documents
The document must be complete and one by which a
right could be established or an obligation could be Elements:
extinguished. 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. Any closed papers, documents, or objects are
If the writings are mere forms, there is no crime. entrusted to his custody;
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed
Damage to public interest is necessary. However, papers, documents or objects;
material damage is not necessary. 4. He does not have proper authority.
Removal is consummated upon taking or secreting The act should not fall under Art 227. Damage is also
away of the document from its usual place. It is not necessary.
immaterial whether or not the illicit purpose of the
offender has been accomplished.
g. Article 229 – Revelation of
This could cover failure on the part of the post office Secrets by an Officer
to forward the letters to their destination.
Mode 1: Revealing any secrets known to the
Damage in this article may consist in mere alarm to offending public officer by reason of his official
the public or in the alienation of its confidence in any capacity;
branch of the government service.
Elements:
e. Article 227 – Officer Breaking 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He knows of a secret by reason of his official
Seal capacity;
3. He reveals such secret without authority or
Elements: justifiable reasons;
1. Offender is a public officer;

Page 213 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

4. Damage, great or small, is caused to the public

interest. The reason for this provision is to uphold faith and
trust in public service.
Mode 2: Wrongfully delivering papers or copies
of papers of which he may have charge and which 6. Chapter VI: Other Offenses
should not be published.
or Irregularities by Public
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
Officers
2. He has charge of papers;
3. Those papers should not be published; SECTION ONE – DISOBEDIENCE,
4. He delivers those papers or copies thereof to a REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE, AND
third person; MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
5. The delivery is wrongful;
6. Damage is caused to public interest. a. Article 231 – Open Disobedience
Espionage is not contemplated in this article since Elements:
revelation of secrets of the State to a belligerent nation 1. Officer is a judicial or executive officer;
is already defined in Art 117 and CA 616. 2. There is a judgment, decision or order of a
superior authority;
Secrets must affect public interest. Secrets of private 3. Such judgment, decision or order was made
persons are not included. within the scope of the jurisdiction of the
superior authority and issued with all the legal
“Charge” - means custody or control. If he is merely formalities;
entrusted with the papers and not with the custody 4. He, without any legal justification, openly refuses
thereof, he is not liable under this article. to execute the said judgment, decision or order,
which he is duty bound to obey.
If the papers contain secrets which should not be
published, and the public officer having charge b. Article 232 – Disobedience to the
thereof removes and delivers them wrongfully to a
third person, the crime is revelation of secrets.
Order of Superior Officer When
Said Order Was Suspended by
On the other hand, if the papers do not contain Inferior Officer
secrets, their removal for an illicit purpose is infidelity
in the custody of documents. Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
Damage is essential to the act committed. 2. An order is issued by his superior for execution;
3. He has for any reason suspended the execution
h. Article 230 – Public Officers of such order;
Revealing Secrets of Private 4. His superior disapproves the suspension of the
execution of the order;
Individuals 5. Offender disobeys his superior despite the
disapproval of the suspension.
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer; This does not apply if the order of the superior is
2. He knows of the secrets of a private individual by illegal.
reason of his office;
3. He reveals such secrets without authority or
justifiable reason.
c. Article 233 – Refusal of
Assistance
Revelation to one person is sufficient.
Elements:
When the offender is a public attorney or a solicitor, 1. Offender is a public officer;
the act of revealing the secret should not be covered 2. A competent authority demands from the
by Art 209 (Betrayal of Trust). offender that he lend his cooperation towards the
administration of justice or other public service;
Damage to private individual is not necessary. 3. Offender maliciously fails to do so.

Page 214 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The request must come from one public officer to
another. If he receives consideration therefore,
bribery is committed.
But mere demand will fall under the prohibition under
the provision of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act).
Applies whether or not serious damage to the public
interest was committed.
If the offender is a private individual, he may be held
liable for contempt.
d. Article 234 – Refusal to
Discharge Elective Office
Elements:
1. Offender is elected by popular election to a
public office;
2. He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the
duties of said office;
3. There is no legal motive for such refusal to be
sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
Once an individual is elected to an office by the will
of the people, discharge of duties becomes a matter
of duty, not only a right. This only applies for elective,
not appointive officers.
e. Article 235 – Maltreatment of
Prisoners
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
prisoner;
3. He maltreats such prisoner in either of the
following manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or
handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner
under his charge either
b. By the imposition of punishment not
authorized by the regulations;
c. By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel and humiliating
manner;
d. By maltreating such prisoners to extort a
confession or to obtain some information
from the prisoner.
This is committed only by such public officer charged
with direct custody of the prisoner.
Page 215 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Offender may also be held liable for physical injuries
or damage caused.
If the public officer is not the custodian of the
prisoner, and he manhandles the latter, the crime is
physical injuries.
The offended party can either be a convict by final
judgment or a detention prisoner. To be considered a
detention prisoner, the person arrested must be
placed in jail even for just a short while.
The maltreatment does not really require physical
injuries. Any kind of punishment not authorized or
although authorized if executed in excess of the
prescribed degree is covered.
If the maltreatment was done in order to extort
confession, the penalty is qualified to the next higher
degree.
If the acts of maltreatment constitute torture, there is
a separate criminal liability from the crime under the
RPC. Torturous acts are not absorbed in, nor do they
absorb other crimes. [Section 15, RA 9745]
RA 9372: HUMAN SECURITY ACT
Failure to Deliver Suspect to the Proper Judicial
Authority within Three Days (Section 20):
1. The offender is a police or law enforcement
personnel who has apprehended or arrested,
detained and taken custody of a person;
2. The person detained is charged with or suspected
of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy to
commit terrorism;
3. The offender fails to deliver such charged or
suspected person to the proper judicial authority
within the period of 3 days.
Exception (Section 19):
In the event of an actual or imminent terrorist attack,
suspects may be detained for more than 3 days upon
the written approval of:
1. Municipal, city, provincial or regional official of
the Human Rights Commission;
2. Judge of the MTC, RTC, or Sandiganbayan; or
3. Justice of the CA nearest the place of arrest.
The written approval must be procured within 5 days
after the date of detention.
Provided that within 3 days after detention, suspects
whose connection with the terror attack or threat is
not established, shall be released immediately.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If the arrest is made during Saturdays, Sundays,
holidays or after office hours, the arresting police or
law enforcement personnel shall bring the person
thus arrested to the residence of any of the officials
mentioned above that is nearest the place where the
accused was arrested
Infidelity in the Custody of Detained Persons
(Section 44):
1. The offender is any public officer who has direct
custody of a detained person liable under the
provisions of this Act;
2. The offender causes or allows the escape of such
detained person by his deliberate act,
misconduct, or inexcusable negligence;
The offender shall suffer the penalty of:
1. 12 years and 1 day to 20 years of imprisonment,
if the detained person has already been convicted
and sentenced in a final judgment of a competent
court;
2. 6 years and 1 day to 12 years of imprisonment, if
the detained person has not been convicted and
sentenced in a final judgment of a competent
court.
The public officer is punished under the Human
Security Act and not under infidelity in the custody of
prisoners in the RPC (Articles 223-224), if the
detained person is charged with or suspected of the
crime of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism.
False Prosecution (Section 50):
Upon acquittal, any person who is accused of
terrorism shall be entitled to the payment of damages
in the amount of P500,000 for every day that he/she
has been detained or deprived of liberty or arrested
without a warrant as a result of such an accusation.
The amount of damages shall be automatically
charged against the appropriations of the police
agency or the Anti-Terrorism Council that brought or
sanctioned the filing of the charges against the
accused. It shall also be released within 15 days from
the date of the acquittal of the accused.
The award of damages mentioned above shall be
without prejudice to the right of the acquitted accused
to file criminal or administrative charges against those
responsible for charging him with the case of
terrorism.
Any officer, employee, personnel, or person who
delays the release or refuses to release the amounts
awarded to the individual acquitted of the crime of
terrorism as directed in the paragraph immediately
Page 216 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
preceding shall suffer the penalty of 6 months of
imprisonment.
SECTION TWO – ANTICIPATION,
PROLONGATION, AND ABANDONMENT
OF THE DUTIES AND POWERS OF PUBLIC
OFFICE
f. Article 236 – Anticipation of
Duties of a Public Officer
Elements:
1. Offender is entitled to hold a public office or
employment, either by election or appointment;
2. The law requires that he should first be sworn in
and/or should first give a bond;
3. He assumes the performance of the duties and
powers of such office;
4. He has not taken his oath of office and/or given
the bond required by law.
g. Article 237 – Prolonging
Performance of Duties and
Powers
Elements:
1. Offender is holding a public office;
2. The period provided by law, regulations or
special provision for holding such office, has
already expired;
3. He continues to exercise the duties and powers
of such office.
The offenders here can be those suspended,
separated, declared over-aged, or dismissed.
h. Article 238 – Abandonment of
Office or Position
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He formally resigns from his position;
3. His resignation has not yet been accepted;
4. He abandons his office to the detriment of the
public service.
For the resignation to be formal, it has to be in written
form.
The offense is qualified when the purpose of the
abandonment is to evade the discharge of duties of
preventing, prosecuting, or punishing any of the
crimes falling within Title One and Chapter One of
Title Three of book two of the RPC.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

k. Article 241 – Usurpation of

Abandonment of Judicial Functions
Dereliction of Duty
Office or Position
(Art. 208)
(Art. 238) Elements:
Committed only by public 1. Offender is an officer of the executive branch of
officers who have the duty the government;
Committed by any
to institute prosecution for 2. That he:
public officer
the punishment of a. assumes judicial powers, or
violations of the law b. obstructs the execution of any order or
There is actual Public officer does not decision rendered by any judge within his
abandonment through abandon his office but jurisdiction.
resignation to evade the merely fails to prosecute a
discharge of duties violation of the law. l. Article 242 – Disobeying Request
for Disqualification
SECTION THREE – USURPATION OF
POWERS AND UNLAWFUL Elements:
APPOINTMENTS 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. A proceeding is pending before such public
i. Article 239 – Usurpation of officer;
3. There is a question brought before the proper
Legislative Powers authority regarding his jurisdiction, which is not
yet decided;
Elements: 4. He has been lawfully required to refrain from
1. Offender is an executive or judicial officer; continuing the proceeding;
2. He: 5. He continues the proceeding.
a. makes general rules or regulations beyond
the scope of his authority; or The disobedient officer is liable even if the
b. attempts to repeal a law; or jurisdictional question is resolved in his favor.
c. suspends the execution thereof.

Arts. 239-241 punish interference by public officers m. Article 243 – Orders or Request
of the executive or judiciary with the functions of by Executive Officer to Any
another department of government to keep them Judicial Authority
within legitimate confines of their respective
jurisdictions. Elements:
1. Offender is an executive officer;
Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of 2. He addresses any order or suggestion to any
powers. The remedy is to file a petition for judicial authority;
prohibition or injunction. 3. The order or suggestion relates to any case or
business coming within the exclusive jurisdiction
j. Article 240 – Usurpation of of the courts of justice.
Executive Functions
The purpose is to maintain the independence of the
Elements: judiciary from executive dictations.
1. Offender is a judge;
2. That he: n. Article 244 – Unlawful
a. assumes a power pertaining to the executive Appointments
authorities, or
b. obstructs the executive authorities in the Elements:
lawful exercise of their powers. 1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He nominates or appoints a person to a public
Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of office;
powers 3. Such person lacks the legal qualifications
therefore;

Page 217 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

4. Offender knows that his nominee or appointee
lacks the qualification at the time he made the
nomination or appointment.
This can also be covered by RA 3019.
Solicit – to propose earnestly and persistently
something unchaste and immoral to a woman. The
advances must be immoral or indecent. Proof of
solicitation is not necessary when there is sexual
intercourse.

Recommending, knowing that the person Abuse against chastity is not absorbed in rape because
recommended is not qualified is not a crime. the basis of penalizing the acts is different from each
other
There must be a law providing for the qualifications
of a person to be nominated or appointed to a public
office.

o. Article 245 – Abuses against

Chastity
Modes:
1. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to a woman interested in matters
pending before the offending officer for
decision, or with respect to which he is required
to submit a report to or consult with a superior
officer;
2. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to a woman under the offender’s
custody;
3. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent
advances to the wife, daughter, sister or relative
within the same degree by affinity of any person
in the custody of the offending warden or officer.

Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He solicits or makes immoral or indecent
advances to a woman;
3. Such woman is –
a. interested in matters pending before the
offender for decision, or with respect to
which he is required to submit a report to or
consult with a superior officer; or
b. under the custody of the offender who is a
warden or other public officer directly
charged with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest; or
c. the wife, daughter, sister or relative within
the same degree by affinity of the person in
the custody of the offender.

The crime is consummated by mere proposal.

The mother of the person in the custody of the public

officer is not included. If the offender were not the
custodian, then crime would fall under Republic Act
No. 3019.

Page 218 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
H. Title VIII. Crimes
against Persons
1. Chapter I: Destruction of Life
a. Article 246: Parricide
b. Article 247: Death or Physical Injuries Under
Exceptional Circumstances
c. Article 248: Murder
d. Article 249: Homicide
e. Article 250: Penalty for Frustrated Parricide,
Murder or Homicide
f. Article 251: Death Caused in Tumultuous
Affray
g. Article 252: Physical Injuries Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
h. Article 253: Giving Assistance to Suicide
i. Article 254: Discharge of Firearms
j. Article 255: Infanticide
k. Article 256: Intentional Abortion
l. Article 257: Unintentional Abortion
m. Article 258: Abortion Practiced by the
Woman Herself or by Parents
n. Article 259: Abortion by a Physician or
Midwife and Dispensing of Abortives
o. Article 260: Responsibility of Participants in
a Duel
p. Article 261: Challenging to a Duel
1. Chapter II: Physical Injuries
a. Article 262: Mutilation
b. Article 263: Serious Physical Injuries
c. Article 264: Administering Injurious
Substances or Beverages
d. Article 265: Less Serious Physical Injuries
e. Article 266: Slight Physical Injuries and
Maltreatment
f. Article 266-A: Rape (amended by RA 8353)
About this Title: The essence of crimes involves the
taking of human life, destruction of the fetus, or
inflicting injuries.
1. Chapter I: Destruction of
Life
a. Article 246 – Parricide
Elements:
1. Person is killed;
2. Deceased is killed by the accused;
3. Deceased is the accused's
a. legitimate/illegitimate father
b. legitimate/illegitimate mother
Page 219 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
c. legitimate/illegitimate child (should not be
less than 3 days old, otherwise crime is
infanticide)
d. other legitimate ascendant
e. other legitimate descendant
f. legitimate spouse
Relationship
This is the essential element of this crime –
relationship of offender with the victim; except for
spouses, only relatives by blood and in direct line.
Hence, adopted children are not included. [Reyes]
It must be alleged in the information. Wife of victim
cannot be convicted of parricide if charged only with
murder. However, relationship must be considered
aggravating even if not alleged. [People v. Jumawan, G.R.
No. 187495 (2014)]
Spouse must be legitimate. Muslim husbands with
several wives can be convicted of parricide only in
case the first wife is killed. [People v. Subano, G.R. No.
L-20338 (1967)]
A stranger who cooperates and takes part in the
commission of the crime of parricide is not guilty of
parricide but only homicide or murder, as the case
may be. [People v. Patricio, G.R. No. L-20651 (1923);
People v. Echaluce, G.R. No. L-29776 (1975)]
The law does not require knowledge of relationship
between offender and victim. [Reyes]
Parricide shall not be punished by reclusion perpetua to
death in the following cases:
1. Reckless or simple imprudence [Art. 365]
2. Parricide by mistake [Art. 49]
3. Parricide under exceptional circumstances [Art.
247]
b. Article 247 – Death or Physical
Injuries Under Exceptional
Circumstances
Elements:
1. A legally married person, or a parent, surprises
his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18
years of age and living with him in the act of
sexual intercourse with another person;
2. He or she kills any or both of them, or inflicts
upon any or both of them any serious physical
injury in the act or immediately thereafter;
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or
she has not consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Not a Felony
This article does not define a felony, rather it serves
as a defense for a person charged with parricide,
homicide or serious physical injuries. If all the
requisites have been met, the defendant will be
sentenced to destierro instead of the severe penalty for
the aforementioned crimes. If less serious or slight
physical injuries are inflicted, there is no criminal
liability. [Reyes]
Spouse
The wife is also entitled to the benefits of this article.
The phrase “any legally married person” and the word
“spouse” include the wife.
This does not apply if the accused is a common-law
spouse.
Parents
Parents need not be legitimate.
“Living with parent(s)” – understood to be in their
own dwelling. If done in a motel, article does not
apply.
Purpose
This means “to come upon suddenly and
unexpectedly.”
If the accused did not surprise the supposed offenders
in the very act of committing adultery but thereafter,
he cannot invoke the privilege of Art. 247. [People v.
Gonzales, G.R. No. 46310 (1939)]
Justice Laurel’s Dissent: Must the offended
husband look on in the meantime and wait until the
very physical act of coition take place? This
interpretation is far from being rational and certainly
does violence to the reason and purpose of the law.
Immediately Thereafter
There is no set time as jurisprudence has held 1 hour
or even 4 hours as “immediately thereafter”.
However, the act done must be a direct result of the
outrage of the cuckolded spouse, and a continuous act
from the moment of the surprising.
Article does not apply:
1. If the surprising took place before any actual
sexual intercourse could be done.
2. If the daughter is married. Although the article
does not use the word “unmarried,” this article
applies only when the daughter is single because
while under 18 and single, she is still under
parental authority. If she is married, her husband
alone can claim the benefits of this article.
Page 220 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Evidence of the victim’s promiscuity is
inconsequential to the killing. The offender must
prove that he actually surprised his wife and [her
paramour] in flagrante delicto, and that he killed the
man during or immediately thereafter. [People v.
Puedan, G.R. No. 139576 (2002)]
LIABILITY FOR PHYSICAL INJURIES
SUFFERED BY THIRD PERSONS
In one case, two other persons suffered physical
injuries as they were caught in the crossfire when the
accused shot the victim. A complex crime of double
frustrated murder was not committed as the accused
did not have the intent to kill the two victims. Here,
the accused did not commit murder when he fired at
the paramour of his wife. No aberratio ictus because he
was acting lawfully. Inflicting death under exceptional
circumstances is not murder. [People v. Abarca, G.R.
No. 74433 (1987)]
c. Article 248 – Murder
Elements:
1. Person was killed;
2. Accused killed him;
3. Killing attended by any of the following
qualifying circumstances
a. with treachery, taking advantage of superior
strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or
of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity;
b. in consideration of a price, reward or
promise;
c. by means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of
an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving
great waste and ruin;
d. on occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or
of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other
public calamity;
e. with evident premeditation;
f. with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Murder – The unlawful killing of any person which
is not parricide or infanticide with any of the
circumstance mentioned in Art. 248.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
One attendant qualifying circumstance is enough. If
there are more than one alleged in the information for
murder, only one will qualify the killing to murder and
the other circumstances will be taken as generic
aggravating circumstance.
Any of the qualifying circumstances enumerated in
Art. 248 must be alleged in the information. When the
other circumstances are absorbed or included in one
qualifying circumstance, they cannot be considered as
generic aggravating.
TREACHERY
Treachery absorbs the aggravating circumstance of
abuse of superior strength and aid of armed men.
[People v. Sespeñe, G.R. No. L-9346 (1957)]
The essence of treachery is that the offended party
was denied the chance to defend himself because of
the means, methods, or forms of attack deliberately
adopted by the offender were not merely incidental to
the killing.
Killing of a person with treachery is murder even if
there was no intent to kill. [People v. Cagoco, G.R. No.
L-38511 (1933)]
Killing of a child of tender age is qualified by
treachery. [People v. Valerio, G.R. No. L-4116 (1982)]
INTENT TO KILL
When the victim is already dead, intent to kill
becomes irrelevant. It is important only if the victim
did not die to determine if the felony is physical injury
or attempted or frustrated homicide.
“Employing means or persons to insure or afford
impunity” – means are employed by the accused to
prevent his being recognized or to secure himself
against detection and punishment
PRICE, REWARD, OR PROMISE
The person who received the price or reward or who
accepted a promise of price or rewards and would not
have killed the victim were it not for that price,
reward, or promise is a principal by direct
participation.
The person who gave the price or reward or who
made the promise is a principal by induction.
FIRE
When a person is killed by fire, the primordial criminal
intent of the offender is considered. If the primordial
criminal intent of the offender is to kill and fire was
only used as a means to do so, the crime is only
Page 221 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
murder. If the primordial criminal intent of the
offender is to destroy property with the use of
pyrotechnics and incidentally, somebody within the
premises is killed, the crime is arson with homicide, a
single indivisible crime penalized under Art. 326,
which is death as a consequence of arson.
Intent to kill must be present for the use of fire to be
appreciated as a qualifying circumstance. [People v.
Pugay, G.R. No. L-74324 (1988)]
POISON
Treachery and evident premeditation are inherent in
murder by poison only if the offender has the intent
to kill the victim by use of poison.
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
Act of the offender manifestly indicating that he clung
to his determination to kill his victim.
It is absorbed in price, reward or promise, if without
the premeditation the inductor would not have
induced the other to commit the act but not as regards
the one induced.
The prosecution must prove (1) the time when the
offender determined (conceived) to kill his victim; (2)
an act of the offender manifestly indicating that he
clung to his determination to kill his victim; and (3) a
sufficient lapse of time between the determination
and the execution of the killing.
CRUELTY
Under Article 14, the generic aggravating
circumstance of cruelty requires that the victim be
alive, when the cruel wounds were inflicted and,
therefore, there must be evidence to that effect.
Injuries or wounds, not necessary for the killing of the
victim, must be inflicted deliberately by the offender.
Yet, in murder, aside from cruelty, any act that would
amount to scoffing or decrying the corpse of the
victim will qualify the killing to murder.
Outraging – to commit an extremely vicious or
deeply insulting act
Scoffing – to jeer; implies a showing of irreverence
d. Article 249 – Homicide
Elements:
1. Person was killed;
2. Offender killed him without any justifying
circumstances;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
3. Offender had the intention to kill, which is
presumed;
4. Killing was not attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide
or infanticide
Corpus delicti – means the actual commission of the
crime charged
In all crimes against persons in which the death of the
victim is an element of the offense, there must be
satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of death and (2)
the identity of the victim
INTENT TO KILL
Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death
resulted. Evidence of intent to kill is important only
in attempted or frustrated homicide.
In attempted or frustrated homicide, there is intent to
kill. In physical injuries, there is none. However, if as
a result of the physical injuries inflicted, the victim
died, the crime will be homicide because the law
presumes intent to kill and punishes the result, and
not the intent of the act. The accused will, however,
be entitled to the mitigating circumstance of lack of
intent to commit so grave a wrong.
No offense of frustrated homicide through
imprudence.
The element of intent to kill in frustrated homicide is
incompatible with negligence or imprudence. [People
v. Castillo, C.A. No. 227 (1946)]
OTHER NOTES:
Physical injuries sufficient to cause death are one of
the essential elements of frustrated homicide.
In accidental homicide wherein death of a person is
brought about by a lawful act performed with proper
care and skill and without homicidal intent, there is no
liability.
Use of unlicensed firearm is an aggravating
circumstance in homicide.
e. Article 250 - Penalty for
Frustrated Parricide, Murder or
Homicide
Courts may impose a penalty:
1. 2 degrees lower for frustrated parricide, murder,
or homicide
2. 3 degrees lower for attempted parricide, murder,
or homicide.
Page 222 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
For frustrated parricide, homicide or murder, the
courts, in view of the facts of the case, may impose a
penalty lower by one degree than that imposed under
Art. 50.
Art. 50 provides that the penalty next lower in degree
than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon a principal in a
frustrated felony. Thus, under Art. 50, the court can
impose a penalty of TWO DEGREES LOWER for
frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide.
For attempted parricide, homicide, or murder, the
courts, in view of the facts of the case may impose a
penalty by one degree than that imposed under Art.
51.
Art. 51 provides that the penalty lower by two degrees
than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principal in an
attempted felony. Thus, under Art. 250, the court can
impose a penalty of THREE DEGREES LOWER
for attempted parricide, murder, or homicide.
Note: Any attempt on, or conspiracy against, the life
of the Chief Executive of the Philippines or that of
any member of his family, or against the life of any
member of his cabinet or that of any member of the
latter’s family, shall suffer the penalty of death.
f. Article 251 - Death Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
Elements:
1. There are several persons;
2. They do not compose groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking
each other reciprocally;
3. These several persons quarreled and assaulted
one another in a confused and tumultuous
manner;
4. Someone was killed in the course of the affray;
5. It cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased;
6. The person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries or who used violence can be
identified.
Tumultuous affray – is a commotion in a confused
manner to an extent that it would not be possible to
identify who the killer is if death results, or who
inflicted the serious physical injury, but the person or
persons who used violence are known. It exists when
at least four persons took part [Reyes].
• The groups must not be organized to mutually
assault or fight each other, otherwise the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
hostilities would not be considered as a
tumultuous affray. [People v. Abiog, G.R. No. L-
12747 (1917)]
Who are liable?
1. The person or persons who inflicted the serious
physical injuries
2. If it is not known who inflicted the serious
physical injuries on the deceased, all persons who
used violence upon the person of the victim are
liable.
If there is conspiracy, this crime is not committed.
The crime would be murder or homicide.
The crimes committed might be disturbance of public
order, or if participants are armed, it could be
tumultuous disturbance, or if property was destroyed,
it could be malicious mischief.
g. Article 252 - Physical Injuries
Caused in Tumultuous Affray
Elements:
1. There is a tumultuous affray;
2. A participant or some participants thereof
suffered serious physical injuries or physical
injuries of a less serious nature only;
3. The person responsible thereof cannot be
identified;
4. All those who appear to have used violence upon
the person of the offended party are known.
Unlike in Article 251, the injured party in this article
must be one or some of the participants in the affray.
All those who appear to have used violence shall
suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that
provided for the serious physical injuries inflicted. For
less serious physical injuries, the penalty is arresto mayor
from five to fifteen days.
Physical injury should be serious or less serious.
No crime of physical injuries resulting from a
tumultuous affray if the physical injury is only slight
because slight physical injury is considered as inherent
in a tumultuous affray.
h. Article 253 - Giving Assistance to
Suicide
Modes:
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the
suicide is consummated or not;
Page 223 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Lending his assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself.
Giving assistance to suicide means giving means
(arms, poison, etc.) or whatever manner of positive
and direct cooperation (intellectual aid, suggestions
regarding the mode of committing suicide, etc.).
If the person does the killing himself, the penalty is
similar to that of homicide, which is reclusion
temporal.
The relation of the offender to the person committing
suicide is not material. The law does not distinguish.
Hence, penalty would be the same if the offender is
the father, mother or child.
There can be no qualifying circumstance because the
determination to die must come from the victim.
The person attempting suicide is not liable. Reason:
He should be pitied, not punished.
A pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide by
means of poison, but instead of dying, the fetus in her
womb was expelled, is not liable for abortion. In
order to incur criminal liability for the result not
intended, one must be committing a felony [Art.
4; Reyes].
Euthanasia – commonly known as mercy-killing; the
practice of painlessly putting to death a person
suffering from some incurable disease.
• This article does not contemplate euthanasia
where the crime is murder (if without
consent; with consent, covered by Article
253). Euthanasia is not lending assistance to
suicide. In euthanasia, the victim is not in a
position to commit suicide.
• A doctor who resorts to euthanasia of his
patient may be liable for murder. But if the
patient himself asks to be killed by his
doctor, this Article applies. [Reyes]
i. Article 254 - Discharge of
Firearms
Elements:
1. Offender discharges a firearm against or at
another person.
2. Offender has no intention to kill that person.
No crime if firearm is not discharged. It is essential
for prosecution to prove that the discharge of firearm
was directed precisely against the offended party.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The crime is the discharge of firearm, even if the gun
was not pointed at the offended party when it fired,
as long as it was initially aimed by the accused at or
against the offended party
If there is intention to kill, it may be classified as
attempted parricide, murder, or homicide.
No presumed intent to kill if the distance is 200
meters.
Intent to kill or animus inteficendi cannot be
automatically drawn from the mere fact that the use
of firearms is dangerous to life. Animus interficendi
must be established with the same degree of certainty
as is required of the other elements of the crime. The
inference of intent to kill should not be drawn in the
absence of circumstances sufficient to prove such
intent beyond reasonable doubt. [Dado v. People
G.R. No. 131421(2002)]
There is a special complex crime of illegal discharge
of firearm with serious or less serious physical
injuries.
j. Article 255 – Infanticide
Elements:
1. A child was killed by the accused;
2. The deceased child was less than 3 days old (72
hours).
Infanticide – the killing of any child less than three
days of age, whether the killer is the parent or
grandparent, any other relative of the child, or a
stranger.
If the offender is the parent and the victim is less than
three days old, the crime is infanticide and not
parricide.
A stranger who cooperates in the perpetration of
infanticide committed by the mother or grandparent
on the mother’s side, is liable for infanticide, but he
must suffer the penalty prescribed for murder.
It is necessary that the child be born alive and viable
(capable of independent existence). [US v. Vedra, G.R.
No. 4779 (1908)] There is no infanticide when the
child was born dead, or although born alive, it could
not sustain an independent life when it was killed.
Only the mother and maternal grandparents of the
child are entitled to the mitigating circumstance of
concealing the dishonor. Concealment of dishonor is
Page 224 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
not an element of infanticide, it merely lowers the
penalty.
If the child is abandoned without any intent to kill and
death results as a consequence, the crime committed
is not infanticide but abandonment under Article 276.
k. Article 256 - Intentional Abortion
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman;
2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages
administered, or that the accused otherwise acts
upon such pregnant woman;
3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or
beverages upon her, or any other act of the
accused, the fetus dies, either in the womb or
after having been expelled therefrom;
4. The abortion is intended.
Abortion – the willful killing of the foetus in the
uterus or the violent expulsion of the foetus from the
maternal womb which results in the death of the
foetus. [Reyes citing Guevarra]
Ways of committing intentional abortion
• Using any violence upon the person of the
pregnant woman;
• Acting, but without using violence, without the
consent of the woman. (By administering drugs
or beverages upon such pregnant woman without
her consent.)
• Acting (by administering drugs or beverages),
with the consent of the pregnant woman.
Abortion v. Infanticide
Abortion Infanticide
Fetus could sustain an
Fetus could not sustain
independent life after
independent life. No
separation from the
legal viability.
mother’s womb.
If the mother as a consequence of abortion suffers
death or physical injuries, there is a complex crime of
murder or physical injuries and abortion.
In intentional abortion, the offender must know of
the pregnancy because the particular criminal intent is
to cause an abortion.
If the woman turns out not to be pregnant and
someone performs an abortion upon her, he is liable
for an impossible crime if the woman suffers no
physical injury.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If she dies or suffers injuries, the crime will be
homicide, serious physical injuries, etc.
FRUSTRATED ABORTION
committed if the fetus that is expelled is viable and,
therefore, not dead as abortion did not result despite
the employment of adequate and sufficient means to
make the pregnant woman abort.
l. Article 257 - Unintentional
Abortion
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman;
2. Violence is used upon such pregnant woman
without intending an abortion;
3. The violence is intentionally exerted;
4. Result of violence – fetus dies, either in the
womb or expelled therefrom
Unintentional abortion requires physical violence
inflicted deliberately and voluntarily by a third person
upon the pregnant woman, without intention to cause
the abortion.
If the pregnant woman was killed by violence by her
husband, the crime committed is the complex crime
of parricide with unintentional abortion.
Unintentional abortion may be committed through
negligence as it is enough that the use of violence be
voluntary. In one case, the accused was declared guilty
of the crime of unintentional abortion through
reckless imprudence for having bumped a calesa
which resulted in a pregnant woman bumping her
abdomen against the wall of the calesa and eventually
led to an abortion. [Reyes citing a Decision of the Supreme
Court of Spain]
If the act of violence is not felonious, that is, act of
self-defense, and there is no knowledge of the
woman’s pregnancy, there is no liability.
Mere boxing of the stomach taken together with the
immediate strangling of the victim in a fight, is not
sufficient proof to show an intent to cause abortion.
[People v. Salufrania, G.R. No. L-50884 (1988)]
For the crime of abortion, even unintentional, to be
held committed, the accused must have known of the
pregnancy. [People v. Carnaso, CA, 61 O.G. 3420]
Page 225 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
m. Article 258 - Abortion Practiced
by the Woman Herself or by
Parents
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an
abortion;
2. Abortion is intended;
3. Abortion is caused by –
a. The pregnant woman herself;
b. Any other person, with her consent; or
c. Any of her parents, with her consent for the
purpose of concealing her dishonour.
If the purpose of abortion is to conceal dishonor,
mitigation applies only to pregnant woman and not to
parents of pregnant woman, unlike in infanticide.
If the purpose of parents is not to conceal dishonor,
the crime is intentional abortion.
n. Article 259 - Abortion by a
Physician or Midwife and
Dispensing of Abortives
Elements:
1. There is a pregnant woman who has suffered an
abortion;
2. The abortion is intended;
3. Offender, who must be a physician or midwife,
caused or assisted in causing the abortion;
4. Said physician or midwife took advantage of his
or her scientific knowledge or skill.
The penalties provided for intentional abortion shall
be imposed in the maximum period for physicians
and midwives violating this article. Reason: heavier
guilt in making use of their knowledge for the
destruction of human life, when it should be used only
for its preservation. [Reyes citing Albert]
If the abortion is produced by a physician to save the
life of the mother, there is no liability.
Elements (for pharmacists):
1. The offender is a pharmacist;
2. There is no proper prescription from a physician;
3. The offender dispenses any abortive.
This article punishes a pharmacist who merely
dispenses with an abortive without the proper
prescription of a physician.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
It is not necessary that the pharmacist knows that the
abortive would be used to cause an abortion. What is
punished is the dispensing of the abortive without the
proper prescription. It is not necessary that the
abortive be actually used either.
If pharmacist knew that the abortive would be used
for abortion, he would be liable as an accomplice in
the crime of abortion.
o. Article 260 - Responsibility of
Participants in a Duel
Modes:
1. Killing one’s adversary in a duel;
2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical injuries;
3. Making a combat although no physical injuries
have been inflicted.
Persons liable
1. The person who killed or inflicted physical
injuries upon his adversary, or both combatants
in any other case, as principals.
2. The seconds, as accomplices.
Duel – a formal or regular combat previously
consented to by two parties in the presence of two or
more seconds of lawful age on each side, who make
the selection of arms and fix all the other conditions
of the fight to settle some antecedent quarrel.
If these are not the conditions of the fight, it is not a
duel in the sense contemplated in the RPC. It will be
a quarrel and anyone who killed the other will be liable
for homicide or murder, as the case may be.
There is no such crime nowadays because people hit
each other even without entering into any pre-
conceived agreement. This is an obsolete provision.
p. Article 261 - Challenging to a
Duel
Modes:
1. Challenging another to a duel;
2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a
duel;
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for
having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.
Persons Responsible:
1. Challenger
2. Instigators
Page 226 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
If one challenges another to a duel by shouting
“Come down, Olympia, let us measure your prowess.
We will see whose intestines will come out. You are a
coward if you do not come down”, the crime of
challenging to a duel is not committed. What is
committed is the crime of light threats under Article
285, paragraph 1. [People v. Tacomoy, G.R. No. L-4798
(1951)]
2. Chapter II: Physical Injuries
a. Article 262 – Mutilation
First Mode - Mutilation
Intentionally mutilating another by depriving him,
either totally or partially, of some essential organ for
reproduction; (Mutilation)
Elements:
1. There be a castration, that is, mutilation of organs
necessary for generation, such as the penis or
ovarium;
2. The mutilation is caused purposely and
deliberately
Second Mode - Mayhem
Intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by
lopping or clipping off any part of the body of the
offended party, other than the essential organ for
reproduction, to deprive him of that part of his body.
The offender must have the intention to deprive the
offended party of a part of his body. If there is no
such intention, the crime will be serious physical
injuries.
Mutilation – the lopping or clipping off of some part
of the body
Castration – intentionally mutilating another by
depriving him, either totally or partially, of some
essential organ for reproduction
Mayhem – Basically, other intentional mutilation. It
is intentionally making mutilation other than some
essential organ for reproduction and to deprive him
of that part of the body
b. Article 263 - Serious Physical
Injuries
Modes of Commission:
1. By wounding;
2. By beating;
3. By assaulting; or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
4. By administering injurious substance. (Art. 264)
What are serious physical injuries?
They are when the injured person, in consequence of
the physical injuries inflicted—
1. becomes insane, imbecilic, impotent or blind
2. (a) loses the use of speech or the power to hear
or to smell, or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm,
or a leg, or
(b) loses the use of any such member; or
(c) becomes incapacitated for the work in which
he was theretofore habitually engaged, in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted;
3. (a) becomes deformed; or
(b) loses any other member of his body; or
(c) loses the use thereof; or
(d) becomes ill or incapacitated for the
performance of the work in which he was
habitually engaged for more than 90 days;
4. becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more
than 30 days (but must not be more than 90 days).
In physical injuries, there must be no intent to kill,
otherwise the crime is frustrated/attempted murder
or homicide as the case may be.
Physical Injuries v. Attempted or Frustrated
Homicide
Attempted or Frustrated
Physical Injuries
Homicide
May be committed even if no
No intent to kill physical injuries are inflicted
offended party Offender has intent to kill
party
UNDER THE FIRST TYPE
1. Impotence means an inability to copulate. It
includes sterility.
2. Penalty is one degree higher when the victim is
under 12 years of age.
3. Blindness under this type must be of two eyes
while blindness under the second type requires
the loss of an eye only. Mere weakness of vision
is not contemplated.
UNDER THE SECOND TYPE
1. Loss of power to hear must be of both ears. If
hearing in only one ear is lost, it falls under the
third type.
2. Loss of the use of hand or incapacity for work
must be permanent.
3. All the body parts mentioned are principal
members of the body (eye, hand, foot etc.)
Page 227 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
UNDER THE THIRD TYPE
1. It covers any other part of the body which is not
a principal member of the body.
2. Fingers of the hand are not principal members
and the loss of such fall under the third type.
However, if it is proven that the loss of the
fingers resulted in the loss of the use of the hand
itself, it would fall under the second type. [US v.
Punsalan, G.R. No. 7539 (1912)]
Deformity – physical ugliness, permanent and
definite abnormality. It must be conspicuous and
visible.
Elements of deformity:
1. physical ugliness,
2. permanent and definite abnormality, and
3. it must be conspicuous and visible.
All these elements must concur.
Illustrations:
1. Loss of molar tooth – This is not deformity as it
is not visible.
2. Loss of permanent front tooth – This is
deformity as it is visible and permanent.
3. Loss of milk front tooth – This is not deformity
as it is visible but will be naturally replaced.
Deformity by loss of teeth refers to injury which
cannot be repaired by the action of nature. Loss of
both outer ears is a deformity. Loss of the lobule of
the ear is a deformity. Loss of index and middle
fingers only is either deformity or loss of a member,
not a principal one, of his body or use of the same.
Loss of power to hear of right ear only is loss of use
of other part of body.
UNDER THE FOURTH TYPE
Illness – when the wound inflicted did not heal with
a certain period of time.
Note that under serious physical injuries of the fourth
type, illness or incapacity is required, NOT
medical attendance.
Paragraphs 2 and 3 refers to the “work in which he
was theretofore habitually engaged”
Must the injured party have a vocation at the time
of the injury?
YES, insofar as these two paragraphs are concerned.
Incapacity therefore must relate to a certain kind of
work only.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
However, in paragraph 4, incapacity for any kind of
work is acceptable, because the phrase “incapacity for
labor” is used.
Injury requiring hospitalization for more than thirty
days is serious physical injuries under paragraph 4.
When the category of the offense of serious physical
injuries depends on the period of illness or incapacity
for labor, there must be evidence of the length of that
period; otherwise, the offense is only slight physical
injuries.
Lessening of efficiency due to injury is NOT
incapacity.
Distinguished from mutilation: In mutilation, the
body parts should have been purposely and
deliberately lopped or clipped off. This intention is
not present in serious physical injuries.
No attempted or frustrated crime of physical
injuries
This felony is defined by the gravity of the injury. It is
a crime of result. As long as there is no injury, there
can be no attempted or frustrated stage thereof.
Classification of physical injuries:
1. Between less serious physical injuries and serious
physical injuries, do not consider the period of
medical treatment. Only consider the period
when the offended party is rendered
incapacitated for labor.
2. When the injury created a deformity upon the
offended party, disregard the healing duration or
the period of medical treatment involved. At
once, it is considered serious physical injuries.
Serious physical injuries is punished with higher
penalties in the following cases:
1. If it is committed against any of the persons
referred to in the crime of parricide under Article
246;
2. If any of the circumstances qualifying murder
attended its commission.
c. Article 264 - Administering
Injurious Substances or
Beverages
Elements:
1. Offender inflicted upon another any serious
physical injury;
2. It was done by knowingly administering to him
any injurious substance or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity;
Page 228 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
3. No intent to kill.
If the accused did not know of the injurious nature of
the substances administered, he is not liable under this
article.
d. Article 265 - Less Serious
Physical Injuries
Elements:
1. Offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10
days or more (but not more than 30 days), or
needs medical attendance for the same period of
time;
2. The physical injuries must not be those described
in the preceding articles.
Qualified as to penalty
1. A fine not exceeding P 500.00, in addition to
arresto mayor, when
a. There is a manifest intent to insult or offend
the injured person; or
b. There are circumstances adding ignominy to
the offense.
2. A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is
either –
a. The offender’s parents, ascendants,
guardians, curators or teachers; or
b. Persons of rank or person in authority,
provided the crime is not direct assault.
e. Article 266 - Slight Physical
Injuries and Maltreatment
Modes
1. Physical injuries incapacitated the offended party
for labor from 1-9 days, OR required medical
attendance during the same period;
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the
offended party from engaging in his habitual
work or which did not require medical
attendance;
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing
any injury.
This involves even ill-treatment where there is no sign
of injury requiring medical treatment.
Slapping the offended party is a form of ill-treatment
which is a form of slight physical injuries.
But if the slapping is done to cast dishonor upon the
person slapped, or to humiliate or embarrass the
offended party out of a quarrel or anger, the crime is
slander by deed.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Between slight physical injuries and less serious
physical injuries, not only the healing duration of the
injury will be considered but also the medical
attendance required to treat the injury.
So the healing duration may be one to nine days, but
if the medical treatment continues beyond nine days,
the physical injuries would already qualify as less
serious physical injuries.
The medical treatment may have lasted for nine days,
but if the offended party is still incapacitated for labor
beyond nine days, the physical injuries are already
considered less serious physical injuries.
Where there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only
slight physical injuries.
In the absence of proof as to the period of the
offended party’s incapacity for labor or of the
required medical attendance, the crime committed is
slight physical injuries.
f. Article 266-A – Rape (as
amended by RA 8353)
FIRST MODE – RAPE BY SEXUAL
INTERCOURSE
Rape through sexual intercourse without consent of
the woman
Elements:
1. Offender is a man;
2. Offender had carnal knowledge of a woman;
3. Such act is accomplished under any of the
following circumstances:
a. By using force, threat or intimidation;
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or is
otherwise unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority;
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age
(Statutory Rape) or is demented.
SECOND MODE: RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL
ASSAULT
Elements:
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault;
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of
the following means:
a. By inserting his penis into another person's
mouth or anal orifice; or
Page 229 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
b. By inserting any instrument or object into
the genital or anal orifice of another person;
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under
any of the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation; or
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious; or
c. By means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority; or
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented.
CLASSIFICATIONS OF RAPE
1. Rape by sexual intercourse
a. Offended party is always a woman
b. Offender is always a man.
2. Sexual assault
a. Rape can now be committed by a man or a
woman, that is, if a woman or a man uses an
instrument on anal orifice of male, she or he
can be liable for rape.
b. Inserting a finger inside the genital of a
woman is rape through sexual assault within
the context of ‘object’.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES:
1. If the victim:
a. Is under 18 yrs. old, & the offender is a
parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity w/in the
3rd civil degree, or the common law spouse
of the parent of the victim
b. Is under the custody of the police / military
authorities / law enforcement agency
c. Is a religious and such legitimate vocation is
known by the offender before or at the time
of rape
d. is a child below 7 yrs. old;
e. suffered permanent or physical mutilation or
disability by reason or on the occasion of
rape
2. If the offender:
a. is afflicted with a sexually transmissible
disease & the virus / disease is transmitted to
the victim;
b. is a member of the AFP / PNP / any law
enforcement agency / penal institution, &
took advantage of his position;
c. knew of the pregnancy of the offended party
at the time of the commission of rape;
d. knew of the mental disability, emotional
disorder, & / or physical handicap of the
offended party at the time of the commission
of rape
3. If Rape is committed in full view of the
spouse, parent, any of the children, or other
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

relatives w/in the 3rd civil degree of proving resistance. [People v. Metin, G.R. No. 140781
consanguinity (2003)]

Old Anti-Rape Law v. RA 8353 It is not necessary that the force employed against the
Old Anti-Rape Law RA 8553 complaining woman in rape to be so great or of such
a character as could not be resisted. It is sufficient that
Crime against chastity Crime against persons the force used is sufficient to consummate the
Under the 2nd type, sexual culprit’s purpose of copulating with the offended
May be committed by a
assault may be committed woman. [People v. Savellano, G.R. No. L-31227 (1974)]
man against a woman
by any person against any
only
person Intimidation must be viewed in light of the victim’s
perception and judgment at the time of rape and not
PRIVATE CRIME
by any hard and fast rule. It is enough that it produces
Complaint must be
filed by the woman or fear – fear that if the victim does not yield to the
May be prosecuted even if bestial demands of the accused, something would
her parents,
the woman does not file a happen to her at the moment or thereafter, as when
grandparents or
complaint she is threatened with death if she reports the
guardian if the woman
was a minor or incident. [People v. Metin, supra.]
incapacitated
The Supreme Court has ruled that the moral
Marriage extinguishes the ascendancy or influence exercised by the accused over
Marriage of the victim
penal action only as to the the victim substitutes for the element of physical
w/ one of the
principal (the person who force or intimidation such as those committed by:
offenders benefits not
married the victim), and 1. Fathers against their daughters [People v. Bayona,
only the principal but
cannot be extended to co- G.R. No. 133343 (2000)]
also the accomplices
principals in case of 2. Stepfathers against their stepdaughters [People v.
and accessories
MULTIPLE RAPE Vitor, G.R. No. 113690 (1995)]
Marital rape NOT 3. A godfather against his goddaughter [People v.
Marital rape recognized Casil, G.R. No. 110836 (1995)]
recognized
4. Uncles against their nieces [People v. Betonio, G.R.
No. 119165 (1997)]
Complete penetration is NOT necessary. The
5. The first cousin of the victim’s mother [People v.
slightest penetration—contact with the labia—will
Perez, G.R. No. 129213 (1999)]
consummate the rape. There is NO crime of
FRUSTRATED RAPE because in rape, from the
WHEN THE OFFENDED PARTY IS
moment the offender has carnal knowledge of the
DEPRIVED OF REASON OR IS OTHERWISE
victim, he actually attains his purpose, all the essential
UNCONSCIOUS
elements of the offense have been accomplished.
In one case, this was ruled to cover the rape of a 16-
[People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724 (1990)]
year old mental retardate with the intellectual capacity
of a 9-year-old, notwithstanding the victim’s actual
Rape must have specific intent or lewd design. For
age.
rape to be consummated, a slight brush or scrape of
the penis on the external layer of the vagina will not
“Deprived of reason or unconscious” means that the
suffice. Mere touching of the external layer of the
victim has no will to give consent intelligently and
vagina without the intent to enter the same cannot be
freely. The inquiry should likewise determine whether
construed as slight penetration. Accused is only liable
the victim was fully informed of all considerations so
for ATTEMPTED RAPE.
as to make a free and informed decision regarding the
grant of consent.
Conviction does not require a medico-legal finding of
any penetration on the part of the woman.
Whether the complaint stated that the victim was fast
asleep or half-asleep or drowsy or semi-conscious is
FORCE, THREAT, OR INTIMIDATION
not determinative of the crime of rape. For he who
Force employed against the victim of the rape need
lies with a woman while the latter is in a state of being
not be of such character as could be resisted. When
drowsy is guilty of rape. Drowsiness is defined as the
the offender has an ascendancy or influence over the
state of being drowsy, i.e., ready to fall asleep or half-
girl, it is not necessary that she put up a determined
asleep. [People v. Siarza, G.R. No. L-111682 (1997)]
resistance. A rape victim does not have the burden of

Page 230 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
BY MEANS OF FRAUDULENT
MACHINATION OR GRAVE ABUSE OF
AUTHORITY
Rape by means of fraudulent machinations and grave
abuse of authority absorbs the crime of qualified and
simple seduction.
STATUTORY RAPE
1. Statutory rape is the rape of a woman who is
below 12 years of age. Here, the victim is
conclusively presumed incapable of giving
consent to sexual intercourse with another.
[People v. Negosa, G.R. Nos. 142856-7 (2003)]
2. This is consummated when the victim is below
12 yrs. old. Victim’s consent is immaterial, and so
is the offender’s knowledge of the victim’s age.
3. Carnal knowledge of a child below 12 yrs. old
even if she is engaged in prostitution is still
considered statutory rape.
Special qualifying circumstances have to be alleged in
the information for it to be appreciated. [People v.
Gallo] In this case, Gallo was found guilty of the crime
of qualified rape with the penalty of death. The
information filed against him does not allege his
relationship with the victim, his daughter, thus, it
CANNOT be considered as a qualifying
circumstance. The case was reopened and the
judgment is modified from death to reclusion perpetua.
Since relationship qualifies the crime of rape, there
must be clear proof of relationship. In People v. Berana,
G.R. No. 123544 (1999), a 14-year old was raped by
her brother-in-law. To effectively prosecute the
accused for the crime of rape committed by a relative
by affinity w/in the 3rd civil degree, it must be
established that:
1. the accused is legally married to the victim’s
sister; and
2. the victim and the accused’s wife are full or half-
blood siblings.
In this case, relationship was not adequately
substantiated.
RAPE THROUGH SEXUAL ASSAULT
The insertion of fingers constitutes consummated
rape through sexual assault under RA 8353. The
contact of the male’s penis with the woman’s vagina
is referred to as ‘rape with sexual intercourse”, while
the sexual abuse under par.2 of Art.266-A, RPC is
categorized as “rape through sexual assault”.
Insertion of penis into the mouth of a 10-year old boy
is “Rape by Sexual Assault” punished under par.2,
Article 266-A, RPC. [Ordinario v. People, G.R. No.
155415 (2004)]
Page 231 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Evidence which may be accepted in the
prosecution of rape:
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against
the act of rape in any degree from the offended party;
or
Where the offended party is so situated as to render
him/her incapable of giving his consent
Rape shield rule - means that the character of the
offended woman is immaterial in rape.
An accused may be convicted of rape on the sole
testimony of the offended woman.
When several persons conspired to rape a single
victim, each shall be liable for the rape committed
personally by him, as well as those committed by the
others.
What Determines the Number of Times the
Victim was Raped?
In one case, the accused ejaculated twice during the
time that he consummated the rape. He did not
withdraw his penis to insert it again into the vagina or
to touch the labia majora and the labia minora when he
ejaculated the second time. It is not the number of
times that appellant ejaculated but the penetration or
‘touching’ that determines the consummation of the
sexual act. Thus appellant committed only one count
of rape. [People v. Ferrer, G.R. No. 142662 (2001); People
v. Orilla, G.R. Nos. 148939-40 (2004)]
Effect of Pardon
1. Subsequent valid marriage between the offender
and the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed but only
as to the husband
2. When the legal husband is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty, provided that their marriage
is NOT VOID ab initio.
Rape with homicide is a special complex crime if it is
committed by reason or on the occasion of the rape.
Rape may, likewise, be committed in a room adjacent
to where the victim's family is sleeping, or even in a
room shared with other people. There is no rule that
rape can only be committed in seclusion. [People v.
Glivano, G.R. No. 177565 (2008)]
The force, violence or intimidation in rape is a relative
term, depending not only on the age, size, and
strength of the parties but also on their relationship
with each other. [People v. Tuazon, G.R. No. 168650
(2007)]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Attempted Rape with Homicide and Rape with
Homicide
Art 266-B defines and sets forth the composite crimes
of attempted rape with homicide and rape with
homicide. In both composite crimes, the homicide is
committed by reason or on the occasion of rape. As
can be noted, each of said composite crimes is
punished with a single penalty.
The phrase by reason of the rape obviously conveys the
notion that the killing is due to the rape, the offense
the offender originally designed to commit. The
victim of the rape is also the victim of the killing.
To understand what homicide may be covered by the
phrase on the occasion of the rape, a resort to the meaning
the framers of the law intended to convey thereby is
helpful. The legislative intent on the import of the
phrase on the occasion of the rape to refer to a killing
that occurs immediately before or after, or during the
commission itself of the attempted or consummated
rape, where the victim of the homicide may be a
person other than the rape victim herself for as long
as the killing is linked to the rape, became evident.
[People v. Villaflores, G.R. No. 184926 (2012)]
g. Special Laws
RA 9262: Anti-Violence against Women and their
Children Act of 2004
Violence against women and their children –
refers to any act or series of acts committed by any
person against a women who is wife, former wife, or
against a woman with whom the person has or had a
sexual or dating relationship, or with whom he has a
common child, or against her child whether legitimate
or illegitimate, within or without the family abode,
which result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual,
psychological harm or suffering, or economic abuse
including threats of such acts, battery, assault,
coercion, harassment or arbitrary deprivation of
liberty.
Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense –
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be
suffering from battered woman syndrome do not
incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding
the absence of any of the elements for justifying
circumstances of self-defense under the Revised
Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the
woman who was suffering from battered woman
syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime,
Page 232 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
the courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/
psychologists. [Sec. 26, RA 9262]
Punishable Acts:
Sec. 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and
Their Children - The crime of violence against
women and their children is committed through
any of the following acts:
(a) Causing physical harm to the woman or her
child;
(b) Threatening to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(c) Attempting to cause the woman or her child
physical harm;
(d) Placing the woman or her child in fear of
imminent physical harm;
(e) Attempting to compel or compelling the
woman or her child to engage in conduct
which the woman or her child has the right to
desist from or desist from conduct which the
woman or her child has the right to engage in,
or attempting to restrict or restricting the
woman's or her child's freedom of movement
or conduct by force or threat of force,
physical or other harm or threat of physical
or other harm, or intimidation directed
against the woman or child. This shall
include, but not limited to, the following acts
committed with the purpose or effect of
controlling or restricting the woman's or her
child's movement or conduct:
(1) Threatening to deprive or actually
depriving the woman or her child of
custody to her/his family;
(2) Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her children of financial
support legally due her or her family, or
deliberately providing the woman's
children insufficient financial support;
(3) Depriving or threatening to deprive the
woman or her child of a legal right;
(4) Preventing the woman in engaging in any
legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity or controlling the
victim's own money or properties, or
solely controlling the conjugal or
common money, or properties;
(f) Inflicting or threatening to inflict physical
harm on oneself for the purpose of
controlling her actions or decisions;
(g) Causing or attempting to cause the woman or
her child to engage in any sexual activity
which does not constitute rape, by force or
threat of force, physical harm, or through
intimidation directed against the woman or
her child or her/his immediate family;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless
conduct, personally or through another, that
alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her
child. This shall include, but not be limited to,
the following acts:
(1) Stalking or following the woman or her
child in public or private places;
(2) Peering in the window or lingering
outside the residence of the woman or
her child;
(3) Entering or remaining in the dwelling or
on the property of the woman or her
child against her/his will;
(4) Destroying the property and personal d.
belongings or inflicting harm to animals
or pets of the woman or her child; and
(5) Engaging in any form of harassment or
violence; e.
(i) Causing mental or emotional anguish, public
ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her
child, including, but not limited to, repeated
verbal and emotional abuse, and denial of
financial support or custody of minor
children of access to the woman's f.
child/children.
RA 9775: Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009 g.
Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. -
a. "Child" refers to a person below eighteen
(18) years of age or over, but is unable to fully h.
take care of himself/herself from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
because of a physical or mental disability or
condition.
For the purpose of this Act, a child shall also
refer to: i.
(1) a person regardless of age who is
presented, depicted or portrayed as a child
as defined herein; and
(2) computer-generated, digitally or manually
crafted images or graphics of a person
who is represented or who is made to j.
appear to be a child as defined herein.
b. "Child pornography" refers to any
representation, whether visual, audio, or
written combination thereof, by electronic,
mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or any
other means, of child engaged or involved in
real or simulated explicit sexual activities.
c. "Explicit Sexual Activity" includes actual or k.
simulated –
(1) As to form:
Page 233 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
(i) sexual intercourse or lascivious act
including, but not limited to, contact
involving genital to genital, oral to
genital, anal to genital, or oral to anal,
whether between persons of the same
or opposite sex;
(2) bestiality;
(3) masturbation;
(4) sadistic or masochistic abuse;
(5) lascivious exhibition of the genitals,
buttocks, breasts, pubic area and/or anus;
or
(6) use of any object or instrument for
lascivious acts
"Internet address" refers to a website,
bulletin board service, internet chat room or
news group, or any other internet or shared
network protocol address.
"Internet cafe or kiosk" refers to an
establishment that offers or proposes to offer
services to the public for the use of its
computer/s or computer system for the
purpose of accessing the internet, computer
games or related services.
"Internet content host" refers to a person
who hosts or who proposes to host internet
content in the Philippines.
"Internet service provider (ISP)" refers to a
person or entity that supplies or proposes to
supply, an internet carriage service to the
public.
"Grooming" refers to the act of preparing a
child or someone who the offender believes to
be a child for sexual activity or sexual
relationship by communicating any form of
child pornography. It includes online
enticement or enticement through any other
means.
"Luring" refers to the act of communicating,
by means of a computer system, with a child
or someone who the offender believes to be a
child for the purpose of facilitating the
commission of sexual activity or production of
any form of child pornography.
"Pandering" refers to the act of offering,
advertising, promoting, representing or
distributing through any means any material or
purported material that is intended to cause
another to believe that the material or
purported material contains any form of child
pornography, regardless of the actual content
of the material or purported material.
"Person" refers to any natural or juridical
entity.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Unlawful or Prohibited Acts
It shall be unlawful for any person:
1. To hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce
a child to perform in the creation or production
of any form of child pornography;
2. To produce, direct, manufacture or create any
form of child pornography;
3. To publish offer, transmit, sell, distribute,
broadcast, advertise, promote, export or import
any form of child pornography;
4. To possess any form of child pornography with
the intent to sell, distribute, publish, or broadcast:
Provided, That possession of three (3) or more
articles of child pornography of the same form
shall be prima facie evidence of the intent to sell,
distribute, publish or broadcast;
5. To knowingly, willfully and intentionally provide
a venue for the commission of prohibited acts as,
but not limited to, dens, private rooms, cubicles,
cinemas, houses or in establishments purporting
to be a legitimate business;
6. For film distributors, theaters and
telecommunication companies, by themselves or
in cooperation with other entities, to distribute
any form of child pornography;
7. For a parent, legal guardian or person having
custody or control of a child to knowingly permit
the child to engage, participate or assist in any
form of child pornography;
8. To engage in the luring or grooming of a child;
9. To engage in pandering of any form of child
pornography;
10. To willfully access any form of child
pornography;
11. To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts
stated in this section. Conspiracy to commit any
form of child pornography shall be committed
when two (2) or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of any of
the said prohibited acts and decide to commit it;
and
12. To possess any form of child pornography.
Syndicated Child Pornography - The crime of child
pornography is deemed committed by a syndicate if
carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons
conspiring or confederating with one another
Who May File a Complaint.
1. Offended party;
2. Parents or guardians;
3. Ascendant or collateral relative within the third
degree of consanguinity;
4. Officer, social worker or representative of a
licensed child-caring institution;
Page 234 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
5. Officer or social worker of the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD);
6. Local social welfare development officer;
7. Barangay chairman;
8. Any law enforcement officer;
9. At least three (3) concerned responsible citizens
residing in the place where the violation
occurred; or
10. Any person who has personal knowledge of the
circumstances of the commission of any offense
under this Act.
RA 8049: Anti-Hazing Law, AS AMENDED BY
RA 11053
Hazing; definition
Hazing, refers to any act that results in physical or
psychological suffering, harm, or injury inflicted on a
recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member as part of an
initiation rite or practice made as a prerequisite for
admission or a requirement for continuing
membership in a fraternity, sorority, or organization
including, but not limited to paddling, whipping,
beating, branding, forced calisthenics, exposure to the
weather, forced consumption of any food, liquor,
beverage, drug or other substance, or any other brutal
treatment or forced physical activity which is likely to
adversely affect the physical and psychological health
of such recruit, neophyte, applicant, or member. This
shall also include any activity, intentionally made or
otherwise, by one person alone or acting with others,
that tends to humiliate or embarrass, degrade, abuse,
or endanger, by requiring a recruit, neophyte,
applicant, or member to do menial, silly, or foolish
tasks. [Sec. 2a RA 11053]
Initiation or Initiation Rites shall refer to ceremonies,
practices, rituals, or other acts, weather formal or
informal, that a person must perform or take part in
order to be accepted into fraternity, sorority,
organization as a full-fledged member. It includes
ceremonies practices , rituals, and other acts in all
stages of membership in a fraternity, sorority, or
organization. [Sec. 2b RA 11053]
The term “organization” refers to an organized body of
people which includes, but it is not limited to, any
club, association, group, fraternity, and sorority. This
term shall include the Armed Forces of the
Philippines (AFP), the Philippine National Police
(PNP), the Philippine Military Academy (PMA), the
Philippine National Police Academy (PNPA), and
other similar uniformed service learning institutions.
[Sec. 2c RA 11053]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Prohibition on Hazing
All forms of hazing shall be prohibited in fraternities,
sororities, and organizations in schools, including
citizens' military training and citizens' army training.
This prohibition shall likewise apply to all other
fraternities, sororities, and organizations that are not
school-based, such as community-based and other
similar fraternities, sororities and
organizations: Provided, That the physical, mental, and
practices to determine and enhance the physical,
mental, and psychological fitness of prospective
regular members of the AFP and the PNP as
approved by the Secretary of National Defense and
National Police Commission, duly recommended by
the Chief of Staff of the AFP and Director General
of the PNP, shall not be considered as hazing
purposes of this Act: Provided, further, That the
exemption provided herein shall likewise apply to
similar procedures and practices approved by the
respective heads of other uniformed learning
institutions as to their prospective members, nor shall
this provision apply to any customary athletic events
or other similar contests or competitions or any
activity or conduct that furthers a legal and legitimate
objective, subject to prior submission of a medical
clearance or certificate.
In no case shall hazing be made a requirement for
employment in any business or corporation. [Sec. 3
RA 11053]
Regulation of School-Based Initiation Rites
Only initiation rites or practices that do not constitute
hazing shall be allowed, wherein:
1. A written application to conduct initiation rites
shall be made to the proper authorities of the
school not later than seven (7) days prior to
scheduled initiation date;
2. The written application shall indicate the place
and date of the initiation rites and the names of
the recruits, neophytes, or applicants to be
initiated and the manner by which they will
conduct the initiation rites;
3. Such written application shall further contain an
undertaking that no harm of any kind shall be
committed by anybody during the initiation rites;
4. The initiation rites shall not last more than three
(3) days;
5. The application shall contain the names of the
incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization and any person or persons who will
take charge in the conduct of the initiation rites;
6. The application shall be under oath with a
declaration that it has been posted in the official
school bulletin board, the bulletin board of the
office of the fraternity, sorority, or organization,
Page 235 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
and two (2) other conspicuous places in the
school or in the premises of the organization; and
7. The application shall be posted from the time of
submission of the written notice to the school
authorities or head of organization and shall only
be removed from its posting three (3) days after
the conduct of the initiation rites.
Sec. 4 RA 11053
The head of the school or an authorized
representative must assign at least two (2)
representatives of the school to be present during the
initiation. It is the duty of the school representatives
to see to it that no hazing is conducted during the
initiation rites and to document the entire
proceedings. Thereafter, said representatives who
were present during the initiation shall make a report
of the initiation rites to the appropriate officials of the
school regarding the conduct of the said
initiation: Provided, That if hazing is still committed
despite their presence, no liability shall attach to them
unless it is proven that they failed to perform an overt
act to prevent or stop the commission thereof. [Sec. 5
RA 11053]
Who Are Liable / Punishable Acts
The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Three
million pesos (P3,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon
those who actually planned or participated in the
hazing if, as a consequence of the hazing, death, rape,
sodomy, or mutilation results therefrom;
The penalty of reclusion perpetua and a fine of Two
million pesos (P2,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon:
1. All persons who actually planned or participated
in the conduct of the hazing;
2. All officers of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization who are actually present during the
hazing;
3. The adviser of a fraternity, sorority, or
organization who is present when the acts
constituting the hazing were committed and
failed to take action to prevent the same from
occurring or failed to promptly report the same
to the law enforcement authorities if such adviser
or adviser or advisers can do so without peril to
their person or their family;
4. All former officers, nonresident members, or
alumni of the fraternity, sorority, or organization
who are also present during the
hazing: Provided, That should the former officer,
nonresident member, or alumnus be a member
of the Philippine Bar, such member shall
immediately be subjected to disciplinary
proceedings by the Supreme Court pursuant to
its power to discipline members of the Philippine
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Bar: Provided, further, That should the former
officer, nonresident member, or alumnus belong
to any other profession subject to regulation by
the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC),
such professional shall immediately be subjected
to disciplinary proceedings by the concerned
Professional Regulatory Board, the imposable
penalty for which shall include, but is not limited
to, suspension for a period of not less than three
(3) or revocation of the professional license. A
suspended or revoked professional license
pursuant to this section may be reinstated upon
submission of affidavits from at least three (3)
disinterested persons, good moral certifications
from different unaffiliated and credible
government, religious, and socio-civic
organizations and such other relevant evidence to
show that the concerned professional has
become morally fit for readmission into the
profession: Provided, That said readmission into
the profession shall be subject to the approval of
the respective Professional Regulatory Board;
5. Officers or members of a fraternity, sorority, or
organization who knowingly cooperated in
carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to
be present thereat; and
6. Members of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization who are present during the hazing
when they are intoxicated or under the influence
of alcohol or illegal drugs;
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period
and a fine of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall
be imposed upon all persons who are present in the
conduct of the hazing.
The penalty of reclusion temporal and fine of One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be imposed upon
former officers, nonresident member, alumni of the
fraternity, sorority, or organization who, after the
commission of any of the prohibited acts proscribed
herein, will perform any act to hide, conceal, or
otherwise hamper or obstruct any investigation that
will be conducted thereafter: Provided, That should the
former officer, nonresident member, or alumnus be a
member of the Philippine Bar, such member shall
immediately be subjected to disciplinary proceedings
by the Supreme Court pursuant to its power to
discipline members of the Philippine Bar: Provided,
further, That should the former officer, nonresident
members, or alumnus belong to any other profession
subject to regulation by the PRC, such professional
shall immediately be subjected to disciplinary
proceedings by the concerned Professional
Regulatory Board, the imposable penalty for which
shall include, but is not limited to, suspension for a
period of not less than three (3) years or revocation
Page 236 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
of the professional license pursuant to this section
may be reinstated upon submission of affidavits from
at least three (3) disinterested persons, good moral
certifications from different unaffiliated and credible
government, religious, and socio-civic organizations,
and such other relevant evidence to show that the
concerned professional has become morally fit for
readmission into the profession: Provided, That said
readmission into the profession shall be subject to the
approval of the respective Professional Regulatory
Board.
The penalty of prision correcional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall
intimidate, threaten, force, or employ, or administer
any form of vexation against another person for the
purpose of recruitment in joining or promoting a
particular fraternity, sorority, or organization. The
persistent and repeated proposal or invitation made
to a person who had twice refused to participate or
join the proposed fraternity, sorority, or organization,
shall be prima facie evidence of vexation for purposes
of this section.
A fine of One million pesos (P1,000,000.00) shall be
imposed on the school if the fraternity, sorority, or
organization filed a written application to conduct an
initiation which was subsequently approved by the
school and hazing occurred during the initiation rites
or when no representatives from the school were
present during the initiation as provided under
Section 5 of this Act: Provided, That if hazing has been
committed in circumvention of the provisions of this
Act, it is incumbent upon school officials to
investigate motu propio and take an active role to
ascertain factual events and identity witnesses in order
to determine the disciplinary sanctions it may impose,
as well as provide assistance to police authorities.
The owner or lessee of the place where hazing is
conducted shall be liable as principal and penalized
under paragraphs (a) or (b) of this section, when such
owner or lessee has actual knowledge of the hazing
conducted therein but failed to take any action to
prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly
report the same to the law enforcement authorities if
they can do so without peril to their person or their
family. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the
officers or members of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization, the parents shall be held liable as
principals and penalized under paragraphs (a) or (b)
hereof when they have actual knowledge of the hazing
conducted therein but failed to take any action to
prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly
report the same to the law enforcement authorities if
such parents can do so without peril to their person
or their family.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The school authorities including faculty members as
well as barangay, municipal, or city officials shall
be liable as an accomplice and likewise be held
administratively accountable for hazing conducted by
the fraternities, sororities, other organizations, if it can
be shown that the school or barangay, municipal, or
city officials allowed or consented to the conduct of
hazing, but such officials failed to take any action to
prevent the same from occurring or failed to promptly
report to the law enforcement authorities if the same
can be done without peril to their person or their
family.
The presence of any person, even if such person is
not a member of the fraternity, sorority, or
organization, during the hazing is prima facie evidence of
participation therein as a principal unless such person
or persons prevented the commission of the acts
punishable herein or promptly reported the same to
the law enforcement authorities if they can do so
without peril, to their person or their family.
The incumbent officers of the fraternity, sorority,
or organization concerned shall be jointly liable with
those members who actually participated in the
hazing.
Any person charged under the Act shall not be
entitled to the mitigating circumstances that there was
no intention to commit so grave a wrong.
This section shall apply to the president, manager,
director, or other responsible officer of
businesses or corporations engaged hazing as a
requirement for employment in the manner provided
herein.
Any conviction by final judgement shall be
reflected on the scholastic record, personal, or
employment record of the person convicted,
regardless of when the judgment conviction has
become final. [Sec. 14 RA 11053]
RA 7610: Special Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act
Coverage
"Children" - person below 18 years of age or those
over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or
protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or
mental disability or condition.
Page 237 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Child Prostitution/Punishable Acts
Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual
Abuse. – Children, whether male or female, who
for money, profit, or any other consideration or
due to the coercion or influence of any adult,
syndicate or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children
exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed
upon the following:
(a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but
are not limited to, the following:
(1) Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;
(2) Inducing a person to be a client of a child
prostitute by means of written or oral
advertisements or other similar means;
(3) Taking advantage of influence or
relationship to procure a child as
prostitute;
(4) Threatening or using violence towards a
child to engage him as a prostitute; or
(5) Giving monetary consideration goods or
other pecuniary benefit to a child with
intent to engage such child in
prostitution.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse of lascivious conduct with a child
exploited in prostitution or subject to other
sexual abuse; Provided, That when the victims
is under twelve (12) years of age, the
perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article
335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of
Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal
Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the
case may be: Provided, That the penalty for
lascivious conduct when the victim is under
twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period; and
(c) Those who derive profit or advantage
therefrom, whether as manager or owner of
the establishment where the prostitution takes
place, or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place
of entertainment or establishment serving as a
cover or which engages in prostitution in
addition to the activity for which the license
has been issued to said establishment.
The elements of sexual abuse under Section 5, Article
III of R.A. No. 7610 are:
1. The accused commits the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. The said act is performed with a child exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse;
and
3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18
years of age.[Imbo v. People, G.R. No. 197712
(2015)]
If the victim of sexual intercourse is below 12 years of
age, the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual
abuse but for statutory rape under Article 266-A(1)(d)
of the RPC. On the other hand, if the victim is 12
years or older, the offender should be charged with
either sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of RA 7610 or
rape under Article 266-A (except paragraph 1[d]) of
the RPC. However, the offender cannot be accused
of both crimes for the same act because his right
against double jeopardy will be prejudiced. [People v.
Matias, G.R. No. 186469 (2012)]
Section 6. Attempt To Commit Child
Prostitution. – There is an attempt to commit
child prostitution under Section 5, paragraph (a)
hereof when any person who, not being a relative
of a child, is found alone with the said child inside
the room or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel,
motel, pension house, apartelle or other similar
establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other hidden
or secluded area under circumstances which would
lead a reasonable person to believe that the child is
about to be exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse.
There is also an attempt to commit child
prostitution, under paragraph (b) of Section 5
hereof when any person is receiving services from
a child in a sauna parlor or bath, massage clinic,
health club and other similar establishments. A
penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that
prescribed for the consummated felony under
Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon the
principals of the attempt to commit the crime of
child prostitution under this Act, or, in the proper
case, under the Revised Penal Code.
Other Acts Of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty Or
Exploitation And Other Conditions Prejudicial
To The Child’s Development/Punishable Acts
Sec. 10. Other Acts Of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty
Or Exploitation And Other Conditions
Prejudicial To The Child's Development. –
(a) Any person who shall commit any other acts of
child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be
responsible for other conditions prejudicial to the
child's development including those covered by
Page 238 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Article 59 of Presidential Decree No. 603, as
amended, but not covered by the RPC, as
amended, shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor
in its minimum period.
(b) Any person who shall keep or have in his
company a minor, twelve (12) years or under or
who in ten (10) years or more his junior in any
public or private place, hotel, motel, beer joint,
discotheque, cabaret, pension house, sauna or
massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist resort
or similar places shall suffer the penalty of prision
mayor in its maximum period and a fine of not less
than fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00): Provided,
that this provision shall not apply to any person
who is related within the fourth degree of
consanguinity or affinity or any bond recognized
by law, local custom and tradition or acts in the
performance of a social, moral or legal duty.
(c) Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer a
minor to any one prohibited by this act to keep or
have in his company a minor as provided in the
preceding paragraph shall suffer the penalty of
prision mayor in its medium period and a fine of
not less than forty thousand pesos (P40,000.00);
Provided, however, that should the perpetrator be
an ascendant, stepparent or guardian of the minor,
the penalty to be imposed shall be prision mayor
in its maximum period, a fine of not less than fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00), and the loss of
parental authority over the minor.
(d) Any person, owner, manager or one entrusted
with the operation of any public or private place of
accommodation, whether for occupancy, food,
drink or otherwise, including residential places,
who allows any person to take along with him to
such place or places any minor herein described
shall be imposed a penalty of prision mayor in its
medium period and a fine of not less than fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00), and the loss of the
license to operate such a place or establishment.
(e) Any person who shall use, coerce, force or
intimidate a street child or any other child to:
(1) Beg or use begging as a means of living;
(2) Act as conduit or middlemen in drug
trafficking or pushing; or
(3) Conduct any illegal activities, shall suffer the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua.
For purposes of this Act, the penalty for the
commission of acts punishable under articles 248,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

249, 262, paragraph 2, and 263, paragraph 1 of act
no. 3815, as amended, the RPC, for the crimes of
murder, homicide, other intentional mutilation,
and serious physical injuries, respectively, shall be
reclusion perpetua when the victim is under twelve
(12) years of age. The penalty for the commission
of acts punishable under articles 337, 339, 340 and
341 of act no. 3815, as amended, the RPC, for the
crimes of qualified seduction, acts of
lasciviousness with the consent of the offended
party, corruption of minors, and white slave trade,
respectively, shall be one (1) degree higher than
that imposed by law when the victim is under
twelve (12) years age.
The victim of the acts committed under this
section shall be entrusted to the care of the
department of social welfare and development.
RA 9372: Human Security Act of 2007
Punishable Acts of Terrorism/Who are Liable
Sec. 3 Terrorism – Any person who commits an
act punishable under any of the following
provisions of the RPC:
(1) Art. 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in
the High Seas or in Philippine Waters);
(2) Art. 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
(3) Art. 143-A (Coup d’ Etat), including acts
committed by private persons;
(4) Art. 248 (Murder);
(5) Art. 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention);
(6) Art. 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction);
shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism and shall
suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of
imprisonment, without the benefit of parole as
provided for under Act No. 4103, otherwise
known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as
amended.
Sec. 6 Accessory – Any person who, having
knowledge of the commission of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, and
without having participated therein, either as
principal or accomplice under Articles 17 and 18
of the RPC, takes part subsequent to its
commission in any of the following manner: (a) by
profiting himself or assisting the offender to profit
by the effects of the crime; (b) by concealing or
destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or
instruments thereof, in order to prevent discovery;
(c) by harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime,
shall suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one
day to twelve years of imprisonment.
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, the
penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be
imposed upon those who are such with respect to
their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
legitimate, natural and adopted brothers and
sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same
degree, with the single exception of accessories
falling within the provisions of subparagraph (a).

or under these special laws:

(1) PD 1613 (The Law on Arson);
(2) RA 6969 (Toxic Substances and
Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control
Act of 1990);
(3) RA 5207 (Atomic Energy Regulatory and
Liability Act of 1968);
(4) RA 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
(5) PD 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway
Robbery Law of 1974) and,
(6) PD 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying
the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms,
Ammunitions or Explosives)

thereby sowing and creating a condition of

widespread and extraordinary fear and panic
among the populace, in order to coerce the
government to give in to an unlawful demand,

Page 239 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
I. Title IX. Crimes against
Personal Liberty and
Security
1. Chapter I: Crimes against Liberty
a. Article 267 - Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
b. Article 268 - Slight Illegal Detention
c. Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest
d. Article 270 - Kidnapping and Failure to
Return a Minor
e. Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to Abandon
His Home
f. Article 272 – Slavery
g. Article 273 - Exploitation of Child Labor
h. Article 274 - Services Rendered Under
Compulsion in Payment of Debt
2. Chapter II: Crimes against Security
a. Article 275 - Abandonment of Persons in
Danger and Abandonment of Own Victim
b. Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor
c. Article 277 - Abandonment of Minor by
Person Entrusted With Custody;
Indifference of Parents
d. Article 278 - Exploitation of Minors
e. Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to Dwelling
f. Article 281 - Other Forms of Trespass
g. Article 282 - Grave Threats
h. Article 283 - Light Threats
i. Article 284 - Bond for Good Behavior
j. Article 285 - Other Light Threats
k. Article 286 - Grave Coercions
l. Article 287 - Light Coercions
m. Article 288 - Other Similar Coercions
n. Article 289 - Formation, Maintenance, and
Prohibition of Combination of Capital or
Labor through Violence or Threats
3. Chapter III: Discovery and Revelation of Secrets
a. Article 290 - Discovering Secrets through
Seizure of Correspondence
b. Article 291 - Revealing Secrets with Abuse of
Office
c. Article 292 - Revelation of Industrial Secrets
Page 240 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Chapter I: Crimes against
Liberty
a. Article 267 - Kidnapping and
Serious Illegal Detention
Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual;
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
3. The act of detention or kidnapping must be
illegal;
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the
following circumstances is present:
a. The kidnapping lasts for more than 3 days;
b. It is committed simulating public authority;
c. Any serious physical injuries are inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained or
threats to kill him are made; or
d. The person kidnapped or detained is a
minor, female, or a public officer.
The essential element of kidnapping is the deprivation
of the offended party’s liberty under any of the four
instances enumerated. But when the kidnapping was
committed for the purpose of extorting ransom, it is
not necessary that one or any of circumstances
enumerated be present.
If kidnapping be committed under element 4 (b), (c),
or (d), it is not necessary that the kidnapping last for
more than 3 days.
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Purpose is to extort ransom.
2. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence
of the detention.
3. When the victim is raped.
4. When victim is subjected to torture or
dehumanizing acts.
PENALTY: Death
The offenders here are private individuals or public
officers acting in their private capacity. If they are
public officers, they are covered by the crimes under
Title 2.
When a public officer conspires with a private person
in the commission of any of the crimes under Title
IX, the crime is also one committed under this title
and not under Title II.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The purpose is immaterial when any of the
circumstances in the first paragraph of Art. 267 is
present.
Ransom
Means money, price or consideration paid or
demanded for the redemption of a captured person
that would release him from captivity. No specific
form of ransom is required to consummate the felony
as long as the ransom was intended as a bargaining
chip in exchange for the victim’s freedom. Whether
or not ransom is actually paid to or received by the
perpetrator is of no moment. [People v. Jatulan, G.R.
No. 171563 (2007)]
Actual demand for ransom is not necessary, as long as
it can be proven that the kidnapping was done for the
purpose of extorting money.
It is essential that there be actual confinement or
restriction of the person of the offended party. It is
not necessary that the victim be placed in an
enclosure, as long as he is deprived, in any manner, of
his liberty.
It suffices that there be actual or manifest restraint on
the person or liberty of the victim. Accused were
guilty of kidnapping although the victim was found,
at the time of her rescue, outside of the house where
she was brought, talking to the house owner who was
the uncle of the accused. Her failure to attempt to
escape was explained by her to be due to her fear and
threats of the accused to kill her should she do so. In
kidnapping, it is not necessary that the offended party
be kept within an enclosure to restrict her freedom of
locomotion. [People v. Cortez, et al., G.R. Nos. 131619-
20 (2000)]
The victim’s lack of consent is also a fundamental
element of kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
The involuntariness of the seizure and detention is the
very essence of the crime. Although the victim may
have initially consented to go with the offender to a
place, but the victim is thereafter prevented, with the
use of force, from leaving the place where he was
brought to with his consent and is detained against his
will, the offender is still guilty of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention. [People v. Pickrell, G.R. No.
120409 (2003)]
When detention is illegal
It is not ordered by competent authority nor
permitted by law.
Page 241 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Special complex crime of Kidnapping with
Murder
When the victim dies or is killed as a consequence of
the detention, which is covered by the last paragraph
of Art. 267 as amended.
Forcible abduction
If a woman is transported from one place to another
by virtue of restraining her of her liberty, and that act
is coupled with lewd designs.
Serious illegal detention
If a woman is transported just to restrain her of her
liberty. There is no lewd design or lewd intent.
Grave coercion
If a woman is carried away just to break her will, to
compel her to agree to the demand or request by the
offender.
Illegal Detention Arbitrary Detention
Committed by a private Committed by public
individual who officer or employee
unlawfully deprives a who detains a person
person of his liberty without legal ground
Crime against the
Crime against personal
fundamental laws of the
liberty
State
Where the evident purpose of taking the victim was
to kill him, and from the acts of the accused it cannot
be inferred that the latter’s purpose was to actually
detain or deprive the victim of his liberty, the
subsequent killing of the victim did not constitute the
crime of kidnapping. The demand for ransom did not
convert the crime into kidnapping, since no
deprivation of liberty was involved. [People v Padica,
G.R. No. 102645 (1993)]
The essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of
the victim’s liberty coupled with the intent of the
accused to effect it. [People v Luartes, G.R. No. 127452
(1999)]
Physical detention is not necessary. It is enough that
the victim is under the complete control of the
perpetrators as in this case when the Japanese victim
had to rely on his abductors for survival after he was
tricked into believing that the police was after him. It
was also held in this case that keeping a person as
collateral for payment of an obligation is kidnapping.
[People v. Tomio, G.R. No. 74630 (1990)]
Leaving a child in a place from which he did not know
the way home, even if he had the freedom to roam
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

around the place of detention, would still amount to case, there is only one crime committed – the
deprivation of liberty, for under such a situation, the special complex crime of kidnapping with rape.
child’s freedom remains at the mercy and control of [People v. Mirandilla, G.R. No. 186217 (2011)]
the abductor. [People v Baluya,G.R. No. 181822 (2011)]
Kidnapping with Forcible Abduction
The elements of kidnapping for ransom under Rape with Rape
Article 267 of the RPC as amended by RA 7659 Lewd design came after
warranting the imposition of the death penalty At the outset, there is
the intent to kidnap the
are as follows: already lewd design
victim
1. intent on the part of the accused to deprive the It is a complex crime
victim of his liberty; under RPC 48 since
2. actual deprivation of the victim of his liberty; and It is a special complex forcible abduction is a
3. motive of the accused, which is extorting ransom crime. necessary means of
for the release of the victim. committing the crime
of rape.
Neither actual demand for nor payment of ransom is If there is an attempted
necessary for the consummation of the felony. It is rape, the crime
sufficient that the deprivation of liberty was for It there is an attempted
committed is only
extorting ransom even if none of the four rape, it shall be
forcible abduction, the
circumstances mentioned in Article 267 were present considered as a separate
former being an
in its perpetration. [People v. Cenahonon, G.R. 169962 crime.
expression of a lewd
(2007)] design.
If there are multiple
Article 267 has been modified by RA 7659 (an act to If there are multiple rapes, only one is
impose the death penalty on certain heinous crimes, amending rapes, there is only one complexed with
for that purpose the revised penal laws, as amended, other special complex crime forcible abduction and
special penal laws, and for other purposes) in the following of Kidnapping with the rest shall be
respects: Rape. considered as separate
1. Illegal detention becomes serious when it shall crimes.
have lasted for more than three days, instead of
five days as originally provided;
2. In paragraph 4, if the person kidnapped or
b. Article 268 - Slight Illegal
detained was a minor and the offender was Detention
anyone of the parents, the latter has been
expressly excluded from the provision. The Elements:
liability of the parent is provided for in the last 1. Offender is a private individual;
paragraph of Article 271; 2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
3. A paragraph was added to Article 267, which manner deprives him of his liberty.
states: When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence 3. The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal;
of the detention or is raped, or is subjected to torture, or 4. The crime is committed without the attendance
dehumanizing acts, the maximum penalty shall be of any of the circumstances enumerated in Article
imposed. 267.
4. The amendment introduced in our criminal
statutes the concept of "special complex crime" This felony is committed if any of the five
of kidnapping with murder or homicide. circumstances in the commission of kidnapping or
5. It eliminated the distinction drawn by the courts detention enumerated in Article 267 is not present.
between those cases where the killing of the
kidnapped victim was purposely sought by the Privileged mitigating circumstances
accused, and those where the killing of the victim The penalty is lowered if:
was not deliberately resorted to but was merely 1. The offended party is voluntarily released within
an afterthought. three days from the start of illegal detention;
6. Although the victim was raped 27 times, there is 2. Without attaining the intended purpose; AND
only one crime of kidnapping with rape, not 3. Before the institution of the criminal action.
kidnapping with rape and 26 separate counts of
rape. In a way, R.A. 7659 depreciated the The prevailing rule now is Asistio v. Hon. San Diego
seriousness of rape because no matter how many [G.R. No. L-21991 (1964)], which provides that
times the victim was raped, like in the present voluntary release will only mitigate criminal liability if

Page 242 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
crime was slight illegal detention. If serious, it has no
effect.
The liability of one who furnishes the place where the
offended party is being held captive is that of a
principal and not of an accomplice.
c. Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest
Elements
1. Offender arrests or detains another person;
2. The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to
the proper authorities;
3. The arrest or detention is not authorized by law
or there is no reasonable ground therefor.
This felony consists in making an arrest or detention
without legal or reasonable ground for the purpose of
delivering the offended party to the proper
authorities.
Generally, this crime is committed by incriminating
innocent persons by the offender’s planting evidence
to justify the arrest – a complex crime results, that is,
unlawful arrest through incriminatory machinations
under Article 363.
If the arrest is made without a warrant and under
circumstances not allowing a warrantless arrest, the
crime would be unlawful arrest.
If the person arrested is not delivered to the
authorities, the private individual making the arrest incurs
criminal liability for illegal detention under Article 267
or 268.
If the offender is a public officer, the crime is arbitrary
detention under Article 124.
If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground, but the
public officer delays delivery of the person arrested to
the proper judicial authorities, then Article 125 will
apply.
Note: This felony may also be committed by public
officers.
Unlawful Arrest v. Delay in the Delivery of
Detained Persons
Delay in the delivery
Unlawful Arrest
of detained persons
(Art. 269)
(Art. 125)
Detention is for some Detention is not
legal ground. authorized by law.
Page 243 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Crime is committed by
failing to deliver such Committed by making
person to the proper an arrest not authorized
judicial authority within by law
a certain period.
d. Article 270 - Kidnapping and
Failure to Return a Minor
Elements:
1. Offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor
person (whether over or under seven years but
less than 18 years of age)
2. He deliberately fails to restore the said minor to
his parents or guardians
If any of the foregoing elements is absent, the
kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Article
267.
The essential element which qualifies the crime of
kidnapping a minor under Art. 270 is that the
offender is entrusted with the custody of the minor.
If the accused is any of the parents, Article 267 does
not apply; Articles 270 and 271 will then apply.
If the taking is with the consent of the parents, the
crime in Article 270 is committed.
What is punished is the deliberate failure of the
custodian of the minor to restore the latter to his
parents or guardians.
The deliberate failure to return a minor under one’s
custody constitutes deprivation of liberty.
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is necessarily
included in kidnapping and serious illegal detention of
a minor under Article 267(4). [People v. Generosa, G.R.
No. L-69236 (1986)]
Where a minor child was taken by the accused without
the knowledge and consent of his parents, the crime
is kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Article 267, not kidnapping and failure to return a
minor under Article 270. [People v. Mendoza, G.R. No.
180501 (2008)]
Art. 270 distinguished from Art. 267
Art. 270 Art. 267
Offender is entrusted The offender is not
with the custody of the entrusted with the
minor custody of the minor.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

What is punished is the The crime is slavery if the offender is not engaged in
deliberate failure of the What is punished is the the business of prostitution. If he is, the crime is white
offender having illegal detaining or slave trade under Article 341.
custody of the minor to kidnapping of the
restore him to his minor The employment or custody of a minor with the
parents or guardians consent of the parent or guardian, although against
the child’s own will, cannot be considered involuntary
e. Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to servitude.
Abandon His Home But where it is proven that the defendant was obliged
to render service in plaintiff’s house as a servant
Elements: without remuneration whatever and to remain there
1. A minor (whether over or under seven years of so long as she has not paid her debt, there is slavery.
age) is living in the home of his parents or
guardians or the person entrusted with his See Special Law: RA 9208 (Anti-Trafficking of Person
custody; Act of 2003)
2. Offender induces said minor to abandon such
home.
g. Article 273 - Exploitation of
Inducement must be (a) actual, and (b) committed Child Labor
with criminal intent.
Elements:
The minor should not leave his home of his own free 1. Offender retains a minor in his services;
will. What constitutes the crime is the act of inducing 2. It is against the will of the minor;
a minor to abandon the home of his guardian, and it 3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of
is not necessary that the minor actually abandons the a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or
home. person entrusted with the custody of such minor.

Father or mother may commit the crimes in Art. 170 The existence of indebtedness constitutes no legal
and 171 where they are living separately and the justification for holding a person and depriving him
custody of the minor children is given to one of them. of his freedom to live where he wills.

The law is intended to discourage and prevent h. Article 274 - Services Rendered
disruption of filial relationships and undue
interference with the parents’ right and duty to the
Under Compulsion in Payment
custody of their minor children and to rear them. of Debt

f. Article 272 – Slavery Elements:

1. Offender compels a debtor to work for him,
Elements: either as a household servant or farm laborer;
1. Offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a 2. It is against the debtor’s will;
human being; 3. The purpose is to require or enforce the payment
2. The purpose of the offender is to enslave such of a debt.
human being.
Service under Compulsion distinguished from
This is committed if anyone shall purchase, kidnap, or Exploitation of Child Labor
detain a human being for the purpose of enslaving Service under Exploitation of Child
him. Compulsion Labor
Does not distinguish
The penalty is increased if the purpose of the offender whether or not the Victim must be a minor
is to assign the offended party to some immoral victim is a minor
traffic. The minor is compelled
The debtor himself is
to render services for
the one compelled to
If the purpose of the kidnapping or detention is to the supposed debt of
work for the offender
enslave the offended party, slavery is committed. his parents or guardian
Limited to household
Service is not limited
work or farm labor

Page 244 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Chapter II: Crimes against
Security
a. Article 275 - Abandonment of
Persons in Danger and
Abandonment of Own Victim
MODE 1: W/O detriment to self
Failing to render assistance to any person whom the
offender finds in an uninhabited place, wounded or in
danger of dying when he can render such assistance
without detriment to himself, unless such omission
shall constitute a more serious offense.
Elements:
1. The place is not inhabited;
2. Accused found there a person wounded or in
danger of dying;
3. Accused can render assistance without detriment
to himself;
4. Accused fails to render assistance.
MODE 2: accidentally wound another
Failing to help or render assistance to another whom
the offender has accidentally wounded or injured;
MODE 3: abandoning a child < 7
By failing to deliver a child, under seven years of age,
whom the offender has found abandoned, to the
authorities or to his family, or by failing to deliver him
to a safe place.
Does not apply: When a person intentionally wounds
another and leaves him in an uninhabited place.
Immaterial: That the offender did not know that the
child is under seven years.
The child under seven years of age must be found by
the accused in an unsafe place.
b. Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor
Elements:
1. Offender has the custody of a child;
2. The child is under seven years of age;
3. He abandons such child;
4. He has no intent to kill the child when the latter
is abandoned.
Circumstances qualifying the offense:
1. When the death of the minor resulted from such
abandonment; or
Page 245 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
2. If the life of the minor was in danger because of
the abandonment.
The purpose in abandoning the minor under his
custody is to avoid the obligation of taking care of said
minor.
A permanent, conscious and deliberate abandonment
is required in this article. There must be an
interruption of the care and protection the minor
needs by reason of his age.
Intent to kill cannot be presumed from the death of
the child. When there is intent to kill, this article does
not apply.
The ruling that the intent to kill is presumed from the
death of the victim of the crime is applicable only to
crimes against persons, and not to crimes against
security, particularly the crime of abandoning a minor
under Art. 276.
If the offender is the parent of the minor who is
abandoned, he shall be deprived of parental authority.
(Art. 332, Civil Code)
c. Article 277 - Abandonment of
Minor by Person Entrusted With
Custody; Indifference of Parents
MODE 1: WITHOUT consent of guardian
Delivering a minor to a public institution or other
persons without the consent of the one who entrusted
such minor to the care of the offender or, in the
absence of that one, without the consent of the
proper authorities;
Elements:
1. Offender has charge of the rearing or education
of a minor;
2. He delivers said minor to a public institution or
other persons;
3. The one who entrusted such child to the offender
has not consented to such act; or if the one who
entrusted such child to the offender is absent, the
proper authorities have not consented to it.
MODE 2: neglecting education
Neglecting his (offender’s) children by not giving
them the education which their station in life requires
and financial condition permits.
Elements:
1. Offender is a parent;
2. He neglects his children by not giving them
education;
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

3. His station in life requires such education and his made in consideration of any price,
financial condition permits it. compensation or promise.
2. The offender is engaged in a kind of business that
Obligation to educate children terminates if the would place the life or limb of the minor in
mother and children refuse without good reason to danger, even though working for him is not
live with the accused. against the will of the minor.

Failure to give education must be due to deliberate Nature of the Business: this involves circuses which
desire to evade such obligation. If the parents cannot generally attract children so they themselves may
give education because they had no means to do so, enjoy working there unaware of the danger to their
then they will not be liable under this article. own lives and limbs.

d. Article 278 - Exploitation of Age: Must be below 16 years. Article 278 has no
application if minor is 16 years old and above
Minors
Note: if minor is 16 years old and above the
Mode 1: Physical strength/contortion exploitation will be dealt with by RA 7610.
Causing any boy or girl under 16 years of age to
perform any dangerous feat of balancing, physical If the employer is an ascendant, the crime is not
strength or contortion, the offender being any person; committed, unless the minor is less than 12 years old.
Mode 2: Exhibition/acrobat/circus If the minor so employed would suffer some injuries
Employing children under 16 years of age who are not as a result of a violation of Article 278, Article 279
the children or descendants of the offender in provides that there would be additional criminal
exhibitions of acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker, diver, or liability for the resulting felony.
wild-animal tamer, the offender being an acrobat, etc.,
or circus manager or engaged in a similar calling; Exploitation of Inducing a Minor to
Minors (Art. 278, par. Abandon His Home
Mode 3: Descendant employed like mode 2 5) (Art. 271)
Employing any descendant under 12 years of age in Purpose of inducing the
dangerous exhibitions enumerated in the next minor to abandon his
preceding paragraph, the offender being engaged in home is to follow any
any of the said callings; No such purpose
person engaged in any
of the callings
Mode 4: Delivering child under 16 to be employed mentioned
like mode 2
Victim is under 16 years Victim is a minor
Delivering a child under 16 years of age gratuitously
of age (below 18 years of age)
to any person following any of the callings
enumerated in mode 2, or to any habitual vagrant or
beggar, the offender being an ascendant, guardian, e. Article 280 - Qualified Trespass
teacher or person entrusted in any capacity with the to Dwelling
care of such child;
Elements
Mode 5: Inducing child under 16 to abandon 1. Offender is a private person;
home to be employed like mode 2 2. He enters the dwelling of another;
Inducing any child under 16 years of age to abandon 3. Such entrance is against the latter’s will.
the home of its ascendants, guardians, curators or
teachers to follow any person engaged in any of the Qualifying circumstance:
callings mentioned in paragraph 2 or to accompany The offense is committed by means of violence or
any habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender being any intimidation.
person.
DWELLING – This is the place that a person
Circumstances qualifying the offense: inhabits. It includes the dependencies which have
1. If the delivery of the child to any person interior communication with the house.
following any of the calling of acrobat, gymnast,
rope-walker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus It is not necessary that it be the permanent dwelling
manager or to any habitual vagrant or beggar is of the person; hence, a person’s room in a hotel may

Page 246 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC
be considered a dwelling. It also includes a room
where one resides as a boarder.
If the purpose in entering the dwelling is not shown, trespass is
committed. If the purpose is shown, it may be absorbed
in the crime as in robbery with force upon things, the
trespass yielding to the more serious crime.
If the purpose is not shown and while inside the
dwelling he was found by the occupants, one whom
he subsequently injured if there was a struggle, the
crime committed will be trespass to dwelling and
frustrated homicide or physical injuries, or if there
was no injury, unjust vexation.
If the entry is made by a way not intended for entry,
it is presumed to be against the will of the occupant
(example, entry through a window).
It is not necessary that there be a breaking.
“Against the will” – This means that the entrance
is, either expressly or impliedly, prohibited or the
prohibition is presumed.
It is a well-settled rule that whoever enters the
dwelling of another at late hour of the night after the
inmates have retired and closed their doors does so
against their will. Prohibition is presumed. [US v
Mesina, G.R. No. 6717 (1911); US v Panes, G.R. 7987
(1913)]
Prohibition must be in existence prior to or at the
time of entrance, but prohibition is not necessary
when violence or intimidation is employed by the
offender (qualified trespass).
Fraudulent entrance may constitute trespass. The
prohibition to enter may be made at any time and not
necessarily at the time of the entrance.
To prove that an entry is against the will of the
occupant, it is not necessary that the entry should be
preceded by an express prohibition, provided that the
opposition of the occupant is clearly established by
the circumstances under which the entry is made,
such as the existence of enmity or strained relations
between the accused and the occupant.
If the offender is public officer, the crime is
violation of domicile.
Examples of trespass by means of violence:
1. Pushing the door violently and maltreating the
occupants after entering.
2. Cutting of a ribbon or string with which the door
latch of a closed room was fastened. The cutting
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
of the fastenings of the door was an act of
violence.
3. Wounding by means of a bolo, the owner of the
house immediately after entrance
Examples of trespass by means of intimidation:
1. Firing a revolver in the air by persons attempting
to force their way into a house.
2. The flourishing of a bolo against inmates of the
house upon gaining an entrance
In the prosecution for trespass, the material fact or
circumstance to be considered is the occurrence of
the trespass. The gravamen of the crime is violation
of possession or the fact of having caused injury to
the right of the possession. [Marzalado v. People, G.R.
No. 152997 (2004)]
If a person was killed after trespass by the offender,
the following crimes are committed:
1. If there was no intent to kill when he entered –
separate crimes of homicide or murder qualified
by trespass to dwelling
2. If there was intent to kill when he entered – the
crime of homicide/murder with dwelling as an
aggravating circumstance
Trespass may be committed by the owner of a
dwelling (i.e. lessor enters the house leased to another
against the latter’s will).
Cases to which the provision of this article is NOT
applicable:
1. If the entrance to another’s dwelling is made for
the purpose of preventing some serious harm to
himself, the occupants of the dwelling, or a third
person.
2. If the purpose is to render some service to
humanity or justice.
3. If the place where entrance is made is a café,
tavern, inn, and other public house, while the
same are open.
Note: A person who believes that a crime has been
committed against him has every right to go after the
culprit and arrest him without any warrant even if in
the process he enters the house of another against the
latter’s will. [Sec. 6, Rule 113, Rules of Court]
f. Article 281 - Other Forms of
Trespass
Elements:
1. Offender enters the closed premises or the
fenced estate of another;
Page 247 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. The entrance is made while either of them is wrong amounting to a crime, the threat not being
uninhabited; subject to a condition.
3. The prohibition to enter is manifest;
4. The trespasser has not secured the permission of Elements:
the owner or the caretaker thereof. 1. Offender threatens another person with the
infliction upon the latter’s person, honor or
Premises – signifies distinct and definite locality. It property, or upon that of the latter’s family, of
may mean a room, shop, building or definite area, but any wrong.
in either case, locality is fixed. 2. Such wrong amounts to a crime.
3. Threat is not subject to a condition.
Qualified Trespass v. Other Forms of Trespass
Qualified Trespass to Other Forms of Qualifying Circumstance:
Dwelling (Art. 280) Trespass (Art. 281) If threat was made
Offender is a private The offender is any 1. in writing OR
person person 2. through a middleman.
Offender enters closed
Offender enters a It is essential that there be intimidation.
premises or fenced
dwelling
estate
Place entered is Place entered is As the crime consists in threatening another with
inhabited uninhabited some future harm, it is not necessary that the
It is the entering the offended party was present at the time the threats
Act constituting the closed premises or the were made. It is sufficient that the threats came to the
crime is entering the fenced estate without knowledge of the offended party.
dwelling against the will securing the permission
of the owner of the owner or When consummated: As soon as the threats came to
caretaker thereof the knowledge of the offended party.
Prohibition to enter is Prohibition to enter
express or implied must be manifest Threats made in connection with the commission of
other crimes are absorbed by the latter.
g. Article 282 - Grave Threats The offender in grave threats does not demand the
delivery on the spot of the money or other personal
Mode 1: Threatening, even not unlawful property demanded by him. When threats are made
Threatening another with the infliction upon his and money is taken on the spot, the crime may be
person, honor or property or that of this family of any robbery with intimidation.
wrong amounting to a crime and demanding money
or imposing any other condition, even though not The penalties for the first two types of grave threats
unlawful, and the offender attained his purpose; depend upon the penalties for the crimes threatened
to be committed. One degree lower if the purpose is
Elements: attained, and two degrees lower if the purpose is not
1. Offender threatens another person with the attained.
infliction upon the latter’s person, honor or
property, or upon that of the latter’s family, of If the threat is not subject to a condition, the penalty
any wrong. is fixed at arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500
2. Such wrong amounts to a crime. pesos.
3. There is a demand for money or that any other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful. In the first two types, if the threat is made in writing
4. Offender attains his purpose. or through a middleman, the penalty is to be imposed
in its maximum period.
Mode 2: Threat w/o attaining purpose
Making such threat without the offender attaining his The third type of grave threats must be serious and
purpose; deliberate; the offender must persist in the idea
involved in his threats. The threat should not be made
Mode 3: Threat of crime in the heat of anger, because such is punished under
Threatening another with the infliction upon his Article 285. If the condition is not proved, it is grave
person, honor or property or that of his family of any threats of the third type.

Page 248 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

h. Article 283 - Light Threats Mode 2: Oral threat of crime, in anger

Elements:
1. Offender makes a threat to commit a wrong;
2. The wrong does not constitute a crime;
3. There is a demand for money or that other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful;
4. Offender has attained his purpose or, that he has
not attained his purpose.
The harm threatened must not be in the nature of
crime and there is a demand for money or any other
condition is imposed, even though lawful.
Blackmailing may be punished under this article.
Orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, with
some harm constituting a crime, without persisting in
the idea involved in his threat;
Mode 3: Oral threat = not felony
Orally threatening to do another any harm not
constituting a felony.
Under the first type, the subsequent acts of the
offender must show that he did not persist in the idea
involved in the threat.
Threats which are ordinarily grave threats, if made in
the heat of anger, may be other light threats.

Grave Threats Light Threats If the threats are directed to a person who is absent
Act threatened amount Act threatened do not and uttered in a temporary fit of anger, the offense is
to a crime amount to a crime only other light threats.

Grave Threats and

i. Article 284 - Bond for Good Other Light Threats
Light Threats
Behavior No demand for money In certain cases,
demand for money is
When a person is required to give bail bond: material
1. When he threatens another under the No condition imposed In certain cases,
circumstances mentioned in Art. 282 (Grave imposed condition is
Threats). material.
2. When he threatens another under the
circumstances mentioned in Art. 283 (Light Threat is not deliberate Threat is deliberate
Threats).
k. Article 286 - Grave Coercions
Bond for Good Behavior v. Bond to Keep the
Peace Mode 1: Preventing w/ violence, something not
Bond for Good Bond to Keep the prohibited by law
Behavior Peace Preventing another, by means of violence, threats or
Applicable only to intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by
Not application to any
grave threats and light law;
particular case
threats
If the offender fails to Mode 2: Compelling another to do something v.
give bond, he shall be will
detained for a period Compelling another, by means of violence, threats or
If offender fails to give
not exceeding 6 months intimidation, to do something against his will,
bail, he shall be
(if prosecuted for whether it be right or wrong.
sentenced to destierro
grave/less grave felony)
or not exceeding 30 Elements:
days (light felony) 1. A person prevented another from doing
Not a distinct penalty A distinct penalty something not prohibited by law, or that he
compelled him to do something against his will;
j. Article 285 – Other Light Threats be it right or wrong;
2. The prevention or compulsion be effected by
Mode 1: Threat w/weapon in a quarrel violence, threats or intimidation; and
Threatening another with a weapon, or by drawing 3. The person that restrained the will and liberty of
such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self- another had not the authority of law or the right
defense; to do so, or in other words, that the restraint shall

Page 249 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
not be made under authority of law or in the
exercise of any lawful right.
Two ways of committing Grave Coercion:
1. Preventive – Preventing another, by means of
violence, threats, or intimidation, from doing
something not prohibited by law
2. Compulsive – Compelling another, by means of
violence, threats, or intimidation, to do
something against his will, whether it be right or
wrong
Purpose of the Law:
To enforce the principle that no person may take the
law into his hands, and that our government is one of
law, not of men.
Arises only if the act which the offender prevented
another to do is not prohibited by law or ordinance.
If a person prohibits another to do an act because the
act is a crime, even though some sort of violence or
intimidation is employed, it would not give rise to
grave coercion. It may only give rise to threat or
physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted.
In case of grave coercion where the offended party is
being compelled to do something against his will,
whether it be wrong or not, the crime of grave
coercion is committed if violence or intimidation is
employed in order to compel him to do the act.
A public officer who shall prevent by means of
violence or threats the ceremonies or manifestations
of any religion is guilty of interruption of religious
worship (Art. 132).
Any person who, by force, prevents the meeting of a
legislative body is liable under Art. 143.
Any person who shall use force or intimidation to
prevent any member of Congress from attending the
meetings thereof, expressing his opinions, or casting
his vote is liable under Art. 145.
The crime is not grave coercion when the violence is
employed to seize anything belonging to the debtor
of the offender. It is light coercion under Art. 287.
Coercion is consummated even if the offended party
did not accede to the purpose of coercion.
The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit the
interference of another with the same, if the
interference is necessary to avert an imminent danger
and the threatened damage, compared to the damage
Page 250 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
arising to the owner from the interference, is much
greater. (Art. 432, Civil Code)
Neither the crime of threats nor coercion is
committed although the accused, a branch manager
of a bank made the complainant sign a withdrawal slip
for the amount needed to pay the spurious dollar
check she had encashed, and also made her execute
an affidavit regarding the return of the amount against
her better sense and judgment. The complainant may
have acted reluctantly and with hesitation, but still, it
was voluntary. [Lee v. CA, G.R. No. 90423 (1991)]
l. Article 287 - Light Coercions
Elements:
1. Offender must be a creditor;
2. He seizes anything belonging to his debtor:
3. The seizure of the thing be accomplished by
means of violence or a display of material force
producing intimidation;
4. The purpose of the offender is to apply the same
to the payment of the debt.
Deals with light coercions wherein violence is
employed by the offender who is a creditor in seizing
anything belonging to his debtor for the purpose of
applying the same to the payment of the debt.
Bar Question: A was caught peeping through a small
hole in the bathroom door while a young 16-year-old
was taking a bath. A liable for: Light Coercion.
Reason: Unjust vexation is defined as any act
committed without violence, but which unjustifiably
annoys or vexes an innocent person amounts to light
coercion. It should include any human conduct
which, although not productive of some physical or
material harm would, however, unjustifiably annoy or
vex an innocent person.
Unjust Vexation
Any act committed without violence, but which
unjustifiably annoys or vexes an innocent person
amounts to light coercion. It should include any
human conduct which, although not productive of
some physical or material harm would, however,
unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person.
Unjust Vexation is distinguished from grave coercion by the
absence of violence.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Threats Coercion No employer shall limit or otherwise interfere with

Intimidation or the freedom of any employee to dispose of his wages.
Intimidation is essential violence is the essence He shall not in any manner force, compel, oblige his
of the crime employees to purchase merchandise, commodities or
Force or violence must other property from the employer or from any other
Intimidation is future person. (Art. 112, Labor Code.)
be imminent, actual,
and conditional
and immediate
Intimidation is directed
Intimidation is directed n. Article 289 - Formation,
against the victim or his Maintenance, and Prohibition of
against the victim only
family
Combination of Capital or Labor
m. Article 288 - Other Similar through Violence or Threats
Coercions Elements:
1. Offender employs violence or threats, in such a
Mode 1: Force/compel to buy commodities from
degree as to compel or force the laborers or
him
employers in the free and legal exercise of their
industry or work;
Forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or
2. The purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent
knowingly permitting the forcing or compelling of the
coalitions of capital or labor, strike of laborers or
laborer or employee of the offender to purchase
lockout of employers.
merchandise of commodities of any kind from him;
Note: Repealed by the Labor Code.
Elements:
1. Offender is any person, agent or officer of any
association or corporation; 3. Chapter III: Discovery and
2. He or such firm or corporation has employed
laborers or employees;
Revelation of Secrets
3. He forces or compels, directly or indirectly, or
knowingly permits to be forced or compelled, any a. Article 290 - Discovering Secrets
of his or its laborers or employees to purchase through Seizure of
merchandise or commodities of any kind from Correspondence
him or from said firm or corporation.
Elements:
Mode 2: Wages paid by token or object
1. Offender is a private individual or even a public
Paying the wages due his laborer or employee by
officer not in the exercise of his official function;
means of tokens or object other than the legal tender
2. He seizes the papers or letters of another;
currency of the Philippines, unless expressly
3. The purpose is to discover the secrets of such
requested by such laborer or employee.
another person;
4. Offender is informed of the contents of the
Elements:
papers or letters seized.
1. Offender pays the wages due a laborer or
employee employed by him by means of tokens
This is a crime against the security of one’s papers and
or object;
effects. The purpose must be to discover its effects.
2. Those tokens or objects are other than the legal
The act violates the privacy of communication.
tender currency of the Philippines;
3. Such employee or laborer does not expressly
According to Dean Ortega, it is not necessary that the
request that he be paid by means of tokens or
offender should actually discover the contents of the
objects.
letter. Reyes, citing People v. Singh, CA, 40 OG, Suppl.
5, 35, believes otherwise.
General rule: wages shall be paid in legal tender and
the use of tokens, promissory notes, vouchers,
The last paragraph of Article 290 expressly makes the
coupons or any other forms alleged to represent legal
provision of the first and second paragraph thereof
tender is absolutely prohibited even when expressly
inapplicable to parents, guardians, or persons
requested by the employee. (Section 1, Rule VIII, Book
entrusted with the custody of minors placed under
III, Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code)

Page 251 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC
their care or custody, and to the spouses with respect
to the papers or letters of either of them.
The teachers or other persons entrusted with the care
and education of minors are included in the
exceptions.
Distinction from estafa, damage to property, and
unjust vexation:
1. If the act had been executed with intent to gain, it
would be estafa;
2. If, on the other hand, the purpose was not to
defraud, but only to cause damage to another, it
would merit the qualification of damage to
property;
3. If the intention was merely to cause vexation
preventing another to do something which the
law does not prohibit or compel him to execute
what he does not want, the act should be
considered as unjust vexation.
b. Article 291 - Revealing Secrets
with Abuse of Office
Elements:
1. Offender is a manager, employee or servant;
2. He learns the secrets of his principal or master in
such capacity;
3. He reveals such secrets.
An employee, manager, or servant who came to know
of the secret of his master or principal in such capacity
and reveals the same shall also be liable regardless of
whether or not the principal or master suffered
damages.
Essence of this crime is that the offender learned of
the secret in the course of his employment.
He is enjoying a confidential relation with the
employer or master so he should respect the privacy
of matters personal to the latter.
Reason: no one has a right to the personal privacy of another.
c. Article 292 - Revelation of
Industrial Secrets
Elements:
1. Offender is a person in charge, employee or
workman of a manufacturing or industrial
establishment;
2. The manufacturing or industrial establishment
has a secret of the industry which the offender
has learned;
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
3. Offender reveals such secrets;
4. Prejudice is caused to the owner.
Secrets must relate to manufacturing processes.
The act constituting the crime is revealing the secret
of the industry which the offender has learned.
The revelation of the secret might be made after the
employee or workman had ceased to be connected
with the establishment.
Prejudice is an element of the offense.
d. Special Laws
RA 4200 (ANTI WIRE TAPPING ACT)
Punishable Acts
It shall be unlawful for:
1. Any person, not being authorized by all the
parties to any private communication or spoken
word, to tap any wire or cable, or by using any
other device or arrangement, to secretly overhear,
intercept, or record such communication or
spoken word by using a device commonly known
as a dictaphone or dictagraph or dictaphone or
walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or however
otherwise described:
2. Any person, be he a participant or not in the act
or acts penalized in the next preceding sentence,
to knowingly possess any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record, or
copies thereof, of any communication or spoken
word secured either before or after the effective
date of this Act in the manner prohibited by this
law; or to replay the same for any other person or
persons; or to communicate the contents thereof,
either verbally or in writing, or to furnish
transcriptions thereof, whether complete or
partial, to any other person: Provided, That the use
of such record or any copies thereof as evidence
in any civil, criminal investigation or trial of
offenses mentioned in section 3 hereof, shall not
be covered by this prohibition.
Any person who willfully or knowingly does or who
shall aid, permit, or cause to be done any of the acts
declared to be unlawful in the preceding section or
who violates the provisions of the following section
or of any order issued thereunder, or aids, permits, or
causes such violation shall, upon conviction thereof,
be punished by imprisonment for not less than six
months or more than six years and with the accessory
penalty of perpetual absolute disqualification from
public office if the offender be a public official at the
time of the commission of the offense, and, if the
Page 252 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
offender is an alien he shall be subject to deportation
proceedings. [Sec. 2, RA 4200]
Exceptions:
Any peace officer, who is authorized by a written
order of the Court, to execute any of the acts declared
to be unlawful in the two preceding sections in cases
involving the crimes of treason, espionage,
provoking war and disloyalty in case of war,
piracy, mutiny in the high seas, rebellion,
conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion,
inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to
commit sedition, inciting to sedition, kidnapping
as defined by the RPC, and violations of
Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing espionage
and other offenses against national security: Provided,
That such written order shall only be issued or granted
upon written application and the examination under
oath or affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses
he may produce and a showing:
1. that there are reasonable grounds to believe that
any of the crimes enumerated hereinabove has
been committed or is being committed or is
about to be committed: Provided, however, That in
cases involving the offenses of rebellion,
conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion,
inciting to rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to
commit sedition, and inciting to sedition, such
authority shall be granted only upon prior proof
that a rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case may
be, have actually been or are being committed;
2. that there are reasonable grounds to believe that
evidence will be obtained essential to the
conviction of any person for, or to the solution
of, or to the prevention of, any of such crimes;
and
3. that there are no other means readily available for
obtaining such evidence.
Note: RA 9372: Human Security Act
SEC. 7. Surveillance of Suspects and
Interception and Recording of
Communications. The provisions of RA 4200
(Anti-wire Tapping Law) to the contrary
notwithstanding, a police or law enforcement
official and the members of his team may, upon a
written order of the Court of Appeals, listen to,
intercept and record, with the use of any mode,
form, kind or type of electronic or other
surveillance equipment or intercepting and
tracking devices, or with the use of any other
suitable ways and means for that purpose, any
communication, message, conversation,
discussion, or spoken or written words between
members of a judicially declared and outlawed
Page 253 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
terrorist organization, association, or group of
persons or of any person charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
to commit terrorism.
Provided, That surveillance, interception and
recording of communications between lawyers and
clients, doctors and patients, journalists and their
sources and confidential business correspondence
shall not be authorized.
SEC. 8. Formal Application for Judicial
Authorization. - The written order of the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals to
track down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words of any
person suspected of the crime of terrorism or the
crime of conspiracy to commit terrorism shall only
be granted by the authorizing division of the Court
of Appeals upon an ex parte written application of
a police or of a law enforcement official who has
been duly authorized in writing by the Anti-
Terrorism Council created in Section 53 of this Act
to file such ex parte application, and upon
examination under oath or affirmation of the
applicant and the witnesses he may produce to
establish: (a) that there is probable cause to believe
based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that the said crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism has been
committed, or is being committed, or is about to
be committed; (b) that there is probable cause to
believe based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances that evidence, which is essential to
the conviction of any charged or suspected person
for, or to the solution or prevention of, any such
crimes, will be obtained; and, (c) that there is no
other effective means readily available for
acquiring such evidence.
SEC. 9.Classification and Contents of the
Order of the Court. - The written order granted
by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals
as well as its order, if any, to extend or renew the
same, the original application of the applicant,
including his application to extend or renew, if any,
and the written authorizations of the Anti-
Terrorism Council shall be deemed and are hereby
declared as classified information: Provided, That
the person being surveilled or whose
communications, letters, papers, messages,
conversations. Discussions, spoken or written
words and effects have been monitored, listened
to, bugged or recorded by law enforcement
authorities has the right to be informed of the acts
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
done by the law enforcement authorities in the
premises or to challenge, if he or she intends to do
so, the legality of the interference before the Court
of Appeals which issued the written order. The
written order of the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals shall specify the following: (a)
the identity, such as name and address, if known,
of the charged or suspected person whose
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words are to be
tracked down, tapped, listened to, intercepted, and
recorded and, in the case of radio, electronic, or
telephonic (whether wireless or otherwise)
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words, the
electronic transmission systems or the telephone
numbers to be tracked down, tapped, listened to,
intercepted, and recorded and their locations or if
the person suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism is not fully known,
such person shall be subject to continuous
surveillance provided there is a reasonable ground
to do so; (b) the identity (name, address, and the
police or law enforcement organization) of the
police or of the law enforcement official, including
the individual identity (names, addresses, and the
police or law enforcement organization) of the
members of his team, judicially authorized to track
down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record the
communications, messages, conversations,
discussions, or spoken or written words; (c) the
offense or offenses committed, or being
committed, or sought to be prevented; and, (d) the
length of time within which the authorization shall
be used or carried out.
SEC. 10. Effective Period of Judicial
Authorization. - Only for the length of time
specified in the written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals, which shall not
exceed a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
receipt of the written order of the authorizing
division of the CA by the applicant police or law
enforcement official.
The authorizing division of the CA may extend or
renew the said authorization for another non-
extendible period, which shall not exceed 30 days
from the expiration of the original period:
Provided, That the authorizing division of the CA
is satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the
public interest: and Provided, further, That the ex
parte application for extension or renewal, which
must be filed by the original applicant, has been
duly authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism
Council.
Page 254 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
In case of death of the original applicant or in case
he is physically disabled to file the application for
extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the
original applicant among the members of the team
named in the original written order of the
authorizing division of the CA shall file the
application for extension or renewal: Provided,
That, without prejudice to the liability of the police
or law enforcement personnel under Section 20
hereof, the applicant police or law enforcement
official shall have thirty (30) days after the
termination of the period granted by the Court of
Appeals as provided in the preceding paragraphs
within which to file the appropriate case before the
Public Prosecutor’s Office for any violation of this
Act.
If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period,
the applicant police or law enforcement official
shall immediately notify the person subject of the
surveillance, interception and recording of the
termination of the said surveillance, interception
and recording. The penalty of ten (10) years and
one day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall
be imposed upon the applicant police or law
enforcement official who fails to notify the person
subject of the surveillance, monitoring,
interception and recording as specified above.
SEC. 11. Custody of Intercepted and Recorded
Communications. - All tapes, discs, and
recordings made pursuant to the authorization of
the authorizing division of the CA, including all
excerpts and summaries thereof as well as all
written notes or memoranda made in connection
therewith, shall, within forty-eight (48) hours after
the expiration of the period fixed in the written
order of the authorizing division of the CA or
within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration of
any extension or renewal granted by the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, be
deposited with the authorizing Division of the CA
in a sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case
may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint
affidavit of the applicant police or law
enforcement official and the members of his team.
In case of death of the applicant or in case he is
physically disabled to execute the required
affidavit, the one next in rank to the applicant
among the members of the team named in the
written order of the authorizing division of the CA
shall execute with the members of the team that
required affidavit.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer
or any custodian of the tapes, discs and recording,
and their excerpts and summaries, written notes or
memoranda to copy in whatever form, to remove,
delete, expunge, incinerate, shred or destroy in any
manner the items enumerated above in whole or in
part under any pretext whatsoever.
Any person who removes, deletes, expunges
incinerates, shreds or destroys the items
enumerated above shall suffer a penalty of not less
than six (6) years and one day to twelve (12) years
of imprisonment.
SEC. 12. Contents of Joint Affidavit. - The joint
affidavit of the police or of the law enforcement
official and the individual members of his team
shall state: (a) the number of tapes, discs, and
recordings that have been made, as well as the
number of excerpts and summaries thereof and the
number of written notes and memoranda, if any,
made in connection therewith; (b) the dates and
times covered by each of such tapes, discs, and
recordings; (c) the number of tapes, discs, and
recordings, as well as the number of excerpts and
summaries thereof and the number of written
notes and memoranda made in connection
therewith that have been included in the deposit;
and (d) the date of the original written
authorization granted by the Anti-Terrorism
Council to the applicant to file the ex parte
application to conduct the tracking down, tapping,
intercepting, and recording, as well as the date of
any extension or renewal of the original written
authority granted by the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals.
The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that
no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of
any of such tapes, discs, and recordings, and that
no duplicates or copies of the whole or any part of
any of such excerpts, summaries, written notes,
and memoranda, have been made, or, if made, that
all such duplicates and copies are included in the
sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case may
be, deposited with the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals.
It shall be unlawful for any person, police or law
enforcement official to omit or exclude from the
joint affidavit any item or portion thereof
mentioned in this Section.
Any person, police or law enforcement officer who
violates any of the acts proscribed in the preceding
paragraph shall suffer the penalty of not less than
Page 255 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment.
SEC. 13.Disposition of Deposited Materials. -
The sealed envelope or sealed package and the
contents thereof, which are deposited with the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals, shall
be deemed and are hereby declared classified
information, and the sealed envelope or sealed
package shall not be opened and its contents
(including the tapes, discs, and recordings and all
the excerpts and summaries thereof and the notes
and memoranda made in connection therewith)
shall not be divulged, revealed, read, replayed, or
used as evidence unless authorized by written
order of the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals, which written order shall be granted only
upon a written application of the Department of
Justice filed before the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals and only upon a showing that the
Department of Justice has been duly authorized in
writing by the Anti-Terrorism Council to file the
application with proper written notice to the
person whose conversation, communication,
message discussion or spoken or written words
have been the subject of surveillance, monitoring,
recording and interception to open, reveal, divulge,
and use the contents of the sealed envelope or
sealed package as evidence.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify in writing
the persons subject of the surveillance as defined
above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and
one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.
SEC. 14.Application to Open Deposited
Sealed Envelop or Sealed Package. - The
written application with notice to the party
concerned to open the deposited sealed envelope
or sealed package shall clearly state the purpose or
reason: (a) for opening the sealed envelope or
sealed package; (b) for revealing or disclosing its
classified contents; (c) for replaying, divulging, and
or reading any of the listened to, intercepted, and
recorded communications, messages,
conversations, discussions, or spoken or written
words (including any of the excerpts and
summaries thereof and any of the notes or
memoranda made in connection therewith); and,
(d) for using any of said listened to, intercepted,
and recorded communications, messages,
conversations, discussions, or spoken or written
words (including any of the excerpts and
summaries thereof and any of the notes or
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
memoranda made in connection therewith) as
evidence.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify as defined
above shall suffer the penalty of six (6) years and
one day to eight (8) years of imprisonment.
SEC. 15.Evidentiary Value of Deposited
Materials. - Any listened to, intercepted, and
recorded communications, messages,
conversations, discussions, or spoken or written
words, or any part or parts thereof, or any
information or fact contained therein, including
their existence, content, substance, purport, effect,
or meaning, which have been secured in violation
of the pertinent provisions of this Act, shall
absolutely not be admissible and usable as
evidence against anybody in any judicial, quasi-
judicial, legislative, or administrative investigation,
inquiry, proceeding, or hearing.
SEC. 16.Penalty for Unauthorized or malicious
Interceptions and/or Recordings. - Any police
or law enforcement personnel who, not being
authorized to do so by the authorizing division of
the Court of Appeals, tracks down, taps, listens to,
intercepts, and records in whatever manner or
form any communication, message, conversation,
discussion, or spoken or written word of a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of
terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit
terrorism shall be guilty of an offense and shall
suffer the penalty of ten (10) years and one day to
twelve (12) years of imprisonment.
In addition to the liability attaching to the offender
for the commission of any other offense, the
penalty of ten (10) years and one day to twelve (12)
years of imprisonment and the accessory penalty
of perpetual absolute disqualification from public
office shall be imposed upon any police or law
enforcement personnel who maliciously obtained
an authority from the Court of Appeals to track
down, tap, listen to, intercept, and record in
whatever manner or form any communication,
message, conversation, discussion, or spoken or
written words of a person charged with or
suspected of the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
to commit terrorism: Provided, That
notwithstanding Section 13 of this Act, the party
aggrieved by such authorization shall be allowed
access to the sealed envelope or sealed package and
the contents thereof as evidence for the
prosecution of any police or law enforcement
Page 256 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
personnel who maliciously procured said
authorization.
SEC. 26.Restriction on Travel. – In cases where
evidence of guilt is not strong, and the person
charged with the crime of terrorism or conspiracy
to commit terrorism is entitled to bail and is
granted the same, the court, upon application by
the prosecutor, shall limit the right of travel of the
accused to within the municipality or city where he
resides or where the case is pending, in the interest
of national security and public safety, consistent
with Article III, Section 6 of the Constitution.
Travel outside of said municipality or city, without
the authorization of the court, shall be deemed a
violation of the terms and conditions of his bail,
which shall then be forfeited as provided under the
Rules of Court.
He or she may also be placed under house arrest
by order of the court at his or her usual place of
residence.
While under house arrest, he or she may not use
telephones, cellphones, e-mails, computers, the
internet or other means of communications with
people outside the residence until otherwise
ordered by the court.
The restrictions abovementioned shall be
terminated upon the acquittal of the accused or of
the dismissal of the case filed against him or earlier
upon the discretion of the court on motion of the
prosecutor or of the accused.
SEC. 27. Judicial Authorization Required to
Examine Bank Deposits, Accounts, and
Records. - The provisions of Republic Act No.
1405 as amended, to the contrary notwithstanding,
the justices of the Court of Appeals designated as
a special court to handle anti-terrorism cases after
satisfying themselves of the existence of probable
cause in a hearing called for that purpose that (1) a
person charged with or suspected of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of
a judicially declared and outlawed terrorist
organization, association, or group of persons, and
(3) of a member of such judicially declared and
outlawed organization, association, or group of
persons, may authorize in writing any police or law
enforcement officer and the members of his/her
team duly authorized in writing by the anti-
terrorism council to: (a) examine, or cause the
examination of, the deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets and records in a bank or financial
institution; and (b) gather or cause the gathering of
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
any relevant information about such deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records
from a bank or financial institution. The bank or
financial institution concerned shall not refuse to
allow such examination or to provide the desired
information, when so ordered by and served with
the written order of the Court of Appeals.
SEC. 28. Application to Examine Bank
Deposits, Accounts, and Records. - The written
order of the Court of Appeals authorizing the
examination of bank deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets, and records: (1) of a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of
terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of
any judicially declared and outlawed terrorist
organization, association, or group of persons, or
(3) of any member of such organization,
association, or group of persons in a bank or
financial institution, and the gathering of any
relevant information about the same from said
bank or financial institution, shall only be granted
by the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals
upon an ex parte application to that effect of a
police or of a law enforcement official who has
been duly authorized in writing to file such ex parte
application by the Anti-Terrorism Council created
in Section 53 of this Act to file such ex parte
application, and upon examination under oath or
affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses he
may produce to establish the facts that will justify
the need and urgency of examining and freezing
the bank deposits, placements, trust accounts,
assets, and records: (1) of the person charged with
or suspected of the crime of terrorism or
conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2) of a judicially
declared and outlawed terrorist organization,
association or group of persons, or (3) of any
member of such organization, association, or
group of persons.
SEC. 29. Classification and Contents of the
Court Order Authorizing the Examination of
Bank Deposits, Accounts, and Records. - The
written order granted by the authorizing division
of the Court of Appeals as well as its order, if any,
to extend or renew the same, the original ex parte
application of the applicant, including his ex parte
application to extend or renew, if any, and the
written authorizations of the Anti Terrorism
Council, shall be deemed and are hereby declared
as classified information: Provided, That the
person whose bank deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets, and records have been examined,
frozen, sequestered and seized by law enforcement
authorities has the right to be informed of the acts
Page 257 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
done by the law enforcement authorities in the
premises or to challenge, if he or she intends to do
so, the legality of the interference. The written
order of the authorizing division of the Court of
Appeals designated to handle cases involving
terrorism shall specify: (a) the identity of the said:
(1) person charged with or suspected of the crime
of terrorism or conspiracy to commit terrorism, (2)
judicially declared and outlawed terrorist
organization, association, or group of persons, and
(3) member of such judicially declared and
outlawed organization, association, or group of
persons, as the case may be, whose deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records are
to be examined or the information to be gathered;
(b) the identity of the bank or financial institution
where such deposits, placements, trust accounts,
assets, and records are held and maintained; (c) the
identity of the persons who will conduct the said
examination and the gathering of the desired
information; and, (d) the length of time the
authorization shall be carried out.
SEC. 30. Effective Period of Court
Authorization to Examine and Obtain
Information on Bank Deposits, Accounts, and
Records. - The authorization issued or granted by
the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals to
examine or cause the examination of and to freeze
bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets,
and records, or to gather information about the
same, shall be effective for the length of time
specified in the written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals, which shall not
exceed a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
receipt of the written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals by the applicant
police or law enforcement official.
The authorizing division of the Court of Appeals
may extend or renew the said authorization for
another period, which shall not exceed thirty (30)
days renewable to another thirty (30) days from the
expiration of the original period, provided that the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals is
satisfied that such extension or renewal is in the
public interest, and provided further that the
application for extension or renewal, which must
be filed by the original applicant, has been duly
authorized in writing by the Anti-Terrorism
Council.
In case of death of the original applicant or in case
he is physically disabled to file the application for
extension or renewal, the one next in rank to the
original applicant among the members of the team
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
named in the original written order of the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals shall
file the application for extension or renewal:
Provided, That, without prejudice to the liability of
the police or law enforcement personnel under
Section 19 hereof, the applicant police or law
enforcement official shall have thirty (30) days
after the termination of the period granted by the
Court of Appeals as provided in the preceding
paragraphs within which to file the appropriate
case before the Public Prosecutor’s Office for any
violation of this Act.
If no case is filed within the thirty (30)-day period,
the applicant police or law enforcement official
shall immediately notify in writing the person
subject of the bank examination and freezing of
bank deposits, placements, trust accounts, assets
and records. The penalty of ten (10) years and one
day to twelve (12) years of imprisonment shall be
imposed upon the applicant police or law
enforcement official who fails to notify in writing
the person subject of the bank examination and
freezing of bank deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets and records.
Any person, law enforcement official or judicial
authority who violates his duty to notify in writing
as defined above shall suffer the penalty of six (6)
years and one day to eight (8) years of
imprisonment.
SEC. 31. Custody of Bank Data and
Information Obtained after Examination of
Deposits, Placements, Trust Accounts, Assets
and Records. - All information, data, excerpts,
summaries, notes, memoranda, working sheets,
reports, and other documents obtained from the
examination of the bank deposits, placements,
trust accounts, assets and records of: (1) a person
charged with or suspected of the crime of
terrorism or the crime of conspiracy to commit
terrorism, (2) a judicially declared and outlawed
terrorist organization, association, or group of
persons, or (3) a member of any such organization,
association, or group of persons shall, within forty-
eight (48) hours after the expiration of the period
fixed in the written order of the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals or within forty-
eight (48) hours after the expiration of the
extension or renewal granted by the authorizing
division of the Court of Appeals, be deposited with
the authorizing division of the Court of Appeals in
a sealed envelope or sealed package, as the case
may be, and shall be accompanied by a joint
affidavit of the applicant police or law
Page 258 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
enforcement official and the persons who actually
conducted the examination of said bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets and records.
SEC. 32. Contents of Joint Affidavit. - The joint
affidavit shall state: (a) the identifying marks,
numbers, or symbols of the deposits, placements,
trust accounts, assets, and records examined; (b)
the identity and address of the bank or financial
institution where such deposits, placements, trust
accounts, assets, and records are held and
maintained; (c) the number of bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets, and records
discovered, examined, and frozen; (d) the
outstanding balances of each of such deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets; (e) all
information, data, excerpts, summaries, notes,
memoranda, working sheets, reports, documents,
records examined and placed in the sealed
envelope or sealed package deposited with the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals; (f)
the date of the original written authorization
granted by the Anti-Terrorism Council to the
applicant to file the ex parte application to conduct
the examination of the said bank deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets and records, as
well as the date of any extension or renewal of the
original written authorization granted by the
authorizing division of the Court of Appeals; and
(g) that the items enumerated were all that were
found in the bank or financial institution examined
at the time of the completion of the examination.
The joint affidavit shall also certify under oath that
no duplicates or copies of the information, data,
excerpts, summaries, notes, memoranda, working
sheets, reports, and documents acquired from the
examination of the bank deposits, placements,
trust accounts, assets and records have been made,
or, if made, that all such duplicates and copies are
placed in the sealed envelope or sealed package
deposited with the authorizing division of the
Court of Appeals.
It shall be unlawful for any person, police officer
or custodian of the bank data and information
obtained after examination of deposits,
placements, trust accounts, assets and records to
copy, to remove, delete, expunge, incinerate, shred
or destroy in any manner the items enumerated
above in whole or in part under any pretext
whatsoever.
Any person who copies, removes, deletes,
expunges incinerates, shreds or destroys the items
enumerated above shall suffer a penalty of not less
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
than six (6) years and one day to twelve (12) years
of imprisonment.
SEC. 46. Penalty for Unauthorized Revelation
of Classified Materials. - The penalty of ten (10)
years and one day to twelve (12) years of
imprisonment shall be imposed upon any person,
police or law enforcement agent, judicial officer or
civil servant who, not being authorized by the
Court of Appeals to do so, reveals in any manner
or form any classified information under this Act.
RA 9208: ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS
ACT OF 2003
Trafficking in Persons - refers to the recruitment,
transportation, transfer or harboring, or receipt of
persons with or without the victim's consent or
knowledge, within or across national borders by
means of threat or use of force, or other forms of
coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power
or of position, taking advantage of the vulnerability of
the person, or, the giving or receiving of payments or
benefits to achieve the consent of a person having
control over another person for the purpose of
exploitation which includes at a minimum, the
exploitation or the prostitution of others or other
forms of sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of organs.
The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring
or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation
shall also be considered as "trafficking in persons"
even if it does not involve any of the means set forth
in the preceding paragraph.
Punishable Acts
Section 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. - It
shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
juridical, to commit any of the following acts:
(a) To recruit, transport, transfer; harbor,
provide, or receive a person by any means,
including those done under the pretext of
domestic or overseas employment or training
or apprenticeship, for the purpose of
prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
(b) To introduce or match for money, profit, or
material, economic or other consideration,
any person or, as provided for under Republic
Act No. 6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign
national, for marriage for the purpose of
acquiring, buying, offering, selling or trading
him/her to engage in prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced
Page 259 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage;
(c) To offer or contract marriage, real or
simulated, for the purpose of acquiring,
buying, offering, selling, or trading them to
engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor or slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(d) To undertake or organize tours and travel
plans consisting of tourism packages or
activities for the purpose of utilizing and
offering persons for prostitution,
pornography or sexual exploitation;
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in
prostitution or pornography;
(f) To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons
for the purpose of prostitution, pornography,
sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(g) To recruit, hire, adopt, transport or abduct a
person, by means of threat or use of force,
fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or
intimidation for the purpose of removal or
sale of organs of said person; and
(h) To recruit, transport or adopt a child to
engage in armed activities in the Philippines or
abroad.
Section 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in
Persons.- The following acts which promote or
facilitate trafficking in persons, shall be unlawful
to:
(a) knowingly lease or sublease, use or allow to be
used any house, building or establishment for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in
persons;
(b) produce, print and issue or distribute
unissued, tampered or fake counseling
certificates, registration stickers and
certificates of any government agency which
issues these certificates and stickers as proof
of compliance with government regulatory
and pre-departure requirements for the
purpose of promoting trafficking in persons;
(c) advertise, publish, print, broadcast or
distribute, or cause the advertisement,
publication, printing, broadcasting or
distribution by any means, including the use of
information technology and the internet, of
any brochure, flyer, or any propaganda
material that promotes trafficking in persons;
(d) assist in the conduct of misrepresentation or
fraud for purposes of facilitating the
acquisition of clearances and necessary exit
documents from government agencies that are
mandated to provide pre-departure
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

registration and services for departing persons Virus (HIV) or the Acquired Immune
for the purpose of promoting trafficking in Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS).
persons;
(e) facilitate, assist or help in the exit and entry of
persons from/to the country at international
and local airports, territorial boundaries and
seaports who are in possession of unissued,
tampered or fraudulent travel documents for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in
persons;
(f) confiscate, conceal, or destroy the passport,
travel documents, or personal documents or
belongings of trafficked persons in
furtherance of trafficking or to prevent them
from leaving the country or seeking redress
from the government or appropriate agencies;
and
(g) knowingly benefit from, financial or
otherwise, or make use of, the labor or
services of a person held to a condition of
involuntary servitude, forced labor, or slavery.

Section 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons. -

The following are considered as qualified
trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
(b) When the adoption is effected through
Republic Act No. 8043, otherwise known as
the "Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995"
and said adoption is for the purpose of
prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
(c) When the crime is committed by a syndicate,
or in large scale. Trafficking is deemed
committed by a syndicate if carried out by a
group of three (3) or more persons conspiring
or confederating with one another. It is
deemed committed in large scale if committed
against three (3) or more persons, individually
or as a group;
(d) When the offender is an ascendant, parent,
sibling, guardian or a person who exercises
authority over the trafficked person or when
the offense is committed by a public officer or
employee;
(e) When the trafficked person is recruited to
engage in prostitution with any member of the
military or law enforcement agencies;
(f) When the offender is a member of the military
or law enforcement agencies; and
(g) When by reason or on occasion of the act of
trafficking in persons, the offended party dies,
becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is
afflicted with Human Immunodeficiency

Page 260 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
J. Title X. Crimes against
Property
1. Chapter I: Robbery in General
a. Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of Robbery
b. Article 294 - With Violence or Intimidation
of Persons
c. Article 295 - Robbery with Physical Injuries,
in an Uninhabited Place and by a Band
d. Article 296 - Definition of a Band and
Penalty Incurred by the Members Thereof
e. Article 297 - Attempted and Frustrated
Robbery with Homicide
f. Article 298 - Execution of Deeds through
Violence or Intimidation
g. Article 299 - Robbery in an Inhabited House
or Public Building or Edifice Devoted to
Worship
h. Article 300 - Robbery in an Uninhabited
Place and by a Band
i. Article 302 - In an Uninhabited Place or
Private Building
j. Article 303 - Robbery of Cereals, Fruits or
Firewood in an Inhabited Place or Private
Building
k. Article 304 - Possession of Picklock or
Similar Tools
l. Article 305 - False Keys
2. Chapter II: Brigandage
a. Article 306 - Who Are Brigands
b. Article 307 - Aiding and Abetting a Band of
Brigands
3. Chapter III: Theft
a. Article 308 - Who Are Liable for Theft
b. Article 309 – Penalties
c. Article 310 - Qualified Theft
d. Article 311 - Theft of the Property of the
National Library and National Museum
4. Chapter IV: Usurpation
a. Article 312 - Occupation of Real Property or
Usurpation of Real Rights in Property
b. Article 313 - Altering Boundaries or
Landmarks
5. Chapter V: Culpable Insolvency
a. Article 314 - Fraudulent Insolvency
6. Chapter VI: Swindling
a. Article 315 – Estafa
b. Article 316 - Other Forms of Swindling
c. Article 317 - Swindling of a Minor
d. Article 318 - Other Deceits
Page 261 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
7. Chapter VII: Chattel mortgage
a. Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or Pledge of
Mortgaged Property
8. Chapter VIII: Arson and other Crimes involving
Destruction
9. Chapter IX: Malicious mischief
a. Article 327 - Who Are Responsible
b. Article 328 - Special Cases of Malicious
Mischief
c. Article 329 - Other Mischiefs
d. Article 330 - Damage and Obstruction to
Means of Communication
e. Article 331 - Destroying or Damaging
Statues, Public Monuments or Paintings
10. Chapter X: Exemption from Criminal Liability
a. Article 332 - Exemption from Criminal
Liability in Crimes Against Property
1. Chapter I: Robbery in
General
a. Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of
Robbery
Elements of Robbery in General
1. That there is personal property belonging to
another;
2. That there is unlawful taking of that property;
3. That the taking is with intent to gain; and
4. That there is violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things.
The property taken must be personal, if real
property/right is usurped the crime is usurpation (Art.
312).
Prohibitive articles may be the subject of robbery, e.g.,
opium
From the moment the offender gains possession of
the object, even without the chance to dispose of the
same, the unlawful taking is complete.
“Taking” – depriving the offended party of
possession of the thing taken with the character of
permanency.
Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking.
It cannot be established by direct evidence, except in
case of confession.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more

It is not necessary that violence or intimidation is
present from the beginning. If the violence or 7.
intimidation at any time before asportation is
complete, the taking of property is qualified to
robbery.
than 30 days.
If the violence employed by the offender does
not cause any of the serious physical injuries
defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.

When is violence committed? Violence against or

Use of force upon
General rule: Violence or intimidation must be present intimidation of
things
BEFORE the taking of personal property is person
complete. The taking is robbery
only if force is used to:
Exception: When violence results in homicide, rape, 1. enter the building
intentional mutilation, or any of the serious physical 2. break doors,
injuries penalized in par. 1 and 2 of Art. 263, the wardrobes, chests,
taking of the personal property is robbery complexed or any other kind
with any of those crimes under Art. 294, even if the of locked or sealed
taking was already complete when violence was used The taking is always
furniture or
by the offender. robbery
receptacle inside
the building; OR
b. Article 294 – Robbery with 3. force them open
outside after taking
Violence against or Intimidation the same from the
of Persons building (Art. 299
& 302)
Acts punished under Art 294: Value of the thing taken
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, is immaterial. The
Homicide is committed. (Robbery with penalty depends on: If committed in an
Homicide) 1. the result of the inhabited house, public
2. When the robbery is accompanied by Rape or violence used building, or edifice
Intentional Mutilation or Arson. (Robbery (homicide, rape, devoted to religious
with Rape, Robbery with Intentional Mutilation, intentional worship, the penalty is
Robbery with Arson) mutilation, serious based on:
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, physical injuries, 1. the value of the
any of the Physical Injuries resulting in insanity, less serious or thing taken and
imbecility, impotency, or blindness is inflicted. slight physical 2. whether or not the
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any injuries resulted) offenders carry
of the Physical Injuries resulting in the loss of the and arms
use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the loss of 2. the existence of
an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg or the loss of the intimidation only
use of any such member, or incapacity for the work in
which the injured person is theretofore habitually
engaged is inflicted. The crime defined in this article is a special complex
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the crime.
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the “On the occasion” and “by reason” mean that
crime. homicide or serious physical injuries must be
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender committed in the course or because of the robbery.
shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery The violence must be against the person, not upon
any of the Physical Injuries in consequence of the thing taken. It must be present before the taking
which the person injured becomes deformed or loses of personal property is complete.
any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or
becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of the “Homicide” is used in its generic sense, as to include
work in which he is habitually engaged for labor parricide and murder. Hence, there is no robbery with
for more than 90 days or the person injured murder. The crime is still robbery with homicide even

Page 262 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
if, in the course of the robbery, the person killed was
another robber or a bystander.
Even if the rape was committed in another place, it is
still robbery with rape. When the taking of personal
property of a woman is an independent act following
defendant’s failure to consummate the rape, there are
two distinct crimes committed: attempted rape and
theft. Additional rape committed on the same
occasion of robbery will not increase the penalty.
Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of
personal property grave coercion if there is violence
used (Art. 286).
If both violence/intimidation of persons (294) and
force upon things (299/302) co-exist, it will be
considered as violation of Art 294 because it is more
serious than in Art 299/302.
BUT when robbery is under Art 294 par 4 & 5 the
penalty is lower than in Art 299 so the complex crime
should be imputed for the higher penalty to be
imposed without sacrificing the principle that robbery
w/ violence against persons is more severe than that
w/ force upon things. [Napolis v. CA, G.R No. L-
28865 (1972)]
When the taking of the victim’s gun was to prevent
the victim from retaliating, then the crimes committed
are theft and homicide not robbery with homicide.
These offenses are known as SPECIAL COMPLEX
CRIMES. Crimes defined under this article are the
following:
1. Robbery with homicide
2. Robbery with rape
3. Robbery with intentional mutilation
4. Robbery with arson
5. Robbery with serious physical injuries
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE; (Absorption
Theory applied)
Attempted homicide or attempted murder committed
during or on the occasion of the robbery, as in this
case, is absorbed in the crime of Robbery with
Homicide which is a special complex crime that
remains fundamentally the same regardless of the
number of homicides or injuries committed in
connection with the robbery. [People v. Cabbab, Jr.,
G.R. No. 173479 (2007)]
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
If the intention of the accused was to rob, but rape
was committed even before the asportation, the crime
is the special complex crime of Robbery with Rape.
So long as the intent of the accused is to rob, rape may
Page 263 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
be committed before, during or after the robbery. But
if the primary intent of the accused was to rape and
his taking away the belongings of the victim was only
a mere afterthought, two separate felonies are
committed: Rape and Theft or Robbery depending
upon the circumstances surrounding the unlawful
taking. [People v. Naag, G.R. No. 1361394 (2001)]
c. Article 295 - Robbery with
Physical Injuries, in an
Uninhabited Place and by a
Band
Robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons is qualified when it is committed:
1. In an Uninhabited place, or
2. By a Band, or
3. By Attacking a moving train, street car, motor
vehicle, or airship, or
4. By Entering the passengers’ compartments in a
train, or in any manner taking the passengers
thereof by surprise in the respective conveyances,
or
5. On a Street, road, highway, or alley, AND the
intimidation is made with the use of Firearms
Here, the offender shall be punished by the maximum
periods of the proper penalties in Art. 294. The
penalty cannot be offset by a generic mitigating
circumstance.
The intimidation with the use of firearm qualifies only
robbery on a street, road, highway, or alley.
Any of these qualifying circumstances must be alleged
in the information and proved during the trial.
d. Article 296 – Robbery by a Band
Outline of Art. 296 (Definition of a Band and
Penalty Incurred by the Members Thereof):
1. When at least 4 armed malefactors take part in
the commission of a robbery, it is deemed
committed by a band.
2. When any of the arms used in the commission of
robbery is not licensed, penalty upon all the
malefactors shall be the maximum of the
corresponding penalty provided by law, without
prejudice to the criminal liability for illegal
possession of such firearms.
3. Any member of a band who was present at the
commission of a robbery by the band, shall be
punished as principal of any of the assaults
committed by the band, unless it be shown that
he attempted to prevent the crime.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Requisites for Liability for the acts of the other
members:
1. Member of the band.
2. Present at the commission of the robbery.
3. Other members committed an assault.
4. He did not attempt to prevent assault.
Conspiracy is presumed when robbery is by band.
When the robbery was not committed by a band, the
robber who did not take part in the assault by another
is not liable for that assault.
When the robbery was not by a band and homicide
was not determined by the accused when they plotted
the crime, the one who did not participate in the
killing is liable for robbery only. It is only when the
robbery is in band that all those present in the
commission of the robbery may be punished for any
of the assaults which any of its members might
commit.
But when there is conspiracy to commit homicide and
robbery, all the conspirators, even if less than 4 armed
men, are liable for the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide.
Art 296 is not applicable to principal by inducement,
who was not present at the commission of the
robbery, if the agreement was only to commit
robbery.
The article speaks of more than 3 armed malefactors
who “takes part in the commission of the robbery”
and member of a band “who is present at the
commission of a robbery by a band.” Thus, a principal
by inducement, who did not go with the band at the
place of the commission of the robbery, is not liable
for robbery with homicide, but only for robbery in
band, there being no evidence that he gave
instructions to kill the victim or intended that this
should be done.
When there was conspiracy for robbery only but
homicide was also committed on the occasion
thereof, all members of the band are liable for robbery
with homicide.
Whenever homicide is committed as a consequence
of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who took
part in the commission of the robbery are also guilty
as principals in the crime of homicide unless it
appears that they endeavored to prevent the
homicide.
Page 264 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Proof of conspiracy is not essential to hold a member
of the band liable for robbery with homicide actually
committed by the other members of the band.
There is no crime as “robbery with homicide in
band”. Band is only ordinary aggravating
circumstance in robbery w/ homicide
In order for special aggravating circumstance of
unlicensed firearm to be appreciated, it is condition
sine qua non that offense charged be robbery by a
band under Art 295.
Pursuant to Art 295, circumstance of a band is
qualifying only in robbery under par 3, 4 & 5 of Art
294.
Hence, Art. 295 does not apply to robbery with
homicide, or robbery with rape, or robbery with
serious physical injuries under par. 1 of Art. 263.
Special aggravating circumstance of unlicensed
firearm is inapplicable to robbery w/ homicide, or
robbery with rape, or robbery with physical injuries,
committed by a band. [People v. Apduhan, G.R. No. L-
19491 (1968)]
e. Article 297 - Attempted and
Frustrated Robbery with
Homicide
Elements:
1. There is attempted or frustrated robbery
2. A homicide is committed on the same occasion
“Homicide” includes multiple homicides, murder,
parricide, or even infanticide.
The penalty is the same, whether robbery is attempted
or frustrated.
Robbery with homicide and attempted or frustrated
robbery with homicide are special complex crimes,
not governed by Art. 48, but by the special provisions
of Arts. 294 & 297, respectively.
There is only one crime of attempted robbery with
homicide even if slight physical injuries were inflicted
on other persons on the occasion or by reason of the
robbery.
f. Article 298 - Execution of Deeds
through Violence or Intimidation
Elements:
1. Offender has Intent to defraud another
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Offender Compels him to sign, execute, or
deliver any public instrument or document
3. Compulsion is by means of violence or
intimidation.
If the violence resulted in the death of the person to
be defrauded, crime is robbery with homicide and
shall be penalized under Art 294 par. 1.
Art. 298 applies to private or commercial document,
but it does not apply if document is void.
When the offended party is under obligation to sign,
execute or deliver the document under the law, it is
not robbery but coercion.
By Force Upon Things
Robbery by the use of force upon things is committed
only when either:
1. Offender entered a house or building by any of
the means specified in Art. 299 or Art. 302, or
2. Even if there was no entrance by any of those
means, he broke a wardrobe, chest, or any other
kind of locked or closed or sealed furniture or
receptacle in the house or building, or he took it
away to be broken or forced open outside.
g. Article 299 - Robbery in an
Inhabited House or Public
Building or Edifice Devoted to
Worship
Elements of robbery with force upon things
under SUBDIVISION (A):
1. Offender entered
a. An inhabited house
b. Public building
c. Edifice devoted to religious worship
2. Entrance was effected by any of the following
means:
a. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress;
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or door
or window;
c. By using False keys, picklocks or similar
tools; or
d. By using any Fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority.
3. That once inside the building, the offender took
personal property belonging to another with
intent to gain.
There must be evidence that accused entered the
dwelling house or building by any of the means
enumerated in subdivision (a). In entering the
Page 265 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
building, there must be the intent to take personal
property.
“Inhabited house” – any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons even
though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent
when the robbery is committed.
“Public building” – every building owned by the
Government or belonging to a private person but
used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.
Any of the four means described in subdivision (a)
must be resorted to enter a house or building, not to
get out otherwise it is only theft. The whole body of
the culprit must be inside the building to constitute
entering.
Illustration: If the culprit had entered the house
through an open door, and the owner, not knowing
that the culprit was inside, closed and locked the door
from the outside and left, and the culprit, after taking
personal property in the house, went out through the
window, it is only theft, not robbery.
“Breaking” – means entering the building. The force
used must be actual, as distinguished constructive
force.
“False keys” – genuine keys stolen from the owner
or any keys other than those intended for use in the
lock forcibly opened by the offender. The genuine key
must be stolen, not taken by force or with
intimidation, from the owner.
If false key is used to open wardrobe or locked
receptacle or drawer or inside door it is only theft.
Elements of robbery with force upon things
under SUBDIVISION (B) of Art. 299:
1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public
building, or edifice devoted to religious worship,
regardless of the circumstances under which he
entered it.
2. Offender takes personal property belonging to
another, with intent to gain, under any of the
following circumstances:
a. Breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any
other kind of locked or sealed furniture or
receptacle; or
b. Taking such furniture or objects away to be
broken or forced open outside the place of
the robbery.
Entrance into the building by any of the means
mentioned in subdivision (a) is not required in
robbery under subdivision (b)
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

• Even if the occupant was absent during the

The term “door” in par. 1, subdivision (b) of Art. 299,
refers only to “doors, lids or opening sheets” of
furniture or other portable receptacles—not to inside
doors of house or building.
Breaking the keyhole of the door of a wardrobe,
which is locked, is breaking a locked furniture.
It is theft if the locked or sealed receptacle is not
forced open in the building where it is kept or taken
from to be broken outside.
The penalty depends on the value of property taken
and on whether or not offender carries arm. Arms
carried must not be used to intimidate. Liability for
carrying arms is extended to all those who participated
in the robbery, including those without arms.
The provision punishes more severely the robbery in
a house used as a dwelling than that committed in an
uninhabited place, because of the possibility that the
inhabitants in the former might suffer bodily harm
during the robbery.
robbery, the place is still inhabited if the
place was ordinarily inhabited and intended
as a dwelling.
“Public building” – every building owned by the
Government or belonging to a private person but
used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.
“Dependencies” – all interior courts, corrals,
warehouses, granaries or inclosed places contiguous
to the building or edifice, having an interior entrance
connected therewith, and which form part of the
whole (Art. 301, par. 2).
Requisites:
1. Contiguous to the building;
2. Interior entrance connected therewith;
3. Form part of the whole.
Orchards and lands used for cultivation or production
are not included in the term “dependencies” (Art. 301,
par. 3).

h. Article 300 – Robbery in an j. Article 302 – Robbery In an

Uninhabited Place and by a Uninhabited Place or Private
Band Building
Robbery in an inhabited house, public building or Elements:
edifice dedicated to religious worship is qualified 1. Offender entered an uninhabited place or a
when committed by a band and located in an building which was not a dwelling house, not a
uninhabited place. public building, or not an edifice devoted to
religious worship.
See discussion on Art. 296 for definition of “band.” 2. That any of the following circumstances was
present:
To qualify Robbery a. Entrance was effected through an opening
To qualify Robbery
w/ violence against not intended for entrance or egress;
w/ force upon things
or intimidation of b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window
(Art 299)
persons was broken
It must be committed in It must be committed in c. Entrance was effected through the use of
uninhabited place and an uninhabited place or false keys, picklocks or other similar tools;
by a band (Art 300) by a band (Art. 295) d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or
closed furniture or receptacle was broken; or
i. Article 301 - What is an inhabited e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed,
even if the same be broken open elsewhere.
House, Public Building f. With intent to gain, the offender took
Dedicated to Religious Worship therefrom personal property belonging to
and Their Dependencies another.

“Inhabited house” – any shelter, ship, or vessel “Building” – includes any kind of structure used for
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons even storage or safekeeping of personal property, such as
though the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent (a) freight car and (b) warehouse.
when the robbery is committed.

Page 266 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Entrance through an opening not intended for 2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner;
entrance or egress is not necessary, if there is breaking 3. Any key other than those intended by the owner
of wardrobe, chest, or sealed or closed furniture or for use in the lock forcibly opened by the
receptacle, or removal thereof to be broken open offender.
elsewhere.
2. Chapter II: Brigandage
Breaking padlock is use of force upon things.

Use of fictitious name or pretending the exercise of a. Article 306 - Who Are Brigands
public authority is not covered under this article.
Elements of Brigandage:
A receptacle is a container, which must be “closed” 1. There be at least 4 armed persons
or “sealed”. 2. They formed a band of robbers
3. The purpose is any of the following:
Penalty is based only on value of property taken. a. To commit robbery in the highway; or
b. To kidnap for the purpose of extortion or to
k. Article 303 - Robbery of Cereals, obtain ransom; or
c. To attain by means of force and violence any
Fruits or Firewood in an other purpose.
Uninhabited Place or Private
Building Presumption of law as to brigandage: All are
presumed highway robbers or brigands, if any of them
carries unlicensed firearm. The arms carried may be
In cases enumerated in Arts. 299 and 302, the penalty
any deadly weapon.
is one degree lower when robbery consists in the
taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood.
The main object of the law is to prevent the formation
of band of robbers.
Cereals – seedlings which are the immediate product
of the soil. The palay must be kept by the owner as
The term “highway” includes city streets.
“seedling” or taken for that purpose by the robbers.
The following must be proved:
l. Article 304 - Possession of 1. Organization of more than 3 armed persons
Picklock or Similar Tools forming a band of robbers
2. Purpose of the band is any of those enumerated in
Elements: Art. 306.
1. Offender has in his possession picklocks or 3. That they went upon the highway or roamed
similar tools; upon the country for that purpose.
2. Such picklock or similar tools are especially 4. That the accused is a member of such band.
adopted to the commission of robbery;
3. Offender does not have lawful cause for such Robbery in
Brigandage
possession. Band
Purpose 1. Commit
Possession of such tools, without lawful cause, is robbery in a
punished. Actual use is not necessary. Since picking highway
of locks is one way to gain entrance to commit 2. Kidnap to
robbery, a picklock is per se specially adapted to the extort or get Commit
commission of robbery. [People v Lopez, G.R. No. L- ransom robbery, and
18766 (1965)] 3. Any other not necessarily
purpose to be in a highway
If the person who makes such tools is a locksmith, the achieved by
penalty is higher. means of
force or
m. Article 305 - False Keys violence
Proof Mere formation of a It is necessary
Deemed to include the following: band for any of the to prove that
1. Tools mentioned in Article 304; above purposes is the band

Page 267 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
sufficient. There is no actually
requirement that the committed the
brigands consummate robbery.
the crime. Conspiracy to
commit
robbery is not
punishable.
b. Article 307 - Aiding and Abetting
a Band of Brigands
Elements:
1. There is a band of brigands
2. Offender knows the band to be of brigands
3. Offender does any of the following acts:
a. He in any manner aids, abets or protects such
band of brigands; or
b. He gives them information of the
movements of the police or other peace
officers; or
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by
such brigands.
It is presumed that the person performing any of the
acts provided in this article has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.
Any person who aids or protects highway robbers or
abets the commission of highway robbery or
brigandage shall be considered as an accomplice.
3. Chapter III: Theft
a. Article 308 - Who Are Liable for
Theft
Elements:
1. Taking of personal property
2. Personal property belongs to another
3. Taking was done with intent to gain.
4. Taking was without the consent of the owner.
5. Accomplished without the use of violence against
or intimidation of persons or force upon things.
Persons liable:
1. Those who, with intent to gain, without violence
against or intimidation of persons nor force upon
things, take personal property, of another
without the latter’s consent.
2. Those who, having found lost property, fail to
deliver the same to the local authorities or to its
owner.
3. Those who, after having maliciously damaged the
property of another, remove or make use of the
fruits or object of the damage caused by them.
Page 268 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
4. Those who enter an inclosed estate or field where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
and, without the consent of its owner, hunt or
fish upon the same or gather fruits, cereals, or
other forest or farm products.
The theft is consummated & taking completed once
the culprit is able to place the thing taken under his
control, and in such a situation that he could dispose
of it at once.
In accordance with the definition in Art 308, there is
no frustrated theft. The offender has either complete
control of the property (consummated) or without
(attempted). Intent to gain is presumed from the
unlawful taking of personal property belonging to
another. [Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188 (2007)]
If a person takes property of another, believing it to
be his own, presumption of intent to gain is rebutted.
Hence, he is not guilty of theft.
If one takes personal property openly and avowedly
under claim of title made in good faith, he is not guilty
of theft even though claim of ownership is later found
to be untenable.
If possession was only material or physical, the crime
is THEFT. If possession was juridical, crime is
ESTAFA.
Selling share of a partner or co-owner is not theft.
Actual or real gain is not necessary in theft.
The consent contemplated in this article refers to
consent freely given, and not mere lack of opposition
by owner of the property taken.
It is not robbery when violence is for a reason entirely
foreign to the fact of taking.
Gulinao shot Dr. Chua and left. Then he went back
& took Dr. Chua’s diamond ring. The crime was
Theft and not robbery. Circumstances show that the
taking was merely an afterthought. Violence used in killing
Dr. Chua had no bearing on the taking of the ring.
[People v. Gulinao, G.R. Nos. 82264-66 (1989)]
Properties were taken after accused has already
carried out his primary criminal intent of killing the
victim. Considering that the victim was already heavily
wounded when his properties were taken, there was
no need to employ violence against or intimidation
upon his person. Hence, accused can only be held
guilty of the separate offense of theft. [People v. Basao,
G.R. No. 128286 (1999)]
U.P. LAW BOC
One in possession of part of recently stolen property
is presumed to be thief of all.
“Lost property” – embraces loss by stealing or by act
of the owner or by a person other than the owner, or
through some casual occurrence.
It is necessary to prove the following in order to
establish theft by failure to deliver or return lost
property:
1. Time of the seizure of the thing
2. It was a lost property belonging to another; and
3. That the accused having had the opportunity to
return or deliver the lost property to its owner or
to the local authorities, refrained from doing so.
The law does not require knowledge of the owner of
the property.
Elements of hunting, fishing or gathering fruits,
etc., in enclosed estate:
1. That there is an enclosed estate or a field, where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
2. Offender enters the same
3. Offender hunts or fishes upon the same or
gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
products in the estate or field; and
4. That the hunting or fishing or gathering of
products is without the consent of the owner.
Corpus Delicti
To be caught in possession of the stolen property is
not an element of the corpus delicti in theft. Corpus delicti
means the “body or substance of the crime, and, in its
primary sense, refers to the fact that the crime has
been actually committed.”
In theft, corpus delicti has two elements, namely:
1. that the property was lost by the owner, and
2. that it was lost by felonious taking. [Gan v. People,
G.R. No. 165884 (2007)]
Whether snatching is robbery or theft
It depends on whether the offender employed
violence or intimidation upon persons, or force upon
things.
Acampado (the victim) herself merely testified that
Concepcion (the accused) snatched her shoulder bag
which was hanging on her left shoulder. Acampado
did not say that Concepcion used violence,
intimidation or force in snatching her shoulder bag.
Given the facts, Concepcion’s snatching of
Acampado’s shoulder bag constitutes the crime of
theft, not robbery. [People v. Concepcion, G.R. No.
200922 (2012)]
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
b. Article 309 – Penalties
The basis of the penalty in theft is
1. the value of the thing stolen, or
2. the value and nature of the property taken, or
3. the circumstances that impelled the culprit to
commit the crime.
If there is no evidence of the value of the property
stolen, the court should impose the minimum penalty
corresponding to theft involving the value of P5.00.
The court may also take judicial notice of its value in
the proper cases.
c. Article 310 - Qualified Theft
Theft is qualified if:
1. Committed by a domestic servant
2. Committed with grave abuse of confidence
3. The property stolen is
a. motor vehicle
b. mail matter, or
c. large cattle
4. The property stolen consists of coconuts taken
from the premises of a plantation
5. The property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond
or fishery
6. The property is taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil
disturbance.
The penalty for qualified theft is 2 degrees higher.
Theft by domestic servant is always qualified. There is
no need to prove grave abuse of confidence.
The abuse of confidence must be grave. There must
be allegation in the information and proof of a
relation, by reason of dependence, guardianship or
vigilance, between the accused and the offended party
that has created a high degree of confidence between
them, which the accused abused.
Theft of any material, spare part, product or article by
employees and laborers is heavily punished under PD
133.
“Motor vehicle” - all vehicles propelled by power,
other than muscular power. Theft of motor vehicle
may now fall under the Anti-Carnapping law.
When the purpose of taking the car is to destroy it by
burning it, the crime is arson.
Page 269 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
If a private individual took a letter containing postal
money order, it is qualified theft. If it was the
postmaster, to whom the letter was delivered, the
crime would be infidelity in the custody of
documents.
Regarding the theft of coconuts and fish, what
matters is not the execution, but the location where it
is taken. It should be in the plantation or in the
fishpond.
PD 1612: Anti-Fencing Law
Fencing – The act of any person who, with intent to
gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive,
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.
Elements:
1. Robbery or theft has been committed.
2. The accused, who is not a principal or accomplice
in the crime of robbery or theft, buys, receives,
possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or
disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner deals
in any article, item, object, or anything of value,
which has been derived from the proceeds of the
said crime.
3. The accused knows or should have known that
the said article, item, object or anything of value
has been derived from the proceeds of the crime
of robbery or theft.
4. There is, on the part of the accused, intent to gain
for himself or another.
Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or
anything of value which has been the subject of
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing. [People v. Dizon-Pamintuan, G.R. No. 111426
(1994)]
Robbery/theft and fencing are separate and distinct
offenses.
"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 good, article, item, object, or
anything of value which has been the subject of
robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing.
Exception: With Clearance or Permit to Sell
Page 270 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Section 6. Clearance/Permit to Sell/Used
Second Hand Articles. For purposes of this Act,
all stores, establishments or entities dealing in the
buy and sell of any good, article, item, object or
anything of value obtained from an unlicensed
dealer or supplier thereof, shall before offering the
same for sale to the public, secure the necessary
clearance or permit from the station commander
of the Integrated National Police in the town or
city where such store, establishment or entity is
located. The Chief of Constabulary/Director
General, Integrated National Police shall
promulgate such rules and regulations to carry out
the provisions of this section. Any person who
fails to secure the clearance or permit required by
this section or who violates any of the provisions
of the rules and regulations promulgated
thereunder shall upon conviction be punished as a
fence.
RA 10883: NEW ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT OF
2016
Clearance and Permit
Section 12. Clearance and Permit Required for
Assembly or Rebuilding of Motor Vehicles. –
Any person who shall undertake to assemble or
rebuild or cause the assembly or rebuilding of a
motor vehicle shall first secure a certificate of
clearance from the PNP: Provided, That no such
permit shall be issued unless the applicant shall
present a statement under oath containing the
type, make and serial numbers of the engine,
chassis and body, if any, and the complete list of
the spare parts of the motor vehicle to be
assembled or rebuilt together with the names and
addresses of the sources thereof.
In the case of motor vehicle engines to be
mounted on motor boats, motor bancas, water
crafts and other light water vessels, the applicant
shall secure a permit from the PNP, which office
shall in turn furnish the LTO pertinent data
concerning the motor vehicle engines including
their type, make and serial numbers.
Section 13. Clearance Required for Shipment
of Motor Vehicles, Motor Vehicle Engines,
Engine Blocks, Chassis or Body. The
Philippine Ports Authority (PPA) shall submit a
report to the PNP within seven (7) days upon
boarding all motor vehicles being boarded the
“RORO”, ferry, boat, vessel or ship for interisland
and international shipment. The PPA shall not
allow the loading of motor vehicles in all
interisland and international shipping vessels
without a motor vehicle clearance from the PNP,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
except cargo trucks and other trucks carrying
goods. Land Transportation Franchising and
Regulatory Board (LTFRB)-accredited public
utility vehicles (PUV) and other motor vehicles
carrying foodstuff and dry goods.
Definition of terms/Punishable Acts
Carnapping – is the is the taking, with intent to gain,
of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the
latter’s consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon
things.
1. Any person who is found guilty of carnapping
shall, regardless of the value of the motor vehicle
taken, be punished by imprisonment for not less
than twenty (20) years and one (1) day but not
more than thirty (30) years, when the carnapping
is committed without violence against or
intimidation of persons, or force upon things;
and by imprisonment for not less than thirty (30)
years and one (1) day but not more than forty (40)
years, when the carnapping is committed by
means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or force upon things; and the penalty of
life imprisonment shall be imposed when the
owner, driver, or occupant of the carnapped
motor vehicle is killed or raped in the
commission of the carnapping.
2. Any person charged with carnapping or when the
crime of carnapping is committed by criminal
groups, gangs or syndicates or by means of
violence or intimidation of any person or persons
or forced upon things; or when the owner, driver,
passenger or occupant of the carnapped vehicle
is killed or raped in the course of the carnapping
shall be denied bail when the evidence of guilt is
strong. [Sec. 3 RA 10883]
Motor vehicle –is any vehicle propelled by any power
other than muscular power using the public highways,
except road rollers, trolley cars, street sweepers,
sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers, graders, forklifts,
amphibian trucks, and cranes if not used on public
highways; vehicles which run only on rails or tracks;
and tractors, trailers and traction engines of all kinds
used exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers
having any number of wheels, when propelled or
intended to be propelled by attachment to a motor
vehicle, shall be classified as a separate motor vehicle
with no power rating; [Sec. 2 (e) RA 10883]
Defacing or tampering with a serial number – is the
altering, changing, erasing, replacing or scratching of
the original factory inscribed serial number on the
Page 271 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of any
motor vehicle.
Whenever any motor vehicle is found to have a serial
number on its engine, engine block or chassis which
is different from that which is listed in the records of
the Bureau of Customs for motor vehicle imported
into the Philippines, that motor vehicle shall be
considered to have a defaced or tampered serial
number. [Sec 2(b) RA 10883]
Section 4. Concealment of Carnapping. – Any
person who conceals carnapping shall be punished
with imprisonment of six (6) years up to twelve
(12) years and a fine equal to the amount of the
acquisition cost of the motor vehicle, motor
vehicle engine, or any other part involved in the
violation: Provided, That if the person violating
any provision of this Act is a juridical person, the
penalty herein provided shall be imposed on its
president, secretary, and/or members of the board
of directors or any of its officers and employees
who may have directly participated in the violation.
Any public official or employee who directly
commits the unlawful acts defined in this Act or is
guilty of gross negligence of duty or connives with
or permits the commission of any of the said
unlawful acts shall, in addition to the penalty
prescribed in the preceding paragraph, be
dismissed from the service, and his/her benefits
forfeited and shall be permanently disqualified
from holding public office.
d. Article 311 - Theft of the Property
of the National Library and
National Museum
Theft of property of the National Museum and
National Library has a fixed penalty (arresto mayor of
fine of P200-500 or both) regardless of the property's
value. But if it was with grave abuse of confidence,
the penalty for qualified theft shall be imposed.
4. Chapter IV: Usurpation
a. Article 312 - Occupation of Real
Property or Usurpation of Real
Rights in Property
Acts punishable under Art. 312:
1. Taking possession of any real property belonging
to another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

2. Usurping any real rights in property belonging to 5. Chapter V: Culpable

another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons. Insolvency
Elements: a. Art. 314 - Fraudulent Insolvency
1. Offender takes possession of any real property
OR usurps any real rights in property Elements:
2. Real property or real rights belong to another 1. The offender is a debtor, and he has obligations
3. Violence against or intimidation of persons is due and payable
used by the offender in occupying real property 2. He absconds with his property
or usurping real rights in property. 3. There is prejudice to his creditors
4. There is intent to gain.
Actual prejudice, not intention alone, is required.
If no violence or intimidation only civil liability exists. Even if the debtor disposes of his property, unless it
Violence or intimidation must be the means used in is shown that it has actually prejudiced his creditor,
occupying real property or in usurping real rights. conviction will not lie.
Art. 312 does not apply when the violence or Fraudulent concealment of property is not sufficient
intimidation took place subsequent to the entry into if the debtor has some property with which to satisfy
the property. his obligation.
Art. 312 does not apply to a case of open defiance of “Abscond” – does not require that the debtor should
the writ of execution issued in the forcible entry case. depart and physically conceal his property. Real
property could be the subject matter of Art. 314.
Criminal action for usurpation of real property is not
a bar to civil action for forcible entry. The person prejudiced must be creditor of the
offender.
RA 947 punishes entering or occupying public Art. 314 Insolvency Law
agricultural land including lands granted to private
No need for insolvency Crime should be
individuals.
proceedings. committed after the
institution of
Theft or No need to be adjudged insolvency proceedings
Usurpation
Robbery bankrupt or insolvent
Act Occupation or Taking or
Usurpation asportation
What is Real property or Personal 6. Chapter VI: Swindling and
Taken real right property Other Deceits
Intent To gain To gain
a. Article 315 - Estafa
b. Article 313 - Altering Boundaries
or Landmarks Elements of Estafa in General:
1. The accused defrauded another
Elements: a. by abuse of confidence; or
1. There are boundary marks or monuments of b. by means of deceit; and
towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks 2. The damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
intended to designate the boundaries of the same. estimation is caused to the offended party or
2. The offender alters said boundary marks. third person.

Provision does not require intent to gain. WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF

CONFIDENCE (315 PAR. 1(A) (B) (C))
The word “alter” may include:
1. destruction of stone monument Par 1(a): Altering substance, quantity or quality
2. taking it to another place of object subject of obligation to deliver
3. removing a fence

Page 272 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC
Elements of estafa with unfaithfulness
1. Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver
something of value.
2. He alters its substance, quantity, or quality
3. Damage or prejudice is caused to another
Deceit is NOT an essential element of estafa with
abuse of confidence.
Damage or prejudice must be capable of estimation,
because it is the basis of the penalty.
Delivery of anything of value must be “by virtue of an
onerous obligation to do so”.
It is not estafa if the thing delivered is not acceptable
to the complainant when there is no agreement as to
its quality.
Estafa may arise even if thing delivered is not subject
of lawful commerce, such as opium.
Par.1(b): Misappropriation and Conversion
Elements of estafa with abuse of confidence
1. Money, goods, or other personal property is
received by the offender in trust, or in
commission, or for administration, or under any
other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of, or to return, the same;
2. There is misappropriation or conversion of such
money or property by the offender, or denial on
his part of such receipt;
3. Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is
to the prejudice of another; and
4. There is a demand made by the offended party to
the offender
The 4th element is not necessary when there is
evidence of misappropriation of goods by the
defendant.
Check is included in the word “money”.
Money, goods or other personal property must be
received by the offender under certain kinds of
transaction transferring juridical possession to him.
The offender acquires both physical possession and
juridical possession when the thing is received by the
offender from the offended party
1. in trust, or
2. on commission, or
3. for administration,
CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW
“Juridical possession” – means a possession which
gives the transferee a right over the thing which he
may invoke even as against the owner.
When the delivery of a chattel does not transfer
juridical possession/title, it is presumed that the
possession/title of the thing remain w/ owner.
Failure to turn over to the bank the proceeds of sale
of goods covered by trust receipts is estafa.
The phrase “or under any obligation involving the
duty to make delivery of, or to return the same”,
includes quasi-contracts and certain contracts of
bailment. The obligation to return the thing must be
contractual but without transferring to accused
ownership of the thing.
When ownership is transferred to recipient, his failure
to return it results in civil liability only.
Distinction between material or physical possession
and juridical possession. (Paramount Insurance Corp.
v. Sps. Remonduelaz, 686 SCRA 567)
Applicable Civil Code provisions:
1. Art. 1477. The ownership of the thing sold shall
be transferred to the vendee upon actual or
constructive delivery thereof.
2. Art. 1482. Whenever earnest money is given in a
contract of sale, it shall be considered as part of
the price and as proof of the perfection of the
contract.
In estafa with abuse of confidence under par. (b),
subdivision 1 of Art. 315, the thing received must be
returned if there is an obligation to return it.
If no obligation to return there is only civil liability.
No estafa when:
1. Transaction sale fails. There is no estafa if the
accused refused to return the advance payment.
2. The money or personal property received by
accused is not to be used for a particular purpose
or to be returned.
3. Thing received under a contract of sale on credit
Payment by students to the school for the value of
materials broken is not mere deposit.
Novation of contract of agency to one of sale, or to
one of loan, relieves defendant from incipient
criminal liability under the first contract.
He exerted all efforts to retrieve dump truck, albeit
belatedly and to no avail. His ineptitude should not be
Page 273 of 309
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
confused with criminal intent. Criminal intent is
required for the conviction of estafa. Earnest effort to
comply with obligation is a defense against estafa.
[Manahan, Jr. v. CA, G.R. No. 111656 (1996)]
3 Ways of Committing Estafa With Abuse Of
Confidence Under Art. 315 Par. (B):
1. Misappropriating the thing received.
2. Converting the thing received.
3. Denying that the thing was received.
“Misappropriating” – means to own, to take
something for one's own benefit.
“Converting” – Using or disposing of another’s
property as if it were one’s own.
“Conversion” – presupposes that the thing has been
devoted to a purpose or use different from that agreed
upon.
The fact that an agent sold the thing received on
commission for a lower price than the one fixed, does
not constitute estafa [US v. Torres, 11 Phil. Rep. 606].
The law does not distinguish between temporary and
permanent misappropriations.
No estafa under Art. 315 par (b) when there is neither
misappropriation nor conversion.
Right of agent to deduct commission from
amounts
1. If agent is authorized to retain his commission
out of the amounts he collected, there is no
estafa.
2. Otherwise he is guilty of estafa, because his right
to commission does not make the agent a co-
owner of money
3rd element of estafa with abuse of confidence is that
the conversion, or denial by offender resulted in the
prejudice of the offended party.
“To the prejudice of another” – not necessarily of the
owner of the property.
General rule: Partners are not liable for estafa of money
or property received for the partnership when the
business commenced and profits accrued. Failure of
partner to account for partnership funds may give rise
to civil obligation only, not estafa.
Exception: When a partner misappropriates the share
of another partner in the profits, the act constitutes
estafa.
Page 274 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
A co-owner is not liable for estafa, but he is liable if,
after the termination of the co-ownership, he
misappropriates the thing which has become the
exclusive property of the other.
Estafa with abuse of
Theft
confidence
With juridical Only with physical /
possession of thing material possession of
misappropriated thing misappropriated
Offender receives the Offender takes the
thing from the victim thing
But when the money or property had been received
by a partner for specific purpose and he
misappropriated it, there is estafa.
Under the 4th element of estafa with abuse of
confidence demand may be required.
In estafa by means of deceit, demand is not needed,
because the offender obtains the thing wrongfully
from the start. In estafa with abuse of confidence, the
offender receives the thing under a lawful transaction.
Demand is not required by law, but it may be
necessary, because failure to account upon demand is
circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.
Presumption arises only when the explanation of the
accused is absolutely devoid of merit.
The mere failure to return the thing received for
safekeeping or under any other obligation w/ the duty
to return the same or deliver the value thereof to the
owner could only give rise to a civil action and does
not constitute the crime of estafa.
There is no estafa through negligence.
The gravity of the crime of estafa is based on the
amount not returned before the institution of the
criminal action.
Test to distinguish theft from estafa:
In theft, upon the delivery of the thing to the
offender, the owner expects a return of the thing to
him.
General rule: When the owner does not expect the
immediate return of the thing he delivered to the
accused, the misappropriation of the same is estafa.
Exception: When the offender received the thing from
the offended party, with the obligation to deliver it to
a third person and, instead of doing so,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

misappropriated it to the prejudice of the owner, the

crime committed is qualified theft. Offender must induce the offended party to sign the
document. If offended party is willing from the start
Sale of thing received to be pledged for owner is theft, to sign the document, because the contents are
when the intent to appropriate existed at the time it different from those which the offended told the
was received. accused to state in the document, the crime is
falsification.
Estafa with abuse of
Malversation
confidence There can be no conviction for estafa in the absence
Entrusted with funds or of proof that defendant made statements tending to
property mislead complainant.
Both are continuing offenses
Funds or property are Par.3 (b): By resorting to some fraudulent
always private practice to ensure success in a gambling game
Offender is a private Offender is a public
individual or public officer accountable for Par.3 (c): By removing, concealing or destroying
officer not accountable public funds or any court record, office files, document or any
for public funds or property other papers
property
Committed by Committed by Elements:
misappropriating, misappropriating, or 1. There are court record, office files, documents or
converting or denying thru abandonment or any other papers.
having received money, negligence, letting other 2. The offender removed, concealed or destroyed
other personal property person to take the any of them.
public funds or 3. The offender had Intent to defraud another.
property
There is no estafa There can be If there is no malicious intent to defraud, the
through negligence. malversation through destruction of court record is malicious mischief.
abandonment or
negligence. Elements of deceit and abuse of confidence may co-
exist.
When in prosecution for malversation the public
officer is acquitted, the private individual in If there is neither deceit nor abuse of confidence, it is
conspiracy w/ him may be held liable for estafa, not estafa, even if there is damage. There is only civil
depending on the nature of the funds. liability.

Misappropriation of firearms received by a police Deceit through Infidelity in Custody

1. ESTAFA: if it is not involved in the commission Fraudulent Means of Documents
of a crime Offender is a private
Offender is a public
2. MALVERSATION: if it is involved in the person OR a public
person entrusted with
commission of a crime. person not entrusted
the documents
w/ documents
ESTAFA THROUGH OTHER There is intent to Intent to defraud is not
FRAUDULENT MEANS (315 PAR 3 (A) (B) defraud required
(C))
The element of damage or prejudice capable of
Par 3 (a): By inducing another, through deceit, to pecuniary estimation may consist in:
sign any document 1. The offended party being deprived of his money
or property, as result of the fraud;
Elements: 2. Disturbance in property right; or
1. Offender induced the offended party to sign a 3. Temporary prejudice
document.
2. Deceit was employed to make offended party Payment subsequent to the commission of estafa does
sign the document. not extinguish criminal liability or reduce the penalty.
3. Offended party personally signed the document.
4. Prejudice was caused.

Page 275 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The crime of estafa is not obliterated by acceptance
of promissory note.
A private person who procures a loan by means of
deceit through a falsified public document of
mortgage, but paid loan within the period agreed
upon, is not guilty of estafa but only falsification of a
public document.
Accused cannot be convicted of estafa with abuse of
confidence if charged w/ estafa by means of deceit
P.D. 115 TRUST RECEIPTS LAW
Trust receipt
A trust receipt transaction is one where the entrustee
has the obligation to deliver to the entrustor the price
of the sale, or if the merchandise is not sold, to return
the merchandise to the entruster. There are, therefore,
two obligations in a trust receipt transaction: the first
refers to money received under the obligation
involving the duty to turn it over (entregarla) to the
owner of the merchandise sold, while the second
refers to the merchandise received under the
obligation to “return” it (devolvera) to the owner. A
violation of any of these undertakings constitutes
Estafa defined under Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the RPC,
as provided in Sec. 13 of PD 115. [Yang v. People, G.R.
No. 195117 (2013)]
Loan not a trust receipt transaction
Nonetheless, when both parties enter into an
agreement knowing fully well that the return of the
goods subject of the trust receipt is not possible even
without any fault on the part of the trustee, it is not a
trust receipt transaction as the only obligation actually
agreed upon by the parties would be the return of the
proceeds of the sale transaction. This transaction
becomes a mere loan. [Yang v. People, supra.]
Who is liable
If the violation or offense is committed by a
corporation, partnership, association or other juridical
entities, the penalty provided for in this Decree shall
be imposed upon the directors, officers, employees or
other officials or persons therein responsible for the
offense, without prejudice to the civil liabilities arising
from the criminal offense.[Sec 13 PD 115]
Par.1(c): Taking advantage of signature in blank
Elements:
1. Paper with the signature of the offended party is
in blank.
2. Offended party delivered it to the offender.
Page 276 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Above the signature of the offended party a
document is written by the offender without
authority to do so.
4. The document so written creates a liability of, or
causes damage to, the offended party or any third
person.
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSES
OR FRAUDULENT ACTS (315 PAR. 2(A) (B)
(C) (D) (E); BP22):
Elements of estafa by means of deceit:
1. There is a false pretense, fraudulent act or
fraudulent means.
2. Such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent
means was made or executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud.
3. Offended party relied on the false pretense,
fraudulent act, or fraudulent means, that is, he
was induced to part with his money or property
because of such
4. As a result thereof, the offended party suffered
damage.
The acts must be fraudulent. Acts must be founded
on deceit, trick, or cheat, and such must be made prior
to or simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud.
In false pretenses the deceit consists in the use of
deceitful words, in fraudulent acts the deceit consists
principally in deceitful acts. The fraudulent acts must
be performed prior to or simultaneously with the
commission of the fraud.
The offender must be able to obtain something from
the offended party because of the fraudulent acts.
Knowledge of criminal intent of the principal is
essential to be convicted as an accomplice in estafa
through falsification of commercial document. There
must be knowing assistance in the execution of the
offense. [Abejuela v. People, G.R. No. 80130 (1991)]
In a tenant-landowner relationship, it was incumbent
upon the tenant to hold in trust and, eventually,
account for the share in the harvest appertaining to
the landowner, failing which the tenant could be held
liable for misappropriation.
In People v. Vanzuela [G.R. No. 178266 (2008)], it was
ruled that share tenancy has been outlawed for being
contrary to public policy as early as 1963, with the
passage of R.A. 3844. What prevails today, under R.A.
6657, is agricultural leasehold tenancy relationship,
and all instances of share tenancy have been
automatically converted into leasehold tenancy. In
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
such a relationship, the tenant’s obligation is simply
to pay rentals, not to deliver the landowner’s
share. Given this dispensation, the petitioner’s
allegation that the respondents misappropriated the
landowner’s share of the harvest is
untenable. Accordingly, the respondents cannot be
held liable under Article 315, paragraph 4, No. 1(b) of
the RPC.
It is well established in jurisprudence that a person
may be convicted of both illegal recruitment and
estafa. The reason, therefore, is not hard to
discern: illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum, while
estafa is malum in se. [Lapasaran v. People, G.R. No.
179907 (2009)]
Par 2(a): Using fictitious name or false pretenses
at power, influence… or other similar deceits
Ways of committing the offense:
1. By using fictitious name;
2. By falsely pretending to possess:
a. power,
b. influence,
c. qualifications,
d. property,
e. credit,
f. agency,
g. business or imaginary transactions;
3. By means of other similar deceits.
For estafa under Art. 315 par. 2(a), it is indispensable
that the false statement or fraudulent representation
of the accused,
1. be made prior to, or, at least simultaneously with,
2. the delivery of the thing by the complainant.
It is essential that such false statement or fraudulent
representation constitutes the cause or only motive
which induced the complainant to part with the thing.
If there be no such prior or simultaneous false
statement or fraudulent representation, any
subsequent act of the accused, however fraudulent
and suspicious it may appear, cannot serve as a basis
for prosecution for this class of estafa.
A creditor who deceived his debtor is liable for estafa.
In estafa by means of deceit under Art. 315 2(a), there
must be evidence that the pretense of the accused is
false. Without such proof, criminal intent to deceive
cannot be inferred. Fraud must be proved with clear
and positive evidence.
Estafa through false pretenses made in writing is only
a simple crime of estafa, not a complex crime of estafa
through falsification.
Page 277 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Par 2(b): by altering the quality, fineness or
weight of anything pertaining to art or business
Par. 2(c): by pretending to have bribed any
government employee
Manipulation of scale is punished under the Revised
Administrative Code.
Person would ask money from another for the alleged
purpose of bribing a government employee but just
pocketed the money.
Par 2(d): By postdating a check or issuing a
bouncing check
Elements:
1. Offender postdated a check, or issued a check in
payment of an obligation;
2. Such postdating or issuing a check was done
when the offender had no funds in the bank, or
his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to
cover the amount of the check.
The check must be genuine, and not falsified.
The check must be postdated or for an obligation
contracted at the time of the issuance and delivery of
the check and not for pre-existing obligation.
Exception:
1. When postdated checks are issued and intended
by the parties only as promissory notes
2. When the check is issued by a guarantor
The accused must be able to obtain something from
the offended party by means of the check he issues
and delivers.
The mere fact that the drawer had insufficient or no
funds in the bank to cover the check at the time he
postdated or issued a check is sufficient to make him
liable for estafa.
RA 4885 deleted the phrase “the offender knowing at
the time he had no funds in the bank”:
1. The failure of the drawer to deposit the amount
needed to cover his check
2. Within 3 days from receipt of notice of dishonor
of check for lack or insufficiency of funds
3. Shall be prima facie evidence of deceit
constituting false pretense or fraudulent act.
Good faith is a defense in a charge of estafa by
postdating or issuing a check. One who got hold of a
check issued by another, knowing that the drawer had
no sufficient funds in the bank, and used the same in
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

the purchase of goods, is guilty of estafa. [People v. Distinguished from Estafa under Art. 315 2(d)
Isleta, G.R. No. L-41873 (1935)] B.P. Blg. 22 Art. 315, par. 2 (d)
Deceit and damage are Deceit and damage are
PD 818, which increases the penalty for estafa not essential elements required
committed by means of bouncing checks, applies only Mere issuance of a
to estafa under par 2(d) of Art. 315, and does not check that is
apply to other forms of estafa. [People v Villaraza, G.R. dishonored gives rise to
No. L-426228 (1978)] Hence, the penalty prescribed the presumption of
in PD 818, not the penalty provided for in Art. 315, knowledge on the part No such presumption
should be imposed when the estafa committed is of the drawer that he
covered by par 2(d) of Art. 315. issued the same without
sufficient funds and
Estafa by issuing a bad check is a continuing crime. hence punishable
Drawer of a dishonored
B.P. BLG. 22 BOUNCING CHECKS LAW check may be convicted
Such circumstance
even if he had issued the
Sec. 1, Par. 1 negate criminal liability
same for a pre-existing
Elements obligation
1. Making, drawing, and issuance of any check to Crime against public
apply for account or for value interest as it does injury
2. Knowledge of the maker, drawer, or issuer that Crime against property
to the entire banking
at the time of issue he does not have sufficient system
funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the Mala in se [Nierras v.
payment of the check in full upon its Mala prohibita Dacuycuy, G.R. Nos. L-
presentment; and 59568-76(1990)]
3. Subsequent dishonor of the check by the drawee
bank for insufficiency of funds or creditor Preference of imposition of fine
dishonor for the same reason had not the drawer, The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of sound
without any valid cause, ordered the bank to stop discretion, and taking into consideration the peculiar
payment. [Campos v. People, G.R. No. circumstances of each case, determine whether the
187401(2014)] imposition of a fine alone would best serve the
interests of justice or whether forbearing to impose
Sec. 1, Par. 2 imprisonment would depreciate the seriousness of the
Elements offense, work violence on the social order, or
1. Making or drawing and issuing a check having otherwise be contrary to the imperatives of justice.
sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank [A.C. NO. 13-2001 clarifying A.C. NO. 12-2000]
2. Failure to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a
credit to cover the full amount of the check if Notice of dishonor
presented within a period of ninety (90) days While, indeed, Section 2 of B.P. Blg. 22 does not state
from the date appearing thereon that the notice of dishonor be in writing, taken in
3. Check is dishonored by the drawee bank. conjunction, however, with Section 3 of the law, i.e.,
"that where there are no sufficient funds in or credit
Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds with such drawee bank, such fact shall always be
General rule: The making, drawing and issuance of a explicitly stated in the notice of dishonor or refusal,”
check payment of which is refused by the drawee a mere oral notice or demand to pay would appear to
because of insufficient funds in or credit with such be insufficient for conviction under the law. The
bank, when presented within ninety (90) days from Court is convinced that both the spirit and letter of
the date of the check, shall be prima facie evidence of the Bouncing Checks Law would require for the act
knowledge of such insufficiency of funds or credit. to be punished thereunder not only that the accused
issued a check that is dishonored, but that likewise the
Exception: Unless maker or drawer pays the holder accused has actually been notified in writing of the fact
thereof the amount due thereon, or makes of dishonor. [Cabrera v. CA, G.R. No. 150618 (2003)]
arrangements for payment in full by the drawee of
such check within (5) banking days after receiving Double jeopardy does not apply because estafa in
notice that such check has not been paid by the RPC is a distinct crime from BP 22. Deceit and
drawee.[Sec 2 B.P. Blg. 22]

Page 278 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
damage are essential elements of RPC, which are not
required in BP 22. [Nierras vs Dacuycuy , supra.]
b. Article 316 - Other Forms of
Swindling and Deceits
Par 1. By conveying, selling, encumbering, or
mortgaging any real property, pretending to be
the owner of the same
Elements:
1. The thing is immovable, such as a parcel of land
or a building.
2. Offender who is not the owner of said property
represents that he is the owner thereof.
3. Offender executed an act of ownership (selling,
encumbering or mortgaging the real property).
4. The act was made to the prejudice of the owner
or a third person.
The thing disposed of must be real property. If it is
chattel, crime is Estafa.
There must be existing real property.
Even if the deceit is practiced against the second
purchaser but damage is incurred by the first
purchaser, there is violation of par.1 of Art. 316.
Since the penalty is based on the “value of the
damage” there must be actual damage caused.
Par. 2. By disposing of real property as free from
encumbrance, although such encumbrance be
not recorded
Elements:
1. The thing disposed of is real property.
2. Offender knew that the real property was
encumbered, whether the encumbrance is
recorded or not.
3. There was express representation by the offender
that the real property is free from encumbrance.
4. Act of disposing of the real property was made to
the damage of another.
Act constituting the offense is disposing of the real
property representing that it is free from
encumbrance.
“Dispose” – includes encumbering or mortgaging.
“Encumbrance” – includes every right or interest in
the land which exists in favor of third persons.
Page 279 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
The offended party would not have granted the loan
had he known that the property was already
encumbered. When the loan had already been granted
when defendant offered the property as security for
the loan, Art. 316 par. 2 is not applicable.
Usurious loan with equitable mortgage is not an
encumbrance on the property.
If 3rd element not established, there is no crime.
There must be damage caused. It is not necessary that
act prejudice the owner of the land.
The omitted phrase “as free from encumbrance” in
par 2 of Art. 316 is the basis of the ruling that silence
as to such encumbrance does not involve a crime.
Par. 3. By wrongfully taking by the owner of his
personal property from its lawful possessor
Elements:
1. Offender is the owner of personal property.
2. Said property is in the lawful possession of
another.
3. Offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful
possessor.
4. Prejudice is thereby caused to the lawful
possessor or third person.
Offender must wrongfully take the personal property
from the lawful possessor. Wrongfully take does not
include the use of violence or intimidation.
If the thing is taken by means of violence, without
intent to gain, it is not estafa, but grave coercion.
If the owner took the personal property from its
lawful possessor without the latter’s knowledge and
later charged him with the value of the property, the
crime is theft. If there is intent to charge the bailee
with its value, the crime is robbery. [US v Albao, G.R.
No. L-9369 (1914)]
Par. 4. By executing any fictitious contract to the
prejudice of another
Elements:
1. Offender executes a contract
2. Contract is fictitious
3. Prejudice is caused.
Illustration: A person who simulates a conveyance of
his property to another to defraud his creditors. If the
conveyance is real and not simulated, the crime is
fraudulent insolvency.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Par. 5. By accepting any compensation for
services not rendered or for labor not performed
Elements:
1. Offender accepts any compensation for services
or labor
2. He did not render any service or perform any
labor
There must be fraud. Otherwise, it will only be solutio
indebiti, with civil obligation to return the wrong
payment.
If the money in payment of a debt was delivered to a
wrong person, Art. 316 par 5 is not applicable.
In case the person who received it later refused or
failed to return it to the owner of the money, Art. 315
subdivision 1(b) is applicable.
Par. 6. By selling, mortgaging or encumbering
real property or properties with which the
offender guaranteed the fulfilment of his
obligation as surety
Elements:
1. Offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal
or civil action.
2. He guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation
with his real property or properties.
3. He sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner
encumbers said real property.
4. That such sale, mortgage, or encumbrance is
a. Without express authority from the court, or
b. Made before the cancellation of his bond, or
c. Before being relieved from the obligation
contracted by him.
There must be damage caused under Art. 316.
ESTAFA UNDER PD 1689: INCREASING
THE PENALTY FOR CERTAIN FORMS OF
SWINDLING OR ESTAFA
Syndicated estafa
1. Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined by
Art. 315 and 316 RPC was committed;
2. The swindling is committed by a syndicate
consisting of five or more persons formed with
the intention of carrying the unlawful or illegal
act/transaction/enterprise/scheme; and
3. The defraudation results in the misappropriation
of money contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang
nayon(s)”, or farmers association, or of funds
solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public.
Page 280 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Penalty: Life imprisonment to death
Large-scale Estafa
1. Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined by
Art. 315 and 316 RPC was committed;
2. The swindling is NOT committed by a syndicate
as defined above;
3. The defraudation results in the misappropriation
of money contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang
nayon(s)”, or farmers association, or of funds
solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public; and
4. Amount of fraud exceeds Php. 100,000
Penalty: Reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua
c. Article 317 - Swindling of a Minor
Elements:
1. Offender takes advantage of the inexperience or
emotions or feelings of a minor.
2. He induces such minor
a. to Assume an obligation, or
b. to Give release, or
c. to Execute a transfer of any property right.
3. That the consideration is
a. some loan of money,
b. Credit, or
c. Other personal property.
4. That the transaction is to the detriment of such
minor.
Real property is not included because only money,
credit and personal property are enumerated, and
because a minor cannot convey real property without
judicial authority.
d. Article 318 - Other Deceits
Acts punished:
1. By defrauding or damaging another by any other
deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles.
2. By interpreting dreams, by making forecasts, by
telling fortunes, or by taking advantage of the
credulity of the public in any other manner, for
profit or gain.
Any other kind of conceivable deceit may fall under
this article. As in other cases of estafa, damage to the
offended party is required.
The deceits in this article include false pretenses and
fraudulent acts.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Chattel Mortgage
The object of the Chattel Mortgage Law is to give the
necessary sanction to the statute, so that mortgage
debtors may be deterred from violating its provisions
and mortgage creditors may be protected against loss
or inconvenience from wrongful removal or sale of
mortgaged property.
7. Chapter VII: Chattel
Mortgage
No felonious intent if transfer of personal property is
due to change of residence.
If the mortgagee opted to file for collection, not
foreclosure, abandoning the mortgage as basis for
relief, the removal of property to another province is
not a violation of Art 319 par1.
In estafa, the property involved is real property. In
sale of mortgaged property, it is personal property.

a. Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or Elements of selling or pledging personal property

already pledged:
Pledge of Mortgaged Property 1. Personal property is already pledged under the
terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law.
Acts punishable under Art. 319: 2. The offender, who is the mortgagor of such
1. By knowingly removing any personal property property, sells or pledges the same or any part
mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law to thereof.
any province or city other than the one in which 3. There is no consent of the mortgagee written on
it was located at the time of execution of the the back of the mortgage and noted on the record
mortgage, without the written consent of the thereof in the office of the register of deeds.
mortgagee or his executors, administrators or
assigns. The consent of the mortgagee must be
2. By selling or pledging personal property already 1. in writing,
pledged, or any part thereof, under the terms of 2. on the back of the mortgage, and
the Chattel Mortgage Law, without the consent 3. noted on the record thereof in the office of the
of the mortgagee written on the back of the register of deeds.
mortgage and noted on the record thereof in the
office of the register of deeds of the province Damage is NOT essential.
where such property is located.
Chattel mortgage may give rise to estafa by means of
Chattel mortgage must be valid and subsisting. deceit.
If chattel mortgage does not contain an affidavit of
good faith and is not registered, it is void and cannot Art. 319 Art. 316 (Estafa)
be prosecuted under Art 319 In both, there is a selling of a mortgaged property
Property involved is
Elements of knowingly removing mortgaged Personal property
real property
personal property:
Committed by the mere
1. Personal property is mortgaged under the Chatter Committed by selling
failure to obtain
Mortgage Law. real property mortgaged
consent of the
2. Offender knows that such property is so as free, even though the
mortgagee in writing,
mortgaged. vendor may have
even if offender should
3. He removes such mortgaged personal property obtained the consent of
inform the purchaser
to any province or city other than the one in the mortgagee in
that the thing sold is
which it was located at the time of the execution writing
mortgaged
of the mortgage.
Purpose: to protect the Purpose: to protect the
4. The removal is permanent.
mortgagee purchaser
5. There is no written consent of the mortgagee or
his executors, administrators or assigns to such
removal.

A person other than the mortgagor who removed the

property to another province, knowing it to be
mortgaged, may be liable. The removal of the
mortgaged personal property must be coupled with
intent to defraud.

Page 281 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
8. Chapter VIII: Arson and
Other Crimes Involving
Destruction
a. Articles 320-326-B have been
repealed by PD 1613 (Amending
the Law on Arson)
There are actually two categories of arson, namely:
Destructive Arson under Article 320 of the RPC and
Simple Arson under P.D. No. 1316. Said classification
is based on the kind, character and location of the
property burned, regardless of the value of the
damage caused.
Article 320 contemplates the malicious burning of
structures, both public and private, hotels, buildings,
edifices, trains, vessels, aircraft, factories and other
military, government or commercial establishments
by any person or group of persons. On the other
hand, P.D. No. 1316 covers houses, dwellings,
government buildings, farms, mills, plantations,
railways, bus stations, airports, wharves and other
industrial establishments.
Simple Arson
Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of
another shall be punished by Prision Mayor.
The same penalty shall be imposed when a person sets
fire to his own property under circumstances which
expose to danger the life or property of another.[Sec.
1 P.D. No. 1613]
The penalty of Reclusion Temporal to Reclusion Perpetua
shall be imposed if the property burned is any of the
following:
1. Any building used as offices of the government
or any of its agencies;
2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
3. Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or
mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
4. Any plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop,
grain field, orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
5. Any rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill or mill central;
and
6. Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf or
warehouse.[Sec. 2 P.D. No. 1613]
Destructive Arson
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period to
death shall be imposed upon any person who shall
burn:
Page 282 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent
to one single act of burning or as a result of
simultaneous burnings, or committed on several
or different occasions;
2. Any building of public or private ownership,
devoted to the public in general or where people
usually gather or congregate for a definite
purpose such as but not limited to official
governmental function or business, private
transaction, commerce, trade workshop,
meetings and conferences, or merely incidental to
a definite purpose such as but not limited to
hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public
conveyance or stops or terminals, regardless of
whether the offender had knowledge that there
are persons in said building or edifice at the time
it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the
building is actually inhabited or not.
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
airplane, devoted to transportation or
conveyance, or for public use, entertainment or
leisure.
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and
any appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to
the service of public utilities.
5. Any building the burning of which is for the
purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of
another violation of law, or for the purpose of
concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or
to collect from insurance.[Art. 320]
By two or more persons
Irrespective of the application of the above
enumerated qualifying circumstances, the penalty of
death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is
perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons
or by a group of persons, regardless of whether their
purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or
the burning merely constitutes an overt act in the
commission or another violation of law.[Art. 320]
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum
period to death shall also be imposed upon any
person who shall burn:
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military
powder or fireworks factory, ordinance,
storehouse, archives or general museum of the
government.
2. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory
of inflammable or explosive materials.
Arson resulting in death
If as a consequence of his commission of any of the
acts penalized under this Article (320), death or injury
results, or any valuable documents, equipment,
machineries, apparatus, or other valuable properties
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

were burned or destroyed, the mandatory penalty of 3. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other
death shall be imposed.[Art. 320] flammable or combustible substances or
materials soaked therewith or containers thereof,
If by reason of or on the occasion of the arson death or any mechanical, electrical, chemical, or
results, the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua to death shall be electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or
imposed.[Sec. 5 P.D. No. 1613] ashes or traces of any of the foregoing are found
in the ruins or premises of the burned building or
Arson and homicide/murder property.
[I]n cases where both burning and death occur, in 4. If the building or property is insured for
order to determine what crime/crimes was/were substantially more than its actual value at the time
perpetrated whether arson, murder or arson and of the issuance of the policy.
homicide/murder, it is de rigueur to ascertain the 5. If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire
main objective of the malefactor: insurance policy more than two fires have
occurred in the same or other premises owned or
Main objective Crime/s committed under the control of the offender and/or insured.
Burning of the building 6. If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of
or edifice, but death Arson (the resulting the effects insured and stored in a building or
results by reason or on homicide is absorbed) property had been withdrawn from the premises
the occasion of arson except in the ordinary course of business.
To kill a particular 7. If a demand for money or other valuable
person who may be in consideration was made before the fire in
a building or edifice, exchange for the desistance of the offender or for
Murder the safety of the person or property of the
when fire is resorted to
as the means to victim.[Sec. 6 P.D. No. 1613]
accomplish such goal
Two separate and Conspiracy to commit Arson
To kill a particular Conspiracy to commit arson shall be punished by
distinct crimes are
person, and in fact the Prision Mayor in its minimum period.[Sec. 7 P.D. No.
committed: 1)
offender has already 1613]
homicide/murder, and
done so, but fire is
2) arson [People v.
resorted to as a means
to cover up the killing
Baluntong, G.R. No. 9. Chapter IX: Malicious
182061 (2010)]
Mischief
Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson
The penalty in any case of arson shall be imposed in Malicious Mischief – It is the willful causing of
its maximum period; damage to another’s property for the sake of causing
1. If committed with intent to gain; damage because of hate, revenge or other evil motive.
2. If committed for the benefit of another;
3. If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred a. Article 327 - Who Are
towards the owner or occupant of the property Responsible
burned;
4. If committed by a syndicate. The offense is
Elements of malicious mischief:
committed by a syndicate if it is planned or
1. Offender deliberately caused damage to the
carried out by a group of three (3) or more
property of another.
persons.[Sec. 4 P.D. No. 1613]
2. Such act does not constitute arson or other
crimes involving destruction
Prima facie evidence of arson
3. The act of damaging another’s property was
Any of the following circumstances shall constitute
committed merely for the sake of damaging it.
prima facie evidence of arson:
1. If the fire started simultaneously in more than
If there is no malice in causing damage, the obligation
one part of the building or establishment.
to pay for the damages is only civil (Art. 2176. Civil
2. If substantial amount of flammable substances or
Code)
materials are stored within the building note
necessary in the business of the offender nor for
Damage means not only loss but also diminution of
household us.
what is a man’s own. Thus, damage to another’s house

Page 283 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
includes defacing it. [People v Asido, G.R. No. L-32529
(1978)]
b. Article 328 - Special Cases of
Malicious Mischief
Special cases of malicious mischief: (qualified
malicious mischief)
1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
public functions
2. Using any poisonous or corrosive substance
3. Spreading infection or contagion among cattle
4. Causing damage to property of the National
Museum or National Library, or to any archive or
registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or any
other thing used in common by the public.
c. Article 329 - Other Mischiefs
Other mischiefs not included in Art. 328 are punished
based on value of the damage caused.
If the amount involved cannot be estimated, the
penalty of arresto menor or fine not exceeding P200
is fixed by law.
When several persons scattered coconut remnants
which contained human excrement on the stairs and
floor of the municipal building, including its interior,
the crime committed is malicious mischief under Art.
329. [People v Dumlao, G.R. No. 168918 (2009)]
d. Article 330 - Damage and
Obstruction to Means of
Communication
Committed by damaging any railway, telegraph, or
telephone lines. If the damage shall result in any
derailment of cars, collision, or other accident, a
higher penalty shall be imposed. (Qualifying
Circumstance)
Telegraph/phone lines must pertain to railways.
Q: What is the crime when, as a result of the damage
caused to railway, certain passengers of the train are
killed?
A: It depends. Art. 330 says “without prejudice to the
criminal liability of the offender for other
consequences of his criminal act.”
If there is no intent to kill, the crime is “damages to
means of communication” with homicide because of
the first paragraph of Art. 4 and Art. 48.
Page 284 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
If there is intent to kill, and damaging the railways was
the means to accomplish the criminal purpose, the
crime is murder
e. Article 331 – Destroying or
Damaging Statues, Public
Monuments or Paintings
Acts punished:
1. Destroying or damaging statues or any other
useful or ornamental public monument
2. Destroying or damaging any useful or ornamental
painting of a public nature.
The penalty is lower if the thing destroyed is a public
painting, rather than a public monument.
10. Chapter X: Exemption from
Criminal Liability
a. Article 332 - Exemption from
Criminal Liability in Crimes
Against Property
Crimes involved in the exemption:
1. Theft
2. Swindling (estafa)
3. Malicious mischief
If the crime is robbery, exemption does not lie.
Persons exempt from criminal liability:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives
by affinity in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property
which belonged to the deceased spouse before
the same passed into the possession of another.
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together.
The law recognizes the presumed co-ownership of
the property between the offender and the offended
party. There is no criminal, but only civil liability.
Art. 332 does not apply to a stranger who participates
in the commission of the crime.
Stepfather and stepmother are included as ascendants
by affinity. [People v Alvarez; People v Adame]
Guevarra: An adopted or natural child should also be
considered as included in the term “descendants” and
a concubine or paramour within the term “spouses”.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Art. 332 also applies to common-law spouses. [Art.

144, Civil Code; People v Constantino, CA, 60 OG 3605]
K. Title XI. Crimes against
See again: RA 9372: Human Security Act on
Chastity
Punishable Acts of Terrorism 1. Art. 333: Adultery
2. Art. 334: Concubinage
3. Art. 336: Acts of Lasciviousness
4. Art. 337: Qualified Seduction
5. Art. 338: Simple Seduction
6. Art. 339: Acts of Lasciviousness with the consent
of the offended party
7. Art. 340: Corruption of minors
8. Art. 341: White Slave Trade
9. Art. 342: Forcible Abduction
10. Art. 343: Consented Abduction
11. Art. 344: Prosecution of the crimes of Adultery
12. Art. 345: Civil Liability
13. Art. 346: Liability of ascendants, guardians,
teachers, or other persons entrusted with custody
of the offended party

1. Article 333 – Adultery

Elements:
a. The woman is married;
b. She has sexual intercourse with a man not her
husband;
c. As regards the man with whom she has sexual
intercourse: he knows her to be married.

LEGENDS:
H – husband; W – wife; M - marriage

Offenders: Married woman and/or the man who has

carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be married,
even if the M be subsequently declared void. It is not
necessary that there be a valid M (i.e. void ab initio)

Essence of adultery: violation of the marital vow

Gist of the crime: the danger of introducing spurious

heirs into the family, where the rights of the real heirs
may be impaired and a man may be charged with the
maintenance of a family not his own. [US v. Mata.
G.R. No. L-6300 (1911)]

The offended party must be legally married to the

offender at the time of the filing of the complaint, even if the
marriage be subsequently declared void.

Each sexual intercourse constitutes a crime of

adultery.

Abandonment without justification is not exempting,

but only mitigating. Both defendants are entitled to
this mitigating circumstance.

Page 285 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

reputation not only of the living but of dead persons

The man, to be guilty of adultery, must have as well.
knowledge of the married status of the woman.
2. Article 334 – Concubinage
A married man who is not liable for adultery, because
he did not know that the woman is married, may be
Elements:
held liable for concubinage.
a. The man is married;
b. He is either:
Acquittal of one of the defendants does not operate
1. keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
as a cause of acquittal of the other.
2. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstance with a woman not his wife;
Under the law, there is no accomplice in adultery.
3. Cohabiting with her in any other place;
c. As regards the woman, she knows him to be married.
Direct proof of carnal knowledge is not necessary.
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient. (i.e. love letters
Offenders: married man and the woman who knows
signed by the paramour, photos showing intimate
him to be married.
relations, testimony of witnesses)
The woman only becomes liable if she knew him to be
Pardon by the H does not exempt the adulterous W
married prior to the commission of the crime.
and her paramour from criminal liability for
adulterous acts committed subsequent to such
In the 3rd way of committing the crime, mere cohabitation is
pardon, because the pardon refers to previous and not
sufficient; Proof of scandalous circumstances not
to subsequent adulterous acts
necessary. [People v. Pitoc, G.R. No. 18513 (1922)]
Effect of Pardon - applies to Concubinage as
A married man is not liable for concubinage for mere
well:
sexual relations with a woman not his wife. A man
a. The pardon must come before the institution of
would only be guilty of concubinage if he appeared to
the criminal prosecution; and
be guilty of any of the acts punished in Art. 334.
b. Both the offenders must be pardoned by the
offended party. Act of sexual intercourse
A married man who is not liable for adultery because
subsequent to adulterous conduct is considered
he did not know that the woman was married, may be
as an implied pardon.
held liable for concubinage. If the woman knew that
c. Pardon of the offenders by the offended party is
the man was married, she may be held liable for
a bar to prosecution for adultery or concubinage.
concubinage as well.
d. Delay in the filing of complaint, if satisfactorily
explained, does not indicate pardon.
Mistress – a woman taken by the accused to live with
him in the conjugal dwelling as his mistress/concubine.
Effect of consent:
The husband, knowing that his wife, after serving
Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling – no positive
sentence for adultery, resumed living with her co-
proof of sexual intercourse is necessary
defendant, did nothing to interfere with their relations
or to assert his rights as husband. The second charge
Conjugal Dwelling – the home of the husband (H)
of adultery should be dismissed because of consent.
and the wife (W) even if the wife appears to be temporarily
[People v. Sensano and Ramos, G.R. No. L-37720 (1933)]
absent on any account.
Agreement to separate may be used as evidence to
The dwelling of the spouses was constructed from the
show consent by the husband to the infidelity of his
proceeds of the sale of their conjugal properties.
wife.
The fact that W never had a chance to reside therein
Effect of death of paramour: Offending wife may
and that H used it with his mistress instead, does not
still be prosecuted. The requirement that both
detract from its nature. [People v. Cordova, C.A., G.R.
offenders should be included in the complaint is
No. 19100-R (1959)]
absolute only when the two offenders are alive.
Cohabit – to dwell together as H and W for a period
Effect of death of offended party: The proceedings
of time (i.e. A week, a month, year or longer)
may continue. Art. 353 seeks to protect the honor and

Page 286 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Scandalous circumstances – Scandal consists in any

reprehensible word or deed that offends public
conscience, redounds to the detriment of the feelings
of honest persons, and gives occasion to the
neighbors’ spiritual damage or ruin. [People v. Santos,
87 Phil. 687 (1950)]
It is only when the mistress is kept elsewhere (outside
the conjugal dwelling) that “scandalous
circumstances” become an element of the crime. [US
v. Macabagbag, G.R. No. 10564 (1915)]
Qualifying expression: Sexual act which may be
proved by circumstantial evidence
Motive of lascivious acts is not important because the
essence of lewdness is in the very act itself.
Example: If the kissing etc. was done inside church
(which is a public place), absence of lewd designs may
be proven, and the crime is unjust vexation only. But
if the kissing was done in the house of a woman when
she was alone, the circumstances may prove the
accused’s lewd designs.
Absent any of the circumstances of rape under the 3rd
element, the crime is UNJUST VEXATION. (e.g.
touching of breast)

Scandal produced by the concubinage of H: Lascivious intent is implied from the nature of the act
a. H and mistress live in the same room of a house and the surrounding circumstances.
b. They appear together in public,
c. Perform acts in sight of the community which Consider the act and the environment to distinguish
give rise to criticism and general protest among between Acts of Lasciviousness and Attempted Rape.
the neighbors. Desistance in the commission of attempted rape may
constitute acts of lasciviousness.
When spies are employed for the purpose of watching
the conduct of the accused and it appearing that none There is no attempted or frustrated act of
of the people living in the vicinity has observed any lasciviousness.
suspicious conduct, there is no evidence of
scandalous circumstances. [US v. Campos Rueda, G.R. Acts of Lasciviousness v. Grave Coercion
No. L-11549 (1916)] Acts of
Grave Coercion
Lasciviousness
Reason: Adultery is punished more severely than Compulsion or force is Compulsion or force is
concubinage because adultery makes possible the included in the the very act constituting
introduction of another man’s offspring into the constructive element of the offense of grave
family so that the offended H may have another man’s force coercion
son bearing H’s name and receiving support from Moral compulsion
him. Must be accompanied
amounting to
by acts of lasciviousness
intimidation is
or lewdness
3. Article 336 - Acts of sufficient

Lasciviousness Acts of Lasciviousness v. Attempted Rape

Acts of
Elements: Attempted Rape
Lasciviousness
a. The offender commits any act of lasciviousness Same means of committing the crime:
or lewdness; 1. Force, threat, or intimidation is employed; or
b. The act is committed against a person of either 2. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
sex; abuse of authority; or
c. It is done under any of the ff. circumstances: 3. The offended party is deprived of reason or
1. By using force or intimidation; or otherwise unconscious; or
2. When the offended party is deprived of 4. Victim is under 12 yrs. of age or is demented
reason or otherwise unconscious; Offended party is a
3. By means of fraudulent machination or person of either sex.
grave abuse of authority The performance of
4. When the offended party is under 12 years acts of lascivious
of age or is demented. character
Acts performed clearly
Lewd – obscene, lustful, indecent, lecherous; signifies Acts performed do not
indicate that the
form of immorality which has relation to moral indicate that the
accused’s purpose was
impurity or that which is carried in wanton manner

Page 287 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
accused was to lie w/ to lie w/ the offended
the offended party. woman.
Lascivious acts are the Lascivious acts are only
final objective sought the preparatory acts to
by the offender. the commission of rape.
Abuses against chastity (Art. 245) v Acts of
lasciviousness (Art. 336)
Offenses against Abuses against
Chastity Chastity
Committed by a private Committed by a public
individual, in most cases officer only
Some act of Mere immoral or
lasciviousness should indecent proposal made
have been executed by earnestly and
the offender. persistently is sufficient.
The accused followed the victim, held her, embraced
her, tore her dress, and tried to touch her breast.
When a complaint for acts of lasciviousness was filed
against him, accused claimed that he had no intention
of having sexual intercourse with her and that he did
the acts only as revenge. TC found the accused guilty
of FRUSTRATED ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS.
SC held that there is no frustrated crime against
chastity which includes acts of lasciviousness,
adultery, and rape. [People v. Famularcano, G.R. No. L-
17163 (1963)]
From the moment the offender performs all the
elements necessary for the existence of the felony, he
actually attains his purpose.
Motive of revenge is of no consequence since the
element of lewdness is in the very act itself. Example:
Compelling a girl to dance naked before a man is an
act of lasciviousness, even if the dominant motive is
revenge, for her failure to pay a debt.
Two kinds of seduction:
a. Qualified seduction (Art. 337)
b. Simple seduction (Art. 338)
“Lascivious Conduct” under RA 7610
The elements of sexual abuse under Section 5 (b) of
RA 7610 that must be proven in addition to the
elements of acts of lasciviousness are as follows:
a. The accused commits the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct.
b. The said act is performed with a child exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse.
c. The child, whether male or female, is below 18
years of age. [Navarrete v. People, G.R. No. 147913
(2007)]
Page 288 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
“Lascivious conduct” is defined under Section 2
(h) of the rules and regulations of RA 7610 as:
a. The intentional touching, either directly or
through clothing, of the genitalia, anus, groin,
breast, inner thigh, or buttocks, OR the
introduction of any object into the genitalia, anus
or mouth, of any person,
b. whether of the same or opposite sex,
c. with an intent to abuse, humiliate, harass,
degrade, or arouse or gratify the sexual desire of
any person,
d. bestiality, masturbation, lascivious exhibition of
the genitals or pubic area of a person
Comparison with Art. 366, RPC
Acts of lasciviousness is punished under RA 7610
when performed on a child below 18 years of age
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse.
See discussion above for other acts of abuse
The sweetheart theory applies in acts of lasciviousness
and rape, felonies committed against or without the
consent of the victim. It operates on the theory that
the sexual act was consensual. It requires proof that
the accused and the victim were lovers and that she
consented to the sexual relations.
For purposes of sexual intercourse and lascivious
conduct in child abuse cases under RA 7610, the
sweetheart defense is unacceptable. A child exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse
cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse with
another person. [Malto v. People, G.R. No. 164733
(2007)]
4. Article 337 - Qualified
Seduction
Seduction - enticing a woman to unlawful sexual
intercourse by promise of marriage or other means of
persuasion without use of force. It applies when there
is abuse of authority (qualified seduction) or deceit
(simple seduction).
TWO CLASSES OF QUALIFIED
SEDUCTION AND THEIR ELEMENTS:
a. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and under 18
years of age by certain persons such as, a person
in authority, priest, teacher or any person who, in
any capacity shall be entrusted with the education
or custody of the woman seduced.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Elements:
1. Offended party is a virgin, which is
presumed if she is unmarried and of good
reputation;
2. She is over 12 and under 18 yrs. of age; (13-
17 years 11 months 29 days)
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
4. There is abuse of authority, confidence, or
relationship on the part of the offender.
b. Seduction of a sister by her brother, or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age or reputation.
Elements
1. Offended party need not be a virgin or she
may be over 18 years old
2. Offender has sexual intercourse with her
3. Offender is her brother or ascendant by
consanguinity, whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
Virgin - a woman of chaste character and of good
reputation. The offended party need not be physically
a virgin.
If there is no sexual intercourse and only acts of lewdness
are performed, the crime is acts of lasciviousness. If
any of the circumstances in the crime of rape is
present, the crime is not to be punished under Art.
337.
The accused charged with rape cannot be convicted
of qualified seduction under the same information.
Offenders in Qualified Seduction:
a. Those who abused their authority:
1. Person in public authority;
2. Guardian;
3. Teacher;
b. Person who, in any capacity, is entrusted with the
education or custody of the woman seduced.
1. Those who abused confidence reposed in
them:
2. Priest;
3. House servant;
4. Domestic
c. Those who abused their relationship:
1. Brother who seduced his sister;
2. Ascendant who seduced his descendant.
“Domestic” - a person usually living under the same roof,
pertaining to the same house.
Not necessary that the offender be the teacher of the
offended party; it is sufficient that he is a teacher in the
same school.
Page 289 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Qualified seduction may also be committed by a
master to his servant, or a head of the family to any
of its members.
Qualified seduction of a sister or descendant, also
known as INCEST, is punished by a penalty next
higher in degree.
The age, reputation, or virginity of the sister or
descendant is irrelevant. The relationship need not be
legitimate.
A 15-year old virgin, who was brought by her mother
to the house of the accused and his wife to serve as a
helper, repeatedly yielded to the carnal desires of the
accused, as she was induced by his promises of
marriage and frightened by his acts of intimidation.
HELD: DECEIT, although an essential element of
ordinary or simple seduction, does not need to be
proved or established in a charge of qualified
seduction. It is replaced by ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE. [People v. Fontanilla, G.R. No. L-
25354 (1968)]
The accused, a policeman, brought a 13-year old girl
with low mentality, to the ABC Hall where he
succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her. The
complaint did not allege that the girl was a virgin. The
accused was charged with RAPE but convicted of
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION.
HELD: Though it is true that virginity is presumed if
the girl is over 12 but under 18, unmarried and of
good reputation, virginity is still an essential element
of the crime of qualified seduction and must be
alleged in the complaint. Accused is guilty of RAPE,
considering the victim’s age, mental abnormality and
deficiency. There was also intimidation with the
accused wearing his uniform. [Babanto v. Zosa, G.R.
No. L-32895 (1983)]
Perez succeeded in having sexual intercourse with
Mendoza after he promised to marry her. As he did
not make good on said promise, Mendoza filed a
complaint for Consented Abduction. Trial Court
found that the acts constituted seduction, acquitting
him on the charge of Consented Abduction. Mendoza
then filed a complaint for Qualified Seduction. Perez
moved to dismiss the case on the grounds of double
jeopardy.
HELD: There are similar elements between
consented abduction and qualified seduction, namely:
a. the offended party is a virgin, and
b. over 12 but under 18 yrs. of age
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

b. The acts are committed upon a woman who is a

However, an acquittal for CONSENTED virgin or single or widow of good reputation,
ABDUCTION will not preclude the filing of a charge under 18 yrs. of age but over 12 yrs., or a sister or
for QUALIFIED SEDUCTION because the descendant, regardless of her reputation or age;
elements of the two crimes are different. [Perez v. CA, c. The offender accomplishes the acts by abuse of
G.R. No. :-80838 (1988)] authority, confidence, relationship, or deceit.
Note: The fact that the girl gave consent to the sexual
intercourse is not a defense. It is necessary that it be committed under
circumstances which would make it qualified or
5. Article 338 - Simple simple seduction had there been sexual intercourse,
instead of acts of lewdness only.
Seduction
When the victim is under 12 yrs., the penalty shall be
Elements: one degree higher than that imposed by law. (Sec. 10
a. Offended party is over 12 and under 18 years of age; of R.A. 7610)
b. She is of good reputation, single or widow;
c. Offender has sexual intercourse with her; Males cannot be the offended party.
d. It is committed by means of deceit.
Acts of Acts of
Purpose of the law - To punish the seducer who by Lasciviousness Lasciviousness with
means of promise of marriage, destroys the chastity (Art. 336) consent (Art. 339)
of an unmarried female of previous chaste character Committed under
Committed under circumstances which,
Virginity of offended party is not essential, good circumstances which, had there been carnal
reputation is sufficient. had there been carnal knowledge, would
knowledge, would amount to either
Virginity of offended party is not required. amount to rape qualified or simple
seduction
Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled promise Offended party is a Offended party should
of marriage. female or male only be female
Promise of marriage must be the inducement and the
woman must yield because of the promise or other
inducement.
7. Article 340 - Corruption of
Minors
What about unfulfilled promise of material things, as when the
woman agrees to sexual intercourse in exchange for jewelry? Elements:
This is not seduction because she is a woman of loose a. Offender promotes or facilitates the prostitution
morals. or corruption of persons under age (minors),
b. Purpose is to satisfy the lust of another
Promise of marriage after sexual intercourse does not
constitute deceit. Promise of marriage by a married Habituality or abuse of authority or confidence is not
man is not a deceit, if the woman knew him to be necessary.
married.
It is not necessary that the unchaste acts shall have
Seduction is not a continuing offense. been done.

6. Article 339 - Acts of Mere proposal will consummate the offense.

Lasciviousness with the The victim must be of good reputation, not a
Consent of the Offended prostitute or corrupted person.

Party There is a crime of Attempted Child Prostitution. (Sec.

6, RA 7610)
Elements:
a. Offender commits acts of lasciviousness or See again: RA 7610: Special Protection of Children
lewdness; against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination

Page 290 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

Crimes against chastity where age and reputation

8. Article 341 - White Slave are immaterial:
a. Acts of lasciviousness against the will or without
Trade the consent of the offended party
b. Qualified seduction of sister or descendant
Acts punishable: c. Forcible abduction
a. Engaging in business of prostitution
b. Profiting by prostitution The taking away of the woman must be against her
c. Enlisting the services of women for the purpose will.
of prostitution.
The taking away of the woman may be accomplished
Habituality is not a necessary element of white slave by means of deceit first and then by means of violence
trade. and intimidation.

‘Under any pretext’ – one who engaged the services If the female abducted is under 12, the crime is
of a woman allegedly as a maid, but in reality for forcible abduction, even if she voluntarily goes with
prostitution, is guilty under this article. her abductor.

Victim is under 12 yrs., penalty shall be one degree When the victim was abducted by the accused without
higher. lewd designs, but for the purpose of lending her to
illicit intercourse with others, the crime is not
Offender need not be the owner of the house. abduction but corruption of minors.

Maintainer or manager of house of ill-repute need not Rape may absorb forcible abduction, if the main
be present therein at the time of raid or arrest. objective was to rape the victim.

Corruption of Minors White Slave Trade Sexual intercourse is not necessary in forcible
Minority of victims abduction.
Minority is not required
essential
Victims may be male or Lewd designs may be shown by the conduct of the
Applies only to females accused. When there are several defendants, it is
female
May not necessarily be enough that one of them had lewd designs. Husband
Generally for profit is not liable for abduction of his wife, as lewd design
for profit
Committed by a single Generally committed is wanting.
act habitually
Attempt to rape is absorbed in the crime of forcible
Two kinds of abduction: abduction, thus there is no complex crime of forcible
a. Forcible abduction (Art. 342) abduction with attempted rape.
b. Consented abduction (Art. 343)
Nature of the crime - The act of the offender is
violative of the individual liberty of the abducted, her
9. Article 342 - Forcible honor and reputation, and public order.
Abduction
Forcible Abduction Grave Coercion
Elements: There is violence or
a. The person abducted is any woman, regardless of intimidation by the
her age, civil status or reputation; offender
b. The abduction is against her will; The offended part is
c. The abduction is with lewd designs. compelled to do
something against her
Abduction – the taking away of a woman from her will
house or the place where she may be for the purpose No lewd design,
of carrying her to another place with the intent to Abduction is provided that there is
marry or to corrupt her. characterized by lewd deprivation of liberty
design for an appreciable
length of time

Page 291 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

There can only be one complex crime of forcible

Forcible Abduction Corruption of Minors abduction with rape.
Purpose is to effect his Purpose is to lend the
lewd designs on the victim to illicit The victim witnessed the killing of another by the 2
victim intercourse with others accused. Upon seeing her, the accused dragged her to
a vacant lot where they took turns in raping her. TC
Serious Illegal convicted them of rape.
Forcible Abduction
Detention
There is deprivation of HELD: FORCIBLE ABDUCTION is absorbed in
There is deprivation of the crime of RAPE if the main objective is to rape the
liberty and no lewd
liberty and lewd designs victim. Conviction of acts of lasciviousness is not a
designs
bar to conviction of forcible abduction. [People v.
Forcible Abduction Kidnapping with Godines, G.R. No. 93410 (1991)]; People v. Garcia,
with Rape Rape 378 SCRA 266, one count of forcible abduction with
Purpose is to effect his Purpose is to lend the multiple counts of rape.
lewd designs on the victim to illicit
victim intercourse with others 10. Article 343 - Consented
Crime against chastity Crime against liberty
Abduction
Forcible Abduction with Rape - a complex crime
under Art. 48, and not a special complex crime Elements:
a. Offended party is a virgin;
The victim was abducted by the accused and was b. She is over 12 and under 18 yrs. of age;
brought to a hotel where the latter succeeded in c. Offender takes her away with her consent, after
having sexual intercourse with her. solicitation or cajolery from the offender;
d. The taking away is with lewd designs.
HELD: The elements of both rape and forcible
abduction are proven. The presence of lewd designs Purpose of the law - Not to punish the wrong done
in forcible abduction is manifested by the subsequent to the girl because she consents to it, but to prescribe
rape of the victim. [People v. Sunpongco, G.R. No. L- punishment for the disgrace to her family and the
42665 (1988)] alarm caused by the disappearance of one who is, by
her age and sex, susceptible to cajolery and deceit.
Maggie was abducted and brought to a hotel, where
the 4 accused took turns in raping her. If the virgin is under 12 or is deprived of reason, the
crime is forcible abduction because such is incapable
HELD: While the first act of rape was being of giving a valid consent.
performed, the crime of forcible abduction had
already been consummated, hence, forcible abduction The taking away of the girl need not be with some
can only be attached to the first act of rape, detached character of permanence. Offended party need not be
from the 3 subsequent acts of rape. The effect taken from her house.
therefore would be one count of forcible abduction
with rape and 4 counts of rape for each of the When there was no solicitation or cajolery and no
accused. [People v. Jose, G.R. No. L-28232 (1971)] deceit and the girl voluntarily went with the man,
there is no crime committed even if they had sexual
The accused and 2 other men raped the victim. The intercourse.
victim was a jeepney passenger who was prevented
from leaving the jeepney. She was taken to a remote 11. Article 344 - Prosecution of
place where she was raped.
Private Offenses
HELD: The accused is guilty of FORCIBLE
ABDUCTION WITH RAPE. It was proven that the a. Adultery
victim was taken against her will and with lewd design, b. Concubinage
and was subsequently forced to submit to the c. Seduction
accused’s lust, rendering her unconscious in the d. Abduction
process. [People v. Alburo, G.R. No. 85822 (1990)] e. Acts of lasciviousness

Page 292 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Nature of the complaint: The complaint must be
filed in court, not with the fiscal. In case of complex
crimes, where one of the component offenses is a
public crime, the criminal prosecution may be
instituted by the fiscal.
The court motu proprio can dismiss the case for
failure of the aggrieved party to file the proper
complaint even if the accused never raised the
question on appeal.
Crimes against chastity cannot be prosecuted de
oficio.
ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
Who may file the complaint: Adultery and
Concubinage must be prosecuted upon complaint
signed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal
prosecution without including BOTH the guilty
parties if they are alive. Both parties must be included
in the complaint even if one of them is not guilty.
Consent and pardon bar the filing of a criminal
complaint.
The imputation of a crime of prostitution against a
woman can be prosecuted de oficio, but crimes
against chastity cannot.
Prosecution of rape may be made upon complaint by
any person.
Effect of Pardon:
1. Effect of Pardon in Adultery applies also to
Concubinage
2. Condonation or forgiveness of one act of
adultery or concubinage is not a bar to
prosecution of similar acts that may be
committed by the offender in the future.
Consent:
1. May be express or implied
2. Given before the adultery or concubinage was
committed
3. Agreement to live separately may be evidence of
consent.
4. Affidavit showing consent may be a basis for new
trial.
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
Seduction, abduction, or acts of lasciviousness must
be prosecuted upon complaint signed by—
Page 293 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Offended party - When the offended party is a
minor, her parents may file the complaint.
2. When the offended party is of age and is in
complete possession of her mental and physical
faculties, she alone can file the complaint.
3. Parents, Grandparents or Guardian in that order
–
When the offended is a minor or incapacitated and
refuses to file the complaint, any of the persons
mentioned could file.
The term “guardian” refers to legal guardian. He
must be legally appointed by the Court.
The State may also file the complaint as parens patriae
when the offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she could file the complaint and
has no known parents, grandparents, or guardians
Effect of Pardon:
1. Offended party cannot institute criminal
proceedings if the offender has been
EXPRESSLY pardoned by the offended party,
or her parents, grandparents or guardian.
2. Pardon by the parent, grandparent, or guardian
must be accompanied by the express pardon of
the offended woman.
3. The right to file action of the parents,
grandparents and guardian shall be EXCLUSIVE
of other persons and shall be exercised
successively in the order provided.
4. Pardon by the offended party who is a minor
must have the concurrence of parents, EXCEPT
when the offended party has no parents.
Rape complexed with another crime against chastity
need NOT be signed by the offended woman, since
rape is a public crime. When the evidence fails to
prove a complex crime of rape with another crime,
and there is no complaint signed by the offended
woman, the accused CANNOT be convicted of rape.
Marriage of the offender with the offended party in
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape,
extinguishes criminal action or remits the penalty
already imposed.
Marriage (in cases of seduction, abduction, and acts
of lasciviousness) extinguishes the criminal action
even as to co-principals, accomplices, and accessories.
Marriage must be entered into in good faith.
Marriage may take place AFTER criminal
proceedings have commenced, or even after
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
conviction (extinguishes criminal action and remits
penalty).
12. Article 345: Civil Liability of
Persons Guilty of Crimes
Against Chastity
Those guilty of rape, seduction or abduction:
a. Indemnify the offended woman
b. Acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from doing so
c. In every case to support the offspring, EXCEPT:
1. in cases of adultery and concubinage
2. where either of the offended party or
accused is married
3. when paternity cannot be determined, such
as in multiple rape
4. other instances where the law prevents such
The adulterer and the concubine can be sentenced
only to indemnify for damages caused to the offended
spouse. Acknowledgment of offspring is not legally
possible, because only children born of parents who
could marry at the time of conception may be
acknowledged. Support of the offspring is also not
included, because the person who gives birth is one
of the offenders.
In rape of a married woman, only indemnity is
allowed.
13. Article 346 – Liability of
Ascendants, Guardians,
Teachers and Other Persons
Entrusted with the Custody
of the Offended Party
a. Persons who cooperate as accomplices but are
punished as principals in rape, seduction,
abduction, etc.
1. Ascendants
2. Guardians
3. Curators
4. Teachers, and
5. any other person, who cooperate as
accomplice with abuse of authority or
confidential relationship
b. The teachers or persons entrusted with education
and guidance of the youth shall also be penalized
with disqualification.
c. Any person falling within the terms of this article,
and any other person guilty of corruption of
Page 294 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
minors for the benefit of another, shall be
punished by special disqualification from filling
the office of guardian.
RA 7877: Anti-Sexual Harassment Act
Work, Education or Training-Related, Sexual
Harassment Defined
Work, education or training-related sexual
harassment is committed by an employer, employee,
manager, supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher,
instructor, professor, coach, trainor, or any
other person who, having authority, influence or
moral ascendancy over another in a work or training
or education environment, demands, requests or
otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other,
regardless of whether the demand, request
or requirement for submission is accepted by the
object of said act. [Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]
Work-related environment
a. The sexual favor is made as a condition in the
hiring or in the employment, re-employment or
continued employment of said individual, or in
granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or
privileges; or the refusal to grant the sexual favor
results in limiting, segregating or classifying the
employee which in any way would discriminate,
deprive or diminish employment opportunities
or otherwise adversely affect said employee;
b. The above acts would impair the employee's
rights or privileges under existing labor laws; or
c. The above acts would result in an intimidating,
hostile, or offensive environment for the
employee.[Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]
Education or training environment
a. Against one who is under the care, custody or
supervision of the offender;
b. Against one whose education, training,
apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the
offender;
c. When the sexual favor is made a condition to the
giving of a passing grade, or the granting of
honors and scholarships, or the payment of a
stipend, allowance or other benefits, privileges,
or consideration; or
d. When the sexual advances result in an
intimidating, hostile or offensive environment
for the student, trainee or apprentice.[Sec. 3 R.A.
7877]
Other persons liable
Any person who directs or induces another to commit
any act of sexual harassment as herein defined, or
who cooperates in the commission thereof by
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
another without which it would not have been
committed, shall also be held liable under
this Act.[Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]
Penalties
Any person who violates the provisions of this Act
shall, upon conviction, be penalized
by imprisonment of not less than one (1) month nor
more than six (6) months, or a fine of not less than Ten
thousand pesos (P10,000) or more than Twenty thousand
pesos (P20,000), or both such fine and imprisonment
at the discretion of the court. [Sec. 7 R.A. 7877]
Prescription
Any action arising from the violation of the
provisions of this Act shall prescribe in three (3)
years.[Sec. 3 R.A. 7877]
RA 9995: Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of
2009
Definition
Broadcast means to make public, by any means, a
visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a
person or persons.
Capture with respect to an image, means to
videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or
broadcast.
Female breast means any portion of the female
breast.
Photo or video voyeurism means the act of taking
photo or video coverage of a person or group of
persons performing sexual act or any similar activity
or of capturing an image of the private area of a
person or persons without the latter's consent, under
circumstances in which such person/s has/have a
reasonable expectation of privacy, or the act of selling,
copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing, showing
or exhibiting the photo or video coverage or
recordings of such sexual act or similar activity
through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and
similar means or device without the written consent
of the person/s involved, notwithstanding that
consent to record or take photo or video coverage of
same was given by such persons.
Private area of a person means the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks or
female breast of an individual.
Under circumstances in which a person has a
reasonable expectation of privacy means believe
that he/she could disrobe in privacy, without being
concerned that an image or a private area of the
Page 295 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
person was being captured; or circumstances in which
a reasonable person would believe that a private area
of the person would not be visible to the public,
regardless of whether that person is in a public or
private place. [Sec. 3 RA 9995]
Prohibited Acts
a. To take photo or video coverage of a person or
group of persons performing sexual act or any
similar activity or to capture an image of the
private area of a person/s such as the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks
or female breast without the consent of the
person/s involved and under circumstances in
which the person/s has/have a reasonable
expectation of privacy;
b. To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied
or reproduced, such photo or video or recording
of sexual act or any similar activity with or
without consideration;
c. To sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or
distributed, such photo or video or recording of
sexual act, whether it be the original copy or
reproduction thereof; or
d. To publish or broadcast, or cause to be published
or broadcast, whether in print or broadcast
media, or show or exhibit the photo or video
coverage or recordings of such sexual act or any
similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet,
cellular phones and other similar means or
device.
The prohibition under paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) shall
apply notwithstanding that consent to record or take
photo or video coverage of the same was given by
such person/s. Any person who violates this
provision shall be liable for photo or video voyeurism
as defined herein. [Sec. 4 RA 9995]
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

L. Title XII. Crimes against
the Civil Status of
Persons
1. Chapter I: Simulation of Births and Usurpation
of Civil Status
a. Art 347: Simulation of births, substitution of
one child for another and concealment or
abandonment of a legitimate child
b. Art 348: Usurpation of civil status
The fact that the child will be benefited by the
simulation of its birth is not a defense.
Substitution of one child for another
This is committed when a child of a couple is
exchanged with a child of another couple without the
knowledge of the respective parents.
The substitution can also happen by placing a live
child of a woman in place of another’s dead child.
Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child

2. Chapter II: Illegal Marriages Requisites:

a. Art 349: Bigamy 1. The child must be legitimate
b. Art 350: Marriage contracted against 2. The offender conceals or abandons such child;
provisions of law and
c. Art 351: Premature marriages 3. The offender has the intent to cause such child to
d. Art 352: Performance of illegal marriage lose its civil status.
ceremony
The unlawful sale of a child by his father is not a crime
under this article.
1. Chapter I: Simulation of
Births and Usurpation of “Abandon” as used in Art. 347 - The practice of
abandoning newly born infants and very young child
Civil Status at the door of hospitals and churches.

a. Article 347 - Simulation of Births, Art. 347 Art. 246

Substitution of One Child for Offender: the one who
Offender: any person has the custody of the
Another, and Concealment or child
Abandonment of a Legitimate Purpose: to cause the Purpose: to avoid
Child child to lose his civil obligation of rearing
status and caring for the child
Mode 1. Simulation of births;
A physician or surgeon or public officer, who
Mode 2. Substitution of one child for another; cooperates in the execution of these crimes, is also
liable if he acts in violation of the duties of his
Mode 3. Concealing or abandoning any profession or office.
legitimate child with intent to cause such child to
lose its civil status. b. Article 348 - Usurpation of Civil
Status
The object of the crime under Art. 347 is the
creation of false, or the causing of loss of, civil
This crime is committed when a person represents
status.
himself to be another and assumes the filiation or the
parental or conjugal rights of such another person.
Simulation of birth
Takes place when the woman pretends to be pregnant
Usurpation of profession may be punished under Art.
when in fact she is not, and on the day of the
348.
supposed delivery, takes the child of another as her
own.
There must be an intent to enjoy the rights arising
from the civil status of another.
The simulation of birth which is a crime is that which
alters the civil status of a person.
The purpose of defrauding the offended party or his
heirs qualifies the crime.

Page 296 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
2. Chapter II: Illegal Marriages
a. Article 349 – Bigamy
Elements:
1. Offender has been legally married;
2. The marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in
case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse
could not yet be presumed dead according to the
Civil Code
3. He contracts a second or subsequent marriage
4. The second or subsequent marriage has all the
essential requisites for validity.
The first marriage must be valid.
Nullity of marriage, not a defense in bigamy.
The fact that the first marriage is void from the
beginning is not a defense. As with voidable marriage,
there must be a judicial declaration of nullity of
marriage before contracting the second marriage.
Good faith is a defense in bigamy.
Failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the
whereabouts of the first wife is bigamy through
reckless imprudence.
One who contracted a subsequent marriage before
the declaration of presumptive death of the absent
spouse is guilty of bigamy.
The second marriage must have all the essential
requisites for validity.
One convicted of bigamy may also be prosecuted for
concubinage as both are distinct offenses. The first is
an offense against civil status, which may be
prosecuted at the instance of the state; the second is
an offense against chastity, and may be prosecuted
only at the instance of the offended party.
The test is not whether the defendant has already
been tried for the same act, but whether he has been
put in jeopardy for the same offense.
The second spouse is not necessarily liable for
bigamy.
Whether the second spouse should be included in the
information is a question of fact that was to be
determined by the fiscal who conducted the
preliminary investigation. [People v. Nepomuceno, Jr.,
G.R. No. L-40624 (1975)]
Page 297 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
The second husband or wife who knew of first
marriage is an accomplice.
The witness who falsely vouched for the capacity of
either of the contracting parties is also an accomplice.
Bigamy is not a private crime.
In Marbella-Bobis v. Bobis, we laid down the elements
of bigamy thus:
1. The offender has been legally married;
2. The first marriage has not been legally dissolved,
or in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse has not been judicially declared
presumptively dead;
3. He contracts a subsequent marriage; and
4. The subsequent marriage would have been valid
had it not been for the existence of the first.
Applying the foregoing test to the instant case, we
note that the trial court found that there was no actual
marriage ceremony performed between Lucio and
Lucia by a solemnizing officer. Instead, what
transpired was a mere signing of the marriage contract
by the two, without the presence of a solemnizing
officer.
The first element of bigamy as a crime requires that
the accused must have been legally married. But in
this case, legally speaking, the petitioner was never
married to Lucia Barrete. Thus, there is no first
marriage to speak of.
Under the principle of retroactivity of a marriage
being declared void ab initio, the two were never
married “from the beginning.” The contract of
marriage is null; it bears no legal effect.
Taking this argument to its logical conclusion, for
legal purposes, petitioner was not married to Lucia at
the time he contracted the marriage with Maria
Jececha. The existence and the validity of the first
marriage being an essential element of the crime of
bigamy, it is but logical that a conviction for said
offense cannot be sustained where there is no first
marriage to speak of. The petitioner, must, perforce
be acquitted of the instant charge. [Morigo v. People,
G.R. No. 145226 (2004)]
The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of
the first marriage was immaterial because prior to the
declaration of nullity, the crime had already been
consummated. Moreover, petitioner's assertion would
only delay the prosecution of bigamy cases
considering that an accused could simply file a
petition to declare his previous marriage void and
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
invoke the pendency of that action as a prejudicial
question in the criminal case. We cannot allow that.
The outcome of the civil case for annulment of
petitioner's marriage to Narcisa had no bearing upon
the determination of petitioner's innocence or guilt in
the criminal case for bigamy, because all that is
required for the charge of bigamy to prosper is that
the first marriage be subsisting at the time the second
marriage is contracted. Thus, under the law, a
marriage, even one which is void or voidable, shall be
deemed valid until declared otherwise in a judicial
proceeding.
In this case, even if petitioner eventually obtained a
declaration that his first marriage was void ab initio,
the point is, both the first and the second marriage
were subsisting before the first marriage was annulled.
[Abunado v. People, G,R. No. 159218 (2004)]
A careful study of the disputed decision reveals that
respondent Judge had been less than circumspect in
his study of the law and jurisprudence applicable to
the bigamy case. In his comment, respondent Judge
stated: “That the accused married Manuel P. Diego in
the honest belief that she was free to do so by virtue
of the decree of divorce is a mistake of fact.”
This Court, in People v. Bitdu [G.R. No. L-38230
(1933)], carefully distinguished between a mistake of
fact, which could be a basis for the defense of good
faith in a bigamy case, from a mistake of law, which
does not excuse a person, even a lay person, from
liability. Bitdu held that even if the accused, who had
obtained a divorce under the Mohammedan custom,
honestly believed that in contracting her second
marriage she was not committing any violation of the
law, and that she had no criminal intent, the same
does not justify her act.
This Court further stated therein that with respect to
the contention that the accused acted in good faith in
contracting the second marriage, believing that she
had been validly divorced from her first husband, it is
sufficient to say that everyone is presumed to know
the law, and the fact that one does not know that his
act constitutes a violation of the law does not exempt
him from the consequences thereof.
Moreover, squarely applicable to the criminal case for
bigamy, is People v. Schneckenburger [G.R. No. L-48183
(1941)], where it was held that the accused who
secured a foreign divorce, and later remarried in the
Philippines, in the belief that the foreign divorce was
valid, is liable for bigamy. [Diego v. Castillo, AM RTJ-
02-1673 (2004)]
Page 298 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Article 350 - Marriage Contracted
against Provisions of Laws
Elements:
1. Offender contracted marriage;
2. He knew at the time that –
a. The requirements of the law were not
complied with; or
b. The marriage was in disregard of a legal
impediment.
Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage.
Illegal marriage includes also such other marriages
which are performed without complying with the
requirements of law, or marriages where the consent
of the other is vitiated, or such marriage which was
solemnized by one who is not authorized to
solemnize the same.
Conviction of a violation of Art. 350 involves a crime
of moral turpitude. [Villasanta v. Peralta,
Administrative Case (1957)]
c. Article 351 - Premature Marriage
This provision has been repealed on 13 March 2015
when President Benigno Aquino III signed into law
RA 10655. Said law reads: “Without prejudice to the
provisions of the Family Code on paternity and
filiation, Article 351 of the Revised Penal Code,
punishing the crime of premature marriage
committed by a woman, is hereby repealed.”
The author of RA 10655 explained that the law on
premature marriages “is discriminatory for it curtails
the right of a woman to marry under the stated
circumstances when no such penalty is imposed on
the man who does the same. Similarly, the effect of
the provision is an enforced mourning period on the
part of the woman although none is imposed on the
man.”
BEFORE REPEAL:
Persons liable:
1. A widow who is married within 301 days from
the date of the death of her husband, or before
having delivered if she is pregnant at the time of
his death;
2. A woman who, her marriage having been
annulled or dissolved, married before her delivery
or before the expiration of the period of 301 days
after the date of the legal separation.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

The purpose of the law punishing premature

marriages is to prevent doubtful paternity. [People v.
M. Title XIII. Crimes
Rosal, G.R. No. L-25706 (1926)] against Honor
d. Article 352 - Performance of 1. Chapter I: Libel
Illegal Marriage Ceremony a. Art 353: Definition of Libel
b. Art 354: Privileged communication
PERSONS LIABLE: Priests or ministers of any c. Art 355: Libel by means of writings or similar
religious denomination or sect, or civil authorities means
who shall perform or authorize any illegal marriage d. Art 356: Threatening to publish and offer to
ceremony prevent such publication for a compensation
e. Art. 357: Prohibited Publication of Acts
The offender must be authorized to solemnize Referred to in the course of Official
marriages. Proceedings
f. Art 358: Slander
g. Art 359: Slander by Deed

2. Chapter II: Incriminatory Machinations

a. Art 363: Incriminating innocent person
b. Art 364: Intriguing against honor

1. Chapter I: Libel

a. Article 353 - Definition of Libel

Elements:
1. There must be an imputation of–
a. a crime,
b. a vice or defect, real or imaginary, OR
c. any act, omission, condition, status, or
circumstance;
2. The imputation must be made publicly;
3. It must be malicious;
4. The imputation must be directed at a natural or
juridical person, or one who is dead; and
5. The imputation must tend to cause dishonor,
discredit or contempt of the offended party.

Defamation is composed of:

1. Libel – written defamation
2. Slander- oral defamation
3. Slander by deed – defamation through acts

Test of the defamatory character of words used:

Whether they are calculated to induce the hearers to
suppose and understand that the person against
whom they (i.e. the defamatory words) were uttered
was guilty of certain offenses; OR are sufficient to
impeach his honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold
him up to public ridicule. [U.S. v. O’Connell, G.R. No.
L-13173 (1918)]

First element: There must be an imputation of a

crime, a vice or defect, real or imaginary, OR any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstance;

Page 299 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Imputation of a criminal act may be implied from the
acts and statements of the accused.
Imputation of criminal intention is not libelous.
An expression of opinion by one affected by the act
of another and based on actual fact is not libelous.
Second element: The imputation must be made
publicly.
Publication: communication of the defamatory
matter to some third person or persons. There is no
crime if the defamatory imputation is not published.
Sending an unsealed libelous letter to the offended
party constitutes publication. [Magno v. People, G.R.
No. 133896 (2006)]
In libel, publication means making the defamatory
matter, after it is written, known to someone other
than the person against whom it has been written.
Petitioner’s subject letter-reply itself states that the
same was copy furnished to all concerned. Also,
petitioner had dictated the letter to his secretary. It is
enough that the author of the libel complained of has
communicated it to a third person. Furthermore, the
letter, when found in the mailbox, was open, not
contained in an envelope thus, open to public. [Buatis
v. People, G.R. No. 142509 (2006)]
Third element: The publication must be malicious.
Malice in fact – may be shown by proof of ill-will,
hatred or purpose to injure.
Malice in law – presumed from a defamatory
imputation. Proof of malice is not required. (Art. 354,
par.1)
But where the communication is privileged, malice is
not presumed from the defamatory words.
Malice in law is not necessarily inconsistent with
honest or laudable purpose. Even if the publication is
injurious, the presumption of malice disappears upon
proof of good intentions and justifiable motive.
But where malice in fact is present, justifiable motive
cannot exist, and the imputations become actionable.
Fourth element: The imputation must be directed at
a natural or juridical person, or one who is dead.
Page 300 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential that the
victim be identifiable, although it is not necessary that
the person be named. It is enough if by intrinsic
reference the allusion is apparent or if the publication
contains matters of description or reference to facts
and circumstances from which others reading the
article may know the person alluded to, or if the latter
is pointed out by extraneous circumstances so that
those knowing such person could and did understand
that he was the person referred to.
Kunkle v. Cablenews-American and Lyons laid the rule that
this requirement is complied withwhere a third person
recognized or could identify the party vilified in the
article. [People v. Ogie Diaz, G.R. No. 159787 (2007)]
Defamatory remarks directed at a group of persons is
not actionable unless the statements are all-embracing
or sufficiently specific for the victim to be identifiable.
Libel published in different places may be taken
together to establish the identification of the offended
party.
While it is true that a publication's libelous nature
depends on its scope, spirit and motive taken in their
entirety, the article in question as a whole explicitly
makes mention of private complainant Rivera all
throughout. It cannot be said that the article was a
mere general commentary on the alleged existing state
of affairs at the aforementioned public market. Rivera
was not only specifically pointed out several times
therein but was even tagged with derogatory names.
Indubitably, this name-calling was, as correctly found
by the two courts below, directed at the very person
of Rivera himself. [Figueroa v. People, G.R. No. 159818
(2006)]
Fifth element: The imputation must tend to cause
dishonor, discredit or contempt of the offended party.
Dishonor – disgrace, shame or ignominy
Discredit – loss of credit of reputation; disesteem
Contempt – state of being despised
For a statement to be considered malicious, it must be
shown that it was written or published with the
knowledge that they are false OR in reckless disregard of
WON they were false.
Reckless disregard– the defendant entertains
serious doubt as to the truth of the publication, OR
that he possesses a high degree of awareness of their
probable falsity.
To avoid self-censorship that would necessarily
accompany strict liability for erroneous statements,
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

rules governing liability for injury to reputation are

required to allow an adequate margin of error by Kinds of Privilege:
protecting some inaccuracies. [Borjal v. CA, G.R. No. Absolute Qualified
126466 (1999)] NOT actionable.

Fine preferred penalty in libel cases Actionable IF Malice

Narrow and few:
Administrative Circular No. 08-2008 stated the rule of or Bad faith is proven
1. Privileged speeches
preference of fine only rather than imprisonment in (malice in fact)
in Congress
libel cases, having in mind the ff. principles: 2. Statements made in
1. The circular does not remove imprisonment as Based on par 1 and 2 of
judicial proceedings
an alternative penalty Art 354, although the
as long as they are
2. Judges may, in the exercise of their discretion, list is not exclusive
relevant to the issue
determine whether the imposition of fine alone 3. Military affairs
would best serve the interest of justice.
3. Should only a fine be imposed and the accused Art 354 does not cover absolute privilege because
unable to pay the fine, there is no legal obstacle character of communications mentioned therein is
to the application of the RPC on subsidiary lost upon proof of malice in fact.
imprisonment.
Malice in Law Malice in Fact
b. Article 354 - Requirement for Presumed from
To be proved by
Publicity prosecution ONLY IF
defamatory character of
malice in law has been
statement
rebutted
General rule: MALICE IS PRESUMED in every
defamatory imputation, even if it be true, if no good Can be negated by
intention and justifiable motive for making it is Statement is presented evidence of:
shown. to court, and the latter 1. Good motives
will decide whether or AND justifiable
Exceptions: In privileged communications, namely: not it is defamatory ends; or
1. A private communication made by any person to 2. Privileged character
another in the performance of any legal, moral,
or social duty; Requisites of privileged communication under par. 1
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, of Art. 354:
without any comments or remarks, of 1. That the person who made the communication
a. any judicial, legislative or other official had a legal, moral or social duty to make the
proceedings which are not of confidential communication, or, at least, he had an interest to
nature, OR be upheld;
b. any statement, report or speech delivered in 2. That the communication is addressed to an
said proceedings, OR officer or board, or superior, having some
c. any other act performed by public officers in interest or duty in the matter.
the exercise of their functions. 3. That the statements in the communication are
made in good faith without malice in fact.
Defamatory remarks are PRESUMED malicious. The
presumption of malice is REBUTTED, if it is shown Applying to the wrong person due to honest mistake
by the accused that – (see discussion of Art. 361) does not take the case out of privilege. [US v. Bustos,
1. The defamatory imputation is true, IN CASE the G.R. No. L-12592 (1918)]
law allows proof of the truth of the imputation;
2. It is published with good intention; AND Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith.
3. There is justifiable motive for making it
The privileged character simply does away with the
Privileged communication is NOT PRESUMED presumption of malice.
malicious.
The rule is that a communication loses its privileged
character and is actionable on proof of actual malice.

That the statement is a privileged communication is a

matter of defense. To overcome the defense of

Page 301 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

privileged communication under par. 1 of Art. 354, it 5. Radio;

must be shown that: 6. Photograph;
1. The defendant acted with malice in fact; or 7. Painting;
2. There is no reasonable ground for believing the 8. Theatrical exhibition;
charge to be true. 9. Cinematographic exhibition; or
10. Any similar means. (e.g. video broadcast)
Fair and true report of official proceedings
Official proceedings refer to proceedings of the 3 Common characteristic of written libel: their
branches of the government: judiciary, legislative, and permanent nature as a means of publication.
executive.
Use of amplifier system is not libel but oral
Requisites: defamation (slander). But the defamation made in the
1. That it is a fair and true report of a judicial, television program is libel.
legislative, or other official proceedings which are
not confidential in nature, or of a statement, d. Article 356 - Threatening to
report, or speech delivered in said proceedings,
or of any other act performed by a public officer Publish and Offer to Prevent
in the exercise of his functions. Such Publication for a
2. That it is made in good faith; and Compensation
3. That it is without comments or remarks
Acts Punished:
The communication must be pertinent and material 1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning
to the subject matter. – him, his parents, spouse, child or other
members of his family
Doctrine of fair comment: Fair commentaries on 2. Offering to prevent the publication of such libel
matters of public interest are privileged and constitute for compensation or money consideration.
a valid defense in an action for libel or slander.
The essence of this crime is blackmail, which is defined
In order that a discreditable imputation to a public as any unlawful extortion of money by threats of
official may be actionable, it must either be: accusation or exposure.
1. A false allegation of fact; OR
2. A comment based on a false supposition. [People Blackmail can also be in the form of light threats,
v. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444 (2000)] which is punished under ARTICLE 283.
PUBLIC FIGURE – one who, by his
accomplishments, fame, mode of living, OR by e. Article 357 - Prohibited
adopting a profession or calling which gives the public Publication of Acts Referred to in
a legitimate interest in his doings, his affairs and his the Course of Official
character, has become a “public personage” [Ayer
Productions v. Capulong, G.R. No. 82380 (1988)] Proceedings (Gag Law)

Based on the ruling in US v. Ocampo [G.R. No. L-5527 Elements:

(1910)], proof of knowledge of and participation in 1. Offender is a reporter, editor or manager of a
the publication of the offending article is not required, newspaper, daily or magazine;
if the accused has been specifically identified as 2. He publishes facts connected with the private life
“author, editor, or proprietor” or “printer/publisher” of another;
of the publication. 3. Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person.
c. Article 355 - Libel by Writing or Requisites of violation:
Similar Means 1. That the article published contains facts
connected with the private life of an individual;
Libel may be committed by means of: and
1. Writing; 2. That such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue
2. Printing; and reputation of said person.
3. Lithography;
4. Engraving;

Page 302 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Prohibition applies even if the facts are involved in
official proceedings.
Newspaper reports on cases pertaining to adultery,
divorce, legitimacy of children, etc. are barred from
publication.
Under RA 1477, a newspaper reporter cannot be
compelled to reveal the source of the news report he
made, UNLESS the court or a House or committee
of Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by
the security of the state.
f. Article 358 - Slander
Slander, or oral defamation is composed of two
kinds:
1. Simple slander
2. Grave slander, when it is of serious and insulting
nature
Factors that determine the gravity of the oral
defamation:
1. Expressions used
2. Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party.
3. The surrounding circumstances.
Illustration of grave slander:
A woman of violent temper hurled at a respectable
married lady with young daughters offensive and
scurrilous epithets including words imputing
unchastity to the mother and tending to injure the
character of the daughters [U.S. v. Tolosa, G.R. No. L-
12696 (1917)]
Illustration of simple slander:
1. Calling a person a gangster
2. Uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger
with some provocation on the part of the
offended party
The Court does not condone the vilification or
use of scurrilous language on the part of
petitioner, but following the rule that all possible
circumstances favorable to the accused must be
taken in his favor, it is our considered view that
the slander committed by petitioner can be
characterized as slight slander following the
doctrine that: uttering defamatory words in the
heat of anger, with some provocation on the part
of the offended party, constitutes only a light
felony. [Villanueva v. People, G.R. No. 160315
(2006)]
Page 303 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
3. The word “putang ina mo” is a common expression
in the dialect that is often employed not really to
slander but rather to express anger or displeasure.
It is seldom, if ever taken in its literal sense by the
hearer, that is, as a reflection on the virtue of a
mother. [Reyes v. People, G.R. Nos. L-21528-29
(1969)]
The slander need not be heard by the offended party.
g. Article 359 - Slander by Deed
Elements
1. Offender performs any act not included in any
other crime against honor;
2. Such act is performed in the presence of other
person/s; and
3. Such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt
upon the offended party.
Slander by deed is a crime against honor which is
committed by performing any act which casts
dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon another
person.
Slander by deed is of two kinds
1. Simple slander by deed
2. Grave slander by deed
There is no fixed standard in determining whether a
slander is serious or not; hence the courts have
sufficient discretion to determine the same, basing the
finding on the attendant circumstances and matters
relevant thereto.
Slapping the face of another is slander by deed if the
intention of the accused is to cause shame or
humiliation.
Fighting the offended party with intention to insult
him is slander by deed.
Pointing a dirty finger constitutes simple slander by
deed.
Slander by deed and acts of lasciviousness –
distinguished by presence of lewd designs. If such is
present, it is an act of lasciviousness.
Slander by deed and maltreatment – the nature
and effect of maltreatment determines the crime
committed. If the offended party suffered from
shame or humiliation caused by the maltreatment, it
is slander by deed.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
Slander by deed and unjust vexation – If it merely
annoys and irritates, without any other concurring
factor, it is unjust vexation. If the irritation or
annoyance was attended by publicity and dishonor, it
is slander by deed.
h. Article 360 - Persons Responsible
for Libel
1. The person who publishes, exhibits or causes the
publication or exhibition of any defamation in
writing or similar means.
2. The author or editor of a book or pamphlet.
3. The editor or business manager of a daily newspaper,
magazine or serial publication.
4. The owner of the printing plant which publishes a
libelous article with his consent and all other
persons who in any way participate in or have
connection with its publication.
Liability of the editor is the same as that of the author.
Lack of participation in the preparation of libelous
articles does not shield the persons responsible from
liability.
Under Republic Act 8792, otherwise known as the
Electronic Commerce Act, a party or person acting as
a service provider incurs NO civil or criminal liability in
the making, publication, dissemination or distribution
of libelous material if:
1. The service provider does not have actual
knowledge, or is not aware of the facts or
circumstances from which it is apparent that
making, publication, dissemination
distribution of such material is unlawful or
infringes any rights;
2. The service provider does not knowingly receive
a financial benefit directly attributable to the
infringing activity;
3. The service provider does:
a. not directly commit any infringement or
other unlawful act and
b. does not induce or cause another person or party to
commit any infringement or other unlawful
act
c. and/or does not benefit financially from the
infringing activity or unlawful act of another
person or party (Section 30, in relation to Section
5, E-Commerce Law).
Where to file the criminal action? It depends on
who the offended party is.
If he is a public officer, the criminal action can only
be instituted in either:
Page 304 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
1. RTC of the province or city where the libelous
article is printed and first published, OR
2. RTC of the province or city where he held office
at the time of the commission of the offense
If he is a private person, the criminal action may be
brought in:
1. RTC of the province or city where the libelous
article is printed and first published, OR
2. RTC of the province or city where he actually
resided at the time of the commission of the
offense
In order to obviate controversies as to the venue of
the criminal action for written defamation, the
complaint or information should contain allegations
as to whether, at the time the offense was committed,
the offended party was a public officer or a private
individual and where he was actually residing at that
time.
Whenever possible, the place where the written
defamation was printed and first published should
likewise be alleged. That allegation would be a sine qua
non if the circumstance as to where the libel was
printed and first published is used as the basis of the
venue of the action. [Macasaet v. People, G.R. No.
156747 (2005)]
Civil and criminal action must be filed with the same
court.
Offended party must file the complaint for
defamation imputing a crime which cannot be
prosecuted de officio.
or
Libel imputing a vice or defect, not being an
imputation of a crime, is always prosecuted upon
information signed and filed by the fiscal.
i. Article 361 - Proof of Truth
When admissible?
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a
crime regardless of whether the offended party is a
private individual or a public officer.
2. When the offended party is a Government
employee, even if the imputation does not constitute a
crime, provided it is related to the discharge of his
official duties.
Rule of actual malice [or malice in fact]: Even if
the defamatory statement is false, NO liability can
attach IF it relates to official conduct, UNLESS the
public official concerned proves that the statement
was made with actual malice, i.e., with knowledge that
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

it was false or with reckless disregard of WON it was

false. There must be sufficient evidence to permit the
conclusion that the accused in fact entertained serious
That the publication of the article was an honest doubts as to the truth of the statement he published.
mistake is not a complete defense but serves only to Gross/extreme negligence is not sufficient to
mitigate damages where article is libelous per se. establish actual malice. The prosecution bears the
Libel against a public official burden of proving the presence of actual malice in
An open letter addressed to the stockholders of instances where such element is required to establish
OPMC was the subject of a full-page advertisement guilt. The defense of absence of actual malice, even
published in 5 major daily newspapers. Coyiuto, Jr., when the statement turns out to be false, is available
wrote in his capacity as Chairman of the Board and where the offended party is a public official or public
President of OPMC, that there was a sweetheart deal figure.
between Commissioner Mario Jalandoni of the
PCGG and Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. (RCBC) Malice is presumed, however, when the offended
to the prejudice of the Government. party is a private individual. The law presumes its
existence (RPC Art 354) and the accused has the
In the recent case of Vasquez v. Court of Appeals, et. burden of proof to show that he has a justifiable
al., the Court ruled that: "The question is whether reason for the defamatory statement.
from the fact that the statements were defamatory,
malice can be presumed so that it was incumbent j. Article 362 - Libelous Remarks
upon petitioner to overcome such presumption.
Under Art. 361 of the Revised Penal Code, if the 1. Libelous remarks or comments
defamatory statement is made against a public official 2. connected with the matter privileged under the
with respect to the discharge of his official duties and provisions of Art. 354,
functions and the truth of the allegation is shown, the 3. if made with malice,
accused will be entitled to an acquittal even though he 4. shall NOT exempt the author thereof nor the editor
does not prove that the imputation was published or managing editor of a newspaper from criminal
with good motives and for justifiable ends." liability.
Moreover, the Court has ruled in a plethora of cases Libelous remarks or comments on matters privileged,
that in libel cases against public officials which relate if made with malice in fact, do not exempt the author
to official conduct liability will attach only if the public and editor.
official concerned proves that the statement was
made with actual malice, that is, with knowledge that
it was false. 2. Chapter II: Incriminatory
Machinations
Imputations regarding official conduct do not carry
the presumption of malice, hence even if the
defamatory statement is false, if malice was not a. Article 363 - Incriminating
proven, there is no libel. Here petitioner failed to Innocent Person
prove actual malice on the part of the private
respondents. Nor was the Court of the opinion that Elements:
the open letter was written to cast aspersion on the 1. Offender performs an act
good name of the petitioner. 2. By such an act, he incriminates or imputes to an
innocent person the commission of a crime
The paid advertisement merely served as a vehicle to 3. Such act does not constitute perjury.
inform the stockholders of the goings-on in the
business world and only exposed the irregularities Intriguing Incriminating
surrounding the PCGG and RCBC deal and the Against Slander Innocent
parties involved. [Jalandoni v Drilon, G.R. Nos. 115239- Honor Person
40 (2000)] The source of Offender made Offender
the the utterance, performs an
Truth is a legitimate defense but only under the defamatory where the act by which he
condition that the accused has been prompted in utterance is source of the directly
making the statement by good motives and for unknown and defamatory incriminates or
justifiable ends. [Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. the offender nature of the imputes to an
203335 (2014)]

Page 305 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

simply repeats utterance is innocent whether forbearing to impose imprisonment

or passes the known, and person the would depreciate the seriousness of the offense,
same to offender commission of work violence on the social order, or otherwise
blemish the makes a a crime be contrary to the imperative of justice;
honor or republication 3. Should only a fine be imposed and the accused
reputation of thereof be unable to pay the fine, there is no legal
another obstacle to the application of the RPC provision
on subsidiary imprisonment.
As far as this crime is concerned, this has been
interpreted to be possible only in the so-called RA 10175: The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012
planting of evidence. If this act is resorted to, to enable
officers to arrest the subject, the crime is unlawful arrest The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in
through incriminating innocent persons. Article 355 of the RPC, as amended, committed
through a computer system or any other similar
This crime cannot be committed through verbal means which may be devised in the future constitute
incriminatory statements. the offense of cybercrime punishable under the Anti-
Cybercrime Law. [Sec. 4(c)(4) R.A. 10175]
Intriguing Perjury by
Innocent Making False Defamation Penalty
Person Accusations All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, as
Public and amended, and special laws, if committed by, through
Giving of false malicious and with the use of information and communications
Act of planting statement imputation technologies shall be covered by the relevant
evidence and under oath or calculated to provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to
the like in making a false cause be imposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that
order to affidavit, dishonor, provided for by the RPC, as amended, and special
incriminate an imputing to the discredit, or laws, as the case may be.[Sec. 6 R.A. 10175]
innocent person the contempt
person commission of upon the
a crime offended
party

b. Article 364 - Intriguing against

Honor
Elements:
1. Offender disseminates any intrigue
2. Its principal purpose is to blemish the honor or
reputation of a person.

Intriguing against honor is referred to as gossiping:

the offender, without ascertaining the truth of a
defamatory utterance, repeats the same and pass it on
to another, to the damage of the offended party

Administrative Circular 08-2008 Re: Guidelines in

the Observance of a Rule of Preference in the
Imposition of Penalties in Libel Cases
1. This Administrative Circular does not remove
imprisonment as an alternative penalty for the
crime libel under Article 355 of the RPC
2. The Judges concerned may, in the exercise of
sound discretion, and taking into consideration
the peculiar circumstances of each case,
determine whether the imposition of a fine alone
would best serve the interests of justice or

Page 306 of 309

U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
N. Title XIV. Quasi-
Offenses
1. Article 365 - Imprudence and
Negligence
Quasi-offenses punished:
a. Committing through reckless imprudence any act
which, had it been intentional, would constitute a
grave or less grave felony or light felony;
b. Committing through simple imprudence or
negligence an act which would otherwise
constitute a grave or a less serious felony;
c. Causing damage to the property of another
through reckless imprudence or simple
imprudence or negligence;
d. Causing through simple imprudence or
negligence some wrong which, if done
maliciously, would have constituted a light
felony.
Imprudence Negligence
Lack of foresight;
Lack of skill; deficiency
deficiency of
of action
perception
Failure in precaution Failure in advertence
Imprudence or negligence is not a crime itself; it is
simply a way of committing a crime. It becomes
punishable only when it results in a crime.
The rules for graduating penalties (under Art. 64)
based on mitigating and aggravating circumstances
are NOT applicable to offenses punishable thru
criminal negligence.
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE: failure to render
immediate assistance to the injured party. This
qualifying circumstance must be distinguished from
the punishable OMISSION under Article 275.
If the danger that may result from the criminal
negligence is clearly perceivable, the imprudence is
reckless. If it could hardly be perceived, the criminal
negligence would only be SIMPLE.
Criminal negligence is only a modality in incurring
criminal liability. This is so because under Article 3, a
felony may result from dolo or culpa. THEREFORE,
even if there are several results arising from ONLY
ONE CARELESSNESS, the accused may only be
prosecuted under one count for the criminal
negligence. Otherwise, double jeopardy would arise.
Page 307 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements of Reckless Imprudence:
a. The offender does or fails to do an act
b. The doing of or the failure to do the act is
voluntary
c. It is without malice
d. Material damage results
e. There is inexcusable lack of precaution on the
part of the offender, taking into consideration:
1. His employment/occupation
2. Physical condition
3. Degree of intelligence
4. Other circumstances regarding the persons,
time and place
Note:
a. Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide
b. Resulting in Physical Injuries
Inexcusable lack of precaution
Factors to be considered in determining inexcusable
lack of precaution:
a. Employment or occupation
b. Degree of intelligence and physical condition of
the offender; and
c. Other circumstances regarding persons, time,
and place.
Force majeure is an event which cannot be foreseen,
or which being foreseen is inevitable; it implies an
extraordinary circumstance independent of the will of
the actor.
Once malice is proven, recklessness disappears. [People
v. Agliday, supra.]
Elements of Simple Imprudence
a. There is lack of precaution on the part of the
offender
b. The damage impending to be caused is not
immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest.
Test of negligence: Would a prudent man, in the
position of the person to whom negligence is
attributed, foresee harm as a result of the course
actually pursued? If so, it was the duty of the actor to
refrain from that course or to take precautions against
its mischievous results, and the failure to do so
constitutes negligence.
The measure of the damage should be the difference
in value of property immediately before the incident
and immediately after the repair.
Art. 64 relative to mitigating and aggravating
circumstances is not applicable to crimes committed
through negligence.
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II
The penalties provided in Art. 365 are not applicable
in the ff. cases:
a. When the penalty provided for the offense is
equal to or lower than those provided in the first
two paragraphs of Art. 365, in which case the
courts shall impose the penalty next lower in
degree that that which should be imposed, in the
period which they may deem proper to apply.
b. When, by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, the death of a
person shall be caused, in which case the
defendant shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.
When death or serious bodily injury to any person has
resulted, the motor vehicle driver at fault shall be
punished under the Penal Code.
Contributory negligence is not a defense. It only
mitigates criminal liability.
Sec. 59 of Act 3992 (Revised Motor Vehicle Law)
gives the right of way to the driver coming from the
right of another, when both are travelling on
intersecting streets of the same class. The grant of
right of way does not relieve the motorist from the
duty of keeping a lookout for motorists entering the
intersection from his left or right.
Doctrine of last clear chance
The contributory negligence of the party injured will
not defeat the action if it be shown that the accused
might, by exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the negligence of
the injured party.
Emergency rule
An automobile driver who, by negligence of another
and not by his own negligence, is suddenly placed in
an emergency and compelled to act instantly to avoid
collision or injury is not guilty of negligence if he
makes such a choice which a person of ordinary
prudence placed in such situation might make even
though he did not make the wisest choice.
One who suddenly finds himself in a place of danger,
and is required to act without time to consider the
best means that may be adopted to avoid the
impending danger, is not guilty of negligence, if he
fails to adopt what subsequently and upon reflection
may appear to have been a better method, unless the
emergency in which he finds himself is brought about
by his own negligence. [Gan v. CA, G.R. No. L-44264
(1988)]
Page 308 of 309
CRIMINAL LAW
Violation of a rule or regulation or law is proof of
negligence. But negligence cannot be predicated upon
the mere fact of minority or lack of an operator’s
license.
The penalty next higher in degree is imposed if the
offender fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties
such help as may be in his hands to give.
Carillo v. People [G.R. No. 86890 (1994)]: The
gravamen of SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE is the failure
to exercise the diligence necessitated or called for by
the situation which was NOT immediately life-
destructive BUT which culminated, as in the present
case, in the death of a human being 3 days later.
Medical malpractice, which is a form of negligence,
consists in the failure of a physician or surgeon to
apply to his practice of medicine that degree of care
and skill which is ordinarily employed by the
profession generally, under similar conditions, and in
like surrounding circumstances. [Garcia-Rueda v.
Pascasio, G.R. No. 118141 (1997)]
Res ipsa loquitur – the fact of the occurrence of an
injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances, may
permit an inference or raise a presumption of
negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case,
and present a question of fact for the defendant to
meet with an explanation. [Ramos v. CA, G.R. No.
124354 (1999)]
Requisites for the application of res ipsa loquitur
a. The accident was of a kind which does NOT
ordinarily occur UNLESS someone is negligent;
b. The instrumentality or agency which caused the
injury was under the exclusive control of the
person in charge; and
c. The injury suffered must NOT have been due to
any voluntary action or contribution of the
person injured.
Ordinarily, only physicians and surgeons of skill and
experience are competent to testify as to whether a
patient has been treated or operated upon with a
reasonable degree of skill and care.
HOWEVER, testimony as to the statements and acts
of physicians and surgeons, external appearances, and
manifest conditions which are observable by any one
may be given by non-expert witnesses. [Reyes v. Sisters
of Mercy Hospital, G.R. No. 130547 (2000)]
Illustration:
People v. Carmen [G.R. No. 137268 (2001)]: It
would appear that accused-appellants are members of
a cult and that the bizarre ritual performed over the
U.P. LAW BOC CRIMINAL LAW II CRIMINAL LAW

victim was consented to by the victim's parents. With 'homicide through reckless imprudence', and the like;
the permission of the victim's parents, accused- when the strict technical sense is, more accurately,
appellant Carmen, together with the other accused- 'reckless imprudence resulting in homicide'; or 'simple
appellants, proceeded to subject the boy to a imprudence causing damages to property'."
"treatment" calculated to drive the "bad spirit" from
the boy's body. Unfortunately, the strange procedure
resulted in the death of the boy. Thus, accused-
appellants had no criminal intent to kill the boy.

Their liability arises from their reckless imprudence

because they ought that to know their actions would
not bring about the cure. They are, therefore, guilty of
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and not of
murder.

Art. 365 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,

states that reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily,
but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from
which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person performing such act.

Compared to intentional felonies, such as homicide or

murder, what takes the place of the element of malice
or intention to commit a wrong or evil i: the failure of
the offender to take precautions due to lack of skill
taking into account his employment, or occupation,
degree of intelligence, physical condition, and other
circumstances regarding persons, time and place.

The elements of reckless imprudence are apparent in

the acts done by accused-appellants which, because of
their lack of medical skill in treating the victim of his
alleged ailment, resulted in the latter's death. As
already stated, accused-appellants, none of whom is a
medical practitioner, belong to a religious group,
known as the Missionaries of Our Lady of Fatima,
which is engaged in faith healing.

Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro, supra.: The accused

got involved in a car accident for which he was
charged with two separate offenses (RI resulting to
slight physical injuries and RI resulting to homicide
and damage to property). He was convicted of the
first offense and he wanted the second information
quashed on the ground of double jeopardy. The Court
held that the Reckless Imprudence is a single crime
and the consequences on persons and property are
material only to determine the penalty. The
conviction or acquittal of such quasi-offense bars
subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-offense,
regardless of its various resulting acts. The law
penalizes the negligent act and not its result.

Rafael Reyes Trucking v. People, G.R. No.

129029 (2000): Much of the confusion has arisen
from the common use of such descriptive phrase as

Page 309 of 309