nr vo4auwz| 8Facutty or Crvit Law (1734) CRIMINAL LAW 2021 GOLDEN NOTES FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS MANILAThe UST GOLDEN NOTES is the annual student-edited bar review material of the University of Santo Tomas, Faculty of Civil Law. Communications regarding the Notes should be addressed to the Academics Committee of the Team: Bar-Ops. Address: Academics Committee UST Bar Operations Faculty of Civil Law University of Santo Tomas Espafia, Manila 1008 Tel.No: (02) 731-4027 (02) 406-1611 loc. 8578 Academics Committee Faculty of Civil Law University of Santo Tomas Espajia, Manila 1008 All rights reserved by the Academics Committee of the Faculty of Civil Law of the Pontifical and Royal University of Santo Tomas, the Catholic University of the Philippines. 2021 Edition. No portion of this material may be copied or reproduced in books, pamphlets, outlines or notes, whether printed, mimeographed, typewritten, copied in different electronic devises or in any other form, for distribution or sale, without a written permission. A copy of this material without the corresponding code either proceeds from an illegal source or isin possession of one who has no authority to dispose the same. Released in the Philippines, 2021.ACADEMIC YEAR 2020-2021 CIVIL LAW STUDENT COUNCIL LYODYCHIE Q.CAMARAO PRESIDENT MARIA FRANCES FAYE R. GUTIERREZ VICE PRESIDENT INTERNAL ‘STEPHEN FLOYD A. GOPEZ VICE PRESIDENT EXTERNAL KRYSTAL GAYLE R. DIGAY ‘SECRETARY NATHAN RAPHAEL D.L AGUSTIN ‘TREASURER GIAN JUSTIN E. VERONA PUBLICRELATIONS OFFICER IRIS ABIGAIL C. PORAQUE CHIEF-OF-STAFF UST BAR-OPS KRIZA NINA B, MALALUAN CHAIRPERSON ELISHA ELAINE D. BAYOT VICE-CHAIRPERSON INTERNAL JOSEPHINE GRACE W. ANG VICE CHAIRPERSON EXTERNAL MARINETTE M. SOBREVILLA SECRETARY SARAH ANGELA D. EVA HEAD, PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER REBECCA JOY M. MALITAO HEAD, FINANCE COMMITTEE JEDIDIAH R. PADUA HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMMODATIONS COMMITTEE SABINA MARIA H. MABUTAS ASST. HEAD, HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS COMMITTEE JOEMARI MATHEW R. AGARIN HEAD, LOGISTICS COMMITTEE JOHN FREDERICK A. NOJARA LOGISTICS COMMITTE! KIER JOEN V.UY LOGISTICS COMMITTE! (CHRISTINE JOYCE P. ANDRES ‘SENIOR MEMBER ELOUISA ANN D.C. CARREON ‘SENIOR MEMBER NICOLE MARIE A. CORTES ‘SENIOR MEMBER PATRICIA MAE D. GUILLERMO ‘SENIOR MEMBER GLENN MATTHEW C.MANLAPID ‘SENIOR MEMBER CIARIT. MENDOZA ‘SENIOR MEMBER MARYLOU RENZI M. OLOTEO SENIOR MEMBER LOUELLE JUDE B. QUE ‘SENIOR MEMBER JAMES ROSS L.TAN SENIOR MEMBER ATTY. AL CONRAD B. ESPALDON ‘ADVISERACADEMICS COMMITTEE 2021 MARIA FRANCES FAYE R. GUTIERREZ SECRETARY GENERAL NATHAN RAPHAEL D.L, AGUSTIN ASST. SECRETARY GENERAL JOHN EDWARD F. FRONDA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ‘ANGEL ISAH M. ROMERO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE KIRBY ANNE C. RENIA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE KAREN ABBIE C. ASPIRAS EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE JOSE CHRISTIAN ANTHONY I. PINZON EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MARIA FRANCES FAYE R. GUTIERREZ LAYOUT ARTIST CIARIT. MENDOZA COVER DESIGN ARTIST CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE 2021 JUSTINE ISCAH MADRILEJOS CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE HEAD PRECIOUS JOY D. PACIONELA ASST. HEAD, CRIMINAL LAW 1 LARISA C. SERRANO ASST. HEAD, CRIMINAL LAW 2 JOSE J. AZURIN IIL ASST. HEAD, SPECIAL PENAL LAWS MEMBERS RON-SOPHIA NICOLE C. ANTONIO MA. JERMAINE A. MARTINEZ DANIELLE B. BARANDA. SOPHIA MAE P. PIMENTAL EARL NICOLE B. BARRIETA REEM D. PRUDENCIO LYNDON C. BENIDO VINCE RAPHAEL P. ROMANA GERMAINE VIDAL. CARREON KURT RANIEL E, RONQUILLO PRECIOUS DIANNE A. CONCEPCION MARY ANGELIQUE M. SAGUID LANA MEDEYA L. DE GUZMAN JOHN DON CARLO P. TURQUEZA NUVI MAECY H. DELA CRUZ DIANNE MICAH ANGELA YUMANG SABINA MARIA H. MABUTAS ATTY. VINS PLATON AdviserACADEMICS COMMITTEE 2020 AYADOMINIQUE S. CAPARAS SECRETARY GENERAL MARIA FRANCES FAYE R. GUTIERREZ ASST. SECRETARY GENERAL RUTH MAE 6. SANVICTORES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE NICOLEG. AMANTE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE JAYSON GABRIEL R. SORIANO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CARA ANGELAN. FLORES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE IANA CASSANDRA Y. ESMILE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AYA DOMINIQUE S. CAPARAS LAYOUT ARTIST CIARIT. MENDOZA COVER DESIGN ARTIST CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE 2020 JOHN EDWARD F. FRONDA ‘CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE HEAD. NATHAN RAPHAEL AGUSTIN ASST. HEAD, CRIMINAL LAW 1 ANGEL ISAH ROMERO ASST. HEAD, CRIMINAL LAW2 LOUIS-MARI OPINA. ASST. HEAD, SPECIAL PENAL LAWS MEMBERS MARIE ANGELIQUE AQUINO GERIE ROSE MANZANO KIMBERLY BALIGOD ELAINE MARALLAG LYZETH CHONG COLEEN PALISOC APRIL ANNE FLORES SARAH MAE DY SIM MA, ALLYANA LAGUNILLA JOSHUA MARTIN VILLARICA JUSTINE ISCAH MADRILEJOS. ANGELICA FAITH YANCHA ATTY, VINS PLATON ‘AdviserFACULTY OF CIVIL LAW UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS ACADEMIC OFFICIALS ATTY. NILO T. DIVINA REV. FR. ISIDRO C. ABANO, 0.P. DEAN REGENT ATTY. ARTHUR B. CAPILI FACULTY SECRETARY ATTY. ELGIN MICHAEL C. PEREZ LEGAL COUNSEL UST CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTO CONCEPCION LEGAL AID CLINIC JUDGE PHILIP A. AGUINALDO SWDB COORDINATOR LENY G. GADIANA, R.G.C. GUIDANCE COUNSELOROUR DEEPEST APPRECIATION TO OUR MENTORS AND INSPIRATION JUSTICE EDILBERTO G. SANDOVAL JUDGE OSCAR B. PIMENTEL JUDGE RICO SEBASTIAN D. LIWANAG JUDGE PHILIP A. AGUINALDO ATTY. VICTORIA C. GARCIA JUDGE PEDRO T. DABU, JR. For being our guideposts in understanding the intricate sphere of Criminal Law. - Academics Committee 2021DISCLAIMER THE RISK OF USE OF THIS BAR REVIEW MATERIAL SHALL BE BORNE BY THE USERTABLE OF CONTENTS PART I: REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC) BOOK 1 1 _ PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW A. FUNDAMENTAL AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN CRIMINAL LAW. 1. Malain se and Mala Prohibita.. 2. Interpretation of Penal Laws. 3 Applicability and effectivity a. Generality... b. Territoriality ¢. Prospectivity /Irretrospectivit 1. Criminal liabilities and felonies.. a. Classifications of felonies... - b. Aberratio ictus error in personae, and practer intentionem Impossible crime... Stages of acts of execution... £ 8 Conspiracy and proposal : a . 1 Continued crimes... Complex crimes and composite crimes. a. Justifying circumstances... b. Exempting circumstances. Mitigating circumstances... a Agggravating circumstances Alternative circumstances, Absolutory causes. 3. Persons liable and degree of participation. Principal’ ncennnen b. Accomplices.. Accessories. d._ Multiple offenders, 4. Penalties. ‘a Imposable penalties... b. Classification. Duration and effect d._ Application of penalties... Modification and extinction of criminal liability. Civil liability in criminal cases. an PART I: REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC) BOOK I B, CRIMES UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE.. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER... CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTERES: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS .. CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFF CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY... CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS.CRIMES AGAINST HONO! CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE... PART Ill: SPECIAL PENAL LAWS INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW (ACT 4103, AS AMENDED) PROBATION LAW (PD 968 ASAMENDED BY RA 10707} ANTI-CARNAPPING LAW (RA 10883).. ANTFELECTRICITY AND ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINES /MATERIALSPILFERAGE ACT. FISHERIES CODE (RA 8550, AS AMENDED BY RA 10654).. ANTI-FENCING LAW (PD 1612) BOUNCING CHECKS LAW (B.P. 2: SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE - INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR CERTAIN FORMS OF SWINDLING ORESTAFA (PD 1689) MIGRANT WORKERS AND OVERSEAS FILIPINOS ACT OF 1995 (RA 8042, AS AMENDED BY RA 10022). ANTFILLEGAL NUMBERS GAMES LAW INCREASING THE PENALTIES FOR ILLEGAL NUMBERS GAME (PD 1602, AS AMENDED BY RA 9287) COMPREHENSIVE LAW ON FIREARMSAND AMMUNITION (PD 1866, AS AMENDED BY RA 8294 AND RA 10591), ANTLHAZING LAW ( ) COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT (R.A. 9165) CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT (RA 3019, AS AMENDED)... ANTF-PLUNDER ACT (RA 7080, AS AMENDED)... ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT OF 2004 (RA 9160, AS AMENDED).. OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE (PD 1829) ANT-TORTURE ACT (RA 9745) HUMAN SECURITY ACT (RA 9372 ‘THE TERRORISM FINANCING PRE\ ANTE-WIRE TAPPING ACT (RA 4200).. CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT (RA 10175) ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY LAW (RA 9775) ANTI-PHOTO AND VIDEO VOYEURISM ACT OF 2009 (RA 9995) ANTI-SEXUAL HARASSMENT (RA 7877) ANTL-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT (RA 9208, AS AMENDED BY RA 10364 ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT (RA 9262).. ANTI-CHILD ABUSE LAW (RA 7610, AS AMENDED). SAFE SPACES ACT (RA 11313} DATA PRIVACY ACT OF 2012 (RA 10173). ANTF-ARSON LAW (PD 1613). ANTFHIJACKING LAW (RA 6235) ANTLPIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY (PD 532) CHILDREN'S SAFETY ON MOTORCYCLES ACT (RA 10666) ENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT (RA 9344, AS AMENDED BY RA 10630 IN RELATION TO FD. ‘TRUST RECEIPTS LAW (PD 115) ANTIALIAS LAW (CA.142, AS AMENDED) .CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I, REVISED PENAL CODE FUNDAMENTAL AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES IN CRIMINAL LAW. PNR Criminal law is a branch of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment. ‘Theories in criminallaw 1. Classical theory ~ The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of the penalty is retribution. It is endeavoured to cstablish a mechanical and direct proportion between crime and_ penalty. ‘There is a scant regard to the human element. NOTE: The RPC is generally governed by this, theory, 2. Posiivist theory ~ The basis of criminal liability is the sum of the social, natural, and economic phenomena to which the actor is exposed. The purposes of penalty are prevention and correction. The penalties imposed must not only be retributive but must also be reformative. (Campanilla, 2020) ‘This theory is exemplified in the provisions regarding impossible crimes (Art. 4, RPC), the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty (Art. 13, par. 7, PC), and habitual delinquency. (Art. 62, par. 5, RPC) 3. Eelectic or Mixed theory ~ It is a combination of positivist and classical thinking wherein crimes that are economic and social in nature should be dealt in a positive manner; thus, the law is more compassionate. Ideally, the classical theory is applied to heinous crimes, whereas, the positivist is made to work on economic and social crimes. 4. Utilitarian or Protective theory - The primary purpose of punishment under criminal law is the protection of society from actual and potential wrongdoers. The courts, therefore, in exacting retribution for the wronged society, should direct the punishment to potential or actual wrongdoers since criminal law is directed agalust acts or omissions which the society does not approve. Consistent with this theory is the mala prohibita principle which punishes an offense regardless of malice or criminal intent. Equipoise Rule Where the evidence in a criminal case is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the scales in favor of theaccused. Under this rule, where the evidence on an issue of fact is in equipoise or there is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates, the party having the burden of proof loses. The equipoise rule finds application if the inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt, for then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty, and does not suffice to produce a conviction. (Marla Tin v. People, GR. No, 126480, August 10, 2001) Legal basis for inflicting punishment The power to punish violators of criminal law comes within the police power of the State. It is the injury inflicted to the public which a criminal action seeks to redress and not the injury to the individual ‘Sources of criminal or penaliaws 1. The Revised Penal Code (RPC) (Act No. 3815) and its amendments; 2. Special penal laws passed by the Philippine Commission, Philippine Assembly, Philippine Legislature, National Assembly, Batasang Pambansa, and Congress of the Philippines; 3. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial Law by President Marcos: 4. Penal Executive Orders issued during President Corazon Aquino’s term; 5. Decisions of the Supreme Court of the Philippines and Spain; 6. Codigo Penal of Sp 7. Various penal ordinaces passed by local legislative bodies. and NOTE: There are no common law crimes in the Philippines (Reyes, 2017), as embodied in the Latin maxim aullum crimen, nulla poeno sine lege- there is no crime when there is no law punishing the same. Univensiry oF Santo Tomas @ Pacuury or civit LawBook |— FELONIES Limitations on the power of Congress to enact penal_laws (Article I. Sec 22, 1987 Constitution) 1. Ex post facto law - The Congress cannot make an ex post facto law. (Article ill, Sec 22, 1987 Constitution) This limitation probibite the passage of retroactive laws which are prejudicial to the accused. 2. Bill of attainder - The Congress cannot make a bill of attainder. (Article Il, Sec 22, 1987 Constitution) This limitation requires that criminal laws must be of general application and must clearly define the acts and omissions punished as crimes. 3. Equal Protection Clause ~ The Congress must legislate laws that equally treat persons or properties similarly situated with respect to the conferment of rights or imposition of obligations. (Article Il, Sec 22, 1987 Constitution; Campanilla, 2020) 4. Due Process Clause - The Congress must. legislate laws that do not deprive a person his life, liberty, or property and must be given the opportunity to be heard and afforded all rights to which he is entitled, (Article I, Sec 22 1987 Constitution; Campanilla, 2020) Basic maxims in criminallaw 1. Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege (There is no crime when there is no law punishing the same) - No matter how wrongful, evil, or bad the act is, if there is no law defining the act, the same is not considered a crime. 2. Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea (The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal) - This is true to a felony characterized by dolo (deceit), but not to a felony resulting from culpa (fault) 3. Doctrine of Pro Reo - Whenever a penal law to be construed or applied admits of two interpretations, one lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, the interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the offender will be adopted. 4. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus (An act done by me against my will is not my act) — Whenever a person is under a compulsion of irresistible force or uncontrollable fear to do an act against his will, in which that act produces a crime or offense, such person is exempted in any criminal lability arising from said act. Following the Doctrine of Pro Reo, crimes under Art. 48 of the RPC are complexed and punished with a single penalty (that prescribed for the most serious crime and to be imposed in its maximum period). The rationale being that the accused who commits two crimes with a single criminal impulse demonstrates lesser perversity than when the crimes are committed by different sets and several criminal resolutions. (People ¥ Comadre, G.R. No, 153559, June 8, 2004) Crime ‘The generic term used to refer to a wrongdoing punished either under the RPC or under a special Jaw. It is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it, (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 2012, as cited in Reyes, 2017) Classifications ofcrime 1. As to the manner or mode of execution (art 3, RPC) a Dolo or felonies deliberate intent b. Gulpa or those committed by means of fault committed with 2. As tothe stage of execution (Art. 6, RPC) a Consummated b. Frustrated Attempted 3. As togravity (Art. 9, RPC) a Light felonies b. Less grave felonies Grave felonies 4, Astonature a Malain se b. Mala prohibite 5. Astocount Compound Composite or special complex Complex, under Art. 48 of the RPC Continued Continuing panee UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTESCRIMINAL LAW 6. As todivision and, a. Formal felonies - those which are always therefore, consummated (eg. physical injuries). good faith b. Material felonies - those which have and lack of various stages of execution, criminal & Those which do not admit of the intent are frustrated stage (eg. rape and theft} valid defenses Speciallaw unless they are the A penal law which punishes acts not defined and products of penalized by the RPC. They are statutes enacted criminal by the legislative branch which are penal in negligence or character, but are not amendmentsto the RPC. culpa’ Mitigating | Such’ POTENT and circumstance aggravatin }s are not Malo ins vis-i-vis mala prohibita (1999, 5 appreciated 2001, 2003, 2005, 2010,2017 BAR) Asto | circumsta | unless the attending | nces are | special law 7m circumstance | appreciate | has adopted Pirin es din] the scheme or There | It is sufficient imposing | scale of must bea that the the penalties criminal | prohibited penalties [under — the intent’ | actwasdone RPC (a) Good | (a) Good Wrong | Wrong faith; faith; oF from its | merely () lack | (b) | lack of very because it is of criminal nature | prohibited by criminal | intent are not aa ty Astotega | mentor | valid iminal | Criminal Astrea | (0) defenses. intent | intent is not a negligence | It is enough governs | necessary are valid | that the defenses. | prohibition Generally, | Generally, it was it is] is punishable voluntarily punishabl | under special violated Astotheir |e under | laws Criminal | Criminal concepts | the RPC liability is | liability is NOTE: Notall incurred | generally violations of Asto | even incurred only special laws criminal | when the} when the are mala liability | crime is | crime is prohibit. attempted | consummate Even if the or q crime is frustrated punished The The penalty under a penalty is | of the special law, if computed | offender is the act on the| the same as punished is Aetonete® | basis of | they are all taney artcpation |S a | penal wrong the principal same is offender, malum in se, accomplic 3 UNIVERSITY oF SaNTo Tomas Pacuty oF Civ LawBook |— FELONIES accessory. NOTE: The crime of technical malversation, punished under Art. 220 of the RPC, was held to be a crime that is malum prohibitum. The law punishes the act of diverting public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular public purpose for another public purpose. The prohibited act is not inherently immoral, but becomes a criminal offense because positive law forbids its commission on considerations of public policy, order, and convenience. Therefore, good faith and lack of criminal intent are not valid defenses. (Ysidoro v. People, G.R. No. 192330, November 14, 2012) (2015 BAR) Miolations of special Jaws which are considered malain se ‘The following examples of violations under special penal laws are considered mala in se: 1. Piracy in Philippine waters (P.D. No. 532): 2. Brigandage in the highways (P.D. No. 532) and 3. Plunder (RA. 7080). NOTE: When the special laws require that the punished act be committed knowingly and willfully, criminal intent is required to be proved before criminal liability may arise. Effect_on_the nature of the crime when covered by special law and it uses the CaealesinneRee Even if a special law uses the nomenclature of penalties under the RPC, that alone will not make the act o omission a crime mala in se.'The special law may only intend for the Code to apply as supplementary to the special law. (People ¥. Simon, GR. No 93028, July 29, 1994) EN When the law is clear and unambiguous, there is no room for Interpretation but only for the application of the law. However, if there is ambiguity: 1. Penal laws are strictly construed against the State and liberally in favor of the accused. 2. In the interpretation of the provisions of the RPC, the Spanish text is controlling Pon eg urea GR: Penal laws are applied prospectively. XPN: When retrospective application will be favorable to the person guilty of a felony, provided that: 1. The offender is NOT a habitual dolinquent under Art. 62(5); and 2. The new or amendatory law does NOT provide against its retrospective application, Reason for the exception: The sovereign, in enacting a subsequent penal law more favorable to the accused, has recognized that the greater severity of the former law is unjust. Habitual delinquent He isa person who, within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of falsification, robbery, estafa, theft, or serious or less serious physical injuries, is found guilty of any sald crimes a third tme or oftener. Ex-post facto law It is an act which when committed was not a crime, cannot be made so by statute without violating the constitutional prohibition as to ex post facto laws. ‘APPLICABILITY AND EFFECTIVITY OF THE PENAL CODE Rone a en RIK ESOL Pesan 1. Generality GR: Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to the principles of international law and to treaty stipulations. (Art. 14, Civil Code of the Philippines) (2015 BAR) XPNs: 1. Treaty stipulations and_ international agreements, eg. PH-US Visiting Forces Agreement and Asion Development. Philippines Agreement (1966); UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTES 4CRIMINAL LAW 2 2. Laws of Preferential Application, eg. RA, 75 penalizes acts which would impair the proper observance by the Republic and its inhabitants of the immunities, rights, and privileges of duly-accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the Philippines. (2014 BAR); The principles of publicinternational law; 4, Parliamentary Immunity: Members of the Congress are not liable for libel or slander in connection with any speech delivered on the floor of the house during a regular oor special session. (Art. IV, Sec. 11, 1987 Constitution); 5. Public vessels of foreign fri 6, Members of foreign country stationed in the Philippines with its consent. idly power; Examples: a. Sovereigns and other Chiefs of States. b. Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary, ministers residents, and charges d'affaires. NOTE: Only the heads of the diplomatic missions, as well as members of the diplomatic staff, excluding the members of administrative, technical and service staff, are accorded diplomatic rank. A_consul_is_not entitled to the privileges and immunities of an ambassador or minister, Consuls, vice-consuls, and other commercial representatives of foreign nation are NOT diplomatic officers. Consuls are subject to the penal laws of the country where they are assigned. (Minucher v. CA, GR. No. 142396, February 11, 2003) Territoriality GR: The penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its territory. (1994 BAR) XPNs: Art. 2of the RPC (2000 BAR) 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship (fact of registration isin the Philippines); 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coi currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands (Arts 163 & 156); 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding number; 4. While being public officers | or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations. (Arts. 114-123) Extraterritoriality. It means the law will have application even outside the territorial jurisdiction of the state. (Gapit, 2013) Q: X went to Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) in Pasay City and boarded an airship of the Philippine Airlines destined for USA. As the airship passes the Pacific Ocean, X killed Y, a fellow passenger. Which court can try the case of murder committed by X: is it the Philippine Courts or the U.S. Courts? A: The Philippine Courts. Art. 2 of the RPC provides that its provisions shall be applied to those who “should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship.” (Gapit, 2013) 3. Prospectivity /Irretrospectivity GR: Acts o omissions classified as crimes will be scrutinized in accordance with relevant penal laws if committed after the effectivity of those penal laws, The law enforced at the time of the commission of a certain crime should be applied. Article 366 of the RPC provides that crimes are punished in accordance with the law in force at the time of their commission. (Gapit, 2013) NOTE: The maxim Lex Prospicit, Non Respicit means the law looks forward, never backward. XPN; Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect, insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. (Art. 22, RPC) XPNs to the XPN: The new law cannot be given retroactive effect even if favorable to the accused Univensiry oF Santo Tomas @ Pacuury or civit LawBook |— FELONIES a. When the new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing causes of actions. (Tavera Valdez, GR. No. 922, November 8 1902) b. When the offender is a habitual delinquent as defined in Rule Sin Art. 62 OfRPC. (Art. 22, par. 5, RPC) FELONIES PNT Felonies Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC, NOTE: If it is not under the RPC, it is called an offense. Act as contemplated in criminal law An act refers to any bodily movement tending to produce some effect in the external world, it being unnecessary that the same be actually produced, as the possibility of its production is sufficient. (Reyes, 2017) Omissi a An omission contemplated In criminal law means inaction the failure to perform a positive duty which one is bound to do. There must be 2 law requiring the doing or performance of a duty. (Reyes, 2017) Examples: Misprision of treacon, failure of an accountable officer to render accounts Hlements of felonies (2015 BAR) 1. Anactor omission; 2. Punishable by the Revised Penal Code; and 3. The act is performed or the omission incurred by means of deceit or fault. (People v. Gonzales, GR. No. 80762, March 19, 1990) Kinds of felonies 1. Intentional felonies (Dolo) ~ committed with deliberate intent to cause injury to another (with malice); 2. Culpable felonies (Culpa) - where the wrongful acts result from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of ski (unintentional, without malice). 1.999, 2001,2003, 2005.2010 BAR) Asto [Actismalicious ]Act is not] Malice malicious With deliberate [Injury caused is intent Junintentional, jit being an Asto incident of| intent another —_act| performed without malice Has intention [Wrongful _ act Astothe |to cause alresults from source of |wrong imprudence, the wrong negligence, lack| committed lof foresight, or| lack of skill Requisites ofdalo NOTE: If any of the aforesaid requisites is absent, there is NO dolo. 1. Criminal intent (wens rea) ~ the purpose use a particular means to effect such result Intent to commit an act with malice, being purely a mental process, is presumed from the proof of commission ofan unlawful act. It is a mental state; hence, its existence is shown by overt acts NOTE: If there is NO criminal intent, the act is justified. Hence, offender incurs NO criminal liability. 2. Freedom of action ~ voluntariness on the part of the person to commit the act or NOTE: If there is lack of freedom, the offender is exempt from liability 3. Intelligence - the capacity to know and understand the consequences and morality of humanacts NOTE: If there is lack of intelligence, the offender is exempt from liability. ‘Requisites of culpa 1. Griminal negligence on the part of the offender, that is, the crime was the result of UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTESCRIMINAL LAW negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill 2. Freedom of action on the part of the offender, that is, he was not acting under duress; and 3. Intelligence on the part of the offender in performing the negligent act. Negligence Deficiency in perception or lack of foresight, or failure to pay proper attention and to use due diligence in foreseeing injury or damage to be caused. Imprudence Deficiency in action or lack of skill, or failure to take necessary precaution to avoid injury to another. Negligence vis-a-vis Imprudence Prote eed Deficiency of action [Deficiency of perception Lack offoresight [Lack of skill Examples of crimes which _cannot_be 7 : imprudence} 1. Murder 2. Treason 3. Robbery 4. Malicious mischief Mens rea Is the criminal intent or evil mind. In general, the definition of a criminal offense involves not only an act or omission and its consequences but also the accompanying mental state of the actor (Encyclopaedia Britannica) Examples: 1. In theft, the mens rea is the taking of property belonging to another with intent ta gain, 2. In falsification, the mens rea is the commission of forgery with intent to pervert the truth. 3. In robbery, the mens reo Is the taking of property belonging to another coupled with the employment of intimidation or violence ‘upon personsor things. tmtent Refers to the use of a particular means to effect the desired result. It is a mental state, the existence of which is demonstrated by the overt acts of a person, Categories of intent in criminal law 1, General criminal intent - It is presumed from the mere doing of a wrong act (or the actus reus). This does not require proof. NOTE: In felonies by means of dolo, the third clement of vol ntariness is general inte: 2. Specific criminal intent - It isnot presumed because it is an ingredient or element of a crime. It must be alleged in the information and must be established and proven by prosecutor. NOTE: In some felonies, proof of specific intent is required to produce the crime such as in frustrated and attempted homicide, robbery, and acts of lasciviousness. Eresumption—of criminal intent {rom the Criminal intent is always presumed to exist, provided that there is proof of the commission of an unlawful act. NOTE: This presumption does not arise when the act performed is lawful. Moreover, the presumption can always be rebutted by proof of lack of intent. (2014 BAR) ‘Grime may be committed without criminal intent (1996 BAR) A crime may be committed without criminal intent if suchis: 1. A culpable felony, wherein intent is substituted by negligence or imprudence 2. Amalum prohibitum Motive It is the moving power or force which impels a person toa desired result. Motive_as_determinant of criminal Uability 4999,2013 BAR) UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS Pacuty oF Civit LawBook |— FELONIES GR: Motive Is not an element of a crime and becomes immaterial in the determination of criminal Liability. XPNs: Motive is material when: 1. The acts bring about variant crimes; Eg, there is a need to determine whether direct assault is present, as in offenses against persons in authority when the assault is committed while not being in ‘the performance of his duties; 2. The identity of the accused is doubtful; 3. The evidence on the commission of the crime is purely circumstantial; 4, In ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic theories or versions of the killing; and 5. Where there are no eyewitnesses to the crime and where suspicion is likely to fall upon a number of persons. NOTE: Good faith is not a defense to the prosecution ofa malum prohibitum, tad fie Moving power which] Purpose to use a impels one to act for a| particular means definite result. to effect such result Tt is NOT an essential] Generally, it is an element of a crimeessential element Heace, It need NOT be| of acre. proved for purposes of} conviction, TM NI ees To determine: 1. Whether these felonies can be complexed or not (Art. 48, RPC); 2. The prescription of the crime and the prescription of the penalty (Art. 90, RPC): 3. Whether the accessory is liable (Art. 16, RPC); 4. The duration of the subsidiary penalty [Art 39(2), RPC); 5, The duration of the detention in case of fhilura to post the bond to keep the peace (Art 35);and 6. The proper penalty for quasl-offenses (Art 365, par. 1, RPC), 1. Grave - 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 the RPC. (Art. 9, par. 1, RPC) 2. Less grave ~ those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 ofthe RPC. (Art 9, par: 2, RPC) NOTE: The criminal can still be rehabilitated and hence can be the subject of probation and Alternative Dispute Resolution insofar as the civil aspect is concerned, 3. Light - those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 40,000 pesos, or both, is provided. (Art 9, par. 3, RPC as amended by RA. No, 10951, August 29, 2017) penalty for felonies punished under RPC 1. Stages of execution 2. The degree of participation: and 3. The presence of attending circumstances. NOTE: For special penal laws, it must be expressly provided that the aforementioned factors are to be considered, 2 i i ‘The principals, accomplices, and accessories Whentighté i GR: Light felonies are punishable only when they are consummated, Examples: 1. Anattempt to conceal one’s true name is not punishable. (Art. 178, par. 2, RPC) 2. Attempt to commit Alarms and Scandals is not punishable. (Art. 15, RPC) RATIO: It involves insignificant moral and material injuries, if not consummated, the wrong done is so slight that a penalty is unnecessary (also known as the De Minimis principle) UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTESCRIMINAL LAW XPN: Light felonies are punishable in all stages ‘when committed against persons or property (Art 7, RPC) NOTE: However, this provision is not always applicable. Example: If the offender is only an accomplice and there are two or more mitigating circumstances without any compensating aggravating circumstance, the appropriate penalty will be two degrees lower. It must be noted that the penalty lower than arresto menor is public ceasure. There is no two degrees lower than arresto menor. Personaliable inlight felonk Only the principals and their accomplices are made liable for the commission of light felonies. Accessories are not liable for the commission of light felonies. (Art 19, RPC) L js si i felonies Slight physical injuries (Art 266); ‘Theft (Art 309, pars. 7and 8); Alteration of boundary marks (Art. 313); Malicious mischief (Art. 328, par. 3; Art 329, par. 3): Intriguing against honor (Art. 364); and Alarms and Scandals. (Are. 155) NOTE: Ifone assists in the escape of another who committed Alarms and Scandals, he is not liable under RPC but may be liable under P.D. 1829 penalizing Obstruction of Apprehension of Prosecution of Criminal Offenders. LEMENTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY ease Criminal lability (1997, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2009 BAR) Criminal liability is incurred by any person: 1. Committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended (Art. 4, par. 1, RPC);and 2. Performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. (Art. 4, par.2, RPC) ‘Requisites forthe application of _the Provinaer Cause Doart Te 1. That an committed; and 2. ‘That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural, and logical consequence of, the felony committed by the offender. (US. v. Brobst, G.R. No. 4935, October 25 1909) intentional felony has been When considered as the “direct, natural, and logical consequence” of the feloniousact 1. Blow was efficient cause of death; 2. Blow accelerated deatl 3. Blow was the proximate cause of death. (Reyes, 2017) ): In an act to discipline his child, the father claims that the death of his child was not tended by him, Is his contention correct? A: NO. He Is lable under Art. 4 (1) of the RPC. In order that a person may be criminally liable fora felony different from that which he intended to commit, itis indispensable that: (a) a felony was committed; and (b) the wrong done to the aggrieved person be the direct consequence of the crime committed by the perpetrator. In beating his son and inflicting upon him physical injuries, he committed a felony. As a direct consequence of the beating suffered by the child, the latter expired. His criminal liability for the death of his son is, thus, clear. (People v. Sales, GR.No. 177218, October 3,201) 1. Mistake in identity (error in personae) - The offender intends the injury on one person but the harm fell on another. In this situation, the intended victim was not at the scene of the crime. Example: A, wanting to kill B, killed C instead. (2003, 2015 BAR) NOTE: There are only two (2) persons involved: (1) the actual but unintended victim; and (2) the offender. EFFECT: Art. 49 of RPC. It depends when the intended crime and the crime actually committed are punished with different penalties. (Reyes, 2017) UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS Pacuty oF Civit LawBook |— FELONIES If punished with same penalties: no effect. GR: If punished with different penalties, the lesser penalty shall be imposed in maximum period. (Art. 49, pars. 1 and 2) its Non becomes mitigating circumstance. XPN: If the acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime. Ifthe attempted or frustrated crime has a higher penalty, that penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. (Art. 49, par. 3, RPC) 2. Mistake in blow (aberratio ictus) ~ A person directed the blow at an intended victim, but because of poor aim, that blow landed on somebody else. In aberratio ictus, the Intended victim and the actual victim are both atthe scene of the crime. Example: A was aiming to shoot B, but because of lack of precision, hit C instead {BAR 1993, 1994, 1996, 1999, 2015) NOTE: There are three (3) persons involved: (1) the offender; (2) the intended victim; and (3) the actual victim, EFFECT: There are two crimes committed: a Against the intended victim: attempted stage of the felony b. Against the actual victim: the consummated or frustrated felony, as the case may be. NOTE: It may give rise to a complex crime under Art. 48 since it results from a single act. 3. Injurious consequences are greater than that intended (praeter intentionem) - The injury is on the intended victim but the resulting consequence is so grave a wrong than what was intended. It is essential that there is a notable disparity between the means employed or the act of the offender and the felony which resulted. ‘This means that the resulting felony cannot be foreseen from the acts of the offender. Example: A, without intent to kill, struck the victim on the back causing the victim to fall and hit his head on the pavement. EFFECT: Practer intentionem Is a mitigating circumstance particularly covered by paragraph 3 of Art. 13. NOTE: The three enumerated situations are always the result of an intentional felony or dol. ‘These situations do not arise out of criminal negligence. Aberratio ictus vis-a-vis Error in personae tow isc [ewe commite | Secause ot | for another vio vert | ee te aac present | victim are all | intended NOTE: Evror in Personae and Aberratio letus are NOT valid defenses under the “Transfer Intent” Doctrine wherein the law transfers the criminal intent to the actual victim. @: A.and B went on a drinking spree. While they were drinking, they had some arguments So A stabbed B several times. A’s defense is that he had no intention of killing his friend and that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. Is preter intentionem properly invoked? ‘A: NO. Praeter intentionem is improperly invoked because it is only mitigating if there is a notable disparity between the means employed and the resulting felony. The fact that several wounds ‘were inflicted on B is hardly compatible with the idea that he did not intend to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. Mistake of fact ‘The misapprehension of facts on the part of the person who caused injury to another. He is not, however, criminally liable because he did not act UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTES 10CRIMINAL LAW with criminal intent. It Is necessary that had the facts been true as the accused believed them to be, the act is justified. Moreover, the offender must believe that he is performing 3 lawful act. An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption of criminal intent which arises upon the commission ofa felonious act. NOTE: Mistake of fact is a defense only in intentional felonies. Reauisites of mistake of fact 41. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be; 2. That the intention of the accused in performing the act is lawful; and 3. That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused. Q: Ah Chong was afraid of bad elements. One evening, before going to bed, he locked himself in his room and placed a chair against. the door. After going to bed, he was awakened by someone who was trying to open the door. He called out, "Who is there?” twice but received no answer. He then said, “If you enter the room, I will Kill you." At that moment, he was struck by the chair. Believing he was being attacked, he took a kitchen knife and stabbed the intruder who turned out to be his roommate. Is he criminally liable? A: NO. There was mistake of fact in the instant case, Had the facts been as Ah Chong believed them to be, he would have been justified in killing the intruder under Article 11, paragraph 1 on self-defense. (US. v. Ah Chong, GR. No. L-5272, March 19, 1910) Proximate cause ‘That cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening. cause, produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred. (Vda. De Bataclan v. Medina, GR. No. L-10126, October 22, 41957, 102 Phil. 181) As arule, the offender is criminally liable for all the consequences of his felonious act, although not intended, if the felonious act is the proximate cause of the felony. Requisites of proximate cause 1, The direct, natural, and logical cause; 2. Produces the injury or damage; 3. Unbroken by any efficient intervening cause; and 4. Without which the result would not have occurred. Diff between immediate cause and proximate cause Immediate cause may be a cause which is far and remote from the consequence which sets into motion other causes that resulted in the felony. Proximate cause does not require that the offender needs to actually touch the body of the offended party. It is enough that the offender generated in the mind of the offended party the belief that made him risk himself. If a man creates in another person's mind an mediate sense of danger, which causes such person to try to escape, and, in doing so, the latter injures himself, the man who creates sucha state of mind is responsible for the resulting injuries. (People v. Teling, G.R L-27097, January 17,1975) Example: Xand Y are crew members of acargo vessel. They had a heated argument. X, with a big knife in hand, threatened to kil Y. The victim Y, believing himself to be in immediate peril, threw himself into the water. Y died of drowning. In this case, X {s liable for homicide for the death of Y. Even if other causes cooperated in producing the fatal result, as long as the wound inflicted is dangerous, that is, calculated to destroy or endanger life, the actor is liable. It is important that there be no efficient intervening cause. Instances when the felony committed is not the proximate cause of the resulting iniury 1. When there is an efficient intervening cause between the felony committed and the resulting injury; or 2. When the resulting injury or damage is due to the intentional act ofthe victim. Efficientintervening cause Its an intervening active force which is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of theaccused. UNIVERSITY oF Santo Tomas (= u Pacurry or civit LawBook |— FELONIES Q: Cruz and Villacorta were regular customers at Mendeja’s store. At around two o'clock in the morning of January 23, 2002, while Cruz was buying bread at Mendeja's store, Villacorta suddenly appeared and, without uttering a word, stabbed Cruz on the left side of Cruz's body using a sharpened bamboo stick When Villacorta fled, Mendeja chased Villacorta but failed to catch him. When Mendeja returned to her store, she saw Aron removing the broken bamboo stick from Cruz's body. Mendeja and Aron then brought Cruz to Tondo Medical Center and was treated as an outpatient. Cruz was later brought to the San Lazaro Hospital on February 14, 2002, where he died the following day of tetanus infection secondary to stab wound. What is the proximate cause for the death of Cruz? A: The proximate cause of Cruz's death is the tetanus infection, and not the stab wound. There had been an interval of 22 days between the date of the stabbing and the date when Cruz was rushed to San Lazaro Hospital, exhibiting symptoms of severe tetanus infection. If Cruz acquired severe tetanus infection from the stabbing, then the symptoms would have appeared a lot sooner than 22 daye later. Cruz's stab wound was merely the remote cause, and its subsequent infection with tetanus might have been the proximate cause of Cruy’s death, The infection of Cruz's stab wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time Cruz was stabbed to the time of his death. (People v. Villacorta, G.R. No. 186412, September 7, 2011) Q: A and B had a quarrel and started hacking each other. B was wounded at the back Cooler heads intervened and they were separated. Somehow, their differences were patched up. A agreed to shoulder all the expenses for the treatment of the wound of B and to pay him his lost income. B, on the other hand, signed a forgiveness letter in favor of A and on that condition, he withdrew the complaint that he filed against A. After so many weeks of treatment in a clinic, the doctor pronounced the wound already healed. Thereafter, B went back to his farm. ‘Two months later, B came home chilling Before midnight, he died out of tetanus poisoning. The heirs of B filed a case of homicide against A. Is A liable? A: NO. Taking into account the incubation period of tetanus bacteria, medical evidence were presented that tetanus bacterla Is good only for two weeks. That if, indeed, the victim had incurred tetanus infection out of the wound inflicted by A, he would not have lasted two months. What brought about tetanus to infect the body of B was his working in his farm using his, bare hands. Because of this, the SC ruled that the ‘act of B of working in his farm where the soil is filthy, using his own hands, is an efficient supervening cause which relieves A of any liability for the death of B.A, ifat all, is only liable for physical injuries inflicted upon B. (Urbano ¥. IAG GR. No. 72964, January 7, 1988) a i i ‘efficient intervening causes 1. The weal physical condition of the vietins; 2. The nervousness or temperament of the victim; 3. Causes which are inherent in the victim, such asthe victim's inability to swim; 4, Refusal of the injured party to be subjected to medical attendance, 5. Erroneous or unskillful medical treatment; or 6. Delay in the medical treatment. (Reyes, 2017) NOTE: Although the above-mentioned direumstances. may have in the commission of the crime, the offender is still liable for the resulting crime as it is the proximate cause. Because of such proximate cause, his act remains and these circumstances are inefficient. When death is presumed to_be the natural jatoe tat ‘The following facts must be established: intervened 1. That the victim at the time the physical injuries were inflicted was in normal health; 2. That death may be expected from the physical injuries inflicted; 3. That death ensued within a reasonable time. ro Pr pUieee td Reauisi impossible crime 003 204,209. 2014.2015 BAR) 1. Act performed would be an offense against persons or property (see list of crimes under Title 8 and Title 10, Book 2, RP 2. Act was done with evil intent; UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2021 GoLDENNoTES 12