2021 UST Pre Week Criminal Law

University
of Santo Tomas
Faculty of Civil Law

The Law Pertaining to

the State and Its
Relationship with Its
Citizens
PRE-WEEK NOTES 2020/21 BAR EXAMINATIONS

PART III: CRIMINAL LAW

ACADEMICS COMMITTEE

SECRETARY GENERAL: Maria Frances Faye R. Gutierrez
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: John Edward F. Fronda, Angel Isah M. Romero, Kirby
Anne C. Renia, Karen Abbie C. Aspiras, Jose Christian Anthony I. Pinzon

University of Santo Tomas
Faculty of Civil Law

CRIMINAL LAW
PRE-WEEK NOTES

CRIMINAL LAW COMMITTEE

COMMITTEE HEAD: Justine Iscah F. Madrilejos

SUBJECT HEADS: Precious Joy D. Pacionela, Larisa C. Serrano, Jose J. Azurin III

MEMBERS: Ron-Sophia C. Antonio, Danielle B. Barranda, Lyndon C. Benido,
Germaine Vida L. Carreon, Precious Dianne A. Concepcion, Lana Medeya L. De
Guzman, Nuvi Maecy H. dela Cruz, Sabina Maria H. Mabutas, Ma. Jermaine A.
Martinez, Sophia Mae P. Pimentel, Reem D. Prudencio, Vince Raphael P. Romana,
Kurt Raniel Dominic E. Ronquillo, Mary Angelique M. Saguid, Dianne Micah
Angela Yumang

Atty. Vicente Jan O. Platon III
ADVISER

Criminal Law
BASIC PRINCIPLES Republic and its inhabitants of the immunities, rights,

and privileges of duly-accredited foreign diplomatic
Basic maxims in criminal law representatives in the Philippines. (BAR 2014);
3. The principles of public international law;
1. Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege (There is no 4. Parliamentary Immunity: Members of the Congress are
crime when there is no law punishing the same) – No not liable for libel or slander in connection with any
matter how wrongful, evil, or bad the act is, if there is speech delivered on the floor of the house during a
no law defining the act, the same is not considered a regular or special session. (Art. IV, Sec. 11, 1987
crime. Constitution);
2. Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea (The act cannot 5. Public vessels of foreign friendly power; or
be criminal where the mind is not criminal) – This is 6. Members of foreign country stationed in the
true in a felony characterized by dolo (deceit), but not Philippines with its consent.
in a felony resulting from culpa (fault).
3. Doctrine of Pro Reo – Whenever a penal law to be NOTE: Only the heads of the diplomatic missions, as well
construed or applied admits of two interpretations, one as members of the diplomatic staff, excluding the members
lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender, of administrative, technical and service staff, are accorded
the interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the diplomatic rank.
offender will be adopted.
4. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus (An act A consul is not entitled to the privileges and
done by me against my will is not my act) – Whenever immunities of an ambassador or minister.
a person is under a compulsion of irresistible force or
uncontrollable fear to do an act against his will, in Consuls, vice-consuls, and other commercial
which that act produces a crime or offense, such person representatives of foreign nation are NOT diplomatic
is exempted in any criminal liability arising from such officers. Consuls are subject to the penal laws of the
act. country where they are assigned. (Minucher v. CA, G.R. No.
142396, February 11, 2003)
Mala in se vis-à-vis mala prohibita (BAR 1999, 2001,
2003, 2005, 2010, 2017, 2019) 2. Territoriality

When the acts complained of are inherently immoral, they GR: The penal laws of the country have force and effect only
are deemed mala in se, even if they are punished by a special within its territory. (BAR 1994)
law. Accordingly, criminal intent must be clearly
established with the other elements of the crime; otherwise, XPNs: Art. 2 of the RPC (BAR 2000)
no crime is committed. On the other hand, in crimes that are 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or
mala prohibita, the criminal acts are not inherently immoral airship (fact of registration is in the Philippines);
but become punishable only because the law says that they 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of
are forbidden. (Garcia v. CA, G.R. No. 157171, March 14, the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities
2006) issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands
(Arts. 163 & 166);
NOTE: The crime of technical malversation, punished under 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
Art. 220 of the RPC, was held to be a crime that is malum introduction into these islands of the obligations and
prohibitum. The law punishes the act of diverting public securities mentioned in the preceding number;
property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular 4. While being public officers or employees, should
public purpose for another public purpose. The prohibited commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or
act is not inherently immoral, but becomes a criminal 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
offense because positive law forbids its commission on security and the law of nations. (Arts. 114-123)
considerations of public policy, order, and convenience.
Therefore, good faith and lack of criminal intent are not Extraterritoriality
valid defenses. (Ysidoro v. People, G.R. No. 192330, November
14, 2012) (BAR 2015) It means the law will have application even outside the
territorial jurisdiction of the state. (Gapit, 2013)
Three cardinal features or main characteristics of
Philippine criminal law (BAR 1998) 3. Prospectivity/Irretrospectivity

1. Generality GR: Acts or omissions classified as crimes will be
scrutinized in accordance with relevant penal laws if
GR: Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall committed after the effectivity of those penal laws.
be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine
territory, subject to the principles of international law and The law enforced at the time of the commission of a certain
to treaty stipulations. (Art. 14, Civil Code of the Philippines) crime should be applied. Article 366 of the RPC provides
(BAR 2015) that crimes are punished in accordance with the law in force
at the time of their commission. (Gapit, 2013)
XPNs:
1. Treaty stipulations and international agreements, e.g. NOTE: The maxim Lex Prospicit, Non Respicit means the law
PH-US Visiting Forces Agreement and Asian looks forward, never backward.
Development-Philippines Agreement (1966);
2. Laws of Preferential Application, e.g. R.A. 75 penalizes XPN: Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as
acts which would impair the proper observance by the they favor the persons guilty of a felony, although at the
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 1 PRE–WEEK NOTES

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has 3. Intelligence on the part of the offender in performing
been pronounced and the convict is serving the same. (Art. the negligent act.
22, RPC)
Mens rea
XPNs to the XPN: The new law cannot be given retroactive
effect even if favorable to the accused: It is the criminal intent or evil mind. In general, the
a. When the new law is expressly made inapplicable to definition of a criminal offense involves not only an act or
pending actions or existing causes of actions. (Tavera omission and its consequences but also the accompanying
v. Valdez, G.R. No. 922, November 8, 1902) mental state of the actor. Examples:
b. When the offender is a habitual delinquent as defined
in Rule 5 in Art. 62 of RPC. (Art. 22, par. 5, RPC) 1. In theft, the mens rea is the taking of property belonging
to another with intent to gain.
FELONIES 2. In falsification, the mens rea is the commission of
forgery with intent to pervert the truth.
CRIME FELONY OFFENSE 3. In robbery, the mens rea is the taking of property
An act Acts or Acts or belonging to another coupled with the employment of
committed or omissions omissions not intimidation or violence upon persons or things.
omitted in punishable by under the RPC.
violation of a the RPC. Intent
public law
forbidding or It refers to the use of a particular means to effect the desired
commanding it. result. It is a mental state, the existence of which is
demonstrated by the overt acts of a person.

Elements of felonies (BAR 2015) Categories of intent in criminal law

1. An act or omission; 1. General criminal intent – It is presumed from the
2. Punishable by the RPC; and mere doing of a wrong act (or the actus reus). This does
3. The act is performed or the omission incurred by not require proof.
means of deceit or fault. (People v. Gonzales, G.R. No.
80762, March 19, 1990) NOTE: In felonies by means of dolo, the third element
of voluntariness is general intent.
Kinds of felonies
2. Specific criminal intent – It is not presumed because it
1. Intentional felonies (Dolo) – committed with is an ingredient or element of a crime. It must be alleged
deliberate intent to cause injury to another (with in the information and must be established and proven
malice); by prosecutor.
2. Culpable felonies (Culpa) – where the wrongful acts
result from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or NOTE: In some felonies, proof of specific intent is
lack of skill (unintentional, without malice). required to produce the crime such as in frustrated and
attempted homicide, robbery, and acts of
Requisites of dolo lasciviousness.

1. Criminal intent (mens rea) – the purpose to use a Presumption of criminal intent from the commission of
particular means to effect such result. Intent to commit an unlawful act
an act with malice, being purely a mental process, is
presumed from the proof of commission of an unlawful Criminal intent is always presumed to exist, provided that
act. It is a mental state; hence, its existence is shown by there is proof of the commission of an unlawful act.
overt acts
NOTE: This presumption does not arise when the act
NOTE: If there is NO criminal intent, the act is justified. performed is lawful. Moreover, the presumption can always
Hence, offender incurs NO criminal liability. be rebutted by proof of lack of intent. (2014 BAR)

2. Freedom of action (actus rea) – voluntariness on the Crime may be committed without criminal intent (1996
part of the person to commit the act or omission BAR)
3. Intelligence – the capacity to know and understand the
consequences and morality of human acts A crime may be committed without criminal intent if such
is:
NOTE: Mens rea refers to the guilty mind; whereas actus rea 1. A culpable felony, wherein intent is substituted by
refers to the guilty act. negligence or imprudence
2. A malum prohibitum
Requisites of culpa
Motive
1. Criminal negligence on the part of the offender where
the crime was the result of negligence, reckless It is the moving power or force which impels a person to a
imprudence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill; desired result.
2. Freedom of action on the part of the offender where he
was not acting under duress; and

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Motive as determinant of criminal liability (1999, 2013 2. Performing an act which would be an offense against
BAR) persons or property, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the
GR: Motive is not an element of a crime and becomes employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. (Art. 4,
immaterial in the determination of criminal liability. par. 2, RPC)

XPNs: Motive is material when: Requisites for the application of the Proximate Cause
1. The acts bring about variant crimes; Doctrine (Art 4, par. 1, RPC)
E.g. there is a need to determine whether direct
assault is present, as in offenses against persons in 1. That an intentional felony has been committed; and
authority when the assault is committed while not 2. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct,
being in the performance of his duties; natural, and logical consequence of the felony
committed by the offender. (U.S. v. Brobst, G.R. No. 4935,
2. The identity of the accused is doubtful; October 25, 1909)
3. The evidence on the commission of the crime is
purely circumstantial; When considered as the “direct, natural, and logical
4. In ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic consequence” of the felonious act
theories or versions of the killing; and
5. Where there are no eyewitnesses to the crime and 1. Blow was efficient cause of death;
where suspicion is likely to fall upon a number of 2. Blow accelerated death; or
persons. 3. Blow was the proximate cause of death. (Reyes, 2017)

NOTE: Good faith is not a defense to the prosecution of a Proximate cause
malum prohibitum.
That cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence,
Motive vis-à-vis Intent unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the
injury, and without which the result would not have
MOTIVE INTENT occurred. (Vda. De Bataclan v. Medina, G.R. No. L-10126,
October 22, 1957, 102 Phil. 181)
Moving power which impels Purpose to use a particular
one to act for a definite result. means to effect such result. As a rule, the offender is criminally liable for all the
It is NOT an essential element Generally, it is an essential consequences of his felonious act, although not intended, if
of a crime. Hence, it need NOT element of a crime. the felonious act is the proximate cause of the felony.
be proved for purposes of
conviction. Requisites of proximate cause

Classification of felonies (BAR 2019) 1. The direct, natural, and logical cause;
2. Produces the injury or damage;
1. Grave – those to which the law attaches the capital 3. Unbroken by any efficient intervening cause; and
punishment or penalties which in any of their periods 4. Without which the result would not have occurred.
are afflictive, in accordance with Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art.
9, par. 1, RPC) Causes which may produce a result different from that
2. Less grave – those which the law punishes with which the offender intended
penalties which in their maximum period are
correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art. 1. Mistake in identity (error in personae) – The offender
9, par. 2, RPC) intends the injury on one person but the harm fell on
3. Light – those infractions of law for the commission of another. In this situation, the intended victim was not at
which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine not the scene of the crime.
exceeding 40,000 pesos, or both, is provided. (Art. 9, 2. Mistake in blow (aberratio ictus) – A person directed
par. 3, RPC as amended by R.A. No. 10951, August 29, the blow at an intended victim, but because of poor aim,
2017) that blow landed on somebody else. In aberratio ictus,
the intended victim and the actual victim are both at the
Factors to be considered in imposing a penalty for scene of the crime.
felonies punished under RPC 3. Injurious consequences are greater than that
intended (praeter intentionem) – The injury is on the
1. Stages of execution; intended victim but the resulting consequence is so
2. The degree of participation; and grave a wrong than what was intended. It is essential
3. The presence of attending circumstances. that there is a notable disparity between the means
employed or the act of the offender and the felony which
NOTE: For special penal laws, it must be expressly provided resulted.
that the aforementioned factors are to be considered.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Criminal liability (BAR 1997, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2009)
Requisites (BAR 2003, 2004, 2009, 2014, 2015)
The following are the elements of criminal liability:
1. Committing a felony although the wrongful act done be 1. Act performed would be an offense against persons or
different from that which he intended (Art. 4, par. 1, property (see list of crimes under Title 8 and Title 10,
RPC); and Book 2, RPC);

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
2. Act was done with evil intent; a direct or indirect contribution in the execution of the
3. Accomplishment is inherently impossible or means crime planned to be committed.
employed is either inadequate or ineffectual; and
4. Act performed should not constitute a violation of GR: When conspiracy exists, the degree of participation of
another provision of the RPC. each conspirator is not considered because the act of one is
the act of all; thus, they have equal criminal responsibility.
NOTE: The offender must believe that he can consummate
the intended crime. A man stabbing another who he knew XPN: Even though there was conspiracy, if a co- conspirator
was already dead cannot be liable for an impossible crime. merely cooperated in the commission of the crime with
insignificant or minimal acts, such that even without his
STAGES OF EXECUTION cooperation, the crime could be carried out as well, such co-
conspirator should be punished as an accomplice only.
Stages of acts of execution (People v. Niem, CA No. 521, December 20, 1945)

XPN to the XPN: When the act constitutes a single
1. Consummated - all the acts necessary for its indivisible offense.
accomplishment and execution are present. (Art. 6,
RPC) Q: Cesario died as he was stoned, shot, and was
2. Frustrated - when the offender performs all the acts of attempted to be pierced by an arrow by his relatives.
execution which would produce the felony as a result, Eddie was the one who shot the victim while the other
but which nevertheless do not produce it by reason of accuseds threw stones and fired an arrow (but missed).
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. (Art. They were all adjudged guilty of murder by conspiring
6. RPC) (BAR 1992, 1994, 2009) with each other. They claimed that it was only Eddie
3. Attempted - There is an attempt when the offender who shot Cesario and therefore the others shall not be
commences the commission of a felony directly by liable. Who are liable?
overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony, by reason A: All are liable. Conspiracy was proven in this case.
of some cause or accident other than his own Conspiracy may also be proven by circumstantial evidence
spontaneous desistance. (Art. 6, RPC) when it can be inferred from the acts which would prove a
joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community
NOTE: The word directly emphasizes the requirement that of interest.
the attempted felony is that which is directly linked to the
overt act performed by the offender, not the felony he has They "performed specific acts with closeness and
in his mind. coordination as to unmistakably indicate a common
purpose and design to ensure the death of Cesario. (People
Crimes without frustrated stage v. Agacer, G.R. No. 177751, December 14, 2011)

1. Rape – the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge, Two kinds of conspiracy
hence, the slightest penetration to the female organ
consummates the felony. 1. Conspiracy as a crime – The mere conspiracy is the
2. Corruption of public officers – mere offer consummates crime itself. This is only true when the law expressly
the crime. punishes the mere conspiracy. Otherwise, the
3. Physical injury – consummated at the instance the conspiracy does not bring about the commission of the
injuries are inflicted. crime because conspiracy is not an overt act but a mere
4. Adultery – the essence of the crime is sexual congress. preparatory act.
5. Theft– the essence of the crime is the taking of property 2. Conspiracy as a basis of incurring criminal liability –
belonging to another. Once the thing has been taken, or When the conspiracy is only a basis of incurring
in the possession of another, the crime is consummated. criminal liability, there must be an overt act done
(BAR 2014) before the co-conspirators become criminally liable.
(BAR 1996, 1997, 1998, 2003, 2005)
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
Chain conspiracy
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and There is successive communication and cooperation in
decide to commit it. (BAR 1996, 1997, 1998, 2003, 2005) much the same way as with legitimate business operations
between manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler
Requisites of conspiracy (ACE) and retailer, and then retailer and consumer. (Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2002)
1. Two or more persons came to an agreement;
2. Agreement concerned the commission of a crime; and Wheel or circle conspiracy in plunder
3. Execution of a felony was decided upon.
There is a single person or group called the “hub,” dealing
NOTE: Mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of the individually with two or more other persons or groups
act, without cooperation or at least, agreement to known as the “spoke” and the rim that encloses the spokes
cooperate, is not enough to constitute a conspiracy. Except is the common goal in the overall conspiracy. (Estrada v.
when he is the mastermind in a conspiracy, it is necessary Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965, February 26, 2002)
that a conspirator should have performed some overt act as

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Q: Abubakar, Baraguir, and Farouk were public officials ii. One or more grave and one or more less grave
of the DPWH-ARMM at the time of the commission of the felonies; or
offense. After the creation of the ARMM, the national iii. Two or more less grave felonies.
government allotted funds for the implementation of
infrastructure projects of the region, and a portion of Q: The single act of A in firing a shot caused the
the funds were transferred to DPWH-ARMM. The Office death of two persons, arising from one bullet, who
of the President received reports of irregularities were standing on the line of the direction of the
attending the implementation of the infrastructure bullet. Is A liable for two separate crimes of
projects. Thus, the COA conducted an investigation and homicide?
yielded the following findings: (1) Overpayment; (2)
Excessive advance payments; and (3) Improper A: NO. Since the deaths of the two victims were a result
conduct of public bidding. The report found out that of one single act of firing a shot, a complex crime was
DPWH-ARMM officials awarded several contractors committed.
certificate of mobilization a week before the conduct of
the public bidding. The contractors were also allowed 2. Complex crime proper – when an offense is the
to mobilize their equipment on the site. DPWH-ARMM necessary means for committing the other. (Art. 48,
officials also granted and allowed disbursement of 30% RPC)
advance payment to one contractor, with amount was
beyond the 15% limit set by law. Based on the report, a. At least two offenses are committed;
Abubakar, Baraguir, and Guiani were charged with b. One or some of the offenses must be necessary to
violation of Sec. 3(e), R.A. 3019. Before the Court, the commit the other; and
petitioners invoked the Arias Doctrine to exonerate c. Both or all the offenses must be punished under the
them from liability. Is the Arias Doctrine applicable to same statute.
exonerate the accused from liability?
NOTE: Only one penalty is imposed for complex crimes
A: NO. The application of the doctrine is subject to the because there is only one criminal act. Thus, there
qualification that the public official has no foreknowledge of should only be one Information.
any facts or circumstances that would prompt him or her to
investigate or exercise a greater degree of care. There were 3. Special complex crime or composite crime – one in
circumstances that should have prompted Abubakar, which the substance is made up of more than one crime,
Baraguir, and Guiani to make further inquiries on the but which, in the eyes of the law, is only a single
transactions subject of this case. indivisible offense.

As regards the early mobilization of contractors, the NOTE: Robbery with homicide is a special complex crime
irregularity was already apparent on the face of the punished under Art. 294 of the RPC. It is perpetrated when,
certificates of mobilization, which bore dates earlier than by reason or on the occasion of robbery, homicide is
the scheduled public bidding. This should have already committed. It must be stressed that in robbery with
roused suspicion from petitioners Baraguir and Guiani, who homicide, the offender's original intent must be the
were the last signatories and final approving authorities. commission of robbery. The killing is merely incidental and
subsidiary. It is clear that accused-appellants' primary
As regards the Contract of Survey Work, which was used as objective was to rob Enicasio. But, by reason or on the
the primary supporting document for the disbursement of occasion of the robbery, Enicasio was stabbed and died as a
the 30% mobilization fee to Arce Engineering Services, result. (People v. Palema, et al., G.R. No. 228000, July 10, 2019,
contained a patently illegal stipulation. Petitioner Guiani as penned by J. Leonen)
cannot blame his subordinates and claim that he acted in
good faith considering that he entered into the contract Ordinary complex crime vis-à-vis Special complex
with Arce Engineering Services. (Abubakar v. People, G.R. crime (BAR 2003)
No. 202408, June 27, 2018, as penned by J. Leonen)
SPECIAL
ORDINARY COMPLEX CRIME
COMPLEX CRIMES (ART. 48, RPC) AND COMPLEX CRIME
COMPOSITE CRIMES It is made up of two or more It is made up of two or
(BAR 2004, 2005, 2007, 2009, 2015, 2019)) crimes being punished under more crimes which
distinct provisions of the RPC but are considered only
Complex crime alleged in one information either as components of a
because they were brought about single indivisible
Exists when two or more crimes are committed but they by a single felonious act or offense being
constitute only one crime in the eyes of the law. Here, there because one offense is a punished in one
is only one criminal intent; hence, only one penalty is necessary means for committing provision of the RPC.
imposed. the other offense or offenses.

Kinds of complex crimes CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING CRIMINAL LIABILITY

1. Compound crime – when a single act constitutes two JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
or more grave or less grave felonies. (Art. 48, RPC)
Justifying circumstances
a. Only a single act is performed by the offender; and
b. The single act produces: They are those acts of a person said to be in accordance with
i. Two or more grave felonies; or law, such that a person is deemed not to have committed a

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
crime and is therefore free from both criminal and civil examinations, Jesus was found to have sustained a
liability. (see XPN for civil liability in the subsequent crack in his skull. Are the evidence presented sufficient
discussion) evidence: first, to prove that justifying circumstances
existed; and second, to convict the petitioners?
They are:
1. Self-defense; A: NO. Ampong and his fellow accused failed to present
2. Defense of relatives; sufficient evidence to prove that justifying circumstance of
3. Defense of stranger; self-defense and defense of a relative exist, therefore
4. Avoidance of greater evil or injury; resulting to their conviction. Petitioners' entire defense
5. Fulfillment of duty or exercise of right or office; and rests on proof that it was Jesus who initiated an assault by
6. Obedience to an order of a superior. barging into the premises of petitioners' residences,
hacking Victor's door, and threatening physical harm upon
Burden of proving the existence of justifying petitioners and their companions. That is, that unlawful
circumstances aggression originated from Jesus.

In cases where the accused interposes justifying Contrary to what a successful averment of self-defense or
circumstance, this prosecutorial burden is shifted to the defense of a relative requires, petitioners offered nothing
accused who himself must prove all the indispensable more than a self-serving, uncorroborated claim that Jesus
ingredients of such defense (People v. Roxas, G.R. No. appeared out of nowhere to go berserk in the vicinity of
218396, February 20, 2016). their homes. They failed to present independent and
credible proof to back up their assertions. The Regional
El incombit probotion qui decit non qui negat — He who Trial Court noted that it was highly dubious that Jesus
asserts, not he who denies, must prove. would go all the way to petitioners' residences to initiate an
attack for no apparent reason. (Velasquez v. People, G.R. No.
Basis for these justifying circumstances 195021, March 15, 2017, as penned by J. Leonen)

The basis for these justifying circumstances is the lack of BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME AS A DEFENSE
criminal intent, and with the maxim actus non facit reum,
nisi mens sit rea (an act does not make the doer guilty, unless Battered Woman Syndrome used as a defense (BAR
the mind is guilty), there is no crime and there is no criminal 2014, 2015)
in the situations contemplated in this article provided the
respective elements are all present. Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be
suffering from battered woman syndrome do not incur any
SELF-DEFENSE criminal or civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any
of the elements for justifying circumstances of self- defense
Effects of self-defense under the RPC. (Sec. 26, R.A. 9262)

1. When all the elements are present – the person Women who can avail of BWS as a defense
defending himself is free from criminal liability and civil 1. Wife;
liability. 2. Former wife;
2. When only a majority of the elements are present – 3. A woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or
privileged mitigating circumstance, provided there is dating relationship;
unlawful aggression.
NOTE: The “dating relationship” that the law
Requisites of self-defense (URL) (BAR 1993, 1996, contemplates can exist even without a sexual intercourse
2002, 2003, 2005) taking place between those involved.

1. Unlawful aggression; 4. A woman with whom he has a common child, or against
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within or
prevent or repel it; and without the family abode.
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself. STATE OF NECESSITY

If there is no unlawful aggression, there is nothing to Requisites of state of necessity (BAR 1990)
prevent or repel. The second requisite of defense will have
no basis. (Reyes, 2017) 1. Evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
2. Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;
Q: Spouses Jesus and Ana Del Mundo went to sleep in 3. There be no other practical and less harmful means of
their nipa hut. Upon arriving, the spouses saw Ampong preventing it; and
and Nora Castillo having sex. Aghast at what he saw, 4. That the state of necessity or emergency was not due to
Jesus shouted invectives at Ampong and Nora who both the fault or negligence of the person claiming the
fled away. Jesus pursued Ampong and Nora at the house defense.
of Ampong’s aunt but neither Ampong nor Nora was
there. Thereafter, he walked at home when he was then NOTE: The state of necessity must not have been brought
blocked by Ampong and his fellow accused. Without about by the negligence or imprudence by the one invoking
provocation, Ampong and his fellow accused hit Jesus the justifying circumstances. (BAR 1998, 2004)
with a stone on different parts of his body. The accused
then left Jesus on the ground, bloodied. After the x-ray Person incurring benefit is civilly liable

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
The persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented 1. An Imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has
shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they acted during a lucid interval;
received. 2. A child Fifteen years of age or under is exempt from
criminal liability under R.A. 9344; (1998 BAR)
FULFILLMENT OF DUTY 3. A person who is Sixteen to seventeen years old, unless
has acted with discernment, in which case, such child
Requisites of fulfillment of duty shall be subject to appropriate proceedings in
accordance with R.A. 9344; (2000 BAR)
1. Accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due
lawful exercise of a right or office; and care, causes an injury by mere Accident without the
2. Injury caused or offense committed be the necessary fault or intention of causing it; (1992, 2000 BAR)
consequence of the due performance of duty or the 5. Any person who acts under the Compulsion of an
lawful exercise of such right or office. irresistible force;
6. Any person who acts under the Impulse of an
Q: Lucresia was robbed of her bracelet in her home. The uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury; and
following day, Lucresia, while in her store, noticed her 7. Any person who Fails to perform an act required by
bracelet wound around the right arm of Jun-Jun. As law, when prevented by some lawful or insuperable
soon as the latter left, Lucresia went to a nearby police cause. (1994 BAR)
station and sought the help of Pat. Willie Reyes. He went
with Lucresia to the house of Jun-Jun to confront the Q: In cases of exempting circumstances, is there a crime
latter. Pat. Reyes introduced himself as a policeman and committed?
tried to get hold of Jun-Jun who resisted and ran away.
Pat. Reyes chased him and fired two warning shots in A: YES. There is a crime committed but no criminal liability
the air but Jun-Jun continued to run. Pat. Reyes shot him arises from it because of the complete absence of any of the
in the right leg. Jun-Jun was hit and he fell down but he conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness of the
crawled towards a fence, intending to pass through an act.
opening underneath.
IMBECILITY AND INSANITY
When Pat. Reyes was about 5 meters away, he fired
another shot at Jun-Jun hitting him at the right lower Insanity presupposes that the accused was completely
hip. Pat. Reyes brought Jun-Jun to the hospital, but deprived of reason or discernment and freedom of will at
because of profuse bleeding, he eventually died. Pat. the time of the commission of the crime. Only when there is
Reyes was subsequently charged with homicide. During a complete deprivation of intelligence at the time of the
the trial, Pat. Reyes raised the defense, by way of commission of the crime should the exempting
exoneration, that he acted in the fulfillment of a duty. Is circumstance of insanity be considered. (People v. Bulagao,
the defense tenable? G.R. No. 184757, October 5, 2011)

A: NO. The defense of having acted in the fulfillment of a Q: Verdadero, the accused in this case, repeatedly
duty requires as a condition, inter alia, that the injury or stabbed Romeo, the victim, with a Rambo knife. He was
offense committed be the unavoidable or necessary successfully detained by the police officers. Accused
consequence of the due performance of the duty. (People v. testified that he is insane during the commission of the
Oanis, G.R. No. L-47722, July 27, 1943). crime and that he is clinically diagnosed as a
schizophrenic that relapses often in the recent years
It is not enough that the accused acted in fulfillment of a prior to the incident that happened. Is he liable for
duty. After Jun-Jun was shot in the right leg and was already homicide?
crawling, there was no need for Pat. Reyes to shoot him any
further. Clearly, he acted beyond the call of duty, which A: NO. The accused was able to interpose the defense of
brought about the cause of death of the victim. (BAR 2000) insanity which requires that the person be completely
deprived of intelligence due to the mental condition or
OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR ailment and that such deprivation manifest itself during the
SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE commission of the crime. He is clinically diagnosed as a
schizophrenic, and that in the recent years and immediately
NOTE: A governor of a province has no power to order the before the incident, it was apparent that he was not in the
transfer of a detention prisoner. Nor can the provincial jail right state of mind since his eyes were bloodshot and not
warden follow such an unlawful order. Thus, neither of acting accordingly. (Verdadero v. People, G.R. No. 216021,
them can invoke the justifying circumstance of lawful March 2, 2016)
exercise of office or obedience to a lawful order. (Ambil v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 175457, July 6, 2011) MINORITY

EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES AGE CRIMINAL
TREATMENT
BRACKET LIABILITY
GR: No criminal liability, but there is civil liability 15 years old or Exempt The child shall be
below subjected to a
XPN: Par. 4 and Par. 7 are exempted from both criminal and community-based
civil liability intervention program.
Above 15 years Exempt The child shall be
The following are exempted from criminal liability (IF- old but below subjected to a
SAC-IF) 18 years old,

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
who acted community-based person who accidentally discovers kidnap victims would be
without intervention program. held at gunpoint by the kidnappers to guard said victims.
discernment (People v. Licayan, et al., G.R. No. 203961, July 29, 2015)
Above 15 years Not exempt Such child shall be
old but below subjected to a UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
18 years old, diversion program.
who acted with Q: The evidence on record shows that at the time the
discernment ransom money was to be delivered, appellants Arturo
Malit and Fernando Morales, unaccompanied by any of
ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF the other accused, entered the van wherein Feliciano
CAUSING IT Tan was. At that time, Narciso Saldaña, Elmer Esguerra,
and Romeo Bautista were waiting for both appellants
Q: A and B are both security guards. A turned over to B from a distance of about one kilometer. Both appellants
a service firearm who held it with both hands, with the raise the defense of uncontrollable fear. Is their
muzzle pointed at A and the butt towards B. At that contention tenable?
moment, B held opposite the muzzle of the gun where
the trigger is, and almost slip with it while in the act of A: NO. By not availing of this chance to escape, the
gripping and then immediately the gun went off and appellants' allegation of fear or duress becomes untenable.
accidentally shot A. A was able to recover from the shot. It was held that in order for the circumstance of
B was then charged with frustrated homicide. Can B uncontrollable fear may apply, it is necessary that the
raise the defense of accident to mitigate his liability? compulsion is of such a character as to leave no opportunity
for escape or self-defense in equal combat. Moreover, the
A: NO. It is axiomatic that a person who invokes accident reason for their entry to the van could be taken as their way
must prove that he acted with due care. This was belied by of keeping Feliciano Tan under further surveillance at a
the conduct of the accused when he allegedly received the most critical time. (People v. Saldana, G.R. No. 148518, April
shotgun from the private complainant. As he himself 15, 2004)
admitted, he received the shotgun by placing his pointer
finger, also known as the trigger finger, to squeeze the MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
trigger, inside the trigger guard and over the trigger
itself. Worse, he did so while the barrel of the gun was Mitigating circumstances must be present prior to or
pointed at the private complainant. simultaneously with the commission of the offense, except
voluntary surrender or confession of guilt by the accused.
According to him, he knew that it was not proper for a (Art. 13, par. 7, RPC)
person to receive a firearm from another by immediately
inserting a finger inside the trigger guard. Likewise, he Mitigating circumstances reduce the penalty but do not
knew that the hand-over of a firearm with its barrel pointed change the nature of the crime.
towards the giver or any other person was not proper. That
he did these improper acts despite his training and Circumstances which can mitigate criminal liability
experience as a security guard undermines any notion that
he had acted with due care during the subject incident. 1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
(People v. Lanuza, G.R. No. 188562, August 17, 2011) (Privileged Mitigating circumstance); (1990, 1996 BAR)
2. The offender is under 18 or over 70 years old;
COMPULSION OF IRRESISTIBLE FORCE 3. No intention to commit so grave a wrong (praeter
intentionem); (2000, 2001 BAR)
NOTE: The force must be irresistible to reduce the actor to 4. Sufficient threat or provocation;
a mere instrument who acts not only without a will but 5. Vindication of a grave offense; (1993, 2000, 2003
against his will. (People v. Loreno, G.R. No. L-54414, July 9, BAR)
1984) 6. Passion or obfuscation;
7. Voluntary surrender; (1992, 1996, 1997, 1999 BAR)
Q: Rogelio Delos Reyes, along with Roderick Licayan 8. Physical defect;
and Roberto Lara, were charged with the crime of 9. Illness of the offender;
Kidnapping for Ransom. In his defense, Delos Reyes 10. Similar and analogous circumstances; and
argued that he was merely passing by at the crime scene 11. Humanitarian reasons. (Jarillo v. People, G.R. No.
when one of the co-accused pointed a gun at him and 164435, September 29, 2009)
forced him to guard the victims. Hence, he is entitled to
the exempting circumstance of compulsion due to NOTE: Mitigating circumstances must be present prior to or
irresistible force. Is the exempting circumstance of simultaneously with the commission of the offense, except
compulsion due to irresistible force present voluntary surrender or confession of guilt by the accused.
(Art. 13, par. 7, RPC)
A: NO. A person invoking the exempting circumstance of
compulsion due to irresistible force admits in effect the Classes of mitigating circumstances
commission of a punishable act, which must show that the
irresistible force reduced him to a mere instrument that 1. Ordinary mitigating
acted not only without will but also against his will. The 2. Privileged mitigating
duress, force, fear, or intimidation must be present,
imminent and impending; and it must be of such a nature as
to induce a well-grounded apprehension of death or serious ORDINARY MITIGATING PRIVILEGED MITIGATING
bodily harm if the act is not done. It is hard to believe that a

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Can be offset by Can never be offset by any while the last mitigating circumstance is imposed in
aggravating circumstances aggravating circumstance minimum period after being lowered by one degree
Ordinary mitigating Privileged mitigating
circumstances, if not offset, circumstances operate to NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG
will operate to reduce the reduce the penalty by one to (PRAETER INTENTIONEM)
penalty to the minimum two degrees, depending
period, provided the upon what the law provides Intention to commit so grave a wrong (Praeter
penalty is a divisible one Intentionem)
Not considered in the Always considered
determination of the regardless of the penalty Q: Buenamer committed robbery inside a passenger FX
proper penalty when the imposed by threatening to shoot the passengers if they do not
penalty prescribed by law give their wallets and cellphones. Buenamer was
for the single crime is a successful in taking the things of the passengers. Tan,
single indivisible penalty one of the passengers, chased Buenamer who boarded
a passenger jeepney in order to escape. Buenamer

boxed Tan when he held on to the handlebar of the
INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR
jeepney, causing him to lose his grip and fall from the
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE
jeepney and thereafter was ran over by the rear tire of

said jeepney and died. Buenamer contends that he
Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
should be given the mitigating circumstance of lack of

intent to commit so grave a wrong. Is Buenamer
It means that not all the requisites to justify the act are
entitled for the mitigating circumstance?
present or not all the requisites to exempt from criminal

liability are present.
A: NO. This mitigating circumstance addresses itself to the

intention of the offender at the particular moment when the
Effect on the criminal liability of the offender of
offender executes or commits the criminal act. This
incomplete justifying circumstances or incomplete
mitigating circumstance is obtaining when there is a
exempting circumstances
notable disparity between the means employed by the

accused to commit a wrong and the resulting crime
If less than the majority of the requisites necessary to justify
committed. The intention of the accused at the time of the
the act or exempt from criminal liability are present, the
commission of the crime is manifested from the weapon
offender shall only be entitled to an ordinary mitigating
used, the mode of attack employed, and the injury sustained
circumstance.
by the victim. (People v. Buenamer G.R. No. 206227, August

31, 2016)
If a majority of the requisites needed to justify the act or

exempt from criminal liability are present, the offender
PASSION OR OBFUSCATION (BAR 2013)
shall be given the benefit of a privileged mitigating

circumstance. The imposable penalty shall be lowered by
Refers to emotional feeling which produces excitement so
one or two degrees. When there are only two conditions to
powerful as to overcome reason and self-control. It must
justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability, the
come from prior unjust or improper acts. The passion and
presence of one shall be regarded as the majority.
obfuscation must emanate from legitimate sentiments.

Unlawful aggression: condition necessary before
Passion and obfuscation as a mitigating circumstance need
incomplete self-defense, defense of relative, or defense
not be felt only in the seconds before the commission of the
of stranger may be invoked
crime. It may build up and strengthen over time until it can

no longer be repressed and will ultimately motivate the
The offended party must be guilty of unlawful aggression.
commission of the crime. (People v. Oloverio, G.R. No.
Without unlawful aggression, there can be no incomplete
211159, March 18, 2015)
self-defense, defense of relative, or defense of stranger.

VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND CONFESSION OF GUILT
Effects on the criminal liability of the offender of

incomplete self-defense, defense of relative, or defense
Q: If the accused escapes from the scene of the crime in
of stranger
order to seek advice from a lawyer and the latter
1. If only the element of unlawful aggression is present, the
ordered him to surrender voluntarily to the authorities
other requisites being absent – ordinary mitigating
which the accused followed by surrendering himself to
circumstance
the municipal mayor, will his surrender be considered

mitigating?
2. If aside from the element of unlawful aggression,

another requisite but not all is present – privileged
A: YES. He fled to the scene of a crime not to escape but to
mitigating circumstance
seek legal advice.

NOTE: In such a case, the imposable penalty shall be
Requisites of voluntary surrender
reduced by one or two degrees depending upon how

the court regards the importance of the requisites
1. Offender had not been actually arrested;
present
2. Surrender was made to a person in authority or to the

latter’s agent; and
3. If there are at least three (3) mitigating circumstances
3. Surrender was voluntary.
– in the first two, the penalty is lowered by one degree


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Requisites of confession of guilt (BAR 1999) derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other
artifice involving great waste or ruin.;
1. The offender spontaneously confessed his guilt; 13. Evident premeditation; (1991, 2009 BAR)
2. It was made in open court (that is, before the competent 14. Craft, fraud or disguise; (1995 BAR)
court that is to try the case); and 15. Superior strength or means to weaken the defense;
3. It was made prior to the presentation of evidence for 16. Treachery;
the prosecution. 17. Ignominy;
18. Unlawful entry;
NOTE: Qualified plea/plea of guilty to lesser offense than 19. Breaking wall;
that charged is not mitigating. For voluntary confession to 20. Aid of minor or by means of motor vehicle or other
be appreciated, the confession must not only be made similar means; and
unconditionally but the accused must admit the offense 21. Cruelty. (1994 BAR)
charged.
DISREGARD OF RANK, SEX, AGE OR DWELLING
Plea of guilty not applicable to all crimes
Q: What if all four aggravating circumstances are
A plea of guilty is not mitigating in culpable felonies, and in present?
crimes punished by special laws.
A: They have the weight of one aggravating circumstance
PHYSICAL DEFECT only. (Reyes, 2017)

Q: Suppose X is deaf and dumb and he has been When aggravating circumstance of disregard of rank,
slandered, he cannot talk so what he did was he got a age, or sex NOT considered for the purpose of
piece of wood and struck the fellow on the head. X was increasing penalty
charged with physical injuries. Is X entitled to a
mitigating circumstance by reason of his physical 1. When the offender acted with passion or obfuscation
defect? (All three circumstances);
2. When there exists a relationship between the offended
A: YES. The Supreme Court held that being a deaf and dumb party and the offender; or
is mitigating because the only way to vindicate himself is to 3. When the condition of being a woman is indispensable
use his force because he cannot strike back by words. in the commission of the crime (e.g. parricide, rape,
abduction and seduction).
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Instances when dwelling is not aggravating
Four kinds of aggravating circumstances
1. Generic aggravating circumstances are those that 1. When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and
can generally apply to all crimes and can be offset by immediate provocation;
mitigating circumstances. 2. When the offender and the offended party are occupants
2. Specific aggravating circumstances are those which of the same house except in case of adultery in the
apply only to particular crimes and cannot be offset by conjugal dwelling, the same is aggravating; however, if
mitigating circumstances; one of the dwellers therein becomes a paramour, the
3. Qualifying circumstances are those that change the applicable aggravating circumstance is abuse of
nature of the crime to a grave one or bring about a confidence;
penalty next higher in degree and cannot be offset by 3. In the crime of robbery by use of force upon things;
mitigating circumstances. 4. In the crime of trespass to dwelling; and
4. Inherent aggravating circumstances are those that 5. The victim is not a dweller of the house.
essentially accompany the commission of the crime and
does not affect the penalty. NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE OR BAND

Circumstances which aggravate criminal liability Nighttime

1. Advantage taken of public position; Darkness of the night makes nighttime an aggravating
2. Contempt or insult to public authorities; circumstance. Hence, when the place of the crime is
3. Disregard of age, sex, or dwelling of the offended party; illuminated or sufficiently lighted, nighttime is not
(1996, 2009 BAR) aggravating. It is also necessary that the commission of the
4. Abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness; crime was begun and completed at nighttime. Hence, where
5. Palace and places of commission of offense; the series of acts necessary for its commission was begun at
6. Nighttime, uninhabited place or band; (1994, 1997, daytime and was completed that night (People v. Luchico,
2009 BAR) G.R. No. 26170, December 6, 1926), or was begun at night and
7. On occasion of calamity or misfortune; consummated the following day (U.S. v. Dowdell, Jr., et al.,
8. Aid of armed men, or persons who insure or afford G.R. No. 4191, July 18, 1908), the aggravating circumstance
impunity; of nighttime was not applied.
9. Recidivist ; (1993, 2009, 2014 BAR)
10. Reiteracion; GR: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery
11. Price, reward, or promise;
12. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, XPN: Where both the treacherous mode of attack and
stranding of a vessel or intentional damage thereto, nocturnity were deliberately decided upon, they can be

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
considered separately if such circumstances have different A: NO. Espineli is guilty only of the crime of homicide in
factual bases. view of the prosecution's failure to prove any of the alleged
attendant circumstances of abuse of superior strength and
Uninhabited place nighttime. The circumstance of abuse of superior strength
is present whenever there is inequality of forces between
To be aggravating, it is necessary that the offender took the victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of
advantage of the place and purposely availed of it as to superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the
make it easier to commit the crime. aggressor, and the latter takes advantage of it in the
commission of the crime. However, as none of the
Band prosecution witnesses saw how the killing was perpetrated,
abuse of superior strength cannot be appreciated in this
All must be armed; otherwise, the aggravating circumstance case. Neither can nighttime serve as an aggravating
under Art. 14(8) shall apply. circumstance, the time of the commission of the crime was
not even alleged in the Information. (Espineli v. People, G.R.
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION No. 179535, June 9, 2014)

Q: Samuel and his wife, Marissa, were talking at the TREACHERY
doorway of their house when they saw Ordona loitering
by the corner of their house who appeared to be waiting Employment of means, method, or form in the commission
for someone. After some time, Ordona left but returned of the crime against persons which tend directly and
five (5) minutes later. Meanwhile, Hubay emerged from specially to insure its execution without risk to himself
the house, holding some food. Ordona approached arising from the defense which the offended party might
Hubay with a stainless knife, called his attention by make.
saying "Pare," and suddenly stabbed him in the left
shoulder. Hubay managed to run away but Ordona gave The essence of treachery is the suddenness, surprise and
chase and eventually caught up with him. Ordona the lack of expectation that the attack will take place, thus,
stabbed him in the left torso. Hubay immediately died depriving the victim of any real opportunity for self-defense
when he was brought to the hospital. Was the killing while ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to
attended with the qualifying circumstance of evident the aggressor.
premeditation?
Elements of treachery
A: NO. The killing was not attended with the qualifying
circumstance of evident premeditation. It is indispensable 1. The employment of means of execution that would
for the prosecution to establish "how and when the plan to ensure the safety of the accused from retaliatory acts of
kill was hatched or how much time had elapsed before it the intended victim and leaving the latter without an
was carried out." It must be based on external facts which opportunity to defend himself; and
are evident, not merely suspected, which indicate 2. The means employed were deliberately or consciously
deliberate planning. adopted by the offender. (People v. Nelmida, et al, G.R.
No. 184500, September 11, 2012)
There must be direct evidence showing a plan or
preparation to kill, or proof that the accused meditated and Q: Seven members of the Sigma Rho fraternity were
reflected upon his decision to kill the victim. Criminal intent eating lunch in UP Diliman when they were suddenly
must be evidenced by notorious outward acts evidencing a attacked by several masked men who were armed with
determination to commit the crime. In order to be baseball bats and lead pipes. Some sustained injuries
considered an aggravation of the offense, the circumstance which required hospitalization. One of them,
must not merely be "premeditation" but must be "evident Venturina, died due to traumatic head injuries.
premeditation." The date and, if possible, the time when the Informations for murder for Venturina’s death, as well
malefactor determined to commit the crime is essential, as the attempted murder and frustrated murder of
because the lapse of time for the purpose of the third some Sigma Rho members were filed against members
requisite is computed from such date and time. (People v. of Scintilla Juris fraternity (Feliciano, et al.) and seven
Ordona, G.R. No. 227863, September 20, 2017, as penned by J. others. The RTC convicted Feliciano, et al. of murder
Leonen) and attempted murder, and acquitted the other co-
accused, holding that Feliciano, et al. were positively
ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH OR MEANS identified by witnesses as the attackers. The CA
EMPLOYED TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE affirmed the RTC ruling, but modified their criminal
liabilities and ruled out the presence of treachery. Is
Q: Alberto Berbon was shot in the head and different treachery attendant in the present case?
parts of the body in front of his house by unidentified
malefactors who immediately fled the crime scene on A: YES. Treachery attended the attack against private
board a waiting car. Reyes confided to the law enforcers complainants. The essence of treachery is that the attack
that he was willing to give vital information regarding comes without a warning and in a swift, deliberate, and
the Berbon case. Reyes claimed that on December 15, unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed, and
1996, he saw Espineli and Sotero Paredes board a red unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape.
car while armed with a .45 caliber firearm and armalite,
respectively; and that Espineli told Paredes that "ayaw The victims in this case were eating lunch on campus. They
ko na ng abutin pa ng bukas yang si Berbon." Are the were not at a place where they would be reasonably
qualifying circumstances of abuse of superior strength expected to be on guard for any sudden attack by rival
and nighttime present in this case? fraternity men. The victims, who were unarmed, were also

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
attacked with lead pipes and baseball bats. The swiftness and unexpected, that self-defense was not possible.” Is
and the suddenness of the attack gave no opportunity for treachery present in this case?
the victims to retaliate or even to defend themselves.
Treachery, therefore, was present in this case. (People v. A: NO. Treachery did not exist and, hence, petitioner may
Feliciano, G.R. No. 196735, May 5, 2014, as penned by J. only be convicted of two counts of frustrated homicide. The
Leonen) unexpectedness of an attack cannot be the sole basis of a
finding of treachery even if the attack was intended to kill
Test of treachery another as long as the victim’s position was merely
accidental. The means adopted must have been a result of a
The test of treachery is not only the relative position of the determination to ensure success in committing the crime.
parties but more specifically whether or not the victim was
forewarned or afforded the opportunity to make a defense Petitioner’s action was an impulsive reaction to being
or to ward off the attack. dismissed by Austria, his altercation with Naval, and Naval’s
attempt to summon Austria home. Generally, this type of
Although frontal, if the attack was unexpected, and the provocation negates the existence of treachery. There was
unarmed victim was in no position to repel the attack, no evidence of a modicum of premeditation indicating the
treachery can still be appreciated. (People v. Pelis, G.R. No. possibility of choice and planning fundamental to achieve
189328, February 21, 2011) the elements of treachery. (Cirera v. People, G.R. No.
181843, July 14, 2014, as penned by J. Leonen)
NOTE: There is no treachery if the attack was made at the
spur of the moment. Instances that may be absorbed by treachery
1. Abuse of superior strength
Q: On the evening of November 15, 1998, Susan Lalona 2. Aid of armed men
was at Murillo's Restaurant with her friend Julius 3. By a band
Joshua Mata. They were the only customers at that time. 4. Means to weaken the defense
Later, Orozco, Osir, Castro, and Maturan, apparently 5. Craft
drunk, entered and occupied the table in front of them. 6. Nighttime
Orozco approached Mata from behind and stabbed him
twice with a small bolo. Mata shouted that he was Q: A followed the unsuspecting victim, B when he was
stabbed. Lalona grabbed Orozco and wrestled with him, going home and thereafter, deliberately stabbed him in
but he pushed her back. When Mata tried to run out, the the back which resulted in B falling to the ground and
rest of the accused caught him. While Maturan and Osir was thereby further attacked by A. Was there
held Mata's arms, Castro stabbed him in the chest. The treachery?
four (4) accused continued stabbing Mata and ran away
when Lalona shouted for help. Lalona took Mata to the A: YES. B was defenseless and he was not given the
Caraga Regional Hospital on a tricycle, but Mata was opportunity to resist the attack or defend himself. A
pronounced dead on arrival. Is the killing was attended employed means which insured the killing of B and such
by circumstances which qualify the crime as murder? means assured him from the risk of B’s defense. Stabbing
from behind is a good indication of treachery. (People v.
A: YES. The circumstances proved by the prosecution amply Yanson, G.R. No. 179195, October 3, 2011)
show that treachery attended the killing of Mata. Mata was
completely helpless. His hands were held by two other NOTE: Treachery CANNOT co-exist with passion or
persons while he was stabbed. To make matters worse, four obfuscation, for while in mitigating circumstance of passion
persons, who were armed with knives, ganged-up on Mata. or obfuscation, the offender loses his reason and self-
Certainly, Mata was completely deprived of any prerogative control, in the aggravating circumstance of treachery the
to defend himself or to retaliate. Mata was helpless against mode of attack must be consciously adopted. One who loses
a group of persons with knives, who ganged up on him and his reason and self-control could not deliberately employ a
held his hands while stabbing him. (People v. Orozco, G.R. No. particular means, method or form of attack in execution of
211053, December 29, 2017, as penned by J. Leonen) crime.

Q: Austria was playing a lucky nine game at a wake. Q: Several witnesses saw Camposano and De Los Reyes
Cirera arrived, asking money from Austria so he could chasing Ilao and when he fell on the ground, appellants
buy liquor. Austria asked Cirera "to keep quiet." An took turns in stabbing him with a deadly weapon.
altercation then ensued between Naval and Cirera Camposano and De Los Reyes argues that their guilt is
when Naval asked Austria to go home. Thereafter, not established beyond reasonable doubt since that the
Austria stood up and felt that he was stabbed. As he ran testimonies of the witnesses for the prosecution did not
home, he noticed Cirera armed with a knife, this time dovetail in all particulars: the weapon used, relative
chasing Naval, who was also stabbed on the back. position of appellants when they inflicted the mortal
Austria and Naval were hospitalized and were confined stab wound/s, and who between the appellants was
for more than a month, and for six days, respectively. first to inflict the stab wound. Is their contention
Two informations for frustrated murder were filed meritorious?
against Cirera. RTC found him guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crimes charged, and ruled that there was A: NO. The alleged inconsistencies in the witnesses'
treachery on Cirera’s end, considering the length of testimonies, if they be such at all, referred merely to minor
time it took private complainants to realize that they and inconsequential details, which did not at all affect the
were stabbed. CA affirmed the finding of the RTC that substance of their testimonies, much less impair their
there was treachery because “the attack was so sudden credibility.


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
In the ultimate analysis, what really matters in this case is be considered as an aggravating circumstance. (Sec 29,
that the prosecution witnesses did in fact see that it was the par. 1, R.A. 10591)
appellants who assaulted and killed Ilao that tragic
morning. (People v. Camposano and De Los Reyes, G.R. No. Use of Explosives
207659, April 20, 2016)
When a person commits any of the crimes defined in the
IGNOMINY RPC or special laws with the use of hand grenade(s), rifle
grenade(s), and other explosives, including but not limited
It pertains to the moral order, which adds disgrace to the to 'pillbox,' 'molotov cocktail bombs,' 'fire bombs,' or other
material injury caused by the crime. Ignominy adds insult incendiary devices capable of producing destructive effect
to injury or adds shame to the natural effects of the crime. on contiguous objects or causing injury or death to any
Ignominy shocks the moral conscience of man. person, which results in the death of any person or persons,
the use of such explosives, detonation agents or incendiary
Application of ignominy devices shall be considered as an aggravating
1. Crimes against chastity, circumstance. (Sec. 2, R.A. 8294)
2. Less serious physical injuries,
3. Light or grave coercion; and USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS UNDER R.A. 9165 AS
4. Murder. QUALIFYING AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
(BAR 2005, 2009)
No ignominy when a man is killed in the presence of his
wife Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to the contrary,
a positive finding for the use of dangerous drugs shall be a
The circumstance of ignominy will not be appreciated if the qualifying aggravating circumstance in the commission
offender employed no means nor did any circumstance of a crime by an offender, and the application of the penalty
surround the act tending to make the effects of the crime provided for in the RPC shall be applicable. (Sec. 25, R.A.
more humiliating. 9165) (BAR 2005, 2009)

Ignominy when a woman is raped in the presence of her ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
husband
Those circumstances which must be taken into
Ignominy can be appreciated. Rape is now a crime against consideration as aggravating or mitigating according to the
persons (R.A. 8353). Presence of the husband qualifies the nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions
crime of rape under Art. 266. attending its commission. These are: (RIDe)

CRUELTY 1. Relationship;
2. Intoxication;
There is cruelty when the wrong done was intended to 3. Degree of instruction and education of the offender.
prolong the suffering of the victim, causing him
unnecessary moral and physical pain. INTOXICATION

Requisites When intoxication is mitigating (BAR 2000, 2002)
1. That at the time of the infliction of the physical pain, the
offended party is still alive; and If intoxication is:
2. That the offender enjoys and delights in seeing his 1. Not habitual;
victim suffer gradually by the infliction of the physical 2. Not subsequent to the plan to commit a felony; or
pain. 3. At the time of the commission of the crime, the accused
has taken such quantity of alcoholic drinks as to blur his
Ignominy vis-à-vis Cruelty reason and deprive him of certain degree of control.

IGNOMINY CRUELTY When intoxication is aggravating
Ignominy refers to the Cruelty refers to the
moral effect of a crime and physical suffering of the If intoxication is:
it pertains to the moral victim purposely intended 1. Habitual; or
order, whether or not the by the offender. It is 2. Intentional (subsequent to the plan to commit a felony).
victim is dead or alive. necessary that the victim
was still alive when the NOTE: The moment intoxication is shown to be habitual or
wounds were inflicted. intentional to the commission of the crime, the same will
immediately aggravate, regardless of the crime committed.
USE OF LOOSE FIREARMS UNDER R.A. 10591 AND USE
OF EXPLOSIVES UNDER R.A. 8294 AS AGGRAVATING Person considered as “habitual drunkard”
CIRCUMSTANCES
He is one given to intoxication by excessive use of
NOTE: P.D. 1866 (as amended by R.A. 8294) has been intoxicating drinks. The habit should be actual and
superseded by the new Firearms law (R.A. 10591). confirmed. It is unnecessary that it be a matter of daily
occurrence. (People v. Camano, G.R. No. L-36662-63, July 30,
The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the commission 1982)
of a crime punishable under RPC or other special laws, shall
Degree of instruction and education

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
LACK OR LOW DEGREE OF HIGH DEGREE OF Marivic killed her husband. Is Gigi a principal by
INSTRUCTION AND INSTRUCTION inducement?
EDUCATION AND EDUCATION
GR: Lack or low degree of High degree of A: NO. A thoughtless expression is not an inducement to kill.
instruction is mitigating in all instruction or The inducement must precede the act induced and must be
crimes. education is so influential in producing the criminal act that without it
aggravating when the act would not have been perfected.
XPNs: Not mitigating in: the offender took
1. Crimes against property advantage of his ACCOMPLICES
2. Theft and robbery or assault learning in the
upon the persons of another. commission of the One who, not being included in Art. 17 as principal,
3. Crimes against chastity crimes. cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or
4. Murder or homicide simultaneous acts which are not indispensable to the
5. Rape commission of the crime.
6. Treason
An accomplice is also known as an accessory before the fact.
NOTE: Test of lack of instruction as a mitigating
circumstance is not illiteracy alone, but rather lack of Accomplice vis-à-vis Conspirator (BAR 2007)
sufficient intelligence.
ACCOMPLICE CONSPIRATOR
ABSOLUTORY CAUSES Incurs criminal Participates in the
liability by merely commission of a crime as a co-
Those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of cooperating in the principal.
public policy and sentiment there is no penalty imposed. execution of the crime
without participating
Q: Are the grounds for total extinguishment of criminal as a principal, by prior
liability (RPC, Art. 89) and express pardon or marriage or simultaneous acts.
of the accused and the victim in crimes against chastity Incurs criminal Incurs criminal liability not
(RPC, Art. 344) absolutory causes? liability in an only for his individual acts in
individual capacity by the execution of the crime but
A: NO. An absolutory cause prevents criminal liability from his act alone of also from the acts of the other
attaching or arising from the acts of the accused. Art. 89 cooperating in the participants in the
which speaks of extinguishment of criminal liability execution of the crime. commission of the crime
presupposes that the accused was deemed criminally liable; collectively.
otherwise there would be no liability to extinguish. The
same is true with respect to marriage of the parties in NOTE: The acts of the other
crimes against chastity. participants in the execution
of the crime are considered
PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE also as acts of a conspirator
for purposes of collective
For grave and less grave felonies: criminal responsibility.
1. Principals; Participates in the Participates in the adoption
2. Accomplices; and
execution of a crime or making of the criminal
3. Accessories.
when the criminal design.

design or plan is
For light felonies:
already in place.
1. Principals; and
Subjected to a penalty Incurs the penalty of a
2. Accomplices
one degree lower than principal.

that of a principal
Parties in the commission of a crime

1. Active subject (the criminal) – only natural persons can
be the active subject of crime because of the highly ACCESSORIES
personal nature of the criminal responsibility.
2. Passive subject (the injured party) – the holder of the Accessories (BAR 1992, 1998, 2004, 2008)
injured right: natural person, juridical person, group,
and the State. Those who do not participate in the criminal design, nor
cooperate in the commission of the felony, but with
knowledge of the commission of the crime, he subsequently
PRINCIPALS
takes part in three ways by:

Kinds of principals
1. Profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit
1. Principal by direct participation;
by the effects of the crime;
2. Principal by induction/inducement; and
2. Concealing or destroying the body of the crime or the
3. Principal by indispensable cooperation
effects thereof in order to prevent its discovery; and

3. Harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the
Q: Marivic confided to her friend Gigi that her marital
principal of the crime. (BAR 2008)
life had been miserable because she married an

irresponsible and philandering husband. Gigi
Instances when accessories are not criminally liable
remarked: “A husband like that deserves to be killed.”

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
1. When the felony committed is a light felony. as a pledge for Php500 loan. During the trial, MCB
2. When the accessory is related to the principal as raised the defense that being the mother of DCB, she
spouse, or as an ascendant, or descendant or as brother cannot be held liable as an accessory. Will MCB’s
or sister whether legitimate, natural or adopted or defense prosper? (BAR 2004)
where the accessory is a relative by affinity within the
same degree, unless the accessory himself profited A: NO. MCB’s defense will not prosper because the
from the effects or proceeds of the crime or assisted the exemption from criminal liability of an accessory by virtue
offender to profit therefrom. (Art. 20, RPC) of relationship with the principal does not cover accessories
who themselves profited from or assisted the offender to
Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability profit by the effects or proceeds of the crime. This non-
(BAR 1998, 2004, 2010) exemption of an accessory, though related to the principal
of the crime, is expressly provided in Art. 20 of the RPC.
GR: An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when
the principal is his: Q: Immediately after murdering Bob, Jake went to his
1. Spouse mother to seek refuge. His mother told him to hide in
2. Ascendant the maid’s quarter until she finds a better place for him
3. Descendant to hide. After two days, Jake transferred to his aunt’s
4. Legitimate, natural or adopted brother, sister, or house. A week later, Jake was apprehended by the
relative by affinity within the same degree. police. Can Jake’s mother and aunt be made criminally
liable as accessories to the crime of murder? (BAR
XPN: Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even if 2010)
the principal is related to him, if such accessory:
1. Profited by the effects of the crime; or A: The mother is exempt from criminal liability under Art.
2. Assisted the offender to profit from the effects of the 20 of the RPC as a result of her relationship to her son;
crime. however, the aunt is liable as an accessory under Art. 19,
par. 3 of the RPC if the author of the crime is guilty of
Q: DCB, the daughter of MSB, stole the earrings of a murder. The relationship between an aunt and a nephew
stranger. MCB pawned the earrings with TBI Pawnshop does not fall within the classification for exemption.

Reiteracion, recidivism, habitual delinquency, and quasi-recidivism distinguished

REITERACION RECIDIVISM HABITUAL DELIQUENCY QUASI-RECIDIVISM

There are two There are at least There are at least three Felony was committed
convictions. It is two convictions. No convictions. Within a period of 10 after having been
necessary that the prescriptive period years from the date of release or convicted by final
offender shall have on the commission last conviction of the crimes judgment of an offense,
served out his of the offense; it covered, he is found guilty of any before beginning to serve
sentence for the does not prescribe. of said crimes a third time or sentence or while serving
first offense. It is enough that a oftener. the same.
final judgment has
been rendered in
the first offense.
The previous and Requires that the Crimes covered are serious or First and subsequent
subsequent offenses be included less serious physical injuries, conviction may or may not
offenses must not in the same Title of robbery, theft, estafa, and be embraced by the same
be embraced by the the Code falsification title of the RPC
same Title of the
RPC
Not always It increases the Shall suffer additional penalty Shall be punished by the
aggravating; its penalty to its maximum period of the
appreciation is maximum period penalty prescribed by law
within the for the new felony
discretion of the
court
Includes offenses Felonies under RPC Limited to serious or less serious First crime for which the
under special law only physical injuries, robbery, theft, offender is serving
estafa and falsification sentence need not be a
crime under the RPC but
the second crime must be
one under the RPC

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
A generic A generic Extraordinary aggravating Special aggravating
aggravating aggravating circumstance which cannot be circumstance which may
circumstance circumstance offset by a mitigating be offset by special
circumstance privileged mitigating
circumstances not by
ordinary mitigating
circumstances

NOTE: If recidivism and reiteracion are both present, only recidivism must be appreciated because it is easier to prove.

PENALTIES 2. That such power does not extend to cases of
impeachment;
3. No pardon, amnesty, parole or suspension of sentence
ACT PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF for violation of election laws, rules, and regulations
DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES shall be granted by the President without the favorable
(R.A. 9346) recommendation of the COMELEC; and
4. It cannot exempt the offender from the payment of civil
Death penalty is not abolished. It is only prohibited to be indemnity.
imposed. (People v. Muñoz, G.R. No. L-38969-70, February 9,
1989) FINE

NOTE: However, the corresponding civil liability should be Q: E and M are convicted of a penal law that imposes a
the civil liability corresponding to death. (People v. Salome, penalty of fine or imprisonment or both fine and
G.R. No. 169077, August 31, 2006) imprisonment. The judge sentenced them to pay the
fine, jointly and severally, with subsidiary
Reason: The rights of the offended persons or innocent imprisonment in case of insolvency. (BAR 2005)
third parties are not within the gift of arbitrary disposal of
the state. a. Is the penalty proper? Explain.

Penalty imposed in lieu of the death penalty A: NO. Imposing the penalty of fine jointly and severally on
1. Reclusion perpetua - when the law violated makes use E and M is not proper. The penalty should be imposed
of the nomenclature of the penalties of the RPC; or individually on every person accused of the crime. Any of
2. Life imprisonment - when the law violated does not the convicted accused who is insolvent and unable to pay
make use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the the fine, shall serve the subsidiary imprisonment.
RPC. (Sec. 2, RA 9346)
b. May the judge impose an alternative penalty of fine
Persons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion or imprisonment? Explain.
perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion
perpetua, by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for A: NO. The judge may not validly impose an alternative
parole under Act No. 4103 otherwise known as the penalty. Although the law may prescribe an alternative
Indeterminate Sentence Law. (as amended R.A. 9346, Sec 3) penalty for a crime, it does not mean that the court may
impose the alternative penalties at the same time. The
RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT sentence must be definite; otherwise, the judgment cannot
Pertains to the penalty Pertains to the penalty attain finality.
imposed for violation of imposed for violation of
the RPC special laws THREE-FOLD RULE
has fixed duration no fixed duration
It means that the maximum duration of a convict’s sentence
carries with it accessory does not carry with it
shall not be more than three times the length of time
penalties accessory penalty
corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed
upon him but in no case exceed 40 years.
PARDON, ITS EFFECTS
NOTE: The rule applies if a convict has to serve at least four
GR: A pardon shall not restore the right to hold public office (4) sentences, continuously.
or the right of suffrage. (BAR 2015)
SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
XPN: When any or both such rights is/are expressly
restored by the terms of the pardon; or if it is an absolute Subsidiary personal liability is to be suffered by the convict
pardon who has no property with which to meet the fine, at the rate
of one day for each amount equivalent to the highest
NOTE: Pardon shall not exempt the culprit from the minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at the
payment of the civil liability. time of the rendition of judgment of conviction by the
trial court. (R.A. 10159 approved on April 10, 2012)
Limitations upon the exercise of the pardoning power:
Imposition of subsidiary penalty
1. That the power can be exercised only after conviction
“by final judgment”;

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
1. When there is a principal penalty of imprisonment or Those punishable by:
any other principal penalty and it carries with it a fine; 1. Death, reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal in twenty
or (20) years;
2. When penalty is only a fine. 2. Other afflictive penalties (prision mayor) in fifteen (15)
years;
SUBSIDIARY IMPRISONMENT 3. Correctional penalty (prision correccional) in ten (10)
years;
Subsidiary imprisonment is NOT an accessory penalty; it is 4. Arresto mayor in five (5) years;
a principal penalty thus it has to be stated before the 5. Light offenses in two (2) months; and
offender can benefit from it. 6. Oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in
six months.
Instances when subsidiary penalty is NOT imposed
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the
1. There is no subsidiary penalty if the penalty imposed highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of
by the court is prision mayor, reclusion temporal, or prescription. (Art. 90, RPC)
reclusion perpetua. (BAR 2013)
2. No subsidiary penalty for nonpayment of: Prescription of the crimes of oral defamation and
a. Reparation of the damage caused; slander (BAR 1994, 1997, 2004, 2010)
b. Indemnification of the consequential damages;
c. The cost of the proceedings. Grave slander prescribes in six (6) months while simple
3. When there is no fixed duration slander prescribes in two (2) months.
4. Nonpayment of income tax
Q: One fateful night in January 1990, while 5-year old
PECUNIARY LIABILITIES Albert was urinating at the back of their house, he
heard a strange noise coming from the kitchen of their
Pecuniary liabilities of persons criminally liable (BAR neighbor and playmate, Ara. When he peeped inside, he
2005) saw Mina, Ara’s stepmother, very angry and strangling
the 5-year old Ara to death. Albert saw Mina carry the
1. Reparation of damage caused dead body of Ara, place it inside the trunk of the car and
2. Indemnification of the consequential damages drive away. The dead body of Ara was never found.
3. Fine Mina spread the news in the neighborhood that Ara
4. Costs of proceedings went to live with her grandparents in Ormoc City. For
fear of his life, Albert did not tell anyone, even his
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES parents and relatives, about what he witnessed. Twenty
and a half (20 & ½) years after the incident, and right
Partial extinction of criminal liability after his graduation in Criminology, Albert reported the
crime to NBI authorities. The crime of homicide
1. By conditional pardon; prescribes in 20 years. Can the State still prosecute
2. By commutation of the sentence; and Mina for the death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 and 1/2
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may years? (BAR 2000)
earn while he is undergoing preventive imprisonment
or serving his sentence. (Art. 94, RPC as amended by R.A. A: YES. The State can still prosecute Mina for the death of
10592) Ara despite the lapse of 20 and ½ years. Under Art. 91 of the
RPC, the period of prescription commences to run from the
Total extinguishment of criminal liability (Art. 89, RPC) day on which the crime is discovered by the offended party,
(BAR 1990, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2009) the authorities or their agents. In the case at bar, the
commission of the crime was known only to Albert, who
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties; was not the offended party nor an authority or an agent of
and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is an authority. It was discovered by the NBI authorities only
extinguished only when the death of the offender when Albert revealed to them the commission of the crime.
occurs before final judgment; (BAR 2013) Hence, the period of prescription of 20 years for homicide
2. By service of sentence; commenced to run only from the time Albert revealed the
3. By prescription of the crime; same to the NBI authorities.
4. By prescription of the penalty;
5. By marriage of the offended woman in cases of Prescription of penalties (Art. 92, RPC) (BAR 1993,
seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness, as 1994, 1997, 2004, 2010)
provided in Art. 344 of the RPC.
6. By absolute pardon; and 1. Death and reclusion perpetua in twenty (20) years;
7. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty 2. Other afflictive penalties (reclusion temporal to prision
and all its effects. Extinction of criminal liability does mayor) in fifteen (15) years;
not necessarily mean that civil liability is also 3. Correctional penalty (prision correccional) in ten (10)
extinguished. (Petralba v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. years;
81337, August 16, 1991) 4. Arresto mayor in five (5) years; and
8. As an effect of final discharge of probation 5. Light penalties in one (1) year.

Prescription of crimes (Art. 90, RPC) (BAR 1994, 1997, Rules in prescription of penalties (Art. 93, RPC)
2004, 2010)


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
1. The period of prescription of penalties commences to CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS EXEMPT FROM
run from the date when the culprit evaded the service of CRIMINAL LIABILITY
his sentence. (BAR 2015)
2. It is interrupted if the convict— GR: Exemption from criminal liability does not include
a. Gives himself up; exemption from civil liability.
b. Be captured;
c. Goes to a foreign country with which we have XPNs:
no extradition treaty (BAR 2015); or 1. No civil liability in par. 4, Art. 12 of the RPC (injury
d. Commits another crime before the expiration of caused by mere accident);
the period of prescription. 2. No civil liability in par. 7, Art. 12 of the RPC (failure to
perform an act required by law when prevented by
Pardon by the Chief Executive vis-à-vis Pardon by the some lawful or insuperable cause).
offended party (BAR 1994)
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS UNDER JUSTIFYING
PARDON BY THE CHIEF PARDON BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES
EXECUTIVE OFFENDED PARTY
It extinguishes the It does not extinguish GR: There is no civil liability in justifying circumstances.
criminal liability of the criminal liability of the
offender. offender. XPN: In par. 4 of Art. 11 of RPC, there is civil liability, but the
It cannot exempt the Offended party can waive person civilly liable is the one who benefited by the act
offender from the the civil liability which the which caused damage to another.
payment of the civil offender must pay.
indemnity. EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL
It is granted only after Pardon should be given OF CIVIL LIABILITY
conviction and may be before the institution of
extended to any of the criminal prosecution and Civil liability shall be extinguished in the same manner as
offenders. must be extended to both other obligations in accordance with the provisions of the
offenders. (Art. 344, RPC) Civil Law:
1. By payment or performance;
Pardon vis-à-vis Amnesty (BAR 2006, 2015) 2. By the loss of the thing due;
3. By the condonation or remission of debt;
PARDON AMNESTY 4. By the confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and
The convict is excused The criminal complexion debtor;
from serving the sentence of the act constituting the 5. By compensation;
but the effects of crime is erased, as though 6. By novation.
conviction remain unless such act was innocent
expressly remitted by the when committed; hence Other causes: annulment, rescission, fulfillment of a
pardon; hence, for pardon the effects of the resolutory condition, and prescription. (NCC, Art. 1231)
to be valid, there must be conviction are obliterated.
a sentence already final NOTE: Civil liability is extinguished by subsequent
and executory at the time agreement between the accused and the offended party.
the same is granted. Express condonation by the offended party has the effect of
The grant is in favor of Amnesty is granted in waiving civil liability with regard to the interest of the
individual convicted favor of a class of convicted injured party.
offenders, not to a class of offenders, not to individual
convicted offenders. convicted offenders. Survival of Civil Liability
The crimes subject of the The crimes involved are
grant may be common generally political offenses The offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil
crimes or political crimes. not common crimes. liability resulting from the crime committed by him,
The grant is a private act It is a public act that notwithstanding the fact he has served his sentence
of the Chief Executive requires concurrence of consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has
which does not require the Philippine Senate. not been required to serve the same by reason of amnesty,
the concurrence of any pardon, commutation of sentence or any other reason. (Art.
other public officer. 113, RPC)

CIVIL LIABILITY NOTE: While amnesty wipes out all traces and vestiges of
the crime, it does not extinguish civil liability of the
offender.
PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the
GR: Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the
liable. (RPC, Art. 100) sentence.

XPNs: Q: Florencio was an appellant of a case for the crime of
1. If there is no damage caused by the commission of the murder. Pending his appeal, he died while in
crime, the offender is not civilly liable. confinement and notice of his death was belatedly
2. There is no private person injured by the crime. conveyed to the court. Does his death extinguish his
criminal and civil liabilities?

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
A: YES. Florencio’s death prior to the court’s final judgment Suddenly, Joanne saw Abenir hit Delia on the head with
extinguished his criminal and civil liability ex delicto a maso. A second blow hit the cement wall. Joanne
pursuant to Art. 89(1) of the RPC. (People v. Agacer, G.R. No. yelled and tried to pacify Abenir, asking why he did it.
177751, January 7, 2013) Abenir told her that she caught Delia with a man in their
bathroom. However, Joanne saw no one. Delia was
Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction rushed to the hospital but she passed away shortly
extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability after. Is Abenir liable for the crime of Parricide?
based solely thereon. According to Justice Regalado, “the
death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his A: YES. All the elements of the crime of parricide were
criminal liability and only the civil liability directly arising sufficiently proved by the prosecution. There was no
from and based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil dispute as to the relationship between the accused-
liability ex delicto in senso strictiore." appellant and the victim. With respect to the killing by the
accused of his wife, their daughter Joanne clearly testified
Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives that she suddenly saw her father hit the head of her mother
notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also with a small mallet. Joanne's straightforward and candid
be predicated on a source of obligation other than narration of the incident is regarded as positive and
delict. Art. 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these other credible evidence, sufficient to convict the accused.
sources of obligation. (People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007
September 2, 1994) Well settled is the rule that it is unnatural for a relative, in
this case the accused's own child, who is interested in
Q: On July 23, 2014, Renato, Gariguez, Jr., and Larido vindicating the crime, to accuse somebody else other than
were held guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special the real culprit. For her to do so is to let the guilty go free.
complex crime of Kidnapping for Ransom with Where there is nothing to indicate that witnesses were
Homicide. They collectively moved for reconsideration. actuated by improper motives on the witness stand, their
The Court denied such motion with finality in its positive declarations made under solemn oath deserve full
Resolution dated September 24, 2014. However, before faith and credence. (People v. Brusola, G.R. No. 210615, July
the finality of its resolution, the Court received a letter 26, 2017. as penned by J. Leonen)
from the Bureau of Corrections dated September 16,
2014 informing them of the death of one of the accused- Q: If a person killed another not knowing that the latter
appellants in this case, Renato, on June 10, 2014. Is was his son, will he be guilty of parricide? (BAR 1996)
Renato Dionaldo y Ebron criminally liable of special
complex crime of Kidnapping for Ransom with A: YES. The law does not require knowledge of relationship
Homicide? between them.

A: NO. Dianaldo’s liability is extinguished by his death. As Q: Suppose X killed his brother. What is the crime
provided under Art. 89 of the RPC, criminal liability is committed?
totally extinguished by the death of the convict, as to the
personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, liability A: Murder, because brothers are not part of those
therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender enumerated under Art. 246. Their relation is in the
occurs before final judgment. Consequently, Renato's death collateral line and not as ascendants or descendants of each
on June 10, 2014 renders the Court's July 23, 2014 other.
Resolution irrelevant and ineffectual as to him, and is
therefore set aside. Accordingly, the criminal case against Q: Suppose a husband, who wanted to kill his sick wife,
Renato is dismissed. (People v. Dionaldo, G.R. No. 207949, hired a killer. The hired killer shot the wife. What are
September 9, 2015) the crimes committed?

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS A: The husband is liable for parricide as principal by
inducement. The hired killer is liable for murder. The
PARRICIDE personal relationship of the husband to wife cannot be
transferred to a stranger.
Elements (BAR 1994, 1997, 1999, 2003, 2015)
1. That a person is killed; Q: Suppose A, an adopted child of B, killed the latter's
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused; and parents. Will A be liable for parricide?
3. That the deceased is the:
a. Legitimate/Illegitimate father; A: NO. An adopted child is considered as a legitimate child
b. Legitimate/Illegitimate mother; BUT since the relationship is exclusive between the adopter
c. Legitimate/Illegitimate child; and the adopted, killing the parents of the adopter is not
d. Other legitimate ascendant; considered as parricide of other legitimate ascendants.
e. Other legitimate descendant; or
f. Legitimate spouse. Age of the child

Q: While Joanne was eating, she noticed that her father, The child killed by his parent must be at least three days old.
Abenir, seemed restless while he was preparing for If the child is less than three days old, the crime is
work. Meanwhile, Jessica, Abegail, and Delia were infanticide, which is punishable under Art. 255.
watching television, with Delia seated on the floor near
the toilet. DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED
UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
(BAR 2001, 2005, 2015)

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Elements surprised to hear sighs and giggles inside. He opened
1. A legally married person or a parent surprises his the door very carefully and peeped inside where he saw
spouse or daughter, the latter under 18 years of age and his wife B having sexual intercourse with their
living with him, in the act of committing sexual neighbor C. A rushed inside and grabbed C but the latter
intercourse; managed to wrest himself free and jumped out of the
2. He or she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any window. A followed suit and managed to catch C again
or both of them any serious physical injury in the act or and after a furious struggle, managed also to strangle
immediately thereafter; and him to death. A then rushed back to their bedroom
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of where his wife B was cowering under the bed covers.
his wife or daughter, or that he or she has not consented Still enraged, A hit B with fist blows and rendered her
to the infidelity of the other spouse. unconscious. The police arrived after being summoned
by their neighbors and arrested A who was detained,
There is no criminal liability when less serious or slight inquested and charged for the death of C and serious
physical injuries are inflicted. The presence of the requisites physical injuries of B.
enumerated above is an absolutory cause. a. Is A liable for C’s death? Why?
b. Is A liable for B’s injuries? Why? (BAR 1991,
Art. 247 does not define any crime; thus, it cannot be alleged 2001, 2005, 2007)
in an Information. Murder, homicide or parricide needs to
be filed first, with Art. 247 being raised as a defense. A:
a. YES. A is liable for C’s death but under the exceptional
Q: Pedro, a policeman, had slight fever and decided to circumstances in Art. 247 of the RPC where only
go home early. However, he was shocked and enraged destierro is prescribed. Art. 247 governs since A
when, after opening the door of his bedroom, he saw his surprised his wife B in the act of having sexual
brother, Julius completely naked, having sexual intercourse with C, and the killing of C was immediately
intercourse with his wife, Cleopatra. Pedro shot and thereafter as the discover, escape, pursuit and killing of
killed Julius. Cleopatra fled from the bedroom but C form one continuous act. (U.S. v. Vargas, G.R. No. 1053,
Pedro ran after her and shot and killed her. Is Pedro May 7, 1903)
criminally liable for the death of Julius and Cleopatra?
b. YES. A is liable for the serious physical injuries he
A: YES. Under Art. 247 of the RPC, Pedro will be penalized inflicted on his wife but under the same exceptional
by destierro for killing both Julius and Cleopatra. He is also circumstances in Art. 247 of the RPC for the same
civilly liable. However, if what was inflicted was only less reason.
serious or slight physical injuries (not death or serious
physical injury), there is no criminal liability. MURDER (BAR 1999, 2001, 2008, 2009, 2010)

Stages contemplated under Art. 247 Murder is the unlawful killing of any person which is not
1. When the offender surprised the other spouse with a parricide or infanticide, provided that any of the following
paramour or mistress in the act of committing sexual circumstances is present:
intercourse.
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength,
Surprise means to come upon suddenly or with the aid of armed men, or employing means to
unexpectedly. weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure
or afford impunity. (BAR 1995, 2000, 2006, 2008,
2. When the offender kills or inflicts serious physical 2015)
injury upon the other spouse and paramour while in the
act of intercourse, or immediately thereafter, that is, If committed “by a band”, it is still murder because of
after surprising. the circumstance of “with the aid of armed men.”

“Immediately thereafter” means that the discovery, Q: One night, Jennifer was found dead. CCTV footage
escape, pursuit and the killing must all form part of one shows Jennifer and Pemberton leaving a club together.
continuous act. The act done must be a direct result of An unequivocal testimony identified Pemberton as the
the outrage of the cuckolded spouse. (Reyes, 2012) last person who was seen with Jennifer on the night she
(BAR 1991) died. The results of a general physical examination
conducted on Pemberton show abrasions and light
Q: The accused was shocked to discover his wife and scratches on different parts on his body, and
their driver sleeping in the master’s bedroom. Pemberton’s latex print was shown on one of the
Outraged, the accused got his gun and killed both. Can condoms found at the crime scene. Physical
the accused claim that he killed the two under examinations on Jennifer’s cadaver reveal that she was
exceptional circumstances? (BAR 1991, 2001, 2005, strangled from behind. Jennifer’s mother filed a
2007, 2011) complaint for Murder against Pemberton. Pemberton
opposed, stating that there is no probable cause for
A: NO. The accused did not catch them while having sexual murder. Is Pemberton correct?
intercourse.
A: NO. There is ample evidence submitted to establish
Q: A and B are husband and wife. One night, A, a security probable cause that Pemberton murdered Jennifer. First,
guard, felt sick and cold, hence, he decided to go home the killing of Jennifer has been indubitably confirmed.
around midnight after getting permission from his duty Second, the pieces of evidence such as the CCTV footage, the
officer. Approaching the master bedroom, he was testimonies, the latex print on the condom, the results of

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
physical examinations both on Pemberton and Jennifer lead stop because he would alight. As the jeepney ground to
to no other conclusion that Pemberton was the perpetrator a halt, Glino drew a 29-inch balisong and stabbed H. H
of the crime. Aside from that, the result of the physical failed to offer any form of resistance and thereafter,
examination conducted on Jennifer’s cadaver demonstrates died. Glino contended that he is only liable for homicide
that treachery, a qualifying circumstance, is present. since there was no treachery as the victim was
forwarned of the danger. Is the contention of Glino
Pemberton points out the lack of any direct evidence linking legally tenable?
him to the crime. It has been the consistent pronouncement
of the Supreme Court that in such cases, the prosecution A: NO. The rule is well-settled in this jurisdiction that
may resort to circumstancial evidence. If direct evidence is treachery may still be appreciated even though the victim
insisted upon under all circumstances, the guilt of vicious was forewarned of the danger to his person. What is
felons who committed heinous crimes in secret will be hard, decisive is that the attack was executed in a manner that the
if not impossible to prove. (Joseph Scott Pemberton v. De victim was rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate.
Lima, G.R. No. 217508, April 18, 2016, as penned by J. (People v. Glino, G.R. No. 173793, December 4, 2007)
Leonen)
A killing done at the spur of the moment is not treacherous.
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise. (People v. Nitcha, G.R. No. 113517, January 19, 1995)

If this aggravating circumstance is present in the Requisites of evident premeditation
commission of the crime, it affects not only the person 1. Time when the accused decided to commit the crime;
who received the money or reward but also the person 2. Overt act manifestly indicating that he clung to the
who gave it. determination; and
3. A sufficient lapse of time between the decision and
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, execution, allowing the accused to reflect upon the
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault consequences of his act. (People v. Grabador, G.R. No.
upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by motor vehicles, or 227504, June 13, 2018)
with the use of any other means involving great waste
and ruin. (BAR 1997, 2005) Q: A killed B by stabbing B in the heart which resulted
to B’s death. The witness is the wife of the victim, who
a. If the primordial criminal intent is to kill, and fire said that a day prior to the killing, A threatened B.
was only used as a means to do so, it is murder. Based on the testimony of the wife, A was prosecuted
b. If the primordial intent is to destroy the property for murder due to evident premeditation. Is the charge
through fire and incidentally somebody died, it is correct?
arson.
A: NO. The crime committed is homicide only. A mere threat
Treachery and evident premeditation are inherent in is not sufficient to constitute evident premeditation.
murder by poison and, as such, cannot be considered as
aggravating circumstance. HOMICIDE

4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the The unlawful killing of any person, which is neither
preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of parricide, murder, nor infanticide.
volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or other public
calamity. Elements
1. That a person was killed;
The offender must take advantage of the calamity to 2. That the accused killed him without any justifying
qualify the crime to murder. circumstance;
3. The accused had intention to kill which is presumed;
5. With evident premeditation. and
4. The killing was not attended by any of the qualifying
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or infanticide. (Reyes, 2017)
scoffing at his person or corpse.
Evidence to show intent to kill is important only in
Outraging means any physical act to commit an attempted or frustrated homicide
extremely vicious or deeply insulting act while scoffing This is because if death resulted, intent to kill is conclusively
is any verbal act implying a showing of irreverence. presumed. It is generally shown by the kind of weapon used,
the parts of the victim's body at which it was aimed, and by
Outraging or scoffing at the person or corpse of the the wounds inflicted. The element of intent to kill is
victim is the only instance that does not fall under Art. incompatible with imprudence or negligence.
14 on aggravating circumstances in general.
Proving intent to kill
Q: H and W hailed a jeepney where a drunk Glino sat
beside W. Glino’s head fell on W’s shoulder. H told Glino Evidence to prove intent to kill in crimes against persons
to sit properly. The latter arrogantly retorted, “Anong may consist, inter alia, of:
pakialam mo?” and cursed H. Glino then provokingly
asked H, “Anong gusto mo?” H replied, “Wala akong 1. The means used by the malefactors;
sinabing masama.” After the heated verbal tussle, Glino 2. The nature, location and number of wounds sustained
appeared to have calmed down. He told the driver to by the victim;

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
3. The conduct of the malefactors before, at the time of, or Tumultuous affray exists when at least four persons took
immediately after the killing of the victim; part therein.
4. The circumstances under which the crime was
committed; Elements
5. The motive of the accused; (People v. Lanuza y 1. There be several or at least 4 persons;
Bagaoisan, G.R. No. 188562, August 17, 2011) and 2. That they did not compose groups organized for the
6. Words uttered at the time of inflicting the injuries on common purpose of assaulting and attacking each
the victim may also be considered. (De Guzman v. other reciprocally, otherwise, they may be held liable
People, 742 SCRA 501, November 26, 2014) as co-conspirators;
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted one
Q: X, a pharmacist, compounded and prepared the another in a confused and tumultuous manner;
medicine on prescription by a doctor. X erroneously 4. Someone was killed in the course of the affray;
used a highly poisonous substance. When taken by the
patient, the latter nearly died. The accused was charged NOTE: The person killed in the course of the affray
with frustrated homicide through reckless need not be one of the participants in the affray. He
imprudence. Is the charge correct? could be a mere passerby.

A: NO. It is an error to convict the accused of frustrated 5. It cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
homicide through reckless imprudence. He is guilty of deceased.
physical injuries through reckless imprudence. The element
of intent to kill in frustrated homicide is incompatible with NOTE: if the one who inflicted the fatal wound is
negligence or imprudence. Intent in felonies by means of known, the crime is not tumultuous affray. It is a case
dolo is replaced with lack of foresight or skill in felonies by of homicide.
culpa.
6. The person or persons who inflicted serious physical
Accidental homicide injuries or who used violence can be identified.

It is the death of a person brought about by a lawful act Q: M left his house together with R, to attend a public
performed with proper care and skill, and without dance. Two hours later, they decided to have a drink.
homicidal intent. Not long after, M left to look for a place to relieve
himself. According to R, he was only about three meters
Example: In a boxing bout where the game is freely from M who was relieving himself when a short man
permitted by law or local ordinance, and all the rules of the walked past him, approached M and stabbed him at the
game have been observed, the resulting death or injuries side. M retaliated by striking his assailant with a half-
cannot be deemed felonious, since the act of playing the filled bottle of beer. Almost simultaneously, a group of
game is a lawful act. seven men, ganged up on M and hit him with assorted
weapons, i.e., bamboo poles, stones and pieces of wood.
Q: Supposing Pedro was found on the street dead with R, who was petrified, could only watch helplessly as M
30 stab wounds at the back. A witness said that he saw was being mauled and overpowered by his assailants.
Juan running away carrying a bladed weapon. What M fell to the ground and died before he could be given
crime was committed by Juan? any medical assistance. What crime is committed in the
given case?
A: Homicide and not murder. Even if the stab wounds were
found on the back of Pedro, it is not conclusive of the A: The crime committed is Murder and not Death Caused in
presence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery. Tumultuous Affray. A tumultuous affray takes place when a
Further, the witness merely saw Juan running. He must quarrel occurs between several persons who engage in a
have seen the infliction of the wound. confused and tumultuous manner, in the course of which a
person is killed or wounded and the author thereof cannot
NOTE: For treachery to be appreciated, it must be present be ascertained. The quarrel in the instant case is between a
and seen by the witness right at the inception of the attack. distinct group of individuals, one of whom was sufficiently
(People v. Concillado, G.R. No. 181204, November 28, 2011) identified as the principal author of the killing, as against a
common, particular victim. (People v. Unlagada, G.R. No.
Accidental homicide 141080, September 17, 2002)

It is the death of a person brought about by a lawful act Q: A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. While
performed with proper care and skill, and without eating in a seaside restaurant, they were attacked by X,
homicidal intent (e.g. boxing). Y and Z members of a rival fraternity. A rumble ensued
in which the above-named members of the two
DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY fraternities assaulted each other in confused and
tumultuous manner resulting in the death of A. As it
Tumultuous affray (BAR 1997, 2010) cannot be ascertained who actually killed A, the
members of the two fraternities took part in the rumble
It means a commotion in a tumultuous and confused and were charged for death caused in a tumultuous
manner, to such an extent that it would not be possible to affray. Will the charge prosper? (2010 BAR)
identify who the killer is if death results, or who inflicted the
serious physical injuries, but the person or persons who A: NO. The charge of death caused in a tumultuous affray
used violence are known. will not prosper. In death caused by tumultuous affray
under Art. 251 of the RPC, it is essential that the persons

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
involved did not compose groups organized for the Q: What is the criminal liability, if any, of a pregnant
common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other woman who tried to commit suicide by poison, but she
reciprocally. In this case, there is no tumultuous affray since did not die and the fetus in her womb was expelled
the participants in the rumble belong to organized instead? (BAR 1994, 2012)
fraternity.
A: The woman who tried to commit suicide incurs no
INTENTIONAL ABORTION criminal liability for the result not intended. In order to
incur criminal liability for the result not intended, one must
Abortion (BAR 1994) be committing a felony, and suicide is not a felony.
Unintentional abortion is not committed since it is
It is the willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the violent punishable only when caused by violence and not by poison.
expulsion of the fetus from the maternal womb that results There is also no intentional abortion since the intention of
in the death of the fetus. (Guevara as cited in Reyes, 2017) the woman was to commit suicide and not to abort the fetus.

NOTE: The basis of this article is Art. 2, Sec. 12 of the Q: Can unintentional abortion be committed through
Constitution, which states that “The State shall equally negligence?
protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn from
conception.” A: YES. Unintentional abortion is a felony committed by
dolo or deliberate intent. But it can be committed by means
The crime of intentional abortion is committed in three of culpa. However, the culpa lies not in the aspect of
ways abortion but on the violence inflicted on the pregnant
1. By using any violence upon the person of the pregnant woman. Thus, there can be a crime of Reckless
woman; Imprudence resulting in Unintentional Abortion.
2. By administering drugs or beverages upon such
pregnant woman without her consent; or PHYSICAL INJURIES
3. By administering drugs or beverages with the consent
of the pregnant woman. SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES

Elements How the crime of serious physical injuries is
1. There is a pregnant woman; committed:
2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages 1. Wounding; (BAR 1993)
administered, or that the accused otherwise acts upon 2. Beating; (BAR 1995)
such pregnant woman; 3. Assaulting; (BAR 1993), or
3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or beverages 4. Administering injurious substance. (BAR 1992)
upon her, or any other act of the accused, the fetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been expelled Q: If the offender repeatedly uttered “I will kill you” but
therefrom; and he only keeps on boxing the offended party and injuries
4. Abortion is intended. resulted, what is the crime committed?

UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION A: The crime is only physical injuries not attempted or
frustrated homicide.
Elements
1. There is a pregnant woman; Q: X threw acid on the face of Y and, were it not for the
2. Violence is used upon such pregnant woman without timely medical attention, a deformity would have been
intending an abortion; produced on the face of Y. After the plastic surgery, Y
3. Violence is intentionally exerted; and became more handsome than before the injury. What
4. As a result of the violence exerted, the fetus dies either crime was committed? In what stage was it committed?
in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom.
(BAR 2015) A: The crime is serious physical injuries because the
problem itself states that the injury would have produced a
Q: Is the crime of unintentional abortion committed if deformity. The fact that the plastic surgery removed the
the pregnant woman aborted because of intimidation? deformity is immaterial because what is considered is not
the artificial treatment but the natural healing process.
A: NO. The crime committed is not unintentional abortion
because there is no violence. The crime committed is light LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
threats.
Elements (BAR 1994, 1998, 2009)
NOTE: If violence was employed on the pregnant woman by 1. Offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10 days or
a third person, and as a result, the woman and the fetus more (but not more than 30 days), or shall require
died, there is complex crime of homicide with unintentional medical attendance for the same period of time; and
abortion.
NOTE: The disjunctive “or” above means that it is either
Q: Suppose the pregnant woman employed violence to incapacity for work for 10 days or more or the necessity
herself specifically calculated to bring about abortion, of medical attendance for an equal period which will
what crime is committed? make the crime of less serious physical injuries.

A: The woman is liable for intentional abortion under Art. In the absence of proof as to the period of the offended
258. party’s incapacity for labor or required medical

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
attendance, the offense committed is only slight c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave
physical injuries. The phrase “shall require” refers to abuse of authority; or
the period of actual medical attendance. d. When the offended party is under 12 years of age
or is demented, even though none of the above
2. Physical injuries must not be those described in the circumstances mentioned above be present. (BAR
preceding articles. 1995)

If a wound required medical attendance for only 2 days, Elements of rape by sexual assault (BAR 2005)
yet the injured was prevented from attending to his 1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault;
ordinary labor for a period of twenty-nine days, the 2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of the
physical injuries are denominated as less serious. (U.S. following means:
v. Trinidad, 4 Phil. 152) a. By inserting his penis into another person’s mouth
or anal orifice; or
SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND MALTREATMENT b. By inserting any instrument or object into the
genital or anal orifice of another person.
Kinds of slight physical injuries and maltreatment (BAR
1990, 1994, 2003) 3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under any of
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended the following circumstances:
party for labor from 1 to 9 days, or required medical a. By using force or intimidation;
attendance during the same period; b. When the woman is deprived of reason or
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the offended otherwise unconscious;
party from engaging in his habitual work or which did c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse
not require medical attendance; or of authority; or
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing any d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or
injury. demented.

Slapping the offended party is a form of ill-treatment which Q: Geronimo, a teacher, was tried and convicted for 12
is a form of slight physical injuries. counts of rape for the sexual assault, he, on several
occasions, committed on one of his male students by
Q: A disagreement ensued between Cindy and Carina inserting his penis in the victim’s mouth. On appeal,
which led to a slapping incident. Cindy gave twin slaps Geronimo contends that the acts complained of do not
on Carina’s beautiful face. What is the crime committed fall within the definition of rape as defined in the RPC,
by Cindy? particularly that rape is a crime committed by a man
against a woman. Is Geronimo’s contention correct?
A:
a. Slander by deed – if the slapping was done to cast A: NO. Rape may be committed notwithstanding the fact
dishonor to the person slapped. that persons involved are both males. R.A. 8353 provides
b. Slight physical injuries by ill-treatment – if the slapping that an act of sexual assault can be committed by any person
was done without the intention of casting dishonor, or who inserts his penis into the mouth or anal orifice, or any
to humiliate or embarrass the offended party out of a instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of
quarrel or anger. another person. The law, unlike rape under Art. 266-A, has
not made any distinction on the sex of either the offender or
RAPE the victim. Neither must the courts make such distinction.
ARTS. 266-A, 266-B, 266-C AND 266-D, RPC (Ordinario v. People, G.R. No. 155415, May 20, 2004)
AND R.A. 8353
Q: AAA was raped by his father, Pablo, on two separate
Kinds of rape under R.A. 8353 occasions. During these instances, AAA was not able to
1. The traditional concept under Art. 335 – carnal defend herself due to the strength and moral
knowledge with a woman against her will. The offended ascendancy of her father, and due to the act of Pablo of
party is always a woman and the offender is always a placing a bolo near AAA’s head threatening the latter
man. that anyone who subsequently be knowledgeable of his
2. Sexual assault – committed with an instrument or an acts would be killed. Pablo was charged with 2 counts
object or use of the penis with penetration of the mouth of rape, but the State failed to include the phrase, “being
or anal orifice. The offended party or offender can the father of the victim.” Is Pablo guilty of the crime
either be a man or a woman, that is, if the woman or a charged, and not of Qualified Rape?
man uses an instrument in the anal orifice of a male, she
or he can be liable for rape. A: YES. AAA's testimonies established that she was sexually
abused by her father. She categorically and positively
Elements of rape by a man who shall have carnal identified accused-appellant as the perpetrator of the
knowledge of a woman crime. She adequately recounted the details that took place,
1. Offender is a man; the dates of the incidents, how her father committed carnal
2. Offender had carnal knowledge of the woman; and knowledge against her, and his threats to wield the lagting
3. Such act is accomplished under any of the following if the crimes were revealed to others. Pablo had carnal
circumstances: knowledge of AAA twice, through force and intimidation.
a. Through force, threat or intimidation; (BAR His moral ascendancy also intimidated her into submission.
1992) This ascendancy or influence is grounded on his parental
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or authority over his child, which is recognized by our
is otherwise unconscious; Constitution and laws, as well as on the respect and

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
reverence that Filipino children generally accord to their with such shocking and horrifying experience, it would not
parents. be reasonable to impose upon AAA any standard form of
reaction. Different people react differently to a given
Pablo cannot be convicted of qualified rape under Art. 266- situation involving a startling occurrence. (People v. Jastiva,
B (1). The said crime consists of the twin circumstances of G.R. No. 199268, February 12, 2014)
the victim's minority and her relationship to the
perpetrator, both of which must concur and must be alleged NOTE: Impregnation of a woman is not an element of rape.
in the information. It is immaterial whether the relationship
was proven during trial if that was not specifically pleaded Marital Rape
for in the information. In this case, relationship with AAA
was not duly alleged in the information. Thus, his Q: Paolo and Marga are husband and wife. Marga
relationship with the victim cannot qualify the crimes of refuses to have sexual intercourse with her husband so
rape. Ruling otherwise would deprive him of his the latter used force and intimidation against her. Paolo
constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause was able to penetrate his penis inside Marga’s vagina. Is
of accusation against him. (People v. Armodia, G.R. No. Paolo guilty of rape?
210654, Juner 7, 2017, as penned by J. Leonen)
A: YES. A woman is no longer the chattel-antiquated
NOTE: A step-brother or step-sister relationship between practices labeled her to be. A husband who has sexual
the offender and the offended party cannot elevate the intercourse with his wife is not merely using a property, he
crime to qualified rape because they are not related either is fulfilling a marital consortium with a fellow human being
by blood or affinity. The enumeration is exclusive. Hence, with dignity equal to that he accords himself. He cannot be
the common law husband of the victim’s grandmother is not permitted to violate this dignity by coercing her to engage
included. in a sexual act without her full and free consent. (People v.
Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, April 21, 2014)
Q: AAA was a 14-year-old girl with a mental age of only
5 years old. Sometime in 2002, AAA informed her sister Incestuous rape
that she was not having her period. They later found out
that she was pregnant. AAA’s aunt revealed that Allan Q: XXX, a 13-year-old girl, testified that her father, De
Corpuz raped AAA. A neuropsychiatric examination Chavez, raped her. Her sister, YYY saw what happened
was conducted and revealed that her intelligence level and testified as well. Dr. Roy Camarillo, the Medico-
was equivalent to Moderate Mental Retardation. When Legal Officer who conducted laboratory examination
AAA testified, she positively identified Allan as the on XXX, found the presence of deep healed lacerations
father of her child and that when she was 13 years old, on XXX’s organ. De Chavez contends that the
Allan had sex with her on four (4) occasions, each of prosecution was not able to prove the accusations
which he gave her money. Is the qualifying against him beyond reasonable doubt. Is his contention
circumstance of Rape under Art. 266-B (10) present in correct?
this case?
A: NO. His contention is not correct. There is sufficient basis
A: NO. Rape is qualified "when the offender knew of the to conclude the existence of carnal knowledge when the
mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical testimony of a rape victim is corroborated by the medical
handicap of the offended party at the time of the findings of the examining physician as "lacerations,
commission of the crime." This qualifying circumstance whether healed or fresh, are the best physical evidence of
should be particularly alleged in the Information. A mere forcible defloration." In this case, the victim's testimony is
assertion of the victim's mental deficiency is not enough. corroborated not only by her sister but also by the medical
Allan can only be convicted of four (4) counts of rape under findings of the examining physician, who testified that the
Art. 266-A 1(d) of the RPC because the prosecution failed to presence of deep healed lacerations on the victim's
allege the qualifying circumstance in the Information. genitalia, is consistent with the dates the alleged sexual acts
(People v. Corpuz, G.R. No. 208013, July 3, 2017, as penned by were committed. (People v. De Chavez, GR. No. 218427, 31
J. Leonen) January, 2018)

Q: AAA, a 67-year-old woman, was fast asleep when Bill Statutory rape
covered her mouth, threatened her with a knife and
told her not to scream because he will have sexual Sexual intercourse with a girl below 12 years old
intercourse with her. Thereafter, he removed AAA’s is statutory rape. (People v. Espina, G.R. No. 183564, June 29,
underwear. However, his penis was not yet erected so 2011)
he toyed with AAA’s sexual organ by licking it. He then
made his way up and tried to suck AAA’s tongue. Once Q: Suppose a 13-year old retarded woman with mental
done, Bill held his penis and inserted it to AAA’s vagina. capacity of a 5-year old had sexual intercourse with a
In his defense, Bill argued that during the entire alleged man, what is the crime committed?
incident, AAA never reacted at all. Is Bill guilty of rape?
A: Statutory rape. Her mental and not only her
A: YES. Bill is guilty of rape. The force, violence, or chronological age are considered. (People v. Manlapaz, G.R.
intimidation in rape is a relative term, depending not only No. L-41819, February 28, 1978)
on the age, size, and strength of the parties but also on their
relationship with each other. AAA was already 67 years of Q: AAA, 10 years old, went home from school at around
age when she was raped in the dark by Bill who was armed 12 noon to have lunch. On the way home, she met
with a knife. A woman of such advanced age could only Gutierez at his house. He brought her to his room, laid
recoil in fear and succumb into submission. In any case, her down on the bed and had carnal knowledge of her.

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
He then gave her ₱5.00 before she went back to school. Physical resistance need not be established to prove
AAA went back to school at about 2:10 p.m. Her adviser the commission of rape
asked her where she came from because she was tardy.
AAA admitted she came from "Uncle Rod." AAA then It has long been established that a victim's failure to
was brought to the comfort room where another struggle or resist an attack on his or her person does not, in
teacher inspected her panties. She was eventually any way, deteriorate his or her credibility. Physical
brought to a hospital where she was examined. resistance need not be established to prove the commission
of a rape or sexual assault, as the very nature of the crime
An Information was filed against Gutierez charging him entails the use of intimidation and fear that may paralyze a
of statutory rape under Art.266-A of the RPC. During victim and force him or her to submit to the
trial, AAA disclosed that Gutierez had done the same assailant. (People v. Sumayod, G.R. No. 230626, March 9, 2020
thing to her about 10 times on separate occasions. After as penned by J. Leonen)
each act, he would give her ten or five pesos. Gutierez
denied that AAA went to his house on the day of the Q: AAA was 6 years old when she was raped by Eliseo
incident and claimed he was already at work at 1:30 multiple times. AAA revealed this to BBB, her
p.m. Is Gutierez guilty of statutory rape beyond grandmother. Subsequently, Eliseo was charged with
reasonable doubt? rape and rape by sexual assault. The RTC found Eliseo
guilty of the crime charged. On appeal, the CA affirmed
A: YES. In statutory rape, force, intimidation and physical the ruling of the trial court. In his brief, Eliseo put
evidence of injury are not relevant considerations; the only private complainant AAA's credibility in question,
subject of inquiry is the age of the woman and whether contending that the Regional Trial Court erred in
carnal knowledge took place. The child's consent is basing their conviction on her testimony given that her
immaterial because of her presumed incapacity to discern allegations were contrary to common experience. He
good from evil. asserted that private complainant's lack of struggle,
resistance, or the fact that she did not cry during the
In this case, the defense did not dispute the fact that AAA rapes was unnatural. Is Eliseo’s contention correct
was 10 years old at the time of the incident. AAA was able thereby absolving him from criminal liability?
to narrate in a clear and categorical manner the ordeal that
was done to her. It is well-settled that when a woman, more A: NO. Different people have varying reactions during
so when she is a minor, says she has been raped, she says in moments of trauma; more so, a six (6) year old child being
effect all that is required to prove the ravishment. The attacked by people whom she believed to be her protectors.
accused may thus be convicted solely on her testimony- It must be emphasized that a six-year-old child cannot be
provided it is credible, natural, convincing and consistent expected to react similarly as an adult, given her limited
with human nature and the normal course of things. (People understanding of the evils of this world and the desires of
v. Gutierez, G.R. No. 208007, April 2, 2014, as penned by J. men who have no bounds. It is for the same reason that this
Leonen) Court cannot subscribe to the defense's assertion that
private complainant's testimony should not be given
Sweetheart theory in rape weight. It is unfathomable that a six-year-old child would be
able to describe in such detail how she was ravaged by men
The sweetheart theory applies in acts of lasciviousness and she considered protectors unless her statements were true.
rape, felonies committed against or without the consent of Her candid, straightforward, and consistent testimony must
the victim. It operates on the theory that the sexual act was prevail over the self-serving allegations of the defense. Even
consensual. It requires proof that the accused and the victim when she was intimidated by the defense attorney, private
were lovers and that she consented to the sexual relations. complainant, who was then eight (8) years old, did not
For purposes of sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct falter, proving the attorney's attempt to disparage her futile.
in child abuse cases under R.A. 7610, the sweetheart (People v. Sumayod, supra)
defense is unacceptable. A child exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse cannot validly give consent
to sexual intercourse with another person. (People v. Udang, Q: XXX (then a 10-year old boy) requested his mother to
pick up Ricalde at McDonald’s Bel-Air, Sta. Rosa.
G.R. No. 210161, January 10, 2018, as penned by J. Leonen)
Ricalde, then 31 years old, is a distant relative and
Circumstantial Evidence textmate of XXX. After dinner, XXX’s mother told
Ricalde to spend the night at their house as it was late.
In the case of People v. ZZZ (G.R. No. 228828, July 24, 2019, as He slept on the sofa while XXX slept on the living room
penned by J. Leonen), the Supreme Court ruled that the floor. It was around 2:00 a.m. when XXX awoke as "he
commission of the crime of rape may be proven not only by felt pain in his anus and stomach and something
direct evidence, but also by circumstantial evidence. inserted in his anus." He saw that Ricalde "fondled his
Circumstantial evidence are "proof of collateral facts and penis." When Ricalde returned to the sofa, XXX ran
circumstances from which the existence of the main fact toward his mother’s room to tell her what happened. He
may be inferred according to reason and common also told his mother that Ricalde played with his sexual
experience." In the absence of direct evidence, a resort to organ. XXX’s mother armed herself with a knife for self-
circumstantial evidence is usually necessary in proving the defense when she confronted Ricalde about the
incident, but he remained silent. She asked him to
commission of rape. This is because rape "is generally
unwitnessed and very often only the victim is left to testify leave. Is Ricalde guilty of the crime of rape?
for [him or] herself. It becomes even more difficult when the
complex crime of rape with homicide is committed because A: YES. All the elements of rape is present in the case at bar.
the victim could no longer testify. Rape under the second paragraph of Art. 266-A is also


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
known as "instrument or object rape," "gender-free rape," The prosecutor is unsure whether to charge Braulio for
or "homosexual rape." acts of lasciviousness under Art. 336 of the RPC, for
lascivious conduct under R.A. 7610 (Special Protection
Any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned against Child Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination
in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault Act), or for rape under Art.266-A of the RPC. What is the
by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth or anal crime committed? Explain. (BAR 2016)
orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal
orifice of another person. A: The acts of Braulio of touching the chest and sex organ of
Lulu who is under 12 years of age, are merely acts of
The gravamen of rape through sexual assault is "the lasciviousness and not attempted rape because intent to
insertion of the penis into another person’s mouth or anal have sexual intercourse is not clearly shown. (People v.
orifice, or any instrument or object, into another person’s Banzuela, G.R. No. 202060, December 11, 2013)
genital or anal orifice.’’ (Ricalde v. People, G.R. No. 211002,
January 21, 2015, as penned by J. Leonen) To be held liable of attempted rape, it must be shown that
the erectile penis is in the position to penetrate (Cruz v.
Hymenal Laceration People, G.R. No. 166441, October 8, 2014) or the offender
actually commenced to force his penis into the victim’s
Q: AAA narrated that, she had fallen asleep after doing sexual organ. (People v. Banzuela, supra)
laundry, while her stepfather, ZZZ, was doing carpentry
works. Suddenly, she woke up and found ZZZ on top of Q: ZZZ was charged with the crime of rape after he
her, his lower body naked. He then sat on the floor with allegedly had carnal knowledge of his granddaughter,
his penis showing and removed her short pants and AAA, against her will. The prosecution offered the
underwear, after which he went back on top of her and testimonies of the victim AAA and Barangay Captain
masturbated. He took AAA's hands and put them on his Manuel Lotec. The victim, AAA, presented a
penis, telling her that if she became pregnant, "he straightforward and positive testimony that her
would be happy." ZZZ then succeeded in having carnal grandfather raped her. Barangay Captain Lotec
knowledge with AAA. testified that when AAA told him that ZZZ raped her,
Barangay Captain Lotec brought her to the police
Upon examination, it was found that there was redness station where a police officer and a local social worker
and abrasion on the right side of the victim's labia attended to her. Upon cross-examination, Barangay
minora, "caused by a smooth, soft object.” ZZZ testified Captain Lotec described AAA during their conversation
that AAA’s mother, BBB, arrived and she opened the as “pale and trembling.” Was the prosecution able to
door at once. BBB asked ZZZ if he raped AAA, which he prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the
denied. He was around 12 meters away from AAA, accused-appellant ZZZ for the crime of rape?
holding a hammer on the window. ZZZ claimed that BBB
was influenced by her cousins to accuse him. The A: YES. In determining a victim’s credibility in rape cases,
cousins were allegedly mad at him and wanted BBB and courts should be wary of adopting outdated notions of a
him to separate since he was "not a useful person." Is victim’s behavior based on gender stereotypes. Regardless
ZZZ guilty of the crime of rape beyond reasonable of such preconceptions, conviction may be warranted based
doubt? “solely on the testimony of the victim, provided of course,
that the testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and
A: YES. AAA’s recollection on how ZZZ committed the crime consistent with human nature and the normal course of
was detailed; her testimony, consistent. Likewise, the things.”
absence of hymenal laceration fails to exonerate ZZZ. This
Court has consistently held that an intact hymen does not In this case, AAA's account of having been attacked by
negate the commission of rape. The absence of external accused-appellant was sufficiently corroborated by
signs or physical injuries on the complainant's body does Barangay Captain Lotec's testimony that he saw AAA "pale
not necessarily negate the commission of rape, hymenal and trembling." Such description is based on his personal
laceration not being, to repeat, an element of the crime of knowledge, having actually observed and spoken to AAA
rape. (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No. 229862, June 19, 2019, as penned regarding her ordeal. This, taken with the prosecution's
by J. Leonen) other corroborating evidence and AAA's straightforward
identification of accused-appellant as the perpetrator,
Attempted rape vis-à-vis Acts of lasciviousness makes AAA's testimony sufficiently credible independent
of her perceived propensity for truthfulness based on
gender stereotypes. (People v. ZZZ, G.R. No. 229209,
ATTEMPTED RAPE ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS February 12, 2020 as penned by J. Leonen)
There is intent to effect There is no intention to lie
sexual cohesion, with the offended woman. Q: Pojo raped AAA, but it took AAA 27 days from the
although unsuccessful. The intention is merely to crime to report the incident of the rape. Should AAA file
satisfy lewd design. a complaint later on, will it affect her credibility as a
complaining witness?
Q: Braulio invited Lulu, his 11-year old stepdaughter,
inside the master bedroom. He pulled out a knife and A: NO. A delay in reporting the incident of rape does not
threatened her with harm unless she submitted to his diminish the credibility of the complaining witness. (People
desires. He was touching her chest and sex organ when v. Pojo, G.R. No. 183709, December 6, 2010)
his wife caught him in the act.
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
ROBBERY If death results or even accompanies a robbery, the crime
will be robbery with homicide provided that the robbery
Elements of robbery in general and the homicide are consummated. The crime of robbery
1. There is personal property belonging to another; (BAR with homicide is a special complex crime or a single
1992, 1996) indivisible crime. The killings must have been perpetrated
2. There is unlawful taking of that property; by reason or on the occasion of robbery. As long as the
3. Taking must be with intent to gain; and homicide resulted, during, or because of the robbery, even
4. There is violence against or intimidation of any person if the killing is by mere accident, robbery with homicide is
or force upon things. (BAR 1992, 2002, 2005) committed. (People v. Comiling, G.R. No. 140405, March 4,
2004)
GR: The identity of the real owner is not necessary so long
as the personal property taken does not belong to the NOTE: Even if the killing preceded or was done ahead of the
accused. robbing, whether intentional or not, the crime is robbery
with homicide. If aside from homicide, rape or physical
XPN: If the crime is Robbery with Homicide injuries are also committed by reason or on the occasion of
the robbery, the rape or physical injuries are considered
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR aggravating circumstances in the crime of robbery with
INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS homicide. Whenever homicide is committed as a
consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those
Punishable acts under Art. 294, RPC (BAR 2000, 2005, who took part as principals in the commission of the crime
2010) will also be guilty as principals in the crime of robbery with
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery the crime homicide.
of homicide is committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied by: (R-Im-A) Q: On the occasion of the robbery, the storeowner, a
a. Rape; septuagenarian, suffered a stroke due to the extreme
b. Intentional mutilation; or fear which directly caused his death when the robbers
c. Arson pointed their guns at him. Was there robbery with
3. When by reason or on the occasion of such robbery, any homicide?
of the physical injuries resulting in: (B-I3)
a. Insanity; A: YES. It is immaterial that death supervened as a mere
b. Imbecility; accident as long as the homicide was produced by reason or
c. Impotency; or on the occasion of the robbery, because it is only the result
d. Blindness is inflicted which matters, without reference to the circumstances, or
4. When by reason or on the occasion of robbery, any of causes, or persons intervening in the commission of the
the physical injuries resulting in the: (Senses-work) crime which must be considered. (People v. Domingo, G.R.
a. Loss of the use of speech; No. 82375, April 18, 1990)
b. Loss of the power to hear or to smell;
c. Loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg; Q: A, B, C committed robbery in the house of Angelica.
d. Loss of the use of any of such member; or Simeon, the houseboy of Angelica put up a fight. He
e. Incapacity for the work in which the injured tried to wrest the gun from the hand of A. In the process,
person is theretofore habitually engaged is the gun fired hitting A who died as a result. Who is liable
inflicted for the death of A? And what crime is committed?
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the
commission of the robbery is carried to a degree clearly A: B and C are liable for Robbery with Homicide. Simeon is
unnecessary for the commission of the crime; not liable because his act is in accordance with law. The
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall crime applies to the robbers themselves. The death of their
have inflicted upon any person not responsible for the companion A was by reason or on the occasion of robbery.
commission of the robbery any of the physical injuries
in consequence of which the person injured: Q: Jervis and Marlon asked their friend, Jonathan, to
a. Becomes deformed; help them rob a bank. Jervis and Marlon went inside the
b. Loses any other member of his body; bank, but were unable to get any money from the vault
c. Loses the use thereof; because the same was protected by a time-delay
d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of mechanism. They contended themselves with the
the work in which he is habitually engaged for customer’s cellphones and a total of P5,000 in cash.
more than 90 days; or After they dashed out of the bank and rushed into the
e. Becomes ill or incapacitated for labor for more than car, Jonathan pulled the car out of the curb, hitting a
30 days pedestrian which resulted in the latter’s death. What
7. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon, and Jonathan
any of the serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, commit? Explain your answer. (BAR 2007)
or if the offender employs intimidation only.
A: Jervis and Marlon committed the crime of robbery, while
NOTE: The crime defined in this article is a special complex Jonathan committed the special complex crime of robbery
crime. Article 48 does not apply. with homicide. Jervis and Marlon are criminally liable for
the robbery only because that was the crime conspired
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE upon and actually committed by them, assuming that the
taking of the cellphones and the cash from the bank’s
Robbery with homicide (BAR 2009, 2014) customers was effected by intimidation. They will not incur
liability for the death of the pedestrian because they have

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
nothing to do with it. Only Jonathan will incur liability for The crime of robbery with rape is a crime against property
the death of the pedestrian, aside from the robbery, because which is a single indivisible offense. The rape accompanies
he alone brought about such death. Although the death the robbery. In a case where rape and not homicide is
caused was not intentional but accidental, it shall be a committed, there is only a crime of robbery with rape if both
component of the special complex crime of robbery with the robbery and the rape are consummated.
homicide because it was committed in the course of the
commission of the robbery. NOTE: Although the victim was raped twice on the occasion
of Robbery, the additional rape is not considered as an
Q: Wielding loose firearms, Rene and Roan held up a aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery and rape.
bank. After taking the bank’s money, the robbers ran There is no law providing for the additional rape/s or
towards their getaway car, pursued by the bank homicide/s for that matter to be considered as aggravating
security guards. As the security guards were closing in circumstance. It further observed that the enumeration of
on the robbers, the two fired their firearms at the aggravating circumstances under Art. 14 of the RPC is
pursuing security guards. As a result, one of the security exclusive, unlike in Art. 13 of the same Code, which
guards was hit on the head causing his immediate enumerates the mitigating circumstances where analogous
death. For the taking of the bank’s money and killing of circumstances may be considered. (People v. Regala, G.R. No.
the security guard with the use of loose firearms, the 130508, April 5, 2000; People v. Sultan, G.R. No. 132470, April
robbers were charged in court in two separate 27, 2000)
Informations, one for robbery with homicide attended
by the aggravating circumstance of use of loose Q: In case there is conspiracy, are all conspirators liable
firearms, and the other for illegal possession of for the crime of robbery with rape?
firearms. Are the indictments correct? (BAR 2018)
A: YES. In People v. Suyu, it was ruled that once conspiracy
A: YES. The indictment for Robbery with homicide is is established between several accused in the commission
correct. Robbery with homicide, a special complex crime, is of the crime of robbery, they would all be equally culpable
primarily a crime against property and not against persons, for the rape committed by anyone of them on the occasion
homicide being a mere incident of the robbery with the of the robbery, unless anyone of them proves that he
latter being the main purpose of the criminal. The elements endeavored to prevent the others from committing rape.
of robbery with homicide are: (a) the taking of personal (People v. Gallo, GR No. 181902, 2011)
property with the use of violence or intimidation against a
person; (b) the property thus taken belongs to another; the Q: Together XA, YB, and ZC planned to rob Miss OD.
taking is characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi; They entered her house by breaking one of the
and (d) on the occasion, the crime of homicide, which is windows in her house. After taking her personal
therein used in a generic sense, was committed. properties and as they were about to leave, XA decided
on impulse to rape OD. As XA was molesting her, YB and
The indictment for illegal possession of firearm is wrong. In ZC stood outside the door of her bedroom and did
the case of People v. Gaborne, the Court held that in view of nothing to prevent XA from raping OD. What crime or
the amendments introduced by R.A. 8294 and R.A. 10591, crimes did XA, YB, and ZC commit, and what is the
to P.D. 1866, separate prosecutions for homicide and criminal liability of each? (BAR 2004)
illegal possession are no longer in order. Instead, illegal
possession of firearm is merely to be taken as an A: The crime committed by XA, YB, and ZC is the composite
aggravating circumstance in the crime of murder. It is clear crime of robbery with rape, a single, indivisible offense
from the foregoing that where murder results from the use under Art. 294(1) of the RPC.
of an unlicensed firearm, the crime is not qualified illegal
possession but, murder. In such a case, the use of the Although the conspiracy among the offenders was only to
unlicensed firearm is not considered as a separate crime but commit robbery and only XA raped CD, the other robbers,
shall be appreciated as a mere aggravating circumstance. YB and ZC, were present and aware of the rape being
Thus, where murder was committed, the penalty for illegal committed by their co-conspirator. Having done nothing to
possession of firearms is no longer imposable since it stop XA from committing the rape, YB and ZC thereby
becomes merely a special aggravating circumstance. The concurred in the commission of the rape by their co-
intent of Congress is to treat the offense of illegal possession conspirator XA.
of firearm and the commission of homicide or murder with
the use of unlicensed firearm as a single offense. The criminal liability of all, XA, YB, and ZC, shall be the same,
as principals in the special complex crime of robbery with
No crime of robbery with multiple homicide (BAR 1995, rape which is a single, indivisible offense where the rape
2007, 2009) accompanying the robbery is just a component.

There is no crime of robbery with multiple homicide under ROBBERY COMMITTED BY A BAND
the RPC. The crime is robbery with homicide
notwithstanding the number of homicides committed on Robbery committed by a band (BAR 2010)
the occasion of the robbery and even if murder, physical
injuries, and rape were also committed on the same Robbery is committed by a band when at least 4 armed
occasion. (People v. Hijada, G.R. No. 123696, March 11, 2004) malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery.

ROBBERY WITH RAPE Liability for the acts of the other members of the band

Robbery with rape (BAR 1996, 1999, 2003, 2004)

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
A member of the band is liable for any of the assaults A: NO. In a charge for theft, it is enough that the personal
committed by the other members thereof, when the property subject thereof belongs to another and not to the
following requisites concur: offender. It is irrelevant whether the person deprived of the
1. That he was a member of the band; possession of the watch has or has no right to the watch.
2. That he was present at the commission of a robbery by Theft is committed by one who, with intent to gain,
that band; appropriates property of another without the consent of its
3. That the other members of the band committed an owner. Furthermore, the crime is committed even when the
assault; and offender receives property of another but acquires only
4. That he did not attempt to prevent the assault. physical possession to hold the same. P is a finder in law
liable for theft not estafa.
In Robbery by a band, all are liable for any assault committed
by the band, unless one or some attempted to prevent the Complete unlawful taking
assault.
Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the moment the
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC offender gains possession of the thing, even if he has no
BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP opportunity to dispose of the same.
ART. 299, RPC
No crime of frustrated theft
Elements of the first kind of robbery with force upon
things under Art. 299 Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of one’s personal
property, is the element which produces the felony in its
1. Offender entered an inhabited house, or public consummated stage. At the same time, without unlawful
building, or edifice devoted to religious worship; (BAR taking as an act of execution, the offense could only be
1992, 2007, 2008) attempted theft, if at all. With these considerations, under
2. Entrance was effected by any of the following means: Art. 308 of the RPC, theft cannot have a frustrated stage.
a. Through an opening not intended for entrance or Theft can only be attempted or consummated. (Valenzuela
egress; v. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or breaking any
door or window; (BAR 2000) Q: On the way home from work, Rica lost her necklace
c. By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools, or to a snatcher. A week later, she saw what looked like
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending the her necklace on display in a jewelry store in Raon.
exercise of public authority. Believing that the necklace on display was the same
necklace snatched from her the week before, she
The whole body of culprit must be inside the building surreptitiously took the necklace without the
to constitute entering. knowledge and consent of the store owner. Later, the
loss of the necklace was discovered, and Rica was
3. Once inside the building, the offender took personal shown on the CCTV camera of the store as the culprit.
property belonging to another with intent to gain. Accordingly, Rica was charged with theft of the
necklace. Rica raised the defense that she could not be
THEFT guilty as charged because she was the owner of the
necklace and that the element of intent to gain was
Persons liable (BAR 1995, 1998, 2000, 2008, 2009) lacking. What should be the verdict if:
1. Those who, with intent to gain, but without violence a. The necklace is proven to be owned by Rica?
against or intimidation of persons nor force upon b. It is proven that the store acquired the necklace
things, take personal property of another without the from another person who was the real owner of
latter’s consent; the necklace? (BAR 2018)
2. Those who having found lost property, fail to deliver
the same to the local authorities or to its owner; (BAR, A:
1998, 2001) a. The charge against Rica shall not prosper. Under
3. Those who after having maliciously damaged the Art. 308 of the RPC, theft is committed by any person
property of another, remove or make use of the fruits who, with intent to gain but without violence, against,
or object of the damage caused by them; or or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall
4. Those who enter an enclosed estate or a field where take personal property of another without the latter’s
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another and, consent.
without the consent of its owner, hunt or fish upon the
same or gather fruits, cereals or other forest or farm While the CCTV captured Rica surreptitiously taking
products. the necklace from a jewelry store without the
knowledge and consent of the store owner, she cannot
Q: Mario found a watch in a jeep he was riding, and since be charged with theft, because the taking was made
it did not belong to him, he approached policeman P under a claim of ownership. The fact of ownership
and delivered the watch with instruction to return the negates any intention to gain, as Rica cannot steal the
same to whoever may be found to be the owner. P failed necklace which she claims to own.
to return the watch to the owner and, instead, sold it
and appropriated for himself the proceeds of the sale. b. Even if it was proven that the necklace was bought by
Charged with theft, P reasoned out that he cannot be the store from another person who was the real owner
found guilty because it was not he who found the watch. of the necklace, Rica still cannot be held liable for theft
Moreover, the watch turned out to be stolen property. absent a felonious intent. “Actus non facit reum, nisi
Is P's defense valid? (BAR 1998) mens sit rea”. A crime is not committed if the mind of

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
the person performing the act complained of is to truckers who would buy cement for profit. In these
innocent. transactions, he instructed the customers that
payments be made in the form of “Pay to Cash” checks,
The ruling in U.S. v. Vera, 1 Phil 485, May 31, 1974 is for which he did not issue any receipts. He did not
emphatic; i.e. if a person takes personal property of remit the checks but these were either encashed or
another believing it to be his own, the presumption of deposited to his personal bank account. What is the
intent to gain is rebutted and therefore he is not guilty crime committed?
of theft.
A: Qualified theft through grave abuse of confidence. His
Q: Orphaned when still an infant, Rocky lived under the position entailed a high degree of confidence, having access
care of his grandmother Rosario. Now 18, Rocky to funds collected from UCC clients. As Branch Manager of
entered Rosario’s bedroom who was then outside UCC who was authorized to receive payments from UCC
doing her daily marketing. He ransacked the bedroom customers, he gravely abused the trust and confidence
and took Rosario’s money and valuables amounting to reposed upon him by the management of UCC. Precisely, by
PhP100,000. When Rosario came home, she found her using that trust and confidence, Mirto was able to
room in disarray, and her money and valuables gone. perpetrate the theft of UCC funds to the grave prejudice of
She confronted Rocky, who confessed to taking the the latter. (People v. Mirto, G.R. No. 193479, October 19,
money and valuables in order to pay his debts. 2011)

a. What crime, if any, did Rocky commit? Q: Mrs. S was a bank teller. In need of money, she took
b. Does he incur criminal and/or civil liability? P5,000.00 from her money drawer and made it appear
(BAR 2018) that a certain depositor made a withdrawal from his
account when in fact no such withdrawal was made.
A: What crime was committed by Mrs. S?
a. Rocky committed the crime of theft by taking his
grandmother’s money and valuables. He committed A: Qualified theft. Mrs. S was only in material possession
theft under Art. 308 which says: theft is committed by of the deposits as she received the same in behalf of the
any person who, with intent to gain but without bank. Juridical possession remains with the bank. Juridical
violence against or intimidation of person or force upon possession means possession which gives the transferee a
things shall take the personal property of another. right over the thing which the transferee may set up even
against the owner. If a bank teller appropriates the money
b. Rocky could incur civil liability only, not criminal for personal gain then the felony committed is theft.
liability, as Art. 332 (RPC) provides that no criminal but Further, since Mrs. S occupies a position of confidence, and
only civil shall result from the commission of the crime the bank places money in her possession due to the
of theft, swindling or malicious mischief committed confidence reposed on her, the felony of qualified theft was
caused mutually by the ascendants and descendant. committed. (Roque v. People G.R. No. 138954, November 25,
2004)
QUALIFIED THEFT
Q: Clepto went alone to a high-end busy shop and
Qualified Theft (Ser-Gra-Ve-Co-Fi-Fi) (BAR 2007, 2010) decided to take one of the smaller purses without
paying for it. Overcame by conscience, she decided to
1. If theft is committed by a domestic servant; leave her own purse in place of the one she took. Her act
2. If the theft is committed with grave abuse of was discovered and Clepto was charged with theft. She
confidence; claimed that there was no theft, as the store suffered no
injury or prejudice because she had left a purse in place
NOTE: If the offense is to be qualified by abuse of of the one she took. Comment on her defense. (BAR
confidence, the abuse must be grave, like an accused 2014)
who was offered food and allowed to sleep in the house
of the complainant out of the latter’s pity and charity, A: The defense of Clepto has no merit. Theft is already
but stole the latter’s money in his house when he left consummated from the moment Clepto took possession of
the place. one of the smaller purses inside a high-end shop, without
paying for it. She took the personal property of another,
3. If the property stolen is a motor vehicle, mail matter with intent to gain, without the consent of the latter.
or large cattle; (BAR 2002) Damage or injury to the owner is not an element of theft,
4. If the property stolen consist of coconuts taken from hence, even if she left her purse in lieu of the purse she took,
the premises of a plantation; theft is still committed.
5. If the property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond or
fishery; or Q: On May 22, 2012, according to Raquel Torres, one of
6. If property is taken on the occasion of fire, the household helper of victims Spouses Gavino, Belen
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any Mejares received a call. She hurried to the computer
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil room and answered the call away from Torres. When
disturbance. (BAR 2006) Mejares returned, she was “pale, perspiring, and
panicky.” When Torres asked about the identity of the
Q: Mirto is a Branch Manager of UCC. It was alleged that caller, Mejares did not answer. She told her instead that
he used the credit line of accredited dealers in favor of Gavino met an accident and instructed her to get
persons who either had no credit lines or had something from a drawer in the master’s bedroom.
exhausted their credit lines. He diverted cement bags
from the company’s Norzagaray Plant or La Union Plant

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Since it was locked, Mejares was supposedly told to b. There is misappropriation or conversion of such
destroy it. When Mejares emerged from the bedroom, money or property by the offender, or denial on his
she was holding a plastic hamper that contained black part of such receipt;
wallet and envelopes and was talking to someone on c. Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to
her phone. Later on, Mejares told Torres that she was the prejudice of another; and
instructed by Gavino to also take a watch and jewelry d. There is a demand made by the offended
since thecash was not enough to pay the driver in the party to the offender.
accident who was threatening to sue. Mejares placed
everything in a green bag and tried to leave the Illustration: The accused received in trust the money
condominium. Is Valencia liable of the crime of from the complainants for the particular purpose of
qualified theft? investing the same with the Philtrust Investment Corp.
with the obligation to make delivery thereof upon
A: YES. Normal human experience, as well as the demand but failed to return the same despite demands.
consistency in and confluence of the testimonies of It was admitted that she used the money for her
prosecution witnesses, lead to no other conclusion than that business. Accused is guilty of estafa through
Mejares, taking advantage of her being a domestic helper of misappropriation. (Fontanilla v. People, G.R. No. 120949,
private complainant for approximately a year, committed July 5, 1996) (BAR 2015)
the crime of qualified theft.
3. Under paragraph (c):
Thus, the Court has been consistent in holding that "intent a. The paper with the signature of the offended party
to gain or animus lucrandi is an internal act that is presumed is in blank;
from the unlawful taking by the offender of the thing subject b. Offended party delivered it to the offender;
of asportation. Thus, actual gain is irrelevant as the c. Above the signature of the offended party, a
important consideration is the intent to gain." In this case, document is written by the offender without
it is clear from the established facts that it was Mejares who authority to do so; and
opened the drawer in the masters' bedroom and took away d. The document so written creates a liability of, or
the cash and valuables it contained. (People v. Mejares, G.R. causes damage to, the offended party or any third
No. 2255735, January 10, 2018, as penned by J. Leonen) person.

SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS Q: Is the accused’s mere failure to turn over the thing
delivered to him in trust despite demand and the duty
SWINDLING (ESTAFA) to do so, constitutes estafa under Art. 315 par 1 (b)?
(BAR 1999, 2003, 2009, 2010, 2013)
A: NO. The essence of estafa under Art. 315 (1) (b) of the
Elements of estafa in general RPC is the appropriation or conversion of money or
1. Accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or property received, to the prejudice of the owner thereof. It
by means of deceit – This covers the three different takes place when a person actually appropriates the
ways of committing estafa under Art. 315, thus: property of another for his own benefit, use, and enjoyment.
a. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence; The failure to account, upon demand, for funds or property
b. By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts; or held in trust is a mere circumstantial evidence of
c. Through fraudulent means misappropriation.

2. Damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is In other words, the demand for the return of the thing
caused to the offended party or third person. delivered in trust and the failure of the accused to account
a. The failure of the entrustee to turn over the for it are circumstantial evidence of misappropriation.
proceeds of the sale of the goods, documents, or However, this presumption is rebuttable. If the accused is
instruments covered by a able to satisfactorily explain his failure to produce the thing
trust receipt, to the extent of the amount owing to delivered in trust, he may not be held liable for estafa. In the
the entruster, or as appearing in the trust receipt; case at bar, however, since the medical representative failed
or to explain his inability to produce the thing delivered to him
b. The failure to return said goods, documents, or in trust, the rule that “the failure to account, upon demand,
instruments if they were not sold or disposed of in for funds or property held in trust is circumstantial
accordance with the terms of the trust receipt. evidence of misappropriation” applies without doubt.
(Filadams Pharma, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 132422, March 30,
Elements of estafa with unfaithfulness or abuse of 2004)
confidence under Art. 315 (1)
1. Under paragraph (a): Q: D’Aigle posits that Art. 315, par. 1(b) of the RPC
a. Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver requires that the person charged was given juridical
something of value; possession of the thing misappropriated. Here, he did
b. He alters its substance, quantity, or quality; and not acquire juridical possession of the things allegedly
c. Damage or prejudice is caused to another. misappropriated because his relation to SPIs
properties was only by virtue of his official functions as
2. Under paragraph (b): a corporate officer. It is actually SPI, on whose behalf he
a. Money, goods, or other personal property is has acted, that has the juridical possession of the said
received by the offender in trust, or on commission, properties. Is the D’Aigle correct?
or for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return, A: NO. Misappropriation or conversion may be proved by
the same; the prosecution by direct evidence or by circumstantial

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
evidence. The failure to account upon demand, for funds or Elements of Estafa through fraudulent means under
property held in trust, is circumstantial evidence of Article 315 (3)
misappropriation. 1. Under paragraph (a) –
a. Offender induced the offended party to sign a
As mentioned, D’Aigle failed to account for, upon demand, document;
the properties of SPI which were received by him in trust. b. Deceit was employed to make him sign the
This already constitutes circumstantial evidence of document;
misappropriation or conversion of said properties to c. Offended party personally signed the
petitioners own personal use. (Andre L. D’Aigle v. People G.R. document; and
No. 174181, June 27, 2012) d. Prejudice was caused.
2. Under paragraph (b) – Resorting to some fraudulent
Elements of estafa by means of false pretenses or practice to insure success in a gambling game;
fraudulent acts under Article 315 (2) 3. Under paragraph (c) –
a. Offender removed, concealed, or destroyed;
1. Under paragraph (a) – b. Any court record, office files, documents or any
a. Using fictitious name; other papers; and
b. Falsely pretending to possess power, influence, c. With intent to defraud another.
qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or
imaginary transactions; or Q: What does fraud and deceit in the crime of estafa
c. By means of other similar deceits. mean?
2. Under paragraph (b) – Altering the quality, fineness, or
weight of anything pertaining to his art or business. A: Fraud in its general sense is deemed to comprise
3. Under paragraph (c) – Pretending to have bribed any anything calculated to deceive, including all acts, omissions,
government employee, without prejudice to the action and concealment involving a breach of legal or equitable
for calumny which the offended party may deem duty, trust, or confidence justly reposed, resulting in
proper to bring against the offender. (BAR 2014) damage to another, or by which an undue and
4. Under paragraph (d) – postdating a check or issuing a unconscientious advantage is taken of another.
check in payment of an obligation. (BAR 2014)
5. Under paragraph (e) – It is a generic term embracing all multifarious means which
a. By obtaining any food, refreshment or human ingenuity can device, and which are resorted to by
accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant, one individual to secure an advantage over another by false
boarding house, lodging house or apartment house suggestions or by suppression of truth and includes all
without paying therefore, with intent to defraud surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling and any unfair way by
the proprietor or the manager thereof; which another is cheated.
b. By obtaining credit at any of said establishments
using any false pretense; or Deceit is the false representation of a matter of fact whether
c. By abandoning or surreptitiously removing any by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or
part of his baggage from any of said establishments by concealment of that which should have been disclosed
after obtaining credit, food, refreshment or which deceives or is intended to deceive another so that he
accommodation therein, without paying therefore. shall act upon it to his legal injury. (Lateo y Eleazar v. People,
G.R. No. 161651, June 8, 2011)
Elements of estafa under par. 2 (d) of Art. 315
1. The postdating or issuance of a check in payment of an Q: Reynaldo and Adrandea were authorized to extend
obligation contracted at the time the check was issued; credit accommodation to clients up to P200,000.
2. Lack of sufficiency of funds to cover the check; and However, Metrobank’s client, Universal Converter
3. Damage to the payee. (People v. Montaner, G.R. No. Philippines, Inc., was able to make withdrawals totaling
184053, August 31, 2011) P81,652,000 against uncleared regional checks. Such
withdrawals were without prior approval of
Article 315 (2) (d) applies when: Metrobank’s head office. Subsequently, Metrobank and
1. Check is drawn to enter into an obligation Universal entered into a Debt Settlement Agreement
2. Obligation is not pre-existing whereby the latter acknowledged its indebtedness to
the former in the total amount of P50,990,976. Will the
NOTE: The check must be genuine. If the check is falsified Debt Settlement extinguish the criminal liability for
and is encashed with the bank or exchanged for cash, the estafa?
crime is estafa thru falsification of a commercial document.
A: NO. Novation is not a mode of extinguishing criminal
Q: Can the fact that the accused was not the actual liability for estafa. The criminal liability therefor is not
maker of the check be put up as a defense? affected by a compromise or novation of contract.
Reimbursement or belated payment to the offended party
A: NO. In the case of People v. Isleta, et.al. and reiterated in of the money swindled by the accused does not extinguish
the case of Zalgado v. CA, it was held that the appellant, who the criminal liability of the latter. (Metropolitan Bank and
only negotiated directly and personally the check drawn by Trust Company v. Reynado and Adrandea, G.R. No. 164538,
another, is guilty of estafa because he had “guilty knowledge August 9, 2010)
that at the time he negotiated the check, the drawer has no
sufficient funds.” (Garcia v. People, G.R. No. 144785, Separate charges of estafa and illegal recruitment (BAR
September 11, 2003) 2015)


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
It is settled that a person may be charged and convicted insurance premiums. (Osorio v. People, G.R. No. 207711,
separately of illegal recruitment under R.A. No. 8042, in July 2, 2018, as penned by J. Leonen)
relation to the Labor Code, and estafa under Art. 315,
paragraph 2(a) of the RPC. We explicated in People v. Cortez DESTRUCTIVE ARSON
and Yabut that: In this jurisdiction, it is settled that the ART. 320, RPC AS AMENDED BY R.A. 7659
offense of illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum where
the criminal intent of the accused is not necessary for NOTE: The laws on arson in force today are P.D. 1613 on
conviction, while estafa is malum in se where the criminal Simple Arson, and Art. 320, as amended by R.A. 7659 on
intent of the accused is crucial for conviction. Conviction Destructive Arson. (Reyes, 2017)
for offenses under the Labor Code does not bar conviction
for offenses punishable by other laws. Conversely, Commission of Destructive Arson
conviction for estafa under par. 2(a) of Art. 315 of the RPC 1. Any person who shall burn: (BAR 2000)
does not bar a conviction for illegal recruitment under the a. One or more buildings or edifices, consequent to
Labor Code. It follows that one’s acquittal of the crime of one single act of burning, or as a result of
estafa will not necessarily result in his acquittal of the crime simultaneous burnings, or committed on several or
of illegal recruitment in large scale, and vice versa. (People v. different occasions;
Ochoa, G.R. No. 173792, August 31, 2011) b. Any building of public or private ownership,
devoted to the public in general, or where people
OTHER DECEITS usually gather or congregate for a definite purpose
such as, but not limited to official governmental
Other kinds of deceit under Art. 318 (BAR 2000) function or business, private transaction,
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any other deceit commerce, trade workshop, meetings and
not mentioned in the preceding articles; and conferences, or merely incidental to a definite
2. Interpreting dreams, making forecasts, telling fortunes, purpose such as but not limited to hotels, motels,
or taking advantage of the credulity of the public in any transient dwellings, public conveyance or stops or
other similar manner, for profit or gain. terminals, regardless of whether the offender had
knowledge that there are persons in said building
Deceits in this article include false pretenses and fraudulent or edifice at the time it is set on fire and regardless
acts. also of whether the building is actually inhabited or
not; (BAR 1994)
Q: Osorio, an agent of Philam Life, offered Gabriel c. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or
insurance policy. During the meeting, Osorio presented airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance,
her ID and calling card. Gabriel accepted and or for public use, entertainment or leisure;
consistently paid her premiums. Later on, Gabriel d. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and
received a letter from PMIAM thanking her for any appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to
investing her money with PMIAM. Gabriel confronted the service of public utilities; or
Osorio on why her investment was diverted to PMIAM. e. Any building the burning of which is for the
Osorio explained that PMIAM investments would yield purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of
a higher rate of return. Displeased, Gabriel asked for a another violation of law, or for the purpose of
refund of her initial investment. Consequently, Gabriel concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or
received P13,000.00 from PMIAM. In spite of this, to collect from insurance. (BAR 1995)
Gabriel insisted on the refund. PMIAM informed Gabriel
that her initial investment and unpaid interest income 2. Two or more persons or by a group of persons,
would be released to her. Unfortunately, she was regardless of whether their purpose is merely to burn
unable to recover it. Demands were made to Osorio, but or destroy the building or the burning merely
these remained unheeded. Osorio was charged with constitutes an overt act in the commission of another
estafa under Art. 315(2)(e). Is Osorio guilty? violation of law.

A: NO. Osorio is not guilty of estafa under Art. 315(2)(e), but 3. Any person who shall burn:
is guilty of other deceits under Art. 318 of the RPC. Art. 318 a. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military
is broad in application and it is intended as a catch-all powder or fireworks factory, ordinance,
provision to cover all other kinds of deceit not falling under storehouse, archives or general museum of the
Arts. 315, 316, and 317 of the RPC. Government.
b. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
Osorio, in soliciting Gabriel’s money, falsely represented inflammable or explosive materials.
that it would be invested in Philam Life and that its
proceeds would be used to pay for Gabriel's insurance NOTE: If there was intent to kill, the crime committed is not
premiums. This false representation is what induced arson but murder by means of fire.
Gabriel to part with her funds and disregard the payment of
her insurance premiums. MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

Since Osorio deviated from what was originally agreed upon The willful damaging of another’s property by any act not
by placing the investment in another company, Gabriel's constituting arson or crimes of destruction due to hate,
insurance policies lapsed. Osorio must be criminally liable revenge, or mere pleasure of destroying.
for misrepresenting to Gabriel that the latter's money
would be invested in Philam Life Fund Management and Q: There was a collision between the side view mirrors
that its proceeds may be utilized to pay for Gabriel's of two (2) vehicles. Immediately thereafter, the wife
and the daughter of A alighted from the CRV and

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
confronted B. A, in view of the hostile attitude of B, who detains a person for the purpose of extorting ransom
summoned his wife and daughter to enter the CRV and cannot be said to be acting in an official capacity.
while they were in the process of doing so, B moved and
accelerated his Vitara backward as if to hit them. Was PO3 Borja’s membership in the Philippine National Police
there malicious mischief? does not automatically preclude the filing of an information
for kidnapping or serious illegal detention against him. He
A: YES. The hitting of the back portion of the CRV by B was may be prosecuted under Art. 267 of the RPC if it is shown
clearly deliberate. The act of damaging the rear bumper of that he committed acts unrelated to the functions of his
the CRV does not constitute arson or other crimes involving office. (People v. P03 Borja, G.R. No. 199710, August 2,
destruction. When the Vitara bumped the CRV, B was 2017, as penned by J. Leonen)
venting out his anger and hate as a result of a heated
encounter between him and A. (Taguinod v. People, G.R. 2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner
No.185833, October 12, 2011) deprives the latter of his liberty;
3. Act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN 4. In the commission of the offense, any of the following
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY circumstances is present: (BAR 2009)
a. Kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 3 days;
Persons exempted under Art. 332, RPC (BAR 2000, (BAR 2014)
2008) b. It is committed simulating public authority;
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by c. Any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the
affinity in the same line; person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property are made; or
which belonged to the deceased spouse before the d. The person kidnapped or detained is a minor,
same passed into the possession of another; and female, or a public officer. (BAR 1991, 2005)
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-
in-law, if living together. NOTE: In case of a minor, the kidnapper must not be one of
the parents.
NOTE: The exemption does not apply to strangers
participating in the commission of the offense. Q: Jomarie, a minor, was dragged to the house of
Gutierrez after she refused to go with him. Upon
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY reaching the house, he tied her hands. When Jomarie
AND SECURITY pleaded that she be allowed to go home, he refused.
Although Jomarie only stayed outside the house, it was
KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION inside the gate of a fenced property which is high
enough such that people outside could not see what
Elements (BAR 2006) happens inside. Was there kidnapping?
1. Offender is a private individual who is not any of the
parents of the victim; A: YES. When Gutierrez tied the hands of Jomarie, the
former’s intention to deprive Jomarie of her liberty has
NOTE: If the offender is a public officer who has the been clearly shown. For there to be kidnapping, it is enough
authority to arrest or detain a person, the crime that the victim is restrained from going home.
committed is Arbitrary Detention.
Because of her tender age, and because she did not know
Q: Ronalyn was walking with her friend in Quezon City, her way back home, she was then and there deprived of her
when a man who was later identified to be PO3 Julieto liberty. It has been repeatedly held that if the victim is a
Borja, grabbed Ronalyn’s right forearm and took her minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial. (People
inside a van where three (3) other men were waiting. v. Jacalne, G.R. No. 168552, October 3, 2011)
The abductors called Ronalyn’s brother, Edwin and
demanded P100,000 in exchange for Ronalyn’s liberty. Q: Anniban and Lerio are neighbors. Lerio entered the
Edwin sought assistance from the National Anti- house of Anniban, laid down beside the infant child of
Kidnapping Task Force. When Edwin and PO3 Borja Anniban and began chatting with her. Lerio then told
met at Wildlife Park for the exchange of the ransom Anniban that she would take the infant outside to bask
money, the police operatives immediately arrested PO3 him under the morning sun but the latter refused. A few
Borja. minutes later, Anniban realized that Lerio and her child
were no longer in the house. After searching, Anniban
However, they failed to rescue Ronalyn. The found her infant child, Lerio’s boyfriend, and Lerio on
kidnappers of Ronalyn thereafter took her to the board a vessel. Lerio, together with co-accused were
Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency where she was charged with Kidnapping of a Minor. Are they liable as
charged with illegal sale of shabu. The RTC found PO3 charged?
Borja guilty beyond reasonable doubt of kidnapping for
ransom. Can PO3 Borja as a public official be A: YES. All the elements of kidnapping under Art. 267, par.
prosecuted for the crime of kidnapping? 4 are present. The prosecution has adequately and
satisfactorily proven that accused-appellant is a private
A: Although the crime of kidnapping can only be committed individual; that accused-appellant took one-month old baby
by a private individual, the fact that the accused is a public Justin Clyde from his residence, without the knowledge or
official does not automatically preclude the filing of an consent of, and against the will of his mother; and that the
information for kidnapping against him. A public officer victim was a minor, one-month old at the time of the
incident, the fact of which accused-appellant herself

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
admitted. (People v. Lerio, G.R. No. 209039, December 09, Barangay kagawad and barangay tanod, not public
2015) officers contemplated within the purview of Art. 269

Q: Suppose the kidnapped victim disappeared, will such Q: Duropan and Coloma were Barangay Kagawad and
disappearance negate criminal liability of the Barangay Tanod, respectively, of Lincod, Maribojoc,
kidnappers? Bohol. Duropan, Coloma, and another barangay official
saw William Pacis (Pacis), Lino Baldoza Jr., Jeremias
A: NO. In kidnapping, the essential element is deprivation Moquila, Melvin Magbanua, and Ronnel Zambra
of the victim’s liberty and the subsequent disappearance of harvesting nipa palm in a plantation. Coloma
the victim will not exonerate the accused from prosecution. approached them and asked who gave them authority
Otherwise, kidnappers can easily avoid punishment by the to harvest. Pacis replied that they were ALIMANGO
simple expedient of disposing of their victim’s bodies. members, cooperative duly registered which was
(People v. Bernal, G.R. No. 113685. June 19, 1997) authorized to develop, utilize, and protect the
Mangrove-Nipa Area in Lincod, Maribojoc, Bohol.
Effect of the voluntary release of the victim on the Despite their objections, Pacis' group was brought to
criminal liability of the kidnappers (BAR 2004) the Police Station of Maribojoc, Bohol. Upon
1. If it is serious illegal detention, the voluntary release has investigation, Pacis and his companions were released.
no effect on the criminal liability of the offenders. The Maribojoc Chief of Police determined that the
2. If it is slight illegal detention, the voluntary release will barangay officials had no legal basis to arrest Pacis. Are
mitigate the criminal liability of the offenders. Duropan and Coloma liable under Article 269 of the
3. In kidnapping for ransom, voluntary release will not RPC?
mitigate the crime.
A: YES. Duropan was a barangay kagawad, while petitioner
Q: The accused detained the victim AAA for 39 days and Coloma was a barangay tanod of Lincod, Maribojoc, Bohol.
raped her four (4) times, is the RTC correct in its ruling A barangay kagawad is a member of the legislative council
that kidnapping with rape, four counts of rape and rape of the sangguniang barangay, which enacts laws of local
through sexual assault were committed? application. He or she is a person in authority, per Sec. 388
of the LGC. Meanwhile, a barangay tanod is deemed as an
A: NO. The crime committed was a special complex crime of agent of persons in authority whose duties are described in
kidnapping with rape. Emphatically, the last paragraph of Section 388 of the Local Government Code. While deemed
Art. 267 of the RPC, as amended, states that when the victim as persons in authority and agents of persons in authority,
is killed or dies as a consequence of the detention or respectively, the barangay kagawad and barangay
is raped, or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing tanod are not the public officers whose official duty is to
acts, the maximum penalty shall be imposed. This provision arrest or detain persons contemplated within the purview
gives rise to a special complex crime. of Art. 269 of the RPC. Even granting that petitioners may
have had the authority to inquire into the surrounding
Notably, however, no matter how many rapes had been circumstances, and that what transpired was a stop and
committed in the special complex crime of kidnapping with frisk search, petitioners failed to cite any suspicious
rape, the resultant crime is only one kidnapping with circumstance that warranted Pacis' immediate arrest.
rape. In a way, R.A. 7659 depreciated the seriousness of Petitioners argue that due to the numerous reports of
rape because no matter how many times the victim was stealing nipa leaves, it was reasonable for them to suspect
raped, like in the present case, there is only one crime that Pacis violated the law. This argument falls short in light
committed – the special complex crime of kidnapping with of three (3) things: (1) they were aware that ALIMANGO
rape. (People v. Mirandilla, Jr., G.R. No. 186417, July 27, 2011) existed, whose members were authorized to harvest nipa;
(2) they personally knew Pacis; and (3) they were uncertain
Q: If the crime of kidnapping was committed through that Cabalit owns the land where they found Pacis and his
conspiracy and rape was committed on the occasion group. (Duropan v. People, G.R. No. 230825, June 10, 2020 as
thereof, but one of the conspirators were no longer penned by J. Leonen)
associated with the one who raped the victim, can he be
held liable for kidnapping with rape? QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING

A: NO. There was no opportunity to prevent his co- Elements (P-E-A) (BAR 2002, 2009)
conspirators from raping the victim because at the time of 1. Offender is a private person;
rape, he was no longer associated with his co-conspirators. 2. He enters the dwelling of another; and
He cannot be held liable for the subsequent rape of the 3. Such entrance is against the latter’s will.
victim. (People v. Anticamara et. al, G.R. No. 178771, June 8,
2011) Circumstances when the crime of trespass to dwelling
is not committed (BAR 2006)
UNLAWFUL ARREST 1. When the purpose of the entrance is to prevent serious
harm to himself, the occupant or third persons.
Elements (No-A-D) 2. When the purpose of the offender in entering is to
1. Offender arrests or detains another person; render some service to humanity or justice.
2. Purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the proper 3. Anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inns and other
authorities; and public houses while they are open.
3. Arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is
no reasonable ground therefor. Q: At about 11 in the evening, Dante forced his way
inside the house of Mamerto. Jay, Mamerto’s son, saw
Dante and accosted him. Dante pulled a knife and

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
stabbed Jay on his abdomen. Mamerto heard the INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT
commotion and went out of his room. Dante, who was
about to escape, assaulted Mamerto. Jay suffered Q: Is mere possession of false bank notes enough to
injuries which, were it not for the timely medical consummate the crime under Art. 168 of RPC which is
attendance, would have caused his death. Mamerto the illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank
sustained injuries that incapacitated him for 25 days. notes and other instruments of credit?
What crime/s did Dante commit? (BAR 1994)
A: NO. As held in People v. Digoro, possession of false
A: Dante committed qualified trespass to dwelling, treasury or bank notes alone, without anything more, is not
frustrated homicide for the stabbing of Jay, and less serious a criminal offense. For it to constitute an offense under Art.
physical injuries for the assault on Mamerto. The crime of 168 of the RPC, the possession must be with intent to
qualified trespass to dwelling should not be complexed with use said false treasury or bank notes. (Clemente v. People,
frustrated homicide because when the trespass is G.R. No. 194367, June 15, 2011)
committed as a means to commit a more serious crime,
trespass to dwelling is absorbed by the greater crime and NOTE: But a person in possession of falsified document and
the former constitutes an aggravating circumstance of who makes use of the same is presumed to be the material
dwelling. (People v. Abedoza, 53 Phil 788) author of falsification.

GRAVE COERCIONS FORGERY

Elements (Pre-No-V) (BAR, 1998, 1999, 2009) Forgery is committed by (BAR 1999, 2008):
2. A person prevented another from doing something not 1. Giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument
prohibited by law, or that he compelled him to do payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the
something against his will, be it right or wrong; appearance of a true and genuine document; or
3. Prevention or compulsion be effected by violence, 2. Erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any
threats or intimidation; and means the figures, letters, words, or sign contained
therein.
NOTE: The threat must be present, clear, imminent and
actual. Such threat cannot be made in writing or NOTE: Not any alteration of a letter, number, figure or
through a middle man. design would amount to forgery. At most, it would only be
frustrated forgery.
4. Person that restrained the will and liberty of another
has no authority of law or the right to do so. FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR
NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
Q: Isagani lost his gold necklace bearing his initials. He (BAR 2015)
saw Roy wearing the said necklace. Isagani asked Roy
to return to him the necklace as it belongs to him, but Q: Atty. Constantino notarized the Joint
Roy refused. Isagani then drew his gun and told Roy, “If Acknowledgement of the last will and testament of
you will not give back the necklace to me, I will kill you!” Severino. Dr. Asuncion was not present during the
Out of fear for his life and against his will, Roy gave the execution, but his name was not crossed out from the
necklace to Isagani. What offense did Isagani commit? document. He only signed the document after it was
(1998 Bar) notarized. With this, Atty. Constantino was charged of
the crime of falsifying a public document under Art.
A: Isagani committed the crime of grave coercion (Art. 286, 171(2) of the RPC for making it appear that Dr.
RPC) for compelling Roy, by means of serious threats or Asuncion appeared before him and witnessed the
intimidation, to do something against the latter’s will, execution of the Last Will and Testament. Is Atty.
whether it be right or wrong. Serious threats or Constantino guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
intimidation approximating violence constitute grave crime of falsifying a public document?
coercion, not grave threats. Such is the nature of the threat
in this case because it was committed with a gun, is a deadly A: NO. In falsification of public documents under Art.
weapon. 171(2) of the RPC, the prosecution must prove that these
elements exist: (1) that the offender is a public officer,
LIGHT COERCION employee, notary public, or an ecclesiastical minister; (2)
that he takes advantage of his official position; (3) that he
Unjust Vexation (BAR 1994, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2010) falsifies a document by causing it to appear that persons
Unjust vexation is any act committed without violence but have participated in any act or proceeding; and (4) that such
which unjustifiably annoys or vexes an innocent person. person or persons did not in fact so participate in the
proceeding.
NOTE: In determining whether the crime of unjust vexation
is committed, the offender’s act must have caused Here, the first element has already been proven since Atty.
annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress, or Constantino is a notary public. The second element is
disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is presumed when the alleged falsity committed by the notary
directed. (People v. Gozum, 54, O.G. 7409) public pertains to the notarization. However, the third and
fourth elements are lacking. Even if Atty. Costantino falsely
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST certified that Dr. Asuncion was an instrumental witness to
the execution of the will, one crucial detail remains: Dr.
ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE Asuncion signed the Joint Acknowledgement after it was
TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER notarized. Since Dr. Asuncion did not sign the Joint

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
Acknowledgement before it was notarized, he cannot be Elements:
considered as having attested and subscribed to its due a. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification
execution at the time of its notarization. It was not Atty. except Art. 171 (7), that is, issuing in an
Constantino who made it appear that Dr. Asuncion authenticated form a document purporting to be a
participated in the execution of the Joint Acknowledgement, copy of an original document when no such original
but Dr. Asuncion himself. Therefore, he must be exists, or including in such a copy a statement
acquitted. (Atty. Constantino v. People, G.R. No. 225696, contrary to, or different from that of the genuine
April 8, 2019, as penned by J. Leonen) original;
b. Falsification was committed in any private
Persons liable under Art. 171 document; and
1. Public officer, employees, or notary public who takes c. Falsification caused damage to a third party or at
advantage of official position; least the falsification was committed with intent to
2. Ecclesiastical minister if the act of falsification may cause such damage.
affect the civil status of persons; or
3. Private individual, if in conspiracy with public officer. Mere falsification of private document is not enough.
Two things are required:
Q: Augustina filed a criminal complaint against 1. He must have counterfeited the false document;
Bernante for falsification of public document because and
the latter allegedly falsified leave forms. It was alleged 2. He must have performed an independent act which
that Bernante made it appear in his leave application operates to the prejudice of a third person.
that he was on forced leave and on vacation leave on
certain dates. In truth, Bernante was serving a 20-day 3. Use of falsified document.
prison term because of his conviction of the crime of
slight physical injuries. Is Bernante liable for the crime Elements:
of falsification of documents? a. In introducing in a judicial proceeding
i. Offender knew that the document was
A: NO. Augustina failed to point to any law imposing upon falsified by another person;
Bernante the legal obligation to disclose where he was ii. The falsified document is in Arts. 171 or 172
going to spend his leave of absence. “Legal obligation” (1 or 2);
means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the iii. He introduced said document in evidence in a
truth of the facts narrated. Bernante may not be convicted judicial proceeding.
of the crime of falsification of public document by making b. In use in any other transaction -
false statements in a narration of facts absent any legal i. Offender knew that a document was falsified
obligation to disclose where he would spend his vacation by another person
leave and forced leave. (Enemecio v. Office of the ii. The false document is embraced in Arts. 171
Ombudsman [Visayas], G.R. No. 146731, January 13, 2004) or 172 (1 or 2)
iii. He used such document (not in judicial
Q: In falsification of public documents, is it necessary proceedings).
that there be the idea of gain or intent to injure a third iv. The use caused damaged to another or at least
person? used with intent to cause damage

A: NO. In falsification of public or official documents, it is NOTE: The user of the falsified document is deemed the
not necessary that there be present the idea of gain or the author of the falsification if: (1) the use was so closely
intent to injure a third person because in the falsification of connected in time with the falsification, and (2) the user had
a public document, what is punished is the violation of the the capacity of falsifying the document. (BAR 1997, 1999)
public faith and the destruction of the truth as therein
solemnly proclaimed. (Galeos v. People, G.R. Nos. 174730-37, The person who used the falsified document is not the one
February 9, 2011) who falsified the document. If the one who used the falsified
document is the same person who falsified it, the crime is
FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND USE OF only falsification and the use of the same is not a separate
FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS crime.

Punishable Acts Q: OCBC, a commercial bank, was ordered closed by the
1. Falsification of a public, official, or commercial BSP. PDIC was designated as the receiver of OCBC.
document by a private individual. Based on their investigation, it appears that fictitious
loans in favor of two entities – Timmy’s, Inc. and Asia
Elements (BAR 1991, 1992, 1993, 2000, 2009): Textile Mills, Inc. were approved. After which, two
a. Offender is a private individual or public officer or manager’s checks representing the supposed proceeds
employee who did not take advantage of his official of these loans were issued but made payable to two
position; different entities without any documents issued by the
b. He committed any act of falsification; and supposed borrowers assigning the supposed loan
c. The falsification is committed in a public, official, or proceeds to the two payees. Thereafter, these two
commercial document or letter of exchange. manager’s checks were encashed, and then deposited
in the OCBC Savings Account of Jose Go. PDIC as receiver
NOTE: Damage is not essential. It is presumed. sent demand letters to the bank’s debtor-borrowers on
record, including Timmy’s, Inc. and Asia Textile Mills,
2. Falsification of private document by any person Inc. However, it was discovered that the signatures of
the corporate officers were forgeries, and the

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
purported loans were obtained through falsified loan upon X and Y's assent, Mr. U solemnized the marriage,
documents. What crime did Go, et al. commit? despite his lack of authority therefor.
a. What crime may Mr. U be charged with under
A: Go, et. al., are liable for the crime of Estafa thru the RPC?
Falsification of Commercial Documents. In a prosecution for b. Assuming that Mayor Z signed the marriage
estafa, demand is not necessary where there is evidence of certificate which stated that he solemnized the
misappropriation or conversion. The accused may be marriage of X and Y, what crime may Mayor Z
convicted of the felony under Art. 315, paragraph 1(b) of the be charged with under the RPC? (BAR 2019)
RPC if the prosecution proved misappropriation or
conversion by the accused of the money or property subject A:
of the information. Moreover, the falsification of a public, a. Mr. U can be charged with the crime of Usurpation
official, or commercial document may be a means of of Authority or Official Functions. Under Art. 177 of
committing estafa because before the falsified document is the RPC, Usurpation of Authority may be
actually utilized to defraud another, the crime of committed by performing any act pertaining to any
falsification has already been consummated, damage or person in authority or public officer of the
intent to cause damage not being an element of the crime of Philippine Government or of a foreign government
falsification of public, official or commercial document. or any agency thereof, under the pretense of official
Therefore, the falsification of the public, official or position, and without being lawfully entitled to do
commercial document is only a necessary means to commit so. Here, despite his lack of authority, Mr. U
the estafa. (People of the Philippines v. Jose Go, et. al, G.R. No. knowingly solemnized a marriage pertaining to
191015, August 6, 2014) Mayor Z.

OTHER FALSITIES b. Mayor Z may be charged with Falsification under
Art. 171, par. 2 of the RPC. Its elements are: (1) that
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR the offender is a public officer; (2) that the takes
OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS advantage of his official position; and (3) that he
falsifies a document by causing it to appear that
Q: The NDRRMC requested the release of P961,550,000 persons have participated in any act of proceeding
to the Negros Oriental province to finance the when they did not in fact so participate. Here, all
rehabilitation of various infrastructures damaged by the elements of the crime are present. Mayor Z
Typhoon Sendong and a 6.9-magnitude signed the marriage certificate which states that he
earthquake. The Office of the President approved the solemnized the marriage of X and Y when in fact, he
request. The Department, through its Regional Office did not participate in its solemnization.
No. VII, issued a Special Allotment Release Order which
covered the approved amount. FALSE TESTIMONY

In a June 19, 2012 letter-advice, Undersecretary FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND
Relampagos informed Negros Oriental Governor PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
Degamo that the Department is withdrawing the
Special Allotment Release Order because its release did Perjury
not comply with the guidelines on large-scale fund The willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood under oath or
releases for infrastructure projects. Is Relampagos affirmation administered by authority of law on a material
guilty of Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions? matter.

A: NO. Relampagos did not commit the crime of usurpation Elements (BAR 2005)
of authority or official functions. The crime of usurpation of 1. Accused made a statement under oath or executed an
official functions punishes any person who, under pretense affidavit upon a material matter (BAR 2008);
of official position, performs any act pertaining to any 2. Statement or affidavit was made before a competent
person in authority or public officer of the Philippine officer, authorized to receive and administer oath;
Government or any foreign government, or any agency 3. In that statement or affidavit, the accused made a
thereof, without being lawfully entitled to do so. In this case, willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood (BAR
there was no attempt to represent the President in the 1996); and
letter. It appears that Relampagos was acting on behalf of 4. Sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is
Secretary Abad, upon the instructions of the President. required by law. (BAR 1991)
Under the doctrine of qualified political agency, department
secretaries may act for and on behalf of the President on CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
matters where the President is required to exercise
authority in their respective departments. (Degamo v. Office IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE
of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212416, December 5, 2018, as
penned by J. Leonen) Punishable acts (BAR 1993, 2001, 2008, 2009)
1. Committing through reckless imprudence any act
Q: X and Y approached Mayor Z and requested him to which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave
solemnize their marriage. On the day of the ceremony, or less grave felony or light felony;
X and Y proceeded to Mayor Z's office but he was not 2. Committing through simple imprudence or negligence
there. Mayor Z's chief of staff, Mr. U, however, an act which would otherwise constitute a grave or a
represented that he himself can solemnize their less serious felony;
marriage and just have Mayor Z sign the marriage
certificate when the latter comes back. Consequently,

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
3. Causing damage to the property of another through When penalty is imposed by Special Penal Law (BAR
reckless imprudence or simple imprudence or 1994)
negligence; and 1. Maximum Term – must not exceed the maximum term
4. Causing through simple imprudence or negligence fixed by said law.
some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have 2. Minimum Term – must not be less than the minimum
constituted a light felony. term prescribed by the same. (BAR 2003)

IMPRUDENCE NEGLIGENCE Q: Bruno was charged with homicide for killing the 75-
year old owner of his rooming house. The prosecution
Deficiency of action Deficiency of perception
proved that Bruno stabbed the owner causing his death
Failure in precaution Failure in advertence
and that the killing happened at 10 in the evening in the
To avoid wrongful acts, To avoid wrongful acts, house where the victim and Bruno lived.
one must take the paying proper attention
necessary precaution once and using due diligence in Bruno, on the other hand, successfully proved that he
they are foreseen foreseeing them voluntarily surrendered to the authorities; that he
pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it was the
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS victim who first attacked and did so without any
provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he prevailed
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW because he managed to draw his knife with which he
ACT 4103, AS AMENDED stabbed the victim. The penalty for homicide is
reclusion temporal.
To uplift and redeem valuable human material, and prevent
unnecessary and excessive deprivation of personal liberty Assuming a judgment of conviction and after
and economic usefulness. (People v. Ducosin, G.R. No. L- considering the attendant circumstances, what penalty
38332, December 14, 1933) should the judge impose? (BAR 2013)

Rules in imposing a penalty under the indeterminate A: Bruno should be sentenced to an indeterminate sentence
sentence law (BAR 1999, 2005, 2009, 2010, 2013) penalty of arresto mayor in any of its period as
minimum to prision correccional in its medium period
When penalty is imposed by RPC: as maximum. Bruno was entitled to the privileged
1. The Maximum Term – is that which in view of the mitigating circumstances of incomplete self-defense and
attending circumstances could be properly imposed the presence of at least two ordinary mitigating
under the RPC. circumstances (voluntary surrender and plea of guilt)
2. The Minimum Term – is within the range of the penalty without any aggravating circumstance under Art. 69 and
next lower to that prescribed by the RPC. 64(5) of the RPC respectively, which lowers the prescribed
penalty for homicide which is reclusion temporal to prision
Prescribed penalty is what the penalty is without looking at correccional.
the circumstances. As opposed to imposed penalty which NOTE: In this kind of question, the Bar examiner wants you
takes into account the circumstances. to determine whether there was self-defense or not. The
problem provides that the defense was able to prove that it
Q: An agonizing and protracted trial having come to a was the man who first attacked Bruno; therefore, there was
close, the judge found A guilty beyond reasonable doubt unlawful aggression. But there was no provocation coming
of homicide and imposed on him a straight penalty of from Bruno, therefore, there was a lack of sufficient
six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor. The provocation. Hence, two elements of self-defense are
public prosecutor objected to the sentence on the present.
ground that the proper penalty should have been
twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion Q: How about the 3rd element of self-defense,
temporal. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent
or repel the attack, is this present?
The defense counsel chimed in, contending that
application of the indeterminate sentence law should A: NO. The 3rd element of self-defense is absent because
lead to the imposition of a straight penalty of six (6) based on the facts proven by Bruno, although it was the man
months and one (1) day of prision correccional only. who attacked Bruno first, he prevailed upon the man
Who among the three is on the right track? (BAR 2010) because he made use of a knife and stabbed the man. While
the man attacked Bruno by means of his fist, it is not
A: None of the contentions is correct because the reasonably necessary for Bruno to make use of a knife in
Indeterminate Sentence Law (Act 4103, as amended) has killing the man. Therefore, what transpired in the instant
not been followed. case is an incomplete self-defense.

The imposition of penalty for the crime of homicide, which Under par. 1 of Art. 13, in case of incomplete self-defense, if
is penalized by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year and is aside from unlawful aggression, another element is present
divisible, is covered by the Indeterminate Sentence Law. but not all, we have a privileged mitigating circumstance.
The said law requires that the sentence in this case should Therefore, this incomplete self-defense shall be treated as a
reflect a minimum term for purposes of parole, and a privileged mitigating circumstance.
maximum term fixing the limit of the imprisonment.
Imposing a straight penalty is incorrect. Q: The prosecution was able to prove that the man is 75
years old. Would you consider the aggravating
circumstance of disrespect of age?

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
A: NO. Even if Bruno killed the said 75 year-old man, there two years and four months; medium period is two
was no showing in the problem that he disrespected the age years, four months and one day to four years and two
of the man. months; and maximum period is four years, two
months and one day to six years.
Q: Would you consider nighttime as an aggravating
circumstance? At arraignment, Sammy Peke pleads guilty to the crime
charged. Supposing the trial judge imposes a straight
A: NO. Even if the crime was committed at 10 o’clock in the penalty of imprisonment for one year, is the penalty
evening, it did not say whether the house was lighted or not. correct in the context of the Indeterminate Sentence
There was also no showing that the offender deliberately Law? Explain your answer. (BAR 2017)
sought nighttime to commit the crime.
A: YES, a straight penalty of one year is a valid sentence
Q: Would you consider dwelling? since it is not more than one year which would require the
application of Indeterminate Sentence. The penalty of 1
A: NO. Dwelling is not an aggravating circumstance because year is correct provided it is not less than what is prescribed
both of them are living in the same dwelling. It cannot be by the law and not more than what is prescribed by the law.
said that when Bruno killed the man, he disrespected the
dwelling of the said man. Therefore, we have no aggravating Q: Randy was prosecuted for forcible abduction
circumstance present. attended by the aggravating circumstance of
recidivism. After trial, the court held that the
Bruno was able to prove voluntary surrender, voluntary prosecutor was able to prove the charge. Nonetheless,
plea of guilt, and incomplete self-defense — a privileged it appreciated in favor of Randy, on the basis of the
mitigating circumstance. defense’s evidence, the mitigating circumstances of
voluntary surrender, uncontrollable fear, and
Applying these conclusions, there are two (2) ordinary provocation. Under Art. 342 of the RPC, the penalty for
mitigating circumstances with one (1) privileged mitigating forcible abduction is reclusion temporal. Applying the
circumstance and no aggravating circumstance. Indeterminate Sentence Law, what penalty should be
imposed on Randy? (BAR 2018)
How to compute the penalty
1. Consider first the Privileged Mitigating Circumstance. A: Since he was found guilty of Forcible Abduction with one
2. Consider the Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance. aggravating circumstances of recidivism, this aggravating
3. Determine the Maximum Sentence after considering all circumstance is off-set by one of the three mitigating
justifying, exempting, mitigating, and aggravating circumstances; so the penalty to be imposed is
circumstances, if any. still Reclusion Temporal (Art. 342, RPC) but because there
4. Determine the minimum term of the sentence. are two (2) more mitigating circumstances left and the
penalty is divisible, in determining the maximum term, we
Persons disqualified from availing the benefits of the have to reduce to Prision Mayor and because there is no
Indeterminate Sentence Law (BAR 1990, 2005) more mitigating and aggravating circumstances to be
considered, the maximum term shall be prision mayor in its
1. Convicted of: medium period that is eight (8) years and one (1) day to ten
a. An offense punishable with death penalty, reclusion (10) years. The minimum, term shall be any range within,
perpetua, or life imprisonment that is from six (6) years and one (1) day to six (8) years.
b. Treason, conspiracy, or proposal to commit
treason Thus Randy will suffer as Minimum term any penalty
c. Misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition, ranging from six months and one (1) day, and the maximum
espionage term will be, any range from eight (8) years and one (1) day
d. Piracy; to ten (10) years of Prision Mayor.

2. Habitual delinquents; PROBATION LAW
3. Those who shall have escaped from confinement or P.D. 968 AS AMENDED BY R.A. 10707
evaded sentence; (BAR 2007)

4. Granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive and
Probation only affects the criminal aspect of the case and
shall have violated the term (condition) thereto; (BAR
has no bearing on his civil liability.
1999)

5. Whose maximum term of imprisonment does not
Effect of filing for application for probation
exceed one year; (BAR 2005)

6. Who are already serving final judgment upon the
A judgment of conviction becomes final when the accused
approval of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. (Sec. 2, Act
files a petition for probation. However, the judgment is not
4103)
executory until the petition for probation is resolved. The

filing of the petition for probation is a waiver by the accused
NOTE: Recidivists, who are not habitual delinquents, are
of his right to appeal the judgment of conviction.
entitled to the benefit of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

(People v. Jaranilla, G.R. No. L-28547, February 22, 1974)
NOTE: An order placing defendant on probation is not a
sentence but a suspension of the imposition of sentence. It
Q: Sammy Peke was convicted of a violation of R.A. is not a final judgment but an "interlocutory judgment" in
123456 for selling fake books. The law prescribes the the nature of a conditional order placing the convicted
penalty of prision correccional, a divisible penalty defendant under the supervision of the court for his
whose minimum period is six months and one day to reformation, to be followed by a final judgment of discharge,

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
if the conditions of the probation are complied with, or by a issuance of said order, the probation may be revoked by the
final judgment if the conditions are violated. (Bala v. Hon. Court. (Bala v. Martinez, G.R. No. L-67301, January 29, 1990)
Martinez, G.R. No. L-67301, January 29, 1990)
In June 2017, Mr. P was criminally charged with
When probation shall be denied Qualified Theft under the RPC. After due proceedings,
the Regional Trial Court found him guilty beyond
If the court finds that: reasonable doubt, and accordingly, sentenced him to
1. The offender is in need of correctional treatment that suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an
can be provided most effectively by his commitment to indeterminate period of six (6) years and one (1) day of
an institution; prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years and
2. There is an undue risk that during the period of one (1) day, of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
probation the offender will commit another crime; or Thereafter, Mr. P applied for probation.
3. Probation will depreciate the seriousness of the offense
committed. (Sec. 8, P.D. 968) May Mr. P be extended the benefits of the Probation
Law? Explain. (BAR 2019)
Disqualification to avail the benefits of the probation
law (BAR 2004) A: NO. Mr. P may not be extended the benefits of Probation
Law because he is a disqualified offender. Under Section 9
1. Sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of PD 968, as amended by RA 10707, the benefits of
of more than six (6) years; (BAR 1990, 1995, 2002) probation shall not be extended to those sentenced to serve
2. Convicted of any crime against national security; a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 6 years.
3. Who have previously been convicted by final judgment
of an offense punishable by imprisonment of more than ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
six (6) months and one (1) day and/or a fine of more AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT
than one thousand pesos (P1,000); R.A. 9262
4. Who have been once on probation under the provision
of this Decree; Violence against women and their children
5. Who are already serving sentence at the time the
substantive provisions of this Decree became Any act or a series of acts committed by ANY PERSON
applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof; against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or against a
6. If he perfected an appeal from the judgment of woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or dating
conviction (Sec. 4, P.D. 968 as amended by R.A. 10707); relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or
7. If he is convicted of violation of Election offenses (Sec. against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate, within
264, B.P. 881); or or without the family abode, which result in or is likely to
8. Any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering,
under R.A. 9165 regardless of the penalty imposed (Sec. or economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery,
24, R.A. 9165). assault, coercion, harassment, or arbitrary deprivation of
liberty. (Sec. 3(a), R.A. 9262)
Period of probation
1. The period of probation of a defendant sentenced to a NOTE: A man cannot be a victim under this Act. He should
term of imprisonment of not more than one year shall resort to the appropriate provisions of the RPC.
not exceed two years, and in all other cases, said period
shall not exceed six years. The elements of the crime of violence against women
2. When the sentence imposes a fine only and the offender through harassment are:
is made to serve subsidiary imprisonment in case of 1. The offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship
insolvency, the period of probation shall not be less with the offended woman;
than nor be more than twice the total number of days 2. The offender, by himself or through another, commits
of subsidiary imprisonment. (BAR 2005) an act or series of acts of harassment against the
woman; and
Termination of probation (BAR 2005) 3. The harassment alarms or causes substantial emotional
or psychological distress to her. (Ang v. CA, G.R. No.
The court may order the final discharge of the probationer 182835, April 20, 2010)
upon finding that he has fulfilled the terms and conditions
of probation. NOTE: It is immaterial whether the relationship had ceased
for as long as there is sufficient evidence showing the past
Effects of termination of probation or present existence of such relationship between the
1. Case is deemed terminated; offender and the victim when the physical harm was
2. Restoration of all civil rights lost or suspended; committed. (Dabalos v. RTC, Branch 59, Angeles City,
3. Totally extinguish his criminal liability as to the offense Pampanga, G.R. No. 193960 January 7, 2013)
for which probationwas granted. (Sec. 16, P.D. 968 as
amended by R.A. 10707) Prohibited Defense
1. Being under the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or
NOTE: The mere expiration of the period for probation does any other mind-altering substance (Sec. 27, R.A. 9262)
not, ipso facto, terminate the probation. Probation is not co- 2. End of dating relationship prior to the violence.
terminus with its period, there must be an order from the
Court of final discharge, terminating the probation. If the Four (4) Acts included under Sec. 3: (PEPS)
accused violates the condition of the probation before the 1. Physical violence (Sec. 3(a)(A), R.A. 9262);
2. Economic abuse (Sec. 3(a)(D), R.A. 9262);

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
3. Psychological violence (Sec. 3(a)(C), R.A. 9262); and However, AAA's relationship with Melgar turned sour
4. Sexual violence (Sec. 3(a)(B), R.A. 9262). as the latter had an affair with a younger woman. When
BBB was just about one-year-old, Melgar stopped giving
Economic abuse (BAR 2010) support, prompting AAA to file a case for support, which
was eventually granted. This notwithstanding, Melgar
Acts that make or attempt to make a woman financially still refused to give support for her and BBB. As such,
dependent which includes, but is not limited to, the AAA was constrained to file the instant criminal case
following: against Melgar. Is Melgar liable for violation of Section
1. Withdrawal of financial support or preventing the 5(i) of R.A. 9262?
victim from engaging in any legitimate profession,
occupation, business, or activity, except in cases A: NO. Melgar is not liable for violation of Section 5(i) of R.A.
wherein the other spouse/partner objects on valid, 9262 since it cannot be proven that his deprivation of
serious, and moral grounds as defined in Art. 73 of the support caused mental and emotional anguish. In this case,
Family Code; while the prosecution had established that MELGAR indeed
2. Deprivation or threat of deprivation of financial deprived AAA and BBB of support, no evidence was
resources and the right to the use and enjoyment of the presented to show that such deprivation caused either AAA
conjugal, community or property owned in common; or BBB any mental or emotional anguish.
3. Destroying household property;
4. Controlling the victims’ own money or properties or Section 5 (i) of R.A. 9262, a form of psychological violence,
solely controlling the conjugal money or properties. punishes the act of "causing mental or emotional anguish,
(Sec. 3(a)(D), R.A. 9262) public ridicule or humiliation to the woman or her child,
including, but not limited to, repeated verbal and emotional
Q: AAA had a romantic relationship with Melgar, which abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of minor
resulted in the birth of BBB, an illegitimate child. children or denial of access to the woman's child/children."
Melgar freely acknowledged the paternity of BBB. (Melgar v. People, GR No. 223477, February 14, 2018)
However, AAA's relationship with Melgar turned sour
as the latter had an affair with a younger woman. When Q: For the past five years, Ruben and Rorie had been
BBB was just about one year old, Melgar stopped giving living together as husband and wife without the benefit
support, prompting AAA to file a case for support, which of marriage. Initially, they had a happy relationship
was eventually granted. This, notwithstanding, Melgar which was blessed with a daughter, Rona, who was born
still refused to give support for her and BBB. As such, on March 1, 2014. However, the partners’ relationship
AAA was constrained to file the instant criminal case became sour when Ruben began indulging in vices,
against Melgar. Is Melgar liable for violation of Section such as women and alcohol, causing frequent
5(e) of R.A. 9262? arguments between them. Their relationship got worse
when, even for slight mistakes, Ruben would lay his
A: YES. Melgar is liable for the violation of Section 5(e) of hands on Rorie. One day, a tipsy Ruben barged into
R.A. 9262 for his refusal to provide support to his child. their house and, for no reason, repeatedly punched
R.A. 9262 is a landmark legislation that defines and Rorie in the stomach. To avoid further harm, Rorie ran
criminalizes acts of violence against women and their out of the house. But Ruben pursued her and stripped
children (VAWC) perpetrated by women's intimate her naked in full view of their neighbors; and then he
partners, i.e., husband, former husband, or any person who vanished.
has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or with whom the
woman has a common child, or against her child whether Ten days later, Ruben came back to Rorie and pleaded
legitimate or illegitimate, within or without the family for forgiveness. However, Rorie expressed her wish to
abode, which result in or is likely to result in, inter alia, live separately from Ruben and asked him to continue
economic abuse. As may be gathered from the foregoing, providing financial support for their daughter Rona. At
"economic abuse" may include the deprivation of support of that time, Ruben was earning enough to support a
a common child of the man-accused and the woman-victim, family. He threatened to withdraw the support he was
whether such common child is legitimate or not. (Melgar v. giving to Rona unless Rorie would agree to live with him
People, GR No. 223477, February 14, 2018) again. But Rorie was steadfast in refusing to live with
Ruben again, and insisted on her demand for support
Psychological violence for Rona. As the ex-lovers could not reach an
agreement, no further support was given by Ruben.
Acts or omissions causing or likely to cause mental or What crimes did Ruben commit:
emotional suffering of the victim such as but not limited to a) For beating and humiliating Rorie?
intimidation, harassment, stalking, damage to property, b) For withdrawing support for Rona? (BAR
public ridicule or humiliation, repeated verbal abuse, and 2018)
marital infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the victim
to witness the physical, sexual, or psychological abuse of a A:
member of the family to which the victim belongs, or to a. For beating and humiliating Rorie, such acts violate R.A.
witness pornography in any form, or to witness abusive 9262, particularly section 3 (a) thereof under “Physical
injury to pets, or to unlawful or unwanted deprivation of the Violence” referring to acts that include bodily or
right to custody and/or visitation of common children. (Sec. physical harm against a woman with whom the person
3(a)(C), R.A. 9262) has or had a sexual or dating relationship.

Q: AAA had a romantic relationship with Melgar, which b. For withdrawing support for Rona, such act is a
resulted in the birth of BBB, an illegitimate child. violation of R.A. 9262, section 3 (d), which reads:
Melgar freely acknowledged the paternity of BBB.

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
“Economic abuse” refers to acts that make or 1. Psychological and physical abuse, neglect, cruelty,
attempt to make a woman financially dependent sexual abuse, and emotional maltreatment; (BAR
which includes, but is not limited to the following: 2002, 2005)
1. Withdrawal of financial support or 2. Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or
preventing the victim from engaging in any demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a
legitimate profession, occupation, business human being;
or activity, except in cases wherein the other 3. Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs for
spouse/partner objects on valid, serious and survival, such as food and shelter; or
moral grounds as defined in Art. 73 of the 4. Failure to immediately give medical treatment to an
Family Code; injured child resulting in serious impairment of his
growth and development or in his permanent
BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME incapacity or death. (Sec. 3(b), R.A. 7610) (BAR 2002)

In order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple Q: When Garingarao touched the breasts and private
must go through the battering cycle at least twice. (People parts of the minor, AAA, is it correct to say that the
v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004) accused should have been convicted only of acts of
lasciviousness and not of violation of R.A. 7610 since
3 Phases of Cycle of Violence the incident happened only once?
1. Tension-Building Phase - minor battering occurs - it
could be verbal or slight physical abuse or another form A: NO. The Court has already ruled that it is inconsequential
of hostile behavior. that sexual abuse under R.A. 7610 occurred only once. Sec.
2. Acute battering incident - characterized by brutality, 3(b) of R.A. 7610 provides that the abuse may be habitual
destructiveness and, sometimes, death. The battered or not. Hence, the fact that the offense occurred only once is
woman deems this incident as unpredictable, yet also enough to hold Garingarao liable for acts of lasciviousness
inevitable. under R.A. 7610. (Garingarao v. People, G.R. No. 192760, July
3. Tranquil, loving or (at least nonviolent) phase - the 20, 2011)
couple experience profound relief. On one hand, the
batterer may show a tender and nurturing behavior PUNISHABLE ACTS
towards his partner. On the other hand, the battered
woman tries to convince herself that the battery will 1. Child prostitution and other sexual abuse (Sec. 5, R.A.
never happen again. (People v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, 7610);
January 15, 2004) 2. Attempt to commit child prostitution (Sec. 6, R.A.
7610);
Q: BBB and AAA had a relationship when the latter was 3. Child trafficking (Sec. 7, R.A. 7610);
still raising her first child borne CCC from a previous 4. Attempt to commit child trafficking (Sec. 8, R.A.7610);
relationship. During the relationship with BBB, AAA 5. Obscene publications and indecent shows (Sec. 9,
bore two more children namely, DDD and EEE. To R.A.7610);
legalize their relationship, BBB and AAA married in 6. Other acts of neglect, abuse, cruelty or exploitation
civil rights and thereafter, the birth certificates of the and other conditions prejudicial to the child’s
children, including CCC’s, was amended to change their development (Sec. 10, R.A.7610);
civil status to be legitimated by virtue of the said 7. Establishments or enterprises promoting, facilitating,
marriage. However, there were fights and arguments or conducting activities constituting child prostitution
which caused them to have strained relationship that and other sexual abuse, child trafficking, obscene
lead them to the filing of a case under the VAWC. publications and indecent shows, and other acts of
Pending the Court’s deliberation of the instant case, abuse (Sec. 11, R.A.7610);
BBB filed a Manifestation and Motion to Render 8. Employment of children (Sec. 12, R.A.7610);
Judgment Based on a Memorandum of Agreement 9. Discrimination of children of indigenous cultural
(MOA). BBB alleges that on July 29, 2013, he and AAA communities (Sec. 20, R.A. 7610); and
had entered into a compromise anent the custody, 10. Confidentiality. (Sec. 29, R.A.7610)
exercise of parental authority over, and support of DDD
and EEE. Is the case a proper subject of a compromise Child prostitution and other sexual abuse
agreement?
Children, whether male or female, who for money, profit, or
A: NO. The instant petition is not a proper subject of a any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence
compromise agreement. The law explicitly prohibits of any adult, syndicate or group, indulge in sexual
compromise on any act constituting the crime of violence intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be
against women. Thus, in Garcia v. Drilon, the Court declared children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.
that: Violence is not a subject for compromise. A process (Sec. 5, R.A.7610)
which involves parties mediating the issue of violence
implies that the victim is somehow at fault. NOTE: R.A.7610 recognizes the existence of a male
prostitute as a victim and not just as an offender.
ANTI-CHILD ABUSE LAW
R.A. 7610, AS AMENDED Q: One evening in September 2002, AAA, then 12 years
old, drank alcoholic beverages with Udang's children,
Child abuse (BAR 2004) her neighbors: Betty Udang and Bienvinido Udang, Jr. at
their house in Lumbia, Cagayan de Oro City. After
The maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child drinking, AAA became intoxicated. Udang carried her
which includes any of the following: into a dark room where he laid her on the bed,

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
undressed her, and started kissing her. Udang then proceedings to begin when they chanced upon
went on top of AAA and inserted his penis into her Torres. CCC's wife, persuaded Torres to attend the
vagina. After the incident, Udang went out to report for proceedings to answer for his liability which he
duty as barangay tanod while AAA remained inside his vehemently denied. In the middle of the brewing
house as she was still too weak to move. argument, AAA suddenly interjected that Torres
damaged CCC's multicab and accused him of stealing
One year and three months after, in December 2003, CCC's fish nets. Torres told AAA not to pry in the affairs
AAA, who by then was already 13 years old, again had of adults and warned AAA that he would whip him if he
some drinks at Udang's house. This time, she was with did not stop. However, AAA refused and continued the
Bienvinido, Jr. and Udang himself. When AAA felt accusations. Infuriated, Torres whipped AAA on the
sleepy, she went into one (1) of the rooms inside the neck using a wet t-shirt three times causing the latter to
house. While AAA was lying in bed, Udang, who had fall down from the stairs. CCC came to AAA’s defense
followed her into the room, went on top of her, and punched Torres. They engaged in a fistfight until
undressed her, and inserted his penis into her vagina they were separated by Brngy. Captain. Based on the
until he ejaculated. After having sexual intercourse physical examination, AAA sustained a contusion. The
with AAA, Udang went out to report for duty as RTC and CA convicted Torres guilty of Other Acts of
barangay tanod. AAA, too tired, remained lying in bed. Child Abuse under Sec 10, par A of R.A. 7610. Is Torres
Bienvinido claims that AAA welcomed his kisses and liable under Other Acts of Child Abuse under Section 10,
touches and consented to have sexual intercourse with paragraph A of R.A. 7610?
him. They engaged in these acts out of mutual love and
affection. (sweetheart theory) Is Bienvinido Udang, Sr. A: YES. Torres is liable under Other Acts of Child Abuse
y Sevilla liable for Two (2) counts of sexual abuse under under Section 10, paragraph A of R.A. 7610. The victim,
Section 5(b) of R.A 7610 or under Art. 266-A (1) of the AAA, was a child when the incident occurred. Therefore,
RPC? AAA is entitled to protection under R.A. 7610 the primary
purpose of which has been defined by previous
A: The trial court was wrong in ruling that charging Udang jurisprudence as a measure geared towards the
with both rape, under under Art. 266-A(1) of the RPC, and implementation of a national comprehensive program for
sexual abuse under Sec. 5(b), of R.A. 7610, would violate his the survival of the most vulnerable members of the
right against double jeopardy. population, the Filipino children, in keeping with the
Constitutional mandate under Article XV, Section 3,
The “force, threat or intimidation” or deprivation of reason paragraph 2, that "The State shall defend the right of the
or unconsciousness elements under Art. 266-A (1) is not the children to assistance, including proper care and nutrition,
same as the “coercion or influence” required under the Sec. and special protection from all forms of neglect, abuse,
5 (b), R.A. 7610. Consent is immaterial in the crime of sexual cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to
abuse because the mere act of having sexual intercourse their development."
with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to sexual Although it is true that not every instance of laying of hands
abuse is already punishable by the law. However, consent on the child constitutes child abuse, petitioner's intention to
exonerates an accused from a rape charge. (People v. debase, degrade, and demean the intrinsic worth and
Udang, G.R. No. 210161, January 10, 2018, as penned by dignity of a child can be inferred from the manner in which
J. Leonen) he committed the act complained of. (Torres v. People, G.R.
No. 206627, January 18. 2017, as penned by J. Leonen)
NOTE: The ruling in the case of People v. Udang as regards
the non-application of double jeopardy overturned the Q: Mrs. Robinson is a teacher at an elementary school.
2009 People v. Abay ruling wherein the Supreme Court In one of her classes, she found, to her consternation,
ruled that charging an accused with both rape, under Article that an 8-year old Richard was always the cause of
266-A (1) of the RPC, and sexual abuse under Sec. 5(b), of distraction, as he was fond of bullying classmates
R.A. 7610 would constitute a violation of the right of the smaller in size than him.
accused against double jeopardy.
One morning, Reymart, a 7-year old pupil, cried loudly
Non-applicability of Sweetheart Theory and complained to Mrs. Robinson that Richard had
boxed him on the ear. Confronted by Mrs. Robinson
In the case of People v. Udang (ibid.), the sweetheart theory about Reymart’s accusation, Richard sheepishly
applies in acts of lasciviousness and rape, felonies admitted the same. Because of this, Mrs. Robinson
committed against or without the consent of the victim. It ordered Richard to lie face down on a desk during class.
operates on the theory that the sexual act was consensual. After Richard obliged, Mrs. Robinson hit him ten (10)
It requires proof that the accused and the victim were lovers times on the legs with a ruler and pinched his ears.
and that she consented to the sexual relations. For purposes Richard ran home and reported to his mother what he
of sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct in child abuse had suffered at the hands of Mrs. Robinson. When
cases under R.A. 7610, the sweetheart defense is Richard’s parents went to Mrs. Robinson to complain,
unacceptable. A child exploited in prostitution or subjected she interposed the defense that she merely performed
to other sexual abuse cannot validly give consent to sexual her duty as a teacher to discipline erring pupils.
intercourse with another person. Richard’s parents ask your advice on what actions can
be instituted against Mrs. Robinson for acts committed
Q: CCC, AAA's uncle, filed a complaint for malicious on their minor child.
mischief against Torres, who allegedly caused damage a. May Mrs. Robinson be charged with child abuse
to his multicab. AAA witnessed the alleged incident and OR slight physical injuries?
was brought by CCC to testify. At the barangay, CCC, b. May Mrs. Robinson be charged with child abuse
CCC’s wife and AAA were waiting for the conciliation AND slight physical injuries? (BAR 2018)

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
1. Making offensive body gestures at someone; and
A: 2. Exposing private parts for the sexual gratification of the
a. YES. Mrs. Robinson can be charged with either child perpetrator with the effect of demeaning, harassing,
abuse under R.A. 7610 R.A. 7610 or slight physical threatening or intimidating the offended party
injuries if the injuries inflicted constitute slight physical including flashing of private parts, public masturbation,
injuries. Sec. 10 of R.A. 7610 provides: groping, and similar lewd sexual actions.

Any person who shall commit any other acts of child Under Sec. 11 (c) not enumerated under Sec. 4
abuse, cruelty or exploitation or be responsible for 1. Stalking, and any acts mentioned in Sec. 11 (a) and (b),
other conditions prejudicial to the child’s development when accompanied by touching, pinching or brushing
including those covered by Art. 59 of P.D. 603 but not against the body of the offended person; or
covered by the RPC shall suffer the penalty of prision 2. Any touching, pinching, or brushing against the
mayor”. genitalia, face, arms, anus, groin, breasts, inner thighs,
face, buttocks or any part of the victim's body even
In other words, Richard’s parents was choose to when not accompanied by acts mentioned in Section 11
prosecute Mrs. Robinson under the RPC e or R.A. 7610. paragraphs (a) and (b).
I will advise them to consider R.A. 7610 as there was no
showing of the extent of the physical injuries inflicted. 2. Gender-based online sexual harassment

b. NO. Mrs. Robinson cannot be charged with both of child a. Use of information and communications technology
abuse and slight physical injuries, because the latter is in terrorizing and intimidating victims through –
deemed absorbed in the charge of child abuse.
i. Physical, psychological, and emotional threats,
SAFE SPACES ACT unwanted sexual misogynistic, transphobic,
R.A. 11313 homophobic and sexist remarks and comments
online whether publicly or through direct and
PUNISHABLE ACTS private messages;
ii. Invasion of victim’s privacy through
1. Gender-based streets and public spaces sexual cyberstalking and incessant messaging;
harassment iii. Uploading and sharing without the consent of
the victim, any form of media that contains
How committed photos, voice, or video with sexual content;
iv. Any unauthorized recording and sharing of
Through any unwanted and uninvited sexual actions or any of the victim’s photos, videos, or any
remarks against any person regardless of the motive. information online;
v. Impersonating identities of victims online or
Elements: posting lies about victims to harm their
1. Unwanted and has threatened one’s sense of personal reputation; or
space and physical safety; and vi. Filing false abuse reports to online platforms to
2. Committed in public spaces. silence victims. (Sec. 12, R.A. 11313)

Under Sec. 4, par. 2, R.A. 11313 (CRAMPS-WUG) 3. Qualified gender-based street, public, and online
a. Catcalling; sexual harassment
b. Relentless requests for personal details;
c. Any advances, whether verbal or physical; a. The act takes place in a common carrier or PUV,
d. Misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic, and sexual including, but not limited to, jeepneys, taxis,
slurs; tricycles, or app-based transport network vehicle
e. Persistent uninvited comments or gestures on a services, where the perpetrator is the driver of the
person’s appearance; vehicle and the offended party is a passenger;
f. Statement of sexual comments and suggestions, Public b. The offended party is a minor, a senior citizen, or a
masturbation or flashing of private parts; person with disability (PWD), or a breastfeeding
g. Wolf-whistling; mother nursing her child;
h. Unwanted invitation; and c. The offended party is diagnosed with a mental
i. Groping. problem tending to impair consent;
d. The perpetrator is a member of the uniformed
Under Sec. 11 (a) not enumerated under Sec. 4 (CUT- services, such as the PNP and the Armed Forces of
PAIL) the Philippines (AFP), and the act was perpetrated
1. Cursing; while the perpetrator was in uniform; or
2. Use of sexual names, comments, and demands; e. The act takes place in the premises of a government
3. Taunting; agency offering frontline services to the public and
4. Persistent telling of sexual jokes; the perpetrator is a government employee. (Sec. 15,
5. Any statement that has made an invasion on a person’s R.A. 11313)
personal space or threatens the person’s sense of
personal safety; 4. Gender-based sexual harassment in workplace
6. Intrusive gazing; and
7. Leering. a. Any unwelcome sexual advances, requests or
demand for sexual favors or any act of sexual
Under Sec. 11 (b) not enumerated under Sec. 4 nature, whether done verbally, physically or

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
through the use of technology (text messaging or QUALIFIED GENDER-BASED STREET, PUBLIC SPACES
electronic mail) or through any other forms of AND ONLINE HARASSMENT
information and communication systems, that has
or could have a detrimental effect on the Acts that are legitimate expressions of indigenous culture
conditions of an individual’s employment or and tradition, as well as breastfeeding in public shall not be
education, job performance or opportunities; penalized (Sec. 31, R.A. 11313)
b. A conduct of sexual nature and other conduct-
based on sex affecting the dignity of a person, GENDER-BASED SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN THE
which is unwelcome, unreasonable, and offensive WORKPLACE
to the recipient, whether done verbally, physically
or through the use of technology such as text Information and Communication system
messaging or electronic mail or through any other
forms of information and communication A system for generating, sending, receiving, storing or
systems; or otherwise processing electronic data messages or
c. A conduct that is unwelcome and pervasive and electronic documents and includes the computer system or
creates an intimidating, hostile or humiliating other similar devices by or in which data are recorded or
environment for the recipient: stored and any procedure related to the recording or
storage of electronic data messages or electronic
Provided, That the crime of gender-based sexual documents. (Sec 16(d), R.A. 11313)
harassment may also be committed between
peers and those committed to a superior officer by Duties of Employers
a subordinate, or to a teacher by a student, or to a
trainer by a trainee. (Sec. 16, R.A. 11313) Employers or other persons of authority, influence or moral
ascendancy in a workplace shall have the duty to prevent,
5. Gender-based sexual harassment in educational deter, or punish the performance of acts of gender-based
and training institution sexual harassment in the workplace. (Sec. 17, R.A. 11313)

GENDER-BASED STREETS AND PUBLIC SPACES SEXUAL DATA PRIVACY ACT OF 2012
HARASSMENT R.A. 10173

Public Spaces PUNISHABLE ACTS
1. Alleys
2. Roads 1. Unauthorized processing of personal information and
3. Sidewalks sensitive personal information. (Sec. 25, R.A. 10173)  
4. Parks 2. Accessing personal information and sensitive personal
5. Buildings information due to negligence. (Sec. 26, R.A. 10173)  
6. Schools 3. Improper disposal of personal information and
7. Churches sensitive personal information. (Sec. 27, R.A. 10173)  
8. Restaurants 4. Processing of personal information and sensitive
9. Malls personal information for unauthorized purposes. (Sec.
10. Public washrooms
28, R.A. 10173)  
11. Bars
5. Unauthorized access or intentional breach – Persons
12. Internet shops
who knowingly and unlawfully, or violating data
13. Public markets
confidentiality and security data systems, breaks in any
14. Transportation terminals
way into any system where personal and sensitive
15. Public utility vehicles (Sec. 4, R.A. 11313) personal information is stored. (Sec. 29, R.A. 10173)  
6. Concealment of security breaches involving sensitive
Obligations of Establishments (ASSOCS) personal information. (Sec. 30, R.A. 10173)  
1. Provide assistance to victims of gender-based sexual 7. Malicious disclosure – Any personal information
harassment by coordinating with local police controller or personal information processor or any of
authorities immediately after gender-based sexual
its officials employees or agents, who, with malice or in
harassment is reported;
bad faith, discloses unwarranted or false information
2. Making CCTV footage available when ordered by the
relative to any personal information or personal
court;
sensitive information obtained by him or her. (Sec. 31,
3. Providing a safe gender-sensitive environment to R.A. 10173)
encourage victims to report gender-based sexual 8. Unauthorized disclosure – Any personal information
harassment at the first instance; controller or personal information processor or any of
4. Install in clearly-visible warning signs against its officials, employees or agents, who discloses to a
gender-based public spaces sexual harassment,
third party personal information or sensitive personal
including the anti-sexual harassment hotline number in
information not covered by Section 30 without the
bold letters; consent of the data subject. (Sec. 32, R.A. 10173)
5. Designate at least 1 Anti-Sexual Harassment Officer 9. Combination or series of acts as defined in Sections 25
to receive gender-based sexual harassment complaints; to 32. (Sec. 33, R.A. 10173).
6. Security guards in these places may be deputized to
apprehend perpetrators caught in flagrante delicto and SCOPE OF APPLICATION
are required to immediately coordinate with local
authorities. (Sec. 5, R.A. 11313) 1. Any natural and juridical person involved in personal


2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
information processing Any operation or any set of operations performed upon
2. Personal information controllers and processors, personal information including, but not limited to, the
although not found or established in the Philippines: collection, recording, organization, storage, updating or
a. Use equipment that are located in the modification, retrieval, consultation, use, consolidation,
Philippines or; blocking, erasure or destruction of data. (Sec. 3(j), R.A.
b. Those who maintain an office, branch or 10173)
agency in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, R.A. 10173)
The processing of personal information shall be allowed,
EXCEPTIONS subject to compliance with the requirements under R.A.
10173 and other laws allowing disclosure of information to
1. Information about any individual who is or was an the public and adherence to the principles of transparency,
officer or employee of a government institution that legitimate purpose and proportionality.
relates to the position or functions of the individual,
including: Criteria for Lawful Processing of Personal Information
a. The fact that the individual is or was an officer
or employee of the government institution; 1. Not otherwise prohibited by law; and
b. The title, business address and office telephone 2. When at least one of the following conditions exists:
number of the individual; a. The data subject has given his or her consent;
c. The classification, salary range and b. The processing of personal information is
responsibilities of the position held by the necessary and is related to the fulfillment of a
individual; and contract with the data subject or in order to take
d. The name of the individual on a document steps at the request of the data subject prior to
prepared by the individual in the course of entering into a contract;
employment with the government; c. The processing is necessary for compliance with a
legal obligation to which the personal information
2. Information about an individual who is or was controller is subject;
performing service under contract for a government d. The processing is necessary to protect vitally
institution that relates to the services performed, important interests of the data subject, including
including the terms of the contract, and the name of life and health;
the individual given in the course of the performance e. The processing is necessary in order to respond to
of those services. national emergency, to comply with the
3. Information relating to any discretionary benefit of a requirements of public order and safety, or to
financial nature such as the granting of a license or fulfill functions of public authority which
permit given by the government to an individual, necessarily includes the processing of personal
including the name of the individual and the exact data for the fulfillment of its mandate; or
nature of the benefit; f. The processing is necessary for the purposes of
4. Personal information processed for journalistic, the legitimate interests pursued by the personal
artistic, literary or research purposes; information controller or by a third party or
5. Information necessary in order to carry out the parties to whom the data is disclosed, except
functions of public authority which includes the where such interests are overridden by
processing of personal data for the performance by fundamental rights and freedoms of the data
the independent, central monetary authority and law subject which require protection under the
enforcement and regulatory agencies of their Philippine Constitution. (Sec. 12, R.A. 10173)
constitutionally and statutorily mandated functions;
6. Information necessary for banks and other financial NOTE: Personal information controller may subcontract
institutions under the jurisdiction of the independent, the processing of personal information, Provided That: the
central monetary authority or BSP to comply with R.A. personal information controller shall be responsible for
9510, otherwise known as the Credit Information ensuring that proper safeguards are in place to ensure the
System Act (CISA), and R.A. 9160, as amended, confidentiality of the personal information processed,
otherwise known as the Anti-Money Laundering Act prevent its use for unauthorized purposes, and generally,
and other applicable laws; or comply with the requirements of R.A. 10173, and other laws
7. Personal information originally collected from for processing of personal information. The personal
residents of foreign jurisdictions in accordance with information processor shall comply with all the
the laws of those foreign jurisdictions, including any requirements of this law and other applicable laws. (Sec. 14,
applicable data privacy laws, which is being R.A. 10173)
processed in the Philippines. (Sec. 4, R.A. 10173)
SENSITIVE PERSONAL INFORMATION
PERSONAL INFORMATION AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION

Any information whether recorded in a material form or Privileged Information
not, from which the identity of an individual is apparent or Any and all forms of data which under the Rules of Court
can be reasonably and directly ascertained by the entity and other pertinent laws constitute privileged
holding the information, or when put together with other communication. (Sec. 3(k), R.A. 10173)
information would directly and certainly identify an
individual. (Sec. 3(g), R.A. 10173) Sensitive Personal Information
1. About an individual’s race, ethnic origin, marital status,
Processing of personal information age, color, and religious, philosophical or political
affiliations.

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
2. About an individual’s health, education, genetic or Summary (I-BAR-OP-C-Dean)
sexual life of a person, or to any proceeding for any
offense committed or alleged to have been committed 1. Informed
by such person, the disposal of such proceedings, or the 2. Block
sentence of any court in such proceedings. 3. Access
3. Issued by government agencies peculiar to an 4. Rectify
individual which includes, but not limited to, social 5. Object
security numbers, previous or current health records, 6. Portability
licenses or its denials, suspension or revocation, and 7. Complaint
tax returns. 8. Damages
4. Specifically established by an executive order or an act
of Congress to be kept classified. (Sec. 3(l), R.A. 10173) Rights of a data subject

Processing of sensitive personal information and 1. Be informed whether personal information pertaining
privileged information to him or her shall be, are being or have been processed;
2. Be furnished the information indicated hereunder
GR: The processing of sensitive personal information, as before the entry of his or her personal information into
well as those considered privileged, is prohibited by law. the processing system of the personal information
controller, or at the next practical opportunity:
XPNs:
1. The data subject has given his or her consent, specific a. Description of the personal information to be
to the purpose prior to the processing, or in the case of entered into the system;
privileged information, all parties to the exchange b. Purposes for which they are being or are to be
have given their consent prior to processing; processed;
2. The processing of the same is provided for by existing c. Scope and method of the personal information
laws and regulations, Provided That: processing;
d. The recipients or classes of recipients to whom
a. Such regulatory enactments guarantee the they are or may be disclosed;
protection of the sensitive personal information e. Methods utilized for automated access, if the same
and the privileged information is allowed by the data subject, and the extent to
b. The consent of the data subjects are not required which such access is authorized;
by law or regulation permitting the processing of f. The identity and contact details of the personal
the sensitive personal information or the information controller or its representative;
privileged information; g. The period for which the information will be
stored; and
3. The processing is necessary to protect the life and h. The existence of their rights, i.e., to access,
health of the data subject or another person, and the correction, as well as the right to lodge a complaint
data subject is not legally or physically able to express before the Commission.
his or her consent prior to the processing;
4. The processing is necessary to achieve the lawful and NOTE: Any information supplied or declaration made
noncommercial objectives of public organizations and to the data subject on these matters shall not be
their associations, Provided That: amended without prior notification of data subject:
a. Such processing is only confined and related to Provided, That the notification under this right shall not
the bona fide members of these organizations or apply should the personal information be needed
their associations pursuant to a subpoena or when the collection and
b. The sensitive personal information are not processing are for obvious purposes, including when it
transferred to third parties is necessary for the performance of or in relation to a
c. Consent of the data subject was obtained prior to contract or service or when necessary or desirable in
processing; the context of an employer-employee relationship,
between the collector and the data subject, or when the
5. The processing is necessary for purposes of medical information is being collected and processed as a result
treatment, is carried out by a medical practitioner or a of legal obligation (Sec. 16(b), R.A. 10173).
medical treatment institution, and an adequate level of
protection of personal information is ensured; or 3. Reasonable access to, upon demand, the following:
6. The processing concerns such personal information a. Contents of his or her personal information that
as is necessary for the protection of lawful rights and were processed;
interests of natural or legal persons in court b. Sources from which personal information were
proceedings, or the establishment, exercise or defense obtained;
of legal claims, or when provided to government or c. Names and addresses of recipients of the
public authority. (Sec. 13, R.A. 10173) personal information;
d. Manner by which such data were processed;
Personal information controllers may invoke the principle e. Reasons for the disclosure of the personal
of privileged communication over privileged information information to recipients;
that they lawfully control or process. Subject to existing f. Information on automated processes where the
laws and regulations, any evidence gathered on privileged data will or likely to be made as the sole basis for
information is inadmissible. (Sec. 15, R.A. 10173) any decision significantly affecting or will affect
the data subject;
RIGHTS OF DATA SUBJECT

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022
Criminal Law
g. Date when his or her personal information 2. To processing of personal information gathered for
concerning the data subject were last accessed the purpose of investigations in relation to any
and modified; and criminal, administrative or tax liabilities of a data
h. The designation, or name or identity and address subject. (Sec. 19, R.A. 10173)
of the personal information controller.
Q: Robin and Rowell are best friends and have been
4. Dispute the inaccuracy or error in the personal classmates since grade school. When the boys
information and have the personal information graduated from high school, their parents gifted them
controller correct it immediately and accordingly, with a trip to Amsterdam, all expenses paid. At age 16,
unless the request is vexatious or otherwise this was their first European trip. Thrilled with a sense
unreasonable. If the personal information have been of freedom, they decided to try what Amsterdam was
corrected, the personal information controller shall known for. One night, they scampered out of their hotel
ensure the accessibility of both the new and the room, went to the De Wallen, better known as the Red-
retracted information and the simultaneous receipt of light District of Amsterdam. There, they went to a
the new and the retracted information by recipients “coffee shop” which sells only drinks and various items
thereof: Provided, That the third parties who have made from opium poppy, cannabis, and marijuana, all
previously received such processed personal of which are legal in Amsterdam. They represented
information shall be informed of its inaccuracy and its themselves to be of age, and were served, and took
rectification upon reasonable request of the data shots of, cannabis and marijuana products. They
subject; indulged in these products the whole night, even if it
was their first time to try them.
5. Suspend, withdraw, or order the blocking, removal or
destruction of his or her personal information from the Before returning to Manila, they bought a dozen
personal information controller's filing system upon lollipops laced with cannabis, as souvenir and
discovery and substantial proof that the personal “pasalubong” for their friends. They were accosted at
information are incomplete, outdated, false, the Manila International Airport and were charged with
unlawfully obtained, used for unauthorized purposes importation of dangerous drugs under the
or are no longer necessary for the purposes for which Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. They
they were collected. In this case, the personal were also charged with use of dangerous drugs after
information controller may notify third parties who pictures of them in the “coffee shop” in Amsterdam
have previously received such processed personal were posted on Facebook, showing them smoking and
information; and taking shots of a whole menu of cannabis and
6. Be indemnified for any damages sustained due to such marijuana products. Their own captions on their
inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, false, unlawfully Facebook posts clearly admitted that they were using
obtained or unauthorized use of personal information. the dangerous products. The pictures were posted by
(Sec. 16, R.A. 10173) them through Private Messenger (PM) only for their
close friends, but Roccino, the older brother of one of
Transmissibility of Rights of Data Subject their best friends, was able to get hold of his younger
brother’s password, and without authority from his
The lawful heirs and assigns of the data subject may invoke brother, accessed his PM and shared Robin and
the rights of the data subject for, which he or she is an heir Rowell’s Amsterdam photos on Facebook. Can Roccino
or assignee at any time after the death of the data subject or be prosecuted for the act of accessing and sharing on
when the data subject is incapacitated or incapable of Facebook the private pictures sent by PM to his
exercising the rights as enumerated herein. (Section 17, R.A. brother? If yes, for what crime? (BAR 2018)
10173)
A: YES. Roccino, who accessed the private messages of his
Right to Data Portability brother and shared in Facebook pictures of other people
without their consent, can be charged with violation of R.A.
The data subject shall have the right, where personal 10173 in relation to Chapter II, sec. 6 of R.A. 10175 which
information is processed by electronic means and in a states that:
structured and commonly used format, to obtain from the All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC, as
personal information controller a copy of data undergoing amended, and special laws, if committed by, through
processing in an electronic or structured format, which is and with the use of information and communications
commonly used and allows for further use by the data technologies.
subject. The Commission may specify the electronic format,
as well as the technical standards, modalities, and Therefore, Roccino committed unauthorized access and
procedures for their transfer. (Sec. 18, R.A. 10173) disclosure of personal data. (Secs. 29 and 32 of R.A. 10173)

Exception to the applicability of the rights of the data
subject:
1. If the processed personal information are used only for
the needs of scientific and statistical research and, on
the basis of such, no activities are carried out and no
decisions are taken regarding the data subject,
Provided:
a. That the personal information shall be held
under strict confidentiality; and
b. Shall be used only for the declared purpose.

2021 GOLDEN NOTES 2021 & 2022

2021 UST Pre Week Criminal Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2021 UST Pre Week Criminal Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

University

The Law Pertaining to

BASIC PRINCIPLES Republic and its inhabitants of the immunities, rights,

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 1 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 2 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 3 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 4 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 5 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 6 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 7 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 8 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 9 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 10 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 11 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 12 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 13 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 14 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 15 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 16 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 17 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 18 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 19 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 20 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 21 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 22 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 23 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 24 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 25 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 26 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 27 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 28 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 29 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 30 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 31 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 32 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 33 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 34 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 35 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 36 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 37 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 38 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 39 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 40 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 41 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 42 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 43 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 44 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 45 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 46 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 47 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 48 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 49 PRE–WEEK NOTES

UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS 50 PRE–WEEK NOTES

You might also like