AUSL Criminal Law

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL
JAYSON FRANCISCO JULIAN PAOLO FABROS LOUIE JOHN BAYON

Chairperson Operations Head Auditor
REA MAY HERMOSURA MA. ISIS DANIELLE VOLANTE CRISTOBAL RABINO

Vice Chairperson for Academics Secretary Creative Director
MIKYLA CORDERO TIMOTHY JAMES PACSON ARRIANE SANGALANG

Vice Chairperson for Administration Treasurer Volunteer Core Head
CRIMINAL LAW TEAM

RANDEL ABALOS
Commissioner NEIL JOPET BAUTISTA PATRICIA MARIE ALONZO
Subject Head – Criminal Law 1 JOSEPH BRIONES
ADRIAN DELA CRUZ JAN ANTHONY DE JESUS
Deputy Commissioner AILE CARISSA ABCEDE JHONEL DELLOVA
Subject Head - Criminal Law 2 INA GAVINO
RITZ MERIDA
RHINN RIVERA MELODY SANTIAGO
Subject Head – Special Penal Laws JOY MARIE SEVILLENO
Members
CENTER FOR LEGAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

ATTY. RODERICK M. VILLOSTAS
Director
ATTY. ANTONY J. PARREÑO

ATTY. LESTER NAZARENE V. OPLE
ATTY. RICKSON M. BUENVIAJE
Research Fellows
BRANDO DE TORRES
MARICAR ASUNCION
JAYSON GALAPON
Research Staff
PHILIPPINE COPYRIGHT
This material is an intellectual creation of the Arellano Law Bar Operations Commission 2021. Any unauthorized reprint or use
of this material is prohibited. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including but not limited to photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system without the
express written consent of both Arellano Law bar Operations Commission 2021 and the Arellano University School of Law.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © 2021

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
CRIMINAL LAW
A. BASIC PRINCIPLES
1. Distinguish crimes Mala in Se from Mala Prohibita.
Mala in Se Mala Prohibita

Nature Wrongful from their nature, or Wrong because there is a law
inherently evil. prohibiting the act.
Governing Law Generally, punishable under the RPC. Generally, punishable under
special penal laws.
Example of exception:
The crime of Illegal Use of Public Fund Example of exception:
(Technical Malversation) under Article Plunder, a crime punishable
219 of RPC falls under mala prohibita. under a special penal law (RA
7080), is classified as mala in se.
Basis of Offender‟s moral trait. Offender‟s voluntariness.
Criminal
Liability
Good Faith or Good faith or lack of criminal intent is Good faith or lack of criminal
Lack of Criminal a defense. intent is NOT accepted as a
Intent as a defense, UNLESS this is an
Defense element of the crime such as in
Section 3(e) of R.A. 3019
[evident bad faith].
Modifying These circumstances are taken into These circumstances are not
Circumstances account in imposing the penalty of the considered because the law
as consideration offender precisely because his moral intends to discourage the
trait is the basis of the crime. commission of the act specially
prohibited.
Degree of This determines the penalty imposable This does not affect their liability,
Participation so that it is computed on the basis of hence, the penalty on all of them
whether he is principal offender, or is the same whether they are
merely an accomplice or accessory. principals or merely accomplices
or accessories.
Stage of This affects the penalty imposed, thus, This is considered only when the
Accomplishment the penalty depends on whether the crime is accomplished or
crime is consummated, frustrated, or consummated. There is no
attempted. attempted or frustrated stage
because it is the commission of
the act itself that is prohibited
and also since intent, which is
inherent in attempted or
frustrated stage, is not an
element. Thus, just like felonies
by culpa, mala prohibita is
always consummated.
Involvement of Generally, crimes mala in se involve Generally, crimes mala prohibita

Moral Turpitude moral turpitude. do not involve moral turpitude.
As to Division of Penalties may be divided into degrees There is no such division of
Penalties and periods. penalties.
As to whether Yes. Generally, no unless the statute
the crime can specifically provided for the
be complexed same.
Delito continuado does not also
apply in malum prohibitum.
(Campanilla, The Revised Penal
Code: Book One 2021)
(Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Book One, 19th Edition, 2017).
Center for Legal Education And Research |1

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
2. Explain the principle “actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea”.
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea means that no crime is committed if the mind of the
person performing the act complained of is innocent .(People vs. Ojeda, G.R. Nos. 104238-58,
June 3, 2004)
This maxim supplies an important characteristic of a mala in se crime, that "ordinarily, evil
intent must unite with an unlawful act for there to be a crime”. Mens rea has been defined
as "a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful purpose or criminal intent," and "essential for
criminal liability." Actus reus are the overt acts that constitute the crime. (Natividad vs.
People, G. R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
3. Characteristics of Criminal law
Application Exception/s
Characteristic
Generality Penal laws and those of public security TLP
and safety shall be obligatory upon all
who live and sojourn in the Philippine Treaty stipulations and
territory. international agreements;
Law of preferential application;

and
Principles of Public International

Law.
Territoriality Penal laws of the Philippines have force OFACO
and effect only within its territory.
Offenses committed while on a
On crimes committed aboard merchant Philippine ship or airship;
vessels while in the territorial waters of
another country, the governing rule is Forgery or counterfeiting of any
either: coin or currency note of the
Philippines or obligations and
French Rule- such crimes are not securities issued by the Philippine
triable in the courts of that country, Government;
unless their commission affects the
peace and security of the territory or Acts connected with the
the safety of the state is endangered; introduction into the Philippines of
or the obligations and securities
mentioned in the preceding
English Rule- Crimes committed aboard number;
foreign merchant vessels are triable in
that country, unless they merely affect Crimes against national security
things within the vessel or they refer to and the law of nations, defined in
the internal management thereof. Title One of Book Two of the RPC;
and
In the Philippines, we observe the
English Rule. Offenses committed by public
officers or employees in the
exercise of the functions.
Prospectivity The application of criminal law is A new penal law is applied
prospective. It looks forward and not retroactively when it establishes
backward. Thus, the Congress is conditions that are more lenient or
prohibited from passing an ex-post favorable to the accused such as:
facto law which:
a) Imposition of a lighter penalty,
IDAPA except when the offender is a
habitual delinquent or when the
Inflicts a punishment greater than that new law is expressly made not
Bar Operations Commissions |2

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
Application Exception/s
Characteristic
provided under a preceding law; applicable to pending action or
existing causes of action; and
Deprives the accused some lawful
protection to which he has become b) Obliteration of the crime under
entitled; the new law.
Aggravates a crime or make it greater

than it was committed;
Penalizes an act that was not

punishable at the time of its
commission; and
Authorizes conviction upon less or

different testimony than the law
required at the time of the commission
of the offense.
4. What is the Doctrine of Pro Reo?
In dubio pro reo literally means “when in doubt, for the accused.” Intimately related to the
in dubio pro reo principle is the rule of lenity. The rule applies when the court is faced with
two possible interpretation of a penal statute – one that is prejudicial to the accused and
another that is favorable to him. The rule calls for the adoption of an interpretation which
is more lenient to the accused (Intestate Estate of Gonzales vs. People, G.R. No. 181409,
February 11, 2010).
5. Construction/Interpretation of Penal Laws
When the language of the penal law is ambiguous. In the existence of doubt as to the
interpretation of a penal law, the same must be strictly construed against the State and
liberally in favor of the accused (Martin Centeno vs. Victoria Villalolin-Pornillos, G.R. No. 113092,
September 1, 1984).
6. Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws
The penal statute, when it imposes conditions that are more lenient or favorable to the
accused, can be given retroactive effect, except when:
a) The new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing causes of
action (Tavera vs. Valdez, G.R.No. L-922, November 8, 1902); and
b) The offender is a habitual criminal under Rule 5, Article 62 of the Revised Penal Code

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
B. JUSTIFYING, EXEMPTING, MITIGATING, AGGRAVATING, AND ALTERNATE

CIRCUMSTANCES
7. Distinguish justifying circumstances from exempting circumstances
JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

CIRCUMSTANCES (Art. 11) (Art. 12)
As to criminal liability No criminal liability. No criminal liability.
Pertains to the act complained Pertains to the actor. The act is not
As to subject of. The act is justified. justified but the actor is exempt
from criminal liability.
Because the act is justified, it The act is unjustified. Although the

is non-felonious. The non- actor is exempt from criminal
criminal character of the act liability, the exemption does NOT
would make the actor exempt extend to CIVIL LIABILITY arising
not only from CRIMINAL from a crime.
LIABILITY but also CIVIL
LIABILITY. A non-felonious EXCEPTION: Art. 12(4) or
As to civil liability act could not be a source of accident, and, 12(7) or lawful
civil obligation arising from a and insuperable cause, do NOT
crime. incur civil liability.
EXCEPTION: Art. 11(4), or

avoidance of greater evil
or injury, still incurs civil
liability.
(Campanilla, Criminal Law Reviewer Vol. I, 2018 Edition, Page 141).
8. Elements of Justifying Circumstances
Self-Defense Defense of a relative Defense of a Avoidance of

(URL) (URP) stranger (URR) Greater Evil or
Injury (EFP)
1. Unlawful 1. Unlawful Aggression 1. Unlawful 1. Evil sought to be

Aggression Aggression avoided actually
exists
2. Reasonable
2. Reasonable necessity of the 2. Reasonable 2. The injury feared
necessity of means employed to necessity of the be greater than
the means prevent or repel it. means employed to that done to
employed to prevent or repel it. avoid it
prevent or 3. In case the
repel it. provocation was 3. The person 3. There be no
given by the person defending be not other practical or
3. Lack of attacked, the one induced by less harmful
sufficient making the defense revenge, means of
provocation had no part therein. resentment or preventing it.
on the part of other evil motive.
the person
defending
himself

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
9. Gabriel, together with his friends were sitting outside his house. Eugene,
together with his friend Rudy arrived and without warning, shot Gabriel in the
chest. Gabriel fled but Eugene chased him. Rudy heard another gunshot.
Moments later, Gabriel was found dead and according to the post-mortem
report, Gabriel died due to massive bleeding of a laceration on his right
shoulder and a gunshot wound on his chest. Eugene was charged with
homicide. In his defense, Eugene admitted to shooting Gabriel but invoked self-
dense. Should Eugene‟s defense be appreciated?
No. The existence of unlawful aggression is the basic requirement in a plea of self-defense,
either to justify the commission of a crime or to mitigate the imposable penalty. It is
settled that without unlawful aggression, there can be no self-defense, whether complete
or incomplete. For unlawful aggression to justify or mitigate a crime, the same must be an
actual, sudden, unexpected attack or imminent danger thereof, and not merely threatening
and intimidating attitude, towards the one claiming self-defense.
Here, there was no unlawful aggression. On this score, Eugene's plea of self-defense -
whether as a justifying or as a mitigating circumstance - should fail. (People vs. Samuya, G.R.
No. 213214, April 20, 2015)
10. Exempting Circumstances
1. An imbecile or an Note:
insane person, When a person was insane at the time of the commission of the felony,
unless the latter has he is exempt from criminal liability.
acted during a lucid
interval When he was sane at the time at the commission of the crime, but he
becomes insane at the time of the trial, he is criminally liable. The trial,
however, will be suspended until the mental capacity of the accused be
restored to afford him a fair trial.
2. A person under 15 Note:

years of age A child 15 years of age or under at the time of the commission of the
offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be
subject to an intervention program. (Sections 6 and 20, R.A. 9344)
3. A person over 15 Note:

years of age and A child in conflict with the law is a person who at the time of the
under 18, unless he commission of the offense is below 18 years old but not less than 15
acted with years and one day old (Sec. 1, A.M. No. 01-1-18-SC)
discernment, in
which case, such A minor under 18 but above 15 must have acted with discernment to
minor shall be incur criminal liability.
proceeded against in
accordance with the
provisions of Art. 80 XPN: Even if the same child committed a crime with discernment, he is
of the RPC exempted from criminal responsibility and no Information should be filed
against the child if the offense committed are any of these:
(a) status offenses;
(b) vagrancy and prostitution under Sec. 202 of the RPC;
(c) mendicancy under P.D. 1563; and
(d) sniffing of rugby under P.D. 1619. (Revised Rules on Children in

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
Conflict of Law and Sec. 58, RA 9344)
4. Any person who, Elements:

while performing a 1. A person is performing a lawful act
lawful act with due 2. With due care
care, causes an 3. He causes an injury to another by mere accident;
injury by mere 4. Without fault or intention of causing it
accident without
fault or intention of
causing it
5. Any person who acts Elements:
under the 1. The compulsion is by means of physical force
compulsion of an 2. The physical force must be irresistible.
irresistible force 3. The physical force must come from a third person.
6. Any person who acts Elements:

under the impulse of 1. The threat which causes the fear is an evil greater than or at
an uncontrollable least equal to, that which he is required to commit;
fear of an equal or 2. It promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the
greater injury ordinary man would have succumbed to it.
7. Any person who fails Elements:

to perform an act 1. The act is required by law to be done.
required by law, 2. A person fails to perform such act
when prevented by 3. His failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or
some lawful or insuperable cause.
insuperable cause.
11. Nika and Kenneth have been married for 10 years. One night, Kenneth came
home drunk. Finding no food on the table, Kenneth started hitting Nika only to
apologize the following day. A week later, the same episode occurred – Kenneth
came home drunk and started hitting Nika. Fearing for her life, Nika left and
stayed with her sister. To woo Nika back, Kenneth sent floral arrangements of
lilies and tulips. Two days later, Nika returned home and decided to give
Kenneth another chance. After several days, however, Kenneth again came
home drunk. The following day, he was found dead. Nika was charged with
parricide but raised the defense of Battered Woman Syndrome.
a. What are the three phases of the Battered Woman Syndrome? Identify the
phases in the case at hand.
The battered woman syndrome is characterized by the so-called cycle of violence,

which has three phases: (1) the tension-building phase; (2) the acute battering
incident; and (3) the tranquil, loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase. In invoking
BWS, there must be at least two battering episodes.
In this case, the tension-building phase happened when BBB started beating her
because there was no food on the table. The acute battering phase happened when
BBB continues to beat his wife AAA. The tranquil/loving phase occurred when BBB
sent flowers to AAA as an apology to what he did (People vs. Genosa, G.R No. 135981,
January 15, 2004).

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
b. Would the defense prosper despite the absence of any of the elements for the
justifying circumstance of self-defense under the RPC?
Yes. Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered
woman syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the
absence of any of the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under
the Revised Penal Code(Sec. 26, RA 9262).
12. Distinguish ordinary from privileged mitigating circumstances.
Ordinary mitigating Privileged mitigating
APPLICATION If penalty is divisible, apply the Lower the penalty by degree/s.

penalty in its minimum period.
If penalty is indivisible, apply the

lesser penalty.
OFFSETTING Can be offset by a generic Cannot be offset by any
aggravating circumstance. aggravating circumstance.
WHEN Not considered when what is Always considered, whether the

CONSIDERED prescribed is single indivisible prescribed penalty is divisible or
penalty. indivisible.
13. Name the five (5) kinds of aggravating circumstances and state their effect on
the penalty of crimes and nature thereof.
Kind Nature/Effect Example

ORDINARY Those that require the application of the dwelling, nighttime,
AGGRAVATING penalty in its maximum period if prescribed recidivism
penalty is divisible; or the greater penalty if the
prescribed penalty is indivisible; and can be
offset by mitigating circumstances.
SPECIFIC Those that require the application of the ignominy – chastity

AGGRAVATING penalty in its maximum period.
SPECIAL Those which arise under special conditions to Article 63. Advantage
AGGRAVATING increase the penalty for the offense to its be taken by the
maximum period, but the same cannot increase offender of his public
the penalty to the next higher degree; cannot position
be offset by ordinary mitigating circumstance. (People vs. De Leon,
G.R. 179943, June
26, 2009)
QUALIFYING Those that change the nature of the crime to a treachery/evident
CIRCUMSTANCES graver one, or brings about a penalty next premeditation –
higher in degree, and cannot be offset by murder
mitigating circumstances.
INHERENT Those that essentially accompany the evident

AGGRAVATING commission of the crime and do not affect the premeditation –
penalty for the crime. robbery, theft, estafa

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
14. What are the two kinds of unlawful aggression?
ACTUAL OR MATERIAL UNLAWFUL IMMINENT UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION

AGGRESSION
An attack with physical force or with a An attack that is impending or at the point of
weapon, an offensive act that positively happening; it must not consist in a mere
determines the intent of the aggressor to threatening attitude, nor must it be merely
cause the injury. imaginary, but must be offensive and positively
strong (like aiming a revolver at another with intent
to shoot or opening a knife and making a motion as
(Rustia vs. People, G.R. No. 208351, if to attack).
October 5, 2016) Must not be a mere threatening attitude of the
victim, such as pressing his right hand to his hip
where a revolver was holstered, accompanied by an
angry countenance, or like aiming to throw a pot.
15. What are Alternative Circumstances?
Those circumstances which must be considered as aggravating or mitigating according to

the nature and effects of the crime and other condition attending its commission. They are
relationship, intoxication and the degree of instruction and education of the offender. (Art.
15, RPC)
16. What are Absolutory Causes?
Where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public policy and sentiment there is
no penalty imposed. (Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Book One, 18th Edition, 2012).
17. Give some examples of Absolutory Causes.
1. Article 6 (3) – spontaneous desistance in the attempted stage unless the overt act
committed already constitutes a crime other than that intended
2. Article 7 – attempted/frustrated light felonies except those against persons or property
3. Article 16 – accessories in light felonies
4. Article 20 – certain relatives who are accessories subject to the requisites provided
therein: upon those who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by
affinity within the same degrees
5. Article 247 – death and physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances: any
legally married person
6. Article 332 – certain relatives in theft, estafa, and malicious mischief: committed or
caused mutually by the following persons: (a) spouses, ascendants and descendants,
or relatives by affinity in the same line; (b) the widowed spouse with respect to the
property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have passed
into the possession of another; and (c) brothers and sisters and brothers–in–law and
sisters–in–law, if living together

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
7. Article 124, last paragraph – the commission of a crime, or violent insanity of any other
ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital, shall be
considered legal grounds for the detention of any person
8. Battered woman syndrome – Section 26, R.A. 9262
9. Status offenses in Sections 57 and 58, R.A. 9344
10. Article 280, paragraph 3 – the provisions of this Article (On trespass to dwelling) shall
not be applicable to any person who shall enter another‟s dwelling for the purpose of
preventing some serious harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third
person, nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a dwelling for the
purpose of rendering some service to humanity or justice, nor to anyone who shall
enter cafes, taverns, inns and other public houses, while the same are open
11. Somnambulism
12. Article 344, paragraph 4 – In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and
rape, the marriage of the offender with the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action or remit the penalty already imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph
shall also be applicable to the co–principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact
of the above–mentioned crimes
13. Mistake of fact.
14. Repeal of a penal law, either absolute or modification of the penalty when favorable to
the offender.
15. Instigation by reason of public policy.
18. Sato, by deceit, intentionally defrauded his mother-in-law. Sato presented a

document to his mother-in-law Manolita (who was already blind at that time)
and induced her to sign and thumbmark the same. He made Manolita believe
that the said document was in connection with her taxes when it was in fact a
special power of attorney (SPA) authorizing his minor daughter Wendy to sell,
assign, transfer or otherwise dispose of Manolita‟s properties in Tagaytay City.
A simple crime of estafa was filed against Sato.

a) May Sato be held criminally liable?
No. Sato is exempt from criminal liability. Article 332 of the RPC provides that there
can be no criminal, but only civil liability which shall result from the commission of
the crime of theft, swindling or malicious mischief committed by spouses, ascendants
and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line. Here, Sato committed a
crime of estafa against his mother-in-law, a relative by affinity within the same line.
Therefore, such exempting circumstance is applicable herein.
b) Will your answer be the same even if the wife of Sato already died
considering that death of one spouse extinguishes the marriage?
Yes. Sato may still avail of the exemption under Art. 332 of the RPC. While it is true
that death of one spouse extinguishes the marriage, it does not erase the fact that
Sato and Manolita are still son-in-law and mother-in-law and they remain to be so
even beyond the death of Manolita‟s daughter. Article 332 of the RPC does not
distinguish. Therefore, we must not distinguish. The relationship by affinity endures

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
even after the dissolution of the marriage that produced it as a result of the death of
one of the parties to the said marriage. Sato is still related to Manolita by affinity
even if his wife already died. Therefore, Sato is still exempted under Art. 332 of the
RPC. (Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales vda De Carungcong vs. People of the Philippines,
G.R. No. 181409, February 11, 2010)
c) A reading of the facts alleged in the Information reveals that Sato is being
charged not with simple estafa but with the complex crime of estafa
through falsification of public documents. Can he still avail of the
absolutory cause under Art 332 of the RPC?
No. Sato cannot avail himself of the absolutory cause provided under Article 332 of
the RPC. Art 332 is meant to address specific crimes against property, namely, the
simple crimes of theft, swindling and malicious mischief. Thus, all other crimes,
whether simple or complex, are not affected by the absolutory cause provided by the
said provision.
The purpose of Article 332 is to preserve family harmony and obviate scandal. When
estafa is committed through falsification of a public document, however, the matter
acquires a very serious public dimension and goes beyond the respective rights and
liabilities of family members among themselves. Therefore, Sato can no longer be
exempted under Article 332 of the RPC. (Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales vda De
Carungcong vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 181409, February 11, 2010)
C. APPLICATION OF THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
19. What is Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISLAW)?
It is a law which modifies the imposition of penalties under the RPC and special laws. The
courts are mandated in imposing a sentence to fix a minimum and a maximum period of
penalty. The minimum sentence must be served and thereupon, the convict becomes
eligible for parole. When released, he is not actually discharged for the rest of his sentence
is served out of prison under the supervision of a parole officer. (Campanilla, 2018)
20. Does Indeterminate Sentence Law apply to destierro?
No. Indeterminate Sentence Law is expressly granted to those who are sentenced to
imprisonment exceeding 1 year.
21. What are the crimes to which ISLAW is not applicable?
1. Treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or

sedition, espionage or piracy;
2. Habitual Delinquents;
3. Those who have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence;
4. Those who violated the terms of conditional pardon;
5. Penalty of imprisonment, the maximum term of which does not exceed one year;
6. Death Penalty or life imprisonment (Section 2 of Act No. 4103); or Reclusion Perpetual
(R.A. No. 9346);
7. Use of trafficked victim. (Section 11 of R.A. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No. 10364).

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
22. Is Indeterminate Sentence Law applicable to recidivist?
Yes, while habitual delinquents are not entitled to an indeterminate sentence, a recidivist
for the first time may be given the benefits of law. (People vs. Yu Lian, C.A., 40 O.G. 4205;
People vs. Venus, 63 Phil. 435, 442)
23. What are the rules in computing the maximum and minimum periods under the
Indeterminate Sentence Law?
UNDER RPC UNDER SPECIAL LAW

Anywhere within the range imposed by the RPC, Should not exceed what is
Maximum
considering all attending/modifying circumstances prescribed under the special law.

(mitigating and aggravating)
Within range of penalty, 1 degree lower than that Should not be less than the
Minimum
prescribed by RPC, without considering any minimum prescribed by law.

ordinary aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
In the case of a complex crime, DO NOT consider
the fact that the higher penalty shall be imposed in
its maximum period. Consider all others (i.e.,
special aggravating, privileged mitigating, etc.).
(Act No. 4103, Section 1, as amended).
24. Marta is charged with an offense punished by a special law. The penalty
prescribed for the offense is imprisonment of not less than five (5) years but
not more than ten (10) years. Upon arraignment, he entered a plea of guilty.
a. In the imposition of the proper penalty, should the Indeterminate Sentence

Law be applied?
Yes. The Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISLAW) should be applied because the
minimum requirement for the application of ISLAW is imprisonment for more than one
(1) year. However, applying the Batistis case, the Court may opt not to apply ISLAW
by fixing the penalty at exactly 5 years of imprisonment since this straight penalty is
favorable to the accused. (Batistis vs. People, G.R. No. 181571, December 16, 2009)
b. If you were the judge trying the case, what penalty would you impose on
Marta?
I will impose an indeterminate sentence, the maximum of which shall not exceed the
maximum penalty fixed by law (not more than 10 years), and the minimum shall not
be less than the minimum penalty prescribed (not less than 5 years). As a judge, I
shall sentence the accused to suffer 5 years of imprisonment as minimum penalty to
10 years as maximum penalty.
c. Assume that the crime charged was Frustrated Homicide with one
mitigating circumstance. Compute the penalty to be imposed on Marta.
The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal. Since the crime is at the frustrated
stage, the penalty shall be reduced to one degree lower, and that is prision mayor.
Since one mitigating circumstance is present, prision mayor shall be applied in its
minimum period. Applying ISLAW, the maximum penalty shall be fixed within the
proper imposable period, and that is, minimum period of prision mayor, while the

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
minimum penalty shall be fixed within the range of the penalty next lower in degree,
and that is prision correccional. Hence, if I were the judge, I will sentence the accused
to suffer 6 months and 1 day of prision correccional as minimum penalty to 8 years of
prision mayor as maxium penalty.
25. Discuss the penalty to be imposed for the crime of direct assault with homicide.
The penalty of reclusion temporal for homicide, which is the serious component of this
complex crime, shall be applied in its maxium period (Art. 48, RPC).
The minimum penalty shall be fixed anywhere within the full range of prision mayor (6
years and 1 day to 12 years), which is the penalty next lower in degree.
The maximum penalty shall be fixed anywhere within the range of reclusion temporal in its
maximum period (17 years, 4 months and 1 day to 20 years).
Hence, the court may sentence the accused to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 12 years
of prision mayoras minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum (People vs.
Rillorta, G.R. 57415, December 15, 1989; People vs. Recto, G.R. No. 129069, October 17, 2001;
Page 307, Criminal Law Reviewer Vol 1 by Judge Marlo Campanilla, 2018 Edition).
26. What is the rule for Graduation of Penalties?
The penalty prescribed by law for the felony shall be lowered by one or two degrees, as
follows (Arts.50-57, RPC):
a. For the principal in frustrated felony – one degree lower;

b. For the principal in attempted felony – two degrees lower;
c. For the accomplice in consummated felony – one degree lower;
d. For the accessory in consummated felony – two degrees lower.
Consummated Frustrated Attempted
Principals 0 1 2
Accomplices 1 2 3
Accessories 2 3 4
The figure “0” represents the penalty prescribed by law in defining a crime, which is to be
imposed on the principal in a consummated offense, in accordance with the provisions of
Art. 46, RPC. The other figures represent the degrees to which the penalty must be
lowered, to meet the different situations anticipated by law.
27. The accused was charged with estafa, and was sentenced to arresto mayor with
the accessory penalty of suspension from public office and the right of suffrage
during the term of his sentence by the justice of the peace court. The accused
raised the question of jurisdiction of the justice of the peace court. Does the
justice of peace court have jurisdiction?
Yes. The justice of the peace court has jurisdiction. The accessory penalties DO NOT
AFFECT the jurisdiction of the court in which the information is filed, because they do not
modify, or alter the nature of the penalty provided by law. What determines jurisdiction in
criminal cases is the extent of the principal penalty which the law imposes for the crime
charged in the information or complaint. ((Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Book One, 19th
Edition, 2017); People vs. Fajardo, G.R. No. 43466. May 25, 1938)

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
28. What is the accessory penalty for destierro?
None. The RPC does not provide for an accessory penalty for destierro. ((Reyes, The Revised
Penal Code: Book One, 19th Edition, 2017))
29. What are the effects of Accessory penalties?
ACCESSORY PENALTY EFFECTS

Perpetual or Deprivation of any public office or employment of offender;
Temporary Absolute deprivation of the right to vote in any election or to be voted upon;
Disqualification Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension.
Perpetual or For public office, profession or calling:

Temporary Special
Disqualification  Deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling
affected;
 Disqualification for holding similar offices or employments

during the period of disqualification;
For the exercise of right to suffrage:
 Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in an

office;
 Cannot hold any public office during the period of

disqualification.
Suspension from Disqualification from holding such office or the exercise of such
Public Office, the Right profession or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence;
to Vote and Be Voted Cannot hold another office having similar functions during the
for, the Right to period of suspension.
Practice a Profession
or Calling
Civil Interdiction Deprivation of the following rights:
 Parental authority
 Guardianship over the ward
 Marital authority
 Right to manage property and to dispose of the same by

acts inter vivos
Indemnification or Forfeiture in favor of the Government of the proceeds of the crime

Confiscation of and the instruments or tools with which it was committed.
Instruments or
Proceeds of the
Offense
Payment of Costs If the accused be convicted, the costs may be charged against him;
If he be acquitted, costs are de officio, i.e., each party will bear
his/her own expense.

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
D. SERVICE OF SENTENCE
30. What is the Three-fold Rule in Criminal law?
Under the three-fold rule, the maximum duration of the convict‟s sentence shall not be
more than three times of the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the
penalties imposed upon him. (The Revised Penal Code Criminal Law Book 1 2017, L.B. Reyes, p.
764). Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. (The Revised Penal Code Criminal
Law Book 1 2017, L.B. Reyes, p. 762)
31. Illustration of Three-fold Rule
X is sentenced to suffer a 14 years, eight months and one day for the crime he
committed; 17 years, four months and one day in another case; 14 years and
eight months in the third case; and another 12 years on the other case.
How will the three-fold rule apply? Under this case, the most severe of those
penalties is 17 years, four months and one day thus three times that penalty is 52 years
and three days. But under the three-fold rule, the law has limited the duration of the
maximum term of imprisonment to not more than 40 years. Hence the accused will have
to suffer 40 years only. ((The Revised Penal Code Criminal Law Book 1 2017, L.B. Reyes, p. 764-
765)
32. What is probation?
Probation is a disposition under which a defendant, after conviction and sentence, is

released subject to conditions imposed by the court and to the supervision of a probation
officer. (Reyes, 2017)
33. When and where should one apply for Probation?
After conviction and sentencing of the defendant, the application for probation must be
filed within the period for perfecting an appeal, and such application shall be filed in the
trial court. If the application is based on a modified decision imposing a probationable
penalty, it shall be filed in the trial court where the judgment of conviction imposing a non-
probationable penalty was rendered. (Reyes, The Revised Penal Code: Book One, 19th Edition,
2017)
34. What is the rule on the grant of probation on appealed cases?
As a general rule, no application for probation shall be entertained or granted if the

defendant has perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction. However, when the
defendant appealed a judgment of conviction imposing a NON-PROBATIONABLE penalty
and such judgment, upon review, was modified through the imposition of a probationable
penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified
decision BEFORE such decision becomes final. (Sec. 4, P.D. 968, as amended by R.A. 10707)
35. Arnel was found guilty by the trial court of frustrated homicide that imposed a
penalty beyond six (6) years, disqualifying him for probation. After his appeal,
the court found that he was only liable for attempted homicide with a penalty
less than six (6) years. Is Arnel now entitled to apply for probation despite the
fact that he has appealed?
Yes. Arnel did not appeal from a judgment that would have allowed him to apply for
probation. He did not have a choice between appeal and probation. He was not in a
position to say, "By taking this appeal, I choose not to apply for probation." The stiff
penalty that the trial court imposed on him denied him that choice. The finding of

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
attempted homicide is an original conviction that for the first time imposes on Arnel a
probationable penalty. Had the RTC done Arnel right from the start, it would have found
him guilty of the correct offense and imposed on him the right penalty This would have
afforded Arnel the right to apply for probation. (Colinares vs. People, G.R. No.
182748,December 13, 2011).
36. Mr. T applied for probation but such application was denied on the ground that
there is undue risk that during the period of probation, Mr. T will commit
another crime. Mr. T appealed the denial of application. Will the appeal
prosper?
No. An order granting or denying probation is not appealable. (Reyes, The Revised Penal
Code: Book One, 19th Edition, 2017)
37. Who are disqualified to avail the benefits of Probation?
a. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years
(Section 9 of P.D. No. 968), unless the crime involved is possession or use of
dangerous drugs committed by first time minor offender (Section 70 or R.A. No. 9165);
b. Those convicted of any crime against national security;
c. (Note: R.A. 10707 has amended P.D. No. 968 by deleting the crime against public
order in Section 9 thereof. In sum, under the present law on probation, crimes against
public order, such as alarm and scandal and direct assault are now probationable)
d. (N.B. Rebellion is a crime against public order and not a crime against national
security. But it is not probationable since the penalty prescribed for it is higher than six
years of imprisonment)
e. Those who have been previously convicted by final judgment of an offense punished
by imprisonment of more than six months and one day and/or a fine of more than
P1,000;
f. Those who have been once on probation;
g. Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of the
law became applicable (Section 9 of P.D. No. 968, as amended by R.A. No. 10707); and
h. Those convicted of dangerous drug trafficking or pushing (Section 24 of R.A. No. 9165).
38. Distinguish Probation and Intermediate Sentence Law
PROBATION ISLAW
PERIOD OF Sentence must not be more than 6 Maximum period of the sentence
SENTENCE years must be more than 1 year
PENALTY Penalty either imprisonment or fine Imprisonment only
APPLICATION Sentence is suspended Need for the minimum to be served
EFFECT OF Appeal forecloses probation Appeal has no effect on the
APPEAL operation of ISLAW
AVAILABILITY Available only once Every time as long as offender is
not disqualified
NATURE A privilege; convict must apply for it Mandatory; convict need not apply
for it
39. Joshua was 17 years old when he committed homicide in 2005. The crime is
punishable by reclusion temporal. After two years in hiding, he was arrested
and appropriately charged in May 2007. Since Republic Act 9344 (Juvenile
Justice and Welfare Act of 2006) was already in effect, Joshua moved to avail of
the process of intervention or diversion.

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
a. Distinguish intervention from diversion.
INTERVENTION DIVERSION
Refers to a series of activities which are Refers to an alternative, child-appropriate process of
designed to address issues that caused determining the responsibility and treatment of a
the child to commit an offense. It may child conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
take the form of an individualized social, cultural, economic, psychological or
treatment program which may include educational background without resorting to formal
counselling, skills training, education, court proceedings.
and other activities that will enhance
his/her psychological, emotional and
psycho-social well-being.
This is available to a child 15 years old This process governs when the child is over 15 years
or less at the time of the commission of old but below 18 at the time of the commission of
the crime or although over 15 but below the crime and he acted with discernment.
18 years old at the time of commission
of the crime, the child acted without
discernment.
b. Is Joshua entitled to intervention or diversion? Explain.
Yes. Joshua is entitled to diversion. Being only 17 years old at the time he committed
the crime of homicide, he is treated as a child in conflict with the law under R.A. 9344.
c. Suppose Joshua‟s motion for intervention or diversion was denied, and he

was convicted two (2) years later when he was already 21 years old, should
the judge apply the suspension of sentence? Explain.
No. The Judge should not suspend the sentence anymore because he was already 21
years old and no longer a minor at the time of promulgation of the sentence. For
purposes of suspension of sentence, the offender's age at the time of promulgation of
the sentence is the one considered, not his age when he committed the crime.
Suspension of sentence is availing under R.A. 9344 only until a child reaches the
maximum age of twenty-one (21) years. (Sec. 40, R.A. 9344)
d. Suppose Joshua was convicted of attempted murder with a special

aggravating circumstance and was denied suspension of sentence, would he
be eligible for probation under P.D. 968, considering that the reclusion
perpetua to death penalty is imposable for the consummated felony?
Explain.
Yes. He would be eligible for probation because the penalty imposable on him will not
exceed 6 years imprisonment. Since the murder is at the attempted stage, reclusion
perpetua to death shall be reduced to two degrees lower, and that is, prision mayor.
Since the accused is a minor, which is a privileged mitigating circumstance, prision
mayor shall be reduced to prision correccional. Since the range of prision correccional
is from 6 months and 1 day to 6 years, Joshua is entitled to apply for probation
(Supplied by Judge Marlo Campanilla).
40. What is the minimum age of criminal responsibility? (Sec. 6, R.A. 9344).
AGE CRIMINAL LIABILITY CIVIL LIABILITY
15 years of age or under Exempt Subject to civil liability

at the time of the
commission of the
offense

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
Above 15 years but Exempt Subject to civil liability

below 18 years of age
without discernment
Above 15 years but Subject to criminal liability Subject to civil liability

below 18 years of age but shall undergo diversion
with discernment program
Note: Between the ages of above 15 but below 18, a rebuttable presumption operates to
deem a child incapable of committing a criminal act.
The age of doliincapax (criminal incapacity) is 15 years old or below since the accused
in such age is exempt from criminal liability regardless of whether or not he discerned the
consequence of his criminal act. As far as the law is concerned, he cannot do evil, and lack
of discernment is conclusively presumed.
41. When is fine considered afflictive, correctional or light penalty?
Under Section 2 of R.A. 10951, a fine, whether imposed as a single or as an alternative

penalty, shall be considered:
Afflictive More than 1.2M
Correctional 40k – 1.2M
Light Less than 40k
E. EFFECT OF DEATH OF THE ACCUSED
42. What is the effect of death of accused pending appeal on his civil liability ex
delicto?
The civil liability ex delicto is extinguished. In pursuing recovery of civil liability arising from
crime, the final determination of the criminal liability is a condition precedent to the
prosecution of the civil action. (People vs. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, September 2, 1994)
43. What if the death occurs prior the arraignment?
If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice to
any civil action the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased. (People vs.
Lipata, G.R. No. 200302, April 20, 2016)
F. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
44. What are the rules in Parricide?
a. The offender must be related to the victim by blood, except husband and wife;
b. The relationship between the offender and the offended party must be in the direct
descending or ascending line and not in the collateral line except husband and wife;
c. Between parents and child, the relationship may be legitimate or illegitimate;
d. All other ascendants or descendants must be legitimate

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
45. Marlo was dismissed from his job by his employer. Upon reaching home, his
pregnant wife, Anna, nagged him about money for her medicines. Depressed by
his dismissal and angered by the nagging of his wife, Marlo struck Anna with his
fist. She fell to the ground. As a result, she and her unborn baby dies. What
crime was committed by Marlo?
Marlo committed the crime of parricide with unintentional abortion. When Marlo struck his
wife, Anna, with his fist and dies, he is criminally liable for parricide. Since the unborn
baby of Anna died in the process but Marlo had no intention to cause the abortion of his
wife, Marlo committed unintentional abortion. Inasmuch as the single act of Marlo
produced two grace or less grave felonies, his act constitutes a complex crime. (People vs.
Salufrania, G.R. No.L-50884, March 30, 1980)
46. What are the instances embraced in “death or physical injuries inflicted under
exceptional circumstances”?
Any legally married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person, shall kill any or both of them in the act or immediately
thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury; and
A parent who having surprised his daughter under eighteen (18) years of age and living
with him, in the act of committing sexual intercourse with her seducer, shall kill any or
both of them in the act of immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious
physical injury (Art. 247, RPC). He should not have promoted or facilitated the prostitution
of his wife (or daughter) or that he or she has not consented to the infidelity of the other
spouse. (People vs. Puedan, G.R. No. 139576, September 22, 2002)
47. When does Art. 247 operate as mitigating circumstance and as absolutory
cause?
Art. 247 does not define a crime but grants a mitigating circumstance for parricide,
homicide and serious physical injuries committed under the exceptional situation. If only
less or slight physical injuries were inflicted, Art. 247 shall operate as an absolutory cause.
(People vs. Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, September 14, 1987)
48. Manuel arrived home in Tacloban City from Manila. But before Manuel could
reach the bedroom, he was warned by Arvin, his brother-in-law, not to go inside
the bedroom where his wife, Auria, was with a man, for he might be killed.
Ignoring Arvin‟s admonition, Manuel kicked the door open, and saw his wife
Auria and a man seated beside each other conversing. Furious by what he had
seen, Manuel went out of the room, got a knife and delivered a stab blow
towards the man but the latter was shielded by Auria. In the process, the stab
blow landed on Auria. After Auria was accidentally stabbed, the man ran outside
and fled. Out of frustration for not killing the man, Manuel wounded himself on
the chest. He then left the house and went to the hospital for medical
treatment. Auria died of stab wounds, and thereafter Manuel was charged for
the crime of parricide. In his defense, Manuel sought the application of Article
247 of the Revised Penal Code, i.e., death or physical injuries inflicted under
exceptional circumstances, in order to exonerate him of criminal liability. Is
Manuel correct?
No. For Article 247 of Revised Penal Code to apply, the defense must prove the
concurrence of the following elements: (1) that a legally married person surprises his
spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person; (2) that he kills
any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter; and (3) that he has not
promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife (or daughter) or that he or she has not

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
consented to the infidelity of the other spouse. Here, when Manuel saw Auria with a man,
the two were not committing sexual intercourse but were just seated beside each other
and were simply conversing. Hence, Article 247 is not applicable in the present case.
(People vs. Macal, G.R. No. 211062, January 13, 2016)
49. What are the qualifying circumstances in the crime of Murder?
a. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity.
b. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
c. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of
motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin.
d. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity.
e. With evident premeditation.
f. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse(Art. 248, RPC)
50. What are the requisites of Treachery?
a. That at the time of the attack, the victim is not in a position to defend himself;
b. That the offender consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods,
or forms of attack employed by him.(People vs. Racal, G.R. No. 224886, September 4,
2017)
51. What is the meaning of “advantage be taken of superior strength‟?
It means deliberately use of excessive force that is cut out of proportion to the means for
self- defense available to the person attacked. (People vs. Lobingas, G.R. No. 47649, December
17, 2002)
52. What are the elements of evident premeditation?
(a) the time when the offender determined to commit the crime; (b) an act manifestly
indicating and that the culprit has clung to his determination; and (c) a sufficient lapse of
time between the determination and execution, to allow him to reflect upon the
consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his will.
(People v. Cirbeto, G.R. No. 231359, February 7, 2018)
53. What is the effect of the use of an unlicensed firearm in the commission of the
crime of murder?
The accused shall be held guilty for the crime of Murder with the Use of an Unlicensed
Firearm. Under Section 1 of RA No. 8294, “if homicide or murder is committed with the use
of an unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an
aggravating circumstance.” There are two (2) requisites to establish such circumstance,
namely: (a) the existence of the subject firearm; and (b) the fact that the accused who
owned or possessed the gun did not have the corresponding license or permit to carry it
outside his residence. (Salonga vs. People, G.R. No. 218466, January 23, 2017)

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
54. Is the killing of an eight-year old boy murder?
Yes. The qualifying circumstance of treachery exists in the commission of the crime of
murder when an adult person illegally attacks a child of tender years and causes his death.
(People vs. Valerio, G.R. No. L-4116, Febaruary 25, 1982)
55. If the main objective of the offender is to kill a particular person who may be in
a building or edifice and when fire is resorted to as means to accomplish such
goal, what crime is committed?
The crime committed is murder only. Murder qualified by means of fire absorbs the crime
of arson since the latter is an inherent means to commit the former. (People vs. Baluntong,
G.R. No. 182061, March 15, 2010)
56. A killed: (1) a woman with whom he lived without benefit of clergy, (2) their
child who was only two days old, (3) their daughter, and (4) their adopted son.
What crime or crimes did A commit?
A committed the following crimes: 1. HOMICIDE OR MURDER as the case may be, for the
killing of his common-law wife who is not legally considered as „spouse‟; 2. INFANTICIDE
for killing of the child as said child is less than three (3) days old; 3. PARRICIDE for the
killing of their daughter, whether legitimate or illegitimate, as long as she is not less than
three (3) days old at the time of killing; 4. MURDER for the killing of their adopted son as
the relationship between A and the said son must be by blood in order for parricide to
arise.
57. What is the basic framework and difference in circumstances governing crimes
involving the killing of persons?
Parricide: involves the circumstance of relationship

Murder: involves the manner in which the crime was committed
Infanticide: in relation to status, the age of the offended party
Homicide: in the absence of circumstances of murder, parricide or infanticide
58. What crime is committed in firing a gun?
Alarms andScandals (Art. 155, RPC) If the gun was fired ina public place and not
aimed at anybody
Illegal Discharge of Firearm (Art. 254, If the firearm wasdirected at somebody
RPC) else, fired, withoutintent to kill and not hit
Frustrated Illegal Discharge (Art. 254, If directed at somebody without intent to kill and
RPC) bullet jams
Impossible Crime (Art. 4, RPC) If accused fired thegun without knowingthat there
were no bullets
Grave Threats (Art. 282, RPC) If gun was pointed to victim and discharged, but
the
victim was not hit and the offender desisted
Attempted Murderor Homicide if gun is directed at somebody else with intent to
(Art.248, 249, RPC) kill but was not hit or the wound was not mortal
Frustrated Murderor Homicide (Art. If gun was aimed atsomebody with intent to kill,
248, 249, RPC) fired and hit the target and the wound was mortal

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
59. Provide the distinctions for Rape, Seduction, Acts of Lasciviousness, and
Abduction.
ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
ABDUCTIO
SEDUCTION (Art. and CONSENTED
RAPE (Art. 266-A) N (Art. 342,
338) ACTS OF
343)
LASCIVIOUNESS
(Art. 336)
1. By using force or Qualified Seduction: Acts of Forcible
intimidation, or 1. abuse of lasciviousness: abduction:
authority; 1. By using force or Female was
2. When the woman 2. abuse of intimidation, or abducted
is deprived of confidence; or against her
reason or otherwise 3. relationship 2. When the woman will
unconscious, or Simple Seduction: is deprived of
by means of deceit reason or otherwise Victim is
3. By means of unconscious, or under 12
fraudulent years of age
machination or 3. When the woman
Circumsta grave abuse of is under 12 years of Consented
nces authority, or age Abduction:
Female was
4. When the woman Consented acts of abducted
is under 12 years of lasciviousness: with her
age or demented. 1. Abuse of consent but
authority only after
2. Abuse of solicitation or
confidence cajolery from
3. Relationship the offender
4. By means of
deceit
Qualified Seduction Acts of Forcible

with the lasciviousness: age abduction:
Age except in circumstance of except in statutory If it is
statutory rape and relationship: rape and reputation committed
reputation of the of the victim is not against the
victim is not Age and reputation material will, age and
material of the victim is not reputation is
material Consented acts of not material.
lasciviousness: If committed
Qualified same as seduction with consent,
circumstance with the age of
the circumstance of the victim
abuse of confidence must under
Age and or authority: 12 years of
Reputatio age
n Material 1. The victim must
be a virgin, or must Consented
have a good Abduction:
reputation Reputation of
the victim is
2. The age of the material. Her
victim must 12 age must be
years of age or 12 years or
above but under 18 above but
years of age under 18
years of age
Simple Seduction:
Reputation of the
victim is material.

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
Her age must be 12

years or above but
under 18 years of
age
60. Ken, a witness, saw Jim kicked Jack on the stomach twice while the latter was
sprawled on the ground. As Jack stood up, Javi punched him in the stomach
causing Jack to collapse and cry in pain. Thereafter, Jack was taken to the
hospital, however, Jack died the following day. Jim and Javi was charged with
the crime of Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray. Was the crime charged
correct?
No. Jurisprudence provides that a tumultuous affray takes place when a quarrel occurs
between several persons and they engage in a confused and tumultuous affray, in the
course of which some person is killed or wounded and the author thereof cannot be
ascertained. Here, there was no tumultuous affray between groups of persons in the
course of which Jack died because only two persons, Jim and Javi, attacked Jack. There
was no confusion and tumultuous quarrel or affray, nor was there a reciprocal aggression
in that fateful incident. Hence, Jim and Javi should be charged with Homicide. (Wacoy vs.
People, G.R. No. 213792, June 22, 2015)
61. When is physical injury considered as serious, less serious, and slight?
SERIOUS PHYSICAL LESS SERIOUS SLIGHT

INJURIES (Art. 263) PHYSICAL INJURIES PHYSICAL
(Art. 265) INJURIES (Art.
266)
As to days of More than 30 days or for For 10 days or more but For 1 to 9 days
incapacity for more than 90 days not more than 30 days
labor or illness
As to suffering Insanity, imbecility, Incapacity for labor or Incapacity for
impotency, blindness, illness requiring medical labor or illness for
loss of faculty for speech, attendance for 10 days 1 to 9 days, or
hearing or smelling, loss or more but not more there is no
of any part of the body than 30 days. incapacity or
or use thereof, deformity, illness.
incapacity for habitual
work, permanently or for
more than 90 days, or
incapacity or illness for
more than 30 days.
62. The victim, AAA, who was then 10 years old was allegedly raped by Rodrigo.
According to the victim, she went home from school around noon to have lunch.
On her way home, she met Rodrigo at his house. She narrated that she was
brought to his room and he laid her down on the bed where he had carnal
knowledge with her. An information was filed against him where he was found
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of statutory rape.
a. What constitutes the crime of Statutory Rape?
Statutory rape is committed when: (1) the offended party is under 12 years of age and;
(2) the accused has carnal knowledge of her, regardless of whether there was force, threat

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
or intimidation; whether the victim was deprived of reason or consciousness; or whether it

was done through fraud or grave abuse of authority. It is enough that the age of the
victim is proven and that there was sexual intercourse. (People vs. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 208007,
April 2, 2014, J. Leonen)
b. Is Rodrigo guilty of the crime of Statutory Rape?
Yes. In this case, all the elements of statutory rape are present because when the crime
happened AAA was then 10 years old. Being a minor whose age is below 12 years old
regardless of her consent to the sexual act, Rodrigo is guilty of statutory rape.
63. On her way home from school, Marie was threatened by Ricky and Wilson with
a bladed weapon and dragged her to a cottage at a nearby beach resort, and
bound her hands and feet. Thereafter, Ricky removed her clothes and inserted
his penis into her vagina, then after him, Wilson took over and raped her.
Thereafter, they left Marie at the cottage. The next day, Marie‟s father found
her crying. A criminal complaint of Rape was filed against Ricky and Wilson.
Ricky and Wilson objected on the ground that there was no force and
intimidation, thus, no rape happened. Is the objection tenable?
No. Jurisprudence holds that force or intimidation, as an element of rape, need not be
irresistible; as long as the assailant‟s objective is accomplished, any question of whether
the force employed was irresistible or not becomes irrelevant. Here, the act of holding a
bladed instrument, by itself, is strongly suggestive of force or, at least, intimidation, and
threatening the victim with the same is sufficient to bring her into submission. (People vs.
Arguta, G.R. No. 213216, April 20, 2015)
64. Does sexual intercourse with a woman whose actual age is 30 years old but
who is suffering from mental retardation with a mental age of a 9-year
constitute the crime of Statutory Rape?
Yes. Sexual intercourse with a woman who is a mental retardate, with a mental age below
12 years old, constitutes statutory rape. In determining whether a person is “twelve (12)
years of age”, the interpretation should be in accordance with either the chronological age
of the child if he or she is not suffering from intellectual disability, or the mental age if
intellectual disability is established.(People vs. Nierbes, G.R. No. 230975, December 4, 2017)
65. Y, an eighteenyear-old nursing student, is a border of X in the apartment he

owns. As Y had been remiss in paying her rents, X called her to his room to talk
about the matter. In his room, X forcefully pulled Y to sit on his lap and
thereafter, he raped her. In his defense, X contend that he should not be liable
for rape because Y offered no resistance during the sexual act and the victim
seduced him so that he would forget about the unpaid rents. Would you agree
with X‟s contention?
No. I disagree with X‟s contention because resistance is not an element of rape. A rape
victim has no burden to prove that she did all within her power to resist the force or
intimidation employed upon her. What is important is that the victim did not consent to the
intercourse. (People vs. Gabriel, G.R. No. 213390, March 15, 2017)
66. Does the presence of hymenal laceration an essential element of rape?
No, the presence of hymenal lacerations is not an element in the crime of rape (People vs.
Otos, G.R. No. 189821, March 23, 2011)

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
67. Does being sweethearts negate the commission of rape?
No. It is well-settled that being sweethearts does not negate the commission of rape
because such fact does not give appellant license to have sexual intercourse against her
will, and will not exonerate him from the criminal charge of rape. (People vs. Olesco, G.R.
No. 174861, April 11, 2011)
68. Can husband commit rape against his wife?
Yes, husbands do not have property right over their wives‟ bodies. Sexual intercourse,
albeit within the realm of marriage, if not consensual, is rape (People vs. Jumawan, G.R. No.
187495, April 21, 2014)
G. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
69. While Ben, Ian, Jordan, and TJ were robbing a bank, policemen arrived. A
firefight ensued between the bank robbers and the responding policemen, and
one of the policemen was killed. What crime or crimes has been committed.
The crimes committed are Robbery with Homicide and Direct Assault with Multiple
Attempted Homicide. Robbery with Homicide was committed because one of the
corresponding policemen was killed by reason or on occasion of the robbery being
committed.
The complex crime of Direct Assault with Multiple Attempted Homicide was committed in
respect of the officer‟s firing guns at the responding policeman who are agents of person
in authority performing their duty when fired at to frustrate such performance (People vs.
Ladjaalam, G.R. Nos. 136149-51, September 19, 2000)
70. Carl was on board his owner-type jeepney with his wife, Joyce, and daughter,
Anj. While the vehicle was on a stop position, Chester and Allan suddenly
appeared on both sides of the jeepney, with Chester poking a gun at the side of
Carl, and Allan grabbing his mobile phone. Chester, then shot Carl and the latter
reacted by drawing his own firearm but was unable to fire at the assailants as
he fell to the ground which resulted to his death. What was the crime
committed, if any?
The crime committed was a special complex crime of robbery with homicide . To sustain a
conviction for robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove the following elements:
(1) the taking of personal property belonging to another;(2) with intent to
gain;(3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; and (4) on
the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as used in its
generic sense, was committed. Here, Chester poked his gun at Carl, took the latter‟s
mobile phone, and thereafter, shot him, resulting to his death. All the elements of special
complex crime of robbery with homicide are present. (People v. Balute, G.R. No. 212932,
January 21, 2015)
71. How is Robbery with Rape committed?
The offender must have the intent to take the personal property of another under
circumstances that makes the taking one of robbery, and such intent must precede the
rape. If the original plan was to commit rape, but the accused after committing the rape
also committed robbery when the opportunity presented itself, the robbery should be
viewed as a separate and distinct crime. (People vs. Moreno, GR No. 140033, Jan. 25, 2002)

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
72. Distinguish Robbery from Theft
ROBBERY THEFT
(ART. 293) (ART. 308)
As to element of taking Both involve unlawful taking as element.
As to object Both involve personal property belonging to another.
As to intent to gain There is intent to gain.

The taking is done with the use There is no employment of
As to the manner of violence or intimidation of violence or intimidation of
persons or by using force upon persons or using force upon
thing. thing.
73. Distinguish Highway Robbery under Presidential Decree No. 532 from Robbery
committed on a highway.
Highway Robbery (PD No. 532) Robbery Committed on a Highway

The robbery is committed indiscriminately
against persons who commute in such The robbery is committed only against
highways, regardless of the potentiality they predetermined victim; under the Revised
offer; when the offender is a brigand or one Penal Code when the commission thereof in a
who roams in public highways and carries out public highway is only incidental and the
his robbery in public highways as venue, offender is not a brigand, only occasional
whenever the opportunity to do so arises. There against a predetermined victim, without
is frequency in the commission of the robbery in frequency in public highways.
public highways and against persons travelling
thereat.
74. Who are brigands? Distinguish brigandage from robbery in band.
When more than three armed persons form a band of robbers for the purpose of
committing robbery in the highway, or kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or
to obtain ransom, for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence,
they shall be deemed highway robbers or brigands (Art. 306, RPC).
The following distinctions between brigandage and robbery by band:
BRIGANDAGE ROBBERY IN A BAND
As to 1.They are at least four persons; More than three armed

Elements 2. They form a band or robbers; malefactors take part in the
3 The purpose is any of the following; commission of a robbery
(see below)
As to 1.To commit robbery in highway; Commit robbery but not
Purpose 2.Kidnap or extort or get ransom; necessarily in a highway.
3.Any other purpose to be achieved by
means of force or violence
As to The agreement among more than three The agreement is to commit only a
Agreement armed men is to commit robbery in the particular robbery
highway

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
75. Is the crime of theft susceptible of commission in frustrated stage? Explain your
answer in relation to what produces the crime of theft on its consummated
stage and by way of illustration of the subjective and objective phases of the
felony.
No. Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the moment the offender gains possession
of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose the same. Unlawful taking, which is
the deprivation of one‟s personal property, is the element which produces the felony in its
consummated stage. At the same time, without unlawful taking as an act of execution, the
offense could only be attempted theft, if at all. Thus, the theft cannot have a frustrated
stage. Theft can only be attempted or consummated (Valenzuela vs. People, G.R. No. 160188,
June 21, 2007)
76. How is Qualified Theft committed?
a. If theft is committed by a domestic servant;

b. If theft is committed with grave abuse of confidence;
c. If the property stolen is a motor vehicle, mailmatter, large cattle, coconuts taken
from the premises of a plantation, or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery ; or
d. If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption,
or and other calamity, vehicular accident, or civil disturbance. (Art. 310, RPC as
amended by RA 120 and BP 71, 1980)
77. Ernesto Delos Santos undertook the construction of the CTTL Building, adjacent
to the Benguet Pines Tourist Inn (BPTI) which is a business establishment
owned and operated by the University of Manila (UM). His father, Virgilio, who
was the President and Chairman of the Board of Trustees (BOT) of UM, allegedly
ordered the employees of BPTI to assist Ernesto in all his needs in the
construction. Ernesto was permitted to tap into BPTI's electricity and water
supply. When Virgilio died and was succeeded by Emily De Leonas President of
UM; UM, represented by De Leon, filed a criminal complaint against Ernesto for
qualified theft of the electricity and water supply of BPTI for the construction of
the CTTL Building. Will the complaint for qualified theft prosper?
No. The elements of qualified theft, punishable under Art.310, in relation to Arts.308 and
309, of the RPC are as follows:
a. the taking of personal property;
b. the said property belongs to another;
c. the said taking be done with intent to gain;
d. it be done without the owner's consent;
e. it be accomplished without the use of violence or intimidation against persons, nor of
force upon things; and
f. it be done under any of the circumstances enumerated in Article 310 of the RPC, i.e.,
with grave abuse of confidence.
The elements of lack of owner's consent and intent to gain are absent in this case. Here,
Ernesto was permitted by Virgilio to tap into BPTI's electricity and water supply. As such,
Ernesto had no criminal intent - as he, in fact, acted on the faith of his father's authority,
on behalf of UM - to appropriate said personal property. (People vs. De Los Santos, G.R. No.
220685, November 29, 2017)

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
78. Payaman Corporation ordered 14,000 liters of diesel fuel from Unioil, a
company owned by Arturito. Berlin, a truck driver employed by Arturito, was
dispatched to deliver the diesel fuel in Sto. Domingo, Quezon City. However,
Payaman Corporation informed Arturito that it had not yet received its order.
Upon inquiry, Arturito discovered that Berlin, with his helper left the company
premises in the afternoon of the same day on board a truck to deliver Payaman
Corporation‟s diesel fuel order. When Arturito called them on his mobile phone,
he did not receive any response. Arturito reported the incident to Camp Crame
and days later, NBI agents found the abandoned truck emptied of the diesel
fuel. Arturito then filed a complaint for Qualified Theft against Berlin. Will the
criminal complaint for qualified theft prosper?
Yes. The elements of Qualified Theft, under Art. 310 in relation to Art. 309 of the RPC are
as follows:(a) the taking of personal property; (b) the said property belongs to another;(c)
the said taking be done with intent to gain; (d) it be done without the owner‟s consent; (e)
it be accomplished without the use of violence or intimidation against persons, nor of force
upon things; and (f) it be done under any of the circumstances enumerated in Art. 310 of
the RPC, i.e., with grave abuse of confidence. Here, there is a confluence of all the
foregoing elements. The diesel fuel was loaded into the lorry truck driven by Berlin for
delivery to Payaman Corporation was taken by him, without the authority and consent of
Arturito, the owner of the diesel fuel, and that Berlin abused the confidence reposed upon
him by his employer. (Candelaria vs. People, G.R No. 209386, December 8, 2014)
79. Is there such a crime as estafa through negligence?
There is no such crime as estafa through negligence. In estafa, the profit or gain must be
obtained by the accused personally, through his own acts. Mere negligence on allowing
another to take advantage of or benefit from the entrusted chattel cannot constitute
estafa. (People vs. Nepomuceno CA, 460G 6135)
80. Liam borrowed P500,000 from his brother CJ. To pay the loan, Liam issued a
post-dated check to be presented for payment a month after the transaction.
Two days before maturity, Liam called CJ telling him he had insufficient funds
and requested that the deposit of the check be deferred. Nevertheless, CJ
deposited the check and it was dishonored. When Liam failed to pay despite
demand, CJ filed a complaint against him for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg.
22. Was the charge brought against Liam correct?
Yes, the charge brought against Liam is correct. Violation of BP 22 is malum

prohibitumwhich is committed by mere issuance of a check. Good faith is not a defense. As
long as the check was issued on account or for value, the purpose for which the check was
issued, the terms and conditions relating to the issuance are irrelevant to the prosecution
of the offender. For this reason, the request of Liam to defer the deposit of the check as it
has insufficient funds will not militate against his prosecution for BP 22. Despite notice,
Liam can still be charged. Moreover, if what is charged is Estafa, Liam being a brother of
the offended party, cannot be held criminally liable under Article 332, RPC. (BP 22:
Administrative Circular No. 13-2001, February 14, 2001)
81. Jam was the Loans Bookkeeper of River Bank and was authorized to collect
and/or accept loan payments of River Bank‟s clients and issue provisional
receipts therefor, accomplish a cash transfer slip and remit such payments to
Jen, her supervisor. River Bank conducted an audit investigation of its loan
transactions and discovered the non-remittance of some loan payments
received from its clients. River Bank filed a criminal case for estafa through

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
misappropriation under Article 315, par. 1(b) of the Revised Penal Code against
Jam. Jam argued that the first element of estafa through misappropriation has
not been established, insisting that her possession of the collected loan
payments was merely material and not juridical; therefore, she cannot be
convicted of the said crime. Decide.
Jam should not be held guilty of estafa.Under the first element of estafa through
misappropriation,when the money, goods, or any other personal property is
received by the offender from the offended party (1) in trust or (2) on
commission or (3) for administration, the offender acquires both material or
physical possession and juridical possession of the thing received.Juridical
possession means a possession which givesthe transferee a right over the thing which the
transferee may set up even against the owner. Here, Jam was merely a collector of loan
payments from River Bank‟s clients. As such, the money merely passes into her hands and
she takes custody thereof only for the duration of the banking day. Being a mere custodian
of the missing funds and not, in any manner, an agent who could have asserted a right
against River Bank over the same, Jam had only acquired material and not juridical
possession of such funds and consequently, cannot be convicted of the crime of estafa as
charged. (Benabaye vs. People G.R. No. 203466, February 25, 2015)
82. Mia, Val, Jam and Vic were enticed to invest in TGICI an open-end investment
company, due to the offer of high interest rates, as well as the assurance that
they will recover their investments. After giving their money to TGICI, they
received a Certificate of Share and post-dated checks, representing the amount
of the principal investment and the monthly interest earnings, respectively.
Upon encashment, the checks were dishonored as the account was already
closed, prompting them to bring the bounced checks to the TGICI office to
demand payment. At the office, the TGICI employees took the said checks, gave
them acknowledgement receipts, and reassured that their investments, as well
as the interests, would be paid. However, the TGICI office closed down without
Mia, Val, Jam and Vic having been paid and, thus, they were constrained to file
criminal complaints of multiple criminal cases for Syndicated Estafa against the
incorporators and directors of TGICI. Will the criminal complaints prosper?
Yes. The elements of Syndicated Estafa are:

a. Estafa or other forms of swindling, as defined in Arts. 315 and 316 of the RPC is
committed;
b. the Estafa or swindling is committed by a syndicate of five (5) or more persons; and
c. defraudation results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “ samahangnayon(s),” or farmers‟ associations,
or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the general public.
In this case, all the elements of Syndicated Estafa, committed through a Ponzi scheme are
present considering that:
a) the incorporators/directors of TGICI made false pretenses and representations to the

investing public regarding a supposed lucrative investment opportunity with TGICI in
order to solicit money from them;
b) the said false pretenses and representations were made prior to or simultaneous with
the commission of fraud;
c) relying on the same, Mia, Val, Jam and Vic invested their hard-earned money into
TGICI; and

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
d) the incorporators/directors of TGICI ended up running away with Mia, Val, Jam and
Vic‟s investments, obviously to the latter‟s prejudice. (People vs. Tibayan, G.R. Nos.
209655-60, January 14, 2015)
83. As agreed upon, Sue delivered pieces of jewelry to Kee, which the latter will sell
on commission basis. After a month of each delivery, Kee is obliged to either
remit the proceeds of the sold jewelry or return the unsold jewelry to Sue.
Thereafter, Sue delivered various sets of jewelry to Kee amounting to P200,000,
P250,00 and P300,000. Upon delivery of the last batch of jewelry, Kee issued a
check worth P250,000 as full security for the first 2 deliveries. However, the
check was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Sue demanded payment from
Kee, but the latter refused to pay and denied having received any jewelry from
Sue nor having signed any contract of sale of jewelry with her. Kee was charged
with 3 counts of estafa under Art.315 (1)(b) of the RPC. In her defense, Kee
claimed that the transaction between them is not an agency on commission
basis, but a plain sale of jewelry. Will the case of estafa prosper?
Yes. The elements of Estafa under this provision are as follows:
1) the offender's receipt of money, goods, or other personal property in trust, or on

commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving the duty to
deliver, or to return, the same;
2) misappropriation or conversion by the offender of the money or property received, or
denial of receipt of the money or property;
3) the misappropriation, conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another; and
4) demand by the offended party that the offender return the money or property
received.
In this case, the elements of estafa, as defined and penalized under Art. 315 (1)(b) of the
RPC are present, considering that:
a) Sue delivered the jewelry to Kee for the purpose of selling them on commission basis;
b) Kee was required to either remit the proceeds of the sale or to return the jewelry after
one month from delivery;
c) Kee failed to do what was required of her despite the lapse of the aforesaid period;
d) Sue attempted to encash the check given by Kee as security, but such check was
dishonored twice for being drawn against insufficient funds and against a closed
account;
e) Sue demanded that Kee comply with her undertaking, but the latter disregarded such
demand;
f) Kee's acts clearly prejudiced Sue who lost the jewelry and/or its value. (Cheng vs.
People, G.R. No. 174113, January 13, 2016)
84. Wilma received from Victoria several pieces of jewelry amounting to Php
106,000.00 as evidenced by a trust receipt. Several weeks passed, Victoria
alleged that she made several verbal demands to Wilma to return the pieces of
jewelry, but to no avail. Thus, a criminal complaint for estafa was filed by
Victoria against Wilma. Wilma, in her defense, alleged that she entrusted the
pieces of jewelry to Bisquera who issued Security Bank Checks as payment.,
and claimed that Victoria knew that she was planning to sell the pieces of
jewelry to Bisquera. Will the charge prosper?
No. The essence of estafa under Article 315, par. 1(b) is the appropriation or conversion of
money orproperty received to the prejudice of the owner. The words "convert" and
"misappropriate" connotean act of using or disposing of another‟s property as if it were

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
one‟s own, or of devoting it to apurpose or use different from that agreed upon. Here,
although it cannot be denied that Wilma received the pieces of jewelry from Victoria, she
did not misappropriate or convert the amount of the pieces of jewelry for her own personal
use. Hence, Wilma cannot be criminally held liable for estafa. (Tabaniag vs. People, G.R. No.
165411, June 18, 2009).
85. During the nationwide transport strike to protest the phase out of old public
utility vehicles, striking jeepney drivers Percy, Pablo, Pater and Sencio, each
armed with guns, hailed several MMDA buses then providing free transport to
the stranded public to stop them from plying their routes. They later on
commandeered one of the buses without allowing any of the passengers to
alight, and told the driver to bring the bus to Tanay, Rizal.
Upon reaching a remote area in Tanay, Percy, Pablo, Pater and Sencio forcibly
divested the passengers of their cash and valuables. They ordered the
passengers to leave thereafter. Then, they burned the bus. When a tanod of the
barangay of the area came around to Intervene, Pater fired at him, instantly
killing him.
After Percy, Pablo, Pater and Sencio were arrested, the police authorities
recommended them to be charged with the following crimes, to wit: (1)
carnapping; (2) robbery, (3) direct assault with homicide; (4) kidnapping; and
(5) arson.
State your legal opinion on the recommendation of the police authorities on the
criminal liabilities incurred by Percy, Pablo, Pater and Sencio.
Since the taking of the victims was merely to commit robbery and not to transport them to
another place for purpose of detention, the crime committed is not kidnapping but
robbery[(People vs. Puno, G.R. No. 97471, February 17, 1993);Criminal Law Conspectus by Florenz
Regalado].Intent to deprive liberty is not present since deprivation of liberty is just
incidental to the commission of robbery.
Since death results by reason or on occasion of robbery, the crime committed is a special
complex crime of robbery with homicide. Even though only Pater killed the Tanod, Percy,
Pablo, and Sencio are also liable for robbery with homicide since they failed to attempt to
prevent the same [(People vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 168173, December 24, 2008); People vs.
Castro, G.R. No. 187073, March 14, 2012]; Since the crime committed is robbery with
homicide, all other felonies such as arson and direct assault committed by reason or on
occasion of homicide are absorbed (People vs. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, Apr. 5, 2016).
The elements of carnapping are:

1) the taking of a motor vehicle which belongs to another;
2) the taking is without the consent of the owner or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons or by using force upon things; and
3) the taking is done with intent to gain (People vs. Bustinera, G.R. No. 148233, June 8, 2004).
In this case, the accused unlawfully took an MMDA bus without the consent of the owner,
which gives rise to the presumption of their intent to gain. Considering that all the
elements of carnapping are present, the accused shall be liable therefor.

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
Since carnapping is punishable under a special law, it shall be considered as a crime separate
from robbery with homicide(People vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 174658, February 24, 2009; People vs.
Roxas, G.R. No. 172604, August 17, 2010).
86. What are the exemptions from criminal liability in crimes against property?
No criminal but only civil liability shall result from the commission of the crime of theft,
swindling, or malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants or relatives by affinity in the same line;

2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased
spouse before the same shall have passed to the possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law living together. (Art. 332,
RPC)
H. CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
87. Luigi, a private individual, kidnapped Bea, a minor. On the second day, Luigi
released Bea before any criminal information was filed. At the trial, Luigi raised
the defense that he did not incur any criminal liability since he released the
child before the lapse of 3-day period and before criminal proceedings for
kidnapping were instituted. Will Luigi‟s defense prosper?
No, A's defense will not prosper. Voluntary release by the offender of the offended party in
kidnapping is not absolutory. Restraint need not be permanent to be punished for
kidnapping and serious illegal detention. (Art. 267, RPC, US vs. Peralta, G.R. No. L-3273, July
13,1907)
88. Mohamad, Rocky and Ali went to the house of Michelle and forcefully took her.
The next day, a phone call was received by the family of Michelle asking them
for a P30 million ransom for her freedom. After two days, she was rescued by
the operatives of the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force after the
payment of P4.83 million. What was the crime committed, if any?
The crime committed was Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Art. 267 of the
RPC. Its elements are as follows:
(a) the offender is a private individual;
(b) he kidnaps or detains another, or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
(c) the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
(d) in the commission of the offense any of the following circumstances is present: i) the
kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days; ii) it is committed by simulating
public authority; iii) any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or
detained or threats to kill him are made; or iv) the person kidnapped or detained is a
minor, female, or a public officer. The duration of detention is immaterial if the victim is
a minor, or if the purpose of the kidnapping is to extort ransom.(People vs. Lidasan, G.R. No.
227425, September 4, 2017)

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
89. Distinguish Arbitrary Detention, Illegal Detention, Failure to return a minor and
Unlawful Arrest.
KIDNAPPING &
SERIOUS SLIGHT ARBITRARY
UNLAWFUL FAILURE TO
ILLEGAL ILLEGAL DETENTION
ARREST RETURN A MINOR
DETENTION DETENTION
Offender
Any private person Any private Any private person Any person Any public
person or any public officer vested
officer not vested with authority
with authority to to detain or
detain or order the order the
detention of detention of
another another
Necessity of specific purpose
Intent to deprive Intent to Intent to deliver Intent not to return a Intent to
liberty deprive the victim to the minor/ deliberate disregard the
liberty proper authorities failure of the constitutional
custodian to restore right against
the minor to his/her unreasonable
parents or guardian. seizure
Is period of detention an element?
More than 3 days Not more No No, the demand of Yes, penalty is
unless the than 3 days the parent is the dependent on
circumstance of reckoning point. the length of
simulation of detention
authority, serious
physical injuries,
threat to kill,
minority or the
offended party is a
female or public
officer is present
90. Distinguish Grave Threats, Light Threats and Other Light Threats.
GRAVE THREATS LIGHT THREATS OTHER LIGHT THREATS

(ART. 282) (ART. 283) (ART. 285)
The wrong threatened The wrong threatened does not The wrong threatened does
amounts to a crime which amount to a crime but is always not amount to a crime and
may or may not be accompanied by a condition; the there is no condition.
accompanied by a offender may or may not attained  By threatening another with
condition. his purpose. a weapon, or by drawing
such weapon in a quarrel,
unless it be in a lawful self-
defense.
 By orally threatening
another, in the heat of
anger, with some harm not
constituting a crime,
without persisting in the
idea involved in his threat.
 By orally threatening to do
another any harm not
constituting a felony.

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
91. Distinguish Kidnapping with Rape from Forcible Abduction with Rape
KIDNAPPING WITH RAPE RAPE THROUGH FORCIBLE ABDUCTION

The crime is composite (or special complex The crime is complex (under Article 48) since
crime) if the woman kidnapped is also raped. forcible abduction is a necessary means to
commit rape.
There is no lewd design at the time of There is lewd design at the time of abduction
abduction
Regardless of the number of rapes, there is If there are multiple rapes, only the first rape
only one special complex crime of kidnapping shall be complexed with forcible abduction,
with rape subsequent rapes will be treated as separate
crimes.
If rape was merely attempted, kidnapping and If rape was merely attempted, the crime
serious illegal detention and attempted rape committed is only forcible abduction. Attempted
will be treated as separate crimes. rape for being a mere manifestation of lewd
design, which is an element of forcible abduction
is absorbed
92. Distinguish grave coercion from light coercion.
GRAVE COERCION LIGHT COERCION

(Art. 286) (Art. 287)
As to purpose To prevent another, from doing To apply the proceeds of seized

of something not prohibited by law, or to property for the payment of the
commission compel him to do something against his debt.
will, whether right or wrong;
As to manner By means of violence, threats or By means of violence.

of intimidation, and without authority of
commission law.
The restraint shall not be made under
authority of law or in the exercise of
any lawful right.
As to the Any person. A creditor.

offender
As to the Any person. A debtor.

offended
party
I. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
93. What are the kinds of documents?
a. Public document – one that has been notarized, one that is part of public record, any
instrument authorized by a notary public or a competent public official, with the
solemnities (Cacnio vs. Baens, G.R. No. 2116, March 16, 1906);
b. Official document – the execution of which a public official takes part, a document
which is issued by a public official in the exercise of the functions of his office;
c. Commercial document – prepared in accordance with mercantile law, any document
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or any other commercial laws; and
d. Private document – the execution of which only private individuals take part, a deed
or instrument executed by a private person without the intervention of a notary public
or other person legally authorized, by which document some disposition or agreement is
proved, evidenced, or set forth (US vs. Orera, G.R. No. 3810, October 18, 1907).

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
94. How are „forging‟ and falsification committed?
Forging or forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument

payable to bearer or to order the appearance of a true and genuine document; or by
erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters, words
or signs contained therein. (Art. 169, RPC)
Falsification, on the other hand, is committed by:

1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they
did not in fact so participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning;
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary
to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book. (Art. 171, RPC)
95. Mr. Erwin and Bea approached Mayor Abral and requested him to solemnize
their marriage. Mayor Abral agreed. Erwin and Bea went to Mayor Abral‟s office
on the day of the ceremony, but Mayor Abral‟s was not there. When Erwin and
Bea inquired where Mayor Abral was, his chief of staff Donato informed them
that the Mayor was campaigning for the coming elections. Donato told them
that the Mayor authorized them to solemnize the marriage and that Mayor Abral
would just sign the documents when he arrived. Donato thereafter solemnized
the marriage and later turned over the documents to Mayor Abral for his
signature. In the marriage contract, it was stated that the marriage was
solemnized by Mayor Abral. What crime(s) did Mayor Abral and Donato commit?
Mayor Abral is liable for falsification of public document by a public officer under Art. 171.
Making an untruthful statement by stating in a marriage certificate, a public document,
that the marriage was solemnized by him, is an act of falsification. Donato committed the
crime of usurpation of function under Art. 177 because he performed the act of
solemnizing marriage, which pertained to the mayor, a person in authority, without being
lawfully entitled to do so. (Ronulo vs. People, G.R. No. 182438, July 2, 2014)
96. Dino tried to register a Deed of Absolute Sale with the Registry of Deeds
allegedly executed between him as the buyer and Joseph as the seller.
However, it turned out that Joseph was already dead and his heirs opposed the
registration of the Deed on the ground that the signature of Joseph in the Deed
was forged. The heirs wanting to file a complaint for falsification against Dino
went to the Registry of Deeds but they were informed that Dino had withdrawn
all the papers. They then proceeded to the Notarial Section of Manila to get a
certified true copy of the subject deed but were given a mere photocopy
thereof, since the original was no longer on file. They submitted the photocopy
of the deed to the Philippine National Police (PNP) Crime Laboratory for
examination. Upon examination, the document examiner confirmed that the

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
signature of Joseph was forged. Can Dino be convicted for the crime of
falsification of public document
No. In the crime of falsification of public document, the prosecution must establish the fact
of falsification or forgery by clear, positive, and convincing evidence. Such fact can only be
established by a comparison between the alleged forged signature and the authentic and
genuine signature. Since mere photocopies of the subject deed were used to examine the
questioned and standard signatures of Joseph, no valid comparison can be had between
them, thereby rendering the examiner‟s declaration inconclusive to support a finding of
guilt beyond reasonable doubt against Dino. (Lamsen vs. People, G.R. No. 227069, November
22, 2017)
97. Is there a complex crime of estafa with falsification of private documents?
None. The immediate effect of falsification of private document is the same as that of
estafa.
If a private document is falsified to obtain from the offended party the money or other
personal property which the offender later misappropriated, the crime committed is
falsification of private document only (People vs. Reyes, 56 Phil. 286).
If a private document is falsified to conceal the misappropriation of money or other

personal property which has been in the possession of the offender, the crime committed
is only estafa with abuse of confidence (People vs. Co Beng, CA 40 OG 1913).
J. REPUBLIC ACTNO. 9262

(ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004)
98. What are the elements of Violence against Women through harassment?
The elements of the crime of violence against women through harassment are: 1. The
offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the offended woman; 2. The
offender, by himself or through another, commits an act or series of acts of harassment
against the woman; and 3. The harassment alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to her. (Pascua vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 182835, April 20, 2010)
99. What are the limiting qualifications for an act or series of act to be considered
as a crime of violence against women through physical harm?
The law on violence against women and their children specifies two limiting qualifications
for any act or series of acts to be considered as a crime of violence against women through
physical harm, namely: 1) it is committed against a woman or her child and the woman is
the offender‟s wife, former wife, or with whom he has or had sexual or dating relationship
or with whom he has a common child; and 2) it results in or is likely to result in physical
harm or suffering. (San Diego vs. Quiambao, G.R. No. 193960, January 7, 2013)
100. For RA 9262 to be applicable, is it indispensable that the act of violence be a

consequence of the relationship?
No. While it is required that the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the
offended woman, for RA 9262 to be applicable, it is not indispensable that the act of
violence be a consequence of such relationship. Nowhere in the law can such limitation be
inferred. Hence, applying the rule on statutory construction that when the law does not
distinguish, neither should the courts, then, clearly, the punishable acts refer to all acts of

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
violence against women with whom the offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship.
It is immaterial whether the relationship had ceased for as long as there is sufficient
evidence showing the past or present existence of such relationship between the offender
and the victim when the physical harm was committed. (San Diego vs. Quiambao, G.R. No.
193960, January 7, 2013)
101. What is the Battered Woman Syndrome?
It refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychologically and behavioral symptoms

found in women living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse. Victim-
survivors suffering from battered woman syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil
liability notwithstanding the absence of any of the elements for justifying circumstances of
self-defense under RPC. (Secs. 3 & 26, R.A. 9262)
102. What is the effect of the Battered Woman Syndrome as a defense?
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal Code. In
the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering from battered
woman syndrome at the time of the commission of the crime, the courts shall be assisted
by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists (Sec. 26, R.A. 9262).
103. What are the three phases of battery and its effect?
a. Tension building phase;

b. Acute battering incident;
c. Tranquil. Loving phase (People vs. Genora, G.R. No. 1395981)
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal Code
(Sec.26, R.A. 9262)
K. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 7610

(SPECIAL PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AGAINST
ABUSE, EXPLOITATION AND DISCRIMINATION ACT)
104. Who are “children” under RA 7610?
Children refers to person below eighteen (18) years of age or those over but are unable to
fully take care of themselves or protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition (Sec.
3[a], RA 7610).
105. May a person charged with child abuse in violation of R.A. 7610 interpose lack
of intent to debase, degrade or demean the minor as his/her defense?
No. It must be stressed that the crime under R.A. 7610 is malum prohibitum. Hence, the
intent to debase, degrade, or demean the minor is not the defining mark. Any act of
punishment that debases, degrades, and demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child
constitutes the offense.
R.A. 7610 is a measure geared to provide a strong deterrence against child abuse and
exploitation and to give a special protection to children from all forms of neglect, abuse,

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
cruelty, exploitation, and other conditions prejudicial to their development. (Lucido v People,
G.R. No. 217764, August 7, 2017, J. LEONEN)
106. Does it matter on whether or not a maltreatment is habitual in order to be

punishable under RA 7610?
No. The sexual abuse can happen only once, and still the victim would be considered a
child subjected to other sexual abuse, because what the law punishes is the maltreatment
of the child, without regard to whether or not this maltreatment is habitual. The very
definition of “child abuse” under Sec. 3(b) of RA 7610 does not require that the victim
suffer a separate and distinct act of sexual abuse aside from the act complained of. For it
refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child. Thus, a violation of Sec.
5(b) of RA 7610 occurs even though the accused committed sexual abuse against the child
victim only once, even without a prior sexual affront. (People vs. Villacampa, G.R. No. 216057,
January 8, 2018)
107. Is the act of whipping a child on the neck with a wet t-shirt in a public place a
violation of RA 7610?
Yes. The act of whipping a child on the neck with a wet t-shirt is an act that debases,
degrades, and demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child. It is a form of cruelty.
Being smacked several times in a public place is a humiliating and traumatizing experience
for all persons regardless of age. A person who commits an act that debases, degrades, or
demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of the child as a human being, whether habitual or
not, can be held liable for violation of RA 7610. (Torres vs. People, G.R. No. 206627, January
18, 2017)
108. What are the elements of sexual abuse under Section 5(b), Art. III of RA 7610?
Sexual abuse under Section 5(b), Article III of RA 7610 has three elements: (1) the
accused commits an act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct; (2) the said act is
performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and (3)
the child is below 18 years old. Further, before an accused can be held criminally liable for
lascivious conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act (RA) No. 7610, the requisites of the
crime of acts of lasciviousness as penalized under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code
(RPC) must be met in addition to the requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of R.A.
No. 7610. (People vs. Molejon, G.R. No. 208091, April 23, 2018)
L. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 11313(SAFE SPACES ACT)
109. Can a screenshot of a private message containingunwanted sexual

misogynistic, transphobic, homophobic or a sexist remark be admissible as
evidence?
Yes. Acts constitutive and penalized as gender-based online sexual harassment can be
admissible as evidence if there is an authorized written order of the court for any
peace officer to use the online records or any copy thereof as evidence in any
civil, criminal investigation or trial of the crime: Provided, that such written order
shall only be issued or granted upon written application and the examination under oath or
affirmation of the applicant and the witnesses may produce, and upon showing that there
are reasonable grounds to believe that gender-based online sexual harassment has been
committed or is about to be committed, and that the evidence to be obtained is essential to
the conviction of any person for, or to the solution or prevention of such crime. (Sec. 14, IRR
of R.A. No. 11313)

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF LAW
110. What are the penalties for violations under RA 11313 on Gender- Based Sexual
Harassment in Public Utility Vehicles (PUV)?
The Land Transportation Office (LTO) may cancel the license of perpetrators found to have
committed acts constituting sexual harassment in PUVs, and the Land Transportation
Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) may suspend or revoke the franchise of
transportation operators who commit gender- based streets and public spaces sexual
harassment acts. Gender- Based Sexual Harassment in PUVs where the perpetrator is the
driver of the vehicle shall also constitute a breach of contract of carriage, for the purpose of
creating a presumption of negligence on the part of the owner or operator of the vehicle in
the selection and supervision of employees and rendering the owner or operator solidarily
liable for the offenses of the employee. (Sec. 6, IRR of R.A. 11313)
111. Can a security guard apprehend persons caught in the act of violating RA
11313?
Yes. Whenever Gender-Based Sexual Harassment happens, a security guard or any person
who witnessed the crime may conduct a citizen‟s arrest and apprehend the perpetrator in
accordance with law. The security guards in these places may be deputized to apprehend
perpetrators caught in flagrante delicto (or in the act of committing a crime) and are
required to immediately coordinate with local authorities. Towards this end, the Philippine
National Police (PNP) shall issue guidelines on the deputization of security guards . (Sec. 5,
IRR of R.A. 11313)
112. A and B are officemates both occupying rank-and-file positions in XYZ

Corporation. A, while having her lunch was approached by B and made sexual
advance towards A asking her to come to B‟s condominium that night. A ignored
B and his requests however the latter become persistent in his demands. A filed
a case for violation of Anti-Sexual Harassment under R.A. 7877 against B. Will
the case proper? If not, what law should A base her complaint?
No, it will not prosper. B is liable under Sec. 16 of RA 11313 or otherwise known as
Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in the workplace. For an accused to be liable under RA
7877, he must have moral ascendancy over the complainant whether in the workplace,
training, or in educational institution. While under RA 11313, he need not have moral
ascendancy over the complainant.
Here, the sexual favor made by B would not impair A‟s rights and obligations under existing
labor laws. Furthermore, the was no moral ascendancy exercised by B in order to commit
the crime because they are both occupying rank-and-file positions.
M. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10173 (DATA PRIVACY ACT OF 2012)
113. What is “personal information” under RA 10173?
Personal information refers to any information whether recorded in a material form or not,
from which the identity of an individual is apparent or can be reasonably and directly
ascertained by the entity holding the information, or when put together with other
information would directly and certainly identify an individual . (Sec. 2[g], R.A. No. 10173)

20 21
22
PRE-WEEK NOTES
DAY 1
114. Can a person be held liable under RA 10173 for placing a paper containing a
sensitive personal information of an individual in a container for trash
collection?
Yes. A penalty shall be imposed on persons who knowingly or negligently dispose, discard
or abandon the sensitive personal information of an individual in an area accessible to the
public or has otherwise placed the sensitive personal information of an individual in its
container for trash collection. (Sec. 54[b], IRR of R.A. 10173) Personal data shall be disposed
or discarded in a secure manner that would prevent further processing, unauthorized
access, or disclosure to any other party or the public, or prejudice the interests of the data
subjects. (Sec. 19[d][3], IRR of R.A. 10173)
115. In the event of data breach, when can the personal information controller or
personal information processor be held liable for concealment of security
breaches?
When, upon knowledge, seventy- two (72) hours had already passed and the Commission
and affected data subjects was not notified. The Commission and affected data subjects
shall be notified by the personal information controller within seventy-two (72) hours upon
knowledge of, or when there is reasonable belief by the personal information controller or
personal information processor that, a personal data breach requiring notification has
occurred. (Sec. 38[a], IRR of R.A. 10173)
- END -

AUSL 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

AUSL Criminal Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

JAYSON FRANCISCO JULIAN PAOLO FABROS LOUIE JOHN BAYON

REA MAY HERMOSURA MA. ISIS DANIELLE VOLANTE CRISTOBAL RABINO

MIKYLA CORDERO TIMOTHY JAMES PACSON ARRIANE SANGALANG

CRIMINAL LAW TEAM

CENTER FOR LEGAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH

ATTY. ANTONY J. PARREÑO

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © 2021

1. Distinguish crimes Mala in Se from Mala Prohibita.

Mala in Se Mala Prohibita

Involvement of Generally, crimes mala in se involve Generally, crimes mala prohibita

Center for Legal Education And Research |1

3. Characteristics of Criminal law

Law of preferential application;

Principles of Public International

Bar Operations Commissions |2

Aggravates a crime or make it greater

Penalizes an act that was not

Authorizes conviction upon less or

4. What is the Doctrine of Pro Reo?

5. Construction/Interpretation of Penal Laws

6. Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws

Center for Legal Education And Research |3

B. JUSTIFYING, EXEMPTING, MITIGATING, AGGRAVATING, AND ALTERNATE

7. Distinguish justifying circumstances from exempting circumstances

JUSTIFYING EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

Because the act is justified, it The act is unjustified. Although the

EXCEPTION: Art. 11(4), or

8. Elements of Justifying Circumstances

Self-Defense Defense of a relative Defense of a Avoidance of

1. Unlawful 1. Unlawful Aggression 1. Unlawful 1. Evil sought to be

Bar Operations Commissions |4

10. Exempting Circumstances

2. A person under 15 Note:

3. A person over 15 Note:

(a) status offenses;

(b) vagrancy and prostitution under Sec. 202 of the RPC;

(c) mendicancy under P.D. 1563; and

(d) sniffing of rugby under P.D. 1619. (Revised Rules on Children in

Center for Legal Education And Research |5

Conflict of Law and Sec. 58, RA 9344)

4. Any person who, Elements:

6. Any person who acts Elements:

7. Any person who fails Elements:

The battered woman syndrome is characterized by the so-called cycle of violence,

Bar Operations Commissions |6

12. Distinguish ordinary from privileged mitigating circumstances.

Ordinary mitigating Privileged mitigating

APPLICATION If penalty is divisible, apply the Lower the penalty by degree/s.

If penalty is indivisible, apply the

WHEN Not considered when what is Always considered, whether the

Kind Nature/Effect Example

SPECIFIC Those that require the application of the ignominy – chastity

INHERENT Those that essentially accompany the evident

Center for Legal Education And Research |7

14. What are the two kinds of unlawful aggression?

ACTUAL OR MATERIAL UNLAWFUL IMMINENT UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION

15. What are Alternative Circumstances?

Those circumstances which must be considered as aggravating or mitigating according to

16. What are Absolutory Causes?

17. Give some examples of Absolutory Causes.

2. Article 7 – attempted/frustrated light felonies except those against persons or property

3. Article 16 – accessories in light felonies

Bar Operations Commissions |8