VLC Pbr2021 Crit - Areas BNB Crim Part 1 Prof. Leonor D. Boado

BAR 2021 - CRIMINAL LAW
Penal law
1. Definition and elements of penal law
a. The law must define a criminal act

b. It must prescribe a penalty and
c. Must be an act of Congress.
2. Significance - for in dubio pro reo and ex post facto to apply
3. procedural - suspension pendente lite, RA3019; extradition
treaty; no application of pro reo and ex post facto rule
4. Kinds of crimes - felonies, offenses
a. Felonies are crimes under RPC
b. Offenses are crimes under special laws, but it is not wrong to call
violations of RPC as offenses
Fundamental doctrines
1. In dubio pro reo - example - doctrine of lenity for widow’s continued exemption
from criminal liability for theft, estafa, malicious mischief against the deceased’s
relatives under Article 332; offender deemed accomplice rather than principal in
case of doubt
Inmates vs. De Lima declared that even if the amendment to the good conduct
allowance is not a penal law, since it is beneficial to the convicts, it calls for the
application of Article 22 on retroactive application. It said:
The "penal laws" in Article 22 refer to substantive laws, not procedural rules.
Moreover, the mere fact that a law contains penal provisions does not make it
penal in nature.
PRE - BAR REVIEW
SYNCHRONOUS SPECIAL LECTURES
Critical Areas in Criminal Law (Part 1)
Prof. Leonor D. Boado
While R.A. No. 10592 does not define a crime/offense or provide/
prescribe/establish a penalty as it addresses the rehabilitation component of our
correctional system, its provisions have the purpose and effect of diminishing the
punishment attached to the crime. The further reduction on the length of the
penalty of imprisonment is, in the ultimate analysis, beneficial to the detention and
convicted prisoners alike; hence, calls for the application of Article 22 of the RPC.
The prospective application of the beneficial provisions of R.A. 10592 actually
works to the disadvantage of petitioners and those who are similarly situated. It
precludes the decrease in the penalty attached to their respective crimes and
lengthens their prison stay; thus, making more onerous the punishment for the
crimes they committed. Depriving them of time off to which they are justly entitled
as a practical matter results in extending their sentence and increasing their
punishment. Evidently, this transgresses the clear mandate of Article 22 of the
RPC.
2. Nullum crimen nulla pena sine lege - before RA 7610, consensual act with 12 y.o
is not a crime as it is not statutory rape (under
12) and not seduction (over 12)
3. Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea - forgery of signature of deceased on
retirement pay check by widow to pay for funeral is not crime; no intent; no
malice
Characteristics of penal law
1. Generality - unless par in parem and immunity from suit
2. Territoriality - unless 5 exceptions
3. Prospectivity - except beneficial unless habitual delinquent Brazil
ambassador’s case
1. Who has jurisdiction - host; territoriality
Page 2 of 26
WARNING: No part of this presentation may be copied, reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, without prior
written permission from the Villasis Law Center. Villasis Law Center operates a zero tolerance policy in relation to inappropriate behavior of students.
Violators shall be subject to prosecution under the law. All rights reserved by Villasis Law Center.
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. If offender is diplomatic staff - immune from suit
3. Who are diplomatic staff - those exercising political functions

4. physical injuries not triable here; not an exception in Article 2
5. Phil ambassador not triable here - embassy not Phil. Territory
Constitutional limitations on penal law
1. Due process - substantive and procedural
substantive - law inherently valid
procedural - notice; hearing; independent court of jurisdiction
2. Equal protection - unless there is valid classification - elements

a. based on substantial distinctions
b. germane to the purpose of the law
c. Not limited to existing conditions only

d. Applies equally to all members of the class example
of valid law - VAWC
RA 9262 does not single out the husband or father as the culprit. As
defined, VAWC may likewise be committed "against a woman with
whom the person has or had a sexual or dating relationship." Clearly,
the use of the gender-neutral word "person" who has or had a sexual or
dating relationship with the woman encompasses even lesbian
relationships.
The law does not preclude the application of the principle of conspiracy
under the RPC. In one case, the parents-in- law of the victim were held
respondents (Go-Tan v. Spouses Tan) upon the allegation that they and
their son had community of design and purpose in tormenting the victim
by giving her insufficient financial support; harassing and
Page 3 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
pressuring her to be ejected from the family home; and in repeatedly
abusing her verbally, emotionally, mentally and physically. (Garcia v.
Drilon, June 2013)
Congress cannot arbitrarily enact laws favoring one class of society or
thing as against another but must comply with the equal protection
clause. On the other hand, one class of persons or things can be favored,
as long as the classification is valid and complies with the four requisites
for exemption from the application of the clause.
Cruel and unusual punishment - vis-a-vis dura lex sed lex
3. Ex post facto - prospective unless beneficial to non habitual delinquent
4. Bill of attainder - encroaches on judiciary; violates due process Kinds of
felonies
1. Dolo and culpa
2. Formal and material
3. Attempted, frustrated, consummated

4. Complex (compound and complex proper), composite, continued, continuing
5. One crime with two penalties - article 312
6. One crime with many penalties - article 365 (Ivler)
7. Crime different from intended and Impossible crime
8. Simple and qualified
Simple and qualified
a. Theft and qualified theft
b. Simple rape and qualified rape
Page 4 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
c. Homicide and murder/parricide/infanticide Article
10 - relationship between RPC/SPL
1. First sentence states the general rule that special law prevails over general law.
2. Second sentence is the exception - when the general law, RPC shall apply
suppletorily to SPL.
3. Jurisprudence (Simon) explains that when the SPL uses nomenclatures of
penalties of RPC, the rules on penalties of the latter applies including for the
application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
4. But the use of RPC penalties per se does not make the crime
malum in se.
Compare Intentional Felony (dolo) and Culpable Felony (culpa)
1. IF Title 1 to 13 of Book II of the RPC; CF Title 14.
2. IF can be material felonies; CF - always formal
3. IF can be by conspiracy; none in CF
4. IF requires intent; CF by negligence/imprudence to commit the same; culpa
is incompatible with intent.
5. In IF, act or omission punished; CF - the imprudencia punible
6. Abandonment is a crime in IF; qualifying in CF
7. IF recognizes modifying circumstances; not for CF for there is no intent
8. IF has higher, graduated penalties; IF has lower fixed penalty
9. Basis of penalty for IF - severity of crime; for CF, the result whether grave,
less grave or light felonies and the degree of negligence whether reckless or
simple
10. IF can be complexed; CF cannot be.
11. Only one penalty for one IF; as many penalties as the result of one CF
Page 5 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
Formal and material
Formal = always consummated; cannot perform all acts necessary without

consummating. Examples:
1. Culpa - intent not element; once negligent act is
committed, the result is there such as vehicular accident
2. Slander/libel - once defamatory words heard/read by third person, even
one only
3. Physical injury - unless result is there, severity cannot be determined and
in criminal law, speculation is not allowed
Material = has two or three stages Two
stages - no frustrated stage
1. Rape - gravamen is carnal knowledge; slight penetration consummates;
prior thereto, attempted only
2. Arson - definition of crime is burning even portion only

3. Theft/robbery - definition - complete control of property. Once offender
has taken hold of property, even momentary, consummated.
Stages of felony
1. Subjective phase - attempted - because whether to accomplish the intended

crime depends upon the subject - the offender. He has commenced the crime but
he has not done all that is necessary to consummate it. He could could continue
or spontaneously desist which is absolutory for even though he has commenced
the crime by overt acts, the law absolves him from criminal liability. There is no
attempted felony anymore.
DESISTANCE - up to attempted stage only. Example, returning stolen
article to owner not desistance because theft already consummated.
Page 6 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
OVERT ACT vs. PREPARATORY ACT - overt act is the start of criminal
liability; the intent is clear, like aiming a gun on someone. Preparatory act is
equivocal, the intent is capable of different interpretation, like buying poison.
2. Objective phase - frustrated and consummated - because the outcome is out of
the hands of the offender as he has performed all the acts necessary to
accomplish the crime.
3. Frustrated if crime not accomplished due to event independent of his will like
timely medical assistance in case of killing. If he himself prevented the
accomplishment of the crime by bringing the victim to the hospital, the crime is
not frustrated homicide but consummated physical injuries.
Crime different from intended - aberratio ictus (AI), error in
personae (EIP), praeter intentionem (PI), proximate cause (PC)
AI v. EIP — EIP - 2 persons involved, offender and unintended victim, may
or may not mitigate;
AI - 3 persons present - actual victim; intended victim; offender, usually
increases criminal liability - may result to compound crime
PC - the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused. The PC is the one
liable, not the direct cause, for the evil caused will not happen if not for the PC
Compare article 48 and 49
1. Article 48 applies to AI; 49 toPI
2. 48 imposes higher penalty in the maximum period; 49 imposes lower penalty if
intended and actual crimes of different severity, example, homicide and
parricide.
3. 48 - 2 or more crimes committed; 49 - crime different from intended and victim
is a different person
Page 7 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
Summary
Art. 48 - aberratio ictus - increases liability to compound crime Art. 49 - error
in personae with different crimes - extenuates Art. 13(3) - praeter intentionem -
mitigates
PC - makes one liable for different, serious crime than intended
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME - against persons/property
factual - extraneous matter prevents consummation legal -
consummated but crime not produced
recent case - impossible crime of qualified theft
property must have value for penalty is based on value stealing

check which unknown to offender is unfunded
Plurality of crimes
Two kinds of complex crimes - compound/complex proper rule for

firearms - one bullet = 1 crime
complex crimes vs. composite crime/special complex crime
Composite crimes/SCC - single indivisible offense of two specific crimes.
Only one provision on specific crimes imposing a specific penalty.
Examples: Articles 266-A on rape with homicide, 267 on kidnapping with
rape/homicide, 294 on robbery with homicide/ rape, intentional mutilation, 320, on
arson with homicide
Prior to R.A. 7659 and 8353, Rape with homicide was a complex crime involving
Articles 335 and 249 under Article 248.
Distinctions
Page 8 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
a. Composite — combination fixed by law like Kidnapping with rape
(Article 267); Complex — combination in general terms — grave
and/or less grave; or one
offense necessary to commit the other, e.g., Forcible Abduction
with Rape (Articles 342 and 266-A)
b. Composite — penalty also specific — KwR carries RP Complex —

FAwR - not specific but for the most serious in the maximum
period
c. Composite crimes — penalized in a single provision of law. It is not
covered by Article 48.
Complex crimes — penalized by two provisions of law
in relation to Article 48.
d. Composite — even if there are more than one count of component

crime accompanying kidnapping, only one composite crime. All
excess homicides/rapes are absorbed. Complex — if there is more
than one count of the crime forming part of the complex crime, the
first shall be complexed while the other counts may be treated as
separate crime. Example, in FAwR — only one complex for the
first rape; subsequent rapes charged separately. (Jose)
e. Composite — absorbs light felony. Complex — does not absorb the
light felony which may be charged separately.
f. Composite — applies to SPL e.g., carnapping with homicide.
Complex — not possible to complex under Article 48 two offenses;
or one felony and one offense.
Continued crime
RPC or SPL - same time, same place, same provision
Page 9 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
Paera vs. Pp - grave threat — threat successive for he did not have
foreknowledge that he will meet them separately - 3 GT
Santiago vs. Garchitorena - alien legalization

Continuing crime - any of the elements occur in different places like BP 22 or
continuously, like rebellion.
Theft and fencing are not continuing; separate crimes; two
information; otherwise, buyer is accessory
Means of incurring criminal liability

1. Criminis particeps or personal act - one cannot
be liable by implication; he must perform a
positive act
by acting by himself or inducing another
2. Proximate cause -
by committing an act that cause another act that produce an evil effect
Article 4(1) requires the first act to be a felony either dolo or
culpa and a graver wrong resulted that is not intended
If the first act is not a felony like suicide or art. 247 the actor will not be liable
for the evil caused unless he is negligent (Abarca)
3. Conspiracy
Means of incurring liability or

A crime itself if specifically punished
Examples: treason, rebellion, insurrection, coup d’etat, arson,

dangerous drugs, torture
Page 10 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
Planned - wheel and chain conspiracy
wheel — hub - main plunderer; and spokes - the actors chain —
drug lord to distributor to pushers to end-users
Implied conspiracy - there must be criminis particeps, mere

approval without more not make him conspirator
Planned - one must appear to be liable; mere presence is sufficient except for
the mastermind
Act of one, act of all - even if only one conspirator committed the rape, all
four are rapists
Exception - Article 62 - circumstance personal to offender — parricide - only
the specified relative is liable; the non-relative conspirator is liable for murder or
homicide.
Proof of conspiracy
a. Beyond reasonable doubt because one becomes as liable as the
others; without conspiracy, he has no liability - for example, in implied
conspiracy - the onlooker who approved and cheered the offender without
more, not liable - no criminis particeps
b. Direct proof not required because clandestine. Acts before,
during, after the commission of crime indicate joint purpose, concerted
action, and concurrence of sentiments
c. There must be intentional participation for an innocent person
can become liable due to conspiracy.
d. Overt act — active participation; or moral
encouragement by being present; or by exerting moral ascendancy
e. Inducement — by command (precepto) like father to son, advice
or through influence or agreement for consideration (pacto).
Page 11 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
To be a principal by inducement
1. the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the

commission of the crime; and
2. such inducement be the determining cause of the
commission of the crime by the material executor.
Second crime not part of original plan

All liable except for those who prevented the commission of the second crime.
If homicide was committed during the robbery, robbery becomes robbery with
homicide.
Look-out who does not know its commission is liable only for the original
crime.
Arias doctrine
Head of office is liable for acts of subordinates either by conspiracy or by

reckless imprudence which made the crime possible. Negligence cannot co-exist
with conspiracy; it is either through dolo or culpa.
If in good faith relying on subordinate, Arias doctrine prevails.
Planned, implied, wheel conspiracy, chain conspiracy
1. Planned — principals agree on what crime to commit, how to commit it, the
role of each; Implied — agreement to commit crime is instantaneous, a
spur-of-the-moment thing;
2. Planned — principals liable as long as they appear; Implied
— criminis particeps required
3. Wheel and Chain conspiracy are multiple structures of planned
conspiracy.
Example — Arroyo vs. People

1. Plunder requires identification of main plunderer in the
information
Page 12 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. Determined by alleging whether it is an express conspiracy and a wheel
conspiracy.
3. Amount involved here is P360 M with 10 accused. If main plunderer not
identified, cannot determine who amassed P50M. In such case, P360/10 = P36 M
short of the required amount.
4. The corpus delicti of plunder is amassing IGW of at least P50M
Principals of conspiracy - Article 16

1. Mastermind or inducer - the origin of mens rea - liable even if not present
because the crime would not have been committed without his inducement
2. Direct participator - carried out the conspiracy by direct act
3. IIndispensable cooperator may or may not be conspirator - but without his
assistance or cooperation, crime is not possible. Example - only one pump boat
available to go to place where offended lives
Inducer as principal, accomplice
1. Principal — has moral ascendancy over Direct Participator; his utterance is
meant to be obeyed. Example: Father to son
– “Shoot him!”
2. Accomplice — utterance not indispensable but emboldened or encouraged
the offender. Doubt as to degree of liability construed in favor of lenity or
lesser criminal responsibility.
Accomplices vis-a-vis conspirators (principal)
1. Conspirators and accomplices know and agree with the criminal design.
2. Conspirators know the criminal intention for they decided it. Accomplices
know after the principals made the decision; then they agree to cooperate in
its execution.
3. Conspirators decide that a crime should be committed; accomplices merely
concur in it.
4. Conspirators are authors; accomplices, their instruments who perform acts
not essential to the perpetration of the crime.
Page 13 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
5. Conspirators are punished as principal; accomplices, one degree lower.
6. Lack of complete evidence of conspiracy creates doubt whether they had
acted as principals or accomplices. Accused is presumed as accomplice -
doctrine of lenity.
Absorption rules
When a single act results to two crimes:
With Absorption = only one crime will be charged. No

absorption = separate crimes will be filed.
General rule — malum in se and malum prohibitum do not absorb each other;
felony and offense cannot be complexed
A. Examples of special law allowing absorption - 1 crime only
1. RA 7610 - either rape/acts of lasciviousness under the RPC, or sexual assault
under RA 7610
2. RA 9372 (terrorism) - bars prosecution for predicate crimes 3.RA 9160
(money laundering) - predicate acts absorbed

4. Violence against women or children act, or murder, parricide, homicide, or
other felonies with greater punishment
B. SPL that disallows absorption — two crimes

BP22 - separate prosecution for estafa, or any provision of RPC.
RA 9745 - Section 15. - Torture without prejudice to any other criminal liability
under domestic and international laws.
R.A. 9165 - qualifying to crime committed under the influence of drugs. Drug
case plus qualified crime
Article 10, RPC - suppletory application of RPC on SPL
Page 14 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
Section 3 of R.A. 9262 defines violence against women and their children.
While the said provision provides that the offender be related or
connected to the victim by marriage, former marriage, or a sexual or
dating relationship, it does not preclude the application of the principle of
conspiracy under the RPC.
Pursuant to Article 10, legal principles developed from the Penal Code
may be applied in a supplementary capacity to crimes punished under
special laws, such as R.A. 9262, in which the special law is silent on a
particular matter.
The principle of conspiracy under Article 8 of the RPC may be applied
suppletorily to R.A. 9262 because of the express provision of Section 47
that the RPC shall be supplementary to said law. Thus, general provisions
of the RPC, which by their nature, are necessarily applicable, may be
applied suppletorily.
Section 5 of R.A. 9262 expressly recognizes that the acts of violence
against women and their children may be committed by an offender
through another, thus:
SEC. 5. Acts of Violence Against Women and Their Children. - The crime
of violence against women and their children is committed through any of
the following acts:
(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally or

through another, that alarms or causes substantial emotional or
psychological distress to the woman or her child. (Go-Tan, September
2008)
Example of mitigating
PEOPLE vs. RACAL, G.R. No. 224886, September 4, 2017
1. Sufficient provocation. As a mitigating circumstance, SP is any unjust or
improper conduct or act of the victim adequate enough to excite a person to
commit a wrong, which is proportionate in gravity.
Page 15 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. [Note: as element of self-defense, it must be absent on the part of the offender; as
MC, it must be present on the part of the victim.]
3. SP requires that: a) the provocation must be sufficient; b) immediate to the
commission of the crime; and c) must originate from offended party.
4. "Sufficient" = adequate to excite a person to commit the crime and must
accordingly be proportionate to its gravity. Not enough that the act be
unreasonable or annoying. Calling another gay is not SP in law that would
mitigate liability of accused.
5. "Immediate" = no interval of time between the provocation and the crime.
Provocation more than one hour or even 24 hours before the crime is not
immediate. Victim taunted by offender days before the stabbing incident hence
the immediacy required by law was absent. The lapse of time would have given
the accused chance to contemplate and to recover his serenity enough to refrain
from pushing through with his evil plan.
6. [Note: in immediate vindication, there can be an interval of time, as long as the
offender is still suffering from the outrage caused by the victim.]
Example of aggravating - treachery

1. Offender chose the methods, means or form of attack to insure execution of
crime without risk to offender arising from defense or retaliation from offender.
Example - ambush
2. Elements: 1) at the time of attack, victim was not in a position to defend himself;
and (2) accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means,
methods or forms of attack employed by him.
3. Treachery appreciated in aberratio ictus like in stray bullets; crime is murder
but if victim survived, intent to kill cannot be presumed; crime is physical
injuries.
4. In recent a case, treachery was appreciated in the attack on the sleeping victim
who was able to retaliate as a reflex action. The reflex action did not negate the
fact that the attack was sudden, unexpected and especially chosen to accomplish
the crime.
PEOPLE vs. FRANCISCO, G.R. No. 216728, June 4, 2018
Page 16 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
1. Although victim was stabbed suddenly and totally unprepared for the
unexpected attack, the second requirement was missing — that the mode of
attack was consciously adopted with the purpose of depriving the victim of a
chance to either fight or retreat.
2. The suddenness of attack does not, of itself, suffice to support a finding of
treachery, even if the purpose was to kill, so long as the decision was made all of
a sudden and the victim's helpless position was accidental.
3. Where no particulars are known as to the manner in which the aggression was
made or how the act which resulted in the death of the deceased began and
developed, it cannot be established from mere suppositions that the the killing
was treacherous.
Example of alternative - intoxication— P v. Mat-an, Feb 21, 2018

1. Aggravating if habitual or intentional; mitigating if not subsequent to the
plan to commit crime - did not intend to embolden resolve to commit crime
2. Intoxication is presumed unintentional or not habitual. [pro reo and doctrine
of lenity] But accused must first establish his state of intoxication to benefit
from said presumption.
3. He must prove that he took such quantity of alcoholic beverage, prior to the
commission of the crime, as would blur his reason.
PENALTIES
1. Article 21 - only penalties prescribed by law can be imposed; cannot add one day
to reclusion temporal; that is already RP
2. Article 22 - prospectivity rule unless beneficial except for HD
Three scales of penalties:

1. Art 25 - classifies into principal and accessories
Page 17 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. Art 70 - graduates into severity as to which should be served first, or pardoned
first
3. Art 71 - graduates to determine increase or decrease of penalties in relation to
articles 50-57, 61, 64
PRINCIPAL vs. ACCESSORY PENALTIES
1. Principal penalty - the penalty prescribed by law. Example, for homicide,
reclusion temporal (Article 249). Accessory penalty — follows the principal.
Example, for reclusion temporal and reclusion perpetua, Art. 41 - civil
interdiction, perpetual absolute disqualification, etc.
2. Principal penalty must be stated in dispositive portion of the decision; accessory,

automatic without need to state in the dispositive portion of the decision.
3. Another kind is subsidiary penalty which is neither a principal penalty nor an
accessory penalty. Therefore, it must be expressly imposed in the dispositive
portion of the decision, otherwise, the convict cannot be made to serve it.
Effect of RA 10951 -
1. If beneficial - even to final and executory; all sentences affected to be

recomputed
2. Immutability doctrine will not bar application of Article 22
3. Disqualified convict for probation can apply consequently
4. Does not apply to special law. Accessory charged as fence could have higher
penalty than the principal.
5. CASES
Hernan December 2017 - malversation; RA 10951, Article 22
Here is a novel situation wherein the judgment convicting Hernan has
already become final and executory and yet the
Page 18 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
penalty imposed thereon has been reduced by virtue of the passage of said
law. Because of this, not only must petitioner's sentence be modified
respecting the settled rule on the retroactive effectivity of laws, the
sentencing being favorable to the accused, she may even apply for probation,
as long as she does not possess any ground for disqualification, in view of
recent legislation on probation — R.A. 10707 amending the Probation Law
— allowing an accused to apply for probation in the event that she is
sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of not more than 6
years when a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is
appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the imposition
of a probationable penalty.
Cahulogan, March 2018 - Fencing; RA 10951 not applicable
Section 2 of PD 1612 defines and penalizes Fencing. Its essential elements are
as follows: (a) a crime of robbery or theft has been committed; (b) the
accused, who is not a principal or an accomplice in the commission of the
crime of robbery or theft, buys, receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals,
sells or disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any article,
item, object or anything of value, which has been derived from the proceeds
of the crime of robbery or theft; (c) the accused knew or should have known
that the said article, item, object or anything of value has been derived from
the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; and (d) there is, on the part of
one accused, intent to gain for oneself or for another.
Notably, Fencing is a malum prohibitum, and PD 1612 creates a prima facie

presumption of Fencing from evidence of possession by the accused of any
good, article, item, object or anything of value, which has been the subject of
robbery or theft; and prescribes a higher penalty based on the value of the
property.
Page 19 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
The penalty is prision mayor, if the value of the property involved is more
than P12,000 but not exceeding P22,000; if the value exceeds P12,000, the
penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period, adding 1 year for each
additional P10,000 but the total penalty shall not exceed 20 years. The
penalty shall be termed reclusion temporal and the accessory penalty
pertaining thereto provided in the RPC shall also be imposed.
While Fencing is defined and penalized by a special penal law, its penalty is
taken from the nomenclature in the RPC. The rule is, if the SPL adopts the
nomenclature of the penalties under the RPC, the ascertainment of the
indeterminate sentence will be based on the rules applied for those crimes
punishable under the RPC.
PD 1612 was enacted in order to provide harsher penalties to those who
would acquire properties which are proceeds of the crimes of Robbery or
Theft, who prior to the enactment of said law, were punished merely as
accessories after the fact of the said crimes. While a Fence may be prosecuted
either as an accessory of Robbery/Theft or a principal for Fencing, there is a
preference for the prosecution of the latter as it provides for harsher
penalties.
While PD 1612 penalizes those who acquire properties which are proceeds of
Robbery or Theft, its prescribed penalties are similar to the latter crime in
that they are largely dependent on the value of the said properties. In fact, a
reading of Section 3 of PD 1612 and Article 309 of the RPC (which provides
for the prescribed penalties for the crime of Theft) reveals that both
provisions use the same graduations of property value to determine the
prescribed penalty
However, with the recent enactment of RA 10951, which adjusted the values
of the property and damage on which various penalties are based, taking
into consideration the present value of money, as opposed to its archaic
values when
Page 20 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
the RPC was enacted in 1932, the graduation of values in Article 309 was
substantially amended, without any concomitant adjustment for PD
1612. This development would then result in instances where a Fence, which
is theoretically a mere accessory to the crime of Robbery/Theft, will be
punished more severely than the principal of such latter crimes. This
incongruence in penalties therefore, impels an adjustment of penalties.
Article 70
1. For multiple sentences on convict

General rule - multiple sentences must be simultaneously served
Exception - if not possible, follow the scale in this Article.

2. Three-fold rule - Maximum duration of imprisonment should not exceed 3
times the most severe penalty and in no case to exceed 40 years. How computed:
1. Get the total of all penalties; for pena perpetua, use 30 years
2. Multiply the most serious penalty by 3
3. Compare the result of 1 and 2
4. To serve the least which should not exceed 40 years

3. If all penalties are the same, that is the most serious.
4. If indeterminate, multiply both minimum and maximum

HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
- no benefit of retroactive application of beneficial law Elements:
1. Convicted three times or more
Page 21 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. Within 10 years from date of release or last conviction
3. For falsification, robbery, estafa, theft, serious and less serious physical injuries
(FRETSeL)
Penalties - for the present crime plus for the HD: 3rd
conviction = PC med and max
4th conviction = PM min and med 5th
conviction = PM max and RT min
RECIDIVISM -
1.Recidivist = one who, at the time of his trial for one crime shall have been
previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same
title of the RPC.
2.Crime must be a felony for it should be under same title of RPC. 3.To prove
recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same in the

information and to attach thereto certified copies of the sentences rendered
against the accused.
Article 63 - rules for INDIVISIBLE penalty

1. Only paragraph 1 is operational — single indivisible penalty — aggravating and
mitigating not considered. BUT privileged mitigating is always considered
because of its privileged nature.
2. Example — Article 68, when offender is over 15 and 18, 1 degree lower penalty
is mandatory
3. Paragraph 2 — no longer operational; only RP is indivisible Article 64 -
rules for DIVISIBLE penalty
1. Mitigating only — minimum period
Page 22 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
2. Aggravating only — maximum
3. No modifying — medium
4. Two mitigating, NO aggravating — 1 degree lower

Significance of 1 day
1. Separates one degree from another; one period from another
2. Separates divisible (RT) from indivisible (RP) — either article 63 or 64 will apply
3. Separates less grave (arresto mayor) from light (arresto menor) — accessory to
the crime not liable; art. 48 will not apply; period of detention not to exceed 12
hours per article 124
4. Affects Article 125 on delay in the release of detained persons
5. Whether or not convict can apply for probation
6. Whether or not subsidiary penalty will apply Article
65 and 76
1. Article 76 — the legal duration of penalty consists of three periods, the
minimum, medium and maximum
2. Article 65 — if the penalty prescribed by the RPC for a crime does not comply
with Article 76, the court must convert that penalty into three periods. Get the
duration; divide by three, the lowest becomes the minimum, the next higher, the
medium and the highest the maximum.
SUBSIDIARY PENALTY
1. Substitutes for fine in case of insolvency

2. Applies to special law when fine is imposed
3. Neither principal nor accessory
4. Must be expressly imposed in the decision
Page 23 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
RA 9346; A.M. 15-08-02-SC — without eligibility for parole
1. Parole is extended only to those imposed divisible penalties.

2. The phrase “without eligibility for parole” is appended only to those that should
have been imposed the death penalty but is lowered to reclusion perpetua
because of RA 9346 to emphasize that fact.
3. If the penalty is already reclusion perpetua, no need to append the said phrase.
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
PARDON
1. Two kinds of pardon - absolute and conditional, both exclusively executive in
nature — not reviewable by courts
2. Death extinguishes CL absolutely at any stage for there is no more accused; it
extinguishes also civil liability if death occurs before final judgment.
3. Express pardon by offended does not extinguish criminal action except Art. 344
and 266-D. Once the case is already in court, pardon in 344 no longer applies for
the offended has waived her right and made the crime public.
4. Pardon by the President is either absolute or conditional. Conditional pardon is
a private contract between the President and the pardonee. The written contract
must be delivered to the pardonee, or it will not be effective. (Tiu vs. Dizon, G.R.
No. 211269, June 15, 2016)
5. The classification as a colonist must be approved by the President because it is a
reduction of sentence — a conditional pardon. The life sentence is automatically
reduced to 30 years and an additional 5 days deduction per month to good
conduct allowance.
GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCE
Amendments by RA 10592 —
a. Extended to detention prisoners who are NOT (Art. 29):
Page 24 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
1. Recidivists or convicted previously twice or more of any crime
2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence,
they failed to surrender voluntarily
3. Habitual delinquents, escapees and those charged with
heinous crimes
b. Increase in the number of days for GCTA
c. Additional deduction of 15 days per month of study, teaching or
mentoring service
6. The purpose and effect of R.A. 10592 is to diminish the punishment attached to
the crime. The further reduction on the penalty of imprisonment is beneficial to
detention and convicted prisoners alike. Although not penal in nature, calls for
the application of Article 22. (Inmates of Bilibid v. de Lima, 2019)
PRESCRIPTION
1. Things to consider: a) the period of prescription for the offense;
(2) the time when the period starts to run; and (3) the time when the prescriptive
period is interrupted.
2. For felonies, Article 91 provides that prescription starts to run from the day on
which the crime is discovered by the offended, the authorities, or their agents.
[EUEEA].
3. For offenses, if the SPL provides for its own rules, then that should be followed.
4. If the SPL uses the RPC nomenclature of penalties, then the RPC rules under
Art. 91 should apply.
5. If the SPL is silent, Section 2 of RA 3326:
a) Prescription begins to run from the day of the commission of the violation
of the law,
b) if that is not known at the time, from the discovery and institution of
judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment.
Page 25 of 26
PRE - BAR REVIEW
c) Interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the guilty person
6. Blameless ignorance doctrine in Section 2 of Act 3326 — the statute of
limitations runs only upon discovery of the fact of the invasion of a right which
will support a cause of action.
7. While "judicial proceedings" in Sec. 2 of Act 3326 appears before "investigation
and punishment,” with the subsequent change in set-up whereby the
investigation of the charge for purposes of prosecution has become the exclusive
function of the executive branch, "proceedings" should now be understood
either executive or judicial in character: executive when it involves the
investigation phase and judicial when it refers to the trial and judgment stage.
8. Any kind of investigative proceeding against suspect which may ultimately lead
to his prosecution sufficient to toll prescription.
9. Rule — whether punishable by the RPC or by SPL, the filing of complaint with
the prosecutor for preliminary investigation interrupts the period. [Disini v.
Sandiganbayan, 2013]
10. Note: for violations of ordinance, Zaldivia applies - filing in court of
information interrupts, not with prosecutor
11. Act 3326 applies also to city ordinance although the law specifies municipal
ordinance as no other law provides prescription period and the law does
provide any other distinction. (Jadewell Parking) [N.B.: ratio legis should
include city in the coverage.
Page 26 of 26

VLC Pbr2021 Crit - Areas BNB Crim Part 1 Prof. Leonor D. Boado

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

VLC Pbr2021 Crit - Areas BNB Crim Part 1 Prof. Leonor D. Boado

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAR 2021 - CRIMINAL LAW

a. The law must define a criminal act

3. Who are diplomatic staff - those exercising political functions

2. Equal protection - unless there is valid classification - elements

c. Not limited to existing conditions only

3. Attempted, frustrated, consummated

b. Simple rape and qualified rape

Formal = always consummated; cannot perform all acts necessary without

2. Arson - definition of crime is burning even portion only

1. Subjective phase - attempted - because whether to accomplish the intended

property must have value for penalty is based on value stealing

Two kinds of complex crimes - compound/complex proper rule for

b. Composite — penalty also specific — KwR carries RP Complex —

d. Composite — even if there are more than one count of component

RPC or SPL - same time, same place, same provision

Santiago vs. Garchitorena - alien legalization

Means of incurring criminal liability

Means of incurring liability or

Examples: treason, rebellion, insurrection, coup d’etat, arson,

Implied conspiracy - there must be criminis particeps, mere

1. the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the

Second crime not part of original plan

Head of office is liable for acts of subordinates either by conspiracy or by

Example — Arroyo vs. People

Principals of conspiracy - Article 16

With Absorption = only one crime will be charged. No

(money laundering) - predicate acts absorbed

B. SPL that disallows absorption — two crimes

(h) Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally or

Example of aggravating - treachery

PEOPLE vs. FRANCISCO, G.R. No. 216728, June 4, 2018

Example of alternative - intoxication— P v. Mat-an, Feb 21, 2018

Three scales of penalties:

2. Principal penalty must be stated in dispositive portion of the decision; accessory,

1. If beneficial - even to final and executory; all sentences affected to be

Notably, Fencing is a malum prohibitum, and PD 1612 creates a prima facie

1. For multiple sentences on convict

Exception - if not possible, follow the scale in this Article.

4. To serve the least which should not exceed 40 years

4. If indeterminate, multiply both minimum and maximum

recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same in the

Article 63 - rules for INDIVISIBLE penalty

4. Two mitigating, NO aggravating — 1 degree lower

1. Substitutes for fine in case of insolvency

4. Must be expressly imposed in the decision

1. Parole is extended only to those imposed divisible penalties.

a. Extended to detention prisoners who are NOT (Art. 29):

You might also like