BAR

2019

X and Y approached Mayor Z and requested him to solemnize

their marriage. On the day of the ceremony, X and Y
proceeded to Mayor Z's office but he was not there. Mayor Z's
chief of staff, Mr. U, however, represented that he himself can
solemnize their marriage and just have Mayor Z sign the
marriage certificate when the latter comes back. Consequently,
upon X and Y's assent, Mr. U solemnized the marriage, despite
his lack of authority therefor.

(a) What crime may Mr. U be charged with under

the Revised Penal Code (RPC)? Explain. (2.5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER/S:
(a) Usurpation of Authority or Official Functions (Art. 177, RPC). The
elements are as follows: 1. The offender performs any act; 2. Pertaining to
any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine Government or
any foreign government or any agency thereof; 3. Under pretense of
official position; and 4. Without being lawfully entitled to do so. In this
case, Mr. U falsely misrepresented himself as having the authority to
solemnized the marriage when he in fact, did not, and as such, he usurped
the authority and functions of Mayor Z.

(b) Falsification by a public officer (Article 171, RPC). Article 171...

punishes public officers for falsifying a document by making any alteration
or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning. The
elements of falsification under this provision are as follows: 1. The offender
is a public officer, employee, or a notary public, 2. The offender takes
advantage of his or her official position, 3. The offender falsifies a
document by committing any of the acts of falsification under Article 171.
Here, Mayor Z falsified said document in violation of article 171 of the
RPC.
2015

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 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
him 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? Explain.
(4%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Mayor Abral committed Falsification by making it appear he had
participated in an act or proceeding when he did not, in fact, so participate. In
this case, he made it appear in the marriage contract that he solemnized the
marriage between Erwin and Bea when, in actually, he did not.

Donato, on the other hand, committed Usurpation of Authority or

Official Functions under Article 177 of the Revised Penal Code. When Donato
solemnized the marriage, he performed an act pertaining to Mayor Abral
under the pretense of his official function without being lawfully entitled to do
so.

2012

a. What are the elements of the crime of bigamy? (5%)

b. If you were the judge in a bigamy case where the defense
was able to prove that the first marriage was null and
void or a nullity, would you render a judgment of
conviction or acquittal? Explain your answer. (2%)

Judgement of acquittal “ Pulido case”

 c. Assuming the existence of the first marriage when
accused contracted the second marriage and the
subsequent judicial declaration of nullity of the second
marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity,
would you render a judgment of conviction or acquittal?
Explain your answer. (3%)

Judgement of acquittal “ Pulido case”

2011

The three accused forcibly took their victim from his car
but the latter succeeded in freeing himself from their grip.
What crime did the three accused commit?

(A) forcible abduction.

(B) frustrated kidnapping.

(C) attempted kidnapping.

(D) grave coercion.