BAR QUESTIONS

2019

Mr. X has always been infatuated with Ms. Y. Scorned by Ms.

Y's disregard for his feelings towards her, Mr. X came up with
a plan to abduct Ms. Y in order to have carnal knowledge of
her with the help of his buddies, A, B, and C.

On the day they decided to carry out the plan, and while
surreptitiously waiting for Ms. Y, C had a change of heart and
left. This notwithstanding, Mr. X, A, and B continued with the
plan and abducted Ms. Y by forcefully taking her to a deserted
house away from the city. There, Mr. X restrained Ms. Y's
arms, while A held her legs apart. B stood as a lookout. Mr. X
was then able to have carnal knowledge of Ms. Y, who was
resisting throughout the entire ordeal.

Consequently, Mr. X was charged with the crime of Forcible

Abduction under the Revised Penal Code.

(a) Is the charge against Mr. X proper? Explain. (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER/S:
(a) The charge against Mr. X is not proper. The crime Mr X
committed is Rape. The crime of abduction was just a means
of perpetuating the crime. The intent of Mr. X was clearly to
have a carnal knowledge. Hence, the crime of abduction will be
absorbed. (People vs. Sabadlab)

(b) Conspiracy was properly established amongst the 4 and the

crime was consummated; hence, A and B will have the same
criminal liability with Mr X for the crime of Rape. However,
due to his spontaneous desistance prior to the commencement
of the crime, C is not criminally liable.
2018

With a promise of reward, Robert asked Romy to bring

him a young girl that he (Robert) can have carnal knowledge
with. Romy agreed, seized an eight-year old girl and brought
her to Robert. After receiving his reward, Romy left while
Robert proceeded to have carnal knowledge with the girl.

(a) For what felony may Robert and Romy be charged?

(2.5%)

b. Will your answer in (a) be the same if the victim is a 15

year old lass who was enticed, through cunning and
deceit of Romy, to voluntarily go to the house of Robert
where the latter subsequently had carnal knowledge
with her? (2.5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Robert should be charged for the crime of rape while Romy should be
charged with rape as principal by indispensable cooperation.

As held in the case of People vs Mejoraday, the crime of rape is committed if

the main objective of the accused is to rape the victim and the crime of forcible
abduction, which is incidental to the commission of rape, is absorbed. Moreover,
under Art. 17 (3) To be a principal by indispensable cooperation, one must
participate in the criminal resolution, a conspiracy or unity in criminal purpose and
cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act without
which it would not have been accomplished.

In the case at bar, Robert proceeded to have carnal knowledge with the girl
and since the main intention was to rape her, the crime of abduction is absorbed. On
the other hand, Romy cooperated in the consummation of the crime of rape
committed by Robert by acts without which the crime would not have been
consummated by delivering the victim to the latter.

Therefore, Robert should be charged with rape while Romy should be

charged with rape as principal by indispensable cooperation.
2017

Maita was the object of Solito's avid sexual desires. Solito

had attempted many times to entice Maita to a date in bed
with him but Maita had consistently refused. Fed up with all
her rejections, Solito abducted Maita around 7 p.m. one night.
With his cohorts, Solito forced Maita into a Toyota lnnova and
drove off with her to a green-painted house situated in a
desolate part of the town. There, Solito succeeded in having
carnal knowledge of Maita against her will. 

Meanwhile, the police authorities were tipped off that at

11:30 p.m. on that same night Solito would be
selling marijuana outside the green-painted house. Acting on
the tip, the PNP station of the town formed a buy-bust team
with PO2 Masahol being designated the poseur buyer. During
the buy-bust operation, Solito opened the trunk of the Toyota
lnnova to retrieve the bag of marijuana to be sold to PO2
Masahol. To cut the laces that he had tied the bag with, Solito
took out a Swiss knife, but his doing so prompted PO2
Masahol to effect his immediate arrest out of fear that he
would attack him with the knife. PO2 Masahol then
confiscated the bag of marijuana as well as the Toyota lnnova.

(a) Two informations were filed against Solito in the RTC -

one for forcible abduction with rape, raffled to Branch 8 of the
RTC; the other for illegal sale of drugs, assigned to Branch 29
of the RTC. Was Solito charged with the proper offenses based
on the circumstances? Explain your answer. (5%)

Correct.

(a) The charge of Forcible Abduction with Rape filed with RTC,
Branch 8 is not correct. The principal objective of the
abduction of Maita by Solito is to rape her. Thus, forcible
abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape. (People vs.
Sabadlab, 668 SCRA 237, 14 March 2012) [Bersamin, J.,
First Division]

DISCUSSION:
In People vs. Sabadlab supra, it was held that:
Although forcible abduction was seemingly
committed,21 we cannot hold him guilty of the complex crime of
forcible abduction with rape when the objective of the abduction
was to commit the rape. Under the circumstances, the rape
absorbed the forcible abduction.22
The penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly prescribed.
Article 266-A and Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended by Republic Act No. 8353,23 respectively define and punish
simple rape as follows:

Article 266-A. Rape; When and How Committed. –

Rape is committed –
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of
a woman under any of the circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason
or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machinations or
grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12)
years of age or is demented, even though none of the
circumstances mentioned above be present.

Article 266-B. Penalties. – Rape under paragraph 1

of the next preceding article shall be punished
by reclusion perpetua.

2016

Jojo and Felipa are husband and wife. Believing that his
work as a lawyer is sufficient to provide for the needs of their
family, Jojo convinced Felipa to be a stayat- home mom and
care for their children. One day, Jojo arrived home earlier than
usual and caught Felipa in the act of having sexual
intercourse with their female nanny, Alma, in their
matrimonial bed. In a fit of rage, Jojo retrieved his revolver
from inside the bedroom cabinet and shot Alma, immediately
killing her.
 [a] Is Art. 247 (death or physical injuries inflicted under
exceptional circumstances) of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)
applicable in this case given that the paramour was of the
same gender as the erring spouse? (2.5%)

[b] Is Felipa liable for adultery for having sexual relations

with Alma? (2.5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER
(A) No. Art. 247 of the Revised Penal Code is not
applicable.
Under the Revised Penal Code, for Art. 247 to
apply, the offender must catch his or her spouse
in the act of committing sexual intercourse with
another person. In People of the Philippines v. Marciano Gonzales (G.R. No. 46310,
October 31,
1939), the Supreme Court held that to avail of
the privilege under Art. 247, the accused should
surprise his wife in the “very act if sexual
intercourse”.

Sexual intercourse generally presupposes the

penetration of the man’s sexual organ into that
of a woman’s. In this case, the paramour was of
the same gender as the erring spouse. As such,
there is legally, no sexual intercourse to speak of,
hence, Art. 247 is not applicable.

ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: (A) Yes, Art. 247 (death

or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional
circumstances) of the Revised Penal Code is
applicable.

The requisites of Art. 247 are: (1) a legally

married person surprises his spouse in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another
person; (2) he or she kills any or both of them or
inflicts upon any or both of them any serious
physical injury “while in the act” or immediately
thereafter; and (3) he has not promoted or
facilitated the prostitution of his wife or that he
or she has not consented to the infidelity of the
other spouse. All the foregoing requisites are
present in the case at hand. It is a given in the
problem that Jojo caught Felipa and Alma in the
“act of sexual intercourse.” The law did not
qualify that the other person with whom the
spouse be caught committing sexual intercourse
be “male or female.” Hence, the gender of the
paramour, Alma, being of the same gender as
the erring spouse, Felipa, is immaterial, The
answer given presupposes that Jojo and Felipa
are legally married.

(B) No. Under Article 333 of the Revised Penal

Code, adultery is committed by any married
woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a
“man” not her husband. Thus, Felipa in having
homosexual intercourse with Alma, a “woman,”
is not committing adultery.

2015

Filipino citizens Hector and Wendy were married in New

York, and have been living happily in Manila for the last three
years. Hector was removing junk from his basement when he
came across an unlabeled recordable cd. He put it in his
computer's DVD drive to check its contents. To his surprise,
he saw a video of Wendy and another man Ariel, in the act of
sexual intercourse in the master's bedroom of his house.
Angered by what he saw, he filed a complaint for adultery
against Wendy and Ariel. During the course of the trial, and
again to the surprise of Hector, it was proved that Wendy was
born male and underwent sex reassignment later in life.

a) May Hector's charge of adultery against Wendy

and Ariel prosper? Explain. (3%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the charge of adultery will not prosper because under Article 333 of
the Revised Penal Code, a crime of adultery is committed by any married
woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by
the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her to be married, even if
the marriage be subsequently declared void. One of the elements therefore is
that the offender must be a married a woman.
In this case, Wendy is born male and not a woman hence, he cannot be
charged of adultery.

b.) What is an impossible crime? Can there be an impossible crime of adultery?

(2%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Impossible crime under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code is
committed by any person performing an act which would be an offense
against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual
means.
No, there can be no impossible crime of adultery. Impossible crime
under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code applies to crimes against persons or
property. Adultery is classified as a crime against chastity.

2010

Suspecting that her husband of twenty years was having

an affair, Leilanie hired a private investigator to spy on him.
After two weeks, the private investigator showed Leilanie a
video of her husband having sexual intercourse with another
woman in a room of a five-star hotel. Based on what she saw
on the video, Leilanie accused her husband of concubinage.

a.Will the case of concubinage prosper? Explain. (3%)

No, a case for concubinage will not prosper because

said crime may be committed only by a husband in
(3) ways, viz:

1) By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;

or
2) By having sexual intercourse with a woman not
his wife under scandalous circumstances; or
3) By cohabiting with a woman not his wife in any
other place (Art. 334, RPC).

The facts of the case given do not constitute any of

the situations above-stated.