IMPORTANT NOTES IN THE BAR EXAMS

BY DEAN FESTIN
Criminal law is abranch of law,which definescrimes treat of their natureand
provides for their penalty
Doctrine of Pro Reo (IN RELATION TO COMPLEX CRIME)– Whenever a penal law 
is to be construed or applied and the law  admits of two interpretations, one lenient to 
the offender and one strict to the offender,  that interpretation which is lenient or 
favorable to the offender will be adopted.
Following the Doctrine of Pro Reo, crimes under  Art. 48 of the RPC are complexed and
punished  with a single penalty (that prescribed for the most  serious crime and to be
imposed in its maximum  period). The rationale being, that the accused who  commits
two crimes with a single criminal
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus (An act done by me against my will is not
my  act) – Whenever a person is under a  compulsion of irresistible force or 
uncontrollable fear to do an act against his  will, in which that act produces a crime
or  offense, such person is exempted in any  criminal liability arising from said act. 

Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege (There  is no crime when there is no law
punishing  the same) – No matter how wrongful, evil or  bad the act is, if there is no
law defining the  act, the same is not considered a crime. 

RPC- ART. 03
 Dolo or felonies committed with  deliberate intent 
Culpa or those committed by means of  fault

*******Favorite bar question*******

BASIS  MALA IN SE  MALA  

PROHIBITA

As to their There must be  a Sufficient that  

concepts criminal   the prohibited  
intent. act was done.

Wrong from its  very Wrong merely  

nature. because it is  
prohibited by  
 statute.

Criminal intent  governs. Criminal intent is  not necessary.

Generally   Generally  
punished   involves  
under theRPC. violation of  
special laws. 

NOTE: Not all  

violations of  
special laws are  mala prohibita.  Even if
the crime  is punished  
under a special  law, if the act  
punished is one  which is  
inherently  
wrong, the same  is malum in se,  
and, therefore,  good faith and  
the lack of  
criminal intent  are valid  
defenses unless  they are the  
products of  
criminal  
negligence or  
culpa.

Mitigating and  Such  

aggravating   circumstances  
circumstances  are   are not  
appreciated in  imposing appreciated  
the   unless the  
penalties. special law has  adopted the 

scheme or scale  of penalties  

under the RPC.
 As to legal (a) Good faith  (b) lack (a) Good faith  or 
implication of   (b) lack of  
criminal   criminal intent  are not valid  
intent; or  defenses;  
(c) negligence  are it is enough that  the prohibition  was
valid   voluntarily  violated.
defenses.

Criminal   Criminal liability  is generally  

liability is   incurred only  
incurred even  when when the crime  is consummated.
the  
crime is  
attempted or 
frustrated.

Penalty is   The penalty of  

computed on  the the offender is  
basis of   the same as they  are all deemed 
whether he is a  principals.
principal  
offender, or  
merely an  
accomplice or 
accessory.

NOTE: The crime of technical malversation,  punished under Art. 220 of the RPC, was
held to  be a crime that is malum prohibitum. The law  punishes the act of diverting
public property  earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular  public purpose for
another public purpose. The  prohibited act is not inherently immoral, but  becomes a
criminal offense because positive law  forbids its commission on considerations of
public  policy, order, and convenience. Therefore, good  faith and lack of criminal intent
are not valid  defenses (Ysidoro v. People, G.R. No. 192330,  November 14, 2012)

When the law is clear and unambiguous, there is  no room for interpretation but only
for the  application of the law. However, if there is  ambiguity: 

Penal laws are strictly construed against the  State and liberally in favor of the
accused. 
Generality 

GR: Penal laws and those of public security and  safety shall be obligatory upon all
who live or  sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to the  principles of international
law and to treaty  stipulations.

XPNs: 
a. Treaty stipulations and international  agreements, e.g. RP-US Visiting Forces 
Accord. 

b. Laws of Preferential Application, e.g. RA  75 penalizes acts which would impair
the  proper observance by the Republic and its  inhabitants of the immunities, rights,
and  privileges of duly-accredited foreign  diplomatic representatives in the 
Philippines

c. The principles of public international law. d. Members of the Congress are not
liable  for libel or slander in connection with any  speech delivered on the floor of the
house  during a regular or special session

A consul is not entitled to the  privileges and immunities of an 

ambassador or minister 
Consuls, vice-consuls, and other  commercial representatives of foreign  nation are
NOT diplomatic officers.  Consuls are subject to the penal laws of  the country where
they are assigned  (Minucher v. CA, G.R. No. 142396, February  11, 2003).

Territoriality 
GR: The penal laws of the country have force  and effect only within its territory.

XPNs: Art. 2 of the RPC

1. Should commit and offense while on a  Philippine ship or airship (fact of 
registration is in the Philippines); 
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or  currency note of the Philippine Islands  or
obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine 
Islands(Art. 163 & 166); 
3. Should be liable for acts connected with  the introduction into these islands of
the  obligations and securities mentioned in  the preceding number; 
4. While being public officers or employees,  should commit an offense in the
exercise  of their functions; or 
5. Should commit any of the crimes against security and the law of nations   (Art.
114-123). 
 Extraterritoriality 
It means the law will have application even  outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the  state

Prospectivity/Irretrospectivity 

GR: Acts or omissions classified as crimes will  be scrutinized in accordance

with the relevant  penal laws if these are committed after the  effectivity of those
penal laws. 

NOTE: Lex Prospicit, Non Respicitmeans the  law looks forward, never
backward.

XPN: Penal Laws shall have a retroactive  effect insofar as they favor the
persons guilty  of a felony, although at the time of the  publication of such laws a
final sentence has  been pronounced and the convict is serving  the same (RPC,
Art. 22). 

CRIMINAL LIABILITIES AND FELONIES 

Felonies 
Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the  RPC. 

NOTE: If it is not punished under the RPC, it is  called an offense. 

Act as contemplated in criminal law 

An act refers to any bodily movement tending to  produce some effeAct in the
external world it being  unnecessary that the same be actually produced,  as the
possibility of its production is sufficient

Elements of felonies

1. An act or omission; 
2. Punishable by the Revised Penal Code;
3. The act is performed or the omission incurred  by means of deceit or faulT

Kinds of felonies 
1. Intentional felonies(Dolo) – committed with  deliberate intentto cause injury to
another  (with malice) 

2. Culpable felonies(Culpa) – where the  wrongful acts result from imprudence, 

negligence, lack of foresight or lack of  skill(unintentional, without malice

Requisites of dolo 

If any of the following requisites is absent, there is  no dolo. 

1. Criminal intent(mens rea) – the purpose to  use a particular means to effect such
result.  Intent to commit an act with malice, being  purely a mental process, is
presumed from the  proof of commission of an unlawful act. A  mental state, hence,
its existence is shown by  overt acts. 

NOTE: If there is NO criminal intent, the act is  justified. Offender incurs NO
criminal liability.  

2. Freedom of action – voluntariness on the part  of the person to commit the act
or omission. 

NOTE: If there is lack of freedom, the offender  is exempt from liability.  

3. Intelligence – means the capacity to know  and understand the consequences and 
morality of human acts 
NOTE: If there is lack of intelligence, the  offender is exempt from liability. 

Requisites of culpa 

1. Criminal negligence on the part of the  offender, that is, the crime was the result of 
negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of  foresight or lack of skill; 

2. Freedom of action on the part of the offender,  that is, he was not acting under
duress; and 

3. Intelligence on the part of the offender in  performing the negligent act. 

Negligence 

Negligence means deficiency in perception or lack  of foresight, or failure to pay

proper attention and  to use due diligence in foreseeing injury or  damage to be
caused. 

Imprudence 

Imprudence means a deficiency in action or lack of  skill, or failure to oid injury to
another.  
Crimes which cannot be committed through  culpa (negligence or
imprudence) 

1. Murder 
2. Treason 
3. Robbery 
4. Malicious mischief 

Intent Refers to the use of a particular means to effect  the desired result. It is a mental
state, the  existence of which is demonstrated by the overt  acts of a person.

Motive is the moving power or force which impels a  person to a desired result. 

Causes which may produce a result different  from that which the offender
intended 

1. Mistake in identity (error in personae)–The  offender intends the injury on one

person but the  harm fell on another. In this situation the intended  victim was not at
the scene of the crime 

2. Mistake in blow (aberratio ictus)–A person  directed the blow at an intended victim,
but  because of poor aim, that blow landed on  somebody else. In aberratio ictus, the
intended  victim and the actual victim are both at the scene  of the crime. (A, shot at B,
but because of lack of  precision, hit C instead).

3.Injurious consequences are greater than that  (praeter intentionem)–The

injury is on  the intended victim but the resulting consequence  is so grave a wrong
than what was intended. It is  essential that there is a notable disparity between  the
means employed or the act of the offender and  the felony which resulted. 

This means that the resulting felony cannot be  foreseen from the acts of the
offender. (A, without  intent to kill, struck the victim on the back,  causing the victim
to fall down and hit his head on  the pavement.)  

EFFECT: Praeter intentionem is a mitigating  circumstance particularly covered by

paragraph 3  of Art. 13. 

The three enumerated situations are always the  result of an intentional felony or dolo.
These  situations do not arise out of criminal negligence.

((U.S. v. Ah  Chong, G.R. No. L-5272, March 19, 1910). 

Mistake of fact is the misapprehension of facts on  the part of the person who
caused injury to  another. He is not, however, criminally liable,  because he did not
act with criminal intent. It is  necessary that had the facts been true as the  accused
believed them to be, the act is justified.  Moreover, the offender must believe that he
is  performing a lawful act.  
 An honest mistake of fact destroys the  presumption of criminal intent which arises
upon  the commission of a felonious act. 

NOTE: Mistake of fact is a defense only in  intentional felonies.

PROXIMATE CAUE

 Requisites of proximate cause 

1. The direct, natural, and logical cause;

2. . Produces the injury or damage; 

3. Unbroken by any efficient intervening cause;  and 

4. Without which the result would not have  occurred

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME(RPC 4,2)(FAVORITE BAR QUESTION)

Requisites of an impossible crime

1. Act performed would be an offense against  persons or property (see list of crimes
under  Title 8 and Title 10, Book 2, RPC) 
2. Act was done with evil intent; 
3. Accomplishment is inherently impossible or  means employed is either inadequate or 
ineffectual; and 
4. Act performed should not constitute a  violation of another provision of RPC

Kinds of inherent impossibility 

1. Legal impossibility– occurs where the  intended acts, even if completed would not 
amount to a crime. (E.g. killing a dead person.) 
2. Physical impossibility– occurs where  extraneous circumstances unknown to the 
accused prevent the consummation of the  intended crime. (E.g. pick pocketing an
empty  wallet.) 

STAGES OF EXECUTION UNDER RPC 6

 Consummated felony A felony is consummated when all the acts  necessary for its
accomplishment and execution  are present(RPC, Art 6). 

Frustrated felony A felony is frustrated when the offender performs  all the acts of
execution which would produce the  felony as a result, but which nevertheless do not 
produce it by reason of causes independent of the  will of the perpetrator (RPC, Art 6). 

Crimes which do not admit of a frustrated  stage 

1. Rape – the gravamen of the offense is carnal  knowledge, hence, the slightest
penetration to  the female organ consummates the felony. 
2. Corruption of public officers – mere offer  consummates the crime. 
3. Physical injury – consummated at the  instance the injuries are inflicted.

4. Adultery – the essence of the crime is sexual  congress.  

5. Theft– the essence of the crime is the taking  of property belonging to another.Once
the  thing has been taken, or in the possession of  another, the crime is consummated

Attempted felony 
There is an attempt when the offender  commences the commission of a felony
directly by  overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of  execution which should
produce the felony, by  reason of some cause or accident other than his  own
spontaneous desistance (RPC, Art 6).

CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL UNDER RPC ART 8

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons  come to an agreement concerning

the commission  of a felony and decide to commit it

Requisites of conspiracy 

1. Two or more persons came to an agreement; 2. Agreement concerned the

commission of a  crime; and 
3. Execution of a felony was decided upon. 

NOTE: Mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or  approval of the act, without
cooperation or at  least, agreement to cooperate, is not enough to  constitute a
conspiracy. Except when he is the  mastermind in a conspiracy, it is necessary that
a  conspirator should have performed some overt  act as a direct or indirect
contribution in the  execution of the crime planned to be committed. 

CONSPIRACY AS A CRIME
 Examples: Conspiracy to commit treason,  conspiracy to commit rebellion,
conspiracy to  commit acts like sale, importation and  distribution of drugs,
conspiracy to commit  access devise fraud, conspiracy to commit  terrorism
Wheel or circle conspiracy on plunder( **** FAVORITE BAR QUESTION****)
There is a single person or group called the “hub,”  dealing individually with two
or more other  persons or groups known as the “spoke” and the  rim that
encloses the spokes is the common goal  in the overall conspiracy (Estrada v. 
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965, February 26,  2002).
MEMORIZE
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMTANCES

They are those acts of a person said to be in  accordance with law, such that a
person is deemed  not to have committed a crime and is therefore  free from both
criminal and civil liability

1. Self-defense; 
2. Defense of relatives; 
3. Defense of stranger; 
4. Avoidance of greater evil or injury; 
5. Fulfillment of duty or exercise of right or  office;  
6. Obedience to an order of a superior. 

Since there is no crime, necessarily there is no  civil liability ex delicto. 

The basis for these justifying circumstances is the  lack of criminal intent, and with
the maximactus  non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea (an act does not  make the doer
guilty, unless the mind is guilty),  there is no crime and there is no criminal

Self-defense includes not only the defense of the  person or body of the one
assaulted but also that  of his rights, the enjoyment of which is protected  by
law.

Requisites of self-defense

1. Unlawful aggression; 
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed  to prevent or repel it; and 
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of  the person defending himself
NOTE: Unlawful aggression is an indispensable  requisite or condition sine qua non for
self defense to arise
Elements of unlawful aggression 

There are three elements of unlawful aggression:

1. There Emust be a physical or material attack or  assault;  

.2The attack or assault must be actual, or, at  least, imminent; and 
.3 The attack or assault must be unlawful
 Two kinds of unlawful aggression 

1. Actual or material unlawful aggression which means an attack with physical

force or  with a weapon, an offensive act that positively  determines the intent of the
aggressor to  cause the injury; and 
2. Imminent unlawful aggression which is an  attack that is impending or at the point
of  happening; it must not consist in a mere  threatening attitude

In order to constitute an element of self-defense,  the unlawful aggression must come,

directly or  indirectly, from the person who was subsequently  attacked by the accused

Requisites to satisfy the “reasonable necessity  of the means employed to

prevent or repel it” 

1. Nature and quality of the weapon used by the  aggressor; 

2. Physical condition, character, size and other  circumstances of both the offender and 
defender; and 
3. Place and occasion of the assault.

Factors taken into consideration in  determining the reasonableness of means 

employed by the person defending himself 

1. Means were used to prevent or repel;

2. Means must be necessary and there is no  other way to prevent or repel it; and 
3. Means must be reasonable – depending on the   circumstances, but
generally proportionate to  the force of the aggressor

when there can be lack of sufficient  provocation on the person defending

himself 

1. No provocation at all was given to aggressor  by the person defending himself; 

2. Even if provocation was given, it was not  sufficient
3. Even if provocation was sufficient, it was not  given by the person defending himself;
4. Even if provocation was given by the person  defending himself, it was not the
proximate  and immediate to the act of aggression; and
5. Sufficient means proportionate to the damage  caused by the act, and adequate to
stir one to  its commission. 

NOTE; Lack of the sufficient provocation 

Sufficient provocation should not come from the  person defending himself, and it
must  
immediately precede the aggression. 
 BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROM(PEOPLE VS GENOSA)

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

which has 3  phases: 
1. Tension building phase; 
2. Acute battering incident; and 
3. Tranquil, loving (or at least non-violent)  phase. 

EXEMPTIN CIRCUMTANCES
No criminal liability, but there is civil liability

EXEMPTING   BASIS
CIRCUMSTANCE 

Insanity/Imbecility.  Lack of intelligence.

Minority.  Lack of intelligence.

Accident without fault or  intention of causing Lack of criminal  

it. intent.

Compulsion of   Lack of freedom.

irresistible force. 

Uncontrollable fear.  Lack of freedom.

Prevented by some   Lack of criminal  

lawful or insuperable  cause. intent.

BASIS  JUSTIFYING   EXEMPTING  

CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE

As to its The   The circumstances  affect the actor.

effect circumstance  
affects the act,  not the
actor.

As to   The act   Since the act  

existen  complained of is  complained of is  
ce of a   considered to   actually wrong,  
crime have been done  within there is a crime. But  because the
the   actor  acted without  
bounds of law;  hence, it voluntariness, there  is absence of
deemed  as if no crime is  dolo  or culpa. Hence,  
 committed. there is no criminal.

As to   Since there is no  crime or   GR: there is civil  

liability criminal, there is  no liability for the  
criminal   wrong done.  
liability as well  as civil XPN: in paragraphs  4 and 7 of
liability. Article  12, there is neither  criminal
nor civil  liability.

Test of cognition – whether the accused acted  with complete deprivation of

intelligence in  committing said crime.

Test of volition – whether the accused acted  in total deprivation of freedom of will. 

MINIMUM AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY  AND TREATMENT OF CHILD

BELOW THE AGE  OF RESPONSIBILITY  
(RA 9344, as amended by RA 10630) 
AGE BRACKET  CRIMINAL  LIABILITY  TREATMENT

15 years old or  Exempt.  The child shall be  subjected to

below. a 
community-based  intervention 

program.

16-17 years   Exempt.  The child shall be  subjected to

old, who acted  withoutdiscern a 
ment. community-based intervention  
program.

16-17 years   Not   Such child shall be  subjected to

old, who acted  withdiscernme nt. exempt.  a  
diversion  
program.

IF ABOVE 18,DETEREMININIG DISCERNMENT IS NOT NECESSARY.

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES 
ART. 13, RPC
Mitigating circumstances are those which, if  present in the commission of the crime,
do not  entirely free the actor from criminal liability but  serve only to reduce the
penalty. 
ORDINARY   PRIVILEGED  
MITIGATING MITIGATING

Can be offset by   Can never be offset by  any

aggravating   aggravating  
circumstances. circumstance.

Ordinary mitigating  circumstances, if Privileged mitigating  circumstances

not  offset, will operate to  reduce the operate  to reduce the penalty  by one
penalty to  the minimum period,  to two degrees,  depending upon
provided the penalty is  a divisible one. what  the law provides.

PRIVILEGED MITIGATING

INCOMPLETE SELF-DEFENSE

MINORITY

: ONE NOTE DEGREE LOWWER EVEN IF THE PENALTY IS INDIVISIBLE

MEMORIZE MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMTANCES FOR THE

IMPOSITION OF ISL

eneric aggravating vis-à-vis Qualifying  circumstances 

GENERIC   QUALIFYING  
AGGRAVATING   AGGRAVATING  
CIRCUMSTANCES CIRCUMSTANCES

Affects only the   Affects the nature of  the

imposition of the   crime or brings  
penalty prescribed,  but not the nature of  the about a penalty higher  in
crime committed. degree than that  
ordinarily prescribed.

Can be offset by an  ordinary mitigating  GR: Cannot be offset by  any
circumstance. mitigating  
circumstances. 

XPN: Privileged  
mitigating  
circumstances.
 Both must be alleged in the information in order  to be appreciated.

Use of Loose Firearm when inherent in the  commission of the crime considered
as an  aggravating circumstance 

The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in the  commission of a crime punishable
under the  Revised Penal Code or other special laws, shall be  considered as an
aggravating circumstance (par. 1,  Sec 29, RA 10591). 

NOTE: a positive finding for the use of  dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying 
aggravating circumstance in the commission of  a crime by an offender, and the
application of the  penalty provided for in the Revised Penal Code  shall be applicable

INDERTERMINATE SENTENCE LAW ( FAVORITE BAR QUESTION)

TO DETERMINE THE PROPER PENALTY RELATE IT TO ART. 64 OF THE RPC

1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose
the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.

2. When only a mitigating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they
shall impose the penalty in its minimum period.

3. When only an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they
shall impose the penalty in its maximum period.

4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall
reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight.

5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating

circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that
prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem applicable, according to the number
and nature of such circumstances.

6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances, the
courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by law, in its maximum
period.

7. Within the limits of each period, the courts shall determine the extent of the penalty
according to the number and nature of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances
and the greater or lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime.

( NOTE ON THE PRESENCE OF PRIVILEGED MITIGATING)

PRIV. MIT

MINORITY

INCOMPLETE SELF DEFENSE

NOTE: ONE DEGREE LOWER REGARDLESS IF THE IMPOSABLE PENALTY IS

INVISIBLE

NOTE:MINIMUM TERM just state(the period of which is upon the discretion of the
court)

ISLAW IS NOT APPLICABLE WHEN THE PENALTY IMPOSEADIS

DEATH,RECLUSION PERPETUA,LIFE IMPRISONMENT AND DESTIERO OR IF THE
PENALTY IS LESS THAN 1 YEAR.

THE DISQUALIFIED OFFENDERS ARE:

1. Convicted of offenses punished with death or life imprisonment.
2. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason, misprision of
treason, rebellion, sedition  or espionage, or piracy.
3. Those who are habitual delinquents.
Recidivists are entitled to an indeterminate sentence.

4. Those  who shall have escaped from confinement  or  evaded sentence.
A minor who escaped from confinement in the reformatory is entitled to the benefits of
the law because confinement is not considered imprisonment.

5. Those who having been granted conditional pardon by the President shall have
violated the terms thereof.
6. Those whose maximum period of imprisonment does not exceed one year. (Q8, 1999
Bar)
The application of which is based upon the penalty actually imposed in accordance with
law. (People v. Hidalgo, 452, Jan. 22, 1962)

7. Those already serving final judgment upon the approval of this Act
8. Those sentenced to the penalty of destierro or suspension. 
Whenever any prisoner who shall have served the minimum penalty  imposed on him,
said Board of Indeterminate Sentence may, in its discretion, and in accordance with the
rules  and regulations  adopted thereunder, authorize the release of  such prisoner
on parole.  If during the period of surveillance, such parolee  shall  show himself to be a
law-abiding  citizen  and shall not violate any of the laws of the Philippines, the Board
may issue a final certificate of release in his favor.  Whenever any  prisoner released on
parole shall, during the  period  of surveillance, violate any of the conditions of his
parole, the Board may issue an order for his re-arrest and shall serve the remaining
unexpired portion of the maximum sentence.
The application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is mandatory if the imprisonment
would exceed one year.  It would be favorable to the accused.

IF THE APPLICATION CIRCUMTANCES WILL REACH LESS THAN A YEAR, ISLAW

WILL BE NOT APPLIED. A STRAIGHT PENALTY SHOULD BE IMPOSED.

Determine first if the crime committed is not disqualified under ISLAW.