territory, subject to the principles of public

CRIMINAL LAW international law and to treaty stipulations.

(REVISED PENAL CODE - BOOK I)
(a) Treaty or Treaty Stipulations
CRIMINAL LAW DEFINED
An example of treaty or treaty
Criminal Law is that branch or division of law stipulation, as an exception to the
which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and general application of our Criminal
provides for their punishment. Law is the Base Agreement
entered into by and between the
When did the Revised Penal Code take effect? Philippines and the USA on March
14, 1947 stipulating that “the
The Revised Penal Code took effect on Philippines consents that the US
January 1, 1932 (Art. 1, RPC). have the right to exercise
jurisdiction over some particular
Characteristics of Criminal Law offenses. However, the said
Military Bases Agreement already
Criminal Law has three main expired on September 16, 1991.
characteristics, namely (1) general, (2) territorial,
and (3) prospective. (b) Law on Preferential Application

A. General Application Republic Act No. 75 may be

considered a law of preferential
It has General application because application in favor of diplomatic
Criminal Law is binding on all persons who reside representatives and their
or sojourn in Philippine territory. domestic servants.
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code states It is a law to penalize acts
that the provisions of this Code shall be enforced which would impair the proper
within the Philippine Archipelago, including its observance by the Republic and
atmosphere, interior waters and maritime zone, inhabitants of the Philippines of
without reference to the person or persons who the immunities, rights, and
might violate any of its provisions. privileges of duly accredited
Art. 14 of the Civil Code provides that foreign diplomatic representatives
penal laws shall be obligatory upon all who live or in the Philippines.
sojourn in Philippine territory.

Exceptions to the General Application of

Criminal Law Nota Bene:

There are cases where our Criminal Law The law does not apply when
does not apply even if the crime is committed by a the foreign country adversely
person residing or sojourning in the Philippines. affected does not provide similar
They constitute the exceptions. protection to our diplomatic
representatives.
(1) The opening sentence of Art. 2 of the
Revised Penal Code says that the (c) Principles of Public
provisions of this Code shall be enforced International Law
within the Philippine Archipelago, “except
as provided in the treaties and laws of Persons exempt from the
preferential application.” operations of our criminal laws by
(2) Art. 14 of the Revised Penal Code provides virtue of the principles of public
that penal laws and those of public international law:
security and safety shall be obligatory 1) Sovereigns and other chiefs of
upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine state;
2) Ambassadors;
 3) Ministers plenipotentiary;
4) Minister’s resident; and
5) Charges d’ affaires.
It is well established principle
of international law that
diplomatic representatives, such
as ambassadors or public
ministers and their official retinue,
possess immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the country
of their sojourn and cannot be
sued, arrested or punished by the
law of that country.
Nota Bene:
A consul is not entitled to the
privileges and immunities of an
ambassador or minister.
B. Territorial Application
It is Territorial, in that criminal law
undertakes to punish crimes committed within
the Philippine territory.
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code states
that the provisions of this Code shall be enforced
within the Philippine Archipelago, including its
atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime
zone, which constitute the Philippine territory.
Extent of Philippine Territory for Purposes of
Criminal Law:
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code provides that
the provisions of said Code shall be enforced within
the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere,
its interior waters and maritime zone.
Art. 1 of the 1987 Constitution provides as
follows:
“The national territory comprises the
Philippine Archipelago, with all the islands and waters
embraced therein, and all other territories over which
the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction,
consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains,
including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the
insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The
waters around, between and connecting the islands of
the Archipelago, regardless of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the
Philippines.
www.rkmfiles.net2
Exceptions to the Territorial Application of
Criminal Law
Art. 2 of the Revised penal Code provides:
“Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code
shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior
waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
jurisdiction against those who:
1) Should commit an offense while on a
Philippine ship or airship;
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;
3) Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the forged or
counterfeited obligations and securities;
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
national security and the law of nations;
6) Should destroy or cause destruction to the
maritime/marine zone, the Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) and the natural
resources within the EEZ of the Philippines.
C. Prospectivity of Criminal Laws
It is Prospective, in that a penal law
cannot make an act punishable when committed.
Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the
time of their commission
Art. 21 of the Revised Penal Code
provides that no felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its
commission.
Art. 366 of the Revised Penal Code
provides that felonies are punishable under the
laws enforced at the time of their commission.
Exception to the Prospective Application of
Criminal Laws
Whenever a new statute dealing with crime
establishes conditions more lenient or favorable to the
accused, it can be given a retroactive effect.
Exceptions to the Exception:
 This exception has no application in the
following instances:
(1) where the new law is expressly made
inapplicable to pending actions or
existing causes of actions.
(2) Where the offender is a habitual
delinquent/criminal under Art. 62 of
the Revised Penal Code.
Nota Bene:
The new law can still be given a
retroactive effect if the offender is a Recidivist.
THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW
There are three theories in criminal law, namely: (1)
classical theory, (2) positivist theory, and (3) eclectic
theory.
A. CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSICAL THEORY
1. The basis of criminal liability is human tree will
and the purpose of the penalty it retribution.
2. That man is essentially a moral creature with an
absolutely free will to choose between good and evil,
thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result
of the felonious act than upon the man, the criminal
himself.
3. It has endeavoured to establish a mechanical
and direct proportion between crime and penalty.
4. There is a scant regard to the human element.
B. CHARACTERISTICS OF POSITIVIST THEORY
1. That man is subdued occasionally by a strange
and morbid phenomenon which constraints him to do
wrong, in spite of or contrary to his volition.
2. That crime is essentially a social and natural
phenomenon, and as such, (a) it cannot be treated and
checked by the application of abstract principles of
law and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a
punishment fixed and determined a priori; (b) but
rather through the enforcement of individual
investigation conducted by a competent body of
psychiatrist and social scientists.
C. CHARACTERISTICS OF ECLECTIC THEORY
What are felonies (Delitos)?
Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by
law (Art. 3, 1st par., RPC).
www.rkmfiles.net3
What are the two ways of committing felonies?
How are felonies committed?
Felonies are committed by means of deceit
(dolo) or by means of fault (culpa).
Elements of Felonies:
1. That there must be an act or omission.
2. That the act or omission must be punishable
by the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
3. That the act is performed or the omission
incurred by means of dolo or culpa.
4. That the act or omission must have been
voluntarily.
When is there deceit?
There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent.
Requisites of Intentional Felonies
In order that an act or omission may be
considered as having been performed or incurred
with deliberate intent, the following requisites must
concur:
1. The offender must have FREEDOM while
doing an act or omitting to do an act;
2. The offender must have INTELLIGENCE
while doing the act or omitting to do the act; and
3. The offender must have INTENT while doing
the act or omitting to do the act.
NECESSITY OF FREEDOM
When a person acts without freedom, he is no
longer a human being but a tool. His liability is as much
as that of the knife that wounds, or of the torch that
sets fire, or of the key that opens a door, or of the
ladder that placed against the wall of a house in
committing robbery.
Example:
The following have no freedom: (a) a person
who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force,
or (b) a person who acts under the impulses of an
uncontrollable fear of an equal of greater injury. Thus,
they are exempt from criminal liability under Art. 12,
paragraphs 5 and 6 respectively of the Revised Penal
Code.
NECESSITY OF INTELLIGENCE
Intelligence is a necessary factor in
determining the morality of a particular act. Thus
without this power, no crime can exist.
Example:
The following are exempt from criminal
liability because of the absence of intelligence:
(1) An imbecile or an insane person, unless
the latter has acted during a lucid interval
(Art. 12, (1), RPC);
(2) A person under nine (9) years of age (Art.
12, (2), RPC);
(3) A person over nine (9) years of age and
under fifteen (15), unless he has acted
with discernment (Art. 12, (3), RPC).
NECCESSITY OF INTENT
Intent to commit he act with malice, being
purely a mental process, is presumed and the
presumption arises from the proof of the commission
of an unlawful act.
Nota Bene:
All the three requisites of voluntariness in
intentional felony must be present because “a
voluntary act is a free, intelligent, and intentional act”.
When is there fault?
There is fault when the wrongful act results
from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack
of skill.
Requisites of Culpa
In order that the act or omission in felonies
committed by means of fault or culpa may be
considered voluntary, the following must concur:
(1) The offender must have FREEDOM while
doing the act or omitting to do the act;
(2) The offender must have INTELLIGENCE
while doing the act or omitting to do the
act; and
www.rkmfiles.net4
(3) The offender is IMPRUDENT, NEGLIGENT
or LACKS FORESIGHT or SKILL while
doing the act or omitting to do the act.
Felonies are classified according to the means
by which they are committed into:
(1) Intentional Felonies or felonies committed
with malice or deliberate intent, and
(2) Culpable Felonies or felonies committed
as a result of imprudence, negligence, lack
of foresight or lack of skill.
GENERAL CLASSES OF CRIMES
1. Intentional Felonies;
2. Culpable Felonies; and
3. Those crimes defined and penalized by special laws,
which include crimes punishable by municipal or city
ordinances.
The first two are defined and penalized under
the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.
Who incurs criminal liability?
Criminal liability shall be incurred:
(1) By any person committing a felony
(delito) although the wrongful act done be
different from that which he intended.
(2) 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 on
account of the employment of inadequate
or ineffectual means (Art. 4, RPC).
Notes:
Under paragraph 1 of Art. 4, a person
committing a felony is criminally liable although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he
intended.
The causes which may produce a result
different from that which the offender intended are:
1. error in personae or mistake in the identity
of the victim;
2. aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow, that
is, when the offender intending to do an injury to one
person actually inflicts it on another; and
 3. praeter intentionem or when the injurious
result is greater than that intended or the act exceeds
the intent.
Requisites:
In order that a person may be held criminally
liable for a felony different from that which he
intended to commit, the following must be present:
(1) That an intentional felony has been
committed; and
(2) That the wrong done to the aggrieved
party be the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed by
the offender.
In simple words, the felony committed must
be the proximate cause of the resulting injury.
PROXIMATE CAUSE DEFINED
“That cause, which in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
cause, produces the injury, and without which the
result would not have occurred”.
The felony committed is not the proximate
cause of the resulting injury –
(1) when there is an active force that
intervened between the felony committed
and the resulting injury, and the active
force is a distinct act or fact absolutely
foreign from the felonious act of the
accused, or
(2) when the resulting injury is due to the
intentional act of the victim.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the Revised Penal
Code defines impossible crime, to wit, “an act which
would be an offense against persons or property. Were
it not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the employment of
inadequate or ineffectual means”.
Why are impossible crimes punishable?
The commission of an impossible crime is
indicative of criminal propensity or criminal tendency
on the part of the actor. Such person is a potential
www.rkmfiles.net5
criminal. Objectively, the offender does not commit a
felony, but subjectively he is a criminal.
According to the positivist way of thinking, the
community must be protected from anti-social
activities, whether actual or potential, of the morbid
type of man called “socially dangerous person”.
Requisites of Impossible Crime
(1) That the act performed would be an
offense against persons or property.
(2) That the act was done with evil intent.
(3) That is accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is
either inadequate or ineffectual.
(4) That the act performed should not
constitute a violation of another provision
of the Revised Penal Code.
Example of an Impossible Crime, where the act
performed by the offender would have been an offense
against persons were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment.
Stabbing a person lying on bed, the offender
having the intent to kill him and thinking that he was
only sleeping, when in fact that person had already
been dead before he stabbed him. The act performed
by the offender would have been murder, an offense
against persons, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment, it being
impossible to kill a person who is already dead.
Example of an impossible crime, where the act
performed by the offender would have been an offense
against property were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment.
Picking the pocket of another, without his
knowledge and consent, to take with intent to gain any
personal property from that pocket which turned out
to be empty. The act performed by the offender would
have been theft, an offense against property, were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment, since theft cannot be committed
when there is no personal property that could be
taken.
Case:
A picked the pocket of B and succeeded in
extracting B’s wallet. Once in possession of the wallet,
A opened it, but finding it empty, he threw away the
wallet. Is A guilty of an impossible crime?

Ans:
No, because the wallet has some value and the
crime of theft is consummated from the moment the
offender has taken possession of the wallet with intent
to gain. Hence, that person is guilty, not of an
impossible crime, but of theft.
Nota Bene:
In impossible crime, the act performed should
not constitute another offense, specifically punished
by law.
Example of an impossible crime where the means
employed is inadequate
Using small quantity of arsenic or poison to kill
a person. The small quantity of poison is inadequate to
kill a person. But the one who used it to kill another is
liable for impossible crime, because subjectively he is
a criminal.
Example of an impossible crime where the means
employed is ineffectual.
Believing that certain white powder was
arsenic or poison, A mixed it with the coffee intended
for B. When B drank it he was not injured at all,
because the white powder was sugar.
What is the penalty for impossible crime?
The penalty for impossible crime is arresto
mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos (Art. 59, RPC).
What factors must be considered by the court in
determining the proper penalty for impossible
crime?
The factors that must be considered by the
court in determining the proper penalty are: (1) the
social danger and (2) the degree of criminality shown
by the offender (Art. 59, RPC).
Case:
A fired his revolver at B from a distance of one
kilometer. Is A criminally liable?
Ans.:
No. It is believed that A shows stupidity rather
than dangerousness. According to the positivist
theory, A should not be punished, because there is
neither “social danger” nor any “degree of criminality”
www.rkmfiles.net6
shown by him. Even subjectively, a man with little
common sense will know that he cannot hit a person
by firing a revolver one kilometer away.
What is the duty of the court in connection with
acts, which should be repressed, but which are not
covered by the law?
Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and which s not
punishable by law, it shall render the proper decision,
and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the
court to believe that said act should be made the
subject of legislation (Art. 5, 1st paragraph, RPC).
What is the duty of the court in cases of excessive
penalties?
Whenever the court finds that a strict
enforcement of the provisions of the Revised Penal
Code would result in the imposition of a clearly
excessive penalty, taking into consideration the
degree of malice and the injury caused by the offense,
the court shall submit to the Chief Executive, through
the Department of Justice, such statement as may be
deemed proper, without suspending the execution of
the sentence (Art. 5, 2nd paragraph, RPC).
What are the three stages of the acts execution of
a felony?
The three stages of execution of a felony are
attempted, frustrated and consummated.
Are these stages of execution punishable?
Consummated felonies, as well as those which
are frustrated and attempted, are punishable (Art. 6,
1st paragraph, RPC).
Nota Bene:
When the crime is punishable by a special law,
the attempted and frustrated stages of the acts of
execution are not punishable, unless the special law
provides a penalty therefore.
When is a felony attempted?
A felony is attempted when the offender
commences the commission of a felony directly by
over 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 (Art. 6, 3rd paragraph, RPC).
Elements of Attempted Felony
1. The offender commences the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts;
2. He does not perform all the acts of execution which
should produce the felony;
3. The offender’s act be not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance; and
4. The non-performance of all the acts of execution
was due to cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance.
The external acts must have a direct
connection with the crime intended to be committed
by the offender.
What is an indeterminate offense?
It is one where the purpose of the offender in
performing an act is not certain. Its nature in relation
to its objective is ambiguous.
When is a felony frustrated?
A felony is frustrated when the offender
performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator (Art. 6, 2nd
paragraph, RPC).
Elements of Frustrated Felony
1. The offender performs all the acts of execution;
2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as
a consequence;
3. The felony is not produce ;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.
Felony Distinguished from Attempted Felony
1. In both, the offender has not accomplished
his criminal purpose.
2. In frustrated felony, the offender has
performed all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony, while in attempted felony, the
offender merely commences the commission of a
www.rkmfiles.net7
felony directly by overt acts and does not perform all
the acts of execution.
In other words, in frustrated felony, the
offender has reached the objective phase; in
attempted felony, the offender has not passed the
subjective phase.
SUBJECTIVE PHASE
It is that portion of the execution of the crime,
starting from the point where the offender begins to
that point where he has still control over his acts,
including their natural course.
OBJECTIVE PHASE
It is that portion of the acts of the offender,
where he has no more control over the same. All the
acts of execution have been performed by him.
Attempted Felony/Frustrated Felony Distinguished
from Impossible Crime
1. In attempted or frustrated felony and
impossible crime, the evil intent of the offender is not
accomplished.
2. In impossible crime, the evil intent of the
offender cannot be accomplished; in attempted or
frustrated felony the evil intent of the offender is
possible of accomplishment.
3. In impossible crime, the evil intent of the
offender cannot be accomplished or because the
means employed by the offender is inadequate or
ineffectual; in attempted or frustrated felony, what
prevented its accomplishment is the intervention of
certain cause or accident in which the offender had no
part.
Are there felonies that have no attempted or
frustrated stages of execution? If yes what are they?
Yes there are felonies that have no attempted
and frustrated felonies. They are:
(1) flight to enemy country,
(2) corruption of minors,
(3) formal crimes, lie slander ad false
testimony;
(4) felonies by omission like misprision of
treason; and
(5) treason.
The crime of flight to enemy country has no
attempted and frustrated stages of execution because
in flight to enemy country, the mere attempt to flee or
go to enemy country consummates the crime.
The same is true with the crime of corruption
of minors. The mere proposal to the minor to satisfy
the lust of another consummates the crime.
In formal crimes, there are no attempted and
frustrated stages of execution because they are
consummated in one instant by a single act.
In felonies by omission, there is either a felony
when the offender fails to perform an act required by
law to be done, or no felony, if the offender performs
the act.
In treason, the overt act I itself constitutes the
crime.
Nota Bene:
In the case of People versus Orita,
184 SCRA 1905, the Supreme Court
held there is no such crime as
Frustrated Rape. Rape could either
be attempted of consummated.
When is a felony consummated?
A felony is consummated when all the
elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present (Art. 6, 2nd paragraph,
RPC).
Every crime has its own elements which must
all be present to constitute a culpable violation of a
precept of law.
What is an overt act?
An overt act is physical activity, more than a
mere planning or preparation, which evinces the
intention of the offender to commit a particular felony.
In what stage of the acts of execution is it
important to determine the existence of the overt
act?
The existence of the overt act is important only
in the attempted stage of the acts of execution.
It is not necessary to determine the existence
of overt act in the other stages of execution, because in
frustrated stage, as well as in the consummated stage
of execution, the offender has performed all the acts of
execution which necessarily implies that the offender
has done more than an overt act.
www.rkmfiles.net8
What is a preparatory act? Give at least two
examples.
Preparatory acts are those initial acts of a
person who has conceived the idea of committing a
crime, but which cannot by themselves logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. They are not
even overt acts and hence, they do not constitute the
attempted stage of the acts of execution.
The examples of preparatory acts are (1)
conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony, and (2)
buying or securing weapon to commit a crime, i.e.
murder, homicide, robbery, etc.
Are preparatory acts punishable?
Generally, preparatory acts are not punishable
because the law regards the as innocent or at least
permissible, except in rare and exceptional cases.
The following preparatory acts are punishable:
1. conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion and
sedition;
2. proposal to commit treason and rebellion; and
3. preparatory acts which are considered in
themselves, by law, as independent crimes like the
following:
a) possession of picklocks which is
preparatory to the commission of robbery
with force upon things;
b) possession of unlicensed firearm.
Nota Bene:
The above mentioned acts are
punished by law not a preparatory acts but
as a distinct crime i.e. possession of
picklocks defined and punished under Art.
304 of the Revised penal Code and illegal
possession of firearm defined and
punished under P.D. 1866 as amended by
R.A. 8294.
When are light felonies punishable under the
Revised Penal Code?
As a general rule, light felonies are punishable
only when they have been consummated (Art. 7, RPC).
Example of light felonies which are punishable only
when consummated.
1. Betting in sport contest,
 2. Illegal cock-fighting, and
3. Intriguing against honor.
Nota Bene:
These light felonies are
punishable only when
consummated because they are not
against persons or property and,
hence, they are covered by the
general rule.
Reason for the rule:
Light felonies produce such sight, such
insignificant moral and material injuries that public
conscience is satisfied with providing alight penalty
for their consummation. If they are not consummated,
the wrong done is so light that there is no need of
providing a penalty at all.
Is there any exception?
Yes, there is. Light felonies committed against
persons or properties are punishable even if they are
only in the attempted or frustrated stage of execution
(Art. 7, RPC).
Conspiracy is punishable only in the cases in
which the law specially provides a penalty therefore
(Art. 8, 1st paragraph, RPC).
Distinguish conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy
as a manner of incurring criminal liability:
Conspiracy is a felony when the law especially
provides a penalty therefore. In such cases, the mere
agreement and decision to commit a particular felony
is punished by law. Thus, conspiracy to commit
treason, rebellion and sedition is punishable.
However, if after the conspiracy the offenders
actually committed treason, rebellion or sedition, the
conspiracy ceases to be a felony and becomes only a
manner of incurring criminal liability, that is, the act of
one conspirator is the act of all the other conspirators.
In other crimes, like murder or abduction, the
mere agreement and decision to commit them is not
punishable, as there is no provision in the RPC which
punishes conspiracy to commit murder or abduction.
The conspirators become liable only when the crime,
like murder or abduction, is actually committed. But
they are liable for the crime actually committed, not
for conspiracy to commit it. The conspiracy will be
considered only to make the offenders equally liable,
that is, in the same degree and to the same extent.

Reason for the exception When is there a proposal to commit a felony?

The commission of felonies against persons or
property presupposes in the offender some moral
depravity
WHEN IS THERE CONSPIRACY?
A conspiracy exists when to or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it (Art. 8, 2nd paragraph,
RPC).
There is proposal when the person who has
decided to commit e felony proposes its execution to
some other person or persons (Art. 8, 3rd paragraph,
RPC).
Is proposal to commit a felony punishable?
Proposal to commit a felony is punishable only
in cases in which the law specially provides a penalty
therefore (Art. 8, 1st paragraph, RPC).

Requisites of Conspiracy May a person be held liable for proposal to commit

rebellion if the proposal is rejected by the person to
1. That two pr more persons came to an whom the proposal is made? Why?
agreement;
2. That the agreement concerned the commission Yes, because what the law punishes is the
of a felony; and mere proposal to commit rebellion or treason by one
3. That the execution of the felony be decided who is decided to commit it. The acceptance of such
upon. proposal is not necessary.

Is conspiracy punishable? What are the three classifications of felonies

according to gravity?

www.rkmfiles.net9
 According to gravity, felonies are classified as
grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies.
What are grave felonies?
Grave felonies are those to which the law
attaches the capita punishment or penalties which in
any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with
Article 25 of the Revised Penal Code (Art. 9, 1st par.,
RPC).
What are less grave felonies?
Less grave felonies are those which the law
punishes with penalties which in their maximum
period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of
the Revised Penal Code (Art. 9, 2nd par. RPC).
What are light felonies?
Light felonies are those infractions of law for
the commission of which a penalty of arresto menor or
a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both, is provided
(Art. 9, 3rd par., RPC).
Are Offenses defined and penalized by special laws
subject to the provisions of the Revised Penal
Code? What is the function of the RPC with regard
to these offenses?
No. Offenses, which are or in the future may be
punishable under special laws are not subject to the
provisions of the Revised Penal Code. The Revised
Penal Code shall be supplementary to such laws,
unless the latter should specially provide the contrary
(Art 10, RPC).
What are the circumstances which affect criminal
liability?
The circumstances which affect criminal
liability are:
(1) justifying circumstances (Art. 11, RPC),
(2) exempting circumstances (Art. 12, RPC)
and other absolutory causes (Art. 20, Art.
124, last paragraph, RPC),
(3) mitigating circumstances (Art. 13, RPC),
(4) aggravating circumstances (Art. 14, RPC),
and
(5) alternative circumstances (Art. 15, RPC).
Justifying Circumstances
www.rkmfiles.net10
Any person acting under any of the justifying
circumstances does not incur criminal liability.
The act of a person under any of the justifying
circumstances is in accordance with law, so that such
person is deemed not to have transgressed the law
and is free from both criminal and civil liability.
Exempting Circumstances
Technically, one who acts by virtue of any of
the exempting circumstances commits a crime,
although by the complete absence of any of the
conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness
of the act, no criminal liability arises. Hence, there is
wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions
which make the act voluntary, or negligent. There is
however, civil liability.
Mitigating Circumstances
These circumstances are based on the
diminution of either the freedom of action,
intelligence, or intent, or on the lesser perversity of the
offender.
Aggravating Circumstances
These are based on the greater perversity of
the offender manifested in the commission of the
felony as shown by (1) the motivating power itself, (2)
the place of commission, (3) the means and ways
employed, (4) the time, or (5) the personal
circumstances of the offender or of the offended party.
Alternative Circumstances
The basis of these alternative circumstances is
the nature and effects of the crime and the other
conditions attending its commission.
What are the justifying circumstances?
The justifying circumstances provided for
under Art. 11 are the following:
(1) Anyone who acts in defense of his person
or rights, provided that the following
circumstances concur:
1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the
part of the person defending himself.
(2) Any one who acts in defense of the person
or rights of his spouse, ascendants, or
legitimate natural or adopted brothers or
sisters, or of his relatives by affinity in the
same degrees and those by consanguinity
within the fourth civil degree, provided
the following requisites are present:
1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
3. In case the provocation was given by
the person attacked, that the one
making defense had no part therein.
(3) Anyone who acts in defense of the person
or rights of a stranger, provided that the
following requisites concur:
1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
3. The person defending be not induced
by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive.
(4) Any person who, in order to avoid an evil
or injury, does an act which causes
damage to another, provided that the
following requisites are present:
1. That the evil sought to be avoided
actually exists.
2. That the injury feared be greater than
that done to avoid it.
3. That there be no other practical and
less harmful means of preventing it.
(5) Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a
duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or
office.
(6) Any person who acts in obedience to an
order issued by a superior for some lawful
purpose.
What constitutes unlawful aggression?
The act must be unjustified and sufficient to
imperil one’s life, limb or right.
www.rkmfiles.net11
Is threat an unlawful aggression?
Mere threatening attitude is not unlawful
aggression. But if the threat is offensive and positively
strong, showing the wrongful intent to cause an injury,
that threat is an unlawful aggression.
Who are exempt from criminal liability?
The following are exempt from criminal
liability:
(1) An imbecile or an insane person,
unless the latter has acted during a
lucid interval.
When the imbecile or an insane person
has committed an act which the law defines as
a felony (delito), the court shall order his
confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums
established for persons thus afflicted, which
he shall not be permitted to leave without first
obtaining the permission of the same court.
(2) A person under nine years of age.
(3) A person over nine years of age and
under fifteen, unless he has acted with
discernment, in which case, such
minor shall be proceeded against in
accordance with the provisions of
Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code.
When such minor is adjudged to be
criminally irresponsible, the court, in
conformity with the provisions of this and the
preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the
care and custody of hi family who shall be
charged with his surveillance and education
otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of
some institutions or person mentioned in said
Art. 80.
(4) Any person who, while performing a
lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault
or intention of causing it.
Nota Bene:
What is the penalty
imposable when all the
 conditions required are not (4) That sufficient provocation or threat on
present? the part of the offended party
immediately preceded the act.
When all the conditions
required to exempt from criminal (5) That the act was committed in the
liability (under circumstance immediate vindication of a grave offense
number 4 of Art. 12) are not to the one committing the felony (delito),
present, the penalty imposable his spouse, ascendants, descendants,
upon the culprit is legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers
or sisters, or relatives by affinity within
(a) arresto mayor in its the same degrees.
maximum period to
prision correccional in (6) That of having acted upon an impulse so
its minimum period if powerful as naturally to have produced
he shall have been passion or obfuscation.
guilty of a grave felony,
and (7) That the offender had voluntarily
(b) arresto mayor in its surrendered himself to a person in
minimum and medium authority or his agents, or that he had
periods, if of a less voluntarily confessed his guilt before the
grave felony (Art. 67, court prior to the presentation of the
RPC). evidence for the prosecution.

(5) Any person who acts under the
compulsion of irresistible force.
(6) Any person who acts under the impulse of
an uncontrollable fear or an equal or
greater injury.
(7) Any person who fails to perform an act
required by law, when prevented by some
lawful insuperable cause.
(8) That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind
or otherwise suffering some physical
defect which thus restricts his means of
action, defense or communication with
his fellow beings.
(9) Such illness of the offender as would
diminish the exercise of the will power of
the offender without however depriving
him of the consciousness of his acts.

What are the mitigating circumstances? (10) Any other circumstances of a similar
nature and analogous to those above
The following are mitigating circumstances: mentioned.

(1) Those justifying and exempting
circumstances when all the requisites
necessary to justify the act or to exempt
from criminal liability in the respective
cases are not attendant.
(2) That the offender is under eighteen years
of age or over seventy years. In the case
of the minor, he shall be proceeded
against in accordance with the
provisions of Article 80.
(3) That the offender had no intention to
commit so grave a wrong as that
committed.
What are the aggravating circumstances?
The aggravating circumstances are the
following:
(1) That advantage be taken by the offender of
his public position.
(2) That the crime be committed in contempt
of or with insult to the public authorities.
(3) That the act be committed with insult or in
disregard of the respect due the offended
party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or
that it be committed in the dwelling of the

www.rkmfiles.net12
 offended party, if the latter has not given
provocation.
(4) That the act be committed with abuse of
confidence or obvious ungratefulness.
(5) That the crime be committed in the palace
of the chief executive, or in his presence, or
where public authorities re engaged in the
discharge of their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship.
(6) That the crime be committed in the night
time, or in an uninhabited lace, or by a
band, whenever such circumstances may
facilitate the commission of an offense.
Whenever more than three armed
malefactors shall have acted together in
the commission of an offense, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a
band.
(7) That the crime be committed on the
occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or
misfortune.
(8) That the crime be committed with the aid
of armed men or persons who insure or
afford impunity.
(9) That the accused is a recidivist.
A recidivist is 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 this Code.
(10) That the offender has been previously
punished by an offense to which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty or
for two or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.
(11) That the crime be committed in
consideration of a price, reward or
promise.
(12) That the crime be committed by means
of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
stranding of a vessel or intentional
damage thereto, derailment of a
locomotive, or by the use of any other
artifice involving great waste and ruin.
www.rkmfiles.net13
(13) That the act committed with evident
premeditation.
(14) That craft, fraud or disguise be
employed.
(15) That advantage be taken of superior
strength, or means be employed to
weaken the defense.
(16) That the act be committed with
treachery (alevosia).
There is treachery when the offender
commits any of the crimes against the
person, employing means, methods, or
forms in the execution thereof which
tend directly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to himself arising
from the defense which the offended
party might make.
(17) That means be employed or
circumstances brought about which add
ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
(18) That the crime be committed after an
unlawful entry.
There is an unlawful entry when an
entrance is effected by way not intended
for the purpose.
(19) That as a means to the commission of a
crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window
be broken.
(20) That the crime be committed with the
aid of persons under fifteen years of age
or by means of motor vehicles,
motorized watercraft, airships, or other
similar means (as amended by RA 5438).
(21) That the wrong done in the commission
of the crime be deliberately augmented
by causing other wrong not necessary
for its commission.
What are alternative circumstances? What are
they?
Alternative circumstances are those which
must be taken into consideration as aggravating or
mitigating according to the nature and effects of the confirmed. It is unnecessary that it be a matter of daily
crime and the other conditions attending its occurrence.
commission.
DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND
The alternative circumstances are (1) EDUCATION
relationship, (2) intoxication, and (3) the degree of
instruction and education of the offender. Low degree of instruction and education or
lack of it is generally mitigating.
When is the alternative circumstance of
relationship be considered? High degree of instruction and education is
aggravating when the offender avails himself of
The alternative circumstance of relationship his learning in committing the crime.
shall be taken into consideration when the offended
party is the (a) spouse, (b) ascendant (c) descendant, Nota Bene:
(d) legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or
(e) relative by affinity in the same degrees of the Night time and dwelling are
offender. not qualifying aggravating
circumstances. They are merely
When shall the alternative circumstance of ordinary or generic aggravating
intoxication mitigating? circumstances that could elevate
the impossible penalty to its
The intoxication of the offender shall be taken maximum period.
into consideration as a mitigating circumstance when The qualifying aggravating
the offender has committed a felony in a state of circumstances are those provided
intoxication, if the same is (a) not habitual or (b) not for in Art. 248 of the Revised Penal
subsequent to the plan to commit said felony. Code. If any qualifying aggravating
circumstance attended the
Nota Bene: commission of the crime it elevates
the crime to a graver offense and
For an accused to be entitled to the gives it its proper designation. For
mitigating circumstance of example when the killing is
intoxication, it must be shown that: attended with any of the qualifying
aggravating circumstances like
(1) at the time of the commission of the dwelling, the offender will be liable
criminal act, he has taken such for murder and not merely
quantity of alcoholic drinks as to homicide.
blur his reason and deprive him of
a certain degree of control; and NIGHT TIME
(2) that such intoxication is not That period of darkness
habitual, or subsequent to the plan beginning at end of dusk and
top commit the felony. ending at dawn. The Civil Code
defines it as from sunset to sunrise.
When is intoxication aggravating? (Art. 13, Civil Code of the
Philippines).
The intoxication of the offender is aggravating
(a) when the intoxication is habitual or intentional or Not all the time, night time
(b) when it is intentional or subsequent to the plan to may be appreciated as an
commit the crime. aggravating circumstance.
Night time may be
Habitual Drunkard appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance in the following
One given to intoxication by excessive use of instances:
intoxicating drinks. The habit should be actual and

www.rkmfiles.net14
1) when it facilitated the commission party to commit the crime therein,
of the crime; there was VIOLATION OF THE
2) when it is especially sought for by SANCTITY OF THE HOME.
the offender to insure the
commission of the crime; or Dwelling is not aggravating in the
3) when the offender took advantage following instances;
thereof for the purpose of impunity.
1) When the offended party in his
Night time is not aggravating, dwelling gave sufficient and
even if the crime was committed immediate provocation to the
during night time in the following offender.
instances:
The offended party loses his
1) When the crime was the result of a right to be respected in his home,
succession of acts which took lace because he gave sufficient
within the period of two hours provocation to the offender. But the
commencing at 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 provocation contemplated has
p.m.; three requisites:
2) When treachery concurred with (a) it must be given in his
night time in the commission of the dwelling;
crime because night time is (b) it must be sufficient; and
absorbed in treachery; and (c) it must be immediate.

3) When the meeting between the 2) When both the offender and the
offender and the offended party at offended party are occupants of
night time is causal and the idea of the same dwelling.
committing the crime came into the 3) When dwelling is inherent in
mind of the offender only at that the crime, such as in robbery
time. with force upon things and in
The reason for this is that trespass to dwelling.
night time was not especially
sought for by the offender. Pursuant to the 2000 Rules
But, it may still be on Criminal procedure specifically
aggravating, if the darkness Rule 110 qualifying aggravating
facilitated the commission of the circumstances as well as ordinary
crime or that the offender took or generic aggravating
advantage of it. circumstances must be alleged in
the information in order to be
DWELLING appreciated.

Dwelling is an aggravating WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE?

circumstance when the crime is
committed in the dwelling of the Ans.: The following are criminally liable for
offended party. grave and less grave felonies:
Why? Because of two 1) Principals.
reasons, namely: 2) Accomplices.
3) Accessories.
(1) when the offender was welcomed
in the home of the offended party The following are liable for light felonies:
and the offender committed the
crime against the latter, there was 1) Principals.
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE; and 2) Accomplices.
(2) when the offender forced his way
into the dwelling of the offended

www.rkmfiles.net15
WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS PRINCIPALS?
The following are considered principals:
(1) Those who take a direct part in the
execution of the act;
(2) Those who directly force or induce others
to commit it;
(3) Those who cooperate in the commission of
the offense by another act without which
it would not have been accomplished (Art.
17, RPC).
Three Kinds of Principals:
1. Principal by Direct Participation (PDP) -
Those who take a direct part in the
execution of the act.
2. Principal by Induction (PI) - Those who
directly force or induce others to commit a
crime.
3. Principal by Indispensable Cupertino
(PIC) - Those who cooperate in the
commission of the offense by another act
without which the crime would not have
been accomplished.
PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION
The principal by direct participation
personally takes part in the execution of the act
constituting the crime. For example, one who with
intent to gain, personally shoots another is liable as
principal by direct participation in the crime of
homicide or one who burns the house of another is a
principal by direct participation in the crime of arson.
Nota Bene:
Two or more persons may
take direct part in the execution of
the act, in which case they may be
principals by direct participation,
provided, the following requisites
are present:
(1) That they participated
in the criminal
resolution. Absent this
requisite, the offender
cannot be made liable
as principal.
(2) That they carried out
their plan and
www.rkmfiles.net16
personally took part in
its execution by acts,
which directly tended
to the same end.
PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION
Becomes liable only as such when
the principal by direct participation
committed the act induced.
Requisites:
In order that a person may be
convicted as principal by inducement, the
following requisites must be present:
1. That the inducement be made
directly with the intention of procuring the
commission of the crime; and
2. That such inducement be the
determining cause of the commission of the
crime by the material executor.
Two Ways of Becoming a Principal by
Induction
1. By directly forcing another to commit a
crime, either
(a) by using irresistible force, or
(b) by causing uncontrollable fear.
2. By directly inducing another to commit a
crime, either
(a) by giving price, or offering
reward or promise, or
(b) by using words of command.
PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE
COOPERATION
Cooperates with the principal by direct
participation.
Requisites:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that
is, there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of
criminal purpose and intention immediately before
the commission of the crime charged; and
 2. Cupertino in the commission of the offense
by performing another act without which the crime
would not have been accomplished.
Nota Bene:
Determine the cooperation
rendered by the offender whether
dispensable or indispensable. If
indispensable, liable as principal by
indispensable cooperation, but if
the cooperation is dispensable,
liable as an accomplice.
WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS ACCOMPLICES?
Accomplices are those who, not being
principals cooperate in the execution of the offense by
previous or simultaneous acts (Art. 18, RPC).
Requisites:
In order that a person may be considered as
accomplice, the following requisites must concur:
1. There must be a community of design; that
is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by
direct participation, he concurs with the latter in his
purpose;
2. He cooperates in the execution of the
offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the
intention of supplying material or moral aid in the
execution of the crime in an efficacious way; and
3. There must be a relation between the acts
done by the principal and those attributed to the
person charged as accomplice.
Examples of Cooperation by an Accomplice
1. By Previous Act -- Lending of a dagger or
pistol to the murderer, knowing the latter’s criminal
purpose.
2. By Simultaneous Act – The defendant who
held one of the hands of the victim and tried to take
away the latter’s revolver, while his co-defendant was
attacking him, is an accomplice for he cooperates in
the execution of the crime by simultaneous act
without any previous agreement or understanding.
Nota Bene:
www.rkmfiles.net17
1. An accomplice is neither
a principal nor an accessory but
who cooperates with the principal
by direct participation by previous
or simultaneous acts.
2. An accomplice concurs or
approves the act of the principal by
direct participation and performs
other acts showing his conformity
to the act of the principal by direct
participation.
3. An accomplice is not a
part of the plan or conspiracy.
4. The act or acts of the
accomplice must be lesser than the
act or acts done by the principal by
direct participation, that is, they
must not be equal to or graver than
the act or acts of the principal by
direct participation.
5. The cooperation of the
accomplice is only necessary, not
indispensable.
How an Accomplice Acquires Knowledge of the
Criminal Design of the Principal?
1. When the principal informs or tells the
accomplice of the former’s criminal purpose.
2. When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of
the principal.
Distinction between Conspirators and
Accomplices
1. Conspirators and accomplices have one thing
in common; they know and agree with the
criminal design. Conspirators, however, know
the criminal intention because they
themselves have decided upon such course of
action. Accomplices come to know about after
the principals have reached a decision and
only then do they agree to cooperate in its
execution.
2. Conspirators decide that a crime should be
committed; accomplices merely concur in it.
Accomplices do not decide whether a crime
should be committed, they merely assent to
the plan and cooperate in its accomplishment.
3. Conspirators are the authors of the crime;
accomplices are merely their instruments who
 perform acts not essential to the perpetration
o the offense.
WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS ACCESSORIES?
Accessories are those who having knowledge
of the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or
accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission
in any of the following manners:
(1) By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the
crime.
(2) By concealing or destroying the body of
the crime, or the effects or instruments
thereof, in order to prevent its discovery.
(3) By harboring, concealing or assisting in
the escape of the principal of the crime,
provided the accessory acts with abuse of
his public functions or whenever the
author of the crime is guilty of treason,
parricide, murder, or an attempt to take
the life of the Chief Executive, or is known
to be habitually guilty of some other crime
(Art. 19, RPC).
Paragraph 3 of Article 19 contemplates two
kinds of accessories. They are:
1. Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the
escape of the principal of ANY CRIME (except for light
felony) with the abuse of his pubic functions.
Requisites:
(a) The accessory is a public officer.
(b) He harbors, conceals, or assists in
the escape of the principal;
(c) The public officer acts with abuse
of his public functions.
(d) The crime committed by the
principal is any crime, provided it
is not a light felony.
2. Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in the
escape of the author of the crime or the principal:
(1) who is guilty of (a) treason, (b) parricide,
(c) murder, or (d) an attempt against the
life of the Chief Executive, or
(2) who is known to be habitually guilty of
some other crime.
www.rkmfiles.net18
Nota Bene:
The accessory, to be liable, must
have knowledge that the principal
is habitually guilty of some other
crime.
Presidential Decree No. 1612 (Anti-
Fencing Law of 1979)
FENCING. DEFINED (Sec. 2, par. A,
PD 1612)
The act of any person who,
with intent to gain for himself or for
another shall buy, receive, possess,
keep, acquire, conceal, sell or
dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or
in any other manner deal in any
article, item, object or anything of
value which he knows or should be
known to him, to have been derived
from the proceeds of the crime of
robbery or theft.
FENCE, DEFINED (Sec. 2, par. B)
Any person, firm,
association, corporation or
partnership or other organization
who/which commits the act of
fencing.
WHO ARE THE ACCESSORIES THAT ARE EXEMPT
FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY? IS THERE ANY
EXECPTION?
Those accessories with respect to their
spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural,
and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by
affinity within the same degrees.
The only exception is those accessories who
incurred such liability by profiting themselves or
assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the
crime. These accessories are criminally liable even if
the principal be their spouse, ascendant, descendant,
legitimate, natural and adopted brother or sister, or
relative by affinity with in the same degree (Art. 20,
RPC).
Notes:
1. An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when
the principal is his--
(a) spouse, or
(b) ascendant, or
(c) descendant, or
(d) legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister, or
(e) relative by affinity within the same
degrees.
2. Nephew or niece not included among such relatives.
3. Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even
if the principal is related to him, if such accessory:
(a) profited by the effects of the crime, or
(b) assisted the principal to profit by the
effects of the crime.
PENALTIES
Can you punish an act which is not defined and
penalized by any statute at the time of its
commission?
No. Article 21 of the Revised Penal Code
provides that “No felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
The penalties under the Revised Penal Code have
three-fold purposes, namely:
1. Retribution of Expiation – the penalty is
commensurate with the gravity of the offense.
2. Correction or Reformation – those penalties
consisting deprivation of liberty.
3. Social Defense – shown by its inflexible
severity to recidivists and habitual
delinquents.
May penal laws be given retroactive effect or
application?
Yes. Penal laws shall have retroactive effect
insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony,
who is not a habitual criminal, although at the time of
the publication of such laws a final sentence has been
pronounced and the convict is serving the same (Art.
22, RPC).
www.rkmfiles.net19
What is the effect of pardon given by the offended
party?
A pardon by the offended party does not
extinguish criminal action, but civil liability with
regard to the interest of the injured party is
extinguished by the express waiver of the offended
party (Art. 23, RPC).
However, if the pardon is given prior to the
institution of the criminal action, it shall extinguish
criminal liability
What are the measures of prevention or safety
which are not considered penalties?
The following shall not be considered as
penalties:
(1) The arrest and temporary detention of
accused persons, as well as their detention
by reason of insanity or imbecility, or
illness requiring their confinement in a
hospital.
(2) The commitment of a minor:
(a) to a public or private, benevolent or
charitable institution, established
under the law for the care, correction
or education of orphaned, homeless,
defective, and delinquent children, or
(b) to the custody or care of any other
responsible person in any other place
subject to the visitation and
supervision by the Director of Public
Welfare or any of his agents or
representatives, if there be any, or
otherwise by the Superintendent of
Public Schools or his representatives.
(3) Suspension from the employment or
public office during the trial or in order to
institute proceedings.
(4) Fines and other corrective measures
which, in the exercise of their
administrative disciplinary powers,
superior officials may impose upon their
subordinates.
(5) Deprivation of rights and the reparations
which the civil laws may establish in penal
form.
What are the different classes of penalties which
may be imposed under the Revised Penal Code?
 The different classes of penalties which may A fine whether imposed as a single or as an
be imposed under the Revised Penal Code are the alternative penalty shall be considered:
following:
(a) an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000
1. PRINCIPAL PENALTIES pesos;
(b) a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed
(1) Capital Punishment 6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos;
Death and
(2) Afflictive Penalties (c) light penalty if it be less than 200 pesos
Reclusion Perpetua (Art. 26, RPC).
Reclusion Temporal
Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification DURATION OF PENALTIES (Art. 27, RPC as amended
Perpetual or Temporary Special by RA 7659)
Disqualification
Prision Mayor Reclusion Perpetua – 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
Fine Reclusion Temporal – 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
Bond to Keep the Peace Prision Mayor and Temporary Disqualification – 6
(3) Correctional Penalties years and 1 day to 12 years, except when the penalty
Prision Correccional of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty,
Arresto Mayor in which case, its duration shall be that of the principal
Suspension penalty.
Destierro Prision Correccional, Suspension, and Destierro –
Fine 6 months and 1 day to 6 years, except when
Bond to Keep the Peace suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty, in
(4) Light Penalties which case, its duration shall be that of the principal
Arresto Menor penalty.
Public Censure Arresto Mayor – 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
Arresto Menor – 1 day to 30 days
Nota Bene: Penalties common to Afflictive Bond to Keep the Peace – The bond to keep the peace
penalties, Correctional Penalties and Light penalties shall be required as to cover such period of time as the
are: court may determine.

(1) Fine, and

(2) Bond to Keep the Peace

2. ACCESSORY PENALTIES
COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES
(1) Perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification Rules:
(2) Perpetual or temporary special
disqualification 1. If offender be in prison, the term of the
(3) Suspension from public office, the right to duration of the temporary penalties shall be
vote and be voted for, the profession or computed from the day on which the judgment
calling of conviction shall have become final
(4) Civil interdiction
(5) Indemnification 2. If the offender be not in prison, the term of the
(6) Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments duration of the penalty consisting of
and proceeds of the offense deprivation of liberty shall be computed from
(7) Payment of costs (Art. 25, RPC). the day that the offender is placed at the
disposal of the judicial authorities for the
When is a penalty considered afflictive, enforcement of the penalty.
correctional, or light?
3. The duration of other penalties shall be
computed only from the day on which the
www.rkmfiles.net20
 defendant commences to serve his sentence
(Art. 28, RPC).
When may the period of preventive imprisonment
be allowed to be deducted from the term of
imprisonment?
Offenders who have undergone preventive
imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their
sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty,
(a) with the full time during which they have
undergone preventive imprisonment, if
the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily
in writing to abide by the same
disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners; or
(b) four-fifths (4/5) of the time during which
he has undergone preventive
imprisonment if the detention prisoner
does not agree to abide by the same
disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted persons (Art. 29, RPC as
amended by RA 6127).
Requisites:
1. The sentence imposed by the court consists of
deprivation of liberty or imprisonment;
2. The offender has undergone preventive
imprisonment during the pendency of the
criminal proceeding until the finality of the
judgment; and
3. The detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in
writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules
imposed upon convicted prisoners.
Who are not entitled to be credited with the full time
or four-fifths of the time of preventive
imprisonment?
The following offenders are not entitled to be
credited either with the full time or four-fifths of the
time of preventive imprisonment:
1. Recidivist, or those convicted previously twice
or more times of any crime; and
2. Those who, upon being summoned for the
execution of the their sentence have failed to
surrender voluntarily (Art. 29, RPC).
www.rkmfiles.net21
Rule When Preventive Imprisonment for a Period
Equal to or more than the Possible Maximum
Imprisonment
Whenever the accused has undergone
preventive imprisonment or a period equal to or more
than the possible maximum imprisonment of the
offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his
case is not yet terminated, he shall be released
immediately without prejudice to the continuation of
the trial thereto or the proceeding on appeal, if the
same is under review (Art. 29, RPC as amended by EO
214, July 10, 1987).
Rule in Case the Maximum Penalty is Destierro
In case the maximum penalty to which the
accused may be sentenced is Destierro, he shall be
released after 30 days of preventive imprisonment
(Ibid).
EFFECTS OF THE PENALTIES ACCORDING TO
THEIR RESPECTIVE NATURE
What are the effects of the penalties of Perpetual
or Temporary Absolute Disqualification?
The penalties of perpetual or temporary
absolute disqualification for public office shall
produce the following effects:
1. The deprivation of the public offices and
employment which the offender may have held, even
if conferred by popular election.
2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any
election for any popular office or to be elected to such
office. In case of temporary disqualification, the
disqualification shall last during the term of the
sentence.
3. The disqualification for the offices or public
employment’s and for the exercise of any of the rights
mentioned. In case of temporary disqualification, the
disqualification shall last during the term of the
sentence.
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or
other pension for nay office formerly held (Art. 30,
RPC).
What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual
or temporary special disqualifications?

The penalties of perpetual or temporary
special disqualification for public office, profession or
calling shall produce the following effects:
1. The deprivation of the office, employment,
profession or calling affected.
2. The disqualification or holding similar
offices or employments either perpetually or during
the term of the sentence according to the extent of
such disqualification (Art. 31, RPC).
What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual
or temporary special disqualification for the
exercise of the right of suffrage?
The perpetual or temporary special
disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage
shall:
(a) deprive the offender perpetually or during the
term of the sentence, according to the nature
of said penalty, of the right to vote in any
popular election for any public office or to be
elected to such office; and
(b) the offender shall not be permitted to hold any
public office during the period of his
disqualification (Art. 32, RPC).
What are the effects of the penalties of suspension
from any public office, profession or calling, or the
right of suffrage?
The penalties of suspension from any public
office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage
shall disqualify the offender from holding such office
or exercising such profession or calling or right of
suffrage during the term of the sentence.
The person suspended from holding public
office shall not hold another having similar functions
during the period of his suspension (Art. 33, RPC).
What are the effects of civil interdiction?
Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender
during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental
authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or
property of the ward, of marital authority, of the right
to manage his property and of the right to dispose of
such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos
(Art. 34, RPC).
What are the effects of bond to keep the peace?
www.rkmfiles.net22
It gives the person sentenced to give bond to
keep the peace the duty to present two sufficient
sureties who:
(a) shall undertake that such person will not
commit the offense sought to be prevented,
and
(b) in case such offense be committed they will
pay the amount determined by the court in the
judgment, or otherwise to deposit such
amount in the office of the clerk of the court to
guarantee said undertaking (Art. 35, RPC).
What is the effect if the person sentenced failed to
give the bond required by the court?
Should the person sentenced fail to give the
bond as required he shall be detained for a period
which:
(a) shall in no case exceed six (6) months, if he
shall have been prosecuted or a grave or less
grave felony, and
(b) shall not exceed thirty (30) days if for a light
felony (Art. 35, RPC).
What is the period of duration of the bond?
The period of duration of the bond depends
upon the discretion of the court. The court shall
determine, according to its discretion, the period of
duration of the bond (Art. 35, RPC).
What are the effects of pardon given by the
President in the exercise of his pardoning power?
The pardon given by the President have the
following effects:
(1) It shall not work the restoration of the right to
hold pubic office, or the right of suffrage
except when such rights were expressly
restored by the terms of the pardon, and
(2) It shall in no case exempt the culprit from the
payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon
him by the sentence (Art 36, RPC).
What are included in the costs of the proceeding in
criminal cases?
Costs shall include fees and indemnities in the
course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be
fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined
by law or regulations in force, or amounts not subject
to schedule (Art. 37, RPC).
What are pecuniary liabilities of a person guilty of
a crime?
The pecuniary liabilities of the offender are the
following:
(1) The reparation of the damage caused;
(2) Indemnification of consequential
damages;
(3) The Fine; and
(4) The cost of the proceedings.
What is the order of payment in case the property
of the offender is not sufficient for the payment of
all his pecuniary liabilities?
In case the property of the offender is not
sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order:
1. The reparation of the damage caused.
2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings.
When should this order of payment be availed of?
The order of payment provided for under Art.
28 of the Revised Penal Code should be availed of only
when the offender is insolvent or his property is not
sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities.
What is subsidiary penalty?
Subsidiary penalty is a subsidiary personal
liability to be suffered by the convict who has no
property with which ti meet the pecuniary liabilities
for the reparation of the damage caused,
indemnification of consequential damages, and fine, at
the rate of one day for each 8.00, subject to the rules
provided for by law.
Is subsidiary penalty deemed imposed in case the
convict could not pay certain pecuniary liabilities
by reason of insolvency? Explain.
No, subsidiary penalty must be expressly
imposed by the Court in order that the convict may be
required to serve it. It is not an accessory penalty. It is
imposed upon the accused and served by him in lieu
of certain pecuniary liabilities which he fails to pay on
account of insolvency.
www.rkmfiles.net23
What are the rules relative to subsidiary penalty?
The rules are:
1. If the penalty imposed if Prision Correccional
or arresto and fine – subsidiary imprisonment,
not to exceed 1/3 of the term of the sentence,
and in no case to continue for more than one
year. Fraction or part of a day, not counted.
2. When the penalty imposed is fine only –
subsidiary imprisonment, not to exceed 6
months, if the offense is grave or less grave
felony; and not to exceed 15 days, if light
felony.
3. When the penalty imposed is higher than
prision correccional – no subsidiary
imprisonment.
4. If the penalty imposed is not by confinement,
but of fixed duration – the nature of the
subsidiary penalty is the same as that of the
principal penalty under the same rules in
number 1, 2, and 3 above.
5. In case the financial circumstances of the
convict should improve he shall pay the fine
(Art. 39, RPC as amended by RA 5465, April 21,
1969).
Notes:
In what case is there no subsidiary penalty, even if the
offender cannot pay the pecuniary liabilities by reason
insolvency?
Even if the offender cannot pay the pecuniary
liabilities by reason of insolvency, the offender cannot
be required to undergo subsidiary penalty in the
following instances:
1. When the penalty imposed is higher than
Prision correccional, such as Prision mayor,
Reclusion temporal and Reclusion perpetua. In
this case, there is no subsidiary penalty.
2. For failure to pay the costs of the proceedings
there is no subsidiary penalty.
3. When the penalty imposed is fine and a
penalty not to be executed by confinement in a
penal institution and has no fixed duration,
there is no subsidiary penalty.
Nota Bene:
Subsidiary penalty is
possible only when any of the
following penalties is imposed:
 (1) prision correccional;
(2) suspension and fine;
(3) destierro
(4) arresto mayor;
(5) arresto menor; and
(6) fine only.
What is the maximum duration of the
subsidiary penalty?
If the penalty imposed is prision
correccional or arresto mayor and fine it shall not
exceed one-third (1/3) of the term of the sentence,
and in no case shall it continue for more than one
(1) year.
But if the penalty imposed if fine only, it
shall not exceed six (6) months, if the offender is
prosecuted for grave or less grave felony; and not
more than fifteen (15) days, if prosecuted for a light
felony.
In what does the subsidiary penalty consist?
Subsidiary penalty does not always consist
of imprisonment.
If the penalty imposed is prision
correccional or arresto mayor and fine, the
subsidiary penalty shall consist in imprisonment.
If the penalty imposed is destierro, the
subsidiary penalty is also destierro.
If the penalty imposed is suspension, the
subsidiary penalty is also suspension.
What is an accessory penalty?
An accessory penalty is that penalty which is
deemed included in the imposition of the principal
penalty.
What are the accessory penalties of death?
If the penalty of death is executed, it has no
accessory penalties for obvious reasons.
If the penalty of death not executed by reason
of commutation or pardon, its accessory penalties are
(1) perpetual absolute disqualification, and (2) civil
interdiction during thirty (30) years EXCEPT when
such accessory penalties have been expressly
remitted in the pardon (Art. 40, RPC).
What are the accessory penalties of Reclusion
Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal?
www.rkmfiles.net24
The accessory penalties of Reclusion Perpetua
and Reclusion Temporal are (1) civil interdiction for
life or during the period of the sentence as the case
may be, and (2) perpetual absolute disqualification
which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned
as to the principal penalty EXCEPT when such
accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in
the pardon (Art. 41, RPC).
What are the accessory penalties of Prision
Mayor?
The accessory penalties of prision mayor are
(1) temporary absolute disqualification, and (2)
perpetual special disqualification from the right of
suffrage which the offender shall suffer although
pardoned as to the principal penalty EXCEPT when
such accessory penalties have been expressly
remitted in the pardon (Art. 42, RPC).
What are the accessory penalties of Prision
Correccional?
The accessory penalties of prision
correccional are (1) suspension from public office,
from the right to follow a profession or calling, and (2)
perpetual special disqualification from the right of
suffrage, if the duration of said imprisonment shall
exceed eighteen (18) months even though pardoned
as to the principal penalty EXECPT when such
accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in
the pardon (Art. 43, RPC).
What are the accessory penalties of arresto?
The accessory penalties of arresto are (1)
suspension of the right to hold office, and the right of
suffrage during the term of the sentence (Art. 44, RPC).
Note:
Every penalty imposed for the commission of
a felony carries with it the forfeiture of the proceeds
of the crime and the instruments or tools with which
it was committed.
What should be done to the proceeds, instruments
or tools?
Such proceeds and instruments or tools are
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government
EXCEPT when such property belongs to a third person
not liable for the offense.
 Those articles which are not subject of lawful
commerce shall be destroyed (Art. 45, RPC).
Is subsidiary penalty an accessory penalty?
No. Subsidiary penalty is a personal penalty
prescribed by law I substitution of the pecuniary
liability when the latter cannot be satisfied because of
the culprit’s insolvency. Hence, subsidiary
imprisonment cannot be served unless the judgment
so provides in case the accused is insolvent (People vs.
Fajardo, 65 Phil. 539).
APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Generally, the Penalty Imposed by Law is to be
Imposed Upon Principals
The penalty prescribed by law for the
commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the
principals in the commission of such felony (Art. 46,
RPC).
Penalty Imposed Applies to Consummated Felony
Whenever the law prescribed a penalty for a
felony in general terms, it shall be understood as
applicable to the consummated felony (Art. 46, RPC).
WHAT IS A COMPLEX CRIME?
A complex crime is one where a single act
constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies or
where an offense is a necessary means for committing
the other (Art. 48, RPC).
Two Kinds of Complex Crime
(1) Delito Compuesto or Compound Crime -
When a single act constitutes two or more
grave or less grave felonies.
(2) Delito Complejo or Complex Crime Proper
- When an offense is a necessary means
for committing the other.
Nota Bene: A complex crime is only
one crime as contemplated by law
because the offender has only one
criminal intent.
DELITO COMPUESTO (Compound Crime)
Requisites:
www.rkmfiles.net25
1. That only a single act is performed by the
offender.
2. That the single act produces two or more
grave or less grave felonies.
Examples: Murder with Homicide, Homicide with
Frustrated Homicide
DELITO COMPLEJO (Complex Crime Proper)
Requisites:
1. That at least two offenses are committed.
2. That one or some of the offenses must be
necessary means for committing the other.
3. That both or all the offenses must be punished
under the same statute.
Examples: Estafa through falsification of
commercial documents.
Malversation through falsification of a
public document.
Nota Bene:
No complex crime when one of the
offenses was committed for the purpose of
concealing the commission of the other.
Example:
After committing homicide, the
accused in order to conceal the crime, set
fire to the house where it had been
perpetrated.
Setting fire to the house is arson
(Art 321). But in this case, neither homicide
nor arson was necessary to commit the
other. Hence, the offender committed two
separate crimes of Homicide and Arson.
No complex crime where the
offense is penalized by a special law.
In the case of Reocdica versus Court
of Appeals, a grave or less grave felony
cannot be complex with a light felony. The
light felony should be separated, no to be
complexed.

PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IN CASE OF COMPLEX
CRIMES
The penalty for the more or most serious
crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its
maximum period (Art. 48, RPC).
Nota Bene:
The penalty to be imposed in case
of complex crime is the penalty imposable
to the gravest offense notwithstanding the
presence of mitigating circumstances. This
is so because the maximum of the
maximum cannot be offset by any
mitigating circumstance.
This does not mean however that
the Indeterminate Sentence Law does not
apply to complex crimes. As long as the case
does not belong to the exceptions provided
for under Sec. 2 of Act 4103 as amended
(Indeterminate Sentence Law), the
provisions of such law shall be applied.
However, in fixing the maximum penalty
imposable to the offender, the maximum
shall be imposed regardless of the presence
of any mitigating circumstance.
Penalty to be Imposed upon the Principals when
the Crime Committed is Different from That
Intended
In cases in which the felony committed is
different from that which the offender intended to
commit, the following rules shall be observed:
(1) If the penalty prescribed for the felony
committed be higher than that
corresponding to the offense which the
accused intended to commit – the penalty
corresponding to the offense which the
accused intended to commit shall be
imposed in its maximum period.
(2) If the penalty prescribed for the felony
committed be lower than that
corresponding to the one, which the
accused intended to commit – the penalty
prescribed for the felony committed shall be
imposed in its maximum period.
(3) The rule established by the next preceding
paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts
committed by the guilty person shall also
www.rkmfiles.net26
constitute an attempt or frustration of
another crime, if the law prescribes a
higher penalty for either of the latter
offenses, in which case the penalty
provided for the attempted or the
frustrated crime shall be imposed in its
maximum period (Art. 49, RPC).
Nota Bene:
Art. 49 does not apply to aberratio
ictus because I this hypothesis there is a
complex crime and Art. 48 applies.
It does not apply also to praeter
intentionem, because in this hypothesis, the
crime befalls the same person, whereas Art.
49 has no application to cases where a
more serious consequence not intended by
the offender befalls the same person
(People versus Alburquerque, 59 Phil. 150).
ARTICLES 50 - 57
Penalty to be imposed upon PRINCIPALS of a
FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the principal in a frustrated felony (Art.
50, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon PRINCIPALS of
ATTEMPTED CRIMES:
A penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a
felony (Art. 51, RPC).
Nota Bene:
Art. 250. Penalty for frustrated
parricide, murder or homicide. – The courts
in view of the facts of the case may impose
upon the person guilty of the frustrated
crime of PARRICIDE, MURDER or
HOMICIDE… a penalty lower by one degree
than that which should be imposed under
the provisions of Art. 50.
The courts, considering the facts of
the case may likewise reduce by one degree
the penalty which under Art. 51 should be
imposed for an attempt to commit any of
such crimes (Art. 250, RPC).
Question: May the court impose a
penalty lower by two degrees than hat
prescribed by law for the consummated
felony upon the principal in a frustrated
felony?
Answer: Yes. The court, in view of
the facts of the case, may impose upon the
person guilty of the frustrated crime of
parricide, murder or homicide a penalty
lower by one degree than that which
should be imposed under the provisions of
Art. 50 (Art. 250, RPC).
Inasmuch as Art. 50 provides that
the penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall, and Art. 250 provides that the
court may impose a penalty lower by one
degree than that which should be imposed
under Art. 50, it is clear that the court can
impose a penalty lower by two degrees.
Question: May the court impose a penalty
lower by three degrees than that
prescribed by law for the consummated
felony upon the principal in an attempted
felony?
Answers: Yes. The court, considering the
facts of the case, may likewise reduce by
one degree the penalty which under Art. 51
should b imposed for an attempt to commit
any of such crimes (Art. 250, 2nd par.).
Inasmuch as Art. 51 provides that a
penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed b law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principal
in an attempt to commit a felony, and Art.
250 provides that the court may reduce by
one degree the penalty which under Art. 51
should be imposed for a attempt to commit
the crime of parricide, murder or homicide,
it is clear that he court can impose a penalty
lower by three degrees.
Note that Art. 250 only applies in
three crimes, namely: (1) PARRICIDE, (2)
MURDER, and (3) HOMICIDE.
www.rkmfiles.net27
Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in a
CONSUMMATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a
consummated felony (Art. 52, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon ACCESSORIES to the
commission of a CONSUMMATED FELONY:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law or the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
consummated felony (Art 53, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in a
FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
frustrated felony (Art. 54, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon ACCESSORIES of a
FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
frustrated felony (Art. 55, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in an
ATTEMPTED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for an attempt to commit a felony
shall be imposed upon the accomplices I an attempt to
commit the felony (Art. 56, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an
ATTEMPTED CRIME:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the attempted felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to commit
a felony (Art. 57, RPC).
Exception to Arts. 50 – 57:
The provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57
shall not be applicable to cases in which the law
expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a
frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon
accomplices or accessories (Art. 60, RPC).
Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain
accessories:
Those accessories falling within the terms of
paragraph 3, Art 19 of the RPC who should act with
abuse of their public functions, shall suffer the
additional penalty for absolute perpetual
disqualification of the principal offender hall e guilty of
a grave felony, ad that of absolute temporary
disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave
felony (Art. 58, RPC).
RULES FOR GRADUATING PENALTIES
For the purpose of graduating the penalties
which according to the provisions of Arts. 50 – 57 are
to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any
frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or
accessories, the following rules shall be observed:
1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is
single and indivisible, the penalty next lower in
DEGREE shall be that immediately following
that indivisible penalty in the respective
graduated scale prescribed in Art. 71.
2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
composed of two indivisible penalties, or of one
or more divisible penalties to be imposed to
heir full extent, the penalty next lower in
degree shall be that immediately following the
lesser of the penalties prescribed in the
respective graduated scale.
4. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
composed of one or two indivisible penalties
and the maximum period of another divisible
penalty, the penalty next lower in degree shall
be composed of three medium and minimum
periods of the proper indivisible penalty and
the maximum period of that immediately
following in said respective graduated scale.
5. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
composed of several periods, corresponding to
different divisible penalties, the penalty next
lower in degree shall be composed of the
period immediately following, which shall be
taken from the penalty prescribed, if possible;
otherwise from the penalty immediately
following in the above mentioned respective
graduated scale.
6. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime
in some manner not especially provided for in
the four preceding rules, the courts proceeding
by analogy, shall impose corresponding
penalties upon those guilty as principals of the
frustrated felony, or of attempt to commit the
same, and upon accomplices and accessories
(Art. 61, RPC).
www.rkmfiles.net28
What is a degree in relation to the penalties
provided by the Revised Penal Code?
A degree is one unit penalty or one of the
penalties enumerated in the graduated scales in Art. 71
of the Revised Penal Code.
Thus, Scale No. 1 of said article mentions the
penalties in the following order:
1. Death,
2. Reclusion Perpetua,
3. Reclusion Temporal,
4. Prision Mayor,
5. Prision Correccional,
6. Arresto Mayor,
7. Destierro,
8. Arresto Menor,
9. Public Censure,
10. Fine.
One of them is a degree in relation to the others.
Prision mayor is one degree lower from reclusion
temporal. Prision correccional is two degrees lower
from reclusion temporal.
Effects of the attendance of mitigating or
aggravating circumstances and of habitual
delinquency:
Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and
habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for the
purpose of diminishing or increasing the penalty in
conformity with the following rules:
1. Aggravating circumstances which in
themselves constitute a crime especially
punishable by law or which are included by the
law in defining a crime and prescribing the
penalty therefor shall not be taken into account
for the purpose of increasing the penalty.
(a). When in the commission of the crime,
advantage was taken by the offender of his public
position, the penalty to be imposed shall be in its
maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances. The
maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was
committed by any person who belongs to an
organized/syndicated crime group.
An organized/syndicated crime group
means a group of two or more persons
collaborating, confederating or mutually helping
one another for purposes of gain in the commission
of any crime.

2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
aggravating circumstances inherent in the
crime to such a degree that it must of necessity
accompany the commission thereof.
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which
arise from the moral attributes of the offender,
or from his private relations with the offended
party, or from any other personal cause, shall
only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability
of the principals, accomplices and accessories
as to whom such circumstances are attendant.
4. The circumstances which consist in the
material execution of the act, or in the means
employed to accomplish it, shall serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of those
persons only who had knowledge of them at
the time of the execution of the act or their
cooperation therein.
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following
effects:
(a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be
sentenced to the penalty provided by law
for the last crime of which he be found
guilty and to the additional penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods;
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall
be sentenced to the penalty provided for
the last crime of which he be found guilty
and to the additional penalty of prision
mayor in its minimum and medium
periods; and
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the
culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty
provided for the last crime of which he be
found guilty and to the additional penalty
of prision mayor in its maximum period to
reclusion temporal in its minimum period.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this
Article, the total of the two penalties to be imposed
upon the offender, in conformity herewith, shall in
no case exceed 30 years.
For the purpose of this article, a person shall
be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within a
period of ten (10) years from the date of his release or
last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
www.rkmfiles.net29
physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he
is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
oftener (Art. 62, RPC as amended by RA 7659).
Rules for the application of indivisible penalties
In all cases in which the law prescribed a
single indivisible penalty, t shall be applied by the
courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating
circumstances that may have attended the
commission of the deed.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a
penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the
following rules shall be observed in the application
thereof:
(1) When in the commission of the deed there
is present only one aggravating
circumstance, the greater penalty shall be
applied.
(2) When there are neither mitigating nor
aggravating circumstances in the
commission of the deed, the lesser penalty
shall be applied.
(3) When the commission of the act is
attended by some mitigating
circumstances and there is no aggravating
circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be
applied.
(4) When the litigating and aggravating
circumstances attended the commission of
the act, the court shall reasonably allow
them to offset one another in
consideration of their number and
importance, for the purpose of applying
the penalty in accordance with the
preceding rules, according to the result of
such compensation (Art. 63, RPC).
Rules for the application of penalties which
contain three periods:
In cases in which the penalties prescribed by
law contain three periods, whether it be a single
divisible penalty or composed of three different
penalties, each one of which forms a period in
accordance with the provisions of Arts. 76 and 77, the
court shall observe for the application of the penalty
the following rules, according to whether there are or
are not mitigating or aggravating circumstances:
(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 tow 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 f each period, the court 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 o the evil produced by the
crime (Art. 64, RPC).
Notes:
What is a period n relation to a penalty?
A period is one of the three equal portions of
a divisible penalty known as minimum, medium and
maximum.
However, when the penalty prescribed by the Code is
composed of three distinct penalties each forming a
period, a period is one of those three penalties.
What is a complex penalty?
A complex penalty is a penalty prescribed by
law, composed of three distinct penalties, each
forming a period. The lightest of them shall be the
minimum period; the next the medium period and
the most severe shall be the maximum period.
Example:
Reclusion Temporal to Death.
minimum period – Reclusion temporal
medium period – Reclusion Perpetua
maximum period – Death
www.rkmfiles.net30
Is a complex penalty the penalty for a complex
crime?
No, it is not the penalty for complex crime. The
penalty for a complex crime is that provided for under
Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, that is, the
penalty for the graver or gravest offense, the same to
be imposed in its maximum period.
Rules in cases in which the penalty is not
composed of three periods
In cases in which the penalty prescribed by
law is not composed of three periods, the courts shall
apply the rules provided under Art. 64, dividing into
three equal portions of time included in the penalty
prescribed and forming one period or each of the three
portions (Art. 65, RPC).
IMPOSITION OF FINES
May the court impose a fine at its own discretion?
Art. 66 provide that in imposing fines the
courts may fix any amount within the limits
established by law. Hence, even though the law
authorizes the court to impose any amount of fine,
said amount should be within the limits provided for
by law.
What are the factors that should be taken into
consideration by the court in fixing the amount of
fine?
In fixing the amount in each case, attention
shall be given, not only to the mitigating and
aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to
the wealth or means of the culprit (Art. 66, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed upon a person under
eighteen years of age
When the offender is a minor under eighteen
years and his case s one coming under the provisions
of the paragraph next to the last of Art. 80 of the
Revised Penal Code, the following rules shall e
observed:
(1) Upon a person under fifteen but over nine
years of age, who is not exempted from
liability by reason of the court having
 declared that he acted with discernment
discretionary penalty shall be imposed,
but always lower by two degrees at least
than that prescribed by law for the crime
which he committed.
(2) Upon a person over fifteen and under
eighteen years of age the penalty next
lower than that prescribed by law shall be
imposed, but always in the proper period
(Art. 68, RPC).
Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed
is not wholly excusable:
A penalty lower by one or two degrees than
that prescribed by law shall be imposed if the deed is
not wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some of
the conditions required to justify the same or to
exempt from criminal ability in the several cases
mentioned in Arts. 11 and 12 provided that the
majority of such conditions are present. The courts
shall impose the penalty in the period which may be
deemed proper, in view of the number and nature of
the conditions of exemption present or lacking (Art.
69, RPC).
SERVICE OF SENTENCE
How should the offender serve his penalties when he
has to serve two or more penalties?
6. Arresto Mayor,
7. Arresto Menor,
8. Destierro,
9. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification,
10. Temporary Absolute Disqualification
11. Suspension for public office, the right to
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a
profession or calling,
12. Public censure.
What is the three-fold rule in Criminal Law?
It is the rule providing that the maximum
duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more
than three-old the length of tie corresponding to the
most severe of the sentence imposed. No other penalty
to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the
sum total of those imposed equals the sae maximum
period.
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed
forty (40) years (Art. 70, PRC).
What is the duration of perpetual penalties (pena
perpetua)?
The duration of perpetual penalties (pena
perpetua) shall be computed at thirty (30) years (Art.
70, RPC).
GRADUATED SCALE

When the culprit has to serve two or more In the case in which the law prescribed a
penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the penalty lower or higher by one or ore degrees than
nature of the penalties will so permit. another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Art. 61
shall be observed in graduating such penalty.
If the nature of such penalties is not possible
for simultaneous service, the order of their severity The lower or higher penalty shall be taken
shall be followed so that they may be executed from the graduated scale in which s comprised the
successively or as nearly as may be possible, should a given penalty.
pardon have been granted as to the penalty or The courts in apllying such lower or higher
penalties first imposed, or should they have been penalty shall observe the following graduated scales:
served out (Art. 70, 1st and 2nd paragraphs, RPC).
SCALE NO. 1
According to severity, what is the order of the
penalties provided for by law? 1. Death,
2. Reclusion Perpetua,
The respective severities of the penalties are 3. Reclusion Temporal,
arranged in the following scale: 4. Prision Mayor,
5. Prision Correccional,
1. Death, 6. Arresto Mayor,
2. Reclusion Perpetua, 7. Destierro,
3. Reclusion Temporal, 8. Arresto Menor,
4. Prision Mayor, 9. Public Censure,
5. Prision Correccional, 10. Fine.

www.rkmfiles.net31

SCALE NO. 2
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
2. Temporary absolute disqualification,
3. Suspension from pubic office, the right to
vote and bevoted for, and the right to
follow a profession or calling,
4. Public censure,
5. Fine (Art. 71, RPC).
What is the order of preference in the payment of
civil liabilities of a person found guilty of two or
more offenses?
The civil liability of a person found guilty of
two or more offenses shall be satisfied by following
the chronological order of the dates of the judgments
rendered against him, beginning with the first in order
of time (Art. 72, RPC).
What is the presumption in regard to the
imposition of accessory penalties?
Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty
which, by provision of law, carries with it other
penalties such as death if not executed by reason of
commutation or pardon, reclusion perpetua, reclusion
temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional, and
arresto, it must be understood that the accessory
penalties are also imposed upon the convict (Art. 73,
RPC).
Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain
cases
In cases in which the law prescribe a penalty
higher than another given penalty, without
specifically designating the name of the former, if such
higher penalty should be that of death, the same
penalty and the accessory penalties of Art. 40, shall be
considered as the next higher penalty (Art. 74, RPC).
DIFFERENTIATIONS
1. When is the discharge of firearm (1) alarm,
(2) illegal discharge of firearm, or (3)
attempted homicide, or attempted murder
or attempted parricide?
www.rkmfiles.net32
• The discharge of firearm is considered as
an alarm when the offender merely
discharges his firearm within a town or
public place, which produces alarm or
danger, without aiming the firearm at or
against any person.
• It is illegal discharge of firearm when the
offender discharges the firearm against or
at a certain person, without any intent to
kill, but merely to frighten the offended
party.
• It is attempted homicide, or attempted
murder or attempted parricide, when
the firearm is discharged at or against
another person with intent to kill the
latter, but without hitting the offended
party or without inflicting a mortal wound
on him.
2. When is the killing of a child below seven
years of age (1) murder, (2) parricide, or
(3) infanticide?
• The killing of a child less than seven years
of age is murder when the relation of the
offender with the child is not one of those
mentioned in the definition of the crime of
parricide and the child is at least three (3)
days old.
• It is parricide when the victim is the child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate or the
legitimate other descendant of the
offender and the age of the child is at least
three (3) days old.
• It is infanticide when the child killed is
less than three (3) days old, regardless of
whether or not the offender is related to
the child.
3. Distinctions of Reclusion Perpetua from Life
Imprisonment
• The penalty of life imprisonment is
applicable to special laws, reclusion
perpetua is applicable to felonies punished
under the Revised Penal Code.
• Reclusion perpetua entails imprisonment
for at least thirty (30) years after which
convict becomes eligible for pardon; Life
imprisonment has no definite extent or
duration.
• Reclusion perpetua carries with it
accessory penalties while life
 imprisonment does not carry with it any
accessory penalty.
4. Distinguish Syndicated Crime Group from a
Conspiracy of Two or More Persons.
• In syndicated crime group, an offense is
committed by a group actually organized
for gain purposes. Such is not necessary in
the latter.
• A syndicate crime group is an organized
group. Such oganization is not required in
mere conspiracy.
• In syndicate, there is a group that is
actually organized for crime purposes.
When two or more persons just agree to
commit a crime, there is conspiracy.
5. Distinguish Piracy from Mutiny
• In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel
or seize its cargo are strangers to said
vessel. In mutiny, they are members of the
crew or passengers.
• Gain is essential in piracy. In mutiny, the
offenders may only intend to ignore the
ship’s officers or to commit plunder.
6. Distinguish Cuadrilla from Syndicate
• Syndicate involves two or more persons
not necessarily armed. Cuadrilla refers to
at least four (4) armed persons.
• Cuadrilla generally applies to all crimes.
Syndicate applies to crimes committed for
purposes of gain.
7. Distinction between general intent and
specific intent.
In felonies committed by dolus, the
third element of voluntariness is a general
intent; whereas, in some particular felonies
proof of particular or specific intent is
required. Thus in certain crimes against
property, there must be the intent to gain (Art.
293, Robbery, Art 308, Theft). Intent to kill is
essential in frustrated or attempted homicide
(Art. 249). In forcible abduction (Art 342), the
specific intent of lewd designs must be proved.
8. Intent to commit the crime and intent to
perpetrate the act, distinguished.
www.rkmfiles.net33
A person may not have consciously
intended to commit a crime; but he did intend
to commit an act, and that act is, by the very
nature of things the crime itself.
In the first (intent to commit the
crime), there must be criminal intent; in the
second (intent to perpetrate the act), it is
enough that the prohibited act is done freely
and consciously.
9. Mala in se and mala prohibita, distinguished.
There is a distinction between crimes
which are mala in se, or wrongful from their
nature, such as theft, rape, homicide, etc., and
those that are mala prohibita, or wrong merely
because prohibited by statute, such as illegal
possession of firearm.
Crimes mala in se are those so serious
in their effects to society as to call for the
almost unanimous condemnation of its
members; while crimes mala prohibita are
violations of mere rules of convenience
designed to secure a more orderly regulation
of the affairs of society.
(1) In acts mala in se, the intent governs; but
in those mala prohibita, the only inquiry is,
has the law been violated?
Criminal intent is not necessary where the
act is prohibited for reasons of public
policy, as in illegal possession of firearm.
(2) The term mala in se refers generally to
felonies defined and penalized by the RPC.
The term mala prohibita refers generally
to acts made criminal by special laws.
10. Intent distinguished from motive.
Motive is the moving power which impels one
to action for a definite result. Intent is the
purpose to use a particular means to effect
such result.
11. Distinguish conspiracy as a felony from
conspiracy as a manner of incurring
criminal liability.
In both, two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. Hence, the
definition of conspiracy in Art 8 applies to
both.

When the conspiracy relates to crimes other
than treason, rebellion or sedition, it is not a
felony but only a manner of incurring criminal
liability. When the felony is committed after
the conspiracy, the act of one offender is the
act of all the other offenders.
Even if the conspiracy relates to the crime of
treason, rebellion or sedition, if the latter is
actually committed, the conspiracy is not a
separate offense, but only a manner of
incurring criminal liability in treason,
rebellion or sedition. The offenders are liable
for treason, rebellion or sedition as the case
may be, and the conspiracy is absorbed.
(12) Imbecility distinguished from insanity.
While the imbecile is exempted in all cases
from criminal liability, the insane is not so
exempted if it can be shown that he acted
during a lucid interval.
(13) Entrapment and instigation,
distinguished.
There is a wide difference between
entrapment and instigation, fir while in the
latter case the instigator practically induces
the would-be accused into the commission of
the offense and himself becomes a co-
principal, in entrapment ways and means are
resorted to for the purpose of trapping and
capturing the law-breakers in the execution of
his criminal plan. Entrapment is no bar to the
prosecution and conviction of the lawbreaker.
But when there is instigation, the accused
must be acquitted.
(14) Ordinary mitigating and privileged
mitigating circumstances, distinguished.
1) An ordinary mitigating circumstance is
susceptible of being offset by any
aggravating circumstance; while a
privileged mitigating circumstance cannot
be offset by aggravating circumstance.
2) Ordinary mitigating, if not offset by an
aggravating circumstance, produces only
the effect of applying the penalty provided
by law in its minimum period; whereas,
www.rkmfiles.net34
privileged mitigating produces the effect
of imposing upon the offender the penalty
lower by one or two degrees that that
provided by law.
(15) Qualifying aggravating circumstance
distinguished from generic aggravating
circumstance.
1) The effect of a generic aggravating
circumstance, not offset by any mitigating
circumstance, is to increase the penalty
which should be imposed upon the
accused to the maximum period, but
without exceeding the limit prescribed by
law; while that of a qualifying
circumstance is not only to give the crime
its proper and exclusive name but also to
place the author thereof in such a situation
as to deserve no other penalty than that
specifically prescribed by law for said
crime.
2) A qualifying aggravating circumstance
cannot be offset by a mitigating
circumstance; a generic aggravating
circumstance may be compensated by a
mitigating circumstance.
3) A qualifying aggravating circumstance to
be appreciated must be allege in the
information If it is not alleged, it becomes
a generic aggravating circumstance only.
(16) With the aid of armed men distinguished
from by a band.
By a band requires that at least four armed
malefactors shall have acted together in the
commission of an offense. Aid of armed men is
present even if the principal offender merely
relied on their aid, for actual aid not necessary.
(17) Recidivism and reiteracion, distinguished.
The circumstance of reiteracion may be
distinguished from recidivism in the following
ways:
(a) In reiteracion, it is necessary that the
offender shall have served his
sentence; whereas, in recidivism it is
enough that a final judgement has
been rendered.
(b) In reiteracion, the previous and
subsequent offenses must not be
defined in the sae title of the RPC;
 whereas, recidivism requires that the
offenses be included in the sae title of
the Code.
(c) Reiteracion is not always an
aggravating circumstance; whereas,
recidivism is always o be taken into
consideration in fixing the penalty to
be imposed upon the accused.
(18) Amnesty and pardon, distinguished.
1) Pardon includes any crime and is exercise
individually by the President; amnesty is a
blanket pardon granted o classes of
persons or communities who may be
guilty of political offenses.
2) Pardon is exercised when the person is
already convicted; amnesty may be
exercised even before trial or investigation
is had.
3) Pardon looks forward and relieves the
offender from the consequences of an
offense of which he has been convicted,
that is, it abolishes or forgives the
punishment, and for that reason it does
not work the restoration of the rights o
hold public office or the right of suffrage,
unless such rights be expressly restored
by the terms of the pardon. On the other
hand, amnesty looks backward and
abolishes and puts oblivion the offense
itself; it so overlooks and obliterates the
offense with which he is charged that the
person released by amnesty stands before
the law precisely as though he had
committed no offense.
4) Both do not extinguish the civil liability of
the offender.
5) Pardon, being a private act of the
President, must be pleaded and proved by
the person pardoned; while amnesty being
by Proclamation of the Chief executive
with the concurrence of Congress is a
public act of which he courts should take
judicial notice.
(19) Conditional pardon distinguished from
parole.
1) Conditional pardon, which may be given at
any time after final judgement is granted
by the Chief Executive under the
provisions of the Administrative Code;
parole, which may be given after the
www.rkmfiles.net35
prisoner has served the minimum penalty,
is granted by the Board of Pardons and
Parole under the provision of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law.
2) For violation of the conditional pardon, the
convict may be ordered rearrested or
reincarcerated by the chief executive, or
may be prosecuted under he RPC; for
violation of the terms of the parole, the
convict cannot be prosecuted under the
RPC. He can be rearrested and
incarcerated to serve the unserved portion
of his original penalty.
(20) Illegal association, distinguished from
illegal assembly.
(1) In illegal assembly, it is necessary that
there is an actual meeting or assembly of
armed persons for the purpose of
committing any o the rimes punishable
under the PRC, or of individuals who,
although not armed, are incited to the
commission of treason, rebellion, sedition,
or assault upon a person in authority or his
agent.
Such requisite is not necessary in the
crime of illegal association.
(2) In illegal assembly, it is the meeting and
attendance at such meeting that are
punished.
In illegal associations, it is ha act of
forming or organising and membership of
the association that are punished.
(3) If the purpose of the meeting is to commit
crimes punishable by special laws, such
meeting is not an illegal assembly.
In illegal association, the purpose may
include the commission of crimes
punishable by special laws, because when
the purpose of the organization is contrary
to public morals the acts which are
contrary to public morals may constitute
crimes punishable under the special laws.
(21) Prevaricacion, distinguished from
bribery.
The third form of direct bribery is committed
by refraining from doing something which
pertains to the official duty of the officer.
Prevaricacion is committed in the same way.
In this regard, the two felonies are similar.
 But they differ in that in bribery the offender
refrained from doing his official duty in
consideration of a gift received or promised.
This element is not necessary in the rime of
prevaricacion.
(22) Direct bribery, distinguished from
indirect bribery.
1) In both, the public officer receives gift.
2) While in direct bribery there is an
agreement between the public officer and
the giver of the gift or present, in indirect
bribery usually no such agreement exists.
3) In direct bribery, the offender agrees to
perform or performs an act or refrains
from doing something, because of the gift
or promise; in indirect bribery, it is not
necessary that the officer should do any
particular act or even promise to do an act,
as it is enough that e accepts gifts by
reason of his office.
(23) Brigandage, distinguished from robbery
in band.
Both brigandage and robbery in band require
that the offenders form a band of robbers.
In brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is
any of the following:
(1) to commit robbery in the highway, or
(2) to kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom, or
(3) for any other purpose to be attained by
means of force and violence; in robbery in
band, the purpose of the offenders is only
to commit a particular robbery not
necessarily in the highway.
If the agreement among more than three (3)
armed men was to commit only a particular
robbery, the offense is not brigandage, but
only robbery in band.
In brigandage, the mere formation of a band
for any of the purposes mentioned in the law
is sufficient as it would not be necessary to
show that the band actually committed
www.rkmfiles.net36
robbery in the highway, etc.; in robbery in
band, it is necessary to prove that the band
actually committed robbery, as a mere
conspiracy to commit robbery is not
punishable
(24) Imprudence distinguished from
negligence.
Imprudence indicates a deficiency of action,
negligence indicates a deficiency of
perception.
Hence, failure in precaution is termed
imprudence. Failure in advertence is known as
negligence.
The wrongful acts may be avoided on two
levels:
(1) by paying proper attention and using due
diligence in foreseeing them, and
(2) by taking the necessary precaution once
they are foreseen.
Failure to do the first is negligence. Failure o do the
second is imprudence.
(25) Forcible abduction with rape,
distinguished from kidnapping.
A, B, C and others grabbed a girl, 16 years of
age and then dragged her to a nearby forest.
There she was brutally ravished, first by A and
afterwards by B. Are they guilty of kidnapping
with rape?
Held: The crime is not kidnapping with rape, but
forcible abduction with rape. When the violent
taking of a woman is motivated by lewd
designs, forcible abduction is the offense.
When it is not so motivated, such taking
constitutes kidnapping. Forcible abduction is
against chastity; kidnapping is against
personal liberty.
 property belonging to another with intent to
gain must be accomplished because of
violence or intimidation. In this case, the
taking of the radio was complete and, hence,
the crime of theft was already consummated
when the offended party was intimidated. The
threat to kill B made by A is not a constitutive
element of robbery because the violence or
intimidation must be employed before the
taking of personal property belonging to
another is complete.

4. A pointed his knife at B and demanded for his

money, and B pulled his wallet from his pocket
and handed it to A who took hold of it, but a
policemen suddenly appeared, collared A, and
placed him under arrest. What crime did A
commit? Explain your answer.
CASES
Answer: The crime committed by A is
consummated robbery with intimidation.
1. A entered the house of B through the window
and once inside took money and jewelry
5. While a woman was walking along Session
belonging to B after intimidating him with a
Road, a man following her suddenly snatched
pistol. What kind of robbery was committed by
her handbag and ran away with it. What crime
A? Why?
was committed by that man? Explain your
answer.
Answer: A committed a complex crime of Robbery
with Force Upon Things with Robbery with
Answer: The man committed the crime of theft,
Intimidation. This is in accordance with the
not robbery with violence against persons,
ruling laid down by the Supreme Court in the
because mere snatching of personal property
case of Napoles versus Court of Appeals.
from the hand of the offended party, although
violence is used, it is not used on the person of
2. A broke the wooden gate of the stone wall
the offended party, but on the thing taken. It is
around the premises of B and once inside took
a rule that to constitute robbery with violence
from the yard of B building materials, which
against persons, the violence must be on the
were lying there. What crime was committed
person of the offended party, not upon the
by A? Explain with reasons.
thing taken.
Answer: Theft, because although he broke open
6. While A was looking for his lost pig, he
the gate, he did not enter the house with force
happened to pass by the house of B and saw
upon things. He entered the yard only.
under the latter’s house a pig. A told B that that
was his lost pig, but B said that that pig
3. A removed the radio of B from the car of the
belonged to him. A unsheathed his bolo and
latter and began to leave the place. On the way,
threatened B with bodily harm, unless the
B met A and, having recognized the radio, B
latter would give to him the pig. Afraid that he
asked A where he had gotten it; but A drew out
might be injured, B gave the pig to A. A was
and opened his knife and threatened to kill B.
prosecuted for robbery with intimidation.
What crime or crimes were committed by A?
During the trial it was established by the
Explain your answer.
prosecution that the pig really belonged to B
and that it was not the lost pig of A. If you were
Answer: A committed two distinct and separate
the judge, would you convict or acquit A? In
crimes of Theft and Grave Threats. To
case you decide to convict him, of what crime
constitute robbery with violence against or
will you find him guilty?
intimidation of persons, the taking of personal
www.rkmfiles.net37

Answer: Since A believed in good faith that the pig
was his, even if his claim later on appeared to
be untenable, there being no intent to gain on
his part, he should be found guilty of grave
coercion and not robbery with intimidation.
One of the elements of robbery is that the
offender took the personal property belonging
to another with intent to gain.
provision of the RPC, impossible crime cannot
exist.
It is submitted that A is not liable for grave
threats, because the intimidation produced
immediate effect.
9. A passer-by noticed three persons inside the
house of another taking personal property.
The passer-by asked them why they were
there. One of them shot and killed him. What
crime was committed? Why?

Answer: The crime committed is robbery with

7. What crime is committed by several persons,
who, by means of intimidation used against
the owner of a small house, succeeded in
removing that small house from the lot of the
owner and carried said house to the lot of one
of the offenders? Explain your answer.
Answer: The crime is robbery with intimidation.
Although a house may be considered as real
property when attached to the ground, the
moment it is removed from the ground and
carried away it ceases to be a real property
and becomes personal property. One of the
elements of robbery is that the property taken
is personal property belonging to another.
homicide, because the homicide was
committed by reason of the robbery, that is, to
do away with a witness.
10. Would it be robbery with homicide if a robber
killed his companion, another robber, on the
occasion or by reason of the robbery? Why?
Answer: Yes, because in robbery with homicide, it
is only the result, without reference or
distinction as to the persons intervening in the
commission of the crime that must be taken
into consideration.

8. A help-up B at the point of a revolver and

succeeded in taking the watch from B. When
he reached home, A found that the watch he …oΩo…
had taken from B was his own property which
he had lost a week before. What crime was
committed by A?

Answer: A committed grave coercion, because he

compelled B to do something against his will
by means of intimidation. While it is true that
A had intent to gain and that ordinarily in
coercion the offender should not act with
intent to gain, the crime committed by A is not
robbery with intimidation, because one of the
elements of robbery is that the personal
property must belong to another. Since the
property belonged to him, A cannot be guilty
of robbery, as no one can be held liable for
robbery of his own property. This is not an CRIMINAL LAW
impossible crime where the act performed (REVISED PENAL CODE- BOOK 2)
would have been an offense against persons or
property, because when the act performed
also constitutes a violation of another TREASON

www.rkmfiles.net38
 Any person who, owing allegiance to (the
Philippine), not being a foreigner, levies war against
them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid or
comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal to death and
shall pay a fine not to exceed P20, 000.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless
on the testimony of 2 witnesses at least to the same
overt acts or on confession of the accused in open
court.
Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines
Islands, who commits acts of treason as defined in par.
1 of this article shall be punished by prision mayor to
death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20, 000.
Elements:
1. The offender owes allegiance to the
Government of the Philippines;
2. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved;
3. The offender either:
a. Levies war against the Government; or
b. Adheres to the enemies, giving them
aid or comfort.
TREASON is a breach of allegiance, which is the
obligation of fidelity and obedience one owes to the
government or sovereign under which he lives, in
return for the protection he receives.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR TREASON
1. Filipino citizens – owe permanent
allegiance to the government.
2. Resident aliens – owe temporary
allegiance to government.
TWO MODES OF COMMITTING TREASON
1. BY LEVYING WAR – actual assemblage of
persons for the purpose of executing a
treasonable design.
2. BY ADHERING TO THE ENEMY, GIVING
HIM AID AND COMFORT
ADHERENCE TO THE ENEMY – a citizen
intellectuality or emotionally favors the enemy
and harbors sympathies or convictions disloyal to
his country’s policy or interest.
www.rkmfiles.net39
AID OR COMFORT – an act which strengthens or
tends to strengthen the enemy of the government
in the conduct of war against the government or of
the country to resist or to attack the enemies of the
government or of the country.
When the alleged treasonous acts consist only
of giving aid and comfort, the law requires that it must
be coupled with adherence. In other words, the mere
giving of aid and comfort WITHOUT ADHERENCE is
not treason.
On the other hand, if the manner of
committing treason by engaging the forces of the
government in combat, there is no need to show that
the offenders are doing so out of adherence to the
enemy. If the aid or support given to the enemy is one
which does not strengthen the enemy in the conduct
of war, there must be an independents evidence of
adherence, otherwise, the accused is entitled to
acquittal.
Basically, the mental condition cannot bring
about the offense not until the offender has started
committing an overt act.
EVIDENCE NEEDED FOR CONVICTION IN TREASON
1. Testimony of at least 2 witnesses to the
same overt act;
2. Confession of guilt by the accused in open
court.
WHAT IS THE SO-CALLED TWO-WITNESS RULE?
Under Art.114 of the RPC, no person shall be
convicted of treason except upon the testimony of at
least 2 witnesses by the same overt act or upon his
confession in open court. The 2-witness rule refers to
that portion of the provision which requires
testimonies of 2 witnesses at least on the same overt
act.
Example:
Supposing during the 2nd World War, A had
cooperated with Japanese solders and A was seen by
it in the company of such soldiers burning a certain
barrio. A is again seen by C in the company of the same
Japanese soldiers burning again another barrio. Under
these set of facts, if B and C would testify of what they
have respectively witnessed, may A be convicted of
treason?

Answer:
No, it is not only the number of witnesses or
the substance but at least 2 witnesses should testify on
the same overt act, commission of the same
treaso0nous act at the same place and at almost the
same time. It is not enough that there be witnesses. It
is necessary that the 2 witnesses have testified to the
same overt act. “OVERT ACT” – we mean acts
committed in different places at times far remote from
each other, you will need 2 witnesses to each of those
places before a conviction may be done.
So, even if there several witnesses testifying
on the treasonous acts, one witness to 2 treasonous
act and the other to another treasonous acts, if the acts
testified to are not committed in the same place and
at the same time, the 2-witnesses rule is not complied
with. The accused himself is entitled to freedom.
EXCEPTION: When the accused himself pleads
guilty to the accusation of treason.
NOTE: The confession of guilt mentioned in
this rule is not a confession of guilt in
the ordinary sense of the word.
The confession referred to here is a plea of
guilty in open court.
So, if a person accused of treason has
previously executed a confession before the
interrogating officer, but upon being arraigned in
court, the pleaded not guilty, he cannot be convicted
simply because he had that confession.
But the confession is admissible in evidence.
Only, it is not sufficient as a basis for conviction. Extra
judicial confessions are admissible but they are not
enough to sustain conviction.
TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM SEDITION:
TREASON: Violation by a subject of his allegiance
to his sovereign or the supreme authority of the
state.
SEDITION: The raising of commotion or
disturbances in the state.
TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM REBELLION
1. An act of levying war to help the enemy is
treason otherwise it would be rebellion.
www.rkmfiles.net40
2. In treason, the purpose is to deliver the
government to the enemy or to pave the way for the
coming of the enemy while in rebellion, the purpose is
to substitute the government with their own.
IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER REGARDING
TREASON:
1. Treason is committed only in time of war.
It cannot be committed in time of peace. Treasonable
acts may be actually during peace time, but there are
no traitors until war has started. [LAUREL VS. MISA,
77 PHIL 856]
2. No matter how many acts of treason are
committed by the offender, he will be liable for one
crime of treason only.
3. There is no complex crime of treason with
murder. Murder is an integral element of the crime of
treason which correspond to the giving of aid and
comfort to the enemy. The offender will be liable for
treason only.
4. In the imposition of the penalty the course
may disregard the attending mitigating and
aggravating circumstances. It may consider only the
number, nature and gravity of the treasonous acts
proven. The imposition of the penalty, although
indivisible, may rest largely on the exercise of judicial
discretion.
5. Treachery, abuse of superior strength and
evident premeditation are inherent in treason if there
are killings.
CONSPIRACY AN PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON
Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2. Two or more persons come to an
agreement to levy war against the government or to
adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or comfort.
3. They decide to commit it.
Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason:
1. There is war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2. The accused has decided to levy war
against the Government or to adhere to the enemies
giving them aid or comfort.
3. He proposes its execution to some other
person of persons.

NOTE: If actual acts of treason are committed after
the conspiracy or after the proposal is accepted,
the crime committed will be treason. The
conspiracy or proposal is considered as a means in
the commission thereof.
IMPORTANT: The co-conspirators or those
persons involved in the proposal will be
criminality liable to that extent only as long as
none among them has committed treasonous acts.
If anyone of the conspirators or person
participating in the proposal have already done
treasonous act even though unknown to the
others, the crime of all of them will be treason and
not merely conspiracy or proposal.
NOTE: Bear in mind that in conspiracy, there
must be an agreement with concurrence of
decision; a mere agreement without decision is
not conspiracy. So also, a mere proposal without
acceptance, it is not criminal proposal.
There must always be the CONCURRENCE of
these 2 elements. One without the other is not
punishable, even if it refers to treason.
MISPRISION OF TREASON
Elements:
1. Offender must owe allegiance to the
Government of the Philippines;
2. Offender is not a foreigner;
3. He has knowledge of a conspiracy to
commit treason against the said government;
4. He conceals or fails to disclose the same to
the authorities of the province or city in which he
resides.
For this crime to be committed, first of all,
there must be a conspiracy to commit treason.
Misprision of treason arises when a person who knew
of such conspiracy does not report the same as soon
as possible.
Even though the offender has reported the
conspiracy to the government, if by the time the report
was made, the conspirators were already able to
commit overt acts of treason, then the party knowing
the conspiracy is nevertheless liable for misprision of
www.rkmfiles.net41
treason because the report was not made as soon as
possible.
Misprision of treason is a felony by omission.
The offender has knowledge of conspiracy to commit
treason but he failed to report it to the authorities AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE.
NOTE: It is not enough that the report be
made. What is required is that it must be
reported as soon as possible, because if the
report is delayed, this might ripen to an act of
treason.
The idea here is to make it obligatory on the
part of all citizens of the Philippines to report it to the
government as soon as possible any conspiracy to
commit treason and that is known to them so that the
government may quell the treason before it can ripen.
Where the conspiracy has already ripened to
an act of treason, the obligation to report does not
exist anymore because that means that the
government knew that there is treason going on.
NOTE: The obligation to report does not cover
aliens even if they are permanent resident of the
Philippines. This crime can only be committed by
citizens of the Philippines, unlike treason, which may
be committed by aliens as long as they are permanent
resident of the Philippines.
ESPIONAGE
There are 2 modes of committing espionage
under the RPC.
Elements of the first mode:
1. Offender, without any authority enters a
warship, naval or military establishment
or reservation, and
2. He obtains information, plans,
photographs or other data of a
confidential nature relative to the defense
of the Philippines.
NOTE: The purpose of the offender in entering
must be to get hold of such materials.
If that is not the purpose, the crime committed
is trespass to government property. Mere entering
here will bring about a consummated espionage as
long as the criminal intent of the offender is to get hold
of those materials which are vital to the defense of the
Philippines.
Elements of the second mode:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his possession articles, data or
information referred to in the first mode of
committing this crime; and
3. He discloses their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
NOTE: Where the offender is not a custodian,
the crime committed is infidelity in the custody of
public records, and it has nothing to do with national
defense of the Philippines, the offender becomes liable
only for infidelity in the custody of public records.
ESPIONAGE DISTINGUISHED FROM TREASON
ESPIONAGE
TREASON
- there is no need of war going on;
- there must be war
- committed in more than 2 ways;
- committed in 2 ways only;
- generally committed by an alien.
- may be committed by citizens or resident
aliens.
INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES FOR
REPRISALS
Elements:
1. Offender commits unlawful or unauthorized acts;
2. Said acts provide or give occasion for war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines or
expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their
persons or property.
This is committed by any public officer or
employee who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts
provoke or gives occasion for a war or liable to involve
the Philippines or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals
on their persons or property. There is no need of war
going on. This may be committed in time of war or
time of peace.
VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
Elements:
1. There is war in which the Philippines is not
involved;
2. Competent authorities have issued
regulations to enforce neutrality; and
3. The offender violates any of said
regulations.
www.rkmfiles.net42
There must be a war going on, but the
Philippines is not a partly to the war. It cannot be
committed as a crime if the government has not
promulgated rules and regulations for the observance
of neutrality. It is the violation of such rules that
brings about the crime of violation of neutrality.
CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY
Elements:
1. There is war in which the Philippines is
involved;
2. The offender shall have correspondence
with an enemy country or territory
occupied by enemy troops; and
3. Said correspondence is:
a) prohibited by the government;
b) the offender shall have
correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by
enemy troops;
c) notice or information to be given
thereby which might be useful to
the enemy or intended by the
offender to aid the enemy.
This presupposes that, there is a war going on
and the Philippines is a party to that war. Under this
article, the mere sending or carrying on of
correspondence from one who is in the enemy country
or who is in the territory occupied by enemy troops is
a crime under the circumstances specified in the
article.
The implication is that when a person writers
to another in any enemy country and he makes use of
ciphers and conventional signs he is hiding something
and that is maybe one which is vital to the defense of
the Philippines, so the mere sending of that under
those conditions makes it a crime.
FLIGHT TO ENEMY COUNTRY
Elements:
1. Existence of war in which the Philippines
is involved;
2. Offender owes allegiance to the
Philippines; and
3. He attempts to flee to the enemy country,
which is prohibited by the government.
This crime can be committed only in times of
war where the Philippines is a party. Mere attempt to
flee to the side of the enemy will already consummate
this crime.
The law presupposes that in time of war, a
person in the Philippines would try to go to the enemy
line, that person must have something for the enemy
to the prejudice of the Philippines and its forces.
ATTEMPT TO FLEE TO ENEMY COUNTRY ---
This is committed when a citizen of the Philippines or
one owing allegiance to the Philippine government
shall attempt to go to an enemy country.
PIRACY
Piracy is committed by any person who, on the
high seas shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a
member of its complement nor a passenger, shall seize
the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment, or personal belongings of its complement
or passengers.
Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on
the high seas without lawful authority and done with
animo furandi and in the spirit and intention of
universal hostility.
Piracy is regarded not as a crime of any
particular country but a crime against the whole world
so that whenever the offenders may go to one country
they can be prosecuted there.
REASON: The law they violated is not the law
of a particular country but the law of the family of
nations.
3 KINDS OF PIRACY
1. Piracy in the high seas punished in the
RPC;
2. Piracy in the Philippine waters punished
in PD 532; and
3. Air piracy punished in RA 6235.
PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS UNDER THE REVISED
PLENAL CODE
1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high
seas;
2. By seizing the whole or part of the cargo or
equipment of the vessel while on the high
seas or the personal belongings of its
complement or passengers, the offenders
not being of the complement or
passengers.
OFFENDERS OF PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS (RPC)
- Strangers to the vessel
- They are not passengers or members of the
crew.
www.rkmfiles.net43
For the purposes of determining whether one
is a stranger to the vessel or not – you only have to
determine whether one is lawfully admitted to the
vessel. If he is lawfully admitted to the vessel, other
than a complement thereof, then he is a passenger.
But if he boards the vessel without being lawfully
admitted thereto, then he is a strange and therefore
liable for piracy.
“HIGH SEAS” refer to the body of water outside
of the territorial waters of the Philippines, even if such
is within the territorial waters of a foreign country.
- Refers to that body of water beyond the
three-mile limit of our jurisdiction. At this point
therefore, it can be easily understood that piracy
under the RPC begins where piracy under PD 532
ends.
ROBBERY ON THE HIGH SEAS
- Offender is a member of the complement or a
passenger of the vessel and there is violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things in taking
the property in the vessel.
PIRACY – the offender is an outsider.
NOTE: In both robbery on the high seas and
piracy, there is
1. Intent to gain; and
2. Manner of committing the crime is the
same.
MUTINY
MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS is the unlawful
resistance to a superior officer or the raising of
commosions and disturbances on board a ship
against the authority of its commander. It may be
committed by members of the crew and
passengers of the vessel.
NOTE: Mutiny must be committed on the high
seas. When committed on board a vessel within
the waters of the Philippine, the killing is punished
as murder.
PIRACY IN THE PHILIPPINE WATERS (P.D. 532)
If any of the acts described in Art. 122 and 123
is committed in Philippine waters, the same shall be
considered as piracy under PD 532.
Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the
taking away of the whole or part thereof or its cargo,
equipment, or the personal belongings of its
complement or passengers, irrespective of the value
thereof, by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons or force upon things, committed by any
person, including a passenger or member of the
complement of said vessel in Philippine waters, shall
be considered as piracy.
In this kind of piracy, the offender may be any
person. He may be a stranger to the vessel, a passenger
or member of the crew of the vessel.
2 WAYS OF COMMITTING PIRACY IN PHILIPPINE
WATERS
(1) By seizing or attacking a vessel while in the
Philippine waters with intent to gain by means of
violence or intimidation;
(2) By taking away the belongings of a
member of a crew or passenger.
Example:
If in the course of the voyage of an inter-island
vessel, a passenger at the point of a knife divested
another passenger of his valuables, the former will be
liable for piracy in Philippine waters, not for robbery.
Q: What will be the crime committed is on the
occasion of piracy in Philippine waters, only a
person was killed by the by the pirates?
- Crime will be piracy in Philippine waters only.
“PHILIPPINE WATERS” refers to all bodies of
water around, between and connecting each of the
islands of the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of
its breadth, depth, length, dimension, and all other
waters belonging to the Philippines by historic or legal
title, including territorial sea, sea-bed, insular shelves,
and other submarine areas over which the Philippines
has sovereignty or jurisdiction.
“VESSEL” - any vessel or watercraft for
transport of passengers and cargo from one place to
another through Philippine waters. Includes all kinds
and types of vessels or boats used in fishing.
ANY PERSON WHO AIDS OR PROTECTS PIRATES OR
ABETS THE COMMISSION OF PIRACY SHALL BE
CONSIDERED AS AN ACCOMPLLICE.
Example:
www.rkmfiles.net44
1. Giving pirates information about the
movement of police or other peace officers of the
government;
2. Acquires or receives property taken by
such pirates or in any manner derives any benefit
therefrom;
3. Directly of indirectly abets the commission
of piracy.
Under the decree, when these acts are
committed the crime is ABETTING PIRACY. These
persons who participate by any of the acts mentioned
above will be charged not for the crime of piracy but
for a crime of abetting piracy under PD 532.
On the other hand, if the piracy falls under the
RPC because it was committed in the high seas,
persons who participated in the loot of the piracy or
who harbor or conceal or help the pirates escape will
be accessories to the crime of piracy. The crime
committed by them is not abetting piracy but piracy
itself.
So, under PD 532, the offender is a principal to
the crime of abetting piracy although the nature of the
act of participation is that of an accessory only and the
penalty imposed under the same decree is only that of
an accomplice.
PRESUMPTION: – any person who does any of the acts
provided in this section has performed them
KNOWINGLY, unless the contrary is proven.
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PIRACY UNDER PD 532
AND RPC
1. Under the PRC, piracy can only be
committed in the high seas – meaning to say beyond
the three mile limit of our territorial waters, whereas
under the decree piracy can only be committed within
Philippine waters.
2. Under the RPC, piracy is committed by
attacking or seizing the vessel or of any of the cargo of
personal belongings of the passengers or
complements of the vessel.
NOTE: An attack or seizure of the vessel
presupposes the employment of force
but it may be such degree of force that
does not amount to robbery.
Under the decree, piracy is committed not
only be an attack or seizure of the vessel or cargo or
personal belongings of the passengers or members of
its complement thru the use of violence and
intimidation.
3. Piracy under RPC is committed by
attacking or seizing a vessel, or by seizing the whole or
part of its cargo, its equipment or personal belongings
of its complement or passengers, while such modes
under PD 532 are accomplished by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon
things.
NOTE: Under the RPC, use of force upon things
does not bring about piracy unless it is
an attack or seizure of the vessel or of
the passenger and their belongings or
of the complement of the vessel.
To make the difference between piracy under
the RPC and piracy under the decree easier to
understand, take note of the following:
NOTE: The essence of piracy under the decree
is not alone the seizure or attack of the
vessel but robbery committed on
board a vessel while this is in
Philippine waters.
The crime of robbery under title x is different
from the crime of theft although both crimes involve
the taking of property. So, if the taking of the cargo of
personal belongings of the passengers or
complements of the vessel amounts only to theft, PO
532 will not apply. Without the use of violence or
intimidation of persons or without the use of force
upon things as this is understood under Art. 299 of the
RPC, the decree will not apply unless there is a seizure
of the vessel or an attack upon the vessel.
Therefore, the taking must be with violence
and intimidation or with the use of force upon things.
If these are absent on the taking, the crime is only
theft.
R.A. 6235
ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN ACTS INIMICAL TO CIVIL
AVIATION
Although RA 6235 is commonly referred to as
the hijacking law, strictly the acts punished if this law
are not purely of hijacking.
When we say hijacking, we generally associate
the idea with that of compelling the plane to land in
www.rkmfiles.net45
the place other than its scheduled destination. This,
however, is not the only meaning of hijacking.
Hijacking generally refers to the taking of
goods in transit through force.
TWO KINDS OF AIRCRAFT MAY BE INVOLVED HERE:
1. Domestic
2. International
PROHIBITED ACTS:
IF AIRCRAFT IS OF PHILIPPINE REGISTRY
(1.) To compel a change in the course or
destination of an aircraft of Philippine registry, while
in flight; or
(2.) To seize or usurp the control thereof,
while it is in-flight.
(3.) To compel an aircraft of foreign registry to
land in Philippine territory; or
(4.) To seize or usurp the control thereof while
it is within Philippine territory.
AIRCRAFT IS IN FLIGHT
An aircraft is “IN FLIGHT” from the
moment all its external doors are closed following
embarkation until any of such doors are opened for
disembarkation.
Under the law, air piracy regarding an
international plane is committed if the offender
compelled the plane to fly in Philippine territory,
seized or usurped it. If the seizure or usurpation of an
international plane, what is essential is that the plane
must be in Philippine territory.
NOTE: PROHIBITION IS ABSOLUTE
a. IF OFFENDER IS A JURIDICAL PERSON –
the penalty shall be imposed upon the manager,
representative, director, agent or employee who
violated, or caused, directed, cooperated or
participated in the violation thereof;
b. IF VIOLATION IS COMMITTED IN THE
INTEREST OF A FOREIGN CORPORATION LEGALLY
DOING BUSINESS IN THE PHILIPPINES – penalty shall
be imposed upon its resident agent, manager,
representative or director responsible for such
violation and in addition thereto, the license of said
corporation to do business in the Philippines shall be
revoked.
 (1.) Section 4 --- The shipping, loading
or carrying of any substance or material in any cargo
aircraft operating as a public utility within the
Philippines shall, be not in accordance with the
regulations issued by the Civil Aeronautics Adm.
NOTE: PROHIBITION IS NOT ABSOLUTE
For any death or injury to persons or damage
to property resulting from a violation of Sects. 3 and 4,
the person responsible therefore may be held liable in
accordance with the applicable provision of the RPC.
- Injury / damage --- not absorbed in that
crime.
- Offender may be prosecuted under the
RPC as well.
NOTE: Aircraft companies which operate as
public utilities or operators of aircraft which are or
hire are authorized to open and investigate suspicious
packages and cargoes in the presence of the owner or
shipper, or his authorized representatives, if present.
PURPOSE: to help the authorities in the
enforcement of the provisions
of this Act.
If the owner, shipper or his representative
refuses to have the same opened and inspected, the
airline or air-carrier is authorized to refuse the
loading thereof.
QUALIFIED PIRACY
Piracy is qualified if any of the following
circumstances is present, to wit:
1. Whenever the offenders have seized the
vessel by boarding or firing upon the same; or
2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned
their victims without means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by
murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION
Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty
3. The act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal
www.rkmfiles.net46
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the
following circumstances are present (becomes
serious)
a. that the kidnapping/detention lasts for more
than 3 days
b. that it is committed simulating public
authority
c. that any serious physical injuries are inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained or
threats to kill him are made, or
d. that the person kidnapped or detained is a
minor (except if parent is the offender),
female or a public officer
Note: When death penalty is imposed:
a. If kidnapping is committed for the purpose of
extorting ransom either from the victim or
from any other person even if none of the
aforementioned are present in the
commission of the offense (even if none of the
circumstances are present)
b. When the victim is killed or dies as a
consequence of the detention or is raped or is
subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts
Illustration:
If a private person commits the crime of
kidnapping or serious illegal detention, even though a
public officer conspires therein, the crime cannot be
arbitrary detention. As far as that public officer is
concerned, the crime is also illegal detention.
In the actual essence of the crime, when one
says kidnapping, this connotes the idea of
transporting the offended party from one place to
another. When you think illegal detention, it connotes
the idea that one is restrained of his liberty without
necessarily transporting him from one place to
another.
The crime of kidnapping is committed if the
purpose of the offender is to extort ransom either
from the victim or from any other person. But if a
person is transported not for ransom, the crime can be
illegal detention. Usually, the offended party is
brought to a place other than his own, to detain him
there.
When one thinks of kidnapping, it is not only
that of transporting one person from one place to
another. One also has to think of the criminal intent.
Forcible abduction -- If a woman is transported from
one place to another by virtue of restraining her of her
liberty, and that act is coupled with lewd designs.
Serious illegal detention – If a woman is transported
just to restrain her of her liberty. There is no lewd
design or lewd intent.
Grave coercion – If a woman is carried away just to
break her will, to compel her to agree to the demand
or request by the offender. If a woman is carried
against her will but without lewd design on the part of
the offender, the crime is grave coercion.
Distinction between illegal detention and arbitrary
detention
Illegal detention is committed by a private
person who kidnaps, detains, or otherwise deprives
another of his liberty. Arbitrary detention is
committed by a public officer who detains a person
without legal grounds.
When the person is deprived of his liberty or
is seized and forcibly taken to another place, the
inquiry would, be “what is the purpose of the offender
in taking him or her away?”
1. If the seizure is only to facilitate the killing of the
victim the crime committed would either be
homicide or murder and the crime of kidnapping
is absorbed.
2. If the seizure or deprivation of liberty is only to
compel the victim to perform an act, be it right or
wrong, the crime committed would only be grave
coercion. (People vs. Astorga, 283 SCRA 420).
3. If the deprivation of liberty is to take away the
victim to satisfy the lewd design of the offender,
the crime would only be forcible abduction.
4. If the seizure of the victim is solely to deprive him
of his liberty, the crime is illegal detention.
In the penultimate paragraph of Article 267,
there is deprivation of liberty but not for any for the
purposes enumerated above. It is for the purpose of
extorting ransom from the victim or from any other
person. The law classifies the crime committed by the
offender as serious illegal detention even if none of the
circumstances to make it serious is present in the
commission of the crime. In this particular mode of
committing the crime of serious illegal detention,
www.rkmfiles.net47
demand for ransom is an indispensable element.
(People vs. Bustamante, G. R. No. 66427, Dec. 4, 1991)
If the victim was not kidnapped or taken
away but was restrained and deprived of his liberty,
like in the case of a hostage incident where the
accused, who was one of the occupants of the house,
grabbed a child, poked a knife on the latter’s neck,
called for media people and demanded a vehicle from
the authorities which he could use in escaping, as it
turned out that there was an unserved arrest warrant
against him, the proper charge is Serious Illegal
Detention (without kidnapping anymore) but
likewise under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code.
Where after taking the victim with her car, the
accused called the house of the victim asking for
ransom but upon going to their safehouse saw several
police cars chasing them, prompting them to kill their
victim inside the car, there were two crime committed
– Kidnapping for Ransom and Murder, not a complex
crime of Kidnapping with Murder as she was not taken
or carried away to be killed, killing being an
afterthought . (People vs. Evanoria, 209 SCRA 577).
SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
Elements:
1. Offender is a private person
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any other
manner deprives him of his liberty / furnished
place for the perpetuation of the crime
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must
be illegal
4. That the crime is committed without the
attendant of any of the circumstances
enumerated in Art 267
One should know the nature of the illegal
detention to know whether the voluntary release of
the offended party will affect the criminal liability of
the offender.
When the offender voluntarily releases the
offended party from detention within three days from
the time the restraint of liberty began, as long as the
offender has not accomplished his purposes, and the
release was made before the criminal prosecution was
commenced, this would serve to mitigate the criminal
liability of the offender, provided that the kidnapping
or illegal detention is not serious.
If the illegal detention is serious, however,
even if the offender voluntarily released the offended
party, and such release was within three days from the
time the detention began, even if the offender has not
accomplished his purpose in detaining the offended
party, and even if there is no criminal prosecution yet,
such voluntary release will not mitigate the criminal
liability of the offender.
One who furnishes the place where the
offended party is being held generally acts as an
accomplice. But the criminal liability in connection
with the kidnapping and serious illegal detention, as
well as the slight illegal detention, is that of the
principal and not of the accomplice.
The prevailing rule now is Asistio v. Judge,
which provides that voluntary release will only
mitigate criminal liability if crime was slight illegal
detention. If serious, it has no effect.
In kidnapping for ransom, voluntary release
will not mitigate the crime. This is because, with the
reimposition of the death penalty, this crime is
penalized with the extreme penalty of death.
What is Ransom?
It is the money, price or consideration paid or
demanded for redemption of a captured person or
persons, a payment that releases a person from
captivity.
UNLAWFUL ARREST
Elements:
1. That the offender arrests or detains another
person
2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver
him to the proper authorities
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized
by law or there is no reasonable ground therefor
Notes:
1. Offender is any person, so either a public
officer or private individual
The offender in this article can be a private
individual or public officer. In the latter case, the
offender, being a public officer, has the authority to
arrest and detain a person, but the arrest is made
without legal grounds. For him to be punished under
this article, the public officer must make the arrest and
detention without authority to do so; or without acting
in his official capacity.
www.rkmfiles.net48
This felony consists in making an arrest or
detention without legal or reasonable ground for the
purpose of delivering the offended party to the proper
authorities.
The offended party may also be detained but
the crime is not illegal detention because the purpose
is to prosecute the person arrested. The detention is
only incidental; the primary criminal intention of the
offender is to charge the offended party for a crime he
did not actually commit.
Generally, this crime is committed by
incriminating innocent persons by the offender’s
planting evidence to justify the arrest – a complex
crime results, that is, unlawful arrest through
incriminatory machinations under Article 363.
2. Refers to warrantless arrests
If the arrest is made without a warrant and
under circumstances not allowing a warrantless
arrest, the crime would be unlawful arrest.
If the person arrested is not delivered to the
authorities, the private individual making the arrest
incurs criminal liability for illegal detention under
Article 267 or 268.
If the offender is a public officer, the crime is
arbitrary detention under Article 124.
If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground,
but the public officer delays delivery of the person
arrested to the proper judicial authorities, then Article
125 will apply.
Note: This felony may also be committed by public
officers.
3. In art 125, the detention is for some legal
ground while here, the detention is not
authorized by law
4. In art 125, the crime pertains to failure to
deliver the person to the proper judicial
authority within the prescribed period while
here, the arrest is not authorized by law
KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR
Elements:
 1. That the offender is entrusted with the
custody of a minor person (whether over or
under 7 but less than 18 yrs old)
2. That he deliberately fails to restore the said
minor to his parents
If any of the foregoing elements is absent, the
kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Article
267.
If the accused is any of the parents, Article 267
does not apply; Articles 270 and 271 apply.
If the taking is with the consent of the parents,
the crime in Article 270 is committed.
In People v. Generosa, it was held that
deliberate failure to return a minor under one’s
custody constitutes deprivation of liberty. Kidnapping
and failure to return a minor is necessarily included in
kidnapping and serious illegal detention of a minor
under Article 267(4).
In People v. Mendoza, where a minor child was
taken by the accused without the knowledge and
consent of his parents, it was held that the crime is
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under Article
267, not kidnapping and failure to return a minor
under Article 270.
INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME
Elements:
1. That the minor (whether over or under 7) is
living in the home of his parents or guardians
or the person entrusted with his custody
2. That the offender induces a minor to abandon
such home
Notes:
The inducement must be actually done with
malice and a determined will to cause damage. (People
vs. Paalam, C.A., O.G. 8267-8268). But where the
victims abandoned their respective homes out of an
irresponsible spirit of restlessness and adventure, the
crime is not committed.
1. Minor should not leave his home of his own
free will
2. Mitigating if by father or mother
The article also punishes the father or mother
who commits the act penalized under the law. This
arises when the custody of the minor is awarded by
www.rkmfiles.net49
the court to one of them after they have separated. The
other parent who induces the minor to abandon his
home is covered by this article.
SLAVERY
Elements:
1. That the offender purchase, sells kidnaps or
detains a human being.
2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave
such human being.
Slavery is the treatment of a human being as a
mere property, stripped of dignity and human rights.
The person is reduced to the level of an ordinary
animal, a mere chattel with material value capable of
pecuniary estimation and for which reason, the
offender purchases and sells the same.
This is distinguished from illegal detention by
the purpose. If the purpose of the kidnapping or
detention is to enslave the offended party, slavery is
committed.
The crime is slavery if the offender is not
engaged in the business of prostitution. If he is, the
crime is white slave trade under Article 341.
EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR
Elements:
1. That the offender retains a minor in his
service.
2. That it is against the will of the minor.
3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,
guardian or person entrusted with the custody
of such minor.
If the minor agrees to serve the accused, no
crime is committed, even if the service is rendered to
pay an ascendant’s alleged debt.
SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION IN
PAYMENT OF DEBT
Element:
1. That the offender compels a debtor to work for
him, either as household servant or farm
laborer.
2. That it is against the debtor’s will.
3. That the purpose is to require or enforce the
payment of a debt.
 Involuntary servitude or service - In this article, no
distinction is made whether the offended is a minor or
an adult.
ABANDONMENT OF PERSON IN DANGER
AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM
Acts punishable:
1. By failing to render assistance to any person
whom the offender finds in an inhabited place
wounded or in danger of dying, when he can
render such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall constitute a
more serious offense
Elements
a. That place is not inhabited.
b. The accused found there a person wounded or
in danger of dying.
c. The accused can render assistance without
detriment to himself.
d. The accused fails to render assistance.
2. By failing to help or render assistance to another
whom the offender has accidentally wounded or
injured
3. By failing to deliver a child, under 7 whom the
offender has found abandoned, to the authorities
or to his family, or by failing to take him to a safe
place
ABANDONING A MINOR
Elements:
1. That the offender has the custody of a child.
2. That the child is under seven years of age.
3. That he abandons such child.
4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the
latter is abandoned.
In order to hold one criminally liable under
this article, the offender must have abandoned the
child with deliberate intent. The purpose of the
offender must solely be avoidance of the obligation of
taking care of the minor.
ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON
ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE
OF PARENTS
Acts punished:
1. By delivering a minor to a public institution or
other persons w/o consent of the one who
www.rkmfiles.net50
entrusted such minor to the care of the offender
or, in the absence of that one, without the consent
of the proper authorities
Elements:
a. That the offender has charged of the
rearing or education of a minor.
b. That he delivers said minor to a public
institution or other persons.
c. That the one who entrusted such child to
the offender has not consented to such act,
or if the one who entrusted such child to
the offender is absent; the proper
authorities have not consented to it.
2. By neglecting his (offender’s) children by not
giving them education which their station in life
requires and financial condition permits
Elements:
a. That the offender is a parent.
b. That he neglects his children by not giving
them education.
c. That his station in life requires such
education and his financial condition
permits it.
“Indifference of parents” – while they are financially
capable of supporting the needs of their children, they
deliberately neglect to support the educational
requirements of these children through plain
irresponsibility caused by wrong social values.
EXPLOITATION OF MINORS
Acts punished:
1. By causing any boy or girl under 16 to perform any
dangerous feat of balancing, physical strength or
contortion, the offender being any person
2. By employing children under 16 who are not the
children or descendants of the offender in
exhibitions of acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker,
diver, or wild-animal tamer or circus manager or
engaged in a similar calling
3. By employing any descendant under 12 in
dangerous exhibitions enumerated in the next
preceding paragraph, the offender being engaged
in any of said callings
4. By delivering a child under 16 gratuitously to any
person following any of the callings enumerated in
par 2 or to any habitual vagrant or beggar, the
offender being an ascendant, guardian, teacher or
person entrusted in any capacity with the care of
such child
5. By inducing any child under 16 to abandon the
home of its ascendants; guardians, curators or
teachers to follow any person engaged in any of
 the callings mentioned in par 2 or to accompany
any habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender being
any person
The offender is engaged in a kind of business
that would place the life or limb of the minor in
danger, even though working for him is not against the
will of the minor.
Nature of the Business – This involves circuses
which generally attract children so they themselves
may enjoy working there unaware of the danger to
their own lives and limbs.
Age – Must be below 16 years. At this age, the
minor is still growing.
If the employer is an ascendant, the crime is
not committed, unless the minor is less than 12 years
old. Because if the employer is an ascendant, the law
regards that he would look after the welfare and
protection of the child; hence, the age is lowered to 12
years. Below that age, the crime is committed.
But remember Republic Act No. 7610 (Special
Protection of Children against Child Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act). It applies to
minors below 18 years old, not 16 years old as in the
Revised Penal Code. As long as the employment is
inimical – even though there is no physical risk – and
detrimental to the child’s interest – against moral,
intellectual, physical, and mental development of the
minor – the establishment will be closed.
Article 278 has no application if minor is 16
years old and above. But the exploitation will be dealt
with by Republic Act No. 7610.
If the minor so employed would suffer some
injuries as a result of a violation of Article 278, Article
279 provides that there would be additional criminal
liability for the resulting felony.
QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING
Elements:
1. That the offender is a private person.
2. That he enters the dwelling of another.
3. That such entrance is against the latter’s will.
Notes:
www.rkmfiles.net51
Dwelling – This is the place that a person
inhabits. It includes the dependencies which have
interior communication with the house. It is not
necessary that it be the permanent dwelling of the
person. So, a person’s room in a hotel may be
considered a dwelling. It also includes a room where
one resides as a boarder.
1. Qualifying circumstance: if the offense is
committed by means of violence or
intimidation, the penalty is higher
2. There must be an opposition to the entry of the
accused
If the entry is made by a way not intended for
entry, that is presumed to be against the will of the
occupant (example, entry through a window). It is not
necessary that there be a breaking.
Lack of permission to enter a dwelling does
not amount to prohibition. So, one who enters a
building is not presumed to be trespasser until the
owner tells him to leave the building. In such a case, if
he refuses to leave, then his entry shall now be
considered to have been made without the express
consent of the owner. (People vs. De Peralta, 42 Phil.
69)
Even if the door is not locked, for as long as it
is closed, the prohibition is presumed especially if the
entry was done at the late hour of the night or at an
unholy hour of the day. (U. S. vs. Mesina, 21 Phil. 615)
3. Implied prohibition is present considering the
situation – late at night and everyone’s asleep or
entrance was made through the window
“Against the will” -- This means that the
entrance is, either expressly or impliedly, prohibited
or the prohibition is presumed. Fraudulent entrance
may constitute trespass. The prohibition to enter may
be made at any time and not necessarily at the time of
the entrance.
To prove that an entry is against the will of the
occupant, it is not necessary that the entry should be
preceded by an express prohibition, provided that the
opposition of the occupant is clearly established by the
circumstances under which the entry is made, such as
the existence of enmity or strained relations between
the accused and the occupant.
4. May be committed even by the owner (as against
the actual occupant)

Distinction between qualified trespass to dwelling and
violation of domicile
Unlike qualified trespass to dwelling, violation
of domicile may be committed only by a public officer
or employee and the violation may consist of any of
the three acts mentioned in Article 128 – (1) entering
the dwelling against the will of the owner without
judicial order; (2) searching papers or other effects
found in such dwelling without the previous consent
of the owner thereof; and (3) refusing to leave the
dwelling when so requested by the owner thereof,
after having surreptitiously entered such dwelling.
5. Not applicable to:
a. entrance is for the purpose of preventing harm
to himself, the occupants or a third person
b. purpose is to render some service to humanity
or justice
c. place is a café, tavern etc while open
OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS
Elements:
1. That the offender enters the closed premises or
the fenced estate of another.
2. That the entrance is made while either of them is
uninhabited.
3. That the prohibition to enter be manifest.
4. That the trespasser has not secured the
permission of the owner or the caretaker thereof.
GRAVE THREATS
Acts punishable:
1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property that of his family of any
wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
money or imposing any other condition, even
though not unlawful and the offender (Note:
threat is with condition)
Elements
a. That the offender threatens another
person with the infliction upon the latter’s
person, honor or property, or upon that of
the latter’s family, of any wrong.
b. That such wrong amounts to a crime.
c. That there is a demand for money or that
any other condition is imposed, even
though not unlawful.
www.rkmfiles.net52
d. That the offender attains his purpose.
2. By making such threat without the offender
attaining his purpose
3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property or that of his family of
any wrong amounting to a crime, the threat not
being subject to a condition (Note: threat is
without condition)
Elements
a. That the offender threatens another
person with the infliction upon the latter’s
person, honor or property, or upon that of
the latter’s family, of any wrong.
b. That such wrong amounts to a crime.
c. That the threat is not subject to a condition
Notes:
Intimidation is an indispensable element in
the crime of threat. The very essence of threat is to
sow fear, anxiety and insecurity in the mind of the
offended party. It is done by threatening to commit the
crime upon the person, honor and property of the
offended party. There is a promise of some future
harm or injury.
Threat is a declaration of an intention or
determination to injure another by the commission
upon his person, honor or property or upon that of his
family of some wrong which may or may not amount
to a crime:
(1) Grave threats – when the wrong threatened to
be inflicted amounts to a crime. The case falls
under Article 282.
(2) Light threats – if it does not amount to a crime.
The case falls under Article 283.
But even if the harm intended is in the nature
of a crime, if made orally and in the heat of anger and
after the oral threat, the issuer of the threat did not
pursue the act; the crime is only other light threats
under Article 285.
To constitute grave threats, the threats must
refer to a future wrong and is committed by acts or
through words of such efficiency to inspire terror or
fear upon another. It is, therefore, characterized by
moral pressure that produces disquietude or alarm.
The greater perversity of the offender is
manifested when the threats are made demanding
money or imposing any condition, whether lawful or
not, and the offender shall have attained his purpose.
So the law imposes upon him the penalty next lower
in degree than that prescribed for the crime
threatened to be committed. But if the purpose is not
attained, the penalty lower by two degrees is imposed.
The maximum period of the penalty is imposed if the
threats are made in writing or through a middleman
as they manifest evident premeditation.
Distinction between threat and coercion:
The essence of coercion is violence or
intimidation. There is no condition involved; hence,
there is no futurity in the harm or wrong done.
In threat, the wrong or harm done is future
and conditional. In coercion, it is direct and personal.
Distinction between threat and robbery:
(1) As to intimidation – In robbery, the
intimidation is actual and immediate; in
threat, the intimidation is future and
conditional.
(2) As to nature of intimidation – In robbery, the
intimidation is personal; in threats, it may be
through an intermediary.
(3) As to subject matter – Robbery refers to
personal property; threat may refer to the
person, honor or property.
(4) As to intent to gain – In robbery, there is intent
to gain; in threats, intent to gain is not an
essential element.
(5) In robbery, the robber makes the danger
involved in his threats directly imminent to
the victim and the obtainment of his gain
immediate, thereby also taking rights to his
person by the opposition or resistance which
the victim might offer; in threat, the danger to
the victim is not instantly imminent nor the
gain of the culprit immediate.
LIGHT THREATS
Elements:
1. That the offender makes a threat to commit a
wrong.
2. That the wrong does not constitute a crime.
3. That there is a demand for money or that other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful
4. That the offender has attained his purpose or, that
he has not attained his purpose
In order to convict a person of the crime of
light threats, the harm threatened must not be in the
www.rkmfiles.net53
nature of crime and there is a demand for money or
any other condition is imposed, even though lawful.
BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
The law imposes the penalty of bond for good
behavior only in case of grave and light threats. If the
offender can not post the bond, he will be banished by
way of destierro to prevent him from carrying out his
threat.
Bond of good behavior means the posting of bond on
the part of the accused in order to guarantee that he
will not molest the offended party. It is in the nature of
an additional penalty.
Bond to keep peace under Article 35 is
applicable to all cases and is treated as a distinct
penalty. If the sentenced prisoner fails to give the
bond, he shall be detained for a period not exceeding
six months if the crime for which he was convicted is
classified as grave felony or for a period not exceeding
thirty days if convicted for a light felony.
OTHER LIGHT THREATS
Elements:
1. Person shall threaten another with a weapon, or
draw weapon in a quarrel unless in self-defense.
2. In the heat of anger, person orally threatens
another with some harm constituting a crime,
without persisting in the idea involved in the
threat. Subsequent acts did not persist.
3. Person orally threatens another with harm not
constituting a felony.
In the crime of light threats, there is no
demand for money and the threat made is not planned
or done with deliberate intent. So threats which would
otherwise qualify as grave threats, when made in the
heat of anger or which is a product of a spur of the
moment are generally considered as light threats.
Whether it is grave or light threats, the crime
is committed even in the absence of the person to
whom the threat is directed.
GRAVE COERCIONS
Elements:
1. That a person prevented another from doing
something OR not to do something against his will,
be it right or wrong;
UNJUST VEXATION
2. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by
violence, of force as would produce intimidation
In unjust vexation, any act committed without
and control the will.
violence, but which unjustifiably annoys or vexes an
3. That the person that restrained the will and liberty
innocent person amounts to light coercion.
by another had not the authority of law or the right
As a punishable act, unjust vexation should
to do so, or, in other words, that the restraint shall
include any human conduct which, although not
not be made under authority of law or in the
productive of some physical or material harm would,
exercise of any lawful right.
however, unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent
person. It is distinguished from grave coercion under
Acts punished
the first paragraph by the absence of violence.
1. Preventing another, by means of violence, threats
OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS
or intimidation, from doing something not
prohibited by law;
ELEMENTS OF NO. 1 - Forcing or compelling, directly
2. Compelling another, by means of violence, threats
or indirectly or knowingly permitting the forcing or
or intimidation, to do something against his will,
compelling of the laborer or employee of the offender
whether it be right or wrong.
to purchase merchandise of commodities of any kind
from him;
In grave coercion, the act of preventing by
force must be made at the time the offended party was
1. That the offender is any person, agent or
doing or was about to do the act to be prevented.
officer of any association or corporation.
2. That he or such firm or corporation has
Grave coercion arises only if the act which the
employed laborers or employees.
offender prevented another to do is not prohibited by
3. That he forces or compels, directly or
law or ordinance. If the act prohibited was illegal, he
indirectly, or knowingly permits to be forced
is not liable for grave coercion.
or compelled, any of his or its laborers or
employees to purchase merchandise or
If a person prohibits another to do an act
commodities of any kind from his or from said
because the act is a crime, even though some sort of
firm or corporation.
violence or intimidation is employed, it would not give
rise to grave coercion. It may only give rise to threat
ELEMENTS OF NO. 2 - Paying the wages due his
or physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted.
laborer or employee by means of tokens or object
However, in case of grave coercion where the offended
other than the legal tender currency of the
party is being compelled to do something against his
Philippines, unless expressly requested by such
will, whether it be wrong or not, the crime of grave
laborer or employee.
coercion is committed if violence or intimidation is
employed in order to compel him to do the act. No
1. That the offender pays the wages due a laborer
person shall take the law into his own hands.
or employee employed by him by means of
tokens or objects.
LIGHT COERCIONS
2. That those tokens or objects are other than the
legal tender currency to the Philippines.
Elements:
3. That such employee or laborer does not
1. That the offender must be a creditor.
expressly request that he be paid by means of
2. That he seizes anything belonging to his debtor.
tokens or objects.
3. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by
means of violence or a display of material force
Under the Republic Act No. 602, known as the
producing intimidation;
Minimum Wage Law, wages of laborers must be paid
4. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the
in legal tender. Accordingly, it is unlawful to pay the
same to the payment of the debt.
wages of the laborers in the form of promissory notes,
vouchers, coupons, tokens, or any other forms alleged
to represent legal tender.
www.rkmfiles.net54

FORMATION, MAINTENANCE, AND PROHIBITION
OF
COMBINATION OF CAPITAL OR LABOR THROUGH
VIOLENCE OR THREATS
Elements:
1. That the offender employs violence or threats, in
such a degree as to compel or force the laborers or
employers in the free and legal exercise of their
industry or work
2. That the purpose is to organize, maintain or
prevent coalitions of capital or labor, strike of
laborers or lockout of employees.
Peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of
speech and is not covered by this article. Preventing
employees or laborers from joining any registered
labor organization is punished under Art. 248 of the
Labor Code.
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS
DISCOVERING SECRETS THROUGH SEIZURE OF
CORRESPONDENCE
Elements
1. That the offender is a private individual or
even a public officer not in the exercise of his
official function,
2. That he seizes the papers or letters of another.
3. That the purpose is to discover the secrets of
such another person.
4. That offender is informed of the contents or
the papers or letters seized.
REVEALING SECRETS WITH ABUSE OF OFFICE
Elements
1. That the offender is a manager, employee or
servant.
2. That he learns the secrets of his principal or
master in such capacity.
3. That he reveals such secrets.
REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL SECRETS
Elements
1. That the offender is a person in charge,
employee or workman of a manufacturing or
industrial establishment.
www.rkmfiles.net55
2. That the manufacturing or industrial
establishment has a secret of the industry
which the offender has learned.
3. That the offender reveals such secrets.
4. That the prejudice is caused to the owner.
A business secret must not be known to other
business entities or persons. It is a matter to be
discovered, known and used by and must belong to
one person or entity exclusively. One who merely
copies their machines from those already existing and
functioning cannot claim to have a business secret,
much less, a discovery within the contemplation of
Article 292.
ROBBERY IN GENERAL
Elements
1. That there be personal property belonging to
another.
2. That there is unlawful taking of that property.
3. That the taking must be with intent to gain,
and
4. That there is violence against or intimidation
of any person, or force upon anything.
Robbery – This is the taking or personal
property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by
means of violence against, or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything.
Two kinds of robbery: 1) robbery with violence or
intimidation and 2) robbery with force upon things.
1. Belonging to another – person from whom
property was taken need not be the owner,
legal possession is sufficient
The property must be personal property and
cannot refer to real property.
2. Name of the real owner is not essential so long
as the personal property taken does not
belong to the accused except if crime is
robbery with homicide
3. Taking of personal property – must be
unlawful; if given in trust – estafa
4. As to robbery with violence or intimidation –
from the moment the offender gains
possession of the thing even if offender has
had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the
unlawful taking is complete

5. As to robbery with force upon things – thing
must be taken out of the building
6. Intent to gain – presumed from unlawful
taking - Intent to gain may be presumed from
the unlawful taking of another’s property.
However, when one takes a property under
the claim of ownership or title, the taking is
not considered to be with intent to gain. (U. S.
vs. Manluco, et al., 28 Phil. 360)
7. When there’s no intent to gain but there is
violence in the taking – grave coercion
8. Violence or intimidation must be against the
person of the offended party, not upon the
thing
9. General rule: violence or intimidation must be
present before the “taking” is complete,
Exception: when violence results in –
homicide, rape, intentional mutilation or any
of the serious physical injuries in par 1 and 2
of art 263, the taking of the property is
robbery complexed with any of these crimes
under art 294, even if taking is already
complete when violence was used by the
offender
10. Use of force upon things – entrance to the
building by means described in arts 299 and
302 (offender must enter)
The other kind of robbery is one that is
committed with the use of force upon anything in
order to take with intent to gain, the personal property
of another. The use of force here must refer to the
force employed upon things in order to gain entrance
into a building or a house. (People vs. Adorno, C. A. 40
O. G. 567)
11. When both violence or intimidation and force
upon things concur – it is robbery with
violence
Robbery and Theft, compared.
1. Both robbery and theft involve unlawful taking as
an element;
2. Both involve personal property belonging to
another;
www.rkmfiles.net56
3. In both crimes, the taking is done with intent to
gain;
4. In robbery, the taking is done either with the use of
violence or intimidation of person or the
employment of force upon things; whereas in
theft, the taking is done simply without the
knowledge and consent of the owner.
Robbery with Grave threats
violence
Intent to gain No intent to gain None
Immediate harm Intimidation; Intimidat
promises some future offended
harm or injury somethin
wrong)
Robbery
X didn’t commit crime but is intimidated to X has co
deprive him of his property money a
prosecuti
Deprived of money thru force or intimidation Giving of
Neither Transacti
Ex. defendant demands payment of P2.00 with
threats of arrest and prosecution, therefore,
robbery because (a) intent to gain and (b)
immediate harm
ANTI – CARNAPPING ACT ( RA # 6539 )
“Carnapping” is the taking, with intent to gain,
of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the
latter’s consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
Any vehicle which is motorized using the
streets which are public, not exclusively for private
use is covered within the concept of motor vehicle
under the Anti-Carnapping Law. A tricycle which is not
included in the enumeration of exempted vehicles
under the Carnapping Law is deemed to be motor
vehicle as defined in the law, the stealing of which
comes within its penal sanction.
If the vehicle uses the streets with or without
the required license, the same comes within the
protection of the law, for the severity of the offense is
not to be measured by what kind of street or highway
the same is used but by the nature of the vehicle itself
and the case to which it is devoted. (Izon, et al., vs.
People, 107 SCRA 118)
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
INTIMIDATION OF PERSON
Acts punished as robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
By reason or on occasion of the robbery, the
following are committed:
1. homicide
2. robbery accompanied with rape or intentional
mutilation, SPI – insane, imbecile, impotent or
blind
3. SPI – lost the use of speech, hear, smell, eye,
hand, foot, arm, leg, use of any such member,
incapacitated for work habitually engaged in
4. Violence/intimidation shall have been carried
to a degree clearly unnecessary for the crime
or when in the cause of its execution –
SPI/deformity, or shall have lost any part of
the body or the use thereof or shall have been
ill or incapacitated for the performance of the
work for > 90 days; > 30 days
5. Any kind of robbery with less serious physical
injuries or slight physical injuries
Case:
A, B, C and D robbed a bank. When
they were about to flee, policemen came,
and they traded shots with them. If one of
the policemen was killed, the offense is
Robbery with Homicide. If one of the
robbers was the one killed, the remaining
robbers shall be charged also with Robbery
with Homicide. If a bank employee was the
one killed either by the robbers or by the
policemen in the course of the latter’s
action of arresting or trying to arrest the
robbers, the crime is still Robbery with
Homicide.
As long as the criminal intent is to rob, that is,
robbery was the real motive, the offense would still be
classified as Robbery with Homicide even if the killing
preceded or was done ahead of the robbing. (People
vs. Tolentino, 165 SCRA 490). Thus, as a member of the
“agaw-armas” gang whose plan and design is to rob a
policeman of his service revolver, but because he fears
that said policeman may beat him to the draw, first
shoots the policeman fatally and only after when the
latter lies dead, does he get the gun – the crime is still
considered Robbery with Homicide.
www.rkmfiles.net57
This is a crime against property, and therefore,
you contend not with the killing but with the robbery.
The term “homicide” is used in the generic
sense, and the complex crime therein contemplated
comprehends not only robbery with homicide in its
restricted sense, but also with robbery with murder.
So, any kind of killing by reason of or on the occasion
of a robbery will bring about the crime of robbery with
homicide even if the person killed is less than three
days old, or even if the person killed is the mother or
father of the killer, or even if on such robbery the
person killed was done by treachery or any of the
qualifying circumstances. In short, there is no crime
of robbery with parricide, robbery with murder,
robbery with infanticide – any and all forms of killing
is referred to as homicide.
Illustration 1:
The robbers enter the house. In entering
through the window, one of the robbers stepped on a
child less than three days old. The crime is not
robbery with infanticide because there is no such
crime. The word homicide as used in defining robbery
with homicide is used in the generic sense. It refers to
any kind of death.
Although it is a crime against property and treachery
is an aggravating circumstance that applies only to
crimes against persons, if the killing in a robbery is
committed with treachery, the treachery will be
considered a generic aggravating circumstance
because of the homicide.
When two or more persons are killed during the
robbery, such should be appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance.
As long as there is only one robbery,
regardless of the persons killed, you only have one
crime of robbery with homicide. Note, however, that
“one robbery” does not mean there is only one taking.
Illustration 2:
Robbers decided to commit robbery in a
house, which turned out to be a boarding house. Thus,
there were different boarders who were offended
parties in the robbery. There is only one count of
robbery. If there were killings done to different
boarders during the robbery being committed in a
boarder’s quarter, do not consider that as separate
counts of robbery with homicide because when
robbers decide to commit robbery in a certain house,
they are only impelled by one criminal intent to rob
and there will only be one case of robbery. If there
were homicide or death committed, that would only
be part of a single robbery. That there were several
killings done would only aggravate the commission of
the crime of robbery with homicide.
In robbery with homicide as a single
indivisible offense, it is immaterial who gets killed.
Even though the killing may have resulted from
negligence, you will still designate the crime as
robbery with homicide.
Illustration 3:
On the occasion of a robbery, one of the
offenders placed his firearm on the table. While they
were ransacking the place, one of the robbers bumped
the table. As a result, the firearm fell on the floor and
discharged. One of the robbers was the one killed.
Even though the placing of the firearm on the table
where there is no safety precaution taken may be
considered as one of negligence or imprudence, you
do not separate the homicide as one of the product of
criminal negligence. It will still be robbery with
homicide, whether the person killed is connected with
the robbery or not. He need not also be in the place of
the robbery.
Note that the person killed need not be one
who is identified with the owner of the place where
the robbery is committed or one who is a stranger to
the robbers. It is enough that the homicide was
committed by reason of the robbery or on the occasion
thereof.
Illustration 4:
There are two robbers who broke into a house
and carried away some valuables. After they left such
house these two robbers decided to cut or divide the
loot already so that they can go of them. So while they
are dividing the loot the other robber noticed that the
one doing the division is trying to cheat him and so he
immediately boxed him. Now this robber who was
boxed then pulled out his gun and fired at the other
one killing the latter. Would that bring about the
crime of robbery with homicide? Yes. Even if the
robbery was already consummated, the killing was
still by reason of the robbery because they quarreled
in dividing the loot that is the subject of the robbery.
www.rkmfiles.net58
Remember also that intent to rob must be
proved. But there must be an allegation as to the
robbery not only as to the intention to rob. If the
motive is to kill and the taking is committed thereafter,
the crimes committed are homicide and theft. If the
primordial intent of the offender is to kill and not to
rob but after the killing of the victims a robbery was
committed, then there are will be two separate crimes.
Illustration 5:
If a person had an enemy and killed him and
after killing him, saw that he had a beautiful ring and
took this, the crime would be not robbery with
homicide because the primary criminal intent is to kill.
So, there will be two crimes: one for the killing and
one for the taking of the property after the victim was
killed. Now this would bring about the crime of theft
and it could not be robbery anymore because the
person is already dead.
For robbery with homicide to exist, homicide
must be committed by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery, that is, the homicide must be committed “in
the course or because of the robbery.” Robbery and
homicide are separate offenses when the homicide is
not committed “on the occasion” or “by reason” of the
robbery.
Robbery with homicide need not be
committed inside a building. What constitutes the
crime as robbery with homicide is the killing of a
person on the occasion or by reason of the taking of
personal property belonging to another with intent to
gain.
The killing on the occasion of robbery may
come in different forms. 1) It may be done by the
offender for the purpose of suppressing evidence, like
when the victim is killed because he happens to know
the person of the offender; or 2) when the killing is
done in order to prevent or remove any opposition
which the victim may put up as regards the taking of
his personal belongings. 3) The killing may also result
from the offender’s defense of his possession of the
stolen goods. 4) Or it may be resorted to by the
offender to facilitate his escape after the commission
of the robbery.
Robbery with Rape
a. Intent to commit robbery must precede rape.
 b. Prosecution of the crime need not be by
offended party – fiscal can sign the
information.
c. When rape and homicide co-exist, rape should
be considered as aggravating only and the
crime is still robbery with homicide
The rape committed on the occasion of the
robbery is not considered a private crime because the
crime is robbery, which is a crime against property.
So, even though the robber may have married the
woman raped, the crime remains robbery with rape.
The rape is not erased. This is because the crime is
against property which is a single indivisible offense.
If the woman, who was raped on the occasion
of the robbery, pardoned the rapist who is one of the
robbers, that would not erase the crime of rape. The
offender would still be prosecuted for the crime of
robbery with rape, as long as the rape is
consummated.
If the rape is attempted, since it will be a
separate charge and the offended woman pardoned
the offender that would bring about a bar to the
prosecution of the attempted rape. If the offender
married the offended woman, that would extinguish
the criminal liability because the rape is the subject of
a separate prosecution.
The intention must be to commit robbery and
even if the rape is committed before the robbery,
robbery with rape is committed. But if the accused
tried to rape the offended party and because of
resistance, he failed to consummate the act, and then
he snatched the vanity case from her hands when she
ran away, two crimes are committed: attempted rape
and theft.
The Revised Penal Code does not differentiate
whether rape was committed before, during or after
the robbery. It is enough that the robbery
accompanied the rape. Robbery must not be a mere
accident or afterthought.
If the two (2) crimes were separated both by
time and place, there is no complex crime of Robbery
with Rape. Thus, when complainant went out of her
room about 1:30 a.m. to urinate, one of the accused
grabbed her, poked an icepick on her neck , and
dragged her out of the house and was made to board a
taxi; and before boarding, she saw the two (2)
companions of the man carrying her typewriter and
betamax and then joining them in the taxi, and that
www.rkmfiles.net59
after alighting from the taxi, the two (2) companions
left her, and the man who had grabbed her brought her
to a motel, where by means of force and intimidation
he was able to have sex with her, the crimes
committed are Robbery and Forcible Abduction with
Rape. The Rape committed cannot be complexed with
Robbery. (People vs. Angeles, 222 SCRA 451).
If rape was the primary objective of the
accused and the taking of her jewelries was not done
with intent to gain but as a token of her supposed
consent to the sexual intercourse, the accused is guilty
of two distinct crimes: rape and unjust vexation.
(People vs. Villarino, C. A. G. R. No. 6342-R, Nov. 26,
1951)
d. robbery with intimidation – acts done by the
accused which by their own nature or by
reason of the circumstances inspire fear in the
person against whom they are directed
In the taking of personal property, it is
necessary that violence must be employed by the
offender in order that the taking may be considered as
robbery. So, where the taking is without violence or
intimidation and the same is complete, but the victim
pursued the offender in order to recover the personal
property taken and by the reason thereof, he suffers
less serious or slight physical injuries in the hands of
the offender, the violence employed on the victim
which resulted to his injuries will not convert the
taking of his personal property to robbery. In such a
case, the offender is liable for two crimes, namely,
theft and less serious or slight physical injuries.
The intimidation must be present at the time
of the taking before it is completed. If the taking is
completed without intimidation and it is employed by
the offender only to prevent the owner from
recovering his stolen property, two crimes are
committed by the offender: theft and grave threat.
If violence is employed against the offended
party in order to deprive him of his personal property
and the violence resulted to the infliction of less
serious or slight physical injuries, the crime
committed would only be robbery. Hence, there is no
crime of robbery with less serious or slight injuries.
(U. S. vs. Barroga, 21 Phil 161)
On Robbery with Physical Injuries
To be considered as such, the physical injuries
must always be serious. If the physical injuries are
only less serious or slight, they are absorbed in the
robbery. The crime becomes merely robbery. But if
the less serious physical injuries were committed after
the robbery was already consummated, there would
be a separate charge for the less serious physical
injuries. It will only be absorbed in the robbery if it
was inflicted in the course of the execution of the
robbery. The same is true in the case of slight physical
injuries.
Illustration 1:
After the robbery had been committed and the
robbers were already fleeing from the house where
the robbery was committed, the owner of the house
chased them and the robbers fought back. If only less
serious physical injuries were inflicted, there will be
separate crimes: one for robbery and one for less
serious physical injuries.
But if after the robbery was committed and the
robbers were already fleeing from the house where
the robbery was committed, the owner or members of
the family of the owner chased them, and they fought
back and somebody was killed, the crime would still
be robbery with homicide. But if serious physical
injuries were inflicted and the serious physical
injuries rendered the victim impotent or insane or the
victim lost the use of any of his senses or lost a part of
his body, the crime would still be robbery with serious
physical injuries. The physical injuries (serious)
should not be separated regardless of whether they
retorted in the course of the commission of the
robbery or even after the robbery was consummated.
On Robbery with Arson
Another innovation of Republic Act No. 7659
is the composite crime of robbery with arson if arson
is committed by reason of or on occasion of the
robbery. The composite crime would only be
committed if the primordial intent of the offender is to
commit robbery and there is no killing, rape, or
intentional mutilation committed by the offender
during the robbery. Otherwise, the crime would be
robbery with homicide, or robbery with rape, or
robbery with intentional mutilation, in that order and
the arson would only be an aggravating circumstance.
It is essential that robbery precedes the arson, as in
the case of rape and intentional mutilation, because
the amendment included arson among the rape and
intentional mutilation which have accompanied the
robbery.
www.rkmfiles.net60
Moreover, it should be noted that arson has
been made a component only of robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons in said Article 294,
but not of robbery by the use of force upon things in
Articles 299 and 302.
So, if the robbery was by the use of force upon
things and therewith arson was committed, two
distinct crimes are committed.
QUALIFIED ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE OR
INTIMIDATION
Qualifying circumstances in robbery with
violence or intimidation of persons, if any of the
offenses defined in subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 of Art 294
is committed:
a. in an uninhabited place or
b. by a band or
c. by attacking a moving train, street car, motor
vehicle or airship, or
d. by entering the passenger’s compartments in a
train, or in any manner taking the passengers
thereof by surprise in the respective
conveyances, or
e. on a street, road, highway or alley and the
intimidation is made with the use of firearms,
the offender shall be punished by the max
period of the proper penalties prescribed in
art 294
Notes:
1. Must be alleged in the information
2. Can’t be offset by generic mitigating
3. Art 295 will not apply to: robbery w/
homicide, rape or SPI under par 1 of art 263
ROBBERY BY A BAND
Band is defined as consisting of at least four
armed malefactors organized with the intention of
carrying out any unlawful design. Their participation
in the commission of the crime must be actual. The
offender must be principal by direct participation, so
that, a principal by inducement cannot be convicted of
this crime where the aggravating circumstance of
band shall be appreciated against him, since the law
requires as a condition to its commission the actual
participation of the offender in the execution of the
crime. In such a case, the conviction of a principal by
inducement will only be limited to his criminal liability
as a co-conspirator.
1. Liability for the acts of the other members of the
band
a. he was a member of the band
b. he was present at the commission of a robbery
by that band
c. other members of the band committed an
assault
d. he did not attempt to prevent the assault
2. Conspiracy to commit robbery with homicide –
even if less than 4 armed men
3. Conspiracy to commit robbery only but homicide
was committed also on the occasion thereof – all
members of the band are liable for robbery with
homicide
Even if the agreement refers only to the
robbery, nonetheless, where the robbery is committed
by a band and a person is killed, any member who was
present at the commission of the robbery and who did
not do anything to prevent the killing of the victim on
the occasion of the robbery shall be held liable for the
crime of robbery with homicide. (People vs. Cinco, 194
SCRA 535)
4. Conspiracy is presumed when 4 or more armed
persons committed robbery
5. Unless the others attempted to prevent the assault
– guilty of robbery by band only
Band is a generic aggravating circumstance in
the crime of robbery with homicide or rape. But in the
other circumstances provided under Article 294
particularly paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, band is a special
aggravating circumstance which must be alleged in
the information.
Band is a special aggravating circumstance if
the robbery results in the infliction of serious physical
injuries.
The arms contemplated under this article
refers to any deadly weapon and is not limited to
firearms, whether long or short.
www.rkmfiles.net61
ATTEMPTED OR FRUSTRATED ROBBERY WITH
HOMICIDE
1. Whether robbery is attempted or frustrated,
penalty is the same
When the robbery is attempted or frustrated, Art.
294 have no application because the robbery and the
homicide must be both consummated.
Where the homicide is only attempted or
frustrated, Article 297 does not apply. In the same
manner, where the attempted or frustrated robbery
results in the commission of serious physical injuries,
Article 297 has no application. In such a case, the
crime shall be treated under the provisions of Article
48 on ordinary complex crimes. Consequently, the
penalty prescribed by Article 48 shall be observed.
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR
INTIMIDATION
Elements
1. That the offender has intent to defraud another.
2. That the offender compels him to sign, execute, or
deliver any public instrument or document.
3. That the compulsion is by means of violence or
intimidation.
The element of intent to gain or fraudulent
intent is what distinguishes this felony from grave
coercion. Although both crimes share a common
element which is the compelling of any person to do
something against his will, nonetheless, in coercion,
the fear created in the mind of the offended party is
not immediate but remote. In this type of robbery, the
fear is immediate and not remote. In coercion, there is
no intent to gain whereas in this form of robbery,
intent to gain is an indispensable element.
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC
BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP
Elements
1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited house,
or (b) public buildings, or (c) edifice devoted to
religious worship.
2. That the entrance was effected by any of the
following means:
a. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress.
 b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window.
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools or.
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority.
3. That once inside the building, the offender took
personal property belonging to another with
intent to gain.
Nota Bene: In this kind of Robbery, no violence or
intimidation against persons is ever used.
1. Includes dependencies (stairways, hallways,
etc.)
A small store located on the ground floor of a house is
a dependency of the house, there being no partition
between the store and the house and in going to the
main stairway, one has to enter the store which has a
door. (U.S. vs. Ventura, 39 Phil. 523).
2. Inhabited house – any shelter, ship or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more
person even though temporarily absent –
dependencies, courts, corals, barns, etc.
3. NOT INCLUDED – ORCHARD, LANDS FOR
CULTIVATION.
4. Important for robbery by use of force upon
things, it is necessary that offender enters the
building or where object may be found. NO
ENTRY, NO ROBBERY
In the absence of evidence to show how
bandits effected an entrance into the convent which
they robbed, there can be no conviction under this
article. The act would be treated as Theft. ( U.S. vs.
Callotes, 2 PHIL 16 )
"Force upon things" has a technical meaning in
law. Not any kind of force upon things will
characterize the taking as one of robbery. The force
upon things contemplated requires some element of
trespass into the establishment where the robbery
was committed. In other words, the offender must
have entered the premises where the robbery was
committed. If no entry was effected, even though force
may have been employed actually in the taking of the
property from within the premises, the crime will only
be theft.
www.rkmfiles.net62
The term force upon things has a legal
meaning. It means the employment of force to effect
entrance into the house or building by destroying the
door, window, roof, wall or floor of the aforesaid
house or building. In other words, the force upon
things has no reference to personal property but to a
house or building which is ordinarily classified as real
property.
5. Entrance is necessary – mere insertion of hand
is not enough (whole body); not to get out but
to enter – therefore, evidence to such effect is
necessary
Two predicates that will give rise to the crime as
robbery:
a. By mere entering alone, a robbery will be
committed if any personal property is
taken from within;
b. The entering will not give rise to robbery
even if something is taken inside. It is the
breaking of the receptacle or closet or
cabinet where the personal property is
kept that will give rise to robbery, or the
taking of a sealed, locked receptacle to be
broken outside the premises.
If by the mere entering, that would already
qualify the taking of any personal property inside as
robbery, it is immaterial whether the offender stays
inside the premises. The breaking of things inside the
premises will only be important to consider if the
entering by itself will not characterize the crime as
robbery with force upon things.
Modes of entering that would give rise to the
crime of robbery with force upon things if something
is taken inside the premises: entering into an opening
not intended for entrance or egress, under Article 299
(a).
Illustration 1:
The entry was made through a fire escape. The
fire escape was intended for egress. The entry will not
characterize the taking as one of robbery because it is
an opening intended for egress, although it may not be
intended for entrance. If the entering were done
through the window, even if the window was not
broken, that would characterize the taking of personal
property inside as robbery because the window is not
an opening intended for entrance.
Illustration 2:
On a sari-sari store, a vehicle bumped the wall.
The wall collapsed. There was a small opening there.
At night, a man entered through that opening without
breaking the same. The crime will already be robbery
if he takes property from within because that is not an
opening intended for the purpose.
Even of there is a breaking of wall, roof, floor or
window, but the offender did not enter, it would not
give rise to robbery with force upon things.
Note that in the crime of robbery with force
upon things, what should be considered is the means
of entrance and means of taking the personal property
from within. If those means do not come within the
definition under the Revised Penal Code, the taking
will only give rise to theft.
Those means must be employed in entering. If
the offender had already entered when these means
were employed, anything taken inside, without
breaking of any sealed or closed receptacle, will not
give rise to robbery.
Illustration 3:
A found B inside his (A’s) house. He asked B what
the latter was doping there. B claimed he is an
inspector from the local city government to look after
the electrical installations. At the time B was chanced
upon by A, he has already entered. So anything he took
inside without breaking of any sealed or closed
receptacle will not give rise to robbery because the
simulation of public authority was made not in order
to enter but when he has already entered.
6. P v. Lamahang – intent to rob being present is
necessary
7. Place: house or building; not car
8. Public building – every building owned, rented
or used by the government (though owned by
private persons) though temporarily vacant
9. Not robbery – passing through open door but
getting out of a window
If accused entered the house through a door, and it
was while escaping that he broke any wall, floor or
www.rkmfiles.net63
window after taking personal property inside the
house – there is no Robbery committed, only Theft.
10. Outside door must be broken, smashed. Theft
– if lock is merely removed or door was merely
pushed
Breaking of the door under Article299 (b) – Originally,
the interpretation was that in order that there be a
breaking of the door in contemplation of law, there
must be some damage to the door.
Before, if the door was not damaged but only the lock
attached to the door was broken, the taking from
within is only theft. But the ruling is now abandoned
because the door is considered useless without the
lock. Even if it is not the door that was broken but only
the lock, the breaking of the lock renders the door
useless and it is therefore tantamount to the breaking
of the door. Hence, the taking inside is considered
robbery with force upon things.
11. False keys – genuine keys stolen from the
owner or any keys other than those intended
by the owner for use in the lock
12. Picklocks – specially made, adopted for
commission of robbery
13. Key – stolen not by force, otherwise, it’s
robbery by violence and intimidation against
persons
14. False key – used in opening house and not
furniture inside, otherwise, theft (for latter to
be robbery., must be broken and not just
opened)
Use of picklocks or false keys refers to
the entering into the premises – If the
picklock or false key was used not to
enter the premises because the
offender had already entered but was
used to unlock an interior door or even
a receptacle where the valuable or
personal belonging was taken, the use
of false key or picklock will not give
rise to the robbery with force upon
things because these are considered
by law as only a means to gain
entrance, and not to extract personal
belongings from the place where it is
being kept.
 15. Gen. Rule: outside door. Exception: inside door
in a separate dwelling
If in the course of committing the robbery
within the premises some interior doors are broken,
the taking from inside the room where the door leads
to will only give rise to theft. The breaking of doors
contemplated in the law refers to the main door of the
house and not the interior door.
But if it is the door of a cabinet that is broken
and the valuable inside the cabinet was taken, the
breaking of the cabinet door would characterize the
taking as robbery. Although that particular door is not
included as part of the house, the cabinet keeps the
contents thereof safe.
16. E.g. pretending to be police to be able to enter
(not pretending after entrance)
When the robbery is committed in a house
which is inhabited, or in a public building or in a place
devoted to religious worship, the use of fictitious
name or pretension to possess authority in order to
gain entrance will characterize the taking inside as
robbery with force upon things.
If A and B told the occupant of the house that
they were the nephews of the spouse of the owner of
the house, and because of that, the closed door was
opened, or that they were NBI agents executing a
warrant of arrest, and so the occupant opened the
door, any taking personal property thereat with intent
to gain, would be Robbery.
ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON
SUBDIVISION (B) OR ART. 299
1. That the offender is inside a dwelling house, public
building, or edifice devoted to religious worship,
regardless of the circumstances under which he
entered it
2. That the offender takes personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain, under
any of the following circumstances.
a. by the breaking of doors, wardrobes,
chests, or any other kind of locked or
sealed furniture or receptacle, or
b. by taking such furniture or objects away to
be broken or forced open outside the place
of the robbery.
Notes:
www.rkmfiles.net64
1. Entrance ( no matter how done)
If the entering does not characterize the taking
inside as one of robbery with force upon things, it is
the conduct inside that would give rise to the robbery
if there would be a breaking of sealed, locked or closed
receptacles or cabinet in order to get the personal
belongings from within such receptacles, cabinet or
place where it is kept.
2. Offender may be servants or guests
A friend who has invited in a house and who
enters a room where he finds a closed cabinet where
money is kept, is guilty of robbery if he forcibly opens
the said cabinet and takes the money contained
therein.
3. When sealed box is taken out for the purpose
of breaking it, no need to open – already
consummated robbery
4. Estafa – if box is in the custody of accused
5. Theft – if box found outside and forced open
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A
BAND
When the robbery with force upon things is
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band, the
robbery becomes qualified. In the same manner,
where robbery with violence against or intimidation
of persons is committed by a band or in an
uninhabited place, the crime becomes qualified.
The place considered uninhabited when it is
not used as a dwelling. It may refer to a building or a
house which is not used as a dwelling.
If a house is inhabited and its owners or
occupants temporarily left the place to take a short
vacation in another place, their casual absence will not
make the place or house uninhabited. (U. S. vs.
Ventura, 39 Phil. 523)
WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC
BUILDING OR BUILDING DEDICATED TO
RELIGIOUS WORSHIP AND THEIR DEPENDENCIES
Nota Bene
 Inhabited house – Any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons, even
though the inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be
absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.
Public building – Includes every building owned by the
government or belonging to a private person but used
or rented by the government, although temporarily
unoccupied by the same.
1. Dependencies – are all interior courts, corrals,
warehouses, granaries or enclosed places:
a. contiguous to the building
b. having an interior entrance connected
therewith
c. which form part of the whole
2. Garage – must have 3 requirements. Exception:
orchards/lands
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR IN A
PRIVATE BUILDING
Elements:
1. That the offender entered an uninhabited place or
a building which was not a dwelling house, not a
public building, or not an edifice devoted to
religious worship.
2. that any of the following circumstances was
present:
a. That entrance was effected through an
opening not intended for entrance or egress.
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window
was broken.
c. The entrance was effected through the use of
false keys, picklocks or other similar tools.
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or
closed furniture or receptacle was broken or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed,
even if the same be broken open elsewhere.
3. That with intent to gain the offender took
therefrom personal property belonging to
another.
Nota Bene:
1. Second kind of robbery with force upon things
It must be taken note of, that the entrance by
using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority is not among those mentioned in
Article 302 because the place is Uninhabited and
therefore without person present. Likewise, in this
class of Robbery, the penalty depends on the amount
www.rkmfiles.net65
taken disregarding the circumstances of whether the
robbers are armed or not as in the case in Robbery in
Inhabited Place.
2. Uninhabited place – is an uninhabited building
(habitable, not any of the 3 places mentioned)
3. Ex. warehouse, freight car, store. Exception:
pigsty
A store may or may not be an inhabited place
depending upon the circumstances of whether or not
it is usually occupied by any person lodging therein at
night. Although it may be used as a dwelling to sustain
a conviction under Article 299, the information must
allege that the same was used and occupied as a
dwelling (People vs. Tubog, 49 Phil. 620), otherwise
Art. 302 is applicable.
4. Same manner as 299 except that was entered
into was an uninhabited place or a building
other than the 3 mentioned in 299. Exception:
does not include use of fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public authority
5. Breaking of padlock (but not door) is only theft
6. False keys – genuine keys stolen from the
owner or any other keys other than those
intended by the owner for use in the lock
forcibly opened
ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS OR FIRE WOOD IN
AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING
Under Article 303, if the robbery under Article
299 and 302 consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or
firewood, the penalty imposable is lower.
The word cereals however must be
understood to mean “seedlings” or “semilla.” It does not
include hulled rice. It may include palay or unhulled
palay.
While the law uses the term uninhabited place,
it however refers to uninhabited building and its
dependencies. If the cereals, fruits or firewood were
taken outside a building and its dependencies, the
crime committed would only be theft even though the
taking was done in an uninhabited place.
ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR
TOOLS
Elements:
1. That the offender has in his possession picklocks
or similar tools.
2. That such picklocks or similar tools are specially
adopted to the commission of robbery.
3. That the offender does not have lawful cause for
such possession.
Nota Bene: Actual use of the same is not necessary
The law also prohibits the manufacture or
fabrication of such tools. If the manufacturer or maker
or locksmith himself is the offender, a higher penalty
is prescribed by law.
Supposing that in the crime of robbery, the
offender used a picklock to enter a building. Can he be
charged of illegal possession of picklocks or similar
tools? The answer is NO since the same possession of
these tools is already absorbed in the graver crime of
robbery.
FALSE KEYS
What constitutes false keys?
1. Picklocks, etc.
2. Genuine key stolen from owner.
3. Any key other than those intended by owner for
use in the lock forcibly opened by the offender
Nota Bene:
1. Possession of false keys here not punishable
2. If key was entrusted and used to steal, not
robbery (not stolen)
BRIGANDAGE
Brigandage – This is a crime committed by more than
three armed persons who 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, or for any other purpose to be attained
by means of force and violence.
WHO ARE BRIGANDS?
Brigands – more than three armed persons forming a
band
Elements of brigandage:
1. There are least four armed persons;
2. They formed a band of robbers;
3. The purpose is any of the following:
a. To commit robbery in the highway;
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom; or
www.rkmfiles.net66
c. To attain by means of force and violence
any other purpose.
Presumption of Brigandage:
a. if members of lawless band and possession
of unlicensed firearms (any of them)
b. possession of any kind of arms (not just
firearm)
BRIGANDAGE ROB
Purposes are given Only to commit rob
Mere formation of a band for the above If the purpose is to
purpose
Necessary to prove
robbery
There is no need for the band robbers to
execute the object of their association in order to hold
them criminally liable for the crime of brigandage.
The primary object on the law on brigandage
is to prevent the formation of bands of robbers. Hence,
if the formed band commits robbery with the use of
force upon persons or force upon things, their criminal
liability shall be limited to the commission of such
crimes. Likewise, if the offenders are charged with
robbery but the same is not established by the
evidence and what appear clear are the elements of
brigandage where the allegation in the information
necessarily includes such offense, the offender can be
convicted of the crime of brigandage.
It does not mean however that to constitute
violation of P.D. 532, there must be a band. One or two
persons can be held liable under this law if they
perpetrated their acts of depredation in Philippine
Highways against persons who are not pre-
determined victims.
If the agreement among more than three
armed men is to commit a particular robbery,
brigandage is not committed because the latter must
be an agreement to commit robbery in general or
indiscriminately.
AIDING AND ABETTING A BAND OF BRIGANDS
Elements:
1. That there is a band of brigands.
2. That the offender knows the band to be of
brigands.
3. That the offender does any of the following acts:
a. he in any manner aids, abets or protects such
band of brigands, or
 b. he gives them information of the movements
of the police or other peace officers of the
government or
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by
such brigands.
PD 532 – Brigandage
1. Seizure of any person for: (a) ransom; (b)
extortion or other unlawful purpose; (c)
taking away of property by violence or
intimidation or force upon things or other
unlawful means
2. Committed by any person
3. On any Phil hi-way
Distinction between brigandage under the Revised
Penal Code and highway robbery/brigandage under
Presidential Decree No. 532:
(1) Brigandage as a crime under the Revised Penal
Code refers to the formation of a band of robbers
by more than three armed persons for the purpose
of committing robbery in the highway, kidnapping
for purposes of extortion or ransom, or for any
other purpose to be attained by force and violence.
The mere forming of a band, which requires at
least four armed persons, if for any of the criminal
purposes stated in Article 306, gives rise to
brigandage.
(2) Highway robbery/brigandage under Presidential
Decree No. 532 is the seizure of any person for
ransom, extortion or for any other lawful
purposes, or the taking away of the property of
another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things or
other unlawful means committed by any person
on any Philippine highway.
THEFT
Elements:
1. That there be taking of personal property.
2. That said property belongs to another.
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain.
4. That the taking be done without the consent of the
owner.
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use
of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things.
PERSONS LIABLE:
1. Those who
a) with intent to gain
b) But without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things
www.rkmfiles.net67
c) take personal property of another
d) without the latter’s consent
The taking from an enclosed corral of a
carabao belonging to another, after force is employed
to destroy a part of the corral to enter the same, is
considered merely as theft because corral is not a
building nor a dependency of a building. (U. S. vs.
Rosales, et al., 1 Phil. 300)
2. Those who
a) having found lost property
b) fail to deliver the same to local authorities or
its owner
Nota Bene:
1. Retention of money/property found is theft.
Retention is failure to return (intent to gain)
The word “lost” is used in the generic sense. It
embraces loss by stealing or any act of a person other
than the owner, as well as the act of the owner, or
through some casual occurrence. (People vs. Rodrigo,
16 SCRA 475)
The felony is not limited to the actual finder.
Theft of a lost property may be committed even by a
person who is not the actual finder. (People vs. Avila,
44 Phil. 720)
2. Knowledge of owner is not required,
knowledge of loss is enough
It is not necessary that the owner of the lost
property be known to the accused. What is important
is that he knows or has reason to know that the
property was lost and for this fact alone, it is his duty
to turn it over to the authorities. If he does otherwise,
like, if he sells the thing to another, then the crime of
theft is committed.
3. Finder in law is liable
Hidden Treasure
Under Article 438 and 439 of the Civil Code,
the finder of hidden treasure on the property of
another and by chance is entitled to one-half of the
treasure that he found. His duty is to tell the owner
about the treasure. If he appropriates the other half
pertaining to the owner of the property, he is liable for
theft as to that share. (People vs. Longdew, C. A. G. R.
No. 9380-R, June 4, 1953)
3. Those who
a) after having maliciously damaged the
property of another
b) remove or make use of the fruits or object of
the damage caused by them
Theft of damaged property occurs only after
the accused has committed the crime of malicious
mischief. In malicious mischief, the offender destroys
the property of another because of hatred, resentment
or other evil motive against the owner. So, a neighbor
who shoots and kills a goat which has destroyed his
flower plants and thereafter slaughters and eats the
meat of the wandering goat is guilty of theft.
4. Those who
a) enter an enclosed estate or a field where
b) trespass is forbidden or which belongs to
another and, without the consent of its owner
c) hunts or fish upon the same or gather fruits,
cereals or other forest or farm products
Nota Bene:
1. Theft is consummated when offender is able to
place the thing taken under his control and in
such a situation as he could dispose of it at
once (though no opportunity to dispose) i.e,
the control test
In the crime of theft, the law makes only of the
term “taking” and not “taking away.” The non-inclusion
of the word “away” is significant because it means that
as soon as the culprit takes possession of the things
taken by him, the crime of theft is already
consummated since the law does not require that the
thief be able to carry away the thing taken from the
owner. (People vs. Jaranilla, 55 SCRA 563)
The consummation of the crime of theft takes
place upon the voluntary and malicious taking of the
property belonging to another which is realized by the
material occupation of the thing. The property need
not be actually taken away by the thief. It is enough
that he has obtained, at some particular moment,
complete control and possession of the thing desired,
adverse to the right of the lawful owner. (People vs.
Naval, 46 O. G. 2641)
2. P v. Dino – applies only in theft of bulky goods
(meaning there has to be capacity to dispose of
the things). Otherwise, P v. Espiritu – full
possession is enough
www.rkmfiles.net68
3. Servant using car without permission deemed
qualified theft though use was temporary
4. Reyes says: there must be some character of
permanency in depriving owner of the use of
the object and making himself the owner,
therefore must exclude “joyride”
5. Theft: if after custody (only material
possession) of object was given to the accused,
it is actually taken by him (no intent to return)
e.g. felonious conversion. But it is estafa if
juridical possession is transferred e.g., by
contract of bailment
Juridical possession of a thing is transferred to
another when he receives the thing in trust or on
commission or for administration, or under a quasi-
contract or a contract of bailment. When possession
by the offender is under any of these circumstances
and he misappropriates the thing received, he cannot
be held guilty of theft but of estafa because here, he
has both the physical and juridical possession of the
property.
6. Includes electricity and gas
a. inspector misreads meter to earn
b. one using a jumper
Personal Property
Personal property in the crime of theft
includes electric current or properties that may have
no material or concrete appearance. The test is not
whether the subject is corporeal or incorporeal but
whether it is incapable of appropriation by another
from the owner. Hence, checks, promissory notes, and
any other commercial documents may be the object of
theft because while they may not be of value to the
accused, they are without doubt of value to the
offended party. (U. S. vs. Raboy, 25 Phil. 1) In such a
case, the penalty shall be based on the amount of
money represented by the checks or promissory note
since, while it may not of value to the thief, it is
undoubtedly of value to the offended party. (People
vs. Koc Song, 63 Phil. 369).
7. Selling share of co-partner is not theft
The personal property must belong to another.
 ▪ A joint owner or partner who sells the
palay to other persons or a co-owner or co-
heir who appropriates the whole property
cannot be guilty of theft since the property
cannot be said to belong to another. (U. S.
Reyes, 6 Phil. 441)
▪ One who takes away the property pledged
by him to another without the latter’s
consent, does not commit theft for the
simple reason that he is the owner of the
thing taken by him. (L. B. Reyes)
8. Salary must be delivered first to employee;
prior to this, taking of Php is theft
9. If offender claims property as his own (in good
faith) – not theft (though later found to be
untrue. If in bad faith – theft)
10. Gain is not just Php – satisfaction, use, pleasure
desired, any benefit (e.g. joyride)
Gain means the acquisition of a thing useful for
the purpose of life. It includes the benefit which in any
other sense may be derived or expected from the act
performed.
11. Actual gain is not necessary (intent to gain
necessary)
12. Allege lack of consent in info is important
Consent as an element of the crime of theft
must be in the concept of consent that is freely given
and not one which is inferred from mere lack of
opposition on the part of the owner.
Where the charge of theft under the first
sentence of Article 308, the information must allege
lack of consent. The allegation of “lack of consent” is
indispensable under the first paragraph of Article 308
since the language or epigraph of the law expressly
requires that the (unlawful) taking should be done
without the consent of the owner. In view of the clear
text of the law, an information which does not aver
“lack of consent of the owner” would render the
allegation insufficient and the information may be
quashed for failure to allege an essential element of
the crime. (Pua Yi Kun vs. People, G. R. No. 26256, June
26, 1968)
Robbery and Theft distinguished.
www.rkmfiles.net69
For robbery to exist, it is necessary that
personal property be taken against the will of the
owner; whereas in theft, it is sufficient that consent on
the part of the owner is lacking.
Presumption:
A person found in possession of a thing taken
in the recent doing of a wrongful act is the taker of the
thing and the doer of the whole act.
Possession is not limited to actual personal
custody. One who deposits stolen property in a place
where it cannot be found may be deemed to have such
property in his possession.
ELEMENTS OF HUNTING, FISHING OR GATHERING
FRUITS, ETC. IN ENCLOSED ESTATE
(PAR. NO.3, ART. 308)
1. That there is an enclosed estate or a field where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another;
2. That the offender enters the same.
3. That the offender hunts or fishes upon the same or
gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
products, and
4. That the hunting or fishing or gathering of
products is without the consent of the owner.
Nota Bene: Fish not in fishpond, otherwise, qualified
Fencing under Presidential Decree No.
1612 is a distinct crime from theft and robbery. If
the participant who profited is being prosecuted
with person who robbed, the person is prosecuted
as an accessory. If he is being prosecuted
separately, the person who partook of the
proceeds is liable for fencing.
Burden of proof is upon fence to overcome
presumption; if explanation insufficient or
unsatisfactory, court will convict. This is a malum
prohibitum so intent is not material. But if
prosecution is under the Revised Penal Code, as an
accessory, the criminal intent is controlling.
When there is notice to person buying, there
may be fencing such as when the price is way below
ordinary prices; this may serve as notice. He may be
liable for fencing even if he paid the price because of
the presumption.
 Cattle Rustling and Qualified Theft of Large
Cattle – The crime of cattle-rustling is defined and
punished under Presidential Decree No. 533, the Anti-
Cattle Rustling law of 1974, as the taking by any
means, method or scheme, of any large cattle, with or
without intent to gain and whether committed with or
without violence against or intimidation of person or
force upon things, so long as the taking is without the
consent of the owner/breed thereof. The crime
includes the killing or taking the meat or hide of large
cattle without the consent of the owner.
Since the intent to gain is not essential, the
killing or destruction of large cattle, even without
taking any part thereof, is not a crime of malicious
mischief but cattle-rustling.
The Presidential Decree, however, does not
supersede the crime of qualified theft of large cattle
under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code, but
merely modified the penalties provided for theft of
large cattle and, to that extent, amended Articles 309
and 310. Note that the overt act that gives rise to the
crime of cattle-rustling is the taking or killing of large
cattle. Where the large cattle was not taken, but
received by the offender from the owner/overseer
thereof, the crime is not cattle-rustling; it is qualified
theft of large cattle.
Where the large cattle was received by the
offender who thereafter misappropriated it, the crime
is qualified theft under Article 310 if only physical or
material possession thereof was yielded to him. If
both material and juridical possession thereof was
yielded to him who misappropriated the large cattle,
the crime would be estafa under Article 315 (1b).
PENALTIES FOR QUALIFIED THEFT
The basis of the penalty is the value of the things
stolen.
If the property has some value but is not proven with
reasonable certainty, the minimum penalty shall
be imposed under par. 6 of Art. 309 (People vs.
Reyes, 58 Phil. 964).
When there is no evidence as to the value of the
property stolen, the court is allowed to take
judicial knowledge of the value of such property.
(People vs. dela Cruz, 43 O. G. 3206)
When the resulting penalty for the accessory to the
crime of theft has no medium period, the court can
www.rkmfiles.net70
impose the penalty which is found favorable to the
accused. (Cristobal vs. People, 84 Phil. 473).
QUALIFIED THEFT
THEFT IS QUALIFIED WHEN:
1. Committed by domestic servant, or
2. With grave abuse of confidence, or
3. Property stolen is:
a. motor vehicle
b. mail matter
c. large cattle
d. coconut from plantation
e. fish from fishpond or fishery, or
4. On occasion of calamities and civil disturbance.
Nota Bene:
When the theft is committed by a domestic
servant, the offended party may either be the
employer where the offender is working as a
household help, or a third person as a guest in the
house. The roomboy is a hotel is embraced within the
term “domestic servant.”
1. “grave abuse” – high degree of confidence e.g.
guests
In the case of abuse of confidence, the latter
must be “grave” in order to comply with the
requirement of the law because abuse of confidence is
not enough. There must be an allegation in the
information that there is a relation between the
accused and the offended party wherein the latter
confided his security as to his person, life and property
to the accused with such degree of confidence and that
the accused abused the same.
Abuse of confidence is determined from the
trust reposed by the offended party to the offender. It
may also refer to the nature of the work of the offender
which must necessarily involve trust and confidence.
Abuse of confidence is also an element of estafa. To
avoid confusion between theft with abuse of
confidence (qualified theft) and estafa with abuse of
confidence, where the offender misappropriates a
thing after he receives it from the victim, the student
must remember that in qualified theft, only the
physical or material possession of the thing is
transferred. If the offender acquires the juridical as
well as the physical possession of the thing and he
misappropriates it, the crime committed is estafa.
Juridical possession of the thing is acquired when one
holds the thing in trust, or on commission, or for
administration or under any other obligation
involving the duty to deliver or to return the thing
received. If the possession of the offender is not under
any of these concepts, the crime is qualified theft.
2. no confidence, not qualified theft
3. theft – material possession’ estafa – juridical
possession
Where only the material possession is
transferred, conversion of the property gives rise to
the crime of theft. Where both the material and
juridical possession is transferred, misappropriation
of the property would constitute estafa. When the
material and juridical possession of the thing transfers
ownership of the property to the possessor, any
misappropriation made by the possessor will not
result in the commission of any crime, either for theft
of estafa.
4. Qualified: if done by one who has access to
place where stolen property is kept e.g.,
guards, tellers
5. novation theory applies only if there’s a
relation
6. industrial partner is not liable for QT (estafa)
7. when accused considered the deed of sale as
sham (modus) and he had intent to gain, his
absconding is QT
8. motor vehicle in kabit system sold to another-
theft. Motor vehicle not used as PU in kabit
system but under K of lease-estafa
On Carnapping and Theft of Motor Vehicle
When the subject is motor vehicle, the Theft
becomes qualified. Under R.A. 6539, Anti-Carnapping
Act of 1972, the term motor vehicle includes, within its
protection, any vehicle which uses the streets, with or
without the required license, or any vehicle which is
motorized using the streets, such as a motorized
tricycle. (Izon vs. People, 107 SCRA 123)
The taking with intent to gain of a motor
vehicle belonging to another, without the latter’s
consent, or by means of violence or intimidation of
persons, or by using force upon things is penalized as
carnapping under Republic Act No. 6539 (An Act
Preventing and Penalizing Carnapping), as amended.
The overt act which is being punished under this law
as carnapping is also the taking of a motor vehicle
under circumstances of theft or robbery. If the motor
vehicle was not taken by the offender but was
www.rkmfiles.net71
delivered by the owner or the possessor to the
offender, who thereafter misappropriated the same,
the crime is either qualified theft under Article 310 of
the Revised Penal Code or estafa under Article 315 (b)
of the Revised Penal Code. Qualified theft of a motor
vehicle is the crime if only the material or physical
possession was yielded to the offender; otherwise, if
juridical possession was also yielded, the crime is
estafa.
9. mail matter – private mail to be QT, Not
postmaster – Art. 226
10. theft of large cattle
OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY OR
USURPATION OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY
Acts punished:
1. Taking possession of any real property belonging
to another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons;
2. Usurping any real rights in property belonging to
another by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender takes possession of any real
property or usurps any real rights in property.
2. That the real property or real rights belong to
another.
3. That violence against or intimidation of persons is
used by the offender in occupying real property or
usurpation real rights in property.
4. That there is intent to gain.
Since this is a crime against property, there
must be intent to gain. In the absence of the intent to
gain, the act may constitute Coercion.
Use the degree of intimidation to determine
the degree of the penalty to be applied for the
usurpation.
Usurpation under Article 312 is committed in the
same way as robbery with violence or
intimidation of persons. The main difference is
that in robbery, personal property is involved;
while in usurpation of real rights, it is real
property. (People v. Judge Alfeche, July 23, 1992)
The possession of the land or real rights must
be done by means of violence or intimidation. So, if the
evidence of the prosecution shows that the accused
entered the premises by means of strategy, stealth or
methods other than the employment of violence, no
crime was committed by the offender. (People vs.
Alfeche, Jr., 211 SCRA 770)
Usurpation of real rights and property should
not be complexed using Article 48 when violence or
intimidation is committed. There is only a single
crime, but a two-tiered penalty is prescribed to be
determined on whether the acts of violence used is
akin to that in robbery in Article 294, grave threats or
grave coercion and an incremental penalty of fine
based on the value of the gain obtained by the
offender.
There is no crime of threat and usurpation of
real property since threat is an indispensable element
of usurpation of real rights. Hence, where threats are
uttered to the owner of real property by one illegally
occupying it, the crime committed is not the complex
crime of usurpation of real property with grave
threats because making a threat is an inherent
element of usurpation of real property. (Castrodes vs.
Cubelo, 83 SCRA 670)
The complainant must be the person upon
whom violence was employed. If a tenant was
occupying the property and he was threatened by the
offender, but it was the owner who was not in
possession of the property who was named as the
offended party, the same may be quashed as it does
not charge an offense. The owner would, at most, be
entitled to civil recourse only.
On Squatting
According to the Urban Development and
Housing Act, the following are squatters:
1. Those who have the capacity or means to pay rent
or for legitimate housing but are squatting
anyway;
2. Also the persons who were awarded lots but sold
or lease them out;
3. Intruders of lands reserved for socialized housing,
pre-empting possession by occupying the same.
www.rkmfiles.net72
Note that violation of Article 312 is punishable
only with fine. So, if physical injuries are inflicted on
the victim due to the violence employed by the
offender in the usurpation of real rights, the latter
shall be punished separately for the crime of physical
injuries.
Violence employed results to the death of the
offended party. When such eventuality does occur,
then the crime may rightfully be denominated as
usurpation of real rights resulting to homicide,
murder, parricide, or infanticide as the case may be.
ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS
Elements:
1. That there be boundary marks or monuments of
towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks
intended to designate the boundaries of the same.
2. That the offender alters said boundary marks.
FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY (culpable insolvency)
Elements:
1. That the offender is a debtor; that is, he was
obligations due and payable.
2. That he absconds with his property.
3. That there be prejudice to his creditors.
To be liable for fraudulent insolvency, the
disposal of the merchandise must be done with malice.
The mere circumstance that a person has disposed of
his merchandise by removing them from the place
where they were kept would necessarily imply fraud.
What is required is actual prejudice to the creditor.
The intention of the accused alone is not enough.
(People vs. Guzman, C. A. 40 O. G. 2655)
The law does not require the offender to be a
merchant. The law says “any person,” and this refers to
anyone who becomes a debtor and performs the acts
made punishable by the law.
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
Estafa is embezzlement under common law. It
is a well-known crime to lawyers and businessmen. It
is a continuing crime unlike theft. Being a public crime,
it can be prosecuted de officio.
ESTAFA
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA IN GENERAL
1. That the accused defrauded another (a.) by abuse
of confidence, or (b) or means of deceit and
2. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
estimation is caused to the offended party or third
person
The concept of damage under this article does
not mean actual or real damage. It may consist in mere
disturbance of the property rights of the offended
party. However, the damage must be capable of
pecuniary estimation. This requirement is important
because in estafa, the penalty is dependent on the
value of the property.
Since estafa is a material crime, it can be
divided into consummated, attempted or frustrated
stages. In the latter case, the damage can be in the form
of temporary prejudice or suffering, or inconvenience
capable of pecuniary estimation.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS
1. That the offender has an onerous obligation to
deliver something of value.
2. That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality.
3. That damage or prejudice is caused to another.
The accused does not receive the goods but
delivers a thing under an onerous obligation which is
not in accordance with the substance, quantity or
quality agreed upon. It is the altering of the substance,
quality or quantity of the thing delivered which makes
the offender liable for the crime of estafa.
The word “onerous” means that the offended
party has fully complied with his obligations to pay.
So, if the thing delivered whose substance was altered,
is not yet fully or partially paid, then the crime of
estafa is not committed.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE UNDER SUBDIVISION NO.1 PAR. (B)
1. That money, goods, or other personal property be
received by the offender in trust, or on
commission, or for administration, or under any
other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return, the same.
2. That there be misappropriation or conversion of
such money or property by the offender, or dental
on his part of such receipt.
3. that such misappropriation or conversion or
dental is to the prejudice of another and
www.rkmfiles.net73
4. That there is a demand made by the offended
party to the offender.
(The fourth element is not necessary when there is
evidence of misappropriation of the goods by the
defendant. [Tubb v. People, et al., 101 Phil. 114] ).
It is necessary in this kind of estafa, for the
money, goods or personal property to have been
received by the offender in trust, or on commission or
for administration. He must acquire both material or
physical as well as juridical possession of the thing
received. In these instances, the offender, who is the
transferee, acquires a right over a thing which he may
set up even against the owner.
A money market transaction however
partakes of the nature of a loan, and non-payment
thereof would not give rise to criminal liability for
Estafa through misappropriation or conversion. In
money market placements, the unpaid investor should
institute against the middleman or dealer, before the
ordinary courts, a simple action for recovery of the
amount he had invested, and if there is allegation of
fraud, the proper forum would be the Securities and
Exchange Commission. (Sesbreno vs. Court of
Appeals, et al., 240 SCRA 606).
2ND ELEMENT OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE UNDER PARAGRAPH (B),
SUBDIVISION N0.1, ART. 315 = 3 WAYS OF
COMMITTING
1. By misappropriating the thing received.
2. By converting the thing received.
3. By denying that the thing was received.
Nota Bene:
1. Unfaithfulness or Abuse of Confidence
a. by altering the substance
b. existing obligation to deliver – even if it is not a
subject of lawful commerce
c. thing delivered has not been fully or partially
paid for – not estafa
d. no agreement as to quality – No estafa if delivery
is unsatisfactory
2. By misappropriating and converting
a. thing is received by offender under
transactions transferring juridical possession,
not ownership
 b. under PD 115 (Trust Receipts Law) – failure to
turn over to the bank the proceeds of the sale
of the goods covered by TR – Estafa
c. same thing received must be returned
otherwise estafa; sale on credit by agency
when it was to be sold for cash – estafa
d. Estafa – not affected by Novation of Contract
because it is a public offense
e. Novation must take place before criminal
liability was incurred or perhaps prior to the
filing of the criminal information in court by
state prosecutors
f. Misappropriating – to take something for one’s
own benefit
g. Converting – act of using or disposing of
another’s property as if it was one’s own; thing
has been devoted for a purpose or use
different from that agreed upon
h. There must be prejudice to another – not
necessary that offender should obtain gain
There is no estafa through negligence. There is
likewise no estafa where the accused did not
personally profit or gain from the
misappropriation.
i. Partners – No estafa of money or property
received for the partnership when the
business is commercial and profits accrued.
BUT if property is received for specific
purpose and is misappropriated – estafa!
j. Failure to account after the DEMAND is
circumstantial evidence of misappropriation
k. DEMAND is not a condition precedent to
existence of estafa when misappropriation
may be established by other proof
l. In theft, upon delivery of the thing to the
offender, the owner expects an immediate
return of the thing to him – otherwise, Estafa
m. Servant, domestic or employee who
misappropriates a thing he received from his
master is NOT guilty of estafa but of qualified
theft
3. When in the prosecution for malversation the
public officer is acquitted, the private individual
allegedly in conspiracy with him may be held
liable for estafa
1. False pretenses or fraudulent acts – executed prior
ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE
Offenders are entrusted with funds or property offenders are entrusted with funds or
and are continuing offenses property and
2. are continuing
Funds: always private Funds: public accused
www.rkmfiles.net74
Offender: private individual, or public officer Offender:
not accountable public fund
Committed by misappropriating, converting, Committed
denying having received money misappro
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY TAKING UNDUE
ADVANTAGE OF
THE SIGNATURE IN BLANK
1. That the paper with the signature of the offended
party be in blank.
2. That the offended party should have delivered it to
offender.
3. That above the signature of the offended party a
document is written by the offender without
authority to do so.
4. That the document so written creates a liability of,
or causes damage to, the offended party or any
third person.
Note: If the paper with signature in blank was stolen –
Falsification if by making it appear that he
participated in a transaction when in fact he did not so
participate
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT
1. that there must be a false pretense, fraudulent
means must be made or executed prior to or
2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or
fraudulent means must be made or executed prior
to or simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud.
3. That the offended party must have relied on the
false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent
means, that is, he was induced to part with his
money or property because of the false pretense,
fraudulent act, or fraudulent means.
4. That as a result thereof, the offended party
suffered damage.
Nota Bene:
MALVERSATION
to or simultaneously with delivery of the thing by
the complainant
There must beoffenses
evidence that the pretense of the
funds orthat
property
he possesses power/influence is false

The representation that accused possessed influence,
to deceive and inveigle the complainant into parting
with his money must however be false to constitute
deceit under No. 2 of Article 315, RPC. (Dela Cruz vs.
Court of Appeals, et al., 265 SCRA 299).
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE
PRETENSES
Acts punished under paragraph (a)
1. Using fictitious name;
2. Falsely pretending to possess power, influence,
qualifications, property, credit, agency, business
or imaginary transactions; or
3. By means of other similar deceits.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY POSTDATING A CHECK
OR ISSUING A CHECK IN PAYMENT OF AN
OBLIGATION
1. That the offender postdated a check, or issued a
check in payment of an obligation.
2. That such postdatig or issuing a check was done
when the offender had no funds in the bank or his
funds deposited therein were not sufficient to
cover the amount of the check.
Note that this only applies if:
(1) The obligation is not pre-existing;
(2) The check is drawn to enter into an
obligation;
(Remember that it is the check that is supposed to be
the sole consideration for the other party to have
entered into the obligation. For example, Rose wants
to purchase a bracelet and draws a check without
insufficient funds. The jeweler sells her the bracelet
solely because of the consideration in the check.)
(3) It does not cover checks where the purpose
of drawing the check is to guarantee a loan as
this is not an obligation contemplated in this
paragraph
The check must be genuine. If the check is
falsified and is cashed with the bank or exchanged for
cash, the crime is estafa thru falsification of a
commercial document.
The general rule is that the accused must be
able to obtain something from the offended party by
means of the check he issued and delivered.
www.rkmfiles.net75
Exception: when the check is issued not in payment of
an obligation.
If the checks were issued by the defendant and
he received money for them, then stopped payment
and did not return the money, and he had an intention
to stop payment when he issued the check, there is
estafa.
Deceit is presumed if the drawer fails to deposit
the amount necessary to cover the check within three
days from receipt of notice of dishonor or insufficiency
of funds in the bank.
1. If check was issued in payment of pre-existing
debt – no estafa
It is therefore essential that the check be issued
in payment of a simultaneous obligation. The check in
question must be utilized by the offender in order to
defraud the offended party. So, if the check was issued
in payment of a promissory note which had matured
and the check was dishonored, there is not estafa since
the accused did not obtain anything by means of said
check. (People vs. Canlas, O. G. 1092)
If a bouncing check is issued to pay a pre-
existing obligation, the drawer is liable under B. P. Blg.
22 which does not make any distinction as to whether
a bad check is issued in payment of an obligation or to
guarantee an obligation. (Que vs. People, 73217-18,
Sept. 21, 1987)
2. Offender must be able to obtain something
from the offended party by means of the check
he issues and delivers
The check must be issued in payment of an obligation.
If the check was issued without any obligation or if
there is lack of consideration and the check is
subsequently dishonored, the crime of estafa is not
committed.
3. If postdating a check issued as mere
guarantee/promissory note – no estafa
ELEMENTS OF OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE FIRST
PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1. That a person makes or draws and issues any
check.
2. That the check is made or drawn and issued to
apply on account or for value.
3. That the person who makes or draws and issues
the check knows at the time of issue that he does
not have sufficient funds in or credit with the
drawee bank for the payment of such check in full
upon its presentment.
4. That the check is subsequently dishonored by the
drawee bank for insufficiency of funds or credit, or
would have been dishonored for the same reason
had not the drawee, without any valid reason,
ordered the bank to stop payment.
Note: Failure to make good within 5 banking days
prima facie evidence of knowledge of lack and
insufficiency
ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE
SECOND PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1. That a person has sufficient funds in or credit with
the drawee bank when he makes or draws and
issues a check.
2. That he fails to keep sufficient funds or to maintain
a credit to cover the full amount of the check if
presented within a period of 90 days from the date
appearing thereon.
3. That the check is dishonored by the drawee bank.
Nota Bene: Failure to make good within 5
banking days prima facie evididence of knowledge of
lack and insufficiency
Distinction between Estafa under Article 315 (2)
(d) of the Revised Penal Code and violation of
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22:
(1) Under both Article 315 (2) (d) and Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22, there is criminal liability if the
check is drawn for non-pre-existing obligation.
If the check is drawn for a pre-existing obligation,
there is criminal liability only under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22.
(2) Estafa under Article 315 (2) (d) is a crime against
property while Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a crime
against public interest. The gravamen for the
former is the deceit employed, while in the latter,
it is the issuance of the check. Hence, there is no
double jeopardy.
(3) In the estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), deceit and
damage are material, while in Batas Pambansa Blg.
22, they are immaterial.
www.rkmfiles.net76
(4) In estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), knowledge by
the drawer of insufficient funds is not required,
while in Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, knowledge by
the drawer of insufficient funds is reqired.
On issuance of a bouncing check
The issuance of check with insufficient funds
may be held liable for estafa and Batas Pambansa Blg.
22. Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 expressly provides that
prosecution under said law is without prejudice to any
liability for violation of any provision in the Revised
Penal Code. Double Jeopardy may not be invoked
because a violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a
malum prohibitum and is being punished as a crime
against the public interest for undermining the
banking system of the country, while under the
Revised Penal Code, the crime is malum in se which
requires criminal intent and damage to the payee and
is a crime against property.
In estafa, the check must have been issued as a
reciprocal consideration for parting of goods
(kaliwaan). There must be concomitance. The deceit
must be prior to or simultaneous with damage done,
that is, seller relied on check to part with goods. If it is
issued after parting with goods as in credit
accommodation only, there is no estafa. If the check is
issued for a pre-existing obligation, there is no estafa
as damage had already been done. The drawer is
liable under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22.
For criminal liability to attach under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22, it is enough that the check was
issued to "apply on account or for value" and upon its
presentment it was dishonored by the drawee bank
for insufficiency of funds, provided that the drawer
had been notified of the dishonor and inspite of such
notice fails to pay the holder of the check the full
amount due thereon within five days from notice.
Under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, a drawer must
be given notice of dishonor and given five banking
days from notice within which to deposit or pay the
amount stated in the check to negate the presumtion
that drawer knew of the insufficiency. After this
period, it is conclusive that drawer knew of the
insufficiency, thus there is no more defense to the
prosecution under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22.
The mere issuance of any kind of check
regardless of the intent of the parties, whether the
check is intended to serve merely as a guarantee or as
a deposit, makes the drawer liable under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22 if the check bounces. As a matter of
public policy, the issuance of a worthless check is a
public nuisance and must be abated.
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY INDUCING ANOTHER TO
SIGN ANY DOCUMENTS
contributed by corporations or associations for the
general welfare.
DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAPABLE OF PECUNIARY
ESTIMATION: (315) (second element of any form of
estafa)

1. That the offender induced the offended party to THE ELEMENTS OF DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE MAY
sign a document. CONSIST OF THE FF:
2. That deceit be employed to make him sign the
document. 1. The offender party being deprived of his money or
3. That the offended party personally signed the property, as a result of the defraudation.
document. 2. Disturbance in property right or
4. That prejudice be caused. 3. Temporary prejudice.

Note: If offended party willingly signed the document ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR.1) BY
and there was deceit as to the character or contents of CONVEYING, SELLING, ENCUMBERING, OR
the document – falsification; but where the accused MORTGAGING ANY REAL PROPERTY,
made representation to mislead the complainants as PRETENDING TO BE THE OWNER OF THE SAME
to the character of the documents - estafa
1. That the thing be immovable, such as a parcel of
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY REMOVING, land or a building.
CONCEALING OR DESTROYING DOCUMENTS 2. That the offender who is not the owner of said
property represented that he is the owner thereof.
1. That there be court records, office files, documents 3. That the offender should have executed an act of
or any other papers. ownership (selling, leasing, encumbering or
2. That the offender removed, concealed or mortgaging the real property).
destroyed any of them. 4. That the act be made to the prejudice of the owner
3. That the offender had intent to defraud another. or a third person.

In order to commit a crime, the offender must

have the intention to defraud. In other words, the ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 2) BY DISPOSING
removal, concealment or destruction of the court OF REAL PROPERTY AS FREE FROM
record should be done with the intent to defraud the ENCUMBRANCE, ALTHOUGH SUCH ENCUMBRANCE
victim. This is distinguished from the crime of BE NOT RECORDED
removal; concealment or destruction of documents
under Article 226 wherein fraud is not an element of 1. that the thing disposed of be real property.
the crime, and which is committed only by public 2. That the offender knew that the real property was
officers. What is punished under this Article is the encumbered, whether the encumbrance is
damage to public interest. recorded or not.
3. That there must be express representation by the
If the act of removing, concealing or offender that the real property is free from
destroying results from hatred, revenge, or other evil encumbrance.
motive, the crime committed is malicious mischief 4. That the act of disposing of the real property be
under Article 327. made to the damage of another.

Syndicated Estafa ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR.3) BY

A syndicate of five or more persons formed
with intent to carry out an unlawful or illegal act,
transaction or scheme and defraudation which results
in misappropriation of money contributed by
stockholders or members of rural banks, cooperatives,
samahang nayon or former’s association; or funds
WRONGFULLY TAKING BY THE OWNER HIS
PERSONAL FROM ITS LAWFUL POSSESSOR
1. That the offender is the owner of personal
property.
2. That said personal property is in the lawful
possession of another.

www.rkmfiles.net77
3. That the offender wrongfully takes it from its
lawful possessor.
4. That prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor
or third person.
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 6) BY SELLING,
MORTGAGING OR ENCUMBERING REAL PROPERTY
OR PROPERTIES WITH WHICH THE OFFENDER
GUARANTEED THE FULFILLMENT OF HIS
OBLIGATION AS SURETY
1. That the offender is a surety in a bond given in a
criminal or civil action.
2. That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such
obligation with his real property or properties.
3. That he sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner
encumbers said real property.
4. That such sale, mortage or encumbrance is (a)
without express authority from the court, or (b)
made before the cancellation of his bond, or (c)
before being relieved from the obligation
contracted by him.
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING A MINOR
1. That the offender takes advantage of the
inexperience or emotions or feelings of a minor.
2. That he induces such minor (a) to assume an
obligation, or (b) to give release, or (c) to execute
a transfer of any property right.
3. That the consideration is (a) some loan of money
(b) credit or (c) other personal property.
4. That the transaction is to the detriment of such
minor.
The property referred to in this article is not
real property. It is limited to personal property since a
minor cannot convey real property without judicial
intervention. So, if what is involved is real property,
the crime of swindling a minor under this article is not
committed even if the offender succeeds in inducing
the minor to deal with such real property since no
damage or detriment is caused against the minor.
ELEMENTS OF OTHER DECEITS
1. not mentioned above;
2. interpretation of dreams, forecast, future-telling
for profit or gain.
The meaning of other deceits under this article has
reference to a situation wherein fraud or damage is
done to another by any other form of deception which
is not covered by the preceding articles.
www.rkmfiles.net78
Another form of deceit would be in the nature of
interpreting dreams, or making forecasts, telling
fortunes or simply by taking advantage of the
credulity of the public by any other similar manner,
done for profit or gain.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE
A. SELLING OR PLEDGING PERSONAL PROPERTY
ALREADY PLEDGED
ELEMENTS:
1. That personal property is already pledged under
the terms of the chattel mortgage law.
2. That the offender, who is the mortgagee of such
property, sells or pledges the same or any part
thereof.
3. That there is no consent of the mortgagee written
on the back of the mortgage and noted on the
record thereof in the office of the register of deeds.
KNOWINGLY REMOVING MORTGAGED PERSONAL
PROPERTY
ELEMENTS:
1. that personal property is mortgaged under the
chattel mortage law.
2. That the offender knows that such property is so
mortaged.
3. That he removes such mortgaged personal to any
province or city other than the one in which it was
located at the time of the execution of the
mortgage.
4. that the removal is permanent.
5. That there is no written consent of the mortgagee
or his executors, administration or assigns to such
removal.
ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING
DESTRUCTIONS
Note: PD 1613 expressly repealed or amended Arts
320-326, but PD 1744 revived Art 320
A. ELEMENTS OF ARSONS OF PROPERTY OF SMALL
VALUES
1. That an uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn,
shed or any other property is burned
2. That the value of the property burned does not
exceed 25 pesos
 3. That the burning was done at a time or under
circumstances which clearly exclude all
danger of the fire spreading
B. ELEMENTS OF CRIME INVOLVING DESTRUCTION
1. That the offender causes destruction of the
property
2. That the destruction was done by means of:
a. explosion
b. discharge of electric current
c. inundation
d. sinking or stranding of a vessel
e. damaging the engine of the vessel
f. taking up rails from the railway track
g. destroying telegraph wires and posts or
those of any other system
h. other similar effective means of
destruction
C. ELEMENTS OF BURNING ONE’S PROPERTY AS A
MEANS TO COMMIT ARSON
1. That the offender set fire to or destroyed his
own property
2. That the purpose of the offender in doing so
was to commit arson or to cause a great
destruction
3. That the property belonging to another was
burned or destroyed
D. ELEMENTS OF ARSON
1. That the property burned is the exclusive
property of the offender
2. That (a) the purpose of the offender is burning
it is to defraud or cause damage to another or
(b) prejudice is actually caused, or (c) the
thing burned is a building in an inhabited place
Legal effect if death results from arson
The crime committed is still arson. Death is
absorbed in the crime of arson but the penalty to be
imposed ranges from reclusion perpetua to death.
(Sec. 5, P.D. No. 1613)
How arson is established?
Arson is established by proving the corpus
delicti, usually in the form of circumstantial evidence
such as the criminal agency, meaning the substance
used, like gasoline, kerosene or other form of
combustible materials which caused the fire. It can
www.rkmfiles.net79
also be in the form of electrical wires, mechanical,
chemical or electronic contrivance designed to start a
fire; ashes or traces of such objects which are found in
the ruins of the burned premises.
Nota Bene:
If the crime of arson was employed by the
offender as a means to kill the offended party, the
crime committed is murder. The burning of the
property as the means to kill the victim is what is
contemplated by the word “fire” under Article 248
which qualifies the crime to murder. (People vs.
Villarosa, 54 O. G. 3482)
When the burning of the property was done by
the offender only to cause damage but the arson
resulted to death of a person, the crime committed is
still arson because the death of the victim is a mere
consequence and not the intention of the offender.
(People vs. Paterno, 47 O. G. 4600)
There is no special complex crime of arson
with homicide. What matters in resolving cases
involving intentional arson is the criminal intent of the
offender.
There is such a crime as reckless imprudence
resulting in the commission of arson. When the arson
results from reckless imprudence and it leads to
death, serious physical injuries and damage to the
property of another, the penalty to be imposed shall
not be for the crime of arson under P. D. No. 1613 but
rather, the penalty shall be based on Article 365 of the
Revised Penal Code as a felony committed by means of
culpa.
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
ELEMENTS
1. That the offender deliberately caused damage to
the property of another.
2. That such act does not constitute arson or other
crimes involving destruction.
3. That the act damaging another’s property be
committed merely for the sake of damaging it.
Nota Bene:
1. Malicious mischief – willful damaging of
another’s property for the sake of causing
damage due to hate, revenge or other evil
motive
2. No negligence
 3. Example. Killing the cow as revenge
4. If no malice – only civil liability
Meaning of “damage” in malicious mischief.
It means not only loss but a diminution of the value of
one’s property. It includes defacing, deforming or
rendering it useless for the purpose for which it was
made.
5. But after damaging the thing, he used it = theft
There is destruction of the property of another but
there is no misappropriation. Otherwise, it would be
theft if he gathers the effects of destruction.
6. Damage is not incident of a crime (breaking
windows in robbery)
SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
1. Obstruct performance of public functions.
2. Using poisonous or corrosive substances.
3. Spreading infection or contagious among cattle.
4. Damage to property of national museum or
library, archive, registry, waterworks, road,
promenade, or any other thing used in common by
the public.
The cases of malicious mischief enumerated in
this article are so-called qualified malicious mischief.
The crime becomes qualified either because of the
nature of the damage caused to obstruct a public; or
because of the kind of substance used to cause the
damage. The crime is still malicious mischief because
the offender has no intent to gain but derives
satisfaction from the act because of hate, revenge or
other evil motive.
Note: Qualified malicious mischief – no uprising or
sedition (#1)
OTHER MISCHIEF
ELEMENTS:
1. Not included in Art. 328
a. scattering human excrement
b. killing of cow as an act of revenge
The offender is punished according to the value of the
damage caused to the offended party. If the damages
cannot be estimated, the minimum penalty is arresto
www.rkmfiles.net80
menor or a fine of not more than 200 pesos shall be
imposed on the offender.
DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION TO MEANS OF
COMMUNICATION
done by damaging railways, telegraph, telephone
lines, electric wires, traction cables, signal system of
railways
Notes:
1. removing rails from tracks is destruction (art 324)
2. not applicable when telegraph/phone lines don’t
pertain to railways (example: for transmission of
electric power/light)
3. people killed as a result:
a. murder – if derailment is means of intent to kill
b. none – art 48
If the damage was intended to cause derailment only
without any intention to kill, it will be a crime
involving destruction under Article 324. If the
derailment is intentionally done to cause the death of
a person, the crime committed will be murder under
Article 248.
4. circumstance qualifying the offense if the damage
shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or
other accident – a higher penalty shall be imposed
DESTROYING OR DAMAGING STATUES, PUBLIC
MONUMENTS OR PAINTINGS
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN CRIMES
AGAINST PROPERTY
Persons exempt from criminal liability
1. Spouse, ascendants and descendants or
relatives by affinity in the same line
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the
property w/c belonged to the deceased spouse
before the same passed into the possession of
another
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together
Offenses involved in the exemption
1. Theft ( not robbery )
2. Swindling
3. Malicious mischief
Notes:
1. Exemption is based on family relations
For the exemption to apply insofar as brothers
and sisters, and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-
law are concerned, they must be living together
at the time of the commission of the crime of
theft, estafa or malicious mischief.
2. Parties to the crime not related to the offended
party still remains criminally liable
3. Persons exempt include:
a. stepfather/mother (ascendants by
affinity)
b. adopted children (descendants)
c. concubine/paramour (spouse)
d. common law spouse (property is part of
their earnings)
Only the relatives enumerated incur no
liability if the crime relates to theft (not robbery),
swindling, and malicious mischief. Third parties who
participate are not exempt. The relationship between
the spouses is not limited to legally married couples;
the provision applies to live-in partners.
ON CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
The crimes of adultery, concubinage,
seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness are the
so-called private crimes. They cannot be prosecuted
except upon the complaint initiated by the offended
party. The law regards the privacy of the offended
party here as more important than the disturbance to
the order of society. For the law gives the offended
party the preference whether to sue or not to sue. But
the moment the offended party has initiated the
criminal complaint, the public prosecutor will take
over and continue with prosecution of the offender.
That is why under Article 344, if the offended party
pardons the offender, that pardon will only be valid if
it comes before the prosecution starts. The moment
the prosecution starts, the crime has already become
public and it is beyond the offended party to pardon
the offender.
ADULTERY
ELEMENTS
www.rkmfiles.net81
1. That the woman is married (even if marriage
subsequently declared void)
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man not her
husband.
3. That as regards the man with whom she has sexual
intercourses, he must know her to be married.
Nota Bene:
There are two reasons why adultery is made
punishable by law. Primarily, it is a violation of the
marital vow and secondarily, it paves the way to the
introduction of a spurious child into the family.
Adultery is a crime not only of the married
woman but also of the man who had intercourse with
a married woman knowing her to be married. Even if
the man proves later on that he does not know the
woman to be married, at the beginning, he must still
be included in the complaint or information. This is so
because whether he knows the woman to be married
or not is a matter of defense and it is up to him to
ventilate that in formal investigations or a formal trial.
If after preliminary investigation, the public
prosecutor is convinced that the man did not know
that the woman is married, then he could simply file
the case against the woman.
The acquittal of the woman does not
necessarily result in the acquittal of her co-accused.
In order to constitute adultery, there must be
a joint physical act. Joint criminal intent is not
necessary. Although the criminal intent may exist in
the mind of one of the parties to the physical act, there
may be no such intent in the mind of the other party.
One may be guilty of the criminal intent, the other
innocent, and yet the joint physical act necessary to
constitute the adultery may be complete. So, if the
man had no knowledge that the woman was married,
he would be innocent insofar as the crime of adultery
is concerned but the woman would still be guilty; the
former would have to be acquitted and the latter
found guilty, although they were tried together.
A husband committing concubinage may be
required to support his wife committing adultery
under the rule in pari delicto.
For adultery to exist, there must be a marriage
although it be subsequently annulled. There is no
adultery, if the marriage is void from the beginning.
 Adultery is an instantaneous crime which is
consummated and completed at the moment of the
carnal union. Each sexual intercourse constitutes a
crime of adultery. Adultery is not a continuing crime
unlike concubinage.
Illustration 1:
Madamme X is a married woman residing in
Pasay City. He met a man, Y, at Roxas Boulevard. She
agreed to go with to Baguio City, supposedly to come
back the next day. When they were in Bulacan, they
stayed in a motel, having sexual intercourse there.
After that, they proceeded again and stopped at
Dagupan City, where they went to a motel and had
sexual intercourse.
There are two counts of adultery committed in
this instance: one adultery in Bulacan, and another
adultery in Dagupan City. Even if it involves the same
man, each intercourse is a separate crime of adultery.
1. mitigated if wife was abandoned without
justification by the offended spouse (man
is entitled to this mitigating circumstance)
Abandonment without justification is not
exempting but only a mitigating circumstance. One
who invokes abandonment in the crime of adultery
hypothetically admits criminal liability for the crime
charged. (U. S. vs. Serrano, et al., 28 Phil. 230)
While abandonment is peculiar only to the
accused who is related to the offended party and must
be considered only as to her or him as provided under
Article 62, paragraph 3, nonetheless, judicially
speaking, in the crime of adultery, there is only one act
committed and consequently both accused are
entitled to this mitigating circumstance. (People vs.
Avelino, 40 O.G. Supp. 11, 194)
2. attempted: caught disrobing a lover
There is no frustrated adultery because of the
nature of the offense.
In the case of People vs. Pontio Guinucud, et al.,
(58 Phil. 621), a private agreement was entered into
between the husband and wife for them to separate
from bed and board and for each of them to go for his
and her own separate way. Thereafter, the wife
Rosario Tagayum lived with her co-accused Pontio
Guinucud in a nearby barangay. Their love affair
ultimately embroiled the spouses’ conservative and
www.rkmfiles.net82
reputable families in a human drama exposed in legal
battles and whispers of unwanted gossips. In
dismissing the complaint, the Court ruled that while a
private agreement between the husband and wife was
null and void, the same was admissible proof of the
express consent given by the condescending husband
to the prodigal wife, a license for her to commit
adultery. Such agreement bars the husband from
instituting a criminal complaint for adultery.
After filing the complaint for adultery and
while the case is pending trial and resolution by the
trial court, the offended spouse must not have sexual
intercourse with the adulterous wife since an act of
intercourse subsequent to the adulterous conduct is
considered as implied pardon. (People vs. Muguerza,
et al., 13 C.A. Rep. 1079)
It is seldom the case that adultery is
established by direct evidence. The legal tenet has
been and still is circumstancial and corroborative
evidence as will lead the guarded discretion of a
reasonable and just man to the conclusion that the
criminal act of adultery has been committed will bring
about conviction for the crime.” (U. S. vs. Feliciano, 36
Phil. 753)
CONCUBINAGE
ELEMENTS:
1. That the man must be married.
2. That he committed any of the following acts:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling.
b. Having sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstances with a woman
who is not his wife.
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
3. That as regards the woman she must know him to
be married.
Note: “Scandal” consists in any reprehensible
word/deed that offends public conscience, redounds
to the detriment of the feelings of honest persons and
gives occasions to the neighbor’s spiritual damage and
ruin
With respect to concubinage the same
principle applies: only the offended spouse can bring
the prosecution. This is a crime committed by the
married man, the husband. Similarly, it includes the
woman who had a relationship with the married man.
 It has been asked why the penalty for adultery
is higher than concubinage when both crimes are
infidelities to the marital vows. The reason given for
this is that when the wife commits adultery, there is a
probability that she will bring a stranger into the
family. If the husband commits concubinage, this
probability does not arise because the mother of the
child will always carry the child with her. So even if
the husband brings with him the child, it is clearly
known that the child is a stranger. Not in the case of
a married woman who may bring a child to the family
under the guise of a legitimate child. This is the reason
why in the former crime the penalty is higher than the
latter.
Unlike adultery, concubinage is a continuing
crime.
If the charges consist in keeping a mistress in
the conjugal dwelling, there is no need for proof of
sexual intercourse. The conjugal dwelling is the house
of the spouse even if the wife happens to be
temporarily absent therefrom. The woman however
must be brought into the conjugal house by the
accused husband as a concubine to fall under this
article. Thus, if the co-accused was voluntarily taken
and sheltered by the spouses in their house and
treated as an adopted child being a relative of the
complaining wife, her illicit relations with the accused
husband does not make her a mistress. (People vs.
Hilao, et al., (C.A.) 52 O.G. 904).
It is only when a married man has sexual
intercourse with a woman elsewhere that “scandalous
circumstances” becomes an element of crime.
For the existence of the crime of concubinage by
having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances, the latter must be imprudent and
wanton as to offend modesty and sense of morality
and decency.
When spies are employed to chronicle the
activities of the accused and the evidence presented to
prove scandalous circumstances are those taken by
the detectives, it is obvious that the sexual intercourse
done by the offenders was not under scandalous
circumstances. (U.S. vs. Campos-Rueda, 35 Phil. 51)
Causal sexual intercourse with a woman in a
hotel is not concubinage. Likewise, keeping of a
mistress in a townhouse procured and furnished by a
married man who does not live or sleep with her in
www.rkmfiles.net83
said townhouse does not constitute concubinage since
there is no cohabitation.
The rule is that, if a married man’s conduct
with a woman who is not his wife was not confined to
occasional or transient interview for carnal
intercourse but is carried n in the manner of husband
and wife and for some period of time, then such
association is sufficient to constitute cohabitation.
(People vs. Zuniga, CA 57 O.G. 2497)
If the evidence of the prosecution consists of a
marriage contract between the offender and the
offended party, and the additional fact of the birth
certificate of a child showing the accused to be the
father of the child with the alleged cocubine, the same
will not be sufficient to convict the accused of
concubinage since the law clearly states that the act
must be one of those provided by law.
RAPE
This has been repealed by Republic Act No.
8353 or the Anti-Rape Law of 1997. Rape is classified
as a Crime against Person. (See notes on Special
Laws)
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender commits any act of
lasciviousness or lewdness.
2. That it is done under any of the following
circumstances:
a. by using force or intimidation, or
b. when the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious, or
c. when the offended party is under 12 years
of age.
3. That the offended party is another person of either
sex.
Note: There are two kinds of acts of lasciviousness
under the Revised Penal Code: (1) under Article 336,
and (2) under Article 339.
1. Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness
Under this article, the offended party may be a man or
a woman. The crime committed, when the act
performed with lewd design was perpetrated
under circumstances which would have brought
about the crime of rape if sexual intercourse was
 effected, is acts of lasciviousness under this article.
This means that the offended party is either –
(1) under 12 years of age; or
(2) being over 12 years of age, the lascivious acts were
committed on him or her through violence or
intimidation, or while the offender party was
deprived of reason, or otherwise unconscious.
2. Article 339. Acts of Lasciviousness with the
Consent of the Offended Party:
Under this article, the victim is limited only to
a woman. The circumstances under which the
lascivious acts were committed must be that of
qualified seduction or simple seduction, that is, the
offender took advantage of his position of ascendancy
over the offender woman either because he is a person
in authority, a domestic, a househelp, a priest, a
teacher or a guardian, or there was a deceitful promise
of marriage which never would really be fulfilled.
Always remember that there can be no
frustration of acts of lasciviousness, rape or adultery
because no matter how far the offender may have
gone towards the realization of his purpose, if his
participation amounts to performing all the acts of
execution, the felony is necessarily produced as a
consequence thereof.
Intent to rape is not a necessary element of the
crime of acts of lasciviousness. Otherwise, there
would be no crime of attempted rape.
In the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the
intention of the wrongdoer is not very material. The
motive that impelled the accused to commit the
offense is of no importance because the essence of
lewdness is in the act itself.
What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct
must be determined from the circumstances of each
case. The demarcation line is not always easy to
determine but in order to sustain a conviction for acts
of lasciviousness, it is essential that the acts
complained of be prompted by lust or lewd designs
and the victim did not consent to nor encouraged the
act.
To be guilty of this crime however, the acts of
lasciviousness must be committed under any of the
circumstances that had there been sexual
intercourse, the crime would have been Rape. Where
circumstances however are such, indicating a clear
www.rkmfiles.net84
intention to lie with the offended party, the crime
committed as Attempted Rape.
This crime (Art. 336) can be committed by
either sex unlike in Acts of Lasciviousness with
Consent under Article 339. Thus, a lesbian who toyed
with the private part of an eleven-year-old girl who
enjoyed it since she was given $50 dollars before the
act, is guilty of Act of Lasciviousness under this Article
as the victim is below twelve year old; and had sexual
intercourse been possible and done, the act would
have been Rape.
SEDUCTION
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION OF A VIRGIN
Two classes of qualified seduction:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 and under 18 years
of age by certain persons, such as a person in
authority, priest, teachers etc and
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age or
reputation (incestuous seduction)
Elements:
1. That the offended party is a virgin, (presumed if
she unmarried and of good reputation.)
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of
age.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That there is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender ( person
entrusted with education or custody of victim;
person in public authority, priest; servant)
Persons liable:
1. Those who abuse their authority:
a. persons in public authority
b. guardian
c. teacher
d. person who, in any capacity, is entrusted
with the education or custody of the
woman seduced
2. Those who abused the confidence reposed in
them:
a. priest
b. house servant
c. domestic
3. Those who abused their relationship:
a. brother who seduced his sister
b. ascendant who seduced his descendant

This crime also involves sexual intercourse.
The offended woman must be over 12 but below 18
years.
The distinction between qualified seduction
and simple seduction lies in the fact, among others,
that the woman is a virgin in qualified seduction, while
in simple seduction, it is not necessary that the woman
be a virgin. It is enough that she is of good repute.
For purposes of qualified seduction, virginity
does not mean physical virginity. It means that the
offended party has not had any experience before.
The virginity referred to here, is not to be
understood in so material a sense as to exclude the
idea of abduction of a virtuous woman of a good
reputation. Thus, when the accused claims he had
prior intercourse with the complainant, the latter is
still to be considered a virgin (U.S. vs. Casten, 34 Phil.
808). But if it was established that the girl had a carnal
relations with other men, there can be no crime of
Seduction as she is not a virgin.
Although in qualified seduction, the age of the
offended woman is considered, if the offended party is
a descendant or a sister of the offender – no matter
how old she is or whether she is a prostitute – the
crime of qualified seduction is committed.
Illustration
If a person goes to a sauna parlor and finds
there a descendant and despite that, had sexual
intercourse with her, regardless of her reputation or
age, the crime of qualified seduction is committed.
In the case of a teacher, it is not necessary that
the offended woman be his student. It is enough that
she is enrolled in the same school.
Deceit is not necessary in qualified seduction.
Qualified seduction is committed even though no
deceit intervened or even when such carnal
knowledge was voluntary on the part of the virgin.
This is because in such a case, the law takes for
granted the existence of the deceit as an integral
element of the crime and punishes it with greater
severity than it does the simple seduction, taking into
account the abuse of confidence on the part of the
agent. Abuse of confidence here implies fraud.
www.rkmfiles.net85
The fact that the offended party gave her
consent to the sexual intercourse is not a defense. Lack
of consent on the part of the complainant is not an
element of the crime.
The term domestic refers to a person usually
living under the same roof with the offended party. It
includes all those persons residing with the family and
who are members of the same household, regardless
of the fact that their residence may only be temporary
or that they may be paying for their board and lodging.
A domestic should not be confused with a
house servant. A domestic is not necessarily a house
servant.
Where the offended party is below 12 years of
age, regardless of whether the victim is a sister or a
descendant of the offender, the crime committed is
rape.
If the offended party is married and over 12
years of age, the crime committed will be adultery.
An essential element of a qualified seduction is
virginity (doncella). It is a condition existing in a
woman who has had no sexual intercourse with any
man. It does not refer to the condition of the hymen as
being intact.
One who is charged with qualified seduction
can be convicted of rape. But one who is charged with
rape cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under
the same information. (People vs. Ramirez, 69 SCRA
144)
Even if the woman has already lost her
virginity because of rape, in the eyes of the law, she
remains a virtuous woman even if physically she is no
longer a virgin.
SIMPLE SEDUCTION
ELEMENTS
1. That the offended party is over 12 and under 18
years of age.
2. That she must be of good reputation, single or
widow.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That it is committed by means of deceit.
Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled
promise to marry. The promise of marriage must
serve as the inducement. The woman must yield on
account of the promise of marriage or other forms of
inducement. (People vs. Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109)
Where the accused failed to have sex with this
sweetheart over twelve (12) but below eighteen (18)
years old because the latter refused as they were not
yet married, and the accused procured the
performance of a fictitious marriage ceremony
because of which the girlfriend yielded, he is guilty of
Simple Seduction. (U.S. vs. Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109).
Here, there was deceit employed. This act may now be
considered Rape under R.A. 8353, Sec. 2 par. 6.
A promise of material things in exchange for
the woman’s surrender of her virtue does not
constitute deceit.
If a woman under 18 years of age but over 12
agrees to a sexual intercourse with a man who
promised her precious jewelries but the man reneges
on his promise, there is no seduction that the woman
is of loose morals. (Luis B. Reyes)
Promise of marriage must precede sexual
intercourse.
A promise of marriage made by the accused
after sexual intercourse had taken place, or after the
woman had yielded her body to the man by mutual
consent will not render the man liable for simple
seduction.
The offended woman must be under 18 but
not less than 12 years old; otherwise, the crime is
statutory rape.
Unlike in qualified seduction, virginity is not
essential in this crime. What is required is that the
woman be unmarried and of good reputation. Simple
seduction is not synonymous with loss of virginity. If
the woman is married, the crime will be adultery.
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE CONSENT OF
THE OFFENDED PARTY
ELEMENTS:
1. that the offender commits acts of lasciviousness or
lewdness.
2. That the acts are committed upon a woman who is
virgin or single or widow of good reputation,
www.rkmfiles.net86
under 18 years of age but over 12 years, or a sister
or descendant regardless of her reputation or age.
3. that the offender accomplishes the acts by abuse
of authority, confidence, relationship, or deceit.
When the acts of lasciviousness is committed
with the use of force or intimidation or when the
offended party is under 12 years of age, the object of
the crime can either be a woman or a man.
Where the acts of the offender were limited to
acts of lewdness or lasciviousness, and no carnal
knowledge was had; but had there been sexual
intercourse, the offense would have been Seduction,
he is guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness under this article.
The crime of acts of lasciviousness under
Article 339 is one that is done with the consent of the
offended party who is always a woman. The lewd acts
committed against her is with her consent only
because the offender took advantage of his authority,
or there was abuse of confidence, or the employment
of deceit, or the offender is related to the victim.
In the commission of the acts of lasciviousness
either by force or intimidation, or with the consent of
the offended party, there must be no sexual
intercourse, or the acts performed are short of sexual
intercourse. In the first situation, the crime would
either be qualified seduction or simple seduction if the
offender succeeds in having sexual intercourse with
the victim. In these two cases, there is consent but the
same is procured by the offender through the
employment of deceit, abuse of confidence, abuse of
authority or because of the existence of blood
relationship.
CORRUPTION OF MINORS
Act punishable: by promoting or facilitating
the prostitution or corruption of persons underage to
satisfy the lust of another.
It is not required that the offender be the
guardian or custodian of the minor. It is not necessary
that the minor be prostituted or corrupted as the law
merely punishes the act of promoting or facilitating
the prostitution or corruption of said minor and that
he acted in order to satisfy the lust of another.
A single act of promoting or facilitating the
corruption or prostitution of a minor is sufficient to
constitute violation of this article.
 What the law punishes is the act of pimp
(bugaw) who facilitates the corruption of a minor. It is
not the unchaste act of the minor which is being
punished. So, a mere proposal to promote or facilitate
the prostitution or corruption of a minor is sufficient
to consummate the crime.
Young minor should enjoy a good reputation.
Apparently, a prostitute above 12 and under 18 years
of age cannot be the victim in the crime of corruption
of minors.
WHITE SLAVE TRADE
Acts penalized:
1. Engaging in the business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the service of women for the purpose of
prostitution
The person liable under Article 341 is the one
who maintains or engages in the trade of prostitution.
A white slave is a woman held unwillingly for
purposes of commercial prostitution. A white slaver
on the other hand is one engaged in white slave traffic,
procurer of white slaves or prostitutes.
The most common way of committing this
crime would be through the maintenance of a bar or
saloon where women engage in prostitution. For each
intercourse, the women pay the maintainer or owner
of a certain amount in this case, the maintainer of
owner of the bar or saloon is liable for white slave
trade. (People vs. Go Lo, 56 O.G. 4056)
ABDUCTION
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the person abducted is any woman,
regardless of her age, civil status, or reputation.
2. That the abduction is against her will.
3. That the abduction is with lewd designs.
Note: Sexual intercourse is NOT necessary
Crimes against chastity where age and reputation of
victim are immaterial: rape, acts of lasciviousness,
qualified seduction of sister/descendant, forcible
abduction
Forcible abduction defined
www.rkmfiles.net87
It is the taking away of any woman against her
will, from her house or the place where she may be, for
the purpose of carrying her to another place with
intent to marry or corrupt her. A woman is carried
against her will or brought from one place to another
against her will with lewd design.
Unlike in Rape and Seduction, in the crime of
Abduction, whether Forcible or Consented, there is no
sexual intercourse. The acts are limited to taking away
from a place the victim, but the same must be with
lewd designs, that is, with unchaste design manifested
by kissing and touching the victim’s private parts.
If the element of lewd design is present, the
carrying of the woman would qualify as abduction;
otherwise, it would amount to kidnapping. If the
woman was only brought to a certain place in order to
break her will and make her agree to marry the
offender, the crime is only grave coercion because the
criminal intent of the offender is to force his will upon
the woman and not really to restrain the woman of her
liberty.
Where lewd design was not proved or shown,
and the victim was deprived of her liberty, the crime
is kidnapping with Serious Illegal Detention under this
Article 267, RPC.
The element of lewd designs, which is
essential to the crime of abduction through violence,
refers to the intention to abuse the abducted woman.
If such intention is lacking or does not exist, the crime
may be illegal detention. It is necessary to establish
the unchaste design or purpose of the offender. But it
is sufficient that the intent to seduce the girl is present.
The evil purpose of the offender may be established or
inferred from the overt acts of the accused.
If the offended woman is under 12 years old,
even if she consented to the abduction, the crime is
forcible abduction and not consented abduction.
Where the offended woman is below the age of
consent, even though she had gone with the offender
through some deceitful promises revealed upon her to
go with him and they live together as husband and
wife without the benefit of marriage, the ruling is that
forcible abduction is committed by the mere carrying
of the woman as long as that intent is already shown.
In other words, where the man cannot possibly give
the woman the benefit of an honorable life, all that
man promised are just machinations of a lewd design
and, therefore, the carrying of the woman is
characterized with lewd design and would bring about
the crime of abduction and not kidnapping. This is
also true if the woman is deprived of reason and if the
woman is mentally retarded. Forcible abduction is
committed and not consented abduction.
Lewd designs may be demonstrated by the
lascivious acts performed by the offender on her.
Since this crime does not involve sexual intercourse, if
the victim is subjected to this, then a crime of rape is
further committed and a complex crime of forcible
abduction with rape is committed.
Lewd design does not include sexual
intercourse. So, if sexual intercourse is committed
against the offended party after her forcible
abduction, the offender commits another crime
separate and distinct from forcible abduction. In this
case, the accused should be charged with forcible
abduction with rape. (People vs. Jose, et al., 37 SCRA
450)
If the accused carried or took away the victim
by means of force and with lewd design and thereafter
raped her, the crime is Forcible Abduction with Rape,
the former being a necessary means to commit the
latter. The subsequent two (2) other sexual
intercourse committed against the will of the
complainant would be treated as independent
separate crimes of Rape. (People vs. Bacalso, 210
SCRA 206).
If the main object of the offender is to rape the
victim, and the forcible abduction was resorted to by
the accused in order to facilitate the commission of the
rape, then the crime committed is only rape. (People
vs. Toledo, 83 Phil. 777)
Where the victim was taken from one place to
another, solely for the purpose of killing him and not
detaining him for any legal length of time, the crime
committed is murder. (People vs. Ong, 62 SCRA 174)
True intention of the offender should be
ascertained. If the detention is only incidental, the
same should be considered as absorbed. Otherwise, it
should be treated as a separate offense. When such a
situation arises, we should consider the application of
Article 48 on complex crimes.
The taking away of the woman may be
accomplished by means of deceit at the beginning and
then by means of violence and intimidation later.
www.rkmfiles.net88
The virginity of the complaining witness is not
a determining factor in forcible abduction.
In order to demonstrate the presence of the
lewd design, illicit criminal relations with the person
abducted need not be shown. The intent to seduce a
girl is sufficient.
If there is a separation in fact, the taking by the
husband of his wife against her will constitutes grave
coercion.
Distinction between Forcible Abduction and
Illegal Detention
When a woman is kidnapped with lewd or
unchaste designs, the crime committed is forcible
abduction.
When the kidnapping is without lewd designs, the
crime committed is illegal detention.
But where the offended party was forcibly
taken to the house of the defendant to coerce her to
marry him, it was held that only grave coercion was
committed and not illegal detention.
Forcible abduction must be distinguished
from the crime of kidnapping. When the violent taking
of a woman is motivated by lewd design, the crime
committed is forcible abduction. But if the motive of
the offender is to deprive the woman of her liberty, the
crime committed is kidnapping. Abduction is a crime
against chastity while kidnapping is a crime against
personal liberty.
CONSENTED ABDUCTION
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offended party must be a virgin.
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of
age.
3. That the taking away of the offended party must
be with her consent, after solicitation or cajolery
from the offender.
4. That the taking away of the offended party must
be with lewd designs.
Virginity may be presumed from the fact that
the offended party is unmarried and has been leading
moral life. Virginity or maidenhood should not be
understood in such a matter of fact as to completely
exclude a woman who has had previous sexual
intercourse. If the previous sexual intercourse was the
result of the crime of rape, the intercourse committed
with her against he will and over her violent objection
should not render her unchaste and a woman of bad
reputation.
If the virgin is under 12 years old, the crime
committed is forcible abduction because of the theory
that a child below 12 years of age has no will of her
own.
The purpose of the law on consented
abduction is to punish the offender for causing
disgrace and scandal to the family of the offended
party. The law does not punish the offender for the
wrong done to the woman since in the eyes of the law,
she consented to her seduction.
The deceit which is termed by the law as
solicitation or cajolery maybe in the form of honeyed
promises of marriage.
In consented Abduction, it is not necessary
that the young victim, (a virgin over twelve and
under eighteen) be personally taken from her
parent’s home by the accused; it is sufficient that he
was instrumental in her leaving the house. He must
however use solicitation, cajolery or deceit, or
honeyed promises of marriage to induce the girl to
escape from her home.
In consented abduction, the taking away of the
virgin must be with lewd design. Actual sexual
intercourse with the woman is not necessary.
However, if the same is established, then it will be
considered as strong evidence to prove lewd design.
PROSECUTION OF ADULTERY, CONCUBINAGE,
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION RAPE AND ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
1. Adultery and concubinage must be prosecuted
upon complaint signed by the offended spouse
2. Seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness must be prosecuted upon
complaint signed by:
a. offended party
b. by her parents
c. grandparents
d. guardians in the order in which they are
named above
The crimes of adultery and concubinage must
be prosecuted upon a complaint signed by the
www.rkmfiles.net89
offended spouse. In the complaint, the offended party
must include both guilty parties if they are both alive.
The word guardian as mentioned in the law
refers to the guardian appointed by the court. (People
vs. Formento, et al., 60 Phil. 434)
What is the meaning of “shall have consented”
which bars the institution of criminal action for
adultery or concubinage?
The term “consent” has reference to the tie
prior to the commission of the crime. In other words,
the offended party gives his or her consent to the
future infidelity of the offending spouse. And so, while
consent refers to the offense prior to its commission,
pardon refers to the offense after its commission.
(People vs. Schnekenburger, et al., 73 Phil. 413)
Nota Bene:
Marriage of the offender with the offended
party extinguishes the criminal action or remit the
penalty already imposed upon him. This applies as
well to the accomplices, accessories-after-the-fact. But
marriages must be in good faith. This rule does not
apply in case of multiple rape
In the crimes involving rape, abduction,
seduction, and acts of lasciviousness, the marriage by
the offender with the offended woman generally
extinguishes criminal liability, not only of the principal
but also of the accomplice and accessory. However,
the mere fact of marriage is not enough because it is
already decided that if the offender marries the
offended woman without any intention to perform the
duties of a husband as shown by the fact that after the
marriage, he already left her, the marriage would
appear as having been contracted only to avoid the
punishment. Even with that marriage, the offended
woman could still prosecute the offender and that
marriage will not have the effect of extinguishing the
criminal liability.
Pardon by the offended woman of the offender
is not a manner of extinguishing criminal liability but
only a bar to the prosecution of the offender.
Therefore, that pardon must come before the
prosecution is commenced. When the prosecution is
already commenced or initiated, pardon by the
offended woman will no longer be effective because
pardon may preclude prosecution but not prevent the
same.
 Pardon in crimes against chastity, is a bar to
prosecution. But it must come before the institution of
the criminal action. (See the cases of People vs.
Villorente, 210 SCRA 647; People vs. Avila, 192 SCRA
635) To be effective, it must include both accused.
How about pardon declared by the offended
party during the trial of the case? Such a declaration is
not a ground for the dismissal of the case. Pardon is a
matter of defense which the accused must plead and
prove during the trial. (People vs. Riotes, C.A., 49
O.G.3403).
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY OF RAPE,
SEDUCTION OR ABDUCTION
1. To idemnify the offended women
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from doing so
3. In every case to support the offspring
The civil liability of the adulterer and the
concubine is limited to indemnity for damages caused
to the offended spouse. The law does not mention the
adulteress in the crime of adultery such that only the
adulterer shall be held civilly liable.
There is likewise no mention of the offender in
the crime of acts of lasciviousness, as being held liable
for civil damages under Article 345, the law only
mentioned the crimes of rape, seduction and
abduction.
Under Article 2219 of the Civil Code, moral
damages may be recovered in seduction, abduction,
rape or other lascivious acts. The crimes of adultery
and concubinage are also included.
In the crimes of rape, abduction and seduction,
if the offended woman had given birth to the child,
among the liabilities of the offender is to support the
child. This obligation to support the child may be true
even if there are several offenders. As to whether all
of them will acknowledge the child that is a different
question because the obligation to support here is not
founded on civil law but is the result of a criminal act
or a form of punishment.
It has been held that where the woman was the
victim of the said crime could not possibly conceive
anymore; the trial court should not provide in its
sentence that the accused, in case a child is born,
should support the child. This should only be proper
www.rkmfiles.net90
when there is a probability that the offended woman
could give birth to an offspring.
ON CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS OF PERSON
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF ONE
CHILD FOR ANOTHER, AND CONCEALMENT OR
ABANDONMENT OF A LEGITIMATE CHILD
Acts Punished:
1. Simulation of births
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child
with the intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status
Requisites:
1. The child must be legitimate
2. The offender conceals or abandons such child
3. The offender has the intent to cause the child to
lose its civil status
Elements of Simulation of Birth
1. Child is baptized or registered in the Registry of
birth as hers
2. Child loses its real status and acquiires a new one
3. Actor’s purpose was to cause the loss of any trace
as to the child’s true filiation
Simulation of birth takes place when a woman
pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on
the day of the supposed delivery, she takes the child of
another and declares the child to be her own. This is
done by entering in the birth certificate of the child
that the offender is the alleged mother of the child
when in fact the child belongs to another.
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
Committed by a person who represents himself as
another and assumes the filiation or rights pertaining
to such person
Notes:
1. There must be criminal intent to enjoy the civil
rights of another by the offender knowing he is not
entitled thereto
The term "civil status" includes one's public
station, or the rights, duties, capacities and
incapacities which determine a person to a given class.
It seems that the term "civil status" includes one's
profession.
 2. Committed by asuming the filiation, or the
parental or conjugal rights of another
Usurpation is committed by assuming the
filiation or parental (when maternal, paternal or
conjugal) claim of another. To be liable for usurpation
of civil status, the offender must have the intent to
enjoy the rights arising from the civil status of another.
3. Circumstances qualifying the offense: penalty is
heavier when the purpose of the impersonation is
to defraud the offended party or his heirs
BIGAMY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender has been legally married.
2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved
or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse could not yet be presumed dead
according to the civil code.
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent
marriage.
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all
the essential requisites for validity.
Nota Bene:
1. The crime does not fall within the category of
private crimes that can be prosecuted only at the
instance of the offended party PUBLIC CRIME
• For the crime of bigamy to prosper the first
marriage must be valid. If the first marriage is
void from the beginning, such nullity of the
marriage is not a defense in a charge of
bigamy. Consequently, when raised as a
defense, the accused should be convicted since
until and unless annulled, the bond of
matrimony remains or is maintained.
• Need for judicial declaration of nullity
• The second marriage must have all the
essential requisites for validity were it not for
the existence of the first marriage.
2. A simulated marriage is not marriage at all and
can be used as a defense for bigamy
Good faith is a defense in bigamy. One who,
although not yet married before, knowingly consents
to be married to one who is already married is guilty
of bigamy knowing that the latter’s marriage is still
valid and subsisting.
www.rkmfiles.net91
3. There must be a summary proceeding to declare
the absent spouse presumptively dead for
purposes of remarriage
4. Failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the
whereabouts of the 1st wife is bigamy through
reckless imprudence
5. A judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage
void ab initio is now required
6. One convicted for bigamy may be prosecuted for
concubinage as both are distinct offenses
7. One who vouches that there is no legal
impediment knowing that one of the parties is
already married is an accomplice
Distinction between bigamy and illegal marriage
Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage. The
offender must have a valid and subsisting marriage.
Despite the fact that the marriage is still subsisting, he
contracts a subsequent marriage.
Illegal marriage includes also such other
marriages which are performed without complying
with the requirements of law, or such premature
marriages, or such marriage which was solemnized by
one who is not authorized to solemnize the same.
MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PROVISIONS
OF LAWS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender contracted marriage.
2. That he knew at the time that
a. the requirement of the law were not
complied with, or
b. The marriage was in disregard of a legal
impediment.
Note: Circumstance qualifying the offense: if either of
the contracting parties obtains the consent of the
other by means of violence, intimidation or fraud
The requirements of the law for a valid marriage are:
1. The legal capacity of the contracting parties;
2. Their consent freely given;
3. Authority of the person performing the marriage;
and
4. Marriage license, except in marriage under
exceptional circumstances.
The law further provides that for accused to be liable
under this article, he should not be guilty of bigamy
because otherwise, the crime punished under Article
350 is deemed absorbed in the bigamy.
Marriages contracted against the provisions of laws
1. The marriage does not constitute bigamy.
2. The marriage is contracted knowing that the
requirements of the law have not been complied
with or in disregard of legal impediments.
3. One where the consent of the other was obtained by
means of violence, intimidation or fraud.
4. If the second marriage is void because the accused
knowingly contracted it without complying with
legal requirements as the marriage license,
although he was previously married.
5. Marriage solemnized by a minister or priest who
does not have the required authority to solemnize
marriages.
PREMATURE MARRIAGE
Acts punished:
1. A widow who within 301 days from death of
husband, got married or before her delivery, if she
was pregnant at the time of his death
2. A woman whose marriage having been dissolved
or annulled, married before her delivery or within
301 days after the legal separation
PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE
CEREMONY
Act punished: Performance of any illegal marriage
ceremony by a priest or minister of any religious
denomination or sect or by civil authorities
ON CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
LIBEL
ELEMENTS:
1. That there must be an imputation of a crime, or of
a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstances.
2. That the imputation must be made publicly.
3. That it must be malicious.
4. That the imputation must be directed at a natural
or juridical person, or one who is dead.
www.rkmfiles.net92
5. That the imputation must tend to cause the
dishonor, discredit or contempt of the person
defamed.
Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a
crime, or a vice or defect, real or imaginary or any act,
commission, condition, status or circumstances
tending to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt
of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the
memory of one who is dead
Character of the words used to make it defamatory
Words calculated to induce suspicion are more
effective in destroying reputation than false charges
directly made. Ironical and metaphorical language is a
favored vehicle for slander. A charge is sufficient if the
words are calculated to induce the hearer to suppose
and understand that the person against whom they
are uttered is guilty of certain offenses, or are
sufficient to impeach his honesty, virtue or reputation,
or to hold him up to public ridicule. (U.S. vs. O’Connell,
37 Phil. 767)
Malice has been defined as a term used to
indicate the fact that the defamer is prompted by
personal ill or spite and speaks not in response to duty
but merely to injure the reputation of the person
defamed.
Kinds of Malice
Malice in law – This is assumed and is inferred
from the defamatory character of an imputation. The
presumption of malice attaches to the defamatory
statement especially if it appears to be insulting per se.
The law presumes that the defamer made the
imputation without good intention or justifiable
motive.
Malice in fact – This refers to malice as a fact.
The presence and existence of personal ill-will or spite
may still appear even if the statement is not
defamatory. So, where the defamatory acts may be
presumed from the publication of the defamatory acts
imputed refer to the private life of the individual,
malice may be presumed from the publication of the
defamatory statement because no one has a right to
invade another’s privacy.
Distinction

Malice in fact is the malice which the law
presumes from every statement whose tenor is
defamatory. It does not need proof. The mere fact that
the utterance or statement is defamatory negates a
legal presumption of malice.
In the crime of libel, which includes oral
defamation, there is no need for the prosecution to
present evidence of malice. It is enough that the
alleged defamatory or libelous statement be
presented to the court verbatim. It is the court which
will prove whether it is defamatory or not. If the tenor
of the utterance or statement is defamatory, the legal
presumption of malice arises even without proof.
Malice in fact becomes necessary only if the
malice in law has been rebutted. Otherwise, there is
no need to adduce evidence of malice in fact. So, while
malice in law does not require evidence, malice in fact
requires evidence.
Malice in law can be negated by evidence that,
in fact, the alleged libelous or defamatory utterance
was made with good motives and justifiable ends or by
the fact that the utterance was privileged in character.
In law, however, the privileged character of a
defamatory statement may be absolute or qualified.
When the privileged character is said to be absolute,
the statement will not be actionable whether criminal
or civil because that means the law does not allow
prosecution on an action based thereon. In libel cases,
the question is not what the offender means but what
the words used by him mean. ( Sazon vs. CA, 255 SCRA
692)
Praises undeserved are slander in disguise
Where the comments are worded in praise of
the plaintiff, like describing him with qualities which
plaintiff does not deserve because of his social,
political and economic status in the community which
is too well known to all concerned, are which intended
are intended to ridicule rather than praise him, the
publication is deemed libelous (Jimenez vs. Reyes, 27
SCRA 52)
Even if what was imputed is true, the crime of
libel is committed unless one acted with good motives
or justifiable end. Poof of truth of a defamatory
imputation is not even admissible in evidence, unless
what was imputed pertains to an act which constitutes
a crime and when the person to whom the imputation
www.rkmfiles.net93
was made is a public officer and the imputation
pertains to the performance of official duty. Other
than these, the imputation is not admissible.
When proof of truth is admissible
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a
crime regardless of whether the offended party is
a private individual or a public officer;
2. When the offended party is a government
employee, even if the act or omission imputed
does not constitute a crime, provided if its related
to the discharged of his official duties.
Requisites of defense in defamation
1. If it appears that the matter charged as libelous is
true;
2. It was published with good motives;
3. It was for justifiable ends.
If a crime is a private crime, it cannot be prosecuted de
officio. A complaint from the offended party is
necessary.
LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITING OR SIMILAR MEANS
A libel may be committed by means of – Writing;
Printing; Lithography; Engraving; Radio; Photograph;
Painting; Theatrical exhibition; Cinematographic
exhibition; or Any similar means.
THREATENING TO PUBLISH LIBEL AND OFFER TO
PREVENT SUCH PUBLICATION FOR A
COMPENSATION
Acts punished
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning
him, or his parents, spouse, child, or other
members of his family;
2. Offering to prevent the publication of such libel for
compensation or money consideration.
It involves the unlawful extortion of money by
appealing to the fear of the victim, through threats of
accusation or exposure. It contemplates of two
offenses: a threat to establish a libel and an offer to
prevent such publication. The gravamen of the crime
is the intent to extort money or other things of value.
 Blackmail – In its metaphorical sense,
blackmail may be defined as any unlawful extortion of
money by threats of accusation or exposure. Two
words are expressive of the crime – hush money. (US
v. Eguia, et al., 38 Phil. 857) Blackmail is possible in
(1) light threats under Article 283; and (2) threatening
to publish, or offering to prevent the publication of, a
libel for compensation, under Article 356.
PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS REFERRED
TO IN THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a reporter, editor or manager
of a newspaper, daily or magazine.
2. That he publishes facts connected with the private
life of another.
3. Those facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person.
Note:
Even though made in connection with or
under the pretext that it is necessary in the narration
of any judicial or administrative proceedings wherein
such facts have been mentioned.
With its provisions, Article 357 has come to be
known as the “Gag Law.” It prohibits reporters, editors
or managers of newspapers from publishing articles
containing facts connected with the private life of an
individual; facts which are offensive to the honor,
virtue and reputation of persons. But these must refer
to facts which are intimately related to the offended
party’s family and home. Occasionally, it involves
conjugal troubles and quarrels because of infidelity,
adultery or crimes involving chastity.
ORAL DEFAMATION / SLANDER
Two Kinds of Oral Defamation:
1. action of a serious and insulting nature (Grave
slander)
2. light insult or defamation – not serious in nature
(simple slander)
Factors that determine gravity of the offense:
a) expressions used
b) personal relations of the accused and the
offended party
c) circumstances surrounding the case
Notes:
The gravity of oral defamation depends not
only on the expressions but also on the personal
www.rkmfiles.net94
relation of the accused with the offended party. Other
circumstances like the presence of important people
when the crime was committed, the social standing
and position of the offended party are factors which
may influence the gravity and defamatory imputation
(Victorio vs. Court of Appeals, 173 SCRA 645).
Note that slander can be committed even if the
defamatory remark was done in the absence of the
offended party. (People vs. Clarin, C.A., 37 O.G. 1106)
If the utterances were made publicly and were
heard by many people and the accused at the same
time levelled his finger at the complainant, oral
defamation is committed (P v Salleque)
The word “puta ” does not impute that the
complainant is prostitute. (People vs. Atienza, G.R. No.
L-19857, Oct. 26, 1968 ) It is a common expression of
anger or displeasure. It is seldom taken in its literal
sense by the hearer. It is viewed more as a threat on
the part of the accused to manifest and emphasize a
point. (Reyes vs. People, 27 SCRA 686)
SLANDER BY DEED
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs any act not included in
any other crime against honor.
2. That such act is performed in the presence of other
person or persons.
3. That such act casts dishonor, discredit or
contempt upon the offended party.
Notes:
Slander by deed is a defamation committed by
the offender against the complainant through the
performance of any act which casts dishonor, discredit
or contempt upon another person. Slander by deed
refers to performance of an act, not use of words.
Two kinds of slander by deed
1. Simple slander by deed; and
2. Grave slander by deed, that is, which is of a serious
nature.
Whether a certain slanderous act constitutes
slander by deed of a serious nature or not, depends on
the social standing of the offended party, the
circumstances under which the act was committed,
the occasion, etc. The acts of slapping and boxing the
woman, a teacher, in the presence of many people has
put her to dishonor, contempt and ridicule. (P v Costa).
If the acts committed against the offended party
caused her physical injury which did not require
medical attendance, then the crime would be
maltreatment which is classified as slight physical
injuries.
Distinctions
a. Unjust Vexation-irritation or
annoyance/anything that annoys or irritates
without justification.
b. Slander by Deed-irritation or annoyance +
attendant publicity and dishonor or contempt.
c. Acts of lasciviousness-irritation or annoyance
+ any of 3 circumstance provided in Art335 of
RPC on rape
- use of force or intimidation
- deprivation of reason or rendering the
offended unconscious
- offended party under 12 yrs of age plus
lewd designs
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBEL
Who are liable?
a. person who publishes, exhibits or causes the
publication or exhibition of any defamation
in writing or similar means(par.1)
b. author or editor of a book or pamphlet
c. editor or business manager of a daily
newspaper magazine or serial
publication(par.2)
d. owner of the printing plant which publishes a
libelous article with his consent and all other
persons who in any way participate in or have
connection with its publication (US v Ortiz)
LIBELOUS REMARKS
Libelous remarks or comments on privileged
matters (under Art. 354) if made with malice in fact
will not exempt the author and editor.
(This article is a limitation to the defense of
privileged communication)
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs an act.
www.rkmfiles.net95
2. That by such act he directly incriminates or
imputes to an innocent person the commission
of a crime.
3. That such act does not constitute perjury.
Two Kinds
a. making a statement which is defamatory or
perjurious (if made under oath and is false)
b. planting evidence
Note: article is limited to planting evidence and the
like
This crime cannot be committed through
verbal incriminatory statements. It is defined as an act
and, therefore, to commit this crime, more than a mere
utterance is required. If the incriminating machination
is made orally, the crime may be slander or oral
defamation. If the incriminatory machination was
made in writing and under oath, the crime may be
perjury if there is a willful falsity of the statements
made. If the statement in writing is not under oath, the
crime may be falsification if the crime is a material
matter made in a written statement which is required
by law to have been rendered. As far as this crime is
concerned, this has been interpreted to be possible
only in the so-called planting of evidence.
There is such a crime as incriminating an
innocent person through unlawful arrest. (People vs.
Alagao, et al., G.R. No. L-20721, April 30, 1966)
INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR
How committed?
By any person who shall make any intrigue
which has for its principal purpose to blemish the
honor or reputation of another person
Notes:
The crime is committed by resorting to any
form of scheme or plot designed to blemish the
reputation of a person. The offender does not employ
written or spoken words, pictures or caricatures to
ridicule the victim. Rather, he uses some ingenious,
crafty and secret ploy which produces the same effect.
Intriguing against honor is referred to as
gossiping. The offender, without ascertaining the
truth of a defamatory utterance, repeats the same and
passes it on to another, to the damage of the offended
party. Who started the defamatory news is unknown.

Where the source of polluted information can
be traced and pinpointed, and the accused adopted as
his own the information he obtained, and passed it to
another in order to cause dishonor to the
complainant’s reputation, the act is Slander and not
intriguing against Honor. But where the source or the
author of the derogatory information can not be
determined and the accused borrows the same, and
without subscribing to the truth thereof, passes it to
others, the act is one of Intriguing against Honor.
Distinction between Intriguing Against Honor and
Slander
When the source of the defamatory utterance
is unknown and the offender simply repeats or passes
the same, the crime is intriguing against honor. If the
offender made the utterance, where the source of the
defamatory nature of the utterance is known, and
offender makes a republication thereof, even though
he repeats the libelous statement as coming from
another, as long as the source is identified, the crime
committed by that offender is slander.
Distinction between Intriguing Against Honor and
Incriminating an Innocent Person
In intriguing against honor, the offender
resorts to an intrigue for the purpose of blemishing
the honor or reputation of another person. In
incriminating an innocent person, the offender
performs an act by which he directly incriminates or
imputes to an innocent person the commission of a
crime.
R.A. 4200 The Anti - Wire Tapping Act
Acts punished:
1) any person, not authorized by all the parties to any
private communication or spoken word
a) taps any wire of cable OR
b) uses any other device or arrangement, to
secretly overhear, intercept, or record such
communication or spoken word by using a
device commonly known as a dictaphone or
dictagraph or walkie talkie or tape recorder
2) any person, whether or not a participant in the
above-mentioned acts:
a) knowingly possesses any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record
www.rkmfiles.net96
or copies thereof of any communication or
spoken word
b) replays the same for any other person
c) communicates the contents thereof,
whether complete or partial, to any other
person
Notes: Peace officer is exempt if acts done under
lawful order of the court. You can only use the
recording for the case for which it was validly
requested. Information obtained in violation of the Act
is inadmissible in evidence in any hearing or
investigation.
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
ELEMENTS OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE:
1. That the offender does or fails to do an act.
2. That the doing of or the failure to do that act is
voluntary.
3. That it be without malice.
4. That material damage results.
5. That there is inexcusable lack of precaution on the
part of the offender, taking into consideration
a. his employment or occupation
b. degree of intelligence, physical condition,
and
c. other circumstances regarding persons,
time and place.
ELEMENTS OF SIMPLE IMPRUDENCE:
1. That there is lack of precaution on the part of the
offender.
2. That the damage impending to be caused in not
immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest.
Quasi-offenses punished
1. Committing through reckless imprudence any act
which, had it been intentional, would constitute a
grave or less grave felony or light felony;
2. Committing through simple imprudence or
negligence an act which would otherwise
constitute a grave or a less serious felony;
3. Causing damage to the property of another
through reckless imprudence or simple
imprudence or negligence;
4. Causing through simple imprudence or negligence
some wrong which, if done maliciously, would
have constituted a light felony.
Distinction between Reckless Imprudence and
Negligence
The two are distinguished only as to whether
the danger that would be impending is easily
perceivable or not. If the danger that may result from
the criminal negligence is clearly perceivable, the
imprudence is reckless. If it could hardly be perceived,
the criminal negligence would only be simple.
There is no more issue on whether culpa is a
crime in itself or only a mode of incurring criminal
liability. It is practically settled that criminal
negligence is only a modality in incurring criminal
liability. This is so because under Article 3, a felony
may result from dolo or culpa.
Nota Bene: Test for determining whether or not a
person is negligent of doing of an act which results in
injury or damages to another person or his property.
Would a prudent man in the position of the
person, to whom negligence is attributed, foresee
harm to the person injured? If so, the law imposes on
the doer, the duty to refrain from the course of action,
or to take precaution against such result. Failure to do
so constitutes negligence. Reasonable foresight of
harm, followed by ignoring the admonition borne of
this provision, is the constitutive fact of negligence.
(Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil. 809, 813)
Test of Negligence
Did the defendant, in doing the alleged
negligent act, use the reasonable care and caution
which an ordinary prudent person would have used in
the same situation? If not, then he is guilty of
negligence.
The penalties under Article 365 has no
application in the following cases:
6. When the penalty provided for the offense ifs
equal or lower than that provided in pars.1 and
2 of Article 365. In this case, the penalty shall
be that which is next lower in degree than that
which should be imposed, in the period which
the court may deem proper to apply.
7. When by imprudence or negligence and with
violation of the Automobile Law, the death of a
person is caused, the penalty is prision
correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.
www.rkmfiles.net97
a. Art.64 on mitigating and aggravating
circumstances not applicable.
b. Failure to lend on the spot assistance
to victim of his negligence: penalty
next higher in degree.
c. Abandoning usually punishable under
Art 275, if charged under Art 365 is
only qualifying and if not alleged
cannot even be an aggravating
circumstance.
d. Contributory negligence—not a
defense, only mitigating
The defense of contributory negligence does not
apply in criminal cases committed through reckless
imprudence. It is against public policy to invoke the
negligence of another to escape criminal liability.
(People vs. Quiñones, C.A., 44 O.G. 1520)
The above-mentioned doctrine should be
reconciled with the doctrine of “concurrent proximate
cause of two negligent drivers.”
In the case of People vs. Desalis, et al., C.A., 57
O.G. 8689, the two accused were drivers of two
speeding vehicles which overtook vehicles ahead of
them and even encroached on the other’s lane without
taking due precaution as required by the
circumstances. The court found the concurrent or
successive negligent act or omission of the two drivers
as the direct and proximate cause of the injury caused
to the offended party. The court could not determine
in what proportion each driver contributed to the
injury. Both were declared guilty for the injury
suffered by the third person.
When negligence does not result in any injury to
persons or damage to property, then no crime is
committed. Negligence becomes punishable when it
results in the commission of a crime. (Lantok, Jr. vs.
Hon. Gorgonio, L-37396, April 30, 1979, 75 O.G. 7763)
Last clear chance doctrine
The contributory negligence of the injured
party will not defeat the action if it be shown that the
accused might, by the exercise of reasonable care and
prudence, have avoided the consequences of the
negligence of the injured party
Emergency rule
 An automobile driver, who, by the negligence
of another, is suddenly placed in an emergency and
compelled to act instantly to avoid a collision or injury
is not guilty of negligence if he makes a choice which a
person of ordinary prudence placed in such a position
might make even though he did not make the wisest
choice.
Doctrine of Pre-emption
It is a rule in collision cases which the driver of
a motor vehicle to make a full stop when crossing a
thru-street. Any accident therefore which takes place
in said corner gives to rise to the presumption of
negligence on the part driver of the motor vehicle
running thru-street has already reached the middle
part of the intersection. In such a case, the other driver
who has the right of way has the duty to stop his motor
vehicle in order to avoid a collision. (People vs.
Taradji, 3 C.A. Rep. [25] 460)
If the criminal negligence resulted, for
example, in homicide, serious physical injuries and
slight physical injuries do not join only the homicide
and serious physical injuries in one information for
the slight physical injuries. You are not complexing
slight when you join it in the same information. It is
just that you are not splitting the criminal negligence
because the real basis of the criminal liability is the
negligence.
If you split the criminal negligence, that is
where double jeopardy would arise.
Accused is not criminally liable for the death
or injuries caused by his negligence to trespassers
whose presence in the premises he was not aware of.
In the case of People vs. Cuadra, C.A., 53 O.G. 7265,
accused was a truck driver. Unknown to him, several
persons boarded his truck and while driving along a
slippery road which has a declinations of 25 degrees,
the left front wheel of the truck fell into a ditch. In his
effort to return the truck to the center of the road, the
truck turned turtle, throwing off two of the passengers
who boarded the truck without his knowledge. As a
consequence, one of them died. Cuadra was acquitted
of the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide and physical injuries.
Overtaking of another vehicle is a normal
occurrence in driving. But when the overtaking is
done from right, it shows recklessness and disregard
of traffic laws and regulations. It is likewise so when
the overtaking is done while another vehicle is
www.rkmfiles.net98
approaching from the opposite direction. This is a
violation of Section 59(b) of the Motor Vehicle Law
(People vs. Songalla, C.A., 67 O.G. 8330)
Driving within the speed limit is not a
guaranty of due care. Speed limits impose the
maximum speed which should not be exceeded. The
degree of care required of a motorist is not governed
by speed limits but by the circumstances and
conditions obtaining in the place at the particular
time. So, if the maximum speed limit is 80 kilometers
per hour and the vehicle driven at 30 kilometers per
hour, but because of the very slow pace of the vehicle,
an accident occurs, the observation of the speed limit
will not be acceptable evidence of due care. (people vs.
Caluza, C.A., 58 O.G. 8060)
…oΩo…
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
RULE 110 - PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
Institution of Criminal actions- Criminal actions
shall be instituted as follows:
(a) For offenses where a preliminary
investigation is required pursuant to
section
I of Rule 112, by filing the complaint with the proper
officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite
preliminary investigation.
(b) For all other offenses, by filing the
complaint or information directly with the
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts, or the complaint with the office of the
prosecutor. In Manila and other chartered cities, the
complaint shall be filed with the office of the
prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their
charters.
The institution of the criminal action shall
interrupt the running of the period of prescription of
the offense charged unless otherwise provided in
special laws.
Complaint or Information – The complaint or
information shall be in writing, in the name of the
People of the Philippines and against all persons who
appear to be responsible for the offense involved.
Complaint defined – A complaint is a sworn written
statement charging a person with an offense,
subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer, or
other public officer charge with the enforcement of the
law violated.
Information defined – Information is an accusation
in writing charging a person with an offense,
subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court.
Who must prosecute Criminal Actions?
All criminal actions commenced by a
complaint or information shall be prosecuted under
the direction and control of the prosecutor. However,
in Municipal Trial Courts or Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts when the prosecutor assigned thereto or to the
case is not available, the offended party, any peace
officer, or public officer charged with the enforcement
of the law violated may prosecute the case. This
authority shall cease upon actual intervention of the
prosecutor or upon elevation of the case to the
Regional Trial Court.
The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall
not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute
criminal prosecution without including the guilty
parties, if both are alive, nor, in any case, if the
offended party has consented to the offense or
pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts
of lasciviousness shall not prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them.
If the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated
before she can file the complaint, and she has no
known parents, grandparents or guardian, the State
shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.
The offended party, even if a minor, has the
right to initiate the prosecution of the offense of
seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness
independently of her parents, grandparents, or
guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of
doing so. Where the offended party, who is a minor,
fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents,
or guardian may file the same. The right to file the
action granted to parents, grandparents or guardian
shall be exclusive of all other persons and shall be
exercised successively in the order herein provided,
except as stated in the preceding paragraph.
No criminal action for defamation which
consists in the imputation of any of the offenses
mentioned above shall be brought except at the
www.rkmfiles.net99
instance of and upon complaint filed by the offended
party.
The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be
governed by the provisions thereof.
Sufficiency of complaint or information
A complaint or information is sufficient if it
states the name of the accused; the designation of the
offense given by the stature; the acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense; the name of
the offended party; the approximate date of the
commission of the offense; and the place where the
offense was committed.
When an offense is committed by more than
one person, all of them shall be included in the
complaint or information.
Name of the accused
The complaint or information must state the
name and surname of the accused or any appellation
or nickname by which he has been or is known. If his
name cannot be ascertained, he must be described
under a fictitious name with a statement that his true
name is unknown.
If the true name of the accused is thereafter
disclosed by him or appears in some other manner to
the court, such true name shall be inserted in the
complaint or information and record.
Designation of the offense
The complaint or information shall state the
designation of the offense given by the statute, aver
the acts or omissions constituting the offense, and
specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances.
If there is no designation of the offense, reference shall
be made to the section or subsection of the statute
punishing it.
Cause of the accusation
The acts or omissions complained of as
constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary
and concise language and not necessarily in the
language used in the statue but in terms sufficient to
enable a person of common understanding to know
what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying
and aggravating circumstances and for the court to
pronounce judgement.
Place of the commission of the offense
The complaint or information is sufficient if it
can be understood from its allegations that the offense
was committed or some of its essential ingredients
occurred at some place within the jurisdiction of the
court, unless the particular place where it was
committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense charged or is necessary for its identification.
Date of commission of the offense
It is not necessary to state in the complaint or
information the precise date the offense was
committed except when it is a material ingredient of
the offense. The offense may be alleged to have been
committed on a date as near as possible to the actual
date of its commission.
Name of the offended party
The complaint or information must state the
name and surname of the person against whom or
against whose property the offense was committed, or
any appellation or nickname by which such person has
been or is known. If there is no better way of
identifying him, he must be described under a
fictitious name.
(a) In offenses against property, if the name of the
offended party is unknown, the property must be
described with such particularity as to properly
identify the offense charged.
(b) If the name of the person against whom or
against whose property the offense was
committed is thereafter disclosed or ascertained,
the court must cause such true name to be
inserted in the complaint or information and the
record.
(c) If the offended party is a juridical person, it is
sufficient to state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it
may be identified, without need or averring that it
is a juridical person or that it is organized in
accordance with law.
Duplicity of the offense
www.rkmfiles.net100
A compliant or information must charge only
one offense, except when the law prescribes a single
punishment for various offenses.
Amendment or substitution
A complaint or information may be amended,
in form or in substance, without leave or court, at any
time before the accused enters his plea. After the plea
and during the trial, a formal amendment may be
made with leave of court and when it can be done
without causing prejudice to the rights or the accused.
However, any amendment before plea, which
downgrades the nature of the offense charged in or
excludes any accused from the complaint or
information, can be made only upon motion by the
prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with
leave of court, the court shall state its reasons in
resolving the motion and copies of its order shall be
furnished all parties, especially the offended party.
If it appears at any time before judgment that
a mistake has been made in charging the proper
offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint
or information upon the filing of a new one charging
the proper offense in accordance with section 19 Rule
119, provided the accused shall not be placed in
double jeopardy. The court may require the witnesses
to give bail for their appearance at the trial.
Place where action is to be instituted
(a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action
shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was
committed or where any of its essential ingredients
occurred.
(b) Where an offense is committed in a train,
aircraft, or other public or private vehicle in the course
of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and ___
in the court of any municipality or territory where
such train, aircraft, or other vehicle passed during its
trip, including the place of its departure and arrival.
(c) Where an offense is committed on board a
vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action
shall be instituted and tried in the court of the first
port of entry or of any municipality or territory where
the vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the
generally accepted principles of international law.
 (d) Crimes committed outside the Philippines
but punishable under Article 2 of the Revised Penal
Code shall be cognizable by the court where the
criminal action is first filed.
Intervention of the offended party in criminal
action
Where the civil action for recovery of civil
liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant
the Rule 111, the offended party may intervene by
counsel in the prosecution of the offense.
RULE 111 - PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION
Institution of criminal and civil actions
(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the
civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising
from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted
with the criminal action unless the offended party
waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it
separately or institutes the civil action prior to the
criminal action.
The reservation of the right to institute
separately the civil action shall be made before the
prosecution starts presenting its evidence and under
circumstances affording the offended party a
reasonable opportunity to make such reservation.
When the offended party seeks to enforce civil
liability against the accused by way of moral, nominal,
temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying
the amount thereof in the complaint or information,
the filing fees therefor shall constitute a first lien on
the judgment awarding such damages.
Where the amount of damage, other than
actual, is specified in the complaint or information, the
corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended
party upon the filing thereof in court.
Except as otherwise provided in these Rules,
no filing fees shall be required for actual damages.
No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party
complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal
case, but any cause of action which could have been
the subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil
action.
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the
www.rkmfiles.net101
corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such
civil action separately shall be allowed.
Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and
civil actions, the offended party shall pay in full the
filing fees based on the amount of the check involved,
which shall be considered as the actual damages
claimed. Where the complaint or information also
seeks to recover liquidated, moral, nominal,
temperate or exemplary damages, the offended party
shall pay additional filing fees based on the amounts
alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but
any of these damages are subsequently awarded by
the court, the filing fees based on the amount awarded
shall constitute a first lien on the judgment.
Where the civil action has been separately and
trial thereof has not yet commenced, it may be
consolidated with the criminal action upon
application with the court trying the latter case. If the
application is granted, the trial of both actions shall
proceed in accordance with section 2 of this Rule
governing consolidation of the civil and criminal
actions.
When separate civil is suspended
After the criminal action has been
commenced, the separate action arising therefrom
cannot be instituted until final judgment has been
entered in the criminal action.
If the criminal action is filed after the said civil
action has already been instituted, the latter shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before
judgment on the merits. The suspension shall last until
final judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is
rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon
motion of the offended party, be consolidated with the
criminal action in the court trying the criminal action.
In case of consolidation, the evidence already adduced
in the civil action shall be deemed automatically
reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice
tot he right of the prosecution to cross-examine the
witnesses presented by the offended party in the
criminal case and of the parties to present additional
evidence. The consolidated criminal and civil actions
shall be tried and decided jointly.
During the pendency of the criminal action, the
running of the period of prescription of the civil action
which cannot be instituted separately or whose
proceeding has been suspended shall be tolled.
The extinction of the penal action does not
carry with it extinction of the civil action. However, the
civil action based on delict shall be deemed
extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in
the criminal action that the act or omission from which
the civil liability may arise did not exist.
When civil may proceed independently
In the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 and
2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the
independent civil action may be brought by the
offended party. It shall proceed independently of the
criminal action and shall require only a
preponderance of evidence. In no case, however, may
the offended party recover damages twice for the
same act or omission charged in the criminal action.
Effect of death on civil actions
The death of the accused after arraignment
and during the pendency of the criminal action shall
extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict.
However, the independent civil action instituted
under section 3 of this Rule or which thereafter is
instituted to enforce liability arising from other
sources of obligation may be continued against the
estate or legal representative of the accused after
proper substitution or against said estate, as the case
maybe. The heirs of the accused may be substituted for
the deceased without requiring the appointment of an
executor or administrator and the court may appoint
a guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal
representative or representatives to appear and be
substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from
notice.
A final judgment entered in favor of the
offended party shall be enforced in the manner
especially provided in these rules for prosecuting
claims against the estate of the deceased.
If the accused dies before arraignment, the
case shall be dismissed without deceased.
Judgment in civil action not a bar
A final judgment rendered in a civil action
absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar
to a criminal action against the defendant for the same
act or omission subject of the civil action.
Suspension by reason of prejudicial question
A petition for suspension of the criminal action
based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in
a civil action may be filed in the office of the
www.rkmfiles.net102
prosecutor or the court conduction the preliminary
investigation. When the criminal action has been filed
in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed
in the same criminal action at any time before the
prosecution rests.
Elements of prejudicial question
The elements of a prejudicial question are: (1)
The previously instituted civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of
such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed.
RULE 112 - PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
Preliminary investigation defined; when required.
Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or
proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient
ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime
has been committed and the respondent is probably
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.
Except as provided in section 7 of this Rule, a
preliminary investigation is required to be conducted
before the filing of a complaint or information for an
offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least
four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day without
regard to the fine.
Officers authorized to conduct preliminary
investigation.
The following may conduct preliminary
investigations:
1. Provincial or City Prosecutors and their
assistants;
2. Judges of the Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;
3. National and Regional State Prosecutors; and
4. Other officers as may be authorized by law.
Their authority to conduct preliminary
investigations shall include all crimes cognizable by
the proper court in their respective territorial
jurisdictions.
Procedure
The preliminary investigation shall be
conducted in the following manner:

(a) The complaint shall state the address of the
respondent and shall be accompanied by the affidavits
of the complainant and his witnesses, as well as other
supporting documents to establish probable cause.
They shall be in such number of copies as there are
respondents, plus two (2) copies for the official file.
The affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to before
any prosecutor or government official authorized to
administer oath, or, in their absence or unavailability,
before a notary public, each of whom must certify that
he personally examined the affiants and that he is
satisfied that he is satisfied that they voluntarily
executed and understood their affidavits.
(b) Within ten (10) days after the filing of the
complaint, the investigating officer shall either
dismiss it if he finds no ground to continue with the
investigation, or issue a subpoena to the respondent
attaching to it a copy of the complaint and its
supporting affidavits and documents.
The respondent shall have the right to
examine the evidence submitted by the complainant
which he may not have been furnished and to copy
them at his expense. If the evidence is voluminous, the
complainant may be required to specify those which
he intends to present against the respondent, and
these shall be made available for examination or
copying by the respondent at his expense.
Objects as evidence need not be furnished a
partly but shall be made available for examination,
copying, or photographing at the expense of the
requesting party.
(c) Within ten (10) days from receipt of the
subpoena with the complaint and supporting
affidavits and documents, the respondent shall submit
his counter-affidavit and that of his witnesses and
other supporting documents relied upon for his
defense. The counter-affidavits shall be subscribed
and sworn to and certified as provided in paragraph
(a) of this section, with copies thereof furnished by
him to the complainant. The respondent shall not be
allowed to file a motion to dismiss in lieu of a counter-
affidavit.
(d) If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed,
or if subpoenaed, does not submit counter-affidavits
within the ten (10) day period, the investigating
officer shall resolve the complaint based on the
evidence presented by the complainant.
(e) The investigation officer may set a hearing
if there are facts and issues to be clarified from a party
www.rkmfiles.net103
or a witness. The parties can be present at the hearing
but without the right to examine or cross-examine.
They may, however, submit to the investigating officer
questions which may be asked to the party or witness
concerned.
The hearing shall be held within ten (10) days
from submission of the counter-affidavits and other
documents or from the expiration of the period for
their submission. It shall be terminated within five (5)
days.
(f) Within ten (10) days after the investigation,
the investigating officer shall determine whether or
not there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent
for trial.
Resolution of investigating prosecutor and its
review
If the investigating prosecutor finds cause to
hold the respondent for trial, he shall prepare the
resolution and information. He shall certify under oath
in the information that he, or as shown by the record,
an authorized officer, has personally examined the
complainant and his witnesses; that there is
reasonable ground to believe that a crime has been
committed and that the accused is probably guilty
thereof; that the accused was informed of the
complaint and of the evidence submitted against him;
and that he was given an opportunity to submit
controverting evidence. Otherwise, he shall
recommend the dismissal of the complaint.
Within five (5) days from his resolution, he
shall forward the record of the case to the provincial
or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, or to the
Ombudsman or his deputy in cases of offenses
cognizable by the Sandigangbayan in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction. They shall act on the resolution
within ten (10) days from their receipt thereof and
shall immediately inform the parties of such action.
No complaint or information may be filed or
dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without the
prior written authority or approval of the provincial
or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Ombudsman or his deputy.
Where the investigating prosecutor
recommends the dismissal of the complaint but his
recommendation is disapproved by the provincial or
city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Ombudsman or his deputy on the ground that a
probable cause exists, the latter may, by himself, file
the information against the respondent, or direct
another assistant prosecutor or state prosecutor to do
so without conducting another preliminary
investigation.
If upon petition by a proper party under such
rules as the Department of Justice may prescribe or
motu proprio, the Secretary of Justice reverse or
modifies the resolution of the provincial or city
prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, he shall direct
the prosecutor concerned either to file the
corresponding information without conducting
another preliminary investigation, or to dismiss or
move for dismissal of the complaint or information
with notice to the parties. The same rule shall apply in
preliminary investigations conducted by the officers
of the Office of the Ombudsman.
Resolution of investigating judge and its review
Within ten (10) days after the preliminary
investigation, the investigating judge shall
transmitted the resolution of the case to the provincial
or city prosecutor, or to the Ombudsman or his deputy
in cases of offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan
in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, for
appropriate action. The resolution shall state the
findings of facts and the law supporting his action,
together with the record of the case ;which shall
include: (a) the warrant, if the arrest is by virtue of a
warrant; (b) the affidavits, counter-affidavits and
other supporting evidence of the parties; (c) the
undertaking or bail of the accused and the order for
his release; (d) the transcripts of the proceedings
during the preliminary investigation; and (e) the
order of cancellation of his bail bond, if the resolution
is for the dismissal of the complaint.
Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
records, the provincial or city prosecutor, or the
Ombudsman or his deputy, as the case may be, shall
review the resolution of the investigating judge on the
existence of probable cause. Their ruling shall
expressly and clearly state the facts and the law on
which it is based and the parties shall be furnished
with copies thereof. They shall order the release of an
accused who is detained if no probable cause is found
against him.
When warrant of arrest may issue?
(a) By the Regional Trial Court.- Within ten
(10) days from the filing of the complaint or
information, the judge shall personally evaluate the
resolution of the prosecutor and its supporting
www.rkmfiles.net104
evidence. He may immediately dismiss the case of the
evidence on record clearly fails to establish probable
cause. If he finds probable cause, he shall issue a
warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the
accused has already been arrested pursuant to a
warrant issued by the judge who conducted the
preliminary investigation or when the complaint or
information was filed pursuant to section 7 of this
rule. In case of doubt on the existence of probable
cause, the judge may order the prosecutor to present
additional evidence within five (5) days from notice
and the issue must be resolved by the court within
thirty (30) days from the filing of the complaint of
information.
(b) By the Municipal Trial Court. – When
required pursuant to the second paragraph of section
1 of this Rule, the preliminary investigation of cased
falling under the original jurisdiction of the
Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial
Court may be conducted by either the judge or the
prosecutor. When conducted by the prosecutor, the
procedure for the issuance of a warrant of arrest by
the judge shall be governed by paragraph (a) of this
section. When the investigation is conducted by the
judge himself, he shall follow the procedure provided
in section 3 of this Rule. If his findings and
recommendations are affirmed by the provincial or
city prosecutor, or by the Ombudsman or his deputy,
and the corresponding information is filed, he shall
issue a warrant of arrest. However, without waiting
for the conclusion of the investigation, the judge may
issue a warrant of arrest if he finds after an
examination in writing under oath of the complainant
and his witnesses in the form of searching questions
and answers, that a probable cause exists and that
there is a necessity of placing the respondent under
immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends
of justice.
(c) When warrant of arrest not necessary. – A
warrant of arrest shall not issue if the accused is
already under detention pursuant to a warrant issued
by the municipal trial court in accordance with
paragraph (b) of this section, or if the complaint or
information was filed pursuant to section 7 of this
Rule or is for an offense penalized by fine only. The
court shall then proceed in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction.
When accused lawfully arrested without warrant
 When a person is lawfully arrested without a
warrant involving an offense which requires a
preliminary investigation, the complaint or
information may be filed by a prosecutor without need
of such investigation provided an inquest has been
conducted in accordance with existing rules. In the
absence or unavailability of an inquest prosecutor, the
complaint may be filed by the offended party or a
peace officer directly with the proper court on the
basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting
officer or person.
Before the complaint or information is filed,
the person arrested may ask for a preliminary
investigation in accordance with this rule, but he must
sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended, in the presence of his
counsel. Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for
bail and the investigation must be terminated within
fifteen (15) days from its inception.
After the filing of the complaint or information
in court without a preliminary investigation, the
accused may, within five (5) days from the time he
learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary investigation
with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense
as provided in this Rule. (7a; sec. 2 R.A. No. 7438)
Records
(a) Records supporting the information or
complaint. An information or complaint filed in court
shall be supported by the affidavits and counter-
affidavits of the parties and their witnesses, together
with the other supporting evidence and the resolution
on the case.
(b) Record of preliminary investigation. – The
record of the preliminary investigation, whether
conducted by a judge or a prosecutor, shall not from
part of the record of the case. However, the, court, on
its own initiative or on motion of any party, may order
the production of the record or any of its part when
necessary in the resolution of the case or any incident
therein, or when it is to be introduced as an evidence
in the case by the requesting party. (8a)
Cases not requiring a Preliminary Investigation
nor covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure
(a) If filed with the prosecutor. – If the
complaint is filed directly with the prosecutor
involving an offense punishable by imprisonment of
less than four (4) years. two (2) months and one (1)
day, the procedure outlined in section 3 (a) of this Rule
www.rkmfiles.net105
shall be observed. The prosecutor shall act on the
complaint based on the affidavits and other
supporting documents submitted by the complainant
within ten (10) days from its filing.
(b) If filed with the Municipal Trial Court. – If
the complaint or information is filed with the
Municipal Trial Court or Municipal Circuit Trial Court
for an offense covered by this section, the procedure
in section 3 (a) of this Rule shall be observed. If within
ten (10) days after the filing of the complaint or
information, the judge finds no probable cause after
personally evaluating the evidence, or after personally
examining in writing and under oath the complainant
and his witnesses in the form of searching questions
and answers, he shall dismiss the same. He may,
however, require the submission of additional
evidence, within ten (10) days from notice, to
determine further the existence of probable cause. if
the judge still finds no probable cause despite the
additional evidence, within ten (10) days from its
submission or expiration of said period, dismiss the
case. When he finds probable case, he shall issue a
warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the
accused had already been arrested, and hold him for
trial. However, if the judge is satisfied that there is no
necessity for placing the accused under custody, he
may issue summons instead of a warrant of arrest.
RULE 113 - ARREST
Arrest defined – Arrest is the taking of a person into
custody in order that he may be bound to answer for
the commission of an offense.
Arrest; how made – An arrest is made by an actual
restraint of a person to be arrested, or by his
submission to the custody of the person making the
arrest.
No violence or unnecessary force shall be used
in making an arrest. The person arrested shall not be
subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his
detention
Duty of arresting officer
It shall be the duty of the officer executing the
warrant to arrest the accused and deliver him to the
nearest police station or jail without unnecessary
delay.
Executive of warrant

The head of the office to whom the warrant of
arrest was delivered for execution shall cause the
warrant to be executed within ten (10) days from its
receipt. Within ten (10) days after the expiration of the
period, the officer to whom it was assigned for
execution shall make a report to the judge who issued
the warrant. In case of his failure to execute the
warrant, he shall state the reasons therefor.
Arrest without warrant; when lawful
A peace officer or a private person may, without a
warrant, arrest a person:
(a) When, in his presence, the person to be
arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed
and he has probable cause to belief based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a
prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment
or place where he is serving final judgment or is
temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has
escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another.
In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b)
above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail
and shall be proceeded against in accordance with
section 7 of Rule 112. (5a)
Time of making arrest - An arrest may be made on
any day and at any time of the day or night.
Method of arrest by officer by virtue of warrant
When making an arrest by virtue of a warrant,
the officer shall inform the person to be arrested of the
cause of the arrest and the fact that a warrant has been
issued for his arrest, except when he flees or forcibly
resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform
him, or when the giving of such information will
imperil the arrest. The officer need not have the
warrant in his possession at the time of the arrest but
after the arrest, if the person arrested so requires, the
warrant shall be shown to him as soon as practicable.
Method of arrest by officer without warrant
www.rkmfiles.net106
When making an arrest without a warrant, the
officer shall inform the person to be arrested of his
authority and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter
is either engaged in the commission of an offense, is
pursued immediately after its commission, has
escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has
opportunity to so inform him, or when the giving of
such information will imperil the arrest.
Method of arrest by private person
When making an arrest, a private person shall
inform the person to be arrested of the intention to
arrest him and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter
is either engaged in the commission of an offense, is
pursued immediately after its commission, or has
escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the person
making the arrest has opportunity to so inform him, or
when the giving of such information will imperil the
arrest.
Officer may summon assistance
An officer making a lawful arrest may orally
summon as many persons as he deems necessary to
assist him in effecting the arrest. Every person so
summoned by an officer shall assist him in effecting
the arrest when he can render such assistance without
detriment to himself.
Right of officer to break into building or enclosure
An officer, in order to make an arrest either by
virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant as provided
in section 5, may break into any building or enclosure
where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably
believed to be, if he is refused admittance thereto,
after announcing his authority and purpose.
Right to break out from building or enclosure
Whenever an officer has entered the building
or enclosure in accordance with the preceding section,
he may break out therefrom when necessary to
liberate himself.
Arrest after escape or rescue
If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is
rescued, any person may immediately pursue or
retake him without a warrant at any time and in any
place within the Philippines.
Right of attorney or relative to visit person
arrested
Any member of the Philippine Bar shall, at the
request of the person arrested or of another acting in
his behalf, have the right to visit and confer privately
with such person in the jail or any other place of
custody at any hour of the day or night. Subject to
reasonable regulations, a relative of the person
arrested can also exercise the same right. (14a)
RULE 114 - BAIL
Bail defined – Bail is the security given for the
release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by
him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance
before any court as required under the conditions
hereinafter specified. Bail may be given in the form of
corporate surety, property bond, cash deposit, or
recognizance.
Conditions of the bail; requirements
All kinds of the bail are subject to the following
conditions:
(a) The undertaking shall be effective upon
approval, and unless cancelled, shall
remain in force at all stage of case until promulgation
of the judgement of the Regional Trail Court,
irrespective of whether the case was originally filled
in or appealed to it;
(b) The accused shall appear before proper
court whenever required by the court or
these Rules;
(c) The failure of the accused to appear at the
trial without justification and despite due
notice shall be deemed a waiver of his
right to be present thereat. In such case,
the trial may proceed in absentia; and
(d) The bondsman shall surrender the
accused to the court for execution of the
final judgment.
The original papers shall state the full name
address of the address of the accused, the amount of
the undertaking and the conditions required by this
section. Photographs (passport size) taken within the
last six (6) months showing the face, left and right
profiles of the accused must be attached to the bail.
No release or transfer except on court or bail
www.rkmfiles.net107
No person under detention by legal process
shall be released or transferred except upon of the
other court or when he is admitted to bail.
Bail, a matter of right; exception
All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail
as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or
released on recognizance as prescribed by law or this
Rule (a) before or after conviction by the Metropolitan
Trial Court, Municipal Trail Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, or Municipal Circuit Trail Court, and (b)
before conviction by the Regional Trail Court of an
offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua,
or life imprisonment.
Bail, when discretionary
Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of
an offense not punishable by death, reclusion
perpetua , or life imprisonment, admission to bail is
discretionary. The application for bail may be filed
and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of a
notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the
original record to the appellate court. However, if the
decision of the trial court convicting the accused
changed the nature of the offense from non – bailable
to bailable, the application for bail cab only be filed
with and resolved by the appellate court.
Should the court grant the application, the
accused may be allowed to continue on provisional
liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the
same bail subject to the consent of the bondsman.
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is
imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, the accused
shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled upon
a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the
accused, of the following or other similar
circumstances:
(a) That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or
habitual deliquent, or has committed the crime
aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
(b) That he has previously escaped from legal
confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the
conditions of his bail without valid justification;
(c) That he committed the offense while
under probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
(d) That the circumstances of his case indicate
the probability of flight if released on bail; or
 (e) That there is undue risk that he may
commit another crime during the pendency of the
appeal.
The appellate court may, motu proprio or on
motion of any party, review the resolution of the
Regional Trial Court after notice to the adverse party
in either case
Capital offense defined – A capital offense is an
offense which, under the law existing at the time of its
commission and of the application for admission to
bail, may be punished with death.
Capital offense or an offense punishable by
reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, not
bailable
No person charged with a capital offense or an
offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when
evidence of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of
the criminal prosecution.
Burden of proof in bail application
At the hearing of an application of bail filed by
a person who is custody for the commission of an
offense punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or
life imprisonment, the persecution has the burden of
showing that evidence of guilt is strong. The evidence
presented during the bail hearing shall be considered
automatically reproduced at the trial but, upon motion
of either party, the court may recall any witness for
additional examination unless the latter is dead,
outside the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.
Amount of bail; guidelines
The judge who is issued the warrant or
granted the application shall fixed a reasonable
amount of bail considering primarily, but not limited
to the following factors:
(a) Financial ability of the accused to give bail;
(b) Nature and circumstances of the offense;
(c) Penalty for the offense charged;
(d) Character and reputation of the accused;
(e) Probability of the accused appearing at the
trial;
(f) Weight of the evidence against the
accused;
(g) Age and health of the accused;
www.rkmfiles.net108
(h) Forfeiture of the accused appearing at the
trial;
(i) Pendency of other cases where the
accused is on bail.
(j) The fact that the accused was a fugitive
from justice when arrested; and
Excessive bail shall not be required.
Corporate surety
Any domestic or foreign corporation, licensed
as a surety in accordance with law and currently
authorized to act as such, may provide bail by a bond
subscribed jointly by the accused and an officer of the
corporation duly authorized by its board of directors.
Property bond how posted
A property bond is an undertaking constituted
as lien on the real property given as security for the
amount of the bail. Within ten (10) days after the
approval of the bond, the accused shall cause the
annotation of the lien on the certificate of title on file
with the Registry of Deeds if the land is registered, or
if unregistered, in the Registration Book on the space
provided therefor in the Registry of Deeds for the
province or city where the land lies, and on the
corresponding tax declaration in the office of the
provincial, city and municipal assessor concerned.
Within the same period; the accused shall
submit to the court his compliance and his failure to
do so shall be sufficient cause for the cancellation of
the property bond his re-arrest and detention.
Qualifications of sureties in property bond
The qualifications of sureties in a property
bond shall be as follows:
(a) Each must be a resident owner of real
estate within the Philippines;
(b) Where there is only one surely, his real
estate must be worth at least the amount of the
undertaking;
(c) If there are two or more sureties, each may
justify in an amount less than that expressed in the
undertaking but the aggregate of the justified sums
must be equivalent to the whole amount of the bail
demanded.
In all cases, every surety must be worth the
amount specified in his own undertaking over and
above all just debts, obligations and properties
exempt from execution:
Justification of sureties
Every surety justify by affidavit taken before
the judge that he possesses the qualifications
prescribed in the preceding section. He shall describe
the property given as security, starting the nature of
his title, its encumbrances, the number and amount of
other bails entered into by him and still undischarged,
and his other liabilities. The court may examine the
sureties upon oath concerning their sufficiency in such
manners as it may deem proper. No bail shall be
approved unless the surety is qualified.
Deposit of cash as bail
The accused or any person acting in his behalf
may deposit in cash with the nearest collector of
internal revenue or provincial city, or municipal
treasure the amount of bail fixed by the court, or
recommended by the prosecutor who investigated or
filed the case. Upon submission of a proper certificate
of deposit and a written undertaking showing
compliance with the requirements of section 2 of this
Rule, the accused shall be discharged from custody.
The money deposited shall be considered as bail and
applied to the payment of fine and costs while the
excess, if any, shall be returned to the accused or to
whoever made the deposit.
Recognizance
Whoever allowed by law or these Rules, the
court may release a person in custody on his own
recognizance or that of a responsible person.
Bail, when not required; reduced bail or
recognizance
No bail shall be required when the law or these
Rules so provide.
When a person has been in custody for a
period equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment prescribed for the offense charged, he
shall be released immediately, without prejudice to
the continuation of the trial or the proceedings on
appeal. If the maximum penalty to which the accused
may be sentences is destierro, he shall be released
after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment.
A person is custody for a period equal to or
more than the minimum of the principal penalty
www.rkmfiles.net109
prescribed for the offense charged, without
application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any
modifying circumstance, shall be released on a
reduced bail or on his own recognizance, at the
discretion of the court.
Bail, where filed
(a) Bail in the amount fixed may be filed with the
court where the case is pending, or in the
absence or unavailability of the judge thereof,
with any regional trial judge, metropolitan
trial judge, municipal trial judge, or municipal
circuit trial judge in the province, city, or
municipality. If the accused is arrested in a
province, city, or municipality other than
where the case is pending, bail may also be
filed with any regional trial court of said place,
or if no judge thereof is available, with any
metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge,
or municipal circuit trial judge therein.
(b) Where the grant of bail is a matter of
discretion, or the accused seeks to be released
on recognizance, the application may only be
filed in the court where the case is pending,
whether on preliminary investigation, trial, or
appeal.
(c) Any person in custody who is not yet charged
in court may apply for bail with any court in
the province, city, or municipality where he is
held.
Notice of application to prosecutor
In the application for bail under section 8 of
this Rule, the court must give reasonable notice of the
hearing to the prosecutor or require him to submit his
recommendation.
Release on bail
The accused must be discharged upon
approval of the bail by the judge with whom it was
filed in accordance with section 17 of this Rule.
When bail is filed with a court other than
where the case is pending, the judge who accepted the
bail shall forward it, together with the order of release
and other supporting papers, to the court where the
case is pending, which ma, for good reason, require a
different one to be filed.
Increase or reduction of bail
 After the accused is admitted to bail, the court
may, upon good cause, either increase or reduce its
amount. When increased, the accused may be
committed to custody if he does not give bail in the
increased amount within a reasonable period. an
accused held to answer a criminal charge, who is
released without bail upon filing of the complaint or
information, may, at any subsequent stage of the
proceedings and whenever a strong showing of guilt
appears to the court, the required to give bail in the
amount fixed, or in lieu thereof, committed to custody.
Forfeiture of bail
When the presence of the accused is required
by the court or these Rules, his bondsmen shall
notified to produce him before the court on a given
date and time. If the accused fails to appear in person
as required, his bail shall be declared forfeited and the
bondsmen given thirty (30) days within which to
produce their principal and to show cause why no
judgment should be rendered against them for the
amount of their bail. Within the said period, the
bondsmen must:
(a) produce the body of their principal or give
the reason for his non-production; and
(b) explain why the accused did not appear
before the court when first required to do so.
Failing in these two requisites, a judgment
shall be rendered against the bondsmen, jointly and
severally, for the amount of the bail. The court shall
not reduce or otherwise mitigate the liability of the
bondsmen, unless the accused has been surrendered
or is acquitted.
Cancellation of bail
Upon application of the bondsmen, with due
notice to the prosecutor, the bail may be cancelled
upon surrender of the accused or proof of his death.
The bail shall be deemed automatically
cancelled upon acquittal of the accused, dismissal of
the case, or execution of the judgment of conviction.
In all instances, the cancellation shall be
without prejudice to any liability on the bail.
Arrest of accused out on bail
For the purpose of surrendering the accused,
the bondsmen may arrest him or, upon written
authority endorsed on a certified copy of the
undertaking, cause him to be arrested by a police
www.rkmfiles.net110
officer or any other person of suitable age and
discretion.
An accused released on bail may be re-
arrested without the necessity of a warrant if he
attempts to depart from the Philippines without
permission of the court where the case is pending.
No bail final judgment; exception
No bail shall be allowed after a judgment of
conviction has become final. If before such finality, the
accused applies for probation, he may be allowed
temporary liberty under his bail. When no bail was
filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court
may allow his release on recognizance to the custody
of a responsible member of the community. In no case
shall bail be allowed after the accused has commenced
to serve sentence.
Court supervision of detainees
The court shall exercise supervision over all
persons in custody for the purpose of eliminating
unnecessary detention. The executive judges of the
Regional Trial Courts shall conduct monthly personal
inspections of provincial, city, and municipal jails and
the prisoners within their respective jurisdictions.
They shall ascertain the number of detainees, inquire
on their proper accommodation and health and
examine the condition of the jail facilities. They shall
order the segregation of sexes and of minors from
adults, ensure the observance of the right of detainees
to confer privately with counsel, and strive to
eliminate conditions inimical to the detainees.
In cities and municipalities to be specified by
the Supreme Court, the municipal trial judges or
municipal circuit trial judges shall conduct monthly
personal inspections of the municipal jails in their
respective municipalities and submit a report to the
executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction therein.
A monthly report of such visitation shall be
submitted by the executive judges to the Court
Administrator which shall state the total number of
detainees, the names of those held for more than thirty
(30) days, the duration of detention, the crime
charged, the status of the case, the cause for detention,
and other pertinent information.
Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack of
or irregular preliminary investigation
 An application for or admission to bail shall
not bar the accused from challenging the validity of his
arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefor, or
from assailing the regularity or questioning the
absence of a preliminary investigation of the charge
against him, provided that he raises them before
entering his plea. The court shall resolve the matter as
early as practicable, but not later than the start of the
trial of the case.
RULE 115 - RIGHTS OF ACCUSED
Rights of accused at the trial
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall
be entitled to the following rights:
(a) To be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him.
(c) To be present and defend in person and by
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The
accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial
pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless
his presence is specifically ordered by the court for
purposes of identification. The absence of the accused
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had
notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be
present thereat. When an accused under custody
escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right
to be present on all subsequent trial dates until
custody over him is regained. Upon motion, the
accused may be allowed to defend himself in person
when it sufficiently appears to the court that he can
properly protect his rights without the assistance of
counsel.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
subject to cross-examination on matters covered by
direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a
witness against himself.
(f) To confront and cross-examine the
witnesses against him at the trial. Either party may
utilize as part of its evidence the testimony of a
witness who is deceased, out of or can not with due
diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable, or
otherwise unable to testify, given in another case or
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the
same parties and subject matter, the adverse party
having the opportunity to cross-examine him.
www.rkmfiles.net111
(g) To have compulsory, process issued to
secure the attendance of witnesses and production of
other evidence in his behalf.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the
manner prescribed by law.
RULE 116 - ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA
Arraignment and plea; how made
(a) The accused must be arraigned before the
court where the complaint or information was filed or
assigned for trial. The arraignment shall be made in
open court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the
accused with a copy of the complaint or information,
reading the same in the language or dialect known to
him, and asking him whether he pleads guilty or not
guilty. The prosecution may call at the trial witnesses
other than those named in the complaint or
information.
(b) The accused must be present at the
arraignment and must personally enter his plea. both
arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but
failure to do so shall not affect the validity of the
proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or
makes a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty shall be
entered for him. (1a)
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but
present exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be
deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be
entered for him.
(e) When the accused is under preventive
detention, his case shall be raffled and its records
transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled
within three (30 days from the filing of the
information r complaint. The pre-trial conference of
his case shall be held within ten (10) days after
arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be
required to appear at the arraignment for purposes of
plea bargaining determination of civil liability, and
other matters requiring his presence. In case of failure
of the offended party to appear despite due notice, the
court may allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to
a lesser offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged with the conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone. (cir. 1-89)
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by
special law or Supreme Court circular, the
arraignment shall be held within thirty (30) days from
the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a
motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other
causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall
be excluded in computing the period. (sec. 2, cir.38-
98)
Plea of guilty to a lesser offense
At arraignment, the accused, with the consent
of the offended party and the prosecutor, may be
allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser
offense which is necessarily included in the offense
charge. After arraignment but before trial, the accused
by still be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser offense
after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No
amendment of the complaint or information is
necessary. (sec. 4, circ. 38-98)
Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of
evidence
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital
offense, the court shall conduct a searching inquiry
into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the
prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree
of culpability. The accused may present evidence in his
behalf.
Plea of guilty to non-capital offense; reception of
evidence, discretionary
When the accused pleads guilty to a non-
capital offense, the court may receive evidence from
the parties to determine the penalty to be imposed.
Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty
At any time before the judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may permit an improvident
plea of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a
plea of not guilty.
Duty of court to inform accused of his right to
counsel
Before arraignment, the court shall inform the
accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he
desires to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to
defend himself in person or has employed counsel of
his choice, the court must assign a counsel de oficto to
defend him.
Appointment of counsel de oficio
www.rkmfiles.net112
The court, considering the gravity of the
offense and the difficulty of the questions that may
arise, shall appoint as counsel de oficio such members
of the bar in good standing who, by reason of their
experience and ability, can competently defend the
accused. But in localities where such members of the
bar are not available, the court may appoint any
person resident of the province and good repute for
probity and ability, to defend the accused.
Time for counsel de oficio to prepare for
arraignment
Whenever counsel de oficio is appointed by
the court to defend the accused at the arraignment, he
shall be given a reasonable time to consult with the
accused as to his plea before proceeding with the
arraignment.
Bill of particulars
The accused may, before arraignment, move
for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead
and prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the
alleged defects of the complaint or information and
the details desired.
Production or inspection of material evidence in
possession of prosecution\
Upon motion of the accused showing good
cause and with notice to the parties, the court, in order
to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration, may
order the prosecution to produce and permit the
inspection and copying or photographing of any
written statement given by the complainant and other
witness in any investigation of the offense conducted
by the prosecution or other investigating
photographs, objects, or tangible things not otherwise
privileged, which constitute or contain evidence
material to any matter involved in the case and which
are in the possession or under the control of the
prosecution, police, or other law investigating
agencies.
Suspension of arraignment
Upon motion by the proper party, the
arraignment shall be suspended in the following
cases:
 (a) The accused appears to be suffering from
an unsound mental condition which effectively
renders him unable to fully understand the charge
against him and to plead intelligently thereto. In such
case, the court shall order his mental examination and,
if necessary, his confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of
the prosecutor is pending at either the Department of
Justice, or the Office of the President; provided that the
period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days
counted from the filing of the petition with the
reviewing office.
RULE 117 - MOTION TO QUASH
Time to move to quash
At any time before entering his plea, the
accused may moved to quash the complaint or
information.
Form and contents
The motion to quash shall be in writing, signed
by the accused or his counsel and shall distinctly
specify its factual and legal grounds. The court shall
consider no ground other than those stated in the
motion, except lack of jurisdiction over the offense
charged.
Grounds
The accused may move to quash the complaint
or information on any of the following grounds:
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an
offense;
(b) That the court trying the case has no
jurisdiction over the offense charged;
(c) That the court trying the case has no
jurisdiction over the person of the
accused;
(d) That the officer who filed the information
had no authority to do so;
(e) That it does not conform substantially to
the prescribed form;
(f) That more than one offense is charged
except when a single punishment for
various offenses is prescribed by law;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has
been extinguished;
www.rkmfiles.net113
(h) That it contains averments which, if true,
would constitute a legal excuse of
justification; and
(i) That the accused has been previously
convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was
dismissed or otherwise terminated
without his express consent.
Amendment of complaint or information
If the motion to quash is based on an alleged
defect of the complaint or information which can be
cured by amendment, the court shall order that an
amendment be made.
If it is based on the ground that the facts
charged do not constitute an offense, the prosecution
shall be given by the court an opportunity to correct
the defect by amendment. The motion shall be granted
if the prosecution fails to make the amendment, or the
complaint or information still suffers from the same
defect despite the amendment.
Effect of sustaining the motion to quash
If the motion to quash is sustained, the court
may order that another complaint or information be
filed except as provided in section 6 of this rule. If the
order is made, the accused, if in custody, shall not be
discharged unless admitted to bail. If no order is made
or if having been made, no new information is filed
within the time specified in the order or within such
further time as the court may allow for good cause, the
accused, if in custody, shall be discharged unless he is
also in custody for another charge.
Order sustaining the motion to quash not a bar to
another prosecution; exception
An order sustaining the motion to quash is not
a bar to another prosecution for the same offense
unless the motion was based on the grounds specified
in section 3 (g) and (i) of this Rule.
Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy
When an accused has been convicted or
acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent by
a court of competent jurisdiction, upon a valid
complaint or information or other formal charge
sufficient in form and substance to sustain a
conviction and after the accused had pleaded to the
charge, the conviction or acquittal of the accused or
the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another
prosecution for the offense charged, or for any
attempt to commit the or frustration thereof, or for
any offense which necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the offense charged in the
former complaint or information under any of the
following instances:
(a) the graver offense developed due to
supervening facts arising from the act or
omission constituting the former charge;
(b) the facts constituting the graver charge
became known or were discovered by
after a plea was entered in the former
complaint information; or
(c) the plea of guilty to the lesser offense was
made without the consent of the executor
and of the offended party except as
provided in section 1(f) of Rule 116.
In any of the foregoing cases, where the
accused satisfies or serves in whole or part of
judgment, be shall be credited with the same in the
event of conviction of the graver offense.
Provisional Dismissal
A case shall not be provisionally dismissed
except with the express consent of the accused and
with notice to the offended party.
The provisional dismissal of offenses
punishable by imprisonment not proceeding six (6)
years or a fine of any amount, or both, shall become
permanent one (1) year after issuance of the order
without the case having been revived. With respect to
offenses punishable by imprisonment of more than six
(6) years, their provisional dismissal shall become
permanent two (2) years after issuance of the order
without case having been revived.
Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground
therefore
The failure of the accused to assert any ground
of a motion to quash before he pleads to the complaint
or information, either because he did not file a motion
to quash or failed to allege the same motion, shall be
deemed a waiver of any objections used on the
grounds provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and
(i) of this Rule.
www.rkmfiles.net114
RULE 118 - PRE-TRIAL
Pre-trail; mandatory in criminal cases
In all criminal cases recognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, Regional Court, Metropolitan Trail
Court, Municipal Trail Court in Cities, Municipal Trail
Court and Municipal Circuit Trail Court, the court
shall, after arraignment and within thirty (30) days
from the date be court acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the accused, unless a shorter period is
provided for in special laws or circulars of the
Supreme Court, order a pre-trail conference to
consider the following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of
the parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of
evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the
accused admits the charge but interposes
a lawful defense; and
(f) such matter as well as promote a fair and
expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of
case. (Sec. 2 and 3, cir. 38-98)
Pre-trial agreement
All agreements or admissions made or entered
during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in
writing and signed by the accused and counsel,
otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.
The agreements covering the matters referred to in
section 1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court.
(sec. 4, cir. 38-98)
Non-appearance at pre-trial conference
If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor
does not appear at the pre-trial conference and does
not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of
cooperation, the court may impose proper sanction of
penalties. (sec.5, cir, 38-98)
Pre-trial order
After the pre-trial conference, the court shall
issue an order reciting the actions taken, the facts
stipulated, and evidence marked. Such order-shall
bind the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed
of, and control the course of the action during the trial
to matters not disposed of, and control the course of
the action during the trail, unless modified by the
court to prevent manifest injustice.
RULE 119 - TRIAL
Time to prepare for trial
After a plea of not guilty is entered, the
accused shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare
for trial. The trial shall commence within thirty (30)
days from receipt of the pre-trial order. (sec. 6, cir. 38-
98)
Continuous trial until terminated; postponements
Trial once commenced shall continue from day
to day as far as practicable until terminated. It may be
postponed for a reasonable period of time for good
cause.
The court shall, after consultation with the
prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for
continuous trial on a weekly or other shot-item trial
calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure
speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period
exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the fi4rst
day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the
Supreme Court. (sec. 8, cir.38-98).
The time limitations provided under this
section and the preceding section shall not apply
where special laws of the Supreme Court provide for a
shorter period of trial.
Exclusions
The following periods of delay shall be exclude
in computing the time within which trial must
commence:
(a) Any period of delay resulting from other
proceedings concerning the accused, including but not
limited to the following:
• Delay resulting from an examination of the
physical and mental condition of the accused;
• Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to
other criminal charges against the accused;
• Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies
against interlocutory orders;
www.rkmfiles.net115
• Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings;
provided, that the delay does not exceed thirty
(30) days;
• Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or
proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or
transfer from other courts;
• Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a
prejudicial question; and
• Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to
exceed thirty (30) days, during which any
proceeding concerning the accused is actually
under advisement.
(b) Any period of delay resulting from the
absence or unavailability of an essential witness.
For purposes of this subparagraph, an
essential witness shall be considered absent when his
whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot
be determined by due diligence. He shall be
considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts
are known but his presence for trial cannot be
obtained by due diligence.
(c) Any period delay resulting from the mental
incompetence or physical inability of the accused to
stand trial.
(d) If the information is dismissed upon
motion of the prosecution and thereafter to charge is
filed against the accused for the same offense, any
period of delay from the date the charge was
dismissed to the date the time limitation would
commence to run as to the subsequent charge had
there been no previous charge.
(e) A reasonable period of delay when the
accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over
whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to
whom the time for trial ha not run and no motion for
separate trial has been granted.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a
continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or on
motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the
prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on
the basis of its findings set forth in the order that the
ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh
the best interest of the public and the accused in a
speedy trial. (sec. 9, cir. 38-98)
Factors for granting continuance
 The following factors, among others, shall be
considered by a court in determining whether to grant
a continuance under section 3 (f) of this Rule.
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a
continuance in the proceeding would likely make a
continuation of such proceeding impossible or result
in a miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole
is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number
of accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it
is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation
within the periods of time establish therein.
In addition, no continuance under section 3 (f)
of this Rule shall be granted because of congestion of
the court’s calendar or lack of diligent preparation or
failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the
prosecutor. (sec. 10, cir. 38-98)
Time limit following an order for new trial
If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to
an order for a new trial, the trial shall commence
within thirty (30) days from notice of the order,
provided that if the period becomes impractical due to
unavailability of witnesses and other factors, the court
may extend it but not to exceed one hundred eighty
(180) days from notice of said order of a new trial.
(sec. 1, cir. 38-98)
Extended time limit
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1
(g) Rule 116 and the preceding section 1, for the first
twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity
on September 15, 1998, the time limit with respect to
the period from arraignment to trial imposed by said
provision shall be one hundred eighty (180) days. for
the second twelve-month period, the time limit shall
be one hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third
twelve-month period, the time limit shall be eighty
(80) days. (sec. 7, cir. 38-98)
Public attorney’s duties where accused is
imprisoned
If the public attorney assigned to defend a
person charged with a crime knows that the latter is
preventively detained, either because he is charged
with a bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or,
is charge with a non-bailable crime, or, is serving a
term of imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall
be his duty to do the following:
www.rkmfiles.net116
(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the
presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a notice to
served on the person having custody of the prisoner
requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of his
right to demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian
of the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of
the charge and of his right to demand trial. If at
anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian
that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice
to that effect to be sent promptly to the public
attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public
attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of
the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the custodian of the prisoner
receives from the public attorney a properly
supported request for the availability of the prisoner
for purposes of trial, the prisoner shall be made
available accordingly. (sec. 12, cir. 38-98)
Sanctions
In any case in which private counsel for the
accused, the public attorney, or the prosecutor:
(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial
without disclosing that a necessary witness would be
unavailable for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he
knows is totally frivolous and without merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of
obtaining continuance which he knows to be false and
which is material tot he granting of a continuance; or
(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without
justification consistent with the provisions hereof, the
curt may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor,
as follows:
(1) By imposing on a counsel privately
retained in connection with the
defense of an accused, a fine not
exceeding twenty thousand pesos
(20,000.00);
(2) By imposing on any appointed counsel
de oficio, public attorney, or
prosecutor a fine not exceeding five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3) By denying any defense counsel or
prosecutor the right to practice before
the court trying the case for a period
not exceeding thirty (30) days. The
punishment provided for by this
section shall be without prejudice to
 any appropriate criminal action or
other sanction authorized under these
rules. (sec. 13, cir. 38-98)
Remedy where accused is not brought to trial
within the time limit
If the accused is not brought to trial within the
time limit required by Section 1 (g), Rule 116 and
Section 1, as extended by Section 7 of this rule, the
information may be dismissed on motion of the
accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy
trial. The accused shall have the burden of proving the
motion but t he prosecution shall have the burden of
going forward with the evidence to establish the
exclusion of time under section 3 of this Rule. The
dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double
jeopardy.
Failure of the accused to move for dismissal
prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right to
dismiss under this section. (sec. 14, cir. 38-98)
Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on
speedy in the Constitution
No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule
implementing the same shall be interpreted as a bar to
any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial
guaranteed by section 14 (2), article III, of the 1987
Constitution. (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)
Order of trial
The trial shall proceed in the following order:
(a) The prosecution shall present evidence to
prove the charge and, in ht proper case, the civil
liability.
(b) The accused may present evidence to
prove his defense and damages if any, arising from the
issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
(c) The prosecution and the defense may, in
that order, present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal evidence
unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits
them to present additional evidence bearing upon the
main issue.
(d) Upon admission of the evidence of the
parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for
decision unless the court directs them to argue orally
or to submit written memoranda.
(e) When the accused admits the act or
omission charged in the complaint or information but
interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be
modified
www.rkmfiles.net117
Application for examination of witness for accused
before trial
When the accused has been held to answer for
an offense, he may, upon motion with notice to the
other parties, have witnesses conditionally examined
in his behalf. The motion shall state: (a) the name and
residence of the witness; (b) the substance of his
testimony; and (c) that the witness is sick or infirm as
to afford reasonable ground for believing that he will
not be able to attend the trial, or resides more than one
hundred (100) kilometers from the place of trial and
has no means to attend the same, or that other similar
circumstances exist that would make him unavailable
or prevent him from attending the trial. The motion
shall be supported by an affidavit of the accused and
such other evidence as the court may require.
Examination of defense witness; how made
If the court is satisfied that the examination f a
witness for the accused is necessary, an order shall be
made directing that the witness be examined at a
specific date, time and place and that a copy of the
order be served on the prosecutor at least three (3)
days before the schedule examination. the
examination shall be taken before a judge, or, if not
practicable, a member of the Bar in good standing so
designated by the judge in the order, or if the order be
made by a court of superior jurisdiction, before an
inferior court to be designated therein. The
examination shall proceed notwithstanding the
absence of the prosecutor provided he was duly
notified of the hearing. A written record of the
testimony shall be taken.
Bail to secure appearance of material witness
When the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath
that a material witness will not testify when required,
it may, upon motion of either party, order the witness
to post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper.
Upon refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him
to prison until he complies or is legally discharged
after his testimony has been taken.
Examination of witness for the prosecution
When it satisfactorily appears that a witness
for the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear at
the trial as directed by the court, or has to leave the
Philippines with no definite date of returning, he may
forthwith be conditionally examined before the court
where the case is pending. Such examination, in the
presence of the accused, or in his absence after
reasonable notice to attend the examination has been
served on him, shall be conducted in the same manner
as an examination at the trial. Failure or refusal of the
accused to attend the examination after notice shall be
considered a waiver. The statement taken may be
admitted in behalf or against the accused.
Trial of several accused
When two or more accused are jointly charged
with an offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the
court, in its discretion and upon motion of the
prosecutor or any accused, orders separate trial for
one or more accused.
Discharge of accused to be state witness
When two or more persons are jointly charged
with the commission of any offense, upon motion of
the prosecution before resting its case, the court may
direct one or more of the accused to be discharged
with their consent so that they may be witnesses for
the state when, after requiring the prosecution to
present evidence and the sworn statement of each
proposed state witness at a hearing in support of the
discharge, the court is satisfied that:
(a) There is absolute necessity for the
testimony of the accused whose discharge is
requested;
(b) There is no other direct evidence available
for the proper prosecution of the offense committed,
except the testimony of said accused;
(c) The testimony of said accused can be
substantially corroborated in its material points;
(d) Said accused does not appear to be the
most guilty; and
(e) Said accused has not at any time been
convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge
shall automatically form part of the trial. If the court
denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state
witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in
evidence.
Discharge of accused operates as acquittal
The order indicated in the preceding section
shall amount to an acquittal of the discharge accused
and shall be a bar to future prosecution for the same
offense, unless the accused fails or refuses to testify
against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn
statement constituting the basis for his discharge.
www.rkmfiles.net118
When mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense
When it becomes manifest at any time before
judgment that a mistake has been made in charging
the proper offense and the accused cannot be
convicted of the offense charged or any other offense
necessarily included therein, the accused shall not be
discharged if there appears good cause to detain him.
In such case, the court shall upon the filing of the
proper information.
Appointment of acting prosecutor
When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is
disqualified to act due to any of the grounds stated in
section 1 of Rule 137 of for any other reason, the judge
or the prosecutor shall communicate with the
Secretary of Justice in order that the latter may
appoint an acting prosecutor.
Exclusion of the public
The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the
pubic from the courtroom if the evidence to be
produced during the trial is offensive to decency or
public morals. He may also, on motion of the accused,
exclude the public from the trial except court
personnel and the counsel of the parties.
Demurrer to evidence
After the prosecution rests its case, the court
may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency
of evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the
prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon
demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or
without leave of court.
If the court denies the demurrer to evidence
filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce
evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to
evidence is filed without leave of court, the court
waives the right to present evidence and submits the
case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the
prosecution.
The motion for leave of court to file demurrer
to evidence shall specifically state its grounds and
shall be filed within a non-extendible period of five (5)
days after the prosecution rests its case. The
prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-
extendible period of five (5) days from its receipts.
If leave of court is granted, the accused shall
file the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible
period of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution
may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar
period from its receipts.
The order denying the motion for leave of
court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer
itself shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari
before judgment.
Reopening
At anytime before finality of the judgment of
conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon
motion, with hearing in either case, reopens the
proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The
proceeding shall be terminated within thirty (30) days
from the order granting it.
RULE 120 - JUDGMENT
Judgment: definition and form
Judgment is the adjudication by the court that
the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense
charged and the imposition on him of the proper
penalty and civil liability, if any. It must be written in
the official language, personally and directly prepared
by the judge and signed by him an shall contain clearly
and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law
upon which it is based.
Content of the judgment
If the judgment is of conviction, it shall state
(1) the legal qualification of the offense constituted by
the acts committed by the accused and the aggravating
or mitigating circumstances which attended its
commission; (2) the participation of the accused in the
offense, whether as principal, accomplice, or
accessory after the fact; (3) the penalty imposed upon
the accused; and (4) the civil liability or damages
caused by his wrongful act or omission to be
recovered from the accused by the offended party, if
there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil
liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or
waived.
In case the judgment is of acquittal, it shall
state whether the evidence of the prosecution
absolutely failed to prove the guilt for the accused or
merely failed to prove his guilty beyond reasonable
doubt. In either case, the judgment shall determine if
the act or omission from which the civil liability might
arise did not exist.
www.rkmfiles.net119
Judgment for two or more offense
When two or more offenses are charged in a
single complaint or information but the accused fails
to object to it before trial, the court may convict him of
as many offenses as are charged and proved, and
impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out
separately the findings of fact and law in each offense.
Judgment in case of variance between allegation
and proof
Where there is variance between the offense
charged in the complaint or information and that
proved, and the offense as charged is included in or
necessarily includes the offense proved, the accused
shall be convicted of the offense proved which is
included in the offense charged, or of the offense
charged which is included in the offense proved.
When an offense includes or is included in anther
An offense charged necessarily includes the
offense proved when some of the essential elements
or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the
complaint or information, constitute the latter. And an
offense charged is necessarily included in the offense
proved, when the essential ingredients of the former
constitute or form part of those constituting the latter.
Promulgation of judgment
The judgment is promulgated by reading it in
the presence of the accused and any judge of the court
in which it was rendered. However, if the conviction is
for a light offense, the judgment may be pronounced
in the presence of his counsel or representative. When
the judge is absent or outside the province or city, the
judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court.
If the accused is confined or detained in
another province or city, the judgment may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional
Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of
confinement or detention upon request of the court
which rendered the judgment. The court
promulgating the judgment shall have authority to
accept the notice of appeal and to approve the bail
bond pending appeal; provided, that if the decision of
the trial court convicting the accused changed the
nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the
application for bail can only be filed and resolved by
the appellate court.
The proper clerk of court shall give notice to
the accused personally or through his bondsman or
warden and counsel, requiring him to be present at the
promulgation of the decision. If the accused was tried
in absentia because he jumped bail or escaped from
prison, the notice to him shall be served at his last
known address.
In case the accused fails to appear at the
scheduled date of promulgation of judgment despite
notice, the promulgation shall be made by recording
the judgment in the criminal docket and serving him a
copy thereof at his last known address or thru counsel.
If the judgment is for conviction and the failure
of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause,
he shall lose the remedies available in these rules
against the judgment and the court shall order his
arrest. Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation f
judgment, however, the accused may surrender and
file a motion for leave of court to avail of these
remedies. He shall state the reasons for his absence at
the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his
absence was for a justifiable cause, he shall be allowed
to avail of said remedies within fifteen (15) days from
notice.
Modification of judgment
A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of
the accused, be modified or set aside before it becomes
final or before appeal is perfected. Except where the
death penalty is imposed, a judgment becomes final
after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal,
or when the sentence has been partially or totally
satisfied or served, or when the accused has waived in
writing his right to appeal, or has applied for
probation.
Entry of judgment
After a judgment has become final, it shall be
entered in accordance with Rule 36.
Exiting provisions governing suspension of
sentence, probation and parole not affected by this
Rule
Nothing in this Rule shall affect any existing
provisions in the laws governing suspension of
sentence, probation or parole.
RULE 121 - NEW TIAL OR RECONSIDERATION
New trial or reconsideration
At any time before a judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may, on motion of the accused
www.rkmfiles.net120
or at its own instance but with the consent of the
accused, grant new trial or reconsideration.
Grounds for a new trial
The court shall grant a new trial on any of the
following grounds:
(a) That errors of law or irregularities
prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused
have been committed during the trial;
(b) That new and material evidence has been
discovered which the accused could not with
reasonable diligence have discovered and produce at
the trial and which if introduce and admitted would
probably change the judgment. (2a)
Ground for reconsideration
The court shall grand consideration on the
ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment, which
requires no further proceedings.
Form of motion and notice to the prosecutor
The motion for new trial or reconsideration
shall be in writing and shall state the grounds on
which it is based. If based on newly-discovered
evidence, the motion must be supported by affidavits
copies of documents which are proposed to be
introduced in evidence. Notice of the motion for new
trial or reconsideration shall be given to the
prosecutor.
Hearing on motion
Where a motion for new trial calls for
resolution of any question of fact, the court may hear
evidence thereon by affidavits or otherwise.
Effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration
The effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration
are the following:
(a) When a new trial is granted on the ground
of errors of law or irregularities committed during the
trial, all the proceedings and evidence affected
thereby shall be set aside and taken anew. The court
may, in the interest of justice, allow the introduction
of additional evidence.
(b) When a new trial is granted on the ground
of newly-discovered, the evidence already adduced
shall stand and the newly-discovered and such other
evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice,
allow to be introduced shall be taken and considered
together with the evidence already in the record.
(c) In all cases, when the court grants new trial
or reconsideration, the original judgment shall be set
aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered
accordingly.
RULE 122 - APPEAL
Who may appeal?
Any party may appeal from a judgment or final
order, unless the accused will be placed in double
jeopardy.
Where to appeal?
The appeal may be taken as follows:
(a) To the Regional Trial Court, in cased
decided by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal
Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or
Municipal Circuit Trial Court;
(b) To the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme
Court in the proper cases provided by law, in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court; and
(d) To the Supreme Court, in cases decided by
the Court of Appeals.
How appeal is taken?
(a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or
to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the
Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal
with the court which rendered the judgment or final
order appealed from and by serving a copy thereof
upon the adverse party.
(b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of
its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review
under Rule 42.
(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases
where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court
is death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or
where a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses
committed on the same occasion or which arose out of
the same occurrence that gave rise to the more serious
offense for which the penalty of death, reclusion
perpetua, or life imprisonment is imposed, shall be by
filing a notice of appeal in accordance with paragraph
(a) of this section.
(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases
where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional
Trial Court. The same shall be automatically reviewed
www.rkmfiles.net121
by the Supreme Court as provided in section 10 of this
Rule.
(e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of
section 13, Rule 124, all other appeals to the Supreme
Court shall be by petition for review on certiorari
under Rule 45.
Publication of notice of appeal
If personal service of the copy of the notice of
appeal can not be made upon the adverse party or his
counsel, service may be done by registered mail or by
substituted service pursuant to sections 7 and 8 Rule
13.
Waiver of notice
The appellee may waive his right to a notice
that an appeal has been taken. The appellate court
may, in its discretion, entertain an appeal
notwithstanding failure to give such notice if the
interest of justice so require.
When appeal is to be taken?
An appeal must be taken within fifteen (15)
day from promulgation of the judgment or from notice
of the final order appealed from. This period for
perfecting an appeal shall be suspended from the time
a motion for new trial or reconsideration is filed until
notice of the order overruling the motion has been
served upon the accused or his counsel at which time
the balance of the period begins to run.
Transcribing and filing notes of stenographic
reporter upon appeal
When notice of appeal is filed by the accused,
the trial court shall direct the stenographic reporter to
transcribe his notes of the proceedings. When filed by
the People of the Philippines, the trial court shall
direct the stenographic reporter to transcribe such
portion of his notes of the proceedings as the court,
upon motion, shall specify in writing. The
stenographic reporter shall certify to the correctness
of the notes and the transcript thereof, which shall
consist of the original and four copies, and shall file
said original and four copies with the clerk without
unnecessary delay.
If death penalty is imposed, the stenographic
reporter shall, within thirty (30) days from
promulgation of the sentence, file with the clerk the
original and four copies of the duly certified transcript
of his notes of the proceedings. No extension of time
for filing of said transcript of stenographic notes shall
be granted except by the Supreme Court and only
justifiable grounds.
Transmission of papers to appellate court upon
appeal
Within five(5) days from the filing of the notice
of appeal, the clerk of the court with whom the notice
of appeal was filed must transmit to the clerk of court
of the appellate court the compete record of the case,
together with said notice. The original and three
copies of the transcript of stenographic notes,
together with the record, shall also be transmitted tot
he clerk of the appellate court without undue delay.
The other copy of the transcript shall remain in the
lower court.
Appeal to the Regional Trial Court
(a) Within five (5) days from perfection of the
appeal, the clerk of curt shall transmit the original
record to the appropriate Regional Trial Court.
(b) Upon receipt of the complete record of the
case, transcripts and exhibits, the clerk of court of the
Regional Trial Court shall notify the parties of such
fact.
(c) Within the fifteen (15) days from receipt of
said notice, the parties may submit memoranda or
briefs, or may be required by the Regional Trial Court
to do so. After the submission of such memoranda or
briefs, or upon the expiration of the period to file the
same, the Regional Trial Court shall decide the case on
the basis of the entire record of the case and of such
memoranda or briefs as may have been filed
Transmission of records in case of death penalty
In all cases where the death penalty is imposed
by the trial curt, the records shall be forwarded to the
Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment
within five (5) days after the fifteen (15) days
following the promulgation of the judgment of notice
of denial of a motion for new trial or reconsideration.
The transcript shall also be forwarded within ten (10)
days after the filing thereof by the stenographic
reporter.
Effect of appeal by any of several accused
(a) An appeal taken by one or more of several
accused shall not affect those who did not appeal,
except insofar as the judgment of the appellate court
is favorable and applicable to the latter.
www.rkmfiles.net122
(b) The appeal of the offended party from the
civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the
judgment or order appealed from.
(c) Upon perfection of the appeal, the
execution of the judgment or final order appealed
from shall be stayed as to the appealing party.
Withdrawal of appeal
Notwithstanding perfection of the appeal, the
Regional Trial Court, metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court,
or Municipal Circuit Trial Court, as the case may be,
may allow the appellant to withdraw his appeal before
the record has been forwarded by the clerk of court to
the proper appellate court as provided in section 8, in
which case the judgement shall become final. The
Regional Trial Court may also, in its discretion, allow
the appellant from the judgment of a Metropolitan
Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal
Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court to
withdraw his appeal, provided a motion to that effect
is filed before rendition of the judgment in the case on
appeal, in which case the judgment of the court of
origin shall become final and the case shall be
remanded to the latter court for execution of the
judgment.
Appointment of counsel de oficio for accused on
appeal
It shall be the duty of the clerk of court of the
trial court, upon filing of a notice of appeal, to
ascertain from the appellant, if confined in prison,
whether he desires the Regional Trial Court, Court of
Appeals or the Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de
oficio to defend him and to transmit with the record
on a form to be prepared by the clerk of court of the
appellate court, a certificate of compliance with this
duty and of the response of the appellant to his
inquiry.
RULE 123 - PROCEDURE IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL
COURTS
Uniform Procedure
The procedure to be observed in the
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall be the same as in
the Regional Trial Courts, except where a particular
provision applies only to either of said courts and in
criminal cases governed by the Revised Rule on
Summary Procedure.

RULE 124 - PROCEDURE IN THE CURT OF APPEALS
Uniform Procedure
In all criminal cases appealed to the Court of
Appeals, the party appealing the case shall be called
the “appellant” and the adverse party the “appellee,”
but the title of the case shall remain as it was in the
court of origin.
Appointment of counsel de oficio for the accused
If it appears from the record of the case as
transmitted that (a) the accused confined in prison,
(b) is without counsel de parte on appeal, or (c) has
signed the notice of appeal himself, the clerk of court
of the Court of Appeals shall designate a counsel de
oficio.
An appellant who is not confined in prison
may, upon request, be assigned a counsel de oficio
within ten (10) days from receipt of the notice to file
brief and he establishes his right thereto.
When brief for appellant to be filed
Within thirty (30) days from receipt by the
appellant or his counsel of the notice from the clerk of
court of the Court of Appeal that the evidence, oral and
documentary, is already attached to the record, the
appellant shall file seven (7) copies of his brief with
the clerk of court which shall accompanied by proof of
service of two (2) copies thereof upon the appellee.
When brief for appellee to be filed; reply brief of
the appellant
Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the
brief of the appellant, the appellee shall file seven (7)
copies of the brief of the appellee with the clerk of
court which shall be accompanied by proof of service
of two (2) copies thereof upon the appellant.
Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the
brief of the appellee, the appellant may file a reply
brief traversing matters raised in the former but not
covered in the brief of the appellant.
Extension of time for filing briefs
www.rkmfiles.net123
Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not
be allowed except for good and sufficient cause and
only if the motion for extension is filed before the
expiration of the time sought to be extended.
Form of briefs
Briefs shall be printed, encoded or typewritten
in double space on legal size good quality unglazed
paper, 30 mm. in length by 216 mm. in width.
Contents of brief
The briefs in criminal cases shall have the
same contents as provided in section 13 and 14 of Rule
44. A certified true copy of the decision or final order
appealed from shall be appended to the brief of the
appellant. (7a)
Dismissal of appeal for abandonment of failure to
prosecute
The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the
appellee or motu proprio and with notice to the
appellant in either case, dismiss the appeal if the
appellant fails to file his brief within the time
prescribed by this Rule, except where the appellant is
represented by a counsel de oficio.
The Court of Appeals may also upon motion of
the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the
appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps,
bail of flees to a foreign country during the pendency
of the appeal.
Prompt disposition of appeals
Appeals of accused who are under detention
shall be given precedence in their disposition over
other appeals. The Court of Appeals shall hear and
decide the appeal at the earliest practicable time with
due regard to the rights of the parties. The accused
need not be present in court during the hearing of the
appeal.
Judgment not to be reversed or modified except
for substantial error
No judgment shall be reversed or modified
unless the Court of Appeals, after and examination of
the record and of the evidence adduced by the parties,
is off the opinion that error was committed which
injuriously affected the substantial rights of the
appellant.
Scope of judgment
The Court of Appeals may reverse, affirm, or
modify the judgment and increase or reduce the
penalty imposed by the trial court, remand the case to
the Regional Trial Court for new trial or retrial, or
dismiss the case.
Power to receive evidence
The Court of Appeals shall have the power to
try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and
perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual
issues raised in cases (a) falling within its original
jurisdiction, (b) involving claims for damages arising
from provisional remedies, or (c) where the court
grants a new trial based only on the ground of newly –
discovered evidence.
Quorum of the court; certification or appeal of
cases to Supreme Court
Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall
constitute a quorum of the sessions of a division. The
unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division
shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a
judgment or final resolution, which shall be reached in
consultation before the writing of the opinion by a
member of the division. In the event that t he three (3
Justices can not reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding
Justice shall direct the raffle committee of the Court to
designate two (2) additional Justices to sit temporarily
with them, forming a special division of five (5)
members and the concurrence of a majority of such
division shall be necessary for the pronouncement of
a judgment or final resolution. The designation of such
additional Justices shall be made strictly by raffle and
rotation among all other Justices of the Court of
Appeals.
Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the
penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment should be imposed in a case, the court
after discussion of the evidence and the law involved
shall render judgment imposing the penalty of death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment as the
circumstances warrant. However, it shall refrain from
entering the judgment and forthwith certify the case
and elevate the entire record thereof to the Supreme
Court for review.
www.rkmfiles.net124
Motion for new trial
At any time after the appeal from the lower
court has been perfected and before the judgment of
the Court of Appeals convicting the appellant becomes
final, the latter may move for a new trial on the ground
of newly-discovered evidence material to his defense.
The motion shall conform to the provision of section
4, Rule 121. (14a)
Where new trial conducted
When a new trial is granted, the Court of
Appeals may conduct the hearing and receive
evidence as provided in section 12 of this Rule or refer
the trial to the court of origin.
Reconsideration
A motion for reconsideration shall be filed
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the decision or
final order of the Court of Appeals, with copies thereof
served upon the adverse party, setting forth the
grounds in support thereof. The mittimus shall be
stayed during the pendency of the motion for
reconsideration. No party shall be allowed a second
motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final
order.
Judgment transmitted and filed in trial court
When the entry of judgment of the Court of
Appeals is issued, a certified true copy of the judgment
shall be attached to the original record which shall be
remanded to the clerk of the court whom from which
the appeal was taken.
Application of certain rules in civil procedure to
criminal cases
The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to
56 relating to procedure in the Court of Appeals and in
the Supreme Court in original and appealed civil cases
shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are
applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of
this Rule.
RULE 125 - PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT
Uniform procedure
 Unless otherwise provided by the Constitution
or by law, the procedure in the Supreme Court in
Original and in appealed cases shall be the same as in
the Court of Appeal.
Review of decisions of the Court of Appeals
The procedure for the review by the Supreme
Court of decisions in criminal cases rendered by the
Court of Appeals shall be the same as in civil cases.
Decision if opinion is equally divided
When the Supreme Court en banc is equally
divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be
had on whether to acquit the appellant, the case shall
again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached
after re-deliberation, the judgment of conviction of the
lower court shall be reverse and the accused
acquitted.
RULE 126 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE
Search warrant defined – A search warrant is an
order in writing issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to peace
officer, commanding him to search for personal
property described therein and bring it before the
court.
Court where application for search warrant shall
be filed
An application for search warrant shall be filed
with the following:
1. Any court within whose territorial
jurisdiction a crime was committed.
2. For compelling reasons stated in the
application, any court within the judicial
region where the crime was committed if
the place of the commission of the crime is
known, or any court within the judicial
region where the warrant shall be enforce.
However, if the criminal action has already
been filed, the application shall only be made in the
court where the criminal action is pending.
Personal property to be seized
A search warrant may be issued for the search and
seizure of personal property:
(a) Subject of the offense;
www.rkmfiles.net125
(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds,
or fruits of the offense, or
(c) Used or intended to be used as the means
of committing an offense.
Requisites for issuing search warrant
A search warrant shall not issue except upon
probable cause in connection with one specific offense
to be determined personally by the judge after
examination under oath or affirmation of the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and
particularly describing the place to be searched and
the things to be seized which may be any wherein the
Philippine
Examination of complainant; record
The judgment, before issuing the warrant,
personally examine in the form of searching questions
and answers, in writing and under oath, the
complainant and the witnesses he may produce on
facts personally known to them and attach to the
record their sworn statements, together with the
affidavits submitted. (4a)
Issuance and form of search warrant
If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts
upon which the application is based or that there is
probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall issue
the warrant, which must be substantially in the form
prescribed by these Rules.
Right to bread door or window to effect search
The officer, if refused admittance to the place
of directed search after giving notice of his purpose
and authority, break open any outer or inner door or
window of a house or any part of a house or anything
therein to execute the warrant or liberate himself or
any person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully
detained therein.
Search of house, room, or premises to be made in
presence of two witnesses
No search of a house, room, or any other
premises shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family
or in the absence of the latter, two witnesses of
sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality.

Time making search
The warrant must direct that it be served in
the day time, unless the affidavit asserts that the
property is on the person or in the place ordered to be
search, in which case a direction may be inserted that
it be served at any time of the day or night.
Validity of search warrant
A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10)
days from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.
Receipt for the property seized
The officer seizing property under the warrant
must give a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful
occupant of the premises in whose presence the
search and seizure were made, or in the absence of
such occupant, must, in the presence of at least two
witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which
he found the seized property.
Delivery of property and inventory thereof to
court; return and proceedings thereon
(a) The officer must forthwith deliver the
property seized to the judge who issued the warrant,
together with a true inventory thereof duly verified
under oath.
(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search
warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain if the return
has been made, and if none, shall summon the person
to whom the warrant was issued and require him to
explain why no return was made. If the return has
been made, the judge shall ascertain whether section
11 of this Rule has been complied with and shall
require that the property seized be delivered to him.
The judge shall see to it that subsection (a) hereof has
been complied with.
(c) The return on the search warrant shall be
filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on
search warrants who shall enter therein the date of
the return, the result, and other actions of the judge.
A violation of this section shall constitute
contempt of court.
Search incident to lawful arrest
A person lawfully arrested may be searched
for dangerous weapon or anything which may have
www.rkmfiles.net126
been used or constitute proof in the commission of an
offense without a search warrant.
Motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress
evidence; where to file
A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to
suppress evidence obtained thereby may be filed in
and acted upon only by the court where the action has
been instituted. If no criminal action has been
instituted, the motion may be filed in and resolved by
the court that issued the search warrant. However, if
such court failed to resolve the motion and a criminal
case is subsequently filed in anther court, the motion
shall be resolved by the latter court.
RULE 127 - PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL
CASES
Availability of provisional remedies
The provisional remedies in civil actions,
insofar as they are applicable, may be availed of in
connection with the civil action deemed instituted
with the criminal action.
Attachment
When the civil action is properly instituted in
the criminal action as provided in Rule 111, the
offended party may have the property of the accused
attached as security for the satisfaction of any
judgment that may be recovered from the accused in
the following cases:
(a) When the accused is about to abscond
from the Philippines;
(b) When the criminal action is based on a
claim for money or property embezzled or
fraudulently misapplied or converted to the use of the
accused who is a public officer, officer of a corporation,
attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk, in the course of
his employment as such, or by any other person in a
fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of duty;
(c) When the accused has concealed,
removed, or disposed of his property, or is
about to do so, and
(d) When the accused resides outside the
Philippines.
…oΩo…

CRIMINAL EVIDENCE
WHAT IS EVIDENCE?
Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the
Revised Rules of Court, of ascertaining to a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact
(Sec. 1, Rule 128)
DEFINE THE FOLLOWING TERM:
Rule of Evidence - Material Evidence -
Relevant Evidence - Competent Evidence - Direct and
circumstantial evidence - Primary or best or
secondary evidence - Positive and negative evidence -
Export evidence - Cumulative evidence -
Corroborative evidence - Rebutting evidence - Prima
facie evidence - Conclusive evidence - Real evidence -
Testimonial evidence
Rule of Evidence – expresses the mode of
manner of proving the facts and circumstances upon
which the party relies to establish the fact in dispute
(Ruporto Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines. Vol.
V. citing 20 Am. Jur. 34, p. 1)
Material evidence – tends to prove the fact in
issue as that issue is determined by the rules of
substantive law and pleadings (Jaime R. Nuevas,
Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., citing Wigmore,
Student’s Ed., p. 530)
Relevant evidence – evidence is relevant
when it has a tendency in reason to establish the
probability or improbability if a fact in issue. (Vicente
Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the
Philippines, 1990 Ed., citing 1 Elliot on Evidence, p. 5)
Competent evidence – not excluded by law in
a particular case (Bautista vs. Aparece, (CA ), 51 O.G.
805 )
www.rkmfiles.net127
Direct and circumstantial evidence – direct
evidence proves the fact in dispute without the aid of
any inference or presumption., while circumstantial
evidence is the proof of a fact or facts from which,
taken either singly or collectively, the existence of the
particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a
necessary or probable consequence (5 Moran,
Remedial Law Review, p. 2)
Primary or best and secondary evidence –
primary or best evidence is that which the law regards
as affording the greatest certainty of the fact in
question, while secondary evidence is that which is
inferior to the primary evidence and is permitted by
the law only when the best evidence is not available (
5 Moran, op. cit., p. 3 )
Positive and negative evidence – evidence is
positive when the witness affirms that a fact did or did
not occur, and negative when the witness states he did
not see or know of the occurrence of a fact (People vs.
Ramos, L-30420, Sept. 22, 1971)
Expert evidence – given by one possessing in
regard to a particular subject or department of human
activity knowledge does not usually acquired by other
persons (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530)
Cumulative evidence – evidence of the same
kind and character as that already given, and tends to
prove the same proposition (Francisco, Ibid., citing
Gardner vs. Gardner, 2 Gray (Mass. 434), p. 5)
Corroborative evidence – additional
evidence of different kind and character, tending to
prove the same [point (Francisco, supra, citing Wyne
vs. Newman, 75, Va., 811, 817, p. 4)
Rebutting evidence – evidence given to repel,
counteract or disprove facts proved by the other side
( Nuevas, citing State vs. Silva, 21 Ida. 247, p. 531 )
Prima facie evidence – evidence which
suffices for the proof of a fact in issue until rebutted or
overcome by other evidence (Nuevas, citing Cal. Code
of Civil Procedure, Sec. 1833, p. 531)
Conclusive evidence – evidence which is
inconvertible (Nuevas, citing Wood vs. Chapin, 13 NY
509)
Real evidence – object (real) evidence is that
which is addressed to the senses of the tribunal, as
where objects are presented for the inspection of the
court ( Franciso, citing 1 Jones on Evidence, 2nd ed.,
Sec. 16, p. 9 0)
Testimonial evidence – testimony given to
the court of deposition by one who has observed that
to which he is testifying; or one who, though who has
not observed the facts, is nevertheless qualified to give
an opinion relative to the fact ( Francisco, citing
Gilbert, Law Summaries of Evidence, p. 9 )
WHERE ARE OUR RULES OF EVIDENCE FOUND?
Our entire rule s of evidence have been
incorporated in the Revised Rules of Court
DISTINGUISH EVIDENCE FROM PROOF
Evidence is the means of proof: proof is the
effect of evidence, the establishment of as fact by
evidence. Proof results as a probative effect of
evidence and is the conviction or persuasion of mind
resulting from a consideration of the evidence (Jaime
R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., p. 531)
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE RULES OR LAW OF
EVIDENCE?
The law of evidence deals with the rules to be
followed in presenting a matter of fact to a court for its
use in the judicial investigation. (1) it prescribes the
manner of presenting the evidence personally by one
who knows the thing, the subject to cross-
examination, or by means of a preposition (2) it fixes
the qualification and the privileges of witnesses, and
the mode of examining them (3) and chiefly, it
determines, as among probative matter, what classes
of things shall not be received (Ruperto Martin,
Rules of Courts in the Philippines, Vol. V, 1978 Ed., pp.
1-2)
WHAT IS THE OBJECT OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE?
The object of the law of evidence is to have a
specific inquiry of the truth to establish the truth by
the use of the perceptive and reasoning faculties
(Martin, supra., p. 2)
DISTINGUISH FACTUM PROBANDUM FROM
FACTUM PROBANS
Factum probandum is the ultimate fact or the
fact to be established; factum probans is the
evidentiary fact, or the fact by which the factum
www.rkmfiles.net128
probandum is to be established ( Nuevas, citing
Wigmore 5-9, p. 531-532 )
ARE THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THE SAME, IN
CRIMINAL AS WELL AS IN CIVIL CASES?
Yes, the rules of evidence shall be the same in
all courts and in all trials and hearings except as
otherwise provided by law or these rules (Sec. 2, Rule
128)
WHEN IS EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?
Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to
the issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules
(Sec. 3, Rule 128)
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY
OF EVIDENCE?
In order that the evidence may be admissible,
two requisites must concur, namely:
a. that is relevant to the issue; and
b. that is competent. That is, that it does not
belong to the class of evidence which is
excluded by the law or Rules of Evidence (
Vicente Francisco, The Revised Rules of
Court in the Philippines, Vol. VII, 1990 Ed.,
p. 19 )
WHEN IS EVIDENCE RELEVANT?
Evidence to be relevant must throw light upon,
or have logical relation to the facts in issues to be
established by one party or disproved by the other (
Ruperto G. Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines,
Vol. V., 1987 ed., citing 20 Am. Jur. 240, p. 9 )
WHEN IS EVIDENCE COMPETENT?
Evidence is competent when it is not excluded
by any of the rules of evidence such as when it is
hearsay or because it is not best evidence which is
within the power of a party to produce. Evidence must
not only be logically relevant, but must be of such
character as to be receivable in courts of justice (
Ruperto G. Martin, Ibid., citing Gilbert Law Summaries
on Evidence, p. 3 )
IS EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY OBTAINED ADMISSIBLE?
WHY?
 Evidence illegally obtains is admissible, the
reason being that exclusion of such kind of evidence is
the only practical way of enforcing the constitutional
right against unreasonable search and seizure (
Stonehill vs. Diokno, L-19550, June 19, 1967 )
WHAT ARE THE TWO AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY
WHICH UNDERLIE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF
THE LAW OF EVIDENCE?
The following: none but facts having rational
probative value are admissible, which is the axiom on
relevancy; and all facts having rational probative value
are admissible, unless some specific rule forbids,
which is the axiom on competency ( Nuevas, citing 1
Wigmore 289-95, p. 532 )
WHAT ARE THE THREE KINDS OR CLASSES OF
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE?
They are:
a. multiple admissibility;
b. conditional admissibility;
c. curative admissibility
WHAT IS MEANT BY MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY OF
EVIDENCE?
This means evidence which is [plainly relevant
and competent for two or more purposes. When this
happens, such evidence will be received if it satisfies
all the requirements prescribed by law in order that it
may be admissible for the purpose for which it is
presented, even if it does not satisfy the other
requisites for its admissibility for other purposes
(People vs. Yatco. 97 Phil. 940)
WHAT IS MEANT BY CONDITIONAL
ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE?
It means that the evidence which appear to be
material is admitted by the court subject to the
condition that its connection to other facts
subsequently to be proved will be established (People
vs. Yatco. Supra)
WHAT IS MEANT BY CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY OF
EVIDENCE?
This means that evidence, otherwise improper is
admitted to contradict improper evidence introduce
by the other party (Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law
reviewer, 1971 ed., A & J Publishing citing Wigmore
304-09, p. 533)
www.rkmfiles.net129
STATE THE RULE OF RELEVANCY OF EVIDENCE
Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in
issue as to induce belief in its existence or non-
existence. Evidence on collateral matter shall not be
allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable
degree to establish the probability or improbability of
the fact of issue (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE RULE ON
RELEVANCY?
The purpose of the rule on relevancy is to
restrict the field of inquiry to its proper scope and to
prevent the issues of becoming beclouded. It also aims
to prevent surprise on the litigant, or the subjection to
the party to the necessity of meeting the evidence that
is possibly prejudicial and of which he has no means
of anticipating (Martin, p. 15 citing 2 Jones on
Evidence, 2nd Ed., 1086, 1087)
WHAT ARE COLLATERAL MATTERS?
Collateral matters are those other than the facts
in issue and which are offered as a basis for inference
as to existence of the facts in issue (Sec. 4, Rule 129)
WHEN MAY THE COURT ALLOW EVIDENCE ON
COLLATERAL MATTERS?
Evidence on collateral matters shall not be
allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable
degree to establish the probability or improbability of
the fact in issue (Sec. 4, Rule 128 )
GIVE THE CONCEPT OF (1) PROSPECTANT
COLLATERAL MATTERS; (2) CONCOMITANT
COLLATERAL MATTERS; (3) RETROSPECTANT
COLLATERAL MATTERS
a. Prospectant collateral matters are those
preceding of the fact in issue but pointing
forward to it, like moral character, motive;
conspiracy, etc.
b. Concomitant collateral matters are matters
are those accompanying the fact in issue and
pointing to it, like alibi, or opportunity and
incompatibility;
c. Retrospectant collateral matters are those
succeeding the fact in issue but pointing
forward to it, like flight and concealment,
behavior of the accused upon being arrested;
finger prints or foot prints; articles left at the
 scene of the crime which may identify the
culprit ( Judge Ed Vincent S. Albano, Remedial
Law Reviewer 1st Ed. 1995, Rex Book Store, p.
888 citing 1 Wigmore 442-43 )
WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE?
The basis upon which all rules of evidence must
rest, if they are to rest upon reason, is their adaptation
to the successful development of the truth; and the
rule of evidence at one time though necessary to the
ascertainment of truth should yield to the experience
has clearly demonstrate the fallacy or unwisdom of
the old rule (Nuevas Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971
Ed., A & J Publishing, p. 534 citing Funk vs. U.S., 290
U.S. 391)
DEFINE JUDICIAL NOTICE
Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts
which judges may properly take and act on without
proof because they already know them. It means no
more than that the court will bring to its aid and
consider, without proof of the facts, its knowledge of
those matter of public concern which are known by all
well-informed persons ( Martin, Revised Rules of
Evidence, 1985 Ed., Premium Book Store, p. 3 citing
C.J.S. 509 )
WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF JUDICIAL NOTICE?
It displaces evidence since, as it stands for proof,
it fulfills the object which evidence is designed to fulfill
and make evidence unnecessary. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535
citing State vs. Main, 69 Conn 123)
STATE THE PRINCIPLE ON WHICH JUDICIAL
NOTICE IS BASED?
The doctrine of judicial notice is based upon
obvious reasons of convenience and expediency and
operated to have trouble, expense and time which
would be lost in establishing, in the ordinary way, facts
which do not admit of contradiction (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
535 citing 20 Am., Jur. 47; Tracy’s Handbook, 62 ed., p.
44)
WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE MANDATORY?
A court shall take judicial notice without the
introduction of evidence, of the existence and
territorial extent of states, their political history,
www.rkmfiles.net130
forms of government and symbols of nationality, the
law of nations, the admiralty and maritime courts of
the world and their seals, the political constitution and
history of the Philippines, the official acts of
legislative, executive and judicial departments of the
Philippines, the laws of nature, the measure of time
and the geographical divisions ( Sec. 1, Rule 129,
Revised Rules on Evidence )
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL NOTICE?
Generally speaking, matters of judicial notice have
three material requisites, namely:
d. the matter be common and general knowledge;
e. the matter must be well and authoritatively
settled and not doubtful or uncertain; and
f. the matter must be known to be within the
limits of jurisdiction of the court ( Martin, Ibid.
p. 35 citing 1 Jones on Evidence, 2nd ed., 643; 20
Am. Jur. 48 )
WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE DISCRETIONARY?
A court may take judicial notice of matters
which are of public knowledge, or are capable of
unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known
to judges because of their judicial functions (Sec. 2,
Rule 129 )
WHEN IS HEARING NECESSARY IN JUDICIAL
NOTICE?
During the trial, the court, on its own initiative,
or on request of the party, may announce its intention
to take judicial notice of any matter and allow the
parties to be heard thereon
After the trial, and before judgment or on
appeal, the proper court. On its own initiative or
request of a party, may take judicial notice of any
matter and allow the parties to be heard thereon if
such matter is decisive of a material issue in the case
(Sec. 3, Rule 129 )
IS THERE ANY NEED TO PROVE ADMISSIONS IN
THE COURT OF PROCEEDING IN COURT?
An admission, verbal or written, made by a
party in the course of the proceedings in the same
case, does not require proof ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 )
HOW MAY AN ADMISSION BE CONTRADICTED?
 Through admission may be contradicted only
by showing that it was made through palpable mistake
or that no such admission was made ( Sec. 4, Rule 129
) Documents as evidence consists of writings or
WHAT ARE THE OBJECTS AS EVIDENCE?
Objects as evidenced are those addressed to
the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to
the fact in issue, it mat be exhibited to, examined or
viewed by the court ( Sec. 1, Rule 130 )
WHAT IS THE PRO BATIVE VALUE OF OBJECT AS
EVIDENCE?
Proof which is addressed directly to the senses
of the court is a most convincing and satisfactory class
of proof (Martin, p. 57 citing 20 Am. Jur.) object
evidence is usually the most trustworthy type of
evidence (Martin, citing Gilbert Law Summaries on
Evidence, p. 1)
WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS TO THE
ADMISSIBILITY OF OBJECT EVIDENCE?
The following:
c. the evidence must e relevant; ( Sec. 1, Rule
130 )
d. indecent or improper objects should be
excluded, unless the same is necessary for
ascertaining the truth; ( Brown vs.
Swineford, 28 Am. Rep. 582 )
e. repulsive objects should also be excluded
if not absolutely necessary for the
administration of justice (Knowless vs.
Crampton, 55 Conn. 366 )
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OB OBJECT OF EVIDENCE?
It is the best and the highest form of proof
(Gentry vs. Mominiss, 3 Dana, Ky. 382 )
WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE
ADMISSION OF THE OBJECT EVIDENCE?
The object must be first identified, which
means that it must be shown, by independent
evidence, that the object offered is the thing in dispute
( People vs. Besold, 154 Cal. 363)
www.rkmfiles.net131
WHAT ARE DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE?
any material containing letters, words, numbers,
figures, symbols or other modes of written
expressions offered as proof of their contents ( Sec. 2,
Rule 130 )
STATE THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of
a document, no evidence shall be admissible other
than the original document itself (Sec. 3, Rule 130 )
THE RULE IS THAT, NO EVIDENCE SHALL BE
ADMISSIBLE OTHER THEN THE DOCUMENTS
ITSELF, ARE THERE EXCEPTION?
Yes, in the following cases:
a. when the original has been lost or destroy,
or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on
the part of the offeror;
b. when the original is in the custody or under
the control of the party against whom the evidence is
offered, and the latter fails to produce it after
reasonable notice;
c. when the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents which cannot be
examined in court without great loss of time and fact
sought to be established from them is only the general
result of the whole; and
d. when the original is a public record in the
custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public
office ( Sec. 3, Rule 130 )
WHAT ARE CONSIDERED ORIGINALS OF A
DOCUMENT?
The following:
a. the original of a document is one of the
contents of which are the subject of inquiry
b. when a document is in two or more copies
executed at or about the same time, with identical
contents, all such copies are equally regarded as
originals
c. when an entry is repeated in a regular
course of business, one being copied from another at
or near the time of transaction, all the entries are
likewise equally regarded as originals ( Sec. 4, Rule
130 )
HOW MAY THE ORIGINAL OF A LOST OR
DESTROYED DOCUMENT BE PROVED?

When the original document has been lost or
destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror,
upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause
of its unavailability without bad faith on its part, may
prove its contents by a copy or by a recital of its
contents in some authentic documents, or by the
testimony of witness in the order stated ( Sec. 5, Rule
130 )
WHEN MAY SECONDARY EVIDENCE BE SHOWN IF
THE ORIGINAL OF A DOCUMENT IS IN THE
POCESSION OF THE ADVERSE PARTY?
If the document is in the custody or under the
control of the adverse party he must have a reasonable
notice to produce it. If after such notice and after
satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to produce
that document secondary evidence may be presented
as in the case of its lost ( Sec. 6, Rule 130 )
HOW MAY A PUBLIC DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
When the original of a document is in the
custody of a public officer and is recorded in a public
office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy
issued by the public office in custody thereof ( Sec. 7,
Rule 130 )
IS THE PARTY WHO CALLS FOR THE PRODUCTION
OF A DOCUMENT BOUND TO OFFER IT IN
EVIDENCE?
No. A party who calls for the production of a
document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer
it as evidence
WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE?
Parol evidence literally means oral or verbal
testimony of a witness ( Ballentine’s Law Dict.., 2nd Ed.,
p. 932 ) However, in the application of the rule, it has
been extended to writings other than the complete
written agreement of the parties ( Phil. Sugar Estates
Dev. Co. vs. Gov’t of P.I. 247 U.S. 385; Woodhous vs.
Halili, 93 Phil. 526 ) Another term for parol evidence
is intrinsic evidence or evidence aliunde ( Uy Coque vs.
Sioca, 43 Phil. 405 )
STATE THE RULE WHEN THE TERMS OF
AGREEMENT ARE PUT TO WRITING
When the terms of an agreement have been
reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all
www.rkmfiles.net132
the terms agreed upon and there can be, between the
parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of
such terms other than the contents of the written
agreement ( Sec. 9, Rule 130 )
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MAY A PARTY
PRESENT EVIDENCE TO MODIFY, EXPLAIN OR ADD
TO THE TERMS OF THE WRITTEN EVIDENCE?
A party may present evidence to modify,
explain or add to the terms of the written agreement if
he puts in issue in his pleading;
a. an intrinsic ambiguity mistake, or
imperfection in the written agreement;
b. the failure of the written agreement to
express the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
c. the validity of written agreement;
d. the existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the
execution of the written agreement
The term “agreement “includes wills (Sec. 9,
Rule 130 )
HOW SHALL THE LANGUAGE OF WRITING BE
INTERPRETED?
The language of writing is to be interpreted
according to the legal meaning; it bears in the place of
execution, unless the parties intended otherwise (Sec.
10, Rule 130)
GIVE SOME RULES IN THE INTERPRETATION OF
DOCUMENTS
1. In the construction of an instrument
where there are several provision of
particulars, such a construction is, if
possible, to be adopted as will give effect
to all ( Sec. 11, Rule 130 )
2. In the construction of an instrument, the
intention of the parties is to be pursued
and when a general and a particular
provision are inconsistent, the latter is
paramount to the former. So a particular
intent will control a general one that is
inconsistent with it (Sec.12, Rule 130)
3. For the proper construction of an
instrument, the circumstances under
which it was made, including the situation
of the subject thereof and of the parties to
it, may be shown, so that the judge may be
place in the position of those whose
 language he is to interpret ( Sec. 13, Rule
130 )
4. The terms of writing are presumed to have
been used in their primary and general
acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
show that they have local, technical, or
otherwise peculiar signification, and were
so used and understood in the particular
instance, in which case the agreement
must be constructed accordingly ( Sec. 14,
Rule 130 )
5. When an instrument consists partly of
written words and partly of a printed
form, and the two are inconsistent, the
former controls the latter ( Sec. 15, Rule
130 )
6. When the character in which the
instruments are difficult to be deciphered,
or the language is not understood by the
court, the evidence of persons skilled in
deciphering the character, or who
understand the language is admissible to
declare the characters or the meaning of
the language ( Sec. 16, Rule 130 )
7. When the terms of an agreement have
been intended in a different sense by the
different parties to it, that sense is to
prevail against either party in which he
supposed the other understood it, and
when different constructions of a
provision are otherwise equally proper,
that is to be taken which the most
favorable to the party in whose favor the
provision was made ( Sec. 17, Rule 130 )
8. When an instrument is equally susceptible
of two interpretations, one in favor of
natural right and the other against it, the
former is to be adopted ( Sec. 18, Rule 130
) 539) If he testifies by signs, there must be an
9. An instrument may be construed
according to usage, in order to determine
its true character ( Sec. 19, Rule 130 )
WHO ARE COMPETENT TO BE WITNESSES?
All persons who can perceive, and perceiving
can make known their perception to others, may be
witnesses
Neither religious or political belief, interest in
the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be a
ground for disqualification.(Sec. 20, Rule 130 )
www.rkmfiles.net133
WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS BY REASON OF
MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY?
The following persons cannot be witnesses:
a. those whose mental condition, at the time of
there production for examination, is such that they are
incapable of intelligently making known their
perception to others; and
b. children whose mental maturity is such to
render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of relating
them truthfully ( sec. 21, rule 130 )
WHEN ARE INSANE PERSONS ICOMPETENT TO
TESTIFY?
What renders insane persons incompetent to
testify is their insanity “ at the time of their production
“ Insanity at the time of the occurrence on which as
witness is called upon to testify merely affects his
credibility, not his competency ( Moran, Remedial Law
Reviewer, p. 578 )
WHAT DEGREE OF INSANITY DISQUALIFIES A
PERSON FROM TESTIFYING?
A person is incompetent to testify if he is
insane to such degree as to be incapable of perceiving
and making known his perception to others. (Moran,
ibid., p. 578 citing State v. Meyers, 46 Nebr. 152)
IS A DEAF AND DUMB PERSON COMPETENT TO
TESTIFY?
A deaf and dumb person may testify in any
manner satisfactory to the court, as by writing or signs
through an interpreter. (People vs. De Leon 50 Phil.
interpreter with whom he may have an understanding
by such means (Territory vs. Duran 3 N.M. 189)
Otherwise he cannot testify (People vs. Bustos, 51 Phil.
385)
IS THE INTOXICATED PERSON COMPETENT TO
TESTIFY?
Drunkenness does not pursue disqualify a
witness from testifying. The port of Pennsylvania said
on this matter: “The point of inquiry is the moment of
examination. Is the witness then offered so besotted in
his understanding as to be deprived of his
intelligence? If he is, excluded him; even if he be a hard
drinker or habitual drunkard yet, if at that time, he is
sober, and possessed of a sound mind, he is to be
perceived. “(Gebhar vs. Shindle, 15 Serg. & R. (Pa 283)
IS A PERSON UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF OPIUM OR
OTHER DRUGS, COMPETENT TO TESTIFY?
If the witness at the time of his examination, is
so intoxicated by opium or other drugs that he is
deprived of his mental powers to such a degree as to
be capable of making known his perceptions, he is
disqualified from testifying. Otherwise, he is
competent
HOW CAN THE COMPETENCY OF AN INFANT BE
DETERMINED?
It is a doctrine laid down in modern decisions
that the test of an infant’s competency to testify is his
capacity to receive just impressions truly. If he
possesses the necessary mental capacity to that effect
and comprehends the obligation of an oath, he is a
competent witness (Moran, Ibid., p. 579 citing
Wheeler vs. U.S. 523)
WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY
REASON OF MARRIAGE?
During their marriage, neither the husband
nor the wife may testify for or against the other
without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a
civil case by one against the other or the latter’s direct
descendants or ascendants ( Sec. 22, Rule 130 )
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE
FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR
AGAINST THE OTHER?
The rule forbidding one spouse to testify or
against the other is based on principles which are
deemed important to preserve the marriage relation
as one of full confidence and affection, and that this is
regarded as more important in public welfare than
that the exigencies of the lawsuits should authorize
domestic peace to be disregarded for the sake of
ferreting out some fact within the knowledge of
strangers ( U.S. vs. Concepcion, 31 Phil 182 )
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE
OF FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR
AGAINST THE OTHER?
There are three:
www.rkmfiles.net134
a. that the spouse for or against whom the
testimony of the other is offered, is a party to the case;
b. that the spouse are legally married; and
c. that the case is not by one against the other
( Moran, Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 584 )
IN ONE CASE, THE DEFENDANT, WHO WAS
ACCUSEDOF KILLING HIS SON TESTIFIED IN HIS
OWN BEHALF DID NOT LIMIT HIMSELF TO
DENYING THAT HE WAS A KILLER BUT WENT
FURTHER AND IMPUTED THE CRIME TO HIS WIFE.
MAY THE WIFE BE ALLOWED TO TESTIFY IN
REBUTTAL AGAINST THE HUSBAND’S CONSENT?
Yes. In giving such testimony, the husband
must, in all fairness, be held to have intended all its
natural and necessary consequences. By his said act,
the husband – himself exercising the very right which
he would deny to his wife upon the ground of their
marital relations – must be taken to have waived all
objections to the latter’s testimony upon rebuttal,
even considering that such object would have been
available at the outset. (People vs. Francisco, 78 Phil
694)
WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY REASON
OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY?
Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or
persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against
an executor or administrator or other representative
of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound
mind, upon a claim or demand against the estate of
such deceased person or against such person of
unsound mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact
occurring before the death of such diseased person or
before such person became of unsound mind. (Sec. 23,
Rule 130)
WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS
LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?
The following persons cannot testify as to
matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
a. the husband or the wife, during or after the
marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication receive in
confidence by one from the other during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other, or in the
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the
other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants;
b. an attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made
by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the
course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk
be examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquiring in such capacity;
c. a person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery or obstetrics.
WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS
LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?
The following persons cannot testify as to
matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
a. The husband of the wife, during or after the
marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication received in
confidence by one from the other during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other, or in
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the
other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants;
b. An attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made
by client to him, or his advice given thereon in the
course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorney’s secretary, stenographer, or clerk
be examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity;
c. A person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or
treatment given by him or any information which he
may have acquired in attending such patient in a
professional capacity, which information was
necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and
which would blacken the reputation of the patient.
d. A minister or priest cannot, without the
consent of the person making the confession made to
or any advice given by him in his professional
character in the course of discipline enjoined by the
church to which the minister or priest belongs;
e. A public officer cannot be examined during
his term of office or afterwards, as to communications
made to him in official confidence, when the courts
www.rkmfiles.net135
find that the public interest would suffer by the
disclosure. (Sec., Rule 130)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE ON MARITAL
COMMUNICATIONS
a. The spouses are legally married;
b. The communication, oral or written, is
made during the marriage;.
c. The communication is confidential.
(Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559)
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVELEGE?
The reason is to preserve the peace of
families and maintain the sacred institution of
marriage. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 559 citing Mever svs.
State, 40 Fla. 216).
MAY THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED AND IF SO, HOW AND
BY WHOM?
The privilege is claimable by the spouse not
called as a witness, so that it is waivable only by him
or her; and it is waivable by any act of such spouse
which might be considered as an express or implied
consent to the disclosure of the communication.
(Neuvas, Ibid., citing People vs. Hayes, 140 N.Y. 484).
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF ATTORNEY
AND CLIENT
The following:
a) There must be a relation of attorney and
client;
b) There must be a communication by the
client to the attorney, or advice thereon
given by the latter to the former;
c) The communication or advice must have
been given confidentially;
d) The communication must have been made
in the course of professional employment.
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE?
The reason is to promote the confidence of the
people in attorneys for their work is essential to the
administration of justice and to encourage the
freedom of consultation of lawyers for clients.
(Nuevas, Ibid., p. 561 citing Fosters vs. Hall, 12 Pick 89;
Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353)
MAY THE LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON
COMMUNICATIOS MADE TO HIM AS TO A FUTURE
CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?
YES, because those communications are not
covered by the privilege for the reason that a lawyer
is not supposed to be consulted on a future crime or
wrong. (Matthews vs. Hoaglang, 21 Atl. 1054)
MAY A LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON
COMMUNICATIONS MADE TO HIM AS TO A PAST
CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?
NO, for those communications are protect by
the privilege. (Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353)
WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THIS PRIVILEGE?
Its duration is forever. (Carter vs. West, 93
Ky. 211)
GIVE THE EXCEPTION TO THE APPLICATION OF
THIS PRIVILEGE AND REASON THEREFOR.
This privilege does not apply to an action filed
by the lawyer against his client, and this exception is
for the protection of the lawyer. (Hunt vs. Blackburn,
128 U.S. 464)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF
PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT.
The following:
a) That the privilege is claimed in a civil case;
b) That the person against whom the
privilege is claimed, is one duly authorized
to practice medicine, surgery or
obstetrics;
c) That such person acquired the
information while he was attending the
patient in his professional capacity, which
information was necessary to enable him
to act in that capacity; and
d) That the information was confidential, and
if disclosed, shall tend to blacken the
character of the patient.
IS THE PRIVILEGE OF COMUNICATIONS BETWEEN
PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT APPLICABLE IN
CRIMINAL CASES?
In criminal cases, the privilege does not apply.
www.rkmfiles.net136
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE?
The reason is to facilitate and make safe, full
and confidential disclosure by patient to physician of
all symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their
subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication
on the witness stand. (Nuevas, Ibid., 562 citing Will of
Bruendl, 102 Wis. 47)
WHEN IS THERE PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT
OF A PHYSICIAN?
There is such employment of a physician when
he is called for the purpose of treatment, whether
curative, preventive or palliative. (Smart vs. Kansas
City, 208 Mo. 162) There is no professional
employment when a physician is consulted for an
unlawful purpose, like the procuring of an abortion.
(Nuevas, Ibd., p. 563 citing Seifert vs. State, 67 N.E.
100)
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THIS PRIVILEGE?
The privilege applies not only to the testimony
of the physician on the stand, but also to affidavits,
certificates, prescription, and hospital records. (Krap
vs. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 143 Mich. 309)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF
PRIEST AND PENITENT.
The following:
a) There must be a priest and a penitent;
b) There must be a confession;
c) The confession must have been given to
the priest in his professional capacity;
and
d) The confession must have been made in
the course of discipline enjoined by the
church to which the penitent belongs.
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRIVILEGE?
The reason is to preserve the sanctity of the
confessional institution. (People’s vs. Philipps, 1 West
L.J. 109)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF A
PUBLIC OFFICER.
The following:
 a) There must be a confidential official
communication;
b) The communication must have been
made to a public officer; and
c) The disclosure of the communication
would affect public interest.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THEPRIVILEGE?
The privilege is intended not for the protection
of public officers, but for the protection of public
interest. (Morn, Ibid., p. 599 citing Vogel vs. Gruaz,
110 U.S. 311)
WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THE PRIVILEGE?
The public officer is privileged not to testify to
official secrets, not only during his term of office, but
also afterwards. The law, therefore, intends that
secrecy be permanent. (Moran, Ibid., p. 509)
IS A DESCENDANT DISQUALIFIED TO TESTIFY, IN A
CRIMINAL CASE, AGAINST HIS PARENTS OR HIS
ASCENDANTS?
A descendant is not disqualified to testify
against his parents and descendants. The rules
provides that “No person may be compelled to testify
against his parents, other direct ascendants, children
or other direct descendants.” (Sec. 25, Rule 130)
WHAT IS AN ADMISSION?
The act, declaration or omission of a party as
to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him.
(Sec. 26, Rule 130)
AGAINST WHOM ARE ADMISSION RECEIVABLE?
Admissions are receivable against the party
who made them, but not in his favor, because then
they would be self-serving evidence (5 Moran,
Comments, p. 212, 1963 Ed.)
DEFINE SELF-SERVING EVIDENCE AND STATE IF IT
IS ADMISSIBLE. WHY?
Self-serving evidence is an admission
favorable to the party making it. (Lichauco vs. Atlantic
Gulf, etc., 84 Phil. 330). It is not admissible in evidence
because of its hearsay character, and for the further
reason that a man may be safely believed if he declares
against his own interest, but not if he advocates his
interest. (Lichauco vs. Atlantic Gulf, etc., supra).
www.rkmfiles.net137
CLASSIFY ADMISSIONS
Admissions are generally divided into two classes:
1. Judicial or those made on the record, or in
connection with the judicial proceeding in
which it is offered;
2. Extra-judicial, or those made elsewhere,
irrespective of time, place, or to whom
made. (Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, p. 209 citing The Chamberlayne
Trial Evidence, p. 42)
DISTINGUISH ADMISSION FROM A CONFESSION
Admission operates equally in both civil and
criminal cases and with the same effect, while
confession is an admission by the person accused of
having committed the act of which he is accused. “It
pertakes largely of the nature of an offer to
compromise with the criminal authorities. (Martin,
Ibid., p 210 citing The Chamberlayen Trial Evidence, p.
441).
STATE THE RULE ON OFFER OF COMPROMISE.
In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an
admission of any liability, and is not admissible in
evidence against the offeror.
In criminal cases, except those involving
quasi-offenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed
by law to be compromised, an offer of compromise by
the accused may be received in evidence as an
implied admission of guilt.
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an
unaccepted offer of a lea of guilty to a lesser offense, is
not admissible in evidence against the accused who
made the plea or offer. (Sec. 27, Rule 130).
GIVE THE EFFECTS OF AN OFFER TO
COMPROMISE.
It depends on whether the offer is made in a
civil or criminal case.
It made in a civil case, it is not an admission
that anything is due and, therefore, not admissible in
evidence. (Obejera vs. Iga Sy, 76 Phil. 580)
If made in a criminal case, it is an implied
admission of guilt and, therefore, admissible in
evidence, unless those involving quasi-
offense(criminal negligence) or those allowed by
laws to be compromised. (Sec. 27, Rule 130).
DEFINE COMPROMISE
A compromise is a contract whereby the
parties, by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a
litigation or put an end tone already commenced. (Art.
2028, Civil Code of the Philippines)
WHAT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER OF COMPROMISE?
It is often difficult to determine in a particular
case what amounts to an ordinary admission and what
constitutes an offer of compromise. The intention of
the parties must be the guide in each case. If the
proposal is tentative, and any statement made in
connection with it is hypothetical – if the offer was
made to “buy peace” and in contemplation of mutual
concessions, it is as to such point a mere offer of
compromise. On the other hand, if the intention is
apparently a liability recognized as such, the proposal
is an ordinary admission. (Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, 1985 Ed., p. 220 citing 31- A C.J.S. 728-729)
STATE THE RULE OF RES INTER ALIOS ACTA AND
THE EXCEPTIONS.
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by
an act, declaration, or omission of another (Sec. 28,
Rule 130) except when between the party making the
admission and the party against whom the admission
is offered, the relation of (a) partnership, (b) agency,
(c) joint interest, (d) conspiracy or (e) privity exists.
(Secs. 29 to 33, Rule 130).
GIVE THE REASON FOR THE RULE OF RES INTER
ALIOS ACTA
On the principle good faith and mutual
convenience, a man’s acts, conduct and declarations
are binding upon him and, therefore, evidence, against
him. Yet, it does not only seem inconvenient, but also
manifestly, unjust, that a man should be bound by the
acts of strangers, neither can their acts or conduct be
used as evidence against him. (Nuevas, Ibid, p. 568
citing Stack on Evidence, 35d., pp. 58-59)
WHEN MAY THE ACT OR DECLARATION OF CO-
PARTNER OR AGENT BE ADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE
AGAINST HIS PRINCIPAL?
The act or declaration of a partner or agent of
the party within the scoop of his authority and during
the existence of the partnership or agency, may be
given in evidence of the partnership or agency, against
such party after the partnership or agency is shown by
www.rkmfiles.net138
evidence other than such act or declaration. The same
rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner,
joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with
the party. (Sec. 29, Rule 130).
WHEN MAY AN ADMISSION OF A PARTNER BE
RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS CO-
PARTNER?
When the following requisites occur:
1. The partnership must be established by
independent evidence;
2. The statement refers to a matter within
the scope of the partnership; and
3. The statement was made during the
existence of the partnership. (Sec. 29,
Rule 130).
WHEN MAY THE ADMISSION OF AN AGENT BE
RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS PRINCIPAL?
When the following requisites concur:
1. The agency must be established by
independent evidence;
2. The statement refers to a matter within
the scope of the agency; and
3. The statement was made during the
existence of the agency. (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
569 citing Hitchman Coal etc. vs. Mithcell,
245 U.S. 229)
STATE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY
CONSPIRACTOR?
The act or declaration of a conspiractor
relating to the conspiracy and during its existence,
may be given in evidence against the co-conspirator
after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than
such act or declaration. (Sec. 30, Rule 130).
WHEN IS THE ADMISSION OF A CONSPIRACTOR
RECEIVABLE IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS CO-
CONSPIRACTOR?
When the following requisites concur:
a) The conspiracy must be established by
independent evidence;
b) The statement refers to the purpose or
object of the conspiracy: and
c) The statement was made during the
existence of the conspiracy. (Sec. 30, Rule
130); People vs. Dacanay, 92 Phil. 873)
 This rule refers to extrajudicial acts and
declarations of a conspiractor, and not to his
testimony as a witness at the trial. (People vs.
Dacanay, supra).
GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY PRIVIES.
Where one derives title to property from
another, the act, declaration, or omission of the latter,
while holding the title, in relation to the property, is
evidence against the former. (Sec. 31, rule 130).
DEFINE PRIVIES.
The word “privies” denotes not only the idea of
succession in right of heirship or testamentary legacy,
but also succession by virtue of acts intervivos, as by
assignment, subrogation, or purchase – in fact any act
whereby the successor is substituted in the place of
the predecessor in interest. (Alpuerto vs. Pastor &
Roa, 38 Phil. 785).
GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY SILENCE, THE
REASON THEREFORE, AND THE EXCEPTION, IS
ANY.
An act or declaration made in the presence and
within the hearing or observation of a party who does
or say nothing when the act or declaration is such as
naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and
when proper and possible for him to do so, may be
given in evidence against him. (Sec. 32, Rule 130).
This rule applies to both civil and criminal cases. The
reason is the recognized rule that if a man remains
silent when he ought to speak, he will be debarred
from speaking later. Qui tacet consentire videtur or
silent means consent. (Gabriel vs. Baens, 56 Phil. 314)
The exceptions to this rule are the following:
1. Where no good reason exists for the party to
comment on the act or declaration as when the
act or declaration was not specifically directed
to the party who remained silent (80 A.L.R.,
Anno., 1272)
2. When the party had no opportunity to
comment on the act or declaration; (People vs.
Ranario, 49 Phil. 220)
3. Where the act or declaration was made in the
course of an official investigation; (U.S. vs Dela
Cruz 12 Phil. 87)
WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON ADMISSION
BY SILENCE?
www.rkmfiles.net139
The basis of such rule is that the natural
reaction of one accused of the commission of a crime
or of the implication therein is to deny the accusation
if it is unjust or unfounded. (Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, p. 252 citing Mathews vs. State, 55 Ala, 187,
28 Ann. Rep. 698)
DEFINE CONFESSION
The declaration of an accused acknowledging
his guilt of the offense charged or of any offence
necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence
against him. (Sec. 33, Rule 130).
DISTINGUISH CONFESSION FROM ADMISSION
A confession as distinguished from an
admission is a declaration made at any time by a
person voluntarily, without compulsion or
inducement, stating or acknowledging that he has
committed or participated in the commission of a
crime. The term admission on the other hand is
usually applied in criminal cases to statements of fact
by the accused which do not directly involve an
acknowledgement of the guilt of the accused or of
criminal intent to commit the offense with which he is
charged. (U.S. vs. Corraled, 28 Phil. 362; U.S. vs. Razon
& Tayag, 37 Phil. 856)
CLASSIFY CONFESSIONA AND DEFINE EACH
A confession may be judicial or extra-judicial.
A judicial confessions is that made in the trial court in
the due course of legal proceedings, whereas an extra-
judicial confession is that made elsewhere, either in a
prior trial, in the preliminary investigation, or out of
court to any person. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 571 citing
Underhill on Criminal Evidence, p. 241).
WHEN IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE?
A confession is admissible when it is
voluntary. (People vs. Pulido, 85 Phil. 695)
WHEN MAY A CONFESSION BE REJECTED? WHY?
A confession may be rejected when the
following requisites concur:
1. The confession is involuntary; and
2. The confession is false (People vs.
Villanueva, 98 Phi. 327; People vs. De Los
Santos, 93 Phil. 83)
 3. The reason for the rule is that what the law
abhors is compelling an accused, by means
of force, violence, or intimidation, to tell a
falsehood, and not compelling him by the
same means to tell the truth. (People vs.
Prias, L-13767, July 30, 1960) So that,
even if a confession is involuntary, if it is
proved or turns out to be true, the same is
admissible. (Ibid).
IN ORDER TO RENDER A CONFESSION
INVOLUNTARY ON THE GROUND OF FORCE AND
VIOLENCE, IS IT REQUIRED THAT IT BE DIRECTLY
EMPLOYED UPON THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED?
WHY?
No, because it is enough that the force or
violence were employed upon the person of his co-
accused, in his presence and within his observation,
such that he had reasonable grounds to believe that he
would suffer the same maltreatment. (U.S. vs. Baluyot,
1 Phil. 451)
WHEN IS THREAT SUFFICIENT TORENDER A
CONFESSION INVOLUNTARY?
It must be a threat of bodily harm or injury and
accompanied by overt acts showing determination to
carry out the threat. (People vs. Cabrera, 82 Phil 839).
WHEN IS A PROMISE OF REWARD OR LENIENCY
SUFFICIENT TO RENDER A CONFESSION
INVOLUNTARY?
It must be a promise of immunity from or
leniency in the criminal prosecution and made by a
person who is in a position to grant the same. (People
vs. Hernandez, 91 Phil. 334)
AGAINST WHOM IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE?
WHY? GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS, IF ANY.
A confession is admissible only against the
accused who made it and not against his co-accused,
for, as against the latter, the confession would be
hearsay and res inter alios acta (People vs. Talledo, 85
Phil. 533)
The exceptions to this rule are the following:
a) When the confession of an accused implicating
his co-accused is made judicially at a joint trial;
(U.S. vs. Macamay, 36 Phil 893)
www.rkmfiles.net140
b) When the offer in evidence of an extra judicial
confession against a co-accused is not objected
to; (People vs. Atienza, 83 Phil 576)
c) When the co-accused against whom an extra-
judicial confession is offered had, by his acts,
conduct and declarations, adopted the
confession as his own; (People vs. Atienza,
supra)
d) Where several accused, without collusion,
made extra judicial confessions which are
identical in essential details and corroborated
by other evidence, each confession is
admissible against the others; (People vs. Go,
88 Phil. 203)
e) The confession of a conspirator is admissible
against his co-conspirators provided it was
made during the existence of the conspiracy;
(People vs. Ramirez, L-5875), May 15, 1953)
f) When the recitals in the extra judicial
confession of an accused are corroborated in
its important details by other proofs in the
record, it may be admitted against the other
accused. (People vs. Villanueva, L12687, July
31, 1962)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF AN EXTRA JUDICIAL
CONFESSION OF A THIRD PERSON TENDING TO
EXCULPATE AN ACUSED?
Unless such confession can be considered as
part of the res gestae, it cannot be received in favor of
the accused for the reason that the same is hearsay.
(People vs. Catalino, L-25403, March 15, 1968)
Besides, the court before which said extra-judicial
confession is offered has ample power to determine its
credibility, and the court may discard the same if it
finds the confession in inherently improbable. (Ibid)
WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A
CONFESSION?
It depends on whether the confession is
judicial or extrajudicial.
A judicial confession, like a plea of guilty, is in
law and in fact evidence of guilt of the most
trustworthy kind, is conclusive upon the court and is
sufficient to sustain a judgment of conviction. (People
vs. Lastimoso, 83 Phil. 714)
A extrajudicial confession is not sufficient for
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of corpus
delicti. (People vs. Mananla, L – 13142, Jan. 30, 1959)
STATE THE RULE ON SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE
 Evidence that one did or did not do a certain
thing at one time is not admissible to prove that he did
or did not do the same or a similar thing at another
time; but it may be received to prove a specific intent
or knowledge, identity, plan, system, scheme, habit,
custom or usage, and the like. (Section 34, Rule 130).
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE ON
SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE?
To admit the proof of crimes other that the
particular one with the accused is charged would be
unfair to the accused. It will compel the defendant to
meet the charges of which the indictment gives him no
information, confuses him in his defense, raises a
variety of issue, and thus diverts the attention of the
court from the charge immediately before it. In fact it
would be allowing evidence of collateral offenses as
substantive evidence of the offense on trial (Martin,
Revised Rules on Evidence, p. 290 citing 20 Am. Jur.
288-289
GIVE THE RULE ONUNACEPTED OFFER.
An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of
money to deliver a written instrument or specific
personal property is, if rejected without valid cause,
equivalent to the actual production and tender of the
money, instrument, or property. (Sec. 35, Rule 130)
IN GENERAL, TO WHAT FACTS MAY A WITNESS
TESTIFY?
A witness can testify only to those facts which
he knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are
derived from his own perception, exception as
otherwise provided in these rules. (Sec. 36, Rule 130)
WHAT IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE?
Hearsay evidence is that which derives its
value, not solely from the credit to be given to the
witness upon the stand, but in part from the veracity
and competency of some other person. (Clement vs.
Packer, 125 U.S. 309) It is not limited to oral
testimony; it also includes writings. (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
576 citing 20 Am. Jur. 400)?
IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE? WHY?
Hearsay evidence is not admissible because it
knows of his own knowledge a witness can testify only
on facts which he knows of his own knowledge (Sec.
36, rule 130); and, furthermore, to preserve the right
www.rkmfiles.net141
of parties ot cross-examine the original witness or
person claiming to have knowledge of the transaction
or occurrence. (People vs. Pagkaliwagan, 76 Phil. 457)
The right to cross-examine the adverse party’s
witnesses is essential in the administration of justice
for it is the only means of testing the credibility of
witnesses and their testimony, and this right is not
available in respect of hearsay evidence since the
declarant is not in court. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 576 citing
Donnelly vs. United States, 228 U.S. 243)
GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE.
The following:
a) Dying declaration;
b) Declaration against interest;
c) Act or declaration about pedigree;
d) Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree;
e) Common reputation;
f) Part of the res gestae;
g) Entries in the course of business;
h) Entries in official records;
i) Commercial lists and the like;
j) Learned treatises; and
k) Testimony or disposition at a former
proceeding.
GIVE THE RULE ON DYING DECLARATION
The declaration of a dying person, made under
the consciousness of an impending death, may be
received in any case wherein his death is the subject
of inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding
circumstances of such death. (Sec. 37, Rule 130,
Revised Rules on Evidence)
WHEN IS DYING DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
a) The declaration refers to the cause and
surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s
death;
b) The declaration was made under
consciousness of impending death;
c) The declaration is offered in a criminal case
wherein the subject of inquiry is the
declarant’s death. (Sec. 37, Rule 130; People
vs. Sagrario, L-18659, June 29, 1965)
WHAT IS A DYING DECLARATION?
 A dying declaration is that made by a person at
the point of death, concerning the case and
circumstances of the injury from which he thereafter
dies. (Moran, Remedial Law Review, p. 619)
WHY IS A DYING DECLARATIN ADMISSIBLE?
DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
A dying declaration is admissible on two
grounds, namely, (a) necessity and (b)
trustworthiness. Necessity, because the declarants’s
death makes it impossible to obtain his testimony is
the best evidence of the crime. (U.S. vs. Virrey, 37 Phil.
618) Trustworthiness, because it is made at the point
of death, a situation so solemn and awful as creating
an obligation equal to that created by a positive oath
administered in a court of justice. (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil.
530)
WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A DYING
DECLARATION?
It must be received with utmost care and given
the same weight as the testimony of a living witness.
(People vs. Almendralejo, 48 Phil. 268)
IS IT NECESSARY THAT THE DECLARANT STATE
EXPLICITY THAT HE HAD GIVEN HOE OF LIVING?
No. it is not necessary to the validity or
admissibility of a declaration that the declarant
expressly state that he has lost all hope of recovery; it
is sufficient that the circumstances are such to lead
inevitably to the conclusion that at the time the
declaration was made, the declarant did not expect to
survive the injury from which he actually died. (Peole
vs. Serrano, 58 Phil. 669)
IS THE INSTANTEOUS DEATH OF DECLARANT
SHOULD FOLLOW IMEDIATELY AFTER MAKING
HIS DYING DECLARATION?
No. The force of dying declaration is not
affected by the circumstances that the declarant did
not die until many hours or days afterwards provided
he finally did die from the wound, whose gravity did
not diminish from the time he made his declaration
until the hour of his death. (Ruperto Martin, Revised
Rules on Evidence, Vol. IV, Premium Book Store, 1989
Ed., pp. 311-312 citing Moore vs. State, 96 Ten. 209
and U.S. vs. Mallari, 29 Phil. 14)
www.rkmfiles.net142
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF RECOVERY OF
DECLARANT FATAL WOUND INFLICTED UPON
HIM ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF DYING
DECLARATION?
The admissibility of the dying declaration of a
deceased person with respect to the person who
inflicted the fatal injury depends upon whether at the
time the declaration was made the deceased believed
that the injury receive would be fatal. The
circumstances that he thereafter recovered
sufficiently to engender the belief that he was going to
live, does not render the declaration inadmissible,
where death in fact resulted from the same injury.
(People vs. Lara, 54 Phil. 96).
IS THE OPINION CONTAINED IN A DYING
DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE?
Opinions in dying declarations are
inadmissible. Dying declarations should consist solely
of facts, and not of conclusions, mental impressions or
opinions. Thus, a dying statement that the deceased
thought or believed the accused had shot him, or that
he expected the accused would try to kill him, is
inadmissible where the deceased did not see his
assailant, but based his declaration wholly upon
threats which had been made by the accused.
(Ruperto Martin, Ibid., p. 318 citing state vs. Horn, 204,
No. 528, 103 S.W. 96)
EXPLAIN BRIEFLY THE MEANING OF
“CONSCIOUSNESS OF AN IMPENDING DEATH.”
The declarant’s belief must be that death was
inevitable, not merely possible, nor even probably, but
sure. In other words, the declarant, at the time he
makes his declaration, must have no hope of recovery.
If at the time he had an expectation, even only a little
hope of recovery, the declaration would be
inadmissible. Fear, or even belief, that illness end in
death, if consistent with hope, is not sufficient. There
must be a settled hopeless expectation. (Mora, Ibid., p.
621)
GIVE THE RULE ON DECLARATION AGAINST
INTEREST.
The declaration made by a person deceased, or
unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant,
if the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to declarant’s own interest,
that a reasonable man in his position would not have
made the declaration unless he believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or his
successors in interest and against third person. (Sec.
38, Rule 130)
WHY IS A DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
It is admissible on two grounds, name, (a)
necessity, and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the declarant is dead or not available as witness, and
trustworthiness, because it is against the declarant’s
interest, and therefore, a guarantee of its truth. (Jaime
R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., A & J
Publishing, p. 581 citing Fitch vs. Chapman, 10 Conn.
11; Smith vs. Moore, 142 N.C. 277)
WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIN
OF DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST?
To render a statement admissible as a
declaration against interest the following
requirements must be met:
1. Declarants must be unavailable as a witness
2. The declaration must have related a fact
against the apparent pecuniary or
proprietary or moral interest of declarant
when his statement was made.
3. The declaration must have concerned a fact
personally cognizable by declarant.
4. That circumstances must render it
improbable that a motive to falsify existed .
(Ruperto Martin, Ibid., p. 327 citing C.J.S. 959)
GIVE THE RULE ON ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
PEDIGREE.
The act or declaration of a person deceased, or
unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another
person related to him by birth or marriage, may be
received in evidence where it occured before the
controversy, and the relationship between the two
persons is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The word “pedigree” includes
relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death,
the dates when and the places where these facts
occurred, and the names of the relatives. It embraces
also facts of family history intimately connected with
pedigree. (Sec. 39, Rule 130)
WHEN IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
www.rkmfiles.net143
1. The declarant is related to the person whose
pedigree is in question;
2. Such relationship is shown by evidence other
than the act or declaration;
3. The act or declaration was made ante litem
motam; and
4. The declarant is dead or unable to testify.
(Sec. 39, Rule 130)
WHY IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT
PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY?
It is admissible on two grounds, namely (a)
necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, because
facts about pedigree are usually those which occurred
long before the trial and known to only a few persons,
and trustworthiness, because those facts are matters
which members of the family are presumed to be
interested in ascertaining the truth. (J.Nuevas, Ibid., p.
582 citing Fulkenson vs. Holmes, 117 U.S. 389; III
Wigmore 218; Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 259
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE TERM “PEDIGREE”?
The word “pedigree” includes:
1. Relationship;
2. Family genealogy;
3. Birth;
4. Marriage;
5. Death;
6. Dates when the places where these facts
occurred;
7. Names of relatives; and
8. Facts of family history intimately connected
with pedigree. (Sec. 39, Rule 130)
GIVE THE RULE ON FAMILY REPUTATION OR
TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE.
The reputation or tradition existing in a family
previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree
of any one of its members, may be received in evidence
if the witness testifying thereon be also a member of
the family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries
in family bibles or other family books or charts,
engravings on rings, family portraits and the like, may
be received as evidence of pedigree. (Sec. 40, rule
130)
WHEN IS FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION
REGARDING PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1. the reputation or tradition must refer to the
pedigree of any member of such family;
2. the reputation or tradition must have been
formed previous to the controversy, i.e., ante
litem motam and
3. the witness testifying thereto must be a
member of the familiy. (R. Martin, Ibid., p.
340)
MAY FACTS OF PEDIGREE BE PROVED BY
COMMON REPUTATION?
No; fact of pedigree, if provable by reputation,
can be proved only by reputation in the family, but not
by reputation in the community, except marriage
which is provable by both family and common
reputation. (Sison vs. Amblada, 30 Phil. 118)
GIVE THE RULE ON COMMON REPUTATION
Common reputation existing previous to the
controversy, respecting facts of public or general
interest more than thirty years old or respecting
marriage or moral character, may be given in
evidence. Monuments and inscriptions in public
places may be received as evidence of common
reputation. (Sec. 41, Rule 130)
WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION
ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1. The reputation refers to a matter of public or
general interest more than thirty (30) years
old; or to marriage or moral character;
2. The reputation is ancient:
3. The reputation was formed ante litem
motam; and
4. The reputation is one formed in the
community interested. (Sec. 41, Rule 130)
WHY IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
It is admissible on two ground, namely, (a)
necessity and (b)trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the fact to be proved is of too ancient a date such that
eye-witnesses are no longer available, and
www.rkmfiles.net144
trustworthiness, because if the reputation had existed
for so long a time, there be some truth to it. (J. Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 584 Mc Kinnon vs. Bliss, 21 N.Y. 206; Reg. vs
Bedforshire, 4E. 535)
WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION
NOT HEARSAY? EXPLAIN BRIEFLY.
It is not hearsay if common reputation is the
fact in issue, or part thereof. Thus, in a prosecution for
maintenance of a house of ill-fame, a gambling house,
or an opium joint, the reputation of the house itself is
the issue, so that testimony of witnesses thereto is not
hearsay. (U.S. vs. Choa Chick, 36 Phil. 831)
GIVE THE RULE ON RES GESTAE.
Statement made by a person while a startling
occurrence is taking place or immediately prior to
subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances
thereof, may be given in evidence as part of the res
getae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal
act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of the res gestae.
WHAT STATEMENTS MAY BE ADMISSIBLE IN
EVIDENCE AS PART OF THE RES GESTAE?
They are of two classes:
1. Spontaneous statements made by a person
while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with
respect to the circumstances thereof; and
2. Statements accompanying an equivocal act
material to the issue, and giving it legal
significance.
3. The former is referred to as spontaneous
exclamations, while the latter as verbal acts.
DEFINE RES GESTAE
Res gestae literally means, “thing done,” and
includes the circumstances, facts and declarations
incidental to the main fact or transaction necessary to
illustrate its character. It is so connected therewith as
to constitute a part of the transaction. (R. Martin, Ibid.,
p. 349 citing Underhill’s Criminal Evidence, p. 348)
WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE AS PART OF THE RES
GESTAE?
 What is admissible as part of the res gestae is
not the details of an occurrence, but the human
assertions or statements about those details.
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF SPONTANEOUS
STATEMENTS?
The requisites for the admissibility of this kind
of evidence as an exception to the rule excluding
hearsay are the following:
1. Statements must have been made while a
startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequently thereto;
2. Such statements must be spontaneous; and
3. Such statements must relate to the
circumstances of the startling occurrence. (R.
Martin, Ibid., p. 350- 351 citing 32 C.J.S. and
People vs. Ricaplaza, 23 SCRA 374)
WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON RES
GESTAE?
The principle rests upon the common
experience that utterances made under such
circumstances are devoid of self-interest, and are in
the same category as exclamations. The probability of
falsehood is so remote as to be negligible. (People vs.
Gondayao, 30 SCRA 226)
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF VERBAL ACTS?
The requisites of verbal acts are:
1. The res gestae is an equivocal act;
2. The equivocal act must be material to the
issue;
3. The statement in question must be necessary
for the understanding of the equivocal act;
and
4. The statement must accompany the equivocal
act. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 citing Tracy’s
Handbook, 62 Ed., p 22).
WHY ARE SPONTANEOUS EXCLAMATIONS AND
VERBAL ACTS ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
They are admissible on two ground, namely,
(a) necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity,
because such natural and spontaneous utterances are
more convincing than the testimony of the same
person on the stand; and trustworthiness, because
those statements are made instinctively. (Jaime
www.rkmfiles.net145
Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 citing Mobile vs. Ascraft, 48 Ala.
31 and Wesley vs. State, 53 Ala. 182)
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DYING DECLARATION
AND A DECLARATION AS PART OF THE RES
GESTAE.
If the requsites of a dying declaration do not
concur, the declaration may be admitted as part of the
res gestae. (People vs. Talledo, 85 Phil. 533)
WHAT IS AN EQUIVOCAL ACT FOR THE PURPOSE
OF THE RULE ON VERBAL ACTS?
An equivocal act is one susceptible of various
interpretations. (Allen vs. Duncan, 11 pick 308)
WHAT ARE VERBAL ACTS? ILLUSTRATE.
Verbal acts are statements accompanying an
equivocal act material to the issue and giving it legal
significance. Such declarations are called verbal acts,
because they are considered as verbal parts of the
equivocal or ambiguous acts which they explain. For
example, when one delivers money to another, such
act does not by itself show whether the money is
intended, say as a gift or as a payment of a debt. But if
the act of delivery is accompanied by the statement
that the money is for payment of a debt, or is a
birthday gift, the statement gives legal significance to
the act.
MAY AN EQUIVOCAL ACT EXTEND OVER A LONG
PERIOD OF TIME? MAY THE STATEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF SUCH
EQUIVOCAL ACT BE ADMISSIBLE AS VERBAL
ACTS?
The equivocal act may extend over a long
period of time, and during that period, those
statements that are necessary for an understanding of
the meaning of said equivocal act, are admissible as
verbal acts. If a man and a woman are cohabiting
together and for a certain period of time they have
been appearing in public together, there is here an
equivocal conduct which may be interpreted either as
licit or illicit. According to the present rule, any
statements made by the parties during such equivocal
conduct showing it to be matrimonial, meretricious or
otherwise, are admissible as verbal acts. (Morann,
Ibid., p. 636 citing Matter of Taylor, 9 Paige (N.Y.), 611)
GIVE THE RULE ON ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF
BUSINESS.
Entries made at, or near the time of the
transactions to which they refer, by a person
deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to
known the facts therein stated, maybe received as
prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries
in h is professional capacity or in the performance of
duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business
or duty (Sec. 43, Rule 130)
WHEN ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS
ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1. The entries must have been made at or near
the time of the transaction to which they
refer;
2. The person who made the entry must be, at
the time the entry is presented as evidence,
deceased, outside of the Philippines or unable
to testify;
3. The person who made the entry must be in a
position to know the facts there in stated at
the time he made the entries;
4. The entries must have been made in his
professional capacity or in the performance of
duty; and
5. The entries must have been made in the
ordinary or regular course of business.
(Ruperto G. Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, vol. IV. 1989 Ed., p. 363)
WHY ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
They are admissible on two grounds, namely, (a)
necessity, and (b trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the entrant is dead or not available as witness, and no
equally satisfactory proof of the entry can be had; and
trustworthiness, because a man who makes regular
entries for purposes of business or duty usually makes
them with accuracy. As these entries are relied upon
by businessmen everyday they can be relied upon the
courts. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 589 citing Welsh vs. Barret,
15 Mass. 380 and Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 276)
IN SHORT, TO WHAT KIND OF ENTRIES DOES
THIS RULE REFER?
It refers to an entry made by a person whose
business or duty it was to make the entry, and which
www.rkmfiles.net146
appears to be part of a regular system of entries kept
in that establishment. (Jaime Nuevas, Ibid., p. 590
citing O’Day vs. Spencer, 189 Pac. 394; Kibbe vs.
Bancraft, 77 III. 19)
IF THE ENTRANT IS ALIVE WOULD HIS ENTRY BE
RECEIVABLE AS INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE?
No; the entrant must be presented as witness.
However, while on the stand, he can refer to his entry
as memorandum to refresh his memory. (Cang Ui vs.
Gardner, 34 Phil. 376). But, if notwithstanding the aid
of his entry as a memorandum, the entrant cannot
recollect the facts stated therein, and then his entry is
admissible as independent evidence, provided all the
other requisites for its admissibility are present.
(Shove vs. Wiley, 18 Mass. 558)
GIVE THE RULE ON OFFICIAL ENTRIES.
Entries in official records made in the
performance of h is duty by a public officer of the
Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a
duty especially enjoined bylaw, are prima facie
evidence of the facts therein stated. (Sec. 44, Rule
130)
WHEN ARE ENTRIS IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
ADMISSIBLE?
To render such entries admissible the following
requisites concur:
1. The entry must be made by a public officer or
by another person especially enjoined by law
to do so;
2. It must be made by a public officer in the
performance of a duty specially enjoined by
law; and
3. The entrant must have personal knowledge
of the facts stated by him. (Ruperto Martin.
Ibd., p. 370 citing V. Wigmore on Evidence, p.
WHY ARE ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
They are admissible on two grounds, namely,
(a) necessity, and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity,
because litigations are numberless in which the
testimony of public officials is required, and
trustworthiness, because the law reposes a particular
confidence in public officials such that is presumes
that they will discharge their duties with fidelity and
accuracy. (Antillon vs. Barcelon, 37 Phil. 148)
WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF ENTRIES IN
OFFICIAL RECORDS?
They are prima facie evidence of the fact
therein entered. (Sec. 44, Rule 130)
GIVE THE RULE ON COMMERCIAL LISTS.
Evidence of statements of matters of interest
to persons engaged in an occupation contained in a
list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation is admissible as tending to proved the
truth of any relevant matter so stated if that
compilation is published for use by persons engaged
in that occupation and is generally used and relied
upon by them therein. (Sec. 45, Rule 130).
WHEN ARE COMMERCIAL LIST AND THE LIKE
ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1. such statements are contained in a list;
2. the compilation is published for use by
person engaged in that occupation; and
3. it is generally used and relied upon by them
therein. (Ruperto Martin, ibid., p. 378)
WHEN ARE THESE COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE
LIKE ADMISSIBLE?
They are admissible if published for use by
persons engaged in that occupation, and is generally
used and relied upon by them. (Sec. 45, Rule 130)
GIVE THE RULES ON LEARNED TREATISES.
A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet
on a subject of history, law, science or art is admissible
as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein
if the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in
the subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in
the treatise periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his
profession or calling as expert in the subject. (Sec. 46,
Rule 130)
WHEN ARE LEARNED TREATISES ADMISSIBLE?
They are admissible if the fact therein stated
can be judicially noticed, or if another expert testifies
that the author is a recognized expert on the subject.
(Sec. 46, Rule 130).
www.rkmfiles.net147
GIVE THE RULE ON TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION
AT A FORMER PROCEEDING.
The testimony or deposition of a witness
deceased or unable to testify, given in a former caser
of proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the
same parties and subject matter, may be given in
evidence against the adverse party who had the
opportunity to cross-examine him. (Sec. 47, Rule 130)
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES IN ORDER THAT THE
TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION OF A WITNESS AT A
FORMER PROCEEDING MAY BE ADMISSIBLE AS
EVIDENCE IN A SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING?
There are five requisites:
1. That the testimony was rendered in a former
case;
2. Between the same parties;
3. Relating to the same matter;
4. That the witness is dead, out of the
Philippines, or unable to testify in the
subsequent proceeding; and
5. That the adverse party has had an
opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
(Moran, Ibid., p. 645)
IS THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BEFORE A
LEGISLATIVE OR ADMINSITRATIVE COMMITTEE
ADMISSIBLE IN A SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING?
No, because they are not judicial in character.
Besides, in legislative and administrative
investigations, the rules of evidence are not binding.
(Moran, Ibid., p. 645)
DISCUSS BRIEFLY THE OPINION RULE.
As a rule, a witness must confine his testimony
to matters within his actual knowledge. He cannot be
asked questions calling for his opinion or conclusions
upon facts, which are for the court to make. (J. Nuevas,
Ibid., p 595 citing 20 Am. Jur. 635). Hence, the opinion
of a witness is not admissible. (Sec. 48, Rules 130)
GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE OPINION RULE.
The following are admissible:
a) The opinion of a witness on a matter
requiring special knowledge, skill,
experience or training which he is shown to
 possess, may be received in evidence. (Sec.
49, Rule 130)
b) The opinion of a witness for which proper
basis is given, may be received in evidence
regarding.
1. The identity of a person about
whom he has adequate knowledge;
2. A handwriting with which he has
sufficient familiarity; and
3. The mental sanity of a person with
whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
c) The witness may also testify on his
impressions of the emotion, behavior,
condition or appearance of a person. (Sc.
50, Rule 130)
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
a) The fact to be proved is one requiring
expert knowledge; and
b) The witness is really an expert. (Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 595 citing 20 Am. Jur. 647-649)
WHAT IS MEANT BY “QUALIFYING THE
WITNESS”? HOW IS IT DONE?
“Qualifying the witness” means proving that the
witness presented is an expert, and this is done by
asking him preliminary questions as to his education,
training, experience, and the like. (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
596 citing Tracy’s Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 207)
WHAT IS MEANT OF OPINION EVIDENCE?
“Opinion evidence” as the term is used in law,
means the testimony of a witness, given or offered in
the trial of an action, that the witness is of the opinion
that some fact pertinent to the case exists or does not
exists, offered as proof of the existence or non-
existence of the fact. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 396 citing 20
Am. Jur. 634)
WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF EXPERT
TESTIMONY?
Expert testimony no doubt constitutes
evidence worthy of meeting consideration although
not exclusive on questions of a professional character.
Courts of justice, however, are not bound to submit
their findings necessarily to such testimony. They are
free to weigh, them, and they can give or refuse to give
them any value as proof, or they can even counter-
www.rkmfiles.net148
balance such evidence with the other elements of
conviction which may have been adduced during the
trial. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 409 U.S. vs. Trono, et. al., 3
Phil. 219-220).
DEFINE EXPERT EVIDENCE.
Expert Evidence may be defined as the
testimony of one possessing in regard to a particular
subject or department of human activity, knowledge
not usually acquired by other persons. (U.S.A vs Gil, 13
Phil. 530)
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARY?
Expert evidence is necessary when there are
certain matters which do not come within the
knowledge of ordinary witnesses. (Moran, Ibid., p.
650)
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY TO
PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF
HANDWRITING?
When the genuineness of handwriting is to be
proven by comparison expert evidence is necessary.
Whether or not the handwriting in questions is similar
to other writings of the same person is a matter which
requires the testimony of a man who has been trained,
or has actual skill or knowledge on the same. (U.S. vs.
Santiago, 41 Phil. 793,802)
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARY TO
PROVE MENTAL INSANITY?
Mental insanity may be proven by the opinion
of ordinary witnesses, but when the mental disease is
to be inferred from an examination and observation of
its symptoms, the opinion of an expert is necessary.
(Torres vs. Lopex, 48 Phil. 772)
IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY IN THE
IDENTIFICAITON OF FINGERPRINTS?
Yes, because it is a science requiring close
study. (People vs. Medina, 59 Phil. 330)
GIVE THE RULES GOVERNING CHARACTER
EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES.
The following:

a) The accused may prove his good moral
character which is pertinent to the moral
involved in the offense charged.
b) Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not
prove his bad moral character which is
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
offense charged.
c) The good or bad moral character of the
offended party may be proved if it tends to
establish in any reasonable degree the
probability or improbability of the offense
charged. (Sec. 51, Rule 130).
DEFINE CHARACTER
Character is defined s that “combination of
properties, qualities or peculiarities which
distinguishes one person from others.” (Martin, Ibid.,
p. 420 citing The Cmaberlayne Trial Evidence, p. 578)
IS EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF THE
ACCUSED ADMISSIBLE IN CRIMINAL CASES?
The good character of an accused is admissible
in evidence to show that improbability of his doing the
act charged. The principle upon which good character
may be proven is, that it affords a presumption against
the commission of crime. This presumption arises
from the improbability, as a general rule, as proven by
common observation and experience that a person
who has uniformly pursued an honest and upright
course of conduct will depart from it and do an act so
inconsistent with it. Such a person may be overcome
by temptation and fall into crime, and cases of that
kind often occur, but they are exceptions; the general
rule is otherwise. (Moran, p. 656 citing Cancemi vs.
People, 16 N.Y. 501)
MAY THE PROSECUTION PROVE THE BAD MORAL
CHARACTER OF THE ACCUSED?
The prosecution is not permitted to impeach
the character of an accused, if the latter does not put it
in issue by giving evidence in his support. (People vs.
Hodges, 48 Phil. 592). The reason for the rule is that
evidence of bad character may create an unfair
prejudice against the acused who may be convicted
not because he is guilty of the crime charged, but
because of his being a crooked man. (Moran, Ibid., p.
657 citing People vs. Shen, 147 N. Y. 78, 41 N.E. 508)
WHAT IS BURDEN OF PROOF?
www.rkmfiles.net149
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to
present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to
establish his claim or defense by the amount of
evidence required by law. (Sec. 1, Rule 131)
DEFINE BURDEN OF EVIDENCE.
“Burden of Evidence” is defined as “that logical
necessity which rests on a party at any particular time
during a trial to create a prima facie case in his own
favor, or to overthrow one when created against him.
The burden of evidence is determined by the progress
of the trial, and shifts to one party when the other
party has produced sufficient evidence to be entitled
as a matter of law to a ruling in his favor. (R. Martin,
Ibid, p. 431 citing 2 Jones on Evidence. 2nd Ed., 355)
WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL
CASES? WHY?
In criminal cases, the burden of proof as to the
offense charged lies on the prosecution (People vs. De
Reyes, 82 Phil. 130), because the accused has in his
favor the presumption of innocence.
WHAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO REBUT THE
PRESUMPTION OF CRIMINAL INTENT?
When it has been proven that the accused
committed the unlawful acts alleged, it is properly
presumed that they were committed with full
knowledge and with criminal intent, and it is
incumbent upon them to rebut such presumption. (R.
Martin, Ibid., p. 441 citing State vs. Sullivan, 34 Idaho
68, 199 p. 647, 17 A.L.R. 902)
GIVE THE RULE ON CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION.
The following are instances of conclusive
presumptions:
a) Whenever a party has, by his own
declaration, act, or omission, intentionally
and deliberately led another to believe a
particular thing true and to act upon such
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out
of such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it;
b) The tenant is not permitted to deny the title
of his landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of the
landlord and tenant between them. (Sec. 2
Rule 131)
WHAT IS A PRESUMPTION?
A presumption is an inference as to the
existence of a fact not actually known, arising from its
usual connection with another which is known. (Jaime
Nuevas, Ibid., p. 602 citing III C.R. Co. vs. Interstate Co.,
206)
WHAT ARE THE CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS OF
LAW?
There are two classes of presumptions of law:
(a) conclusive presumptions or presumptions juris et
de jure and (b) disputable presumption or
presumption juris tantum. Conclusive presumptions
are inferences which the law makes so peremptory
that it will not allow them to be overturned by any
contrary proof however strong. (Mercado vs. Santos,
66 Phil. 216) Disputable presumptions are those
presumptions which may be disputed, opposed,
refuted or rebutted. Such presumptions continue until
overcome by proof to the contrary or by some
stronger presumption. (R. Martin, Ibid., p 447 citing
Annotation: Ann. Cas. 1917 E. 11221).
IS PRESUMPTION EVIDENCE?
No. The effect of a presumption is to do away
with evidence. It is not evidence, even though it takes
the place of it in the trial of causes. (R. Martin, Ibid., p.
448 citing The Chamberlayne Trial Evidence, p. 732)
WHAT IS ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?
Whenever a party has, by his own declaration,
act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led
another to believe a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising
out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted
to falsify it. (Sec. 2, par. (a)Rule 131)
WHAT IS THEREASON FOR THE RULE ON
ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?
The doctrine of estoppel in pais or equitable
estoppel is said to be dictated by the principles of
morality and fair dealing and it intended to subserve
the ends of justice. It concludes the truth in order to
prevent fraud and falsehood and imposes silence on a
party only when in conscience and honesty he should
not be allowed to speak. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 449 citing
19 Am. Jur. 641). Through estoppel an admission or
presentation is rendered conclusive upon the person
making it and cannot be denied or disproved as
www.rkmfiles.net150
against the person relying thereon. (Art. 1431, New
Civil Code of the Philippines)
WHO MAY INVOKE ESTOPPEL?
An equitable estoppel can only be invoked by
one who is in a position to be misled by the
misrepresentation with respect to which the estopped
is invoked; and under circumstances where damage
would result to him from the adoption by the person
estopped of a position different from that which has
been held out to be true. (Cristobal vs. Gomez, 50 Phil
810)
GIVE THE INSTANCES WHERE THERE IS
DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS.
The following presumptions are satisfactory if
uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and
overcome by other evidence:
1. That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
2. That an unlawful act was done with an
unlawful intent;
3. That a person intends the ordinary
consequences of his voluntary act;
4. That a person takes ordinary care of his
concerns;
5. That evidence willfully suppressed would be
adverse if produced;
6. That money paid by one to another was due to
the latter;
7. That a thing delivered by one to another
belonged to the latter;
8. That an obligation delivered up to the debtor
has been paid;
9. That prior rents or installments had been paid
when a receipt for the latter ones is produced;
10. That a person found in possession of a thing
in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the
taker and the doer of the whoe act; otherwise,
that things which a person possesses, or
exercises acts of ownership over, are owned
by him;
11. That a person in possession of an order on
himself for the payment of the money, or the
delivery of anything, has paid, the money, or
the delivery of anything, has paid the money
or delivered the thing accordingly;
12. That a person acting in a public office was
regularly appointed or elected to it;
13. That official duty has been regularly
performed;
 14. That a court, or judge acting as such, whether
in the Philippines or elsewhere was acting in
the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
15. That all the matters within an issue raised in a
case were laid before the court and passed
upon by it; and in like manner that all matters
within an issue raised in a dispute submitted
for arbitration were laid before the arbitrators
and passed upon by them;
16. The private transactions have been fair and
regular;
17. That the ordinary course of business has been
followed;
18. That there was a sufficient consideration for a
contract;
19. That a negotiable instrument was given or
indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
20. That an endorsement of a negotiable
instrument was made before the instrument
was overdue and at the place where the
instrument is dated;
21. That a writing is truly dated;
22. That a letter duly directed and mailed was
received in the regular course of the mail;
23. That after an absence of seven years, it being
unknown whether or not the absentee still
lives, he is considered dead for all purposes,
except for those of succession.
WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRESUMPTION
OF INNOCENCE?
A person accused of crime is presumed to be
innocent until the contrary is proved and this
presumption remains with him throughout the trial
until it is overcome by proof of guilt beyond a
reasonable doubt. The presumption of innocence is
founded upon the first principles of justice and is not
a mere form, but a substantial part of the law.
The presumption of innocence is a conclusion
of law in favor of the accused, whereby his innocence
is not only established but continues until sufficient
evidence is introduced to overcome the proof which
the law has created – namely, his innocence. When a
doubt is created, it is the result of proof, and not the
proof itself. The courts will not impute a guilty
construction or inference compatible with innocence
arises therefrom with equal force and fairness. In fact,
it si always the duty of the court to resolve the
circumstances of evidence upon a theory of innocence
rather than upon a theory of guilt where it is possible
to do so. The accused is not to be presumed guilty
because the facts are consistent with his guilt; this will
www.rkmfiles.net151
be done where the facts are inconsistent with his
innocence. (Vicente J. Francisco, The Revised Rules of
Court in the Philippines (Evidence), Vol, VII, Part I,
1990 Ed., p. 79-80 citing Wharton’s Criminal Evidence,
11th Ed., Sec. 72).
DISTINGUISH PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE
FROM REASONABLE DOUBT.
In making the distinction between the terms
“presumption of innocence” and of “reasonable doubt”,
it has been stated that “presumption of innocence” is
a conclusion drawn by law in favor of a citizen , while
“reasonable” doubt” is a condition of mind produced by
proof resulting from evidence in the case. The former
is regarded as evidence, introduced by the law to be
considered by the court, while the latter is the result
of insufficient proof. (Vicente J. Francisco, Ibid., 81
citing 10 Encyclopedia of Evidence, 625).
EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION “THAT AN
UNLAWFUL ACT WAS DONE WITH AN
UNLAWFUL INTENT.”
The general rule is that, if it is proved that the
accused committed an unlawful act charged, it will be
presumed that the act was done with a criminal
intention, and it is for the accused to rebut this
presumption. The act in itself is evidence of the intent.
(Vicente J. Francisco, Ibid., p. 82 citing 16 C.J. 81)
EXPLAINT EH PRESUMTION “THAT A PERSON
INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF HIS
VOLUNTARY ACT.”
Though it is maxim of law, as well as the
dictate of charity, that every person is to be presumed
innocent until he is proved to be guilty, yet it is a rule
equally sound that every sane person must be
supposed to intended that which is the ordinary and
natural consequences of his own purposed act. (V.J.
Francisco, Ibid., p. 84 citing 3 Green Evidence, 15th ed.,
13)
EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION “THAT A PERSON
INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF HIS
VOLUNTARY ACT”.
Men of sound mind are presumed to intend the
natural and necessary consequences of acts which
they intentionally perform. (Ruperto G. Martin,
Revised Rules on Evidence, Vol. IV 1989 ed., p. 465
citing 1 Jones on Evidence, 2nd Ed., 210). It is said that
man intends that consequence which he contemplates
and which he expects to result from his act, and he,
therefore, must be taken to intend every consequence
which is the natural and immediate result of any act
which he voluntarily does. (Ibid).
IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION
FROM SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE MAY ARISE,
WHAT ARE THERE REQUISITES?
The following must concur:
a) The suppression is willful; (Sec. 3, Rule
131)
b) The suppression is not in the exervcise of
a privilege; (U.S. vs. Melchir, 2 Phil. 588)
c) The evidence suppressed is not merely
corroborative or cumulative; (People vs.
Tuazon, 56 Phil. 649) and
d) The evidence is at the disposal only of the
suppressing party. (People vs. Otero, 51
Phil 201)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NON-PRODUCTION OF
MATERIAL EVIDENCE BY A PARTY?
Non-production of evidence that would
naturally have been produced by an honest and,
therefore,, fearless claimant permits the inference that
its tenor is unfavorable to the party’s cause. (Marvel
Corp. vs. David, 94 Phil. 376)
IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION
FROM POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS MAY
ARISE, WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES?
The following must concur:
a) The crime of theft or robbery was committed;
(U.S. vs. Carreon, 12 Phil.) 51).
b) It was committed recently; (U.S. VS. Carlipio,,
18 Phil. 421)
c) The property object ofthecrime was found in
accused’s possession; (U.S. vs. Ungal, 37 Phil.
835) and
d) The accccused is unable to explain his
possession satisfactorily; (U.S. vs. Espia, 16
Phil. 506) anmd, or for the application of the
presumption of doer of the whole act.
e) It must be shown that the goods were looted
at the same time, in the ssame place and on
the same occasion. (People vs. De Jose, CA-G-
R. No. 02352- CR, Jan. 31, 1963)
www.rkmfiles.net152
WHAT PRESUMPTION ARISES FROM
FABRICATION OF EVIDENCE?
The presumption arises that the case is
groundless and affects the whole mass of evidence
presented by the party. (De Leon vs. Layco, 73 Phil.
588)
WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PRESUMPTION OF
REGULARITY OF OFFICAL ACTS?
It includes regularity of appointment and
performance of duty (Tolentino vs Catoy, 82 Phil. 300)
and applies to corporate officers. (J. Nuevas, Remedial
Law Reviewer, 1971 ed., p. 605)
IN THOSE CASES WHERE DEATH MAY BE
PRESUMED, IS THERE A PRESUMPTION AS TO
THE EXACT DATE OF DEATH?
None, the exact date of death is a matter of
proof. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p 607 citing Davis vs. Briggs,
97 U.S. 628)
WHEN ARE PRESUMPTIONS ADMISSIBLE?
They are admissible when the facts from
which they may be deduced are fully proven; a
presumption cannot be made to rest on another
presumption. (Cuaycong vs. Rius, 86 Phil. 170)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF PRESUMPTIONS?
Presumptions do not constitute evidence and
have no weight as such, but only determined the party
who has the duty of presenting evidence, and when
that duty is met, presumptions recede. (Nuevas, Ibd.,
p. 608 citing Anno. 15 A.L.R. 881) In other words,
presumptions merely aid in establishing a prima facie
case and have no probative effect when countervailing
proof is offered. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 608 citing 20 Am.
Jur. 171)
GIVE THE RULE ON THE PRESUMPTION OF
LEGITIMACY OR ILLEGITIMACY OF A CHILD.
There is no presumption of legitimacy or
illegitimacy of a child born after three hundred days
following the dissolution of the marriage of the
separation of the spouses. Whoever alleged the
legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his
allegation. (Sec. 4, Rule 131)
HOW MAY THE EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS BE
DONE?
The examination of witnesses presented in a
trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under
oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is
incapacitated to speak, or the question calls for a
different mode of answer, the answers of the
witnesses shall be given orally. (Sec. 1)
MUST A WITNESS ANSWER ANY QUESTION
ASKED?
Yes, a witness must answer questions,
although his answer may tend to establish a claim
against him (Sec. 3)
WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF A WITNESS?
The rights of a witness are:
a) To be protected from irrelevant, improper,
or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
b) Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require;
c) Not to be examined exception as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
d) Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
e) Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the
very fact at issued to a fact from which the
fact in issue would presumed. But a witness
must answer to the fact of his previous final
conviction for offenses. (Sec. 3)
STATE THE ORDER OF EXAMINATION OF AN
INDIVIDUAL WITNESS
The order in which individual witnesses may be
examined is as follows:
a) Direct examination by the proponent;
b) Cross-examination by the opponent;
c) Re-direct examination by the proponent;
d) Re-cross-examination by the opponents.
(Sec. 4)
GIVE THE CONCEPTS AND PURPOSES OF DIRECT
EXAMINATION; CROSS EXAMINATION; REDIRECT
EXAMINATION AND RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION.
www.rkmfiles.net153
Direct examination is the examination-in-chief
of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts
relevant to the issue. (Sec. 5)
Cross-examination; its purpose and extent.
Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party
as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and
freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and
freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and to
elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (Sec.
6)
Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent.
– After the cross-examination pf the witness has been
concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling
him, to explain or supplement his answers given
during the cross-examination, may be allowed by the
court in its discretion. (Sec. 7)
Re-cross-examination. – Upon the conclusion
of the re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-
cross-examine the witness on matters stated in his re-
direct examination, and also on such other matters as
may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (Sec. 8)
WHEN MAY A WITNESS BE RECALLED?
After the examination of a witness by both
sides has been concluded, the witness cannot be
recalled without leave of the court. The court will
grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interest
of justice may require.
WHAT IS A LEADING QUESTION?
A leading question is one which suggests to the
witness the answer which the examining party
desires. (Sec. 10)
ARE LEADING QUESTIONS ALLOWED ON DIRECT
EXAMINATION?
As a general rule, they are not allowed, except in the
following cases
a) On cross examination;
b) On preliminary matters;
c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble mind or a deaf-mute;
d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
 e) Of a witness who is an adverse party, or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an
adverse party. (Sec. 10)
WHAT IS A MISLEADING QUESTION?
A misleading question is one which assumed
as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or
contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is
not allowed (Sec. 10)
HOW MAY THE ADVERSE PARTY’S WITNESS BE
IMPEACHED?
A witness may be impeached by the party
against whom he was called, by contradictory
evidence,by evidence that his general reputation for
truth, honesty, or integrity is bad, or by evidence that
he has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his present testimony, but not by evidence of
particular wrongful acts, except that it may be shown
by the examination of the witness, or the record of the
judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense.
(Sec. 11)
WHAT IS IMPEACHMENT OF A WITNESS?
It is simply an attack on the credibility of a
witness. (J. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed.,
P. 611 citing Ballentines’s Law Dict. 2nd Ed., p. 610)
MAY A PARTY IMPEACH HIS OWN WITNESS?
As a rule, no, except, if the witness is an
unwilling or hostile witness or if the witness is an
adverse party of an officer, director, or managing
agent of a public or private corporation or a
partnership or association which is an adverse party.
(Sec. 12)
WHEN MAY A WITNESS MAYBE CONSIDERED AS
UNWILLING OR HOSTILE?
A witness may be considered as unwilling or
hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate
showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance
to testify of his having misled the party into calling him
to the witness stand. (Sec. 12)
HOW MAY A WITNESS BE IMPEACED BY
EVIDENCE OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS?
www.rkmfiles.net154
Before a witness can be impeached by
evidence that he has made at other times statements
inconsistent with his present testimony, the
statements must be related to him, with the
circumstances of the times and places and the persons
present, and he must be asked whether he made such
statements, and if so, allowed to explain them. If the
statements be in writing they must be shown to the
witness before any question is put to him concerning
them. (Sec. 13)
MAY EVIDENCE OF GOOD MORAL CHARACTER OF
AN ACCUSED BE PRESENTED?
As a rule, no. Evidence of the good character
of a witness is not admissible until such character has
been impeached. (Sec. 14)
STATE THE RULES ON THE EXCLUSION AND
SEPARATION OF WITNESSES
On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude
from the court any witness not at the time under
examination sot that he may not hear the testimony of
other witnesses. The judge any also cause witnesses
to be kept separate and to be prevented from
conversing with one another until all shall have been
examined. (Sec. 15)
WHEN MAY A WITNESS REFER TO A
MEMORADUM AND STATE THE
PROCEDURE?
A witness may be allowed to refresh his
memory respecting a fact, by anything written or
recorded by himself or under his direction at the time
when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or
at any other time when the fact was fresh in his
memory and he knew that the same was correctly
written or recorded; but in such case the writing or
record must be produced and may be inspected by the
adverse party, who may, if he chooses, cross-examined
the witness upon it, and may read it in evidence. So,
also, a witness may testify from such a writing or
record, though he retain no recollection of the
particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing
or record correctly stated the transaction when made;
but such evidence must be received with caution. (Sec.
16)
STATE THE RULE WHEN PART OF AN ACT,
DECLARATION OR WRITING IS GIVEN IN
EVIDENCE BY ONE PARTY.
 When part of an act, declaration, conversation,
writing or record is given in evidence by one party, the
whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the
other, and when a detached act, declaration,
conversation, writing or record is given in evidence,
any other ct declaration, conversation, writing or
record necessary to its understanding may also be
given in evidence. (Sec. 17).
GIVE THE RULE ON THE RIGHT TO INSPECT
WRITING SHOWN TO WITNESS.
Whenever writing is shown to witness, it may
be inspected by the adverse party. (Sec. 18)
DEFINE AND CLASSIFY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Documentary evidence refers to any tangible
object capable of expressing a fact, or which tend to
establish the truth or untruth of matters at issue, and
includes all kinds of documents, records and writings.
(Nuevas, Ibid., p 614 citing Curtis vs. Bradley, 65 Conn
99) It may be classified into public and private
documents. (Sec. 19).
WHAT ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS? PRIVATE
DOCUMENTS?
Public documents are:
a) The written official acts, or records of official
acts of the sovereign authority, official
bodies and tribunals, and public officers
whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign
country.
b) Documents acknowledged before a notary
public except last wills and testaments; and
c) Public records, kept in the Philippines, of
private documents required by law to be
entered therein.
WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE
ADMISSIBILITY OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT?
It must be authenticated, which means that its
due execution and authenticity must first be
proved. (Sec. 20)
HOW MAY A PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE
AUTHENTICATED?
In any of the following modes:
www.rkmfiles.net155
a) By anyone who saw the document executed
or written; or
b) By evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker.
(Sec. 20)
WHAT IS AN ANCIENT DOCUMENT?
A document is ancient if the following requisites
concur:
a) The document is more than thirty years
old;
b) It is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine; and
c) It is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion. (Sec. 21).
HOW MAY THE HANDWRITING OF A PERSON
PROVED?
The handwriting of a person may be proved by
any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of
such person because he ahs seen the person write or
has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the
witness has acted or been charged, and has thus
acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such
person. Evidence respecting the handwriting may
also be given by a comparison, made by the witness or
the court, with writings admitted or treated as
genuine by the party against whom the evidence is
offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of
the judge. (Sec. 22)
WHAT DOES A PUBLIC DOCUMENT PROVE?
Document consisting of entries in public
records made in the performance of a duty by a public
officer are prima facie evidence of the facts therein
stated. All other public documents are evidence, even
against a third person, of the fact which gave rise to
their execution and of the date of the latter. (Sec. 23)
HOW MAY AN OFFICIAL RECORD BE PROVED?
The record of public documents referred to in
paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible for any
purpose may be evidenced by an official publication
thereof of by a copy attested by the officer having the
legal custody of the record or by his deputy and
accompanied if the record is not kept in the
Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the
custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in a
foreign country, the certificate may be made by a
secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any officer
in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in
the foreign country in which the record is kept and
authenticated by the seal of his office (Sec. 24)
WHEN A COPY OF A WRITING IS ATTESTED FOR
THE PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE, WHAT MUST THE
ATTESTATION STATE?
Whenever a copy of a document or record is
attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation
must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy
of the original or a specific part thereof, as the case
may be. The attestation must be under the official seal
of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the
clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such
court. (Sec. 25)
WHAT IS MEANT BY IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC
RECORD?
It means that any public record an official copy
of which is admissible in evidence must not be
removed from the office in which it is kept except
upon order of a court where the inspection of the
record is essential to the just determination of a
pending case. (Sec. 26)
HOW MAY THE AUTHORIZED PUBLIC RECORD OF
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
An authorized public record of a private document
may be proved:
a) By the original record; or
b) By a coy thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an
appropriate certificate that such officer has
the custody. (Sec. 27)
GIVE THE RULE ON PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD.
A written statement signed by an officer
having the custody of an official record or by his
deputy that after diligent search no record or entry of
a specified tenor is found to exist in the records of his
office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided,
is admissible as evidence that the records of his office
contain no such records or entry. (Sec. 28).
HOW MAY A JUDICIAL RECORD BE IMPEACHED?
www.rkmfiles.net156
Any judicial record may be impeached be impeached
by evidence of:
a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial
officer;
b) collusion between the parties or
c) fraud in the party offering the record, in
respect to the proceedings.
(Sec. 29)
STATE THE RULE ON PROOF OF NOTARIAL
DOCUMENTS.
Every instrument duly acknowledged or
proved an certified as provided by law, may be
presented in evidence without further proof the
certificate of acknowledgement being prima facie
evidence of the execution of the instrument of
document involved. (Sec. 30)
HOW MAY THE ALTERATIONS IN A DOCUMENT BE
EXPLAINED BY THE PARTY PRODUCING IT?
The party producing a document as genuine
which has been altered and appears to have been
altered after its execution, in a part material to the
question in dispute, must account for the alteration.
He may show that the alteration was made by another
without his concurrence, or was made with the
consent of the parties affected by it or was otherwise
properly or innocently made, or that the alteration did
not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
If he fails to do that, the document shall not be
admissible in evidence. (Sec. 31)
GIVE THE RULE ON SEALED AND UNSEALED
PRIVATE DOCUMENTS.
There shall be no difference between sealed
and unsealed private documents insofar as their
admissibility as evidence is concerned. (Sec. 32).
WHEN MAY DOCUMENTS WRITTEN IN
UNOFFICIAL LANGUAGE BE ADMISSIBLE?
Documents written in an unofficial language
shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied
with a translation into English or Filipino. To avoid
interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys
are directed to have such translation prepared before
trial. (Sec. 33)
WHAT IS THE REASON AND PURPOSE FOR THE
OFFER OF EVIDENCE?

The court shall consider no evidence which
has not been formally offered. The purposes for which
the evidence is offered must be specified. (Sec. 34)
WHEN SHALL OFFER OF EVIDENCE BE MADE?
As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer
must be made at the time the witness is called to
testify. Documentary and object evidence shall be
offered after the presentation of a party’s testimonial
evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless
allowed by the court to be done in writing. (Sec. 35)
WHEN SHALL OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
OFFERED BE MADE?
Objection to evidence offered orally must be made
immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to a question propounded in the
coursed of the oral examination of a witness shall be
made as soon as the grounds therefore shall become
reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be
objected to within three (3) days after notice of the
offer unless a different period is allowed by the court.
In any case, the grounds for the objections
must be specified. (Sec. 36)
WHEN IS OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE
UNNECESSARY?
When it becomes reasonably apparent in the
course of the examination of a witness that the
questions being propounded are of the same class as
those to which objection has been made, whether such
objection was sustained or overruled, it shall not be
necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient
for the adverse party to record his continuing
objection to such class of questions. (Sec. 37)
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A GENERAL AND
SPECIFIC OBJECTION.
An objection is general when the grounds
thereof are not stated, or are generally stated. An
objection that the evidence offered is irrelevant,
incompetent, or inadmissible is a general one. (Moran,
Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 690 citing Rush vs. French,
1 Ariz., 99, 25 Pac. 819) An objection is specific where
it states wherein or how or why the evidence is
www.rkmfiles.net157
irrelevant or incompetent. (Moran, Ibid., Rush vs.
French, supra) The general rule is that an objection
must be specified. (Sec. 36)
WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF A GENERAL OBJECTION?
A general objection is sufficient, if on the face
of the evidence objected to units relation to the rest of
the case, there appears no purpose whatever for
which it would have been admissible. Thus, it has
been held that where there is a general objection to
evidence and it is overruled, and the evidence is
received, the ruling will not be held erroneous unless
the evidence, in its essential nature, is inadmissible.
Where the general objection is sustained, and the
evidence excluded, the ruling will not be upheld,
unless any ground in fact existed for the exclusion (6
Moran, Comments, p. 128, 1963 ed.)
WHEN SHALL THE COURT RULE ON THE
OBJECTIONS TO THE OFFER OF EVIDENCE?
The ruling of the court must be given
immediately after the objection is made, unless the
court desires to take a reasonable time to inform
itself on the question presented by the ruling (Sec.
38)
SHOULD THE COURT STATE THE REASON FOR ITS
RULING IN CASE OF OBJECTION TO
EVIDENCE?
The reason for sustaining or overruling an
objection need not be stated. However, if the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling
sustaining the objection on one or some of them must
specify the ground or grounds relied upon. (Sec. 38)
WHEN MAY THE COURT STRIKE OUT AN ANSWER
OF A WITNESS DURING THE TRIAL?
Should a witness answer the question before
the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its
objection to the same, and such objection is found to
be meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection
and order the answer given to be striken off the
record.
On proper motion, the court may also order
the striking out of answers which are incompetent,
irrelevant or otherwise improper. (Sec. 39)
STATE THE PROCEDURE IF THE COURT EXCLUDES
DOCUMENTS OR THINGS OFFERED IN
EVIDENCE.
If documents or things offered in evidence are
excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence
excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record
the name and other personal circumstances of the
witness and the substance of the proposed testimony.
(Sec. 40)
WHAT IS THE DEGREE OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL
CASES?
In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an
acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable
doubt. (Sec. 2, Rule 133)
WHAT IS PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean
such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of
error, produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty
only is required, or that degree of proof which
produces conviction in uprejudiced mind. (Sec. 2)
WHAT DEGREE OF PROOF IS NECESSARY FOR
CONVICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES?
A defendant in a criminal action shall be
presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved,
and in case of reasonable doubt that his guilt is
satisfactorily shown, he shall be entitled to an
acquittal. (People vs. Bequino, 77 Phil. 629)
Therefore, the guilt of the accused must be established
by the prosecution by proof beyond reasonable doubt.
WHAT ARE THE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED ON
THE WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE?
In determining where the superior weight of
evidence on the issues involved lies the court may
consider all the facts and circumstances of the case
including the following:
a) the witness’ manner of testifying;
b) the intelligence of the witnesses, their
means and opportunity of knowing the
facts to which they are testifying;
www.rkmfiles.net158
c) the nature of the facts to which the
witnesses testify;
d) the probability or improbability of the
testimony of witnesses;
e) the interest or want of interest of the
witnesses;
f) the personal credibility of the witnesses so
far as the same may legitimately appear
upon the trial, and
g) the number of witnesses. (U.S. vs. Lasada,
18 Phil. 90)
WHEN IS THE EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION OF AN
ACCUSED SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT?
An extrajudicial confession made by an
accused, shall not be sufficient ground for conviction,
unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti.
(Sec. 3)
WHAT IS THE CORPUS DELICTI?
It is the fact of specific loss or injury. In
homicide, the fact of death, whether or not
feloniously caused is the corpus delicti (Cortez vs.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-32246, June 2, 1988)
WHAT MANNER OF PROOF IS REQUIRED IN SELF-
DEFENSE?
Accused who claims self-defense has the
burden to prove its elements by clear and convincing
evidence. That evidence must be clear, satisfactory
and convincing. (People vs. Macariola, 120 SCRA 92)
WHEN IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
SUFFICIENT FOR CONVICTION?
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
a) There is more than one circumstance;
b) The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven; and
c) The combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt. (Sec. 4)
GIVE THE RULE ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
In cases filed before administrative or quasi-
judicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established if it
is supported by substantial evidence, or that amount
of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to justify a conclusion. (Sec. 5)

WHAT IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE?
Substantial evidence has been defined to be
such relevant evidenced as a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion.
(Berenguer, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-60287,
Aug. 17, 1988)
WHEN MAY THE COURT STOP THE
PRESENTATION OF FURTHER EVIDENCE?
The court may stop the introduction of
further testimony upon any particular point when the
evidence upon it is already so full that more
witnesses to the same point cannot be reasonably
expected to be additionally persuasive. But this
power should be exercised with caution. (Sec. 6)
GIVE THE RULE ON THE EVIDENCE ON MOTION
When a motion is based on facts not
appearing of record the court may hear the matter on
affidavits or depositions presented by the respective
parties, but the court may direct that the matter be
heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions. (Sec. 7)
HOW MAY A PERSON PERPETUATE HIS OWN
TESTIMONY?
A person who desires to perpetuate his own
testimony or that of another person regarding any
matter that may be cognizable in any court of the
Philippines, may file a verified petition in the court of
the province of the residence of any expected adverse
party. (Sec. 1)
WHAT SHALL BE ALLEGED IN THE PETITION?
The petition shall be entitled in the name of
the petitioner and shall show (a) that the petitioner
expects to be a party to an action in a court of the
Philippines but is presently unable to bring it or cause
it to be brought; (b) the subject matter of the expected
action and his interest therein; (c) the facts which is he
desires to establish by the proposed testimony and his
reasons for desiring to perpetuate it; (d) the names or
a description of the persons he expects will be adverse
parties and their addresses so far as known; and (e)
the names and addresses of the persons to be
examined and the substance of the testimony which he
expects to elicit from each, and shall ask for an order
authorizing the petitioner to take the depositions of
www.rkmfiles.net159
the persons to be examined named in the petition for
the purpose of perpetuating their testimony. (Sec. 2)
WHAT SHALL THE NOTICE OF PETITION
CONTAIN, AND UPON WHOM, WHEN AND HOW
SHALL IT BE SERVED?
The petitioner shall thereafter serve a notice
upon each person named in the petition as an
expected adverse party, together with a copy of the
petition, stating that the petitioner will apply to the
court, at a time and place named therein, for the order
described in the petition. At least twenty (20) days
before the date of hearing the notice shall be served in
the manner provided for service of summons. (Sec. 3)
WHAT SHALL THE COURT DO IF IT IS SATISFIED
THAT THE PERPETUATION OF TESTIMONY MAY
PREVENT A FAILURE OR DELAY OF JUSTICE?
If the court is satisfied that the perpetuation of
the testimony may prevent a failure or delay of justice,
it shall make an order designating or describing the
persons whose deposition may be taken and
specifying the subject matter of the examination, and
whether the deposition shall be taken upon oral
examination or written interrogatories. The
depositions may then be taken in accordance with
Rule 24 before the hearing (Sec. 4)
For the purpose of applying Rule 24 to
depositions for perpetuating testimony, each
reference therein to the court in which the action is
pending shall be deemed to refer to the court in which
the petition for such deposition was filed. (Sec. 5)
GIVE THE RULE ON THE USE OF DEPOSITION.
If a deposition to perpetuate testimony is
taken under this rule, or if, although not so taken, it
would be admissible in evidence, it may be used in any
action involving the same subject matter subsequently
brought in accordance with the provision of Sections
4 and 5 of Rule 24. (Sec. 6)
IN SUCH A CASE, HOW AND WHERE SHALL THE
PETITION BE FILED?
If an appeal has been taken from a judgment of
the Regional Trial Court or before the taking of an
appeal if the time therefore has not expired, the
Regional Trial Court in which the judgment was
rendered may allow the taking of depositions of
witnesses to perpetuate their testimony for use in the
event of further proceedings in the said court. In such
case the party who desires to perpetuate the
testimony may make a motion in the said Regional
Trial Court for leave to take the depositions, upon the
same notice and service thereof as if the action was
pending therein. (Sec. 7)

WHAT SHALL THE MOTION SHOW?

The motion shall show (a) the names and SPECIAL LAWS
addresses of the persons to be examined and the
substance of the testimony which he expects to elicit Republic Act No. 7659 - Heinous Crimes Act
from each; and (b) the reason for perpetuating their
testimony. (Sec. 7) What are HEINOUS CRIMES?

WHAT SHALL BE ORDERED BY THE COURT? Heinous crimes are grievous, odious and
hateful offenses, which by reason of their inherent or
If the court finds that the perpetuation of the manifest wickedness, viciousness atrocity and
testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of perversity are repugnant and outrageous to the
justice, it may make an order allowing is proper to common standards and norms of decency and
avoid a failure or delay of justice, it may make an order morality in a just, civilized and ordered society.
allowing the depositions to be taken, and thereupon
the depositions may be taken and used in the same The heinous crimes are:
manner and under the same conditions as are
prescribed in these rules for depositions taken in 1) Treason;
actions pending in the Regional Trial Court. (Sec. 7) 2) Qualified Piracy/Mutiny
3) Qualified Bribery
4) Parricide
5) Murder
6) Infanticide
7) Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
…oΩo… 8) Robbery with Homicide
9) Robbery with Rape
10) Robbery with Intentional Mutilation
11) Robbery with Arson
12) Destructive Arson
13) Rape committed by two or more persons
14) Rape committed with the use of deadly
weapon
15) Rape with Homicide or attempted Rape with
Homicide
16) Rape attended by any of the following
circumstances:
▪ The victim thereby became insane;
▪ The victim is less than 18 years old and
the offender is an ascendant, a step-
parent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the
3rd civil degree, or the common law
spouse of the victim’s parent;
▪ The victim is under custody of police or
military authorities;

www.rkmfiles.net160
 ▪ The victim is a religious or a child less
than 7 years old;
▪ The rape was committed in full view of
the husband, parent, children or
relative within the 3rd civil degree of
consanguinity;
▪ The offender is afflicted with AIDS and
is aware of it;
▪ The offender is a member of the AFP or
PNP or any law enforcement agency;
or
▪ The victim thereby suffered
permanent physical mutilation.
17. Plunder
18. Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972
as amended when the quantity of drugs
involved in the violation is equal to or more
than that provided under Section 20.
19. Carnapping where the owner, driver or
occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is
killed or raped in the course of the commission
of carnapping or on the occasion thereof.
Nota Bene:
The Death Penalty Law has been superseded by
Republic Act # 9346.
Republic Act No. 7080 - (Anti-Plunder Law)
What is PLUNDER?
Plunder is the crime committed by “any
PUBLIC OFFICER who by himself or in connivance
with members of his family, relative by consanguinity,
business associates, subordinate or other persons
amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth
through a COMBINATION or SERIES of overt or
criminal acts in the aggregate amount or total value of
at least P50, 000,000.00 (as amended by R.A. No.
7659).
Who is a PUBLIC OFFICER under R.A. No. 7080?
Any person holding any PUBLIC OFFICE in the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines by
virtue of
www.rkmfiles.net161
(a) an appointment;
(b) election; or
(c) contract
Government of the Republic of the Philippines
includes the National Government, and Any of its
subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities, including
GOCCs and their subsidiaries.
Who is a PERSON as defined under R.A. No. 7080?
“PERSON” includes any NATURAL or
JURIDICAL person.
NATURAL PERSON – a human being
JURIDICAL PERSON – organizations, or
entities recognized by law as a person such as LGUs,
Registered Corporations and Partnerships.
What is an ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH?
ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH means any asset,
property, business, and enterprise or material
possession of any person, acquired by him directly or
indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents,
subordinates and/or business associates.
What are the means of acquiring ILL-GOTTEN
WEALTH? (Overt or Criminal Acts)
ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH can be acquired through the
following means and similar schemes:
1) Misappropriation, conversion, misuse or
malversation of public funds or raids on the
public treasury;
2) Receiving, directly or indirectly, any
commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks
or any other form of pecuniary benefit from
any person and/or entity in connection with
any government contract or project or by
reason of the office or position of the public
officer concerned;
3) Illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition
of assets belonging to the Government;
4) Obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or
indirectly any share of stock, equity or any
other form of interest or participation
including the promise of future employment in
any business enterprise or undertaking;

5) Establishing agricultural, industrial or
commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation of
decrees and orders intended to benefit
particular persons or special interests; or
6) By taking undue advantage of official position,
authority, relationship, connection or
influence to unjustly enrich himself or
themselves at the expense and to the damage
and prejudice of the Filipino people and the
R.P.
What COURT has the JURISDICTION to hear and try
PLUNDER CASES?
All PLUNDER CASES are within the original
jurisdiction of the SANDIGANBAYAN.
What is the PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD of the crime of
PLUNDER?
A plunder case prescribes in 20 years.
However, the right of the State to recover properties
unlawfully acquired by public officers from them or
from their nominees or transferees is not barred by
prescription, laches, or estoppel (does not prescribe).
Amendments to R.A. 7080 Introduced by R.A.
7659
What amendments did R.A. 7659 introduce to R.A.
7080?
R.A. 7659…
1) AMOUNT - Lowered the amount from at least
P75 million (R.A. 7080) to at least P50 million.
2) IMPOSABLE PENALTY - Changed the
imposable penalty of life imprisonment with
reclusion perpetua to death.
Will the acquisition or accumulation of ill-gotten
wealth by a public official totalling to at least 50
million pesos made through a single act constitute
plunder?
Suggested Answer:
This has not been decided. In our opinion,
however, a single act does not constitute plunder
because the Anti-Plunder Law provides that the
www.rkmfiles.net162
acquisition of ill-gotten wealth by a public official
must be made through a COMBINATION or SERIES of
acts.
Republic Act No. 9160 - Anti-Money Laundering
Act of 2001
What is MONEY LAUNDERING?
Money laundering is a crime whereby the
proceeds of an UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY are transacted;
thereby making them appear to have originated from
legitimate sources.
What constitutes an UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY?
Sec. 3 (i) - unlawful activity refers to any act or
omission or series or combination thereof involving or
having relation to the following:
1) Kidnapping for ransom;
2) Plunder;
3) Robbery and Extortion;
4) Jueteng and Masiao punished as illegal
gambling under P.D. 1602;
5) Piracy;
6) Qualified Theft;
7) Swindling or Estafa;
8) Smuggling;
9) Hijacking; and
10) many others.
MONEY LAUNDERING is committed by the following:
a) Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property represents, involves,
or relates to, the proceeds of any unlawful
activity, transacts or attempts to transact said
monetary instrument or property;
a) Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property represents or involves
the proceeds of any unlawful activity,
performs or fails to perform any act as a result
of which he facilitates the offense of money
laundering;
a) Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property is required under this
Act to be disclosed and filed with the Anti-
 Money laundering Council (AMLC), fails to do
so.
Which has jurisdiction over Money Laundering
cases?
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC): If the
accused is a PRIVATE PERSON.
SANDIGANBAYAN: When committed by
PUBLIC OFFICERS and PRIVATE PERSONS in
conspiracy with such public officers.
Republic Act No. 3019 - Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act
What are the CORRUPT PRACTICES of a PUBLIC
OFFICER?
1) Persuading, inducing or influencing another
public officer to perform an act constituting a
violation of rules and regulations duly
promulgated by competent authority or an
offense in connection with the official duties of
the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded,
induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
2) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving
any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit
for himself or for any other person, in
connection with any contract or transaction
between the Government and any other party,
wherein the public officer in his official
capacity has to intervene under the law.
3) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving
any gift, present or other pecuniary or
material benefit, for himself or for another,
from any person for whom the public officer,
in any manner or capacity, has secured or
obtained, or will secure or obtain, any
Government permit or license, in
consideration for the help given or to be given.
4) Accepting or having any member of his family
accept employment in a private enterprise
which has pending official business with him
during the pendency thereof or within one
year after its termination.
5) Causing any undue injury to any party,
including the Government, or giving any
private party any unwarranted benefits,
www.rkmfiles.net163
advantage or preference in the discharge of
his official, administrative or judicial functions
through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence.
6) Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or
request, without sufficient justification, to act
within a reasonable time on any matter
pending before him for the purpose of
obtaining directly or indirectly, from any
person interested in the matter some
pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or
for the purpose of favoring his own interest or
giving undue advantage in favor of or
discriminating against any other interested
party.
7) Entering on behalf of the Government, into
any contract or transaction manifestly and
grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether
or not the public officer profited or will profit
thereby.
8) Directly or indirectly having financial or
pecuniary interest in any business, contract or
transaction in connection with which he
intervenes or takes part in his official capacity,
or in which he is prohibited by the
Constitution or by any law from having any
interest.
9) Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, or having a material interest in
any transaction or act requiring the approval
of a board, panel or group of which he is a
member, and which exercises discretion in
such approval, even if he votes against the
same or does not participate in the action of
the board, committee, panel or group.
10) Knowingly approving or granting any license,
permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any
person not qualified for or not legally entitled
to such license, permit, privilege or advantage,
or of a mere representative or dummy of one
who is not so qualified or entitled.
11) Divulging valuable information of a
confidential character, acquired by his office
or by him on account of his official position to
unauthorized persons, or releasing such
information in advance of its authorized
release date.
Is a Christmas or birthday gift received by a
public officer considered a corrupt practice?
ANSWER:
No if the gift was –
(a) unsolicited (given by the giver voluntarily
and not demanded by the public officer), and
(b) of small or insignificant value, and
(C) was given as a mere token of gratitude or
friendship according to local customs or usage (Sec.
14).
Prohibition on PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS:
It is unlawful for ANY PERSON having family
or close personal relation with any public official to
capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such family
or close personal relation by directly or indirectly
requesting or receiving any present, gift or material
or pecuniary advantage from any other person
having some business, transaction, application,
request or contract with the Government, in which
such public official has to intervene.
FAMILY RELATION includes the SPOUSE or
RELATIVES by consanguinity or affinity in the 3rd
CIVIL DEGREE.
CLOSE PERSONAL RELATION includes close
personal relationship, social and fraternal
connections, and professional employment all giving
rise to intimacy which assures free access to such
public officer.
It is unlawful for any person knowingly to
induce or cause any public official to commit any of
the CORRUPT PRACTICES.
Prohibition on CERTAIN RELATIVES:
It is unlawful for the SPOUSE or for ANY
RELATIVE, by consanguinity or affinity, within the
3rd civil degree, of the
1) President of the Philippines,
2) Vice President of the Philippines,
3) Senate President, and
4) House Speaker
to INTERVENE directly or indirectly, in any
business, transaction, contract or application with the
Government (subject to the exceptions provided for
under Sec. 5).
www.rkmfiles.net164
Prohibition on MEMBERS OF CONGRESS:
It is unlawful for any member of the Congress,
during his/her term of office to ACQUIRE or RECEIVE
any personal pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be directly and
particularly favored or benefited by any law or
resolution AUTHORED by him/her previously
approved or adopted by the Congress during his/her
term.
Statement of Assets and Liabilities
Every public officer MUST file-
WHAT? A detailed and sworn statement of
assets and liabilities, amounts and sources of his/her
income, amounts of his/her personal and family
expenses and the amount of income taxes paid.
WHEN? 1) within 30 days after
assuming office,
2) on or before April 15 of every year,
3) upon the expiration of his/her term
of office, or
4) upon his/her resignation or
separation from office.
What COURT has the jurisdiction to try
complaints for violations of R.A. 3019?
SANDIGANBAYAN - has the original
jurisdiction to hear and decide complaints for Graft
and Corruption.
Is a public officer who is being investigated or is
facing charges of graft and corruption allowed to
resign or retire during the pendency of the
investigation or the case against him?
No public officer is allowed to resign or retire
pending an investigation, criminal or administrative
or pending a prosecution against him, for any offense
under R.A. No. 3019 or under the provisions of the
RPC on bribery (Sec. 12).
What should be done to the public officer accused
of violation of R.A. No. 3019 during the pendency
of the investigation or during the trial of his case?
The public officer who is under investigation
or is being tried for graft and corruption should be
SUSPENDED FROM OFFICE pending the investigation
or trial of his case.
Is a public officer who was found guilty of the
charges entitled to his retirement or gratuity
benefits?
No. Should the public officer be convicted by
final judgment, he loses all retirement or gratuity
benefits under the law.
What about if the public officer has already
received his retirement or gratuity benefits and
he was convicted of the charges?
The said convicted public officer who was
found guilty of the charges must return or restitute
the amount received as retirement or gratuity benefit
to the Government.
What about if the public officer was found
INNOCENT of the charges against him?
The public officer is acquitted; he is entitled
to reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits
which he failed to receive during suspension.
Republic Act No. 7610 - (Anti-Child Abuse Law)
Who are children under the Act?
“Children” refers to persons:
a) Below 18 years of age, or
b) Over 18 years of age 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).
What is CHILD ABUSE?
CHILD ABUSE refers to the maltreatment,
whether habitual or not, of the child which includes
any of the following acts:
www.rkmfiles.net165
a) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect,
cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;
b) Any act by deeds or words which debases,
degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity
of a child as a human being;
c) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic
needs for survival, such as food and shelter; or
d) Failure to immediately give medical
treatment to an injured child resulting in serious
impairment of his growth and development or his
permanent incapacity or death.
Offenses under this Act
1) CHILD PROSTITUTION and OTHER CHILD ABUSE
Who are considered “children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse”?
Children, whether male or female, who for
money, profit or any other consideration or due to
the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or
group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse (Sec. 5).
Who are liable for Child Prostitution and other
Child Abuse?
The following are punished with reclusion
temporal in its medium period to reclusion
perpetua:
1) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are
not limited to the following:
- Acting as procurer of a child prostitute;
- Inducing a person to be a client of a child
prostitute by means of written or oral
advertisements or other similar means;
- Taking advantage of influence or
relationship to procure a child as a prostitute;
- Threatening or using violence towards a
child to engage him as a prostitute; or
- Giving monetary consideration, goods or
other pecuniary to a child with the intent to
engage such child in prostitution.
2) Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other
sexual abuse;

3) Those who derive profit or advantage there
from, whether as a manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes place,
or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a
cover or which engages in prostitution in
addition to the activity for which the license has
been issued to said establishment.
ACTS PUNISHABLE AS AN ATTEMPT TO COMMIT
CHILD PROSTITUTION
Who are guilty of attempt to commit child
prostitution?
Any person who, not being a relative of the
child is found ALONE with the child inside the room
or cubicle of a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension
house, apartelle or other similar establishments,
vessel, vehicle or any other hidden or secluded area
under circumstances which would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the child is about to be
exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse; and
Any person who receives services from a
child in a sauna parlor, massage clinic, health club
and other similar establishments.
2) CHILD TRAFFICKING
Consummated Act of CHILD TRAFFICKING
Who are liable for consummated act of child
trafficking?
Any person who engages in trading and
dealing with children including, but not limited to,
the act of buying and selling of a child for money, or
for any other consideration, or barter.
Attempt to Commit CHILD TRAFFICKING:
There is an attempt to commit Child
Trafficking:
- When a child travels alone to a foreign
country without valid reason therefor and
without clearance issued by the DSWD or
written permission or justification from the
child’s parents or legal guardian;
- When a pregnant mother executes an
www.rkmfiles.net166
affidavit of consent for adoption for a
consideration;
- When a person, agency, establishment or
child-caring institution recruits women or
couples to bear children for the purpose of
child trafficking;
- When a doctor, hospital, or child clinic
official or employee, nurse, midwife, local
civil registrar or any other person simulates
birth for the purpose of child trafficking; or
- When a person engages in the act of finding
children among low-income families,
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, day-care centers,
or other child-caring institutions who can be
offered for the purpose of child trafficking.
3) OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS
Who are liable?
a) Any person who hires, employs, uses, persuades,
induces, or coerces a child:
1) to perform in obscene exhibitions and
indecent shows, whether live or in video;
2) to pose or model in obscene publications
or pornographic materials.
b) Any ascendant, guardian, or person entrusted in
any capacity with the care of the child who causes
and/or allows a child to be employed or to
participate in an obscene play, scene, act, movie or
show or in any other acts covered by Sec. 9 of R.A.
7610.
Other ACTS of NEGLECT, ABUSE, CRUELTY or
EXPLOITATION and other Conditions Prejudicial to
the Child’s Development:
1) Committing any other act of child abuse,
cruelty or exploitation or be responsible for other
conditions prejudicial to the child’s development;
2) Keeping or having in his company a minor,
12 years or under or who is 10 years or more
younger than his junior in any public place or private
place, hotel, motel, beer joint, discothèque, cabaret,
pension house, sauna or massage parlor, beach
and/or other tourist resort or similar places;
 3) Inducing, delivering or offering a minor to Road rollers; Bulldozers; Trolley cars;
anyone prohibited to keep or have in his company a Graders; Street-Sweepers; Fork-lifts; Sprinklers;
minor as provided in the preceding paragraph; Amphibian Trucks, and Lawn mowers; Cranes

4) Allowing by any person, owner, manager NOT USED ON PUBLIC HIGHWAYS,

or one entrusted with the operation of any public or
private place or accommodation, whether for
occupancy, food, drink, or otherwise, including
residential places any minor;
5) Using, coercing, forcing or intimidating a
street child or any other child to:
a) Beg or use begging as a means of
living;
b) Act as conduit or middleman in
drug trafficking or pushing; or
c) Conduct any illegal activities.
Who may FILE a COMPLAINT for a VIOLATION of
R.A. 7610?
Vehicles, which run only on rails or tracks,
and
Tractors, trailers and traction engines of all
kinds used exclusively for agricultural purposes.
What constitutes unlawful taking in the crime of
CARNAPPING?
UNLAWFUL TAKING in CARNAPPING takes
place when the owner or juridical possessor does not
give his consent to the taking, or, if consent was given,
it was vitiated (People vs. Tan, 323 SCRA 30).

The complaint may be filed by any of the TAKING OF A MOTOR VEHICLE can be:
following:
1) CARNAPPING under R.A. 6538, or
1) Offended party; 2) QUALIFIED THEFT under Art. 310 of the
2) Parents or guardians; RPC, or
3) Ascendant or collateral relative within the 3) ESTAFA under Art. 315 paragraph 1 (b) of
third degree of consanguinity; the RPC.
4) Officer, social worker or representative of
a licensed child-caring institution; CARNAPPING vs. QUALIFIED THEFT vs. ESTAFA
5) Officer, social worker of the DSWD;
6) Barangay Chairman; CARNAPPING QUALIFIED THEFT ESTAFA
7) At least 3 concerned responsible citizens
where the violation occurred.
1) Taking A] Art. 310, RPC 1) Physic
Republic Act No. 6539 - Anti-Carnapping Act of 2) with intent to gain, 1)Taking possessio
1972 3) of a motor vehicle 2) with intent to gain vehicle w
4) belonging to another 3) of a motor vehicle to the acc
What is CARNAPPING? 5) (a) without the 4) belonging to another (e.g. agen
latter’s consent, 5) Without the latter’s 2) He m
It is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor or consent the same
vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s (b) by means of 6) But without violence
consent, or by means of violence against or violence against against or intimidation
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon or intimidation of of persons or force
things. person, or upon things.
(c) by using force
DEFINITION OF TERMS: upon things. B] Jurisprudence
1) Material or physical
MOTOR VEHICLE – is any vehicle propelled by any possession of the
power other than muscular power using the public motor vehicle was
highways transferred to the
accused; (e.g.
EXCEPT the following: borrowed)

www.rkmfiles.net167
 2) He misappropriated 4) Private communication/conversation or
the same. spoken word
5) Without the knowledge or consent of all the
parties.

Note: Private Communications Can Be Waived by

SHOUTING

Presidential Decree No. 533 - Anti-Cattle Rustling

Law of 1974

What is a “CATTLE RUSTLING”?

CATTLE RUSTLING is the -

1. Taking away by any means, methods or
scheme, without the consent of the
owner/raiser, of a LARGE CATTLE whether or
not for profit or gain, or whether committed
Republic Act No. 6235 - ANTI-HIJACKING LAW with or without violence against or
intimidation of any person or force upon
How is the crime of HIJACKING committed? things;

Hijacking is committed by: 2. Killing of a large cattle, or taking its meat or

1) Compelling the pilot to change in course or hide without the consent of the owner/raiser.
destination of a DOMESTIC AIRCARFT;
2) Seizing or usurping the control of a DOMESTIC What is a LARGE CATTLE?
AIRCAFT while it is in flight;
3) Compelling a FOREIGN AIRCRAFT to land in the LARGE CATTLE includes the following:
Philippine territory; and
4) Seizing or usurping the control of the FOREIGN 1) Cow;
AIRCRAFT while it is within Philippine territory. 2) Carabao;
3) Horse;
When is an aircraft considered in flight? 4) Mule;
5) Ass; or
An aircraft is considered in flight from the 6) Other domesticated member of the bovine
moment all its external doors are closed following family.
embarkation until any of such doors is opened for
disembarkation. WHO is considered as an OWNER/RAISER of a
Large Cattle?
Other acts punished by R.A. No. 6235:
OWNER/RAISER - includes the herdsman,
Shipping, loading, or carrying in any caretaker, employee or tenant of any firm or entity
PASSENGER AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility engaged in the raising of large cattle or other persons
within the Philippines any explosive, flammable, in lawful possession of such large cattle.
corrosive or poisonous substance or material.
Duty of OWNER/RAISER to Register the LARGE
Republic Act No. 4200 - Anti-Wire Tapping Law CATTLE - The owner/raiser is duty-bound to register
the large cattle belonging to him
What are the acts punished as wire-tapping?
WHEN? Before the large cattle attains the age of 6
1) Tapping any wire or cable, or months.
2) Using any other device or arrangement, WHERE? With the office of the City/Municipality
3) To secretly overhear, intercept, or record a where the owner/raiser resides.

www.rkmfiles.net168
After registration, a CERTIFICATE of OWNERSHIP is firm,
issued to the owner/raiser. association,
corporation or partnership, or
Permit to BUY and SELL Large Cattle: other organizations
who/which commits the act of fencing.
Any person, partnership, association,
corporation or entity engaged in the business of Presumption of FENCING:
buying and selling large cattles MUST first secure a
permit from (a) the Provincial Commander, and (b) Mere possession of any goods, article, item,
the City/Municipal Treasurer of the place of residence object, or anything of value which has been the subject
of such person, partnership, association, corporation of robbery or theft is a PRIMA FACIE evidence of
or entity. fencing.

Presidential Decree No. 532 - Anti-Piracy and Anti-

Clearance for SHIPMENT of LARGE CATTLE
Any person, partnership, association,
corporation or entity desiring to ship or transport
large cattle, its hides, or meat, from one province to
another MUST secure a PERMIT from the Provincial
Commander.
PRESUMPTION of Cattle Rustling:
Highway Robbery Law
What is PIRACY?
Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the
taking away of the whole or part thereof, or its cargo,
equipment, or the personal belonging of its
complement or passengers, irrespective of the value
thereof, by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons or force upon things.

FAILURE to exhibit or show the required Who may commit PIRACY?

PERMIT or CLEARANCE by any person having in his
possession, control or custody of large cattle is a
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE that the large cattle in his
possession, control, or custody is the fruit of the crime
of cattle rustling.
Any person, including a passenger or member
of the crew/complement of the vessel.
Where may PIRACY be committed?

Presidential Decree No. 1612 - Anti-Fencing Law of Only in Philippine waters.

1979

What is “fencing”?
PIRACY: P.D. 532 VERSUS Art. 122 of the RPC
“Fencing” is the act of any person who,

a) with intent to gain for himself or for
another,
b) BUY, RECEIVE, POSSESS, KEEP, ACQUIRE,
CONCEAL,
SELL, or DISPOSE of, or BUYS and SELLS, or
in any other manner deal in
c) any article, item, object or anything of value
d) which HE KNOWS, or SHOULD BE KNOWN
TO HIM,
e) to have been derived from the proceeds of
the crime of robbery or theft.
Who is a “FENCE”? “FENCE” includes any
person,
www.rkmfiles.net169
P.D. No. 532 ARTICLE 122, RPC
1) Piracy can only be committed on 1) Piracy can be com
Philippine territorial waters. the high seas and
territorial waters.
2) Can be committed by ANY PERSON
including a passenger or member of 2) Can only be comm
the complement of the vessel. who is neither a
member of the com
vessel.
What is HIGHWAY ROBBERY or BRIGANDAGE?
1) The seizure of any person for ransom,
extortion or other unlawful purposes, or

2) Taking away of the property of another by
means of violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things or other
unlawful means.
WHERE? On any PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY
What is a PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY?
Any road, street, passage, highway and bridges
or other parts thereof, or railways or railroad within
the Philippines used by persons, or vehicles, or
locomotives or trains for the movement or circulation
of persons or transportation of goods, articles, or
property or both.
What is the purpose of the accused in Highway
Robbery or Brigandage?
The purpose of brigandage is
INDISCRIMINATE HIGHWAY ROBBERY (i.e. victim
could be any person or persons that passes through a
Philippine Highway).
If the purpose is only a particular robbery (i.e.
there is a predetermined or particular victim), the
crime is only Robbery or Robbery in band if there are
at least 4 armed participants.
Is the number of perpetrators an essential
element of Highway Robbery or Brigandage?
No. The perpetrator could be a single person
or a group of persons not necessarily at least four (4)
armed persons.
Is the fact that Robbery was committed on
Philippine Highway makes it Highway Robbery or
Brigandage?
No. The mere fact that robbery was committed
on Philippine Highway does not give rise to Highway
Robbery or Brigandage. The intent of indiscriminate
highway robbery must be present.
www.rkmfiles.net170
Republic Act No. 8049 - Anti-Hazing Act
What is HAZING?
It is an initiation rite or practice as a
prerequisite for admission into membership in a
fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the
recruit, neophyte or applicant in some
EMBARRASSING or HUMILIATING situations such as
forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and similar tasks
or activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or
psychological suffering or injury.
Take NOTE: The term “ORGANIZATION”
include any club, or the AFP, PNP, PMA, or officer and
cadet corps of the Citizen’s Military Academy (CMT),
or Citizen’s Army Training (CAT).
Requirements before hazing or initiation rites may be
conducted:
1) Prior written notice to the school
authorities or head of organization (seven (7) days
before the conduct of the said initiation rite.
2) The written notice shall
a) indicate the period of the initiation
activities which shall not exceed three (3) days;
b) include the names of those to be initiated;
c) contain an undertaking that no physical
violence be employed by anybody during such
initiation rites.
Republic Act No. 7832 - Anti-Electricity Pilferage
Act
Punishes: 1) Illegal use of electricity (- e.g. illegal
connection, tampering, use of jumpers)
2) Theft of electric power transmission lines
and materials.
What is “MURO-AMI”?
It is the act of fishing with gear method or
other physical or mechanical acts that destroy coral
reefs, sea grass beds and other fishery marine life
habitat
It is punishable under The Philippine Fisheries
Code of 1998 and R.A. 8550.
R.A. 7438 - Act Defining Certain Rights of Persons
Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial
Investigation
Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under
Custodial Investigation:
1) Right to be assisted by counsel at all times.
2) Right to remain silent.
3) Right to have a competent and independent
counsel, preferably of his own choice.
4) Right to be visited by any member of his
immediate family, or any medical doctor or
priest or religious minister chosen by him or
by any NGO duly accredited by the CHR or by
any international NGO duly accredited by the
Office of the President.
In what form shall the investigation report be?
It shall be in written form to be signed or
thumb marked by the person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation.
What should be done if the person arrested or
detained does not know how to read and write?
The contents of the investigation report shall
be read and adequately explained to him by his
counsel or by the assisting counsel in a language or
dialect known to such arrested or detained person.
Form of Extrajudicial Confession
It shall be in
(1) writing and
(2) signed by the person
(3) in the presence of his counsel or in the
latter’s absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the
presence of any of the parents, older brothers and
sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal
judge, district school supervisor, or priest or minister
of the gospel as chosen by him.
Effect of non-compliance with the requirements of a
valid extrajudicial confession:
www.rkmfiles.net171
The extrajudicial confession made by the
person arrested, detained or under custodial
investigation will be INADMISSIBLE as evidence in
any proceeding.
Form of waiver by the person arrested, detained or
under custodial investigation of Article 125 of the RPC:
Any waiver under the provisions of Art. 125 of
the RPC should be in WRITING and SIGNED by such
person in the PRESENCE of his counsel, otherwise,
such waiver shall be null and void and of no effect.
What is CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION?
Includes the practice of issuing an “invitation”
to a person who is being investigated in connection
with an offense he is suspected to have committed.
Republic Act No. 7438 imposes penalties to the
following:
1) Any arresting public officer or employee, or
any investigating officer who fails to inform
any person arrested, detained or under
custodial investigation of his right to remain
silent and to have a competent and
independent counsel preferably of his own
choice;
2) Any pubic officer or employee or anyone
acting upon orders of such investigating
officer or in his place, who fails to provide a
competent and independent counsel to a
person arrested, detained or under custodial
investigation for the commission of an offense
if the latter cannot afford the services of his
own counsel;
3) Any person who obstructs, prevents or
prohibits any lawyer, any member of the
immediate family of a person arrested,
detained or under custodial investigation, or
any medical doctor or priest or religious
minister chosen by him or by any member of
his immediate family or by his counsel, from
visiting and conferring privately with him, or
from examining and treating him, or from
ministering to his spiritual needs, at any hour
of the day, or in urgent cases, of the night.
Batas Pambansa Bilang. 22 - Anti-Bouncing Check
Law
Who is liable for violation of B.P. 22? 8) PROFESSOR,
9) COACH,
1. Any person who makes or draws and issues 10) TRAINER, or
any check to apply on account or value, knowing at 11) ANY OTHER PERSON HAVING
the time of issue that he does not have sufficient AUHTORITY, INFLUENCE OR MORAL ASCENDANCY
funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the OVER ANOTHER in a work or training or education
payment of such checks in full upon its presentment, environment.
which check is subsequently dishonored by the
drawee bank. IN WHAT WAY?

By demanding, requesting or otherwise

requiring any SEXUAL FAVOR from the other,
For what reason? regardless of whether the demand, request or
requirement for submission is accepted by the victim.
For insufficiency of funds or credit or it would
have been dishonored for the same reason had not
the drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the
bank to stop payment.

2. Any person who made or drew and issued a …oΩo…

check who failed to keep sufficient funds or to
maintain a credit to cover the full amount of the check
if said check was presented within a period of 90 days
from the date appearing thereon, for which reason it
is dishonored by the bank.

ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME

1. The accused makes, draws or issues any

check to apply on account or value.
2. The check is subsequently dishonored by
the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds
or credit or it would have been dishonored
for the same reason had not the drawer,
without any valid reason, ordered the
bank to stop payment.
3. The accused KNOWS at the time of
issuance that he or she does not have
sufficient funds in or credit with the
drawee bank for the payment of the check
in full upon its presentment.

Republic Act No. 7877 - Anti-Sexual Harassment

Act

WHOM? By an

1) EMPLOYER,
2) EMPLOYEE,
3) MANAGER,
4) SUPERVISOR,
5) AGENT OF THE EMPLOYER,
6) TEACHER,
7) INSTRUCTOR,

www.rkmfiles.net172