Crimes against Property

1.) The major classification of crimes against property includes the following:
1.) Robbery
a. With violence or intimidation against persons
b. With force upon things
2.) Theft
a. Simple
b. Qualified
3.) Estafa
4.) Malicious Mischief
a. Ordinary
b. Special Cases
5.) Arson
6.) Violation of Chattel Mortgage Law

ARTICLE 293 – ROBBERY IN GENERAL

1.) Robbery – taking of personal property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by
means of violence against, or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.
2.) Elements (PBUIVIF):
o Personal Property
o Belonging to another
o Unlawful taking of that property
o Intent to Gain
o Violence against (Person) or Intimidation of (Person) or Force upon anything
3.) Personal Property (movable)
o Such property, whether tangibles, or those with physical appearance and form or
intangibles, as long as they may be subject of appropriation and may be carried
away without altering its nature. This also includes “Real property by
immobilization or destination” or those attached to the soil or building so long as
they were detached therefrom and carried away. E.g. trees, machineries, statutes,
soil, stones and rocks.
o “Accessories” of real properties are also included. E.g. Fruits
o If real property is occupied, the crime is usurpation
4.) Belonging to another –
o The property does not belong to the offender
 Owner is not guilty of robbery
 Co-owner or partner not guilty of robbery
o Ownership by victim is not necessary, mere possession is sufficient
 o Name of owner in the description of the crime
 Needed in robbery with homicide because of the capital punishment
 Discrepancy between the alleged owner and proven owner will not
be able to convict the accused of robbery
 Not needed in
 robbery with intimidation or violence resulting in physical injuries
 robbery by the use of force upon things
5.) Unlawful Taking (asportation) – means the taking is against the will of the victim
o Taking – means depriving the offended party of ownership of the thing taken with
the character of permanency
 When used only to threaten, no robbery, because no permanency
 Should not be under claim of ownership
o No robbery where the accused “received” or was “delivered” to him
o If taking was lawful, and the unlawful misappropriation follows, crime is estafa
 Unlawful taking of authorities happens when the original plan is to seize
the opium in order to appropriate it
 If misappropriation is afterthought, crime is malversation
o Consummated – when robber acquires possession
o Taking of motor vehicles, crime is carnapping (RA 10883)
6.) Intent to Gain (animus lucrandi)
o Presumed
o Can be established through overt acts
o Cannot be established by direct evidence
 Exception: Confession
o Motive needed for circumstantial evidence
o The gain need not be in terms of financial and material gain as this may include
intent to obtain some utility, enjoyment, satisfaction or pleasure.
o Absence of intent but with violence, crime is grave coercion
7.) INTENT TO GAIN + BELONGING TO ANOTHER (must concur)
o If only intent to gain, but belonging to accused  no robbery
o If only taking of property believing to be his own, but no intent  no robbery
8.) Violence or Intimidation
o Must be against the person, not upon the thing
o Must be present before taking personal property
 If after taking, crime is (1) theft and either (2) physical injuries or grave
threat
 EXCEPTION: with Homicide, Rape, Intentional Mutilation, Serious
Physical Injuries (special complex crime)
o If no violence or intimidation, crime is theft
o Intimidation – when it causes fear or fright of the victim
  need not be threat of bodily harm (like arrest and prosecution)
 need not be immediately after intimidation
9.) Force upon anything
o Will not make the taking robbery if culprit never entered house/building
 Removing by force the tires is only theft
10.) Violence/Intimidation (Person) vs Force (Thing)
o Taking is
 Always robbery in violence/intimidation
 Not always robbery in force upon thing; only when force is used to enter
the building or to break locked or sealed furniture inside the building,
or force them open after taking the same from the building
o Value of property
 Immaterial in violence/intimidation
 Basis of penalty in force upon thing
11.) Complex Crime (Robbery with Violence/Intimidation and Robbery with Use
of Force)
o Robbery against the person is graver than robbery by force
o Penalty to be imposed is that of inhabited house
o Penalty of that against person is only imposed when takes place without entering
inhabited house
12.) Robbery and theft are both continuous offense.

ARTICLE 294 – ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF

PERSONS

1. Acts punished as robbery against or intimidation of persons.

a. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide is
committed
b. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
c. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted;
d. When by reason or on occasion of or robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in the loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the
loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or the loss of the use of any
such member or incapacity for the work in which the injured person is
therefore habitually engaged is inflicted;
e. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery is
carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime.
f. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any
person not responsible for the commission of the robbery any of the physical
injuries in consequence of which the person injured becomes deformed or loses
any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or becomes ill or
 incapacitated for the performance of work in which he is habitually engaged
for more than 90 days or the person injured becomes incapacitated for labor
for more than 30 days;
g. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause any of the serious
physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs intimidation
only
2. Article 48 does not apply to special complex crimes
3. Robbery with Homicide (Special Complex Crime)
a. PENALTY: RP to Death
b. CAUSAL RELAIONSHIP: There is direct relation and intimate connection
between robbery and killing
c. TIME: Killing may be before, during, or after robbery
d. PURPOSE: Robbery is the main purpose and killing was merely incidental
i. If killing is main purpose and taking is afterthought, two separate crimes
of homicide/murder and theft
e. “By reason or on occasion”
i. To facilitate the robbery or the escape of the culprit
ii. To preserve the possession by the culprit of the loot
iii. To prevent discovery of the commission of the crime
iv. To eliminate witnesses to the commission of the crime
f. MEANING OF HOMICE: Term homicide is generic – includes parricide and
murder
i. Robbery with Homicide regardless of number of persons killed
1. No robbery with double homicide
2. Committed by a band, crime is still robbery with homicide (only
aggravating)
3. Murder and Physical injuries, crime is still robbery with homicide
(physical injuries is absorbed)
4. No robbery with murder
g. INTENT: Intent to gain must precede the killing
h. INTENTIONAL OR ACCIDENTAL:
i. No robbery with homicide thru reckless imprudence or simple negligence
1. Even if death is by mere accident, crime is still robbery with
homicide
2. When motive is both robbery and vengeance, crime is still robbery
with homicide
i. WHO IS KILLED:
i. Victim
ii. Another robber is killed, crime is still robbery with homicide
iii. Innocent People or Bystander is killed, crime is still robbery with
homicide
 j. No separate crime of attempted murder or attempted homicide when there is
special complex crime, it is absorbed.
k. Robbery not proved, crime is homicide.
l. BY BAND: Principal in robbery are principals in robbery with homicide
i. EXCEPTION: They endeavor to prevent the killing
m. Accomplice and Accessory: Liable only for robbery if they do not know about the
killing
4. Robbery with Rape (Special Complex Crime)
a. RP to Death
b. Intent to gain must precede the rape
i. Rape committed in another place, crime is robbery with rape
ii. Rape committed in the house other than that where robbery is committed,
rape is separate offense.
c. No crime of robbery with attempted rape (robbery not means to commit rape)
d. Robbery is the main purpose and rape was merely afterthought, crime is robbery
with rape
 If rape is original plan and robbery is afterthought, separate crimes of
robbery and rape.
e. Multiple rapes on the same occasion of robbery, not aggravating circumstance
 Rape in Robbery with Homicide is aggravating circumstance
5. Robbery with Serious Physical Injuries (Special Complex Crime)
a. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted;
i. RT-med to RP
b. When by reason or on occasion of or robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in the loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the
loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or the loss of the use of any
such member or incapacity for the work in which the injured person is
therefore habitually engaged is inflicted;
i. RT
c. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any
person not responsible for the commission of the robbery any of the physical
injuries in consequence of which the person injured becomes deformed or loses
any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or becomes ill or
incapacitated for the performance of work in which he is habitually engaged
for more than 90 days or the person injured becomes incapacitated for labor
for more than 30 days;
i. PM-max to RT-med
ii. Must be inflicted in the course of executing robbery
  If after the taking has been completed, separate crime of robbery
and serious physical injuries
iii. If inflicted upon co-robber, separate crimes of robbery and serious
physical injuries
6. Robbery with Unnecessary Violence or Intimidation
a. PM-max to RT-med
b. Violence need not result in physical injuries (ex. tying the hands)
c. When violence or intimidation is needed, paragraph 4 does not apply.
7. Simple Robbery
a. PC-max to PM-med
b. Does not result to homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or serious physical
injuries
c. Does not cause any of the serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263
i. Less serious physical injuries
ii. Slight physical injuries
iii. No physical injuries (pushing)
d. If the offender employs intimidation only
i. There must be acts done by the accused which inspire fear in the person
against whom they are directed
1. Delivered the money to bring the accused to justice, not from fear
 no robbery

e. Violence/Intimidation need not be before or at the exact moment of taking

i. Can be used before owner is finally deprived (such as preventing someone
to recover property)
8. Robbery through intimidation vs Threats
a. INTIMIDATION
i. In robbery, (1) actual and immediate, (2) personal, (3) directed only to the
person of the victim
ii. In threats, (1) conditional or future, (2) may be thru intermediary, (3) may
refer to the person, honor, or property of the offended party or his family
b. GAIN
i. In robbery, immediate
ii. In threats, not immediate
9. Robbery with Violence vs Grave Coercion
a. There is no intent to gain in grave coercion
b. Someone believing to be the owner compels someone is grave coercion
c. Intimidation is immediate in Grave Coercion
10. Robbery vs Bribery
Robbery Bribery
 -the victim did not commit a crime and he
is intimidated with arrest and/or
prosecution to deprive him of his personal
property
-the victim is deprived of his money or
property by force or intimidation.
-when the victim has committed a crime
and gives money or gift to avoid arrests or
prosecution.
-he parts with his money or property in a
sense voluntarily.

ARTICLE 295 – ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES, COMMITTED IN AN

UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A BAND, OR WITH THE USE OF FIREARM ON A
STREET, ROAD OR ALLEY

1. Qualifying circumstances (UBAES)

a. In an uninhabited place;
b. by a band, or
c. by attacking a moving train, street, car, motor vehicle or airship, or;
d. by entering the passengers’ 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 maximum periods of the proper
penalties prescribed in Art. 294.
2. Qualifying circumstances apply only to (maximum period is applied)
a. When by reason or on occasion of or robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in the loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or the
loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or the loss of the use of any
such member or incapacity for the work in which the injured person is
therefore habitually engaged is inflicted;
b. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery is
carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime.
c. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any
person not responsible for the commission of the robbery any of the physical
injuries in consequence of which the person injured becomes deformed or loses
any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or becomes ill or
incapacitated for the performance of work in which he is habitually engaged
for more than 90 days or the person injured becomes incapacitated for labor
for more than 30 days;
d. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause any of the serious
physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or if the offender employs intimidation
only
3. Qualifying circumstances do not apply to: (HRMA-I3B) maximum period is not
applied
a. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide is
committed
 b. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
c. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries
resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is inflicted;
4. Cannot be offset by mitigating circumstance
5. Must be alleged in the information and proved during the trial.
6. If “by a band” and “uninhabited place” both exist, by a band is qualifying, uninhabited
place is generic.
7. If qualifying does not apply (to HRMA-I3B), cuadrilla (by a band)/uninhabited is only
generic

ARTICLE 296 – DEFINITION OF A BAND AND PENALTY INCURRED BY THE

MEMBERS THEREOF

1. RULES IN “BY A BAND”

a. When at least 4 ARMED MALEFACTORS take part in the commission of a
robbery, it is deemed committed by a band.
 Proof of conspiracy not needed
 Clubs are arms
b. When any of the arms used in the commission of the robbery is NOT
LICENSED, the penalty upon all the malefactors shall be the maximum of the
corresponding penalty provided by law, without prejudice to the criminal
liability for illegal possession of firearms.
 ROBBERY BY A BAND and ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF
FIREARMS
 ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE: illegal possession is special
aggravating. (RA 8294)
 ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE by A BAND. By a band is generic
aggravating.
c. Any member of a band who was present at the commission of a robbery by a
band, shall be punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the
band, UNLESS it be shown that he attempted to prevent the same.
2. REQUISITES OF LIABILITY OF MEMBERS OF BAND
a. That he was member of the band
b. That he was present at the commission of robbery by that band
c. That the other members of the band committed an assault
d. That he did not attempt to prevent the assault
3. NOT BY A BAND: 3 PERSONS OR LESS
a. Not liable for the assault/killing, UNLESS THERE IS CONSPIRACY (TO
COMMIT HOMICIDE). For if there be conspiracy, their acts collectively and
individually executed.
b. PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT – not liable to Robbery with Homicide, only to
Robbery
c. PROOF OF CONSPIRACY – NECESSARY
4. PRESENT IN THE ROBBERY, NOT NECESSARILY IN THE ASSAULT
 a. Present in robbery, but not in rape, may still be liable for Robbery with Rape (BY
A BAND)
5. NOT COMMITED BY A BAND
a. PLACED AWAY WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF COMPANIONS
6. LICENSED OR UNLICENSED IS QUALIFYING
a. If committed on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made
with the use of firearms,
b. not applicable in robbery with HRMA-I3B
7. HIGHWAY ROBBERY
a. It is highway robbery only when it can be proven that the malefactors primarily
organized themselves for the purpose of committing the crime.

ARTICLE 297 – ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY COMMITTED UNDER

CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES

 The penalty is just the same whether the robbery is in ATTEMPTED/FRUSTRATED

STAGE. (RTmax to RP)
o EXCEPTION: When homicide deserves higher penalty (for murder/parricide)
 Homicide in this article in used in its generic sense
o may include murder, parricide or even infanticide,
o whether individual or multiple.
 Art. 296 and not Art. 297 is applicable to ATTEMPTED ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
BY A BAND.
 Slight Physical Injuries inflicted on other persons are absorbed in
ATTEMPTED/FRUSTRATED ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
o There is only one crime of attempted robbery with homicide even if slight
physical injuries were inflicted on other persons on the occasion or by reason of
robbery because Art. 297 speaks of attempted or frustrated robbery with
homicide.
 Article 48 is applicable
o Attempted/Frustrated Robbery with Serious Physical Injuries
o Robbery with Frustrated Homicide
o Robbery with Attempted Homicide
ARTICLE 298 – EXECUTION OF DEED BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR
INTIMIDATION

 Shall be held guilty of ROBBERY

 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.
 This article is not applicable if the document is void
 1. Physical Injuries if there is violence
2. Grave Threat if there is intimidation
 PUBLIC  INSTRUMENT
1. Means that document can be public, private, or commercial
2. Only public instrument
 If the violence resulted in the death of the person to be defrauded, the crime is robbery
with homicide and shall be penalized under Art. 294, par. 1.
 If the party is under obligation to sign, execute, or delivery  no robbery
 If there is violence in compelling  grave coercion
 Ex. Compel the seller to deliver deed of sale after payment
Section Two-Robbery by the use of force upon things

 DOES NOT USE violence or intimidation of any person in taking the personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain, for otherwise, he will be liable under Art. 294.

TWO KINDS OF ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS:

1.) Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship;
2.) Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building.

Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to worship.

Art. 301. What is inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious
worship and their dependencies.

 Robbery with Force upon Things under Subdivision A

1. Elements:
1.) That the offender entered (a) an inhabited place, or (b) public building 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 one inside the building, the offender took personal property belonging
to another, with intent to gain.
 SHALL ENTER
o Any of the four means must be resorted to enter, not to get out
o Whole body must be inside
 Merely inserting his hand to take things is theft not robbery.
o Evidence of manner of entrance necessary, otherwise the crime will be theft
 Circumstantial evidence accepted: Outside door locked but broken
window
 o Both outside door and window are open, crime will be theft
o If there still remains a sufficient indication of the existence of an intention
different from that of committing robbery, crime is trespass to dwelling
 INHABITED HOUSE is any shelter, ship or vessel constituting the dwelling of one or
more person even though temporarily absent when robbery is committed. It includes
dependencies, courts, corals, bans, etc.
o Uninhabited for months but the building was ordinarily inhabited and intended as
a dwelling, is still inhabited house
o Automobile is not a house or building
o It does not include however orchards and lands for cultivation.
 PUBLIC BUILDING- any building owned by the Government or belonging to a private
person but used or rented by the Government, although temporarily unoccupied by the
same.
o What makes the building public is not its inauguration but the fact that State
having title thereto.
o If private school, crime is Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building
 DEPENDENCIES-all interior courts, corrals, warehouses, granaries or inclosed places
contiguous to the building or edifice, having an interior entrance connected therewith,
and which form part of the whole.
1. it must be contiguous to the building;
2. must have an interior entrance connected therewith and
3. must form part of the whole
 BREAKING-means entering the building.
o The force used must be actual, as distinguished from that in the other means
which is only constructive force.
o Wall must be an outside wall
 If a room is occupied by a person as separate dwelling, breaking of inside
wall is robbery
o Door must be broken
 Must be outside door: Main or Back Door
 To constitute robbery, the outside door must be broken or smashed. If the
lock was merely removed or door was merely pushed or opens by means
of some instrument, the crime is only theft.
 Removal of hinges or hooks and lock of doorknob, only theft
 FALSE KEYS are genuine keys stolen from the owner or any keys other than those
intended by the owner for use in the lock which was forcibly opened by the offender.
o The key must have been stolen not by force. Otherwise, it is robbery by violence
against or intimidation of persons.
o False key must have been used in opening house and not any furniture inside.
 Using picklock to open a door of the room and thereafter, he took
jewelries placed on top of a table inside it, the crime is only theft.
 Exception: If a room is a separate dwelling place, the crime is
robbery.
  PICKLOCKS are those especially adopted for the commission of the robbery.
 The use of fictitious name or the act of pretending to exercise authority must be
committed for the purpose of entering the building.

Robbery with Force upon Things under Subdivision B

 Elements:
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 robbery.
NOTA BENE:

 It is not necessary that the entrance was made through any of the means mentioned
in subdivision (a);
 Offender may be servants or guests.
 Destruction of keyhole of cabinet is robbery under this subsection.
 When sealed box is taken out for the purpose of breaking, crime is already
CONSUMATED robbery. There is no need to actually open it inside the building from
where it was taken.
o But if the box was confided into the custody of the accused and he takes the
money contained therein, the crime is ESTAFA.
 The crime is theft if the box was found outside of the building and the accused forced it
open.
 ANY ARMED PERSON
o Bolo used to open a trunk is still considered robber by an unarmed person
o Arms must not be used to intimidate, it will be ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE
AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
 Penalties
1.) RT (ARMED and VALUE > 50K)
2.) PM
a. ARMED and VALUE <=50K
b. UNARMED and VALUE > 50K
3.) PM MIN (UNARMED and VALUE <= 50K)
4.) NEXT LOWER IN DEGREE (if DEPENDENCY)
***The liability for carrying arms while robbing an inhabited house is extended to
each of the offenders who take part in the robbery, even if some of them do not carry
arms. (Guevarra, citing December Supreme Court of Spain. October 27, 1982)
  Heavier Penalty in Inhabited House than Uninhabited
o Because of possibility that the inhabitants might suffer bodily harm

Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band.

 Qualifying circumstance of Robbery with Force Upon Things

o Uninhabited place by a band
o Maximum period of penalty provided

DO NOT BE CONFUSED:

 To qualify robbery with force upon things in Art. 299, it must be committed in
uninhabited place AND by a band (Art. 300);
 To qualify robbery with violence against or intimidation, it must be committed in an
uninhabited place OR by a band (Art. 295).
Art. 302. 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 are present:
a.) That the 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 seal receptacle was removed, even if the same be broken elsewhere.
3.) That with intent to gain, the offender took therefrom personal property belonging
to another.
NOTA BENE:

 This covers the second kind of robbery with force upon things;
 UNINHABITED PLACE-is an uninhabited building which is not a dwelling house,
public building or edifice for worship.
E.g. warehouse, freight car, store
 Robbery under this Article is committed in the same manner as in Art. 299 EXCEPT
THAT what was entered into was UNINHABITED PLACE or building other than
those mentioned in Art. 299.
 The use of fictitious name or the exercise of public authority is NOT also included in
this Article. The reason is OBVIOUS.
  The breaking of padlock but not of door is only theft.
 BUILDING-includes any kind of structure used for storage or safekeeping of personal
property. E.g. warehouse.
 Entrance through an opening not intended or entrance or egress is not necessary, if there
is breaking of wardrobe, chest or sealed or closed furniture or receptacle, or removal
thereof to be broken elsewhere.
o Receptacle or wardrobe must be CLOSED or SEALED.
o If without breaking unlocked but closed chest, theft only
o Mere removal is not sufficient, it must have intention to open it elsewhere.
 Penalty is based on the value of the property taken. Being armed is not important
o PC Med to Max (Value > 50K)
o Next lower (If Value <= 50K)
 NOT ROBBERY
o Taking of large cattle (Anti-Cattle Rustling Law)
o Motor Vehicle (Anti Carnapping)
o Fish in the Fishpond and Coconuts in the Plantation

 ROBBERY IN A STORE:

Punishable under Art. 299 Punishable under Art. 302

If the store is used as a dwelling of one or If the store was not actually occupied at the
more persons, the robbery committed time of robbery and was not used as a
therein would be considered as committed dwelling, since the owner lived in a separate
in an inhabited house. (PP vs. Suarez) house, the robbery committed therein is an
uninhabited house. (PP vs. Silvestre)
If the store is located on the ground floor of
the house belonging to the owner, having an
interior entrance connected therewith, it is a
dependency of an inhabited house and the
robbery committed therein. (US vs. Tapan)

Art. 303. Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an uninhabited place or private

building.

NOTA BENE:

 When the robbery described in Art. 299 (use of force upon things) and 302 (uninhabited
place) consists in the taking of cereals, fruits or firewood, the penalty next lower in
degree than that prescribed in said articles shall be imposed.
 If accompanied by violence or intimidation against person, the article does not apply
 Cerials are seedlings which are immediate product of the soil
o Palay is cerial, hulled rice is not cerial
 o Taugan case: Palay must be
 Kept by the owner as “seedling”
 Taken for that purpose (seedling) by the robbers.
Art. 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools.

 Penalty
o AM Max to PC Min
 Illegal possession
 Making
o PC Med to Max
 Locksmith
 Elements of Illegal Possession of Picklocks or Similar Tools
1.) That the offended has in his possession of picklocks or similar tools s
2.) That such picklocks or similar tools are specially adopted to the commission of
3.) That the offender does not have lawful cause for such possession
 Actual use not necessary
 False keys under 305(2) and 305(3) not punishable.

*** A master key or skeleton key is a picklock.

*** is a key was entrusted to a confidential employee, as a secretary or bodyguard, for
safekeeping but the latter used them to open and take property, the crime is QUALIFIED
THEFT/THEFT as the case may be.
*** In cases of “bukas-kotse gang”, the use of picklock will only be absorbed.

Art. 305. False keys.

False Keys include:

1.) Picklocks or similar tools;

2.) Genuine keys stolen from the owner.
3.) Any keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the lock forcibly opened by
the offender.
Nota Bene:

 Possession of false keys mentioned in 2 and 3 of Art. 305 is not punishable.

In G.R. No. L-188766, May 20, 1965, it held that: (READ IN FULL TEXT):

Since picking of locks is one way to gain entrance to commit robbery, a picklock is per se
specially adopted to the commission of robbery. The description in the information of a picklock
as “specially adapted to the commission of the robbery”, is therefore unnecessary for its
sufficiency. Notwithstanding the omission of such superfluous description, therefore, the charge
of offense of illegal possession of picklock is valid. We find both elements of the crime clearly
alleged in the information in question.

Furthermore, the information alleged illegal possession of “seven (7) false keys”. The
Revised Penal Code, in Article 305, defines “false keys” to include “the tools mentioned in the
next preceding article.” Article 304-“the next preceding article-mentions “picklocks or similar
tools specially adapted to the commission of the crime of robbery.” It follows that the term
“false keys” appearing in the information sufficiently describes such tools.

Chapter Two
BRIGANDAGE

Art. 306. Who are brigands. Penalty.-

 Penalty
o PM Med to RT Min (if not punishable by higher)
o Max period (if any carries unlicensed firearms)
 There is brigandage when:
1.) There must be at least four armed persons.;
2.) They formed a band of a band of robbers;
3.) The purpose is any of the following:
a. To commit robbery in the highway; or
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom; or
c. To attain by any means of force and violence any other purpose.
 Band of robbers (more than 3)
o Band of dissidents not brigandage
 Existence of purpose is sufficient
o Not necessary to show the commission
o Evidence that accused was member of armed band not sufficient
 PRESUMED BRIGANDS If any of them carry unlicensed firearms
 Arms can be firearms, or other weapons
 Things to Prove
1. That there is an organization of more than three armed persons forming a band of
robbers
2. That the purpose of the band is any of those enumerated
3. That they went upon the highway or roamed upon the country for that purpose
4. That the accused is member of such band
 Previous activities considered in determining existence of brigandage
 o Kidnapped and looted on two other occasions
 Main Object of the Law
o to prevent the formation of such a band conspiring together for the purpose of
robbery in the highway. Or kidnapping of persons for extortion or to obtain
ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and violence,
and such formation is sufficient to constitute a violation of the law.
 The term “highway” includes streets within as well as roads outside the cities.
 Robbery with Homicide or Kidnapping for Ransom
o Since penalty is higher for both, such penalty will be imposed

IMPORTANT.
BRIGANDAGE vs. HIGHWAY ROBBERY under P.D. 532
BRIGANDAGE HIGHWAY ROBBERY under P.D. 532
(Ordinary Robbery committed on a
highway)
-constitutes acts of robbery committed -committed indiscriminately against any
against only a predetermined or particular person/s.
victim.
-the commission thereof in public highway is -the offender is a brigand or one who roams
only incidental and the offender is not a in public highways and carries out his
brigand, robbery in public highways as venue,
whenever the opportunity to do so arises.
-its commission is only occasional against a -there is frequency in the commission of the
predetermined victim, without frequency in robbery, in public highways and against
public highways. persons travelling thereat.
-the purpose is only a particular robbery, -the purpose is inter alia, is indiscriminate
the crime is robbery or robbery in band if highway robbery.
there are at least 4 armed participants.
-no proof is required. -a conviction requires proof that the accused
were organized for the purpose of
committing robbery indiscriminately.
REMEMBER:

Under P.D. No 532, BRIGANDAGE is the seizure of any person for (a) ransom; (b)
extortion or other unlawful purpose; or (c) the taking away of property by violence or
intimidation or force upon things or other unlawful means, committed on a Philippine highway.

BRIGANDAGE vs. ROBBERY IN BAND

BRIGANDAGE ROBBERY IN BAND

-offenders form a band of robbers. -offenders form a band of robbers.
-the purpose is any of the following: -the purpose is only to commit robbery not
1. to commit robbery in the highway; necessarily in highway.
2. to kidnap persons for extortion/ransom;
3. for any other purpose to be attained by
force and violence.
-the mere formation of a band for any of -it is necessary to prove that the band
the purposes mentioned, is sufficient, as it actually committed robbery, as a mere
would not be necessary to show that the band conspiracy to commit robbery is NOT
actually committed robbery in the highway, punishable.
etc.

Art. 307. Aiding and abetting a band of brigands.

 PC Med to PM Min
 Elements:
1.) That there is a band of brigands;
2.) That the offender knows the band to be 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;
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by the brigands
NOTA BENE:
 It is presumed that the person performing any of the acts provided in this article has
performed them knowingly, unless the contrary is proven
 Any person who aids or protects highway robbers or abets the commission of highway
robbery or brigandage shall be considered as an accomplice.

Chapter Three
THEFT
Art. 308. Who are liable for theft.

Art. 309. Penalties.

The following are liable for theft:

1.) Those who, (a) with intent to gain, (b) but without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things, (c) take, (d) personal property, (e) of another, (f) without
the latter’s consent;
2.) Those who (a) having found lost property, (b) fail to deliver the same to the local
authorities or to its owner;
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;
 4.) Those who (a) enter an inclosed estate or a field where (b) trespass is forbidden or which
belongs to another and, without the consent of its owner, (c) hunt or fish upon the same
or gather fruits, cereals or other forest or farm products.

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.

 In addition to what was discussed by the jurisprudence, for ROBBERY to exist, it is

necessary that there should be taking against the will of the owner; and for THEFT, it
sufficed that consent on the part of the owner is lacking. (People vs. Chan Wat, 49 Phil
116)

NOTA BENE:
 TAKING
o Based on the definition, there is only one operative act of execution by the actor,
involved in theft  the taking of personal property of another. It is also clear
that in order that such taking may be considered as theft, there must further be
present the descriptive circumstances that the taking was intent to gain; without
force upon things or violence against or intimidation of persons; and it was
without the consent of the owner.
o The “taking” is considered complete only when the offender is able to place the
thing under his control, and in such a situation as he could dispose of it at once.
(Pp vs. Noval).
o In other case, it was held that the asportation is complete from the moment that
the offender had full possession of the thing, even if he did not have an
opportunity to dispose of the same.
o The element of “taking” referred to in the law means the act of depriving another
of the possession and dominion of movable thing coupled with the intention, at
the time of the taking, of withholding it with the character of PERMANENCY.
o Proof as to motive essential when evidence of theft is circumstantial
o Can be done by own hands as well as mechanical device
 There is also “taking” even when the offender received the thing from the offender party.
But in this case, note the difference of physical and juridical possession, as the crime may
also be of estafa.
 PERSONAL PROPERTY as an element of theft includes electricity and gas because
electricity, the same as gas, is a valuable article of merchandise bought and sold like
other personal property and is capable of appropriation by another (US vs. Carlos, 21
Phil, 553);
 o Capable of appropriation, not asportation or carrying away
o Misreading meter reader to appropriate electric current without paying for it
o Promissory note, check, invoice may be object of theft
 Amount which a document represents serves as basis for penalty
 Taking of dishonored check  impossible crime
o Must belong to another, whether stolen from owner, possessor, or another thief
o Selling share of co-owner not theft
o Not owner yet of separation pay until the same is delivered, it will be theft if
taken when not yet delivered
o In sale of goods, purchaser taking the goods without weighing is theft
 INTENT TO GAIN
o It is presumed from the unlawful taking
o By the word GAIN is meant not only the acquisition of a thing useful to the
purpose of life but also the benefit which in any other use may be derived or
expected from the act which is performed.
 The gain can be satisfaction of taking revenge or greed
o Actual gain is not necessary for the crime, for it is enough that on taking them, the
offender is actuated by desire or intent to gain.
o It is well settled rule that the possession of stolen goods is prima facie evidence
that the possessor is the thief, and throws on him the necessity of accounting for
his possession.
o Taking personal property is not theft
 Believing it to be his own, intent to gain is rebutted
 Openly and avowedly under claim of title made in good faith
o Theft even if taking is not for his own use
 WITHOUT CONSENT
o The consent contemplated in the element of theft refers to consent freely given
and not to one which may only be inferred from mere lack of opposition on the
part of the owner of the property taken.
o Law does not say without knowledge. Even if known by owner, but did not
consent, still theft
o Robbery = against will; Theft = without consent
 ACTUAL TRANSFER OF POSSESSION MAY NOT ALWAYS CONSTITUTE
UNLAWFUL TAKING
o An act done after the actual transfer may result in asportation although in the
beginning, it was given to and received by the offender
o Estafa because the juridical possession of the thing is transferred to the offender
when:
 IN TRUST or ON COMMISSION
 FOR ADMINISTRATION
 UNDER A QUASI-CONTRACT
 CONFLICT OF BAILMENT
o Theft: If not of the mentioned above, the offender has only physical or material
possession
o Delivery of deposit or pledge to another is violation of contract
 No theft if the other person appropriates because he did not take from
owner
 THEFT ONLY, NOT ROBBERY
o Taking prior to violence
 EXCEPTION: Prior violence is homicide, rape, mutilation, serious
physical injuries
o No force or violence because victim already wounded
o Reason of violence is entirely foreign from the act of taking
o Force upon things not employed to enter a building
 EXCEPTION: When locked or sealed receptacle is broken in house or
taken therefrom and broken outside
 PRESUMPTIONS
o A person in possession of part of stolen property is presumed to be the thief of all,
in the absence of satisfactory explanation
 Presumption that he is the thief of all applies only when all the goods were
lost at the same time, in the same place, and on the same occasion.
 If disappeared piece by piece, at different times, and on different
occasions, presumption does not apply in the absence of proof that he
had opportunity to take the rest at other times
 All recently stolen effects found and recovered one in possession of
accused and the other in the pasture, no presumption arises, not
reasonable to believe that accused retained one and freed the other

REMEMBER:

 THEFT is committed when the offender has taken a personal property of another,
without the owner’s consent. Such taking, since it is unknown to the owner, only gives the
offender material possession of the property. To define, material possession means the
actual physical possession of the personal property, where the possessor does not have a
better right over such property than the owner. Then, after taking the property, the
offender misappropriates the property. The offender takes the property and uses it as if
he is really the owner.

For example, if ARJIE takes the mobile phone of MYRA from MYRA’s pouch without her
consent, then ARJIE should be liable for theft. In this case, ARJIE has physical
possession of the mobile phone, and after taking it she may use it as if it was her own.

 Estafa on the other hand, if the possession of the property by the offender arouse from a
contract or an agreement, then the possessor has juridical possession of the property – a
right over the property, which he can claim and set up even against the owner. The
juridical possession contemplated for the estafa refers to the delivery of the thing to the
offender in trust, or on commission, or for administration or under any other
circumstance involving the duty to deliver or to return the same thing received. If the
delivery, is therefore, not made under any of said concepts, the crime is theft.
 To distinguish theft from estafa, it is important to know whether the possession of the
property by the offender is only material or if it is coupled with juridical possession. For
example, in the case of Arjie and Myra, if Myra agrees to lend Arjie her mobile phone for
a week, then Arjie has a right over the mobile phone for that week. Myra cannot take the
mobile phone from Arjie during the week that they have agreed upon. Because of their
agreement, Arjie acquired juridical possession over the property. But, if Arjie sells the
phone during the week that it was within her possession, then it is obvious that she has
converted the use of the property. She was permitted to use it, but she was not authorized
to sell it. If this happens, estafa is committed. DO NOT BE CONFUSED.

NO FRUSTRATED THEFT

 Theft cannot have a frustrated stage, according to the Supreme Court in a recent case.
Theft can only be attempted or consummated.
 Ability to freely dispose of the property stolen is not a constitutive element of the crime of
theft
 According to the SC, unlawful taking is deemed complete from the moment the offender
gains possession of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same.
Unlawful taking, which is the deprivation of one’s personal property, is the element
which produces the felony in its consummated stage. At the same time, without unlawful
taking as an act of execution, the offense could only be attempted theft, if at all. Thus,
under Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft cannot have a frustrated stage. Theft
can only be attempted or consummated.
 In that case, the accused were sighted outside the Super Sale Club, a supermarket in SM-
North EDSA, by a security guard who was then manning his post at the open parking
area. The accused were able to bring the merchandise outside the supermarket and
boarded a taxicab at the open parking area. They were apprehended before leaving the
parking area. The accused were convicted by the lower court with the crime of
consummated theft, but they argued that they should only be charged with frustrated
theft, as they didn’t have the opportunity to dispose of the merchandise.

 Finder of lost property, paragraph 1, Art. 308

o Necessary to prove:
1.) The time of the seizure of the thing;
2.) That it was lost property belonging to another; and
3.) That the accused having had the opportunity to return or deliver the lost
property to its owner or to the local authorities, refrained from doing so.

 Lost Property embraces loss by stealing

o Knowing that the property is stolen but deliberately failed to deliver the same to
authorities or to its owner
o Word “lost” is generic and embraces loss by stealing
o Delay in the delivery is immaterial when finder surrendered it voluntarily
 Par. 1 of Article 308 is not limited to the actual finder.
  Again, Thus, if AAA found a wallet containing money worth 1K on the street and he
surrendered it to BBB, a policeman within the area. BBB would be liable for THEFT, not
of ESTAFA if he would refuse to surrender the same to its owner. Explanation: When
AAA found the wallet, he had only the PHYSICAL possession of the thing, not juridical
possession.
o Person who received it from the finder cannot have juridical possession of the
property. The spring cannot rise above its source.
 Theft even if offender does not know who the owner is
o Duty to turn over to the authorities lost property regardless of whether or not he
knew of the owner
 Intent to gain is presumed in this paragraph, if there is deliberate failure to deliver the lost
property to the proper person
o Because finder knows the property does not belong to him
o Theft if the finder of hidden treasure misappropriated the share pertaining to the
owner of property


Hunting, fishing, or gathering of fruits, etc. in enclosed estate, paragraph 3, Art. 308
Elements:
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 in the estate or field; and
4.) That the hunting or fishing or gathering of products is without the consent of the owner.

NOTA BENE:
 The fishing in this paragraph should not be in the fishpond or fishery, otherwise, the
felony would that be of qualified theft.
 Note also P.D. No. 532
 Prosecution must present more than a mere uncorroborated “estimate”
o In the absence of corroborated estimate, court may
 apply the minimum penalty or
 fix the value of the property taken based on attendant circumstances
o Court may take judicial notice of the value of the goods which are matters of
public knowledge or capable of unquestionable demonstration
 Basis for the penalty in theft:
1.) Value of the thing stolen;
2.) Value and the nature of the property taken
3.) Circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime

Art. 310. Qualified Theft

Theft is qualified (2 degrees higher)

1.) If the theft is committed by a domestic servant;
2.) If the theft is committed with grave abuse of confidence;
 3.) If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b) mail letter, or (c) large cattle;
4.) If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the premises of a plantation;
5.) If the property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or
any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance.

NOTA BENE:

 Take note also of the amendments made by RA 10951 so you would know how to
increase the penalty for this article.
 Theft by DOMESTIC SERVANT is always qualified.
 IMPORTANT: There must be allegation in the information and proof of a relation, by
reason of dependence, guardianship and vigilance between the accused and the offended
party, that has created a high degree of confidence between them, which the accused
abused. (People vs. Koc Song, 63 Phil 369)
 During preliminary investigation in the fiscal level, it is not enough that you mention that
the respondent is a domestic servant. There must be also an allegation that there
created a confidence between the respondent and the complainant and that there
must be a showing that respondent has access or at least able to access the valuables
of the thing stolen. Otherwise, the felony would only be that of the simple theft. It is still
a case to case basis.(Opinion, FMimie)
 Gravely abused the confidence of the owner of the house reposed in him upon permitting
him out of charity to live therein
 No confidence reposed on the accused (Simple Theft only)
o His employer never given him possession of the machines involved
o Employer locked the doors and left the accused to attend to his pets only
o Theft by housemate not always qualified, engenders some confidence, but not
grave. Living on the same house may be accidental and goods stolen might not
have been entrusted to the custody or vigilance of the accused
o Mere circumstance that accused worked as a laborer does not make theft
qualified..
 Exception: If theft by one who had access to the place (Qualified)
 Sheep under his care (Physical Possession only)
 Truck driver who took load of his truck (Physical Possession only)
 Trusted employee of pawnshop (Physical Possession only)
 Project manager of construction (Physical possession only)
 Guards of CEO premises (Physical Possession only)
 Use of combination learned by confidential clerk
 Teller of the bank in taking money in his possession (Physical
Possession only)
 Qualified Theft through Falsification of Commercial Document
o Assistant cashier of Metrobank had custody of checks, forged the signature of
officers authorized to sign
 Confidence gravely abused must be that existing between the offended party and the
offender and the same must be alleged in their sworn statement to be appreciated.
o Private secretary of the complainant
 Stealing mail matter is qualified regardless if offender is postal employee or private
 o Postal Money Order: if postmaster, crime is faithlessness in custody of
documents; if private, qualified theft
 The theft of motor vehicle must be read in conjunction with R.A. 10883, the latter is now
controlling.
 While theft of a cattle must be correlated with P.D. No. 533.
 Coconut is still in the tree or deposited on the ground within the plantation (qualified)
o If coconut are stolen in any other place (simple theft)
 The reason for the heavier penalty for theft of a coconut is to encourage and protect the
development of coconut industry as one of the sources of our national economy. The
coconuts must however be taken from the premises of a plantation.
 The fish in this Article must be taken from the fishpond or fishery.
o Fish includes other aquatic animals like crabs, prawns, shrimps, lobsters or shell
fish.

In G.R. No. 179061, July 13, 2009, it held that: (READ IN FULL TEXT)

(As to the difference between qualified theft and estafa)

x x x The principal distinction between the two crimes is that in theft the thing is taken while in
estafa the accused receives the property and converts it to his own use or benefit. However, there
may be theft even if the accused has possession of the property. If he was entrusted only with the
material or physical (natural) or de facto possession of the thing, his misappropriation of the
same constitutes theft, but if he has the juridical possession of the thing, his conversion of the
same constitutes embezzlement or estafa.20 (Underscoring supplied)

The appellate court correctly explained that conversion of personal property in the case of an
employee having material possession of the said property constitutes theft, whereas in the case of
an agent to whom both material and juridical possession have been transferred,
misappropriation of the same property constitutes estafa. 21 Notably, petitioner’s belated
argument that she was not an employee but an agent of private complainant 22 grants her no
respite in view of her stipulation23 during pre-trial and her admission24 at the witness stand of
the fact of employment. Petitioner’s reliance on estafa cases involving factual antecedents of
agency transactions is thus misplaced.

That petitioner did not have juridical possession over the amount or, in other words, she did not
have a right over the thing which she may set up even against private complainant is clear.25 In
fact, petitioner never asserted any such right, hence, juridical possession was lodged with
private complainant and, therefore, estafa was not committed.

Petitioner’s view that there could be no element of taking since private complainant had no
actual possession of the money fails. The argument proceeds from the flawed premise that there
could be no theft if the accused has possession of the property. The taking away of the thing
physically from the offended party is not elemental, 26 as qualified theft may be committed when
the personal property is in the lawful possession of the accused prior to the commission of the
alleged felony.27
A sum of money received by an employee in behalf of an employer is considered to be only in the
material possession of the employee.28 The material possession of an employee is adjunct, by
reason of his employment, to a recognition of the juridical possession of the employer. So long as
the juridical possession of the thing appropriated did not pass to the employee-perpetrator, the
offense committed remains to be theft, qualified or otherwise. 29

FENCING- is 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
have known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery of theft.

ELEMENTS:

1.) The crime of robbery or theft has been committed;

2.) The accused who is not a principal or accomplice in the commission of the crime of
robbery or theft, buys, receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or disposes, or
buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any article, item, object or anything of value has
been derived from the proceeds of the said crime.
3.) That the accused knows or should have known that the said article, item, object or
anything of value has been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft;
4.) There is, on the part of the accused, intent to gain for himself or another.

PRESUMPTION OF FENCING-mere possession of any good, article, item, object or anything

of value which has been the subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing.

 In order to prosecute successfully the crime of fencing, the crime of theft/robbery must
have been decided first, otherwise, the fencing case may be the subject of a motion to
dismiss. Fencing and robbery and theft are SEPARATE and DISTINCT offenses.
 Prosecution must prove that the accused knew or should have known that the item he
acquired and later sold was derived from theft or robbery and that he intended to obtain
some gain out of his acts.

Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library and National Museum.

 AMayor or Fine 40K to 100K or both

o Exception: If higher penalty under other provision
 Theft under this Article has a fixed penalty without regard to the value of the property of
the National Library and National Museum. Unless the crime is committed with grave
abuse of confidence.

USURPATION

 Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property

  Altering boundaries or landmarks

Art 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation of rights in property

 Penalty (IN ADDITION TO PENALTY INCURRED BY ACTS OF VIOLENCE)

o Value of gain can be ascertained:
 FINE to 50% to 100% for gain but not less than 15K
 Meaning penalty must be 15K or more
o Value of gain cannot be ascertained, 40K to 100K
 Acts punishable
o By taking possession of any real property belonging to another by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons
o By 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 issued by the offender in
occupying real property or usurping real rights
4. That there is intent to gain
 BELONGING TO ANOTHER
o Not applicable if defendant shown to be the owner of the land, and the offended
was mere possessor
 Only grave coercion
 Usurpation of Real Right
o After losing the case in cadastral proceeding, accused took possession of the land,
guilty of usurpation of real right
 MEANS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
o Only civil liability if there is no violence or intimidation
o Violence or intimidation must be the means used in occupying real property or
usurping real right
 If subsequent to the entry into the property, Art 312 does not apply
o Refusal of the accused to vacate the land is not under Art 312 because accused did
not possess the land by means of violence or intimidation, crime is contempt of
court
 Criminal action for usurpation of real property, not bar to civil action for forcible entry
o Causes of action different
 NOT A COMPLEX CRIME, additional penalty is incremental penalty
a. Suffer penalty for homicide, rape, mutilation, physical injuries and
b. Pay the fine under this article
 Distinguish from Theft/Robbery
o Taking (theft/robbery); Occupation/Usurpation in this article
o Personal Property (theft/robbery); Real Property (occupation/usurpation)
o There is intent to gain on both
Article 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks

 Arresto Menor / Fine <= 20K / Both

 Elements
a. That there be boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces, or estates, or
any other marks intended to designate the boundaries of the same
b. That the offender alters said boundary marks
 INTENT TO GAIN not NECESSARY
 MERE ALTERATION IS PUNISHABLE
a. Alter is generic and indefinite term
 Destruction of stone monument
 Taking monument into another place
 Removing a fence
 INTENT OF MARKS
 To designate the boundaries of towns, provinces, or estates

Article 314. Fraudulent Insolvency

 Penalty
 PM (merchant)
 PC Max to PM Med (not merchant)
 Elements
a. That the offender is a debtor, that is, he has obligation due and payable
b. That he absconds with his property
c. That there be prejudice to his creditors
 Actual prejudice, not intention alone, is required.
 If debtor disposes his property but actual prejudice is not shown, no conviction
 Mere circumstance that a person has disposed of his merchandise does not imply
fraudulent insolvency, it requires malice
 Real Property may be involved
 Person prejudice must be the CREDITOR OF THE OFFENDER
 Creditors of her husband, she participated in the making of the document
executed by her husband
 INSOLVENCY LAW (criminal act is after insolvency proceedings)
 In fraudulent insolvency, offender need not adjudged bankrupt or insolvent
 SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS

Article 315. Swindling (estafa)

 Elements of Estafa in General

a. That the accused defrauded another (a) by abuse of confidence, or (b) by means of
deceit
b. That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third person
 1st Element
 Three different ways of committing estafa under 1st element
a. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence
b. By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts
c. Through fraudulent means
 Deceit is not requisite of estafa with abuse of confidence
nd
 2 Element
 The damage must be capable of pecuniary estimation
 Estafa with Unfaithfulness or Abuse of Confidence (by altering the substance, etc)
 Elements
a. That the offender has onerous obligation to delivery something of value
b. That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality
c. That damage or prejudice is caused to another
 The obligation to deliver must have existed already
 If thing delivered has not yet fully paid for, not liable for estafa
 Altering the “substance” – 1000 tins of opium, but only 16 contained opium and
the rest molasses
 Altering the “quantity”—Promising 20K bales of hemp but in truth only 12K
 Altering the “quality”—Poor kind of rice at the time of delivery
 No estafa when there is no agreement to the quality
 Even though obligation is based on immoral or illegal consideration
 There is estafa even if the thing to be delivered is not a subject of lawful
commerce
 Estafa with Unfaithfulness or Abuse of Confidence (by misappropriation or
conversion)
 Elements
i. That money, goods, or other personal property be received by the
offender:
 In trust or
 On commission or
 For administration
 Under any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of,
or to return, the same
ii. That there be misappropriation or conversion of such money or property
by the offender, or denial on his part of such receipt
iii. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of
another
 iv. That there is demand made by the offended party to the offender
 th
4 element is not necessary when there is evidence of misappropriation of the
goods by the defendant
 Money, goods, or other personal property
 Check is included in the word money
 Must be received by the offender (taking without consent is theft)
 If in trust, on commission, or for administration, offender acquires both
physical and juridical possession
 Juridical Possession means possession which gives the transferee a right over the
thing which the transferee may set up even against the owner
 Contract for hiring truck
 Agent in agency (right of possession against principal until agency is
terminated)
 Delivery of chattel (without transferring possession and title, it remains to the
owner)
 IN TRUST
 Tenants did not deliver to the landlord half of the money from sale of
harvested abaca
 Trust Receipt Transaction – one where entrustee has the obligation to
deliver to the entruster the price of the sale or if merchandise is not sold, to
return it to entruster
 Two obligations
o Turn over the money received
o Return the merchandise
 When goods subject of trust receipt are not intended for sale, transaction is
mere LOAN
 ON COMMISSION
 To deliver the same to the municipal treasurer
 Thing received must be the same thing to be delivered; otherwise, no
estafa
 FOR ADMINISTRATION
 When appointed by Court to administer estate of a deceased person
 Collecting rentals from different tenants
 ANY OTHER OBLIGATION INVOLVING THE DUTY TO MAKE
DELIVERY OF OR RETURN THE SAME
 QUASI CONTRACTS
 Received by mistake has duty to return the same
 CONTRACT OF BAILMENT
 CONTRACT OF DEPOSIT – pledge
 CONTRACT OF LEASE OF PERSONAL PROPERTY – truck
for hire
o Jeepney driver (pasada) is not a lessee in the eyes of the
law but employee (no estafa but qualified theft)
 CONTRACT OF COMMODATUM – borrower of book or loan
for use
 Does not apply when the contract has effect of transfer of ownership
 Loan for money is mutuum, loan for consumption and the ownership of
thing is passed to the borrower
 Failure to return it is civil liability only
 Purchase and Sale, ownership is transferred upon delivery (civil
liability only)
 Cash advance is a loan to the other (civil liability only)