ARTICLE 4.
CRIMINAL LIABILITY c) PRAETER INTENTIONEM – the act that
Wrongful Act Different From That Intended
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
(DIRECT, NATURAL, LOGICAL)
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 inadequate or ineffectual means.
ONE WHO COMMITS AN INTENTIONAL FELONY IS
RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE CONSEQUENCES
WHICH MAY NATURALLY AND LOGICALLY RESULT
THEREFROM, WHETHER FORESEEN OR INTENDED
OR NOT.
- One is not relieved from criminal liability for the
natural consequences of one’s illegal acts,
merely because one does not intend to produce
such consequences.
DOCTRINE OF PROXIMATE CAUSE
- He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of
the evil caused.
*Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person
COMMITTING A FELONY, not merely performing an act.
If the act is not punishable by the Code, it is not a felony.
WHEN A PERSON HAS NOT COMMITTED A
FELONY, HE IS NOT CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR THE
RESULT WHICH IS NOT INTENDED
- Thus, one who tries to retain the possession of
his bolo which was being taken by another and
because of the struggle, the tip of the bolo struck
and pierced the breast of a bystander, is not
criminally liable therefor, because the law allows
a person to use the necessary force to retain
what belongs to him.
”Although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended”
a) ERROR IN PERSONAE - mistake in the
identity of the victim
(e.g. due to darkness, defendant mistook
Mapudul for Dunca)
b) ABERRATIO ICTUS - mistake in the blow;
when the offender intending to do an injury
to one person actually inflicts it on another
(e.g. due to lack of precision)
exceeds the intent, that is, the injurious
result is greater than that intended
REQUISITES OF PARAGRAPH 1 OF ARTICLE 4
1. That an intentional felony has been committed
2. That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be
the DIRECT, NATURAL, and LOGICAL
consequence of the felony committed by the
offender.
SUICIDE IS NOT A CRIME
- If A, attempting suicide jumped out of the
window to kill himself, but when he dropped to
the ground he fell on an old woman who died as
a consequence, A is not criminally liable for
intentional homicide. A was not committing a
felony when he attempted a suicide.
ANY PERSON WHO CREATES IN ANOTHER’S MIND
AN IMMEDIATE SENSE OF DANGER, WHICH
CAUSES THE LATTER TO DO SOMETHING
RESULTING IN THE LATTER’S INJURIES, IS LIABLE
FOR THE RESULTING INJURIES
- Robbery in a passenger jeepney caused fear
among the passengers. One of the women
jumped out of the jeepney causing her head
struck the pavement. The robber is responsible.
WRONG DONE MUST BE THE DIRECT, NATURAL
AND LOGICAL CONSEQUENCE OF THE FELONIOUS
ACT
- It is an established rule that a person is
criminally responsible for acts committed by him
in violation of the law and for all the natural and
logical consequences resulting therefrom
- E.g. Tetanus infection, jumping to the water and
drowning
- As long as the wound inflicted is dangerous that
is calculated to destroy or endanger life even
though the immediate cause of the death was
erroneous or unskilful medical or surgical
treatment
- Even though the offended party refused to
submit to surgical operation, it does not relieve
the accused from the natural and ordinary
results of his crime.
THE FELONY COMMITTED IS NOT THE PROXIMATE
CAUSE OF THE RESULTING INJURY WHEN:
1. 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
 1. absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the
accused
2. The resulting injury is due to the intentional act
of the victim
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
Requisite:
1. That the act performed would be an offense
against persons or property
2. That the act was done with evil intent
3. That its accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is either
inadequate or ineffectual.
- There must be either
a. Legal impossibility
- With intent to gain took a watch but
turns out to be his. There is legal
impossibility because in theft, the
personal property taken must
belong to another
b. Physical impossibility
- stealing from a safe but turns out to
be empty
4. That the act performed should not constitute a
violation of another provision of the Revised
Penal Code
Examples:
-When one tries to kill another by putting in his soup a
substance which he believed to be arsenic when in fact
is common salt.
- When one tries to murder a corpse
EMPLOYMENT OF INADEQUATE MEANS
- Inadequate poison that is not sufficient for
someone to be killed
VERSUS FRUSTRATED FELONY
- means employed is adequate such that the
quantity of poison used is sufficient to kill but the
result expected is not produced as for example
the offended party has a strong resistance
against the poison
ARTICLE 6. CONSUMMATED, FRUSTRATED, AND
ATTEMPTED FELONIES = three are punishable
DEVELOPMENT OF CRIME
1. Internal Acts – ideas in the mind of a person
-not punishable
-mere intention producing no effect is no
more a crime
2. External Acts
a. Preparatory acts – not punishable
BUT, preparatory acts which are considered
in themselves by law as independent crimes
are punishable (e.g. Possession of
picklocks)
b. Acts of execution
CONSUMMATED
• All elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present
*In arson, It is not necessary that the property is totally
destroyed by fire. The crime of arson is consummated
even if only a portion of the wall or any part of the house
is burned. The consummation of the crime of arson does
not depend upon the extent of the damage caused. If
there was a blaze but no part of the house is burned, the
crime of arson is frustrated.
*In theft, the mere removal of the personal property
constitutes the element of taking. Theft is the intent to
gain but without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things, shall take the personal
property of another without the latter's consent. Unlawful
taking, which is the deprivation of one’s personal
property, is the element which produces the felony in its
consummated stage. Without unlawful taking as an act
of execution, the offense could only be attempted theft, if
at all.
*In robbery by the use of force upon things, since the
offender must enter the building to commit the crime, he
must be able to carry out of the building the thing taken
to consummate the crime.
*There is no attempted crime of treason, because the
overt act in itself consummates the crime
FRUSTRATED
• Offender performs all acts of execution which
would produce the felony as a consequence but
which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason
of causes INDEPENDENT TO THE WILL OF
THE PERPETRATOR
• MORTAL wound is serious and could have
produced death
• There is no intervention of a foreign or extraneous
cause or agency between the beginning of the
consummation and the moment when all of the act
have been performed which should result in the
consummated crime.
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender performs all the acts of execution
 -Nothing more is left to be done as he has
performed the last act necessary to produce the
crime
1. All the acts performed would produce the felony
as a consequence
2. But the felony is not produced (if produced, it is
consummated)
3. By reason of causes INDEPENDENT OF THE
WILL OF THE PERPETRATOR (Not a frustrated
parricide if the doctor directly provided an
antidote for a poison given for it is not from the
independent will of the offender, not attempted
as all the acts of execution were performed, it is
physical injuries)
REQUISITES:
1. The offender has performed all the acts of
execution which would produce the felony
2. That the felony is not produced due to causes
independent of the perpetrator’s will
*The Supreme Court held that there is NO crime of
FRUSTRATED THEFT. Once having committed all the
acts of execution for theft, is able or unable to freely
dispose of the property stolen since the deprivation from
the owner alone has already ensued from such acts of
execution. There could be no true taking until the actor
obtains such degree of control over the stolen item. If
taken not have been accomplished, it would only
downgrade to attempted theft.
*Frustrated bribery – where the defendant fails to corrupt
a public officer, because the latter returned the money
given by the defendant. Attempted bribery – money was
accepted by the police officer for the purpose of using it
as evidence.
*There is no crime of frustrated rape – perfect
penetration is not essential. Any penetration of the
female organ by the male organ is sufficient.
ATTEMPTED
• Offender commences the commission of a
felony directly by overt acts, and DOES NOT
PERFORM ALL THE ACTS OF EXECUTION
which should produce the felony by reason of
some cause or ACCIDENT other than HIS OWN
SPONTANEOUS DESISTANCE
• Only offenders who personally and DIRECTLY
execute the commission of a crime can be guilty
of attempted felony (taking a direct part in the
execution of the act – the person who only
induced someone to kill is not punished, but if
there is agreement between B and C to kill A,
both are liable)
• No wound inflicted or the wound inflicted is not
mortal
• He is stopped short of that point by some cause
apart from his own voluntary desistance
ELEMENTS:
1. Offender commences the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts
-not mere preparatory acts
-OVERT ACT is some physical activity or deed
indicating the intention to commit a particular
crime which if carried to its complete termination
following its natural course, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense
2. He does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony
3. The offender’s act is not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance (If the actor does not
perform all the acts of execution by reason of his
own spontaneous desistance, there is no
attempted felony – reward granted by law to
those who heed the call of their conscience)
4. The non-performance of all acts of execution
was due to cause or accident other than his
spontaneous desistance. (nobullet, stopped by
another person)
*DRAWING OR TRYING TO DRAW A PISTOL IS NOT
AN OVERT ACT OF HOMICIDE. To constitute
attempted homicide, the person using a firearm must fire
the same, with intent to kill, at the offended party, without
however inflicting a mortal wound on the latter.
*RAISING A BOLO AS IF TO STRIKE THE OFFENDED
PARTY WITH IT IS NOT AN OVERT ACT OF
HOMICIDE (Crime is only that of threatening another
with a weapon). No blow was struck. IF A BLOW WAS
STRUCK and there was intent to kill on the part of the
accused, the act of striking the offenses party with the
bolo would be an overt act of the crime of homicide.
*Robbery – there must be an shown that the offender
clearly intended to take possession for the purpose of
gain, of some personal property belonging to another.
• Opening a wall of a store of cheap
goods with an iron bar is merely an
attempted trespass. It is only an attempt,
because A was not able to perform all
the acts of execution.
*The use of a gun fired at another certainly leads to no
other conclusion than that there is intent to kill. The fact
that A inflicted a gunshot wound on the victim shows the
intent to kill.

ATTEMPTED, FRUSTRATED VS. IMPOSSIBLE

CRIME
Impossible crime – the evil intent of the offender
CANNNOT BE ACCOMPLISHED because it is
inherently impossible because the means employed by
the offender is inadequate or ineffectual

Attempted/Frustrated – evil intent is POSSIBLE OF

ACCOMPLISHMENT
-what prevented the accomplishment is the
INTERVENTION OF CERTAIN CAUSE OR ACCIDENT
in which the offender had no part

*There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime