NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008

)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1

BOOK ONE

ARTICLE 1
TIME WHEN ACT TAKES EFFECT

ARTICLE 2
SCOPE AND APPLICATION OF THE CODE

3 Important Characteristics of Criminal Law
1. Generality
2. Territoriality
3. Prospectivity

1. Generality
General → criminal law applies to all who lives/ sojourn
within the Philippine territory.
Lives → committed a crime here, Phil. Criminal law applies
to you
Sojourn → even if you are simply passing thru – you are
subjected to Phil. Criminal law.

General Rule:
Who lives / sojourn in the Phil Territory

Exceptions:
Heads of state, ambassadors, ministers, resident diplomatic

Q: Consuls, Vice-consuls?
A: not exempt from the operation of Phil. Criminal law

2. Territoriality
- physical boundaries, that would include
Phil. Criminal law now will apply to all
crimes within the Phil. Territory.
- Phil. Territory- the land, water and the air

Q: What about the extent of Phil territory? (because of the
Phil. boundaries nga?)

A: water- formerly 3 mile limit but now 12 mile limit from
low water mark.


Originally 3 mile limit extended from the low water mark 12
mile limit from the low water mark- by virtue of the New
Convention of the Law on the Sea, which was ratified in 1982
by member states, 50+ member states, 52/55 expand the
territorial water jurisdiction of Phil. Criminal Law

Exemptions to the Territoriality Characteristics of Phil.
Criminal Law are found in Art. 2 of the RPC (memorize)

× meaning Phil. Criminal law will apply to those
persons who committed it even outside the Phil.
Territory
× so, it applies to all those who commit an offense
while on board/ Philippine ship/airship it shall apply
to those who counterfeit currency notes, bank
notes, coins which have been issued by the
government of the RP, it shall apply to those who
are responsible for the introduction of those
counterfeit, bank notes that has been forge; public
officials and employees who commit offenses in the
course/ discharge of duties/official functions as
such; and to those who commit crimes against
national security and the law of the nations

5 Exceptions - that Even Committed Outside the Philippine
Territory Air, Land and Water Still Subject to Philippine
Criminal Law
1. Crime committed within a Philippine ship or airship.
2. Forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank note
or any instrument payable to bearer or to order the
appearance of a true genuine document or by erasing,
substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the
figures, letters, words or signs contained therein.
3. If forgery was committed abroad, it must refer only to
Philippine coin, currency note or obligations and securities.
4. A public officer or employee who commits a crime related
to the exercise of his office.
5. Title I of Book II on crimes against national security and
the law of nations covers treason, espionage, provoking war
and disloyalty in case of war, piracy and mutiny but not
rebellion.
Note: When rebellion is committed abroad, the Philippines
will not acquire jurisdiction because rebellion is a crime
against public order.

Board/ Phil. Ship/ Airship
- it is not a question of ownership of a vessel
- it is a question of registration
- where it was registered
- for our court to acquire jurisdiction, it must be
registered in accordance of our Phil. Laws
- even it was Filipino owned but not registered under
our law, even if the crimes committed there, we do
not have jurisdiction
- registration in the Bureau of Customs
- for as long as the crime committed on board of Phil
ship / Airship

Q: What if the crime is committed on board on a warship?
A: Of course internationally accepted that would fall under
the jurisdiction - still which the country to which that
warship belongs, even if it is here within the Phil. Territory,
if the crime is committed in that warship that is still
considered an exception in the territory of the country to
which that warship belongs.

Q: Crime committed on board of foreign merchant vessel?
A: 2 rules:
a. French rule - if the crime committed on board of a foreign
merchant vessel.
Example:
Here in our territory, under the French rule, we do not have
jurisdiction except if that crime even if on board of a foreign
merchant vessel affects public order/ national security

b. English rule - the crime is committed on board of a foreign
merchant vessel which is situated in Phil. territory, it is
subject to our jurisdiction except if that crime relates to
internal affairs/ internal management of the foreign
merchant vessel.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
3. Prospectivity
 the law will apply only to facts, circumstances,
events, transactions after the promulgation of the
law

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2

 so the law must made to apply forward, it may not
apply backward, it cannot be given a retroactive
application, that is the rule
Exception:
If it is favorable to the accused, it is not enough
that RA is favorable to the. The accused must not be habitual
delinquent (HD)

HD - Art. 62
2 requisites must concur:
1. RA is favorable to the accused
2. He must not be a HD

Q: Who / What is HD?
A: It is a special aggravating circumstance because it adds to
penalty
· if within a period of 10 years, reckoned from the
date of his last release or the last conviction (2
reckoning point)
· of the crimes of (any of the crimes of) serious
physical injuries, less serious physical injuries,
robbery, theft, estafa and falsification, is found
guilty of any of the said crimes, the third time or
oftener

Take note the effect of repeal of the Penal Law
a.) New law provides a lighter penalty than the penalty
provided in the old law with respect to a crime then the new
law will apply because it is favorable to the accused but
remember he must not be a HD

b.)What if the new law provides a heavier penalty? At the
time of the commission of the crime, then you apply because
it is not totally repealed, its only that it apply to the same
offense but the point th4e lighter penalty in the old law that
would have to be made to apply.

c.) What if the new law does not anymore penalize the act
which has been penalize before the old law
- the crime is obliterated
- acquitted

Schools of Thought
1. Classical Theory
2. Positivist Theory
3. Protective / Utilitarian

1. Classical Theory
- Man is considered a creature of absolutely free will
(voluntary)
- Wherefore he has a choice
- If he chooses to do wrong, he will suffer the
consequences
- If he chooses to be right, fine!
- Purpose of penalty retribution

2. Positivist
- does not do it voluntarily but there is a strange
and morbid phenomenon that compels it to do
the act
- psychological
- did not really mean to commit the crime but
compel him by a strange or morbid
phenomenon to commit the crime
- not penalty, subjected to a battery of
psychological test
- he did not to do it on his own - forced to do it

3. Protective / Utilitarian
Case
Facts: Violation of BP22, he was being made to pay
something, the alleged creditor would not have any cash out,
there is a propensity to fool somebody who is already in a
dire straight -he took advantage on the accused.
Held - SC: Criminal Law, the penalty provided under the
criminal law is not there to protect society only from actual
wrongdoers, but likewise from potential wrongdoers. Those
who have propensity/ intonations to commit a crime

ARTICLE 3
FELONY

Art. 3 relate to Art. 4
Art 3- defines what a felony is
Art. 4- how is criminal liability incurred

Q. What is a felony?
Art. 3, a felony is an act or omissions punishable by law.

Q. Did he incur criminal liability?
A. Go back to Art. 3 & 4

Q. How is that act/omission?
A. Either dolo or culpa.

Q. How is criminal liability incurred?
A. Felony is an act/omission punishable by law it could be by
means of dolo (deceit, intent) culpa (imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight/skills)

2 Basic Kinds of felony
1. Intentional felonies
2. Culpable Felonies

Q. What are the elements: Art 365 Culpable
A.
Intentional vs. Culpable
-freedom -freedom
-intelligence - intelligence
-intent -negligence

Act - overt act, violation of law, you penalize it

Omission - why it is omission of a felony? or punishable by a
law?

Omission - we do not do anything - inaction, Q. So why do
we penalize for something we do not do?
A. because there is a law that tells you to do this, if you do
not to do this, so you omit the obligations to do.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Example
Treason (misprision) you are aware of the conspiracy to
commit treason- you have to report it to the proper
authorities.

ARTICLE 4
HOW IS CRIMINAL LIABILITY INCURRED

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3


Q. How is criminal liability incurred?
A. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he
intended.

By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be different
from that which he intended.
Discussion
before you can incur criminal liability - you do a felony, if
you do something which is not a felonious, you may be civilly
liable but not criminally liable

Q. So how do you incur criminal liability?
A. If you perform a felony

Definition of felony
It is an act/omission punishable by law, if the act is incorrect
merely or otherwise but it is not punishable by law and you
commit it but it appears that it is morally wrong but not
punishable by law, you do not incur criminal liability.

Example
Q. A commit suicide and she jumps from a building and
nibagsak sya kay B, did A incur criminal liability?
A. No, the act is not felonious. Suicide is not a felony. Even it
is immoral.

Opinion: He can be liable for reckless imprudence resulting
to homicide

Judge Cornejo: those person who commit suicide, there’s
something in their head (when you go up in the tallest
building) di kana titingin kung may madadaganan ka pa), I do
not subscribed to the opinion.
The only question is if there is a criminal liability - if your act
is felonious.
If the act is not felonious, you will not incur criminal liability.

To be able to incur criminal liability, 2 requisites must
concur:
1. The act is felonious
2. The act is the proximate cause of the injury

Concept of Proximate Cause
The cause of the cause is the evil caused

Q: How it is defined in criminal law?
A: People vs Iligan
It is that cause which in the natural & continuous sequence of
events unbroken by any events, unbroken by any active
intervening cause produces an injury without which the result
would not have result.

Q: When there is a proximate cause?
A: From the cause to the effect nothing must happen in
between

___________________________________________________
Proximate cause Effect which is the result

Case of Rockwell:
Offender punched the victim, the victim fell on the floor
(cemented pavement), he did not die, while on the ground,
dumating si horsie horsie!!! Dead.

Q: Was the punching - that is an exertion of violence,
protective of injury? Was the punching, that is a felonious
act is the proximate cause of the death of the victim?
A: From the cause which is the act to the effect of the death
nothing must happen in between, o di ba may nangyari the
horsie, horsie,. The intervening cause - horsie horsie

Case of Rockwell vs Case of Chuaco
In Chuaco Case, the horse is not in the scene
Punched -died of cerebral hemorrhage → incur criminal
liability → from the cause to the effect there is no
intervening

People vs. Iligan
- may view that the concept of Proximate Cause
was modified
- the victim was hacked on the head and then he
run until he reached the highway and he fell
and run over by the vehicles.
- SC said: It was still a proximate cause even if
the immediate cause was the running over.

Judge Cornejo: it is not modified → explained by the
Supreme Court, that it is a mortal wound na eh!
- Highway - mabilis ang takbo ng vehicles so you
do not consider that as an efficient intervening
cause
- it was an isolated case
- you do not drive less than 100 km per hour →
still it is the same concept

Felonious Act - effect “nothing happened in between”

Factors Affecting Intent and Correspondingly the Criminal
Liability
1. Mistake of Fact
2. Error in Personae (Mistake in Identity)
3. Aberratio Ictus (mistake in the victim of the blow)
4. Proximate Cause

1. Mistake of Fact
If you commit an act which is felonious, because it is
punishable by law but you did it under a mistake of fact, you
will not be criminally liable
Requisites (the 3 must concur):
1. That act would have been lawful had the facts been as the
accused believe them to be- the act would have been lawful -
nakapatay ka
2. The intention of the accused in performing the act must be
lawful
3. No negligence/carelessness on the part of the accused

U.S. vs. Ah chong
killed the victim, absolved because of mistake of fact→
voluntary yan but under different special circumstances kaya
siya na absolve, fall under the concept of mistake of fact.

1. The act would have been lawful had the facts been as
the accused believe them to be.
Example

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4

He slept, locked the door, he heard somebody knocking
trying to open the door, he taught it was a murderer. But
before he opened / before he killed the victim, the intention
was to protect himself or defend himself, because he
believes there is somebody trying to kill him, but he was not
careless, not negligent, because he asked - sino yan, sino
yan? bukas bukas pa din—3
rd
time asking, upon opening the
door he killed the person and after that he found out that it
was only his roommate
→ He is acting in self-defense which is lawful
→ No fault or carelessness / negligence, precisely he was
calling / asking 3 times

2. Error in Personae (Mistake in Identity)
If the act is criminal act but as was committed not under the
mistake of fact, it was voluntary, it was with knowledge, he
knew what he was doing, talagang penalize siya, only that
there is a mistake in the identity of the victim. Criminally
liable.
Example
A intended to kill B but A killed C instead
Q: Will A be liable for killing C?
A: Naturally, liable

3. Aberratio Ictus (Mistake in the vicitim of the blow)
A intended to shoot B, but A fired to C- mistake in the blow
(Aberatio Ictus) → liable
Example
The husband stopped the wife from talking, punched the
pregnant wife…but there is no intention to kill the wife,
intention to exert of violence into her person, to stop her
from talking. There is intent to cause harm but no intent to
kill the wife. No intention to commit so grave / praeter
intentionem - criminally liable
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Impossible Crimes
By any person performing an act which would be an offense
against persons or property, were if not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means

Q: Is it a crime?
A: technically, No! Impossible crime is not a crime because
the act is not a criminal act it would be an offense or it
would have been an offense against person or property for if
not for the impossibility of its accomplishment or on account
of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.

Q: Then if it is not a crime why it is penalize?
A: it is penalize because the fact of the commission of that
act, how which is not for the productive of a crime, against
person/ property, he has shown his criminal propensity,
intention to commit a crime only that he do not accomplish
the crime because it is inherently impossible.

The criminal propensity, criminal tendency that is the one
which is penalize, not the crime itself, because technically it
is not a crime.
Example

Q: A intended to kill B, A went to the house of B, he saw B
lying on the bed, believing that B was sleeping but in fact
B died in a cardiac arrest and A stabbed B.
Had the person (B) has been alive at the time of stabbing -
homicide/murder
A: the point is A will not be liable for murder/homicide,
because he cannot kill somebody who is dead (inherent
impossibility on account of the employment of inadequate
ineffectual means)

Example
Buying a substance, you knew it is a poison but it is sugar so
your intended victim did not die.

For purposes of impossible crime
The act would be an offense

Additional According to the SC
The act should not constitute another violation of any other
provision in the RPC

Case:
Intod vs. Court of Appeals
Offenders intended to kill Mr. X, so they conducted a
surveillance there is evident premeditation (go out, what
time?), so on the day they decide to execute their plan to kill
Mr. X, they TA! TA! TA! TA! And yet the house specifically the
room - the supposed victim is not there, Mr. X is somewhere
else

Argue in the SC: attempted murder, they tried to kill but he
was not there

Another Justice - impossible crime
How can it be - when one of the requisite is when the act
must not constitute any violation of the RPC, eh di ba TA! TA!
TA! Caused damage to the property, that is a violation of the
RPC.
- modified version of the impossible crime
- hindi pumasok yung last provision- that do not
constitute another violation of any other provision
of the RPC
- but they considered it as an Impossible Crime,
because of the inherent impossibility
- kapag attempted murder dapat andun yung tao and
about to commit the crime
- definition of a felony
- not attempted/ frustrated stage in Impossible Crime

ARTICLE 5
THERE IS NO CRIME WHEN THERE IS NO LAW THAT DEFINES
AND PUNISHES IT

ARTICLE 6
STAGES OF EXECUTION OF FELONY

Different Stages of Execution of felony
1. Consummated
2. Frustrated
3. Attempted

Discussion
 hindi ito crime
 Attempted murder or is hereby found guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of attempted murder
as defined and penalized in Art. 248 of the RPC in
relation to Art. 6 - stages of execution of a felony -
attempted homicide as defined and penalized in
Art. 249 of the RPC in relation to Art. 6

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5


1. Consummated
All the essential elements of the crime are consummated


Example
He kills somebody - die sya - consummated the moment you
put that thing, you have control, consummated na but there
are certain instances the consummation/frustration of the
crime will depend on the disposability of the articles taken.

Case:
People vs. Espiritu
Rifles they put it in a truck then at the checkpoint the rifles
were found, they were unlawfully taken
Consummated? No!
SC: it is simply frustrated because they could not have easily
disposed the rifle

Case:
People vs. Bino – they got hospital linen from the placed it
was stored. They loaded it in the truck. Na-check point sila
SC: consummated, because the linen is easily disposable
So it would depend on the disposability of the articles taken
for the purposes of the consummation

2. Frustrated
Offender performs all the acts of execution, which would
produce it by reason of some cause independent of the will of
the perpetrator
- perpetrator - offender
- offender - he is the one who commit a crime
- all the acts of execution- naperform na nya

Examples
a. Frustrated Homicide - offender performs all the act of
execution if the offender has inflicted a mortal wound
(sufficient to cause death) (fatal would yan) nisaksak mo in
the dibdib - consummated but if you have inflicted of a
mortal wound and then you have change of heart ikaw na
mismo ang nagdala sa hospital or because you are a doctor,
you save his life- frustrated, because the prevention of the
commission of the crime/ consummation of the crime is due
to you
b. you inflicted the mortal wound, doctors came in,
administered the necessary medication and necessary healing
that save his life- frustrated, the offender performs all the
act of execution that would produce a homicide as a
consequence kasi mortal wound na sufficient to death but
nevertheless homicide is not committed coz the victim did
not die, why? Due to some cause not on the will of the
perpetrator but due to the will of timely medical assistance
c. Rape- no frustrated
d. Arson- no frustrated
e. Impossible Crime- no frustrated

3. Attempted
The offender merely commences, merely begins the
performance of the act, the commission of the crime directly
by overt acts

Frustrated → naperform na lahat
Attempted → be merely begins, merely commences, how? By
directly overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of
execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance

Attempted
a. Commences directly by overt acts
b. If the act is preparatory he has not reached the attempted
stage of felony
- overt means direct external / outer
- for the purpose of attempted felony the
overt act must have a direct relation to
the crime intended to be committed
- not necessary that there is a physical act
because the physical act may be
preparatory or overt act
- overt act may have a relation to be the
crime intended to be committed

Example
Q: Person decides to kill somebody, he goes to the drug
store, and buys rat killer intended to mix that to be fed to
the intended victim. His acts in purchasing rat killer, has
reached the attempted stage?
A: NO! preparatory lang yan dib a, no direct relation in his
mind has a direct relation, but in the state of his mind, so it
is a preparatory act, malay mo maraming rats talaga, so it is
different however he comes home he mixes the poison on the
food, he attempted to feed it, overt act, attempted
homicide, because the direct relation.
Paano magiging attempted?
Susubo pa lang nya and the cat went to him, cat ate it and
the cat died → attempted, take note that he did not feed
because of some cause other than his spontaneous desistance

No attempted
Impossible Crime
Homicide
Arson

Notes:
You put flammable articles, nibuhusan mo ng gas, overt act -
attempted
Rape - no frustrated- only attempted and consummated
Consummated rape, when? Slightest penetration of the ano
into the ano is already consummated di na kelangan to go
deeper, slightest penetration, for as long as there is a
slightest penetration
What if walang penetration? yung hugging lang, kasi
obviously may intent, for example, you undress a woman, the
male organ, walang penetration that is attempted it is not
acts of lasciviousness why you place your thing over her thing
without intent to, attempted but the moment slightest
penetration - consummated

Attempted – male organ was placed and nagkiskis dun sa
thigh nung girl. No penetration

SC: that is only an attempted rape. It simply constituted the
strange thing of the castle of the orgasmic potency or the
shelling of the variable passion.

Example
They inflicted injury on the victim, believing the victim has
already died? Survive, is that frustrated homicide?
They belief is immaterial. What matter is if all the acts of
execution were performed.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
6


ARTICLE 7
WHEN LIGHT FELONIES ARE PUNISHABLE

Light Felonies
Are punishable when consummated except those against
person or property.
Generally: when consummated
Except: attempted theft, attempted homicide

Example
Oral defamation
Slander

ARTICLE 8
CONSPIRACY

Q: When is there a conspiracy?
A: When 2 or more persons come into an agreement
concerning the commission of the crime and decide to
commit it.

Conspiracy can be taken into 2 senses:
1. Generally as a mode of incurring criminal liability or it is
taken as a crime itself only when expressly made a crime
under the RPC / law
2. If conspiracy is not expressly made a crime under the law
specifically the RPC and conspiracy is simple a mode of
incurring criminal liability.

1. Conspiracy as a Crime
It is defined in the law as a crime

Example
Conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion, coup d’etat,
sedition, particular penalty
+for as long it is defined a crime and gives a penalty,
conspiracy is a crime but if it is not made/expressly made a
crime, more it is given a penalty in the RPC, it is simple a
mode of incurring criminal liability.

2. Mode of incurring criminal liability
Because the act of 1 is the act of all

Example
Even if I, even if Mr. X is the only one who materially
perform the act, even he is the one who directly stabbed and
killed the victim, kami we were there, did not participate in
the actual killing for as long as it can be establish that we
conspired to kill, then, we are likewise liable as Principals.

Q. Mode of incurring liability – when do you incur criminal
liability?
A. When you perform an act or felony.
¬So you perform an act, you are the one who killed the
victim, kami hindi but we conspired to commit a crime, in
any other manner, we conspire to kill the victim, we are
equally liable as to his death, as Principals, but of course in
conspiracy, it must be established clearly and convincingly as
the crime itself although there is no direct evidence of
conspiracy of course its inferred from circumstantial
evidence, was there some agreement if any part is done by
them that would show there is common decide to commit a
crime, there is conspiracy.
¬Even we say there is a conspiracy, because the act of 1 is
the act of all, they conspire but if somebody or one of the
conspirators try to prevent the commission of an act which
was not one of those agreed upon, he cannot be held liable.
Example:
We conspire to kill A but napatay na then susunugin yung
bahay but you prevent it, you may not be held liable for
arson

General rule: the act of 1 is the act of all
Exception: if 1 of the conspirators try to prevent the
commission of another act which was not agreed upon.

Proposal to Commit a Felony
A mode of incurring criminal liability, is likewise a crime only
if it is made expressly a crime under the RPC

Examples
Proposal to commit treason, proposal to commit rebellion,
proposal to commit sedition

- if it is made expressly made a crime
- it is not necessary that a proposal is accepted,
mere proposal even if not accepted, it is made
a crime in so far as the offense and liable, not
specifically made a crime it must be accepted
perjury
Example
I decide to induce him to execute a false affidavit, propose
the execution, if he will not accept my proposal. He is not
liable
Accept → both will be liable, Principal by Inducement

Q: What if several persons were charged as conspirators, ½
have been acquitted, the last are guilty/ convicted, is
there something wrong?
A: No, People vs. ©
→ Nothing irregular because conspiracy is a mode of incurring
criminal liability.

ARTICLE 9
GRAVE, LESS GRAVE, LIGHT FELONIES

ARTICLE 10
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

ARTICLES 11 TO 15
Art. 11 Justifying Circumstances
Art. 12 Exempting Circumstances
Art. 13 Mitigating Circumstances
Art. 14 Aggravating Circumstances
Art. 15 Alternative Circumstances

JEMAA – they are referred to as modifying circumstances.
Q. Why modifying?
A. Because they modify either to increase or decrease the
degree of criminal liability of a particular accused.

J – there is no criminal liability
E – there is no criminal liability
M – there is criminal liability but reduced
A – there is criminal liability but liability is increased or if it is
in the nature of qualifying aggravating circumstance then the
crime is changed. It changes the nature of the crime.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
7

Example Qualifying aggravating circumstance – killing
generally would amount to homicide but there is an
attendance in the commission of the crime of qualifying
aggravating circumstance of treachery or evident
premeditation, the crime is qualified from homicide to
murder.

Justifying vs. Exempting
1. J – there is no crime, there is no criminal liability because
the act is justified (neither crime nor criminal)
E – there is a crime but there is no criminal
Because the criminal or perpetrator of the act is exempt from
criminal liability

2. J – since there is no crime, there is no civil liability except
Paragraph 4 → state of necessity or avoidance of greater
injury.

(We all know even in criminal procedure – civil liability flows
from the commission of the crime so if there is no crime,
there is no source from which the civil liability might flow or
spring)

E – since there is a crime, there is civil liability. There is no
criminal liability but there is civil liability except paragraphs
4 (accident) and 7 (insuperable cause).
Meaning: with respect to paragraphs 4 and 7 there is neither
criminal liability nor civil liability.

JEM – invoked by the accused.
Aggravating – invoked by the prosecution for the purpose of
increasing the degree of criminal liability of the accused. The
prosecution is requesting and trying to prove to the court
that this circumstance should be appreciated against the
accused in the commission of the crime so as to increase the
criminal liability of the accused.

ARTICLE 11
JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Self – defense (SD)
2. Defense of Relatives (DR)
3. Defense of Strangers (DS)
4. State of Necessity or Avoidance of Greater Evil
5. Fulfillment of a Duty
6. Obedience to Superior

In self-defense, defense of relatives and defense of
strangers, the first two elements of these three defenses
are the same:
1. Unlawful aggression from the victim
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression

They differ in the 3
rd
requisite:
SD – lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself

DR - in case the provocation was given by the person
attacked, that the one making the defense (the accused) had
no part therein / even if the relative being defended gives
the provocation, it is important that the person defending
had no part in the provocation.
DS – the person defending the stranger was not motivated by
hate, revenge, resentment or other evil motives.
The unlawful aggression should have come from the
private offended party.

In all these defenses the indispensable requisite is
unlawful aggression.
Q. Why unlawful aggression is indispensable?
A. Because if there is no unlawful aggression, the second
requisite (which is reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression) has no
basis because you are invoking SD, DR, DS so the unlawful
aggression should have come from the victim. Meaning
without the unlawful aggression, there is nothing to prevent
or repel.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Incomplete Justifying Circumstance (IJC) – if not all the
conditions are present

Q. What is the effect of IJC?
A. It is a privileged mitigating circumstance (PMC).

Q. What is the effect of PMC?
A. It serves to reduce the penalty by degrees. It is 1 degree
lower to the mitigating.

Incomplete SD, Incomplete DR, Incomplete DS, Incomplete
exempting circumstance – not all the conditions necessary to
justify the act or exempt the accused from criminal liability
are present.

If in any of these defenses (SD, DS, DR) there is no unlawful
aggression, even if the two other requisites are present, you
cannot invoke of the PMC of IJC because as far as these
defenses are concerned, the indispensable element is
unlawful aggression coming from the private offended party.

Examples:
1. If in SD reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression and lack of
sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
himself are present but there is no unlawful aggression → no
PMC
2. If in SD unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity of
the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful
aggression are present → there is PMC
3. If in SD unlawful aggression and lack of sufficient
provocation on the part of the person defending himself are
present → there is PMC
4. If in SD one requisite is present, which is unlawful
aggression → ordinary mitigating circumstance.

PAR. 1 - SELF DEFENSE
Requisites:
1. Unlawful aggression from the victim
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
person defending himself

1. Unlawful Aggression from the Victim

Aggression should have come from the victim of the
accused
The unlawful aggression must have come from the victim
because he is defending himself or defending his relative or

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
8

defending a stranger so the aggression should have come
from the victim of the accused.

Q. What is unlawful aggression / What would consist of
unlawful aggression?
A. It is an action either an actual physical assault coming
from the victim or the threat to inflict real injury on the
offender and the threat to inflict real injury must be
immediate and imminent. The threat to inflict real injury in
not merely imagined.

Immediate / Imminent – about to happen. There are signs to
show that the aggression is about to happen.

Example
Lumalapit lang sayo yung tao, no threat, you imagined that
he will kill you → this is not imminent.

It must be at the time the unlawful aggression is still
existing
If you act / claim in SD, it must be at the time the unlawful
aggression is still existing because of you attack somebody
after the unlawful aggression has already ceased to exist,
that is no longer SD, you are no longer preventing, you are no
longer preventing any aggression. When the unlawful
aggression ceased to exist → that is simply retaliation.
Example
Ni-saksak ka nya, umalis na sya tapos ni-attack mo pa sya →
retaliation

Binugbog ka, after binugbog ka, bumagsak ka, he left and did
not do anything else and then you stood up and you followed
him and stabbed him.
Q. Is that SD?
A. No. Tapos na eh! It should be on going or about to happen.
You are simply repelling the aggression so the aggression
must be existing at the time you reacted.

2. Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed to Prevent
or Repel the Unlawful Aggression
- Case to case basis. It would depend on the existence of the
aggression as well as the nature and extent of the aggression
because you are trying to repel or trying to prevent the
aggression so it must be reasonable and must depend on the
nature and extent of the aggression.
Example
Nisampal ka nya, sinaksak mo sya. Is that reasonable? No.
Kung sinampal ka, sampalin mo din or suntukin mo.

Minura ka, sinaksak mo – that is unreasonable!

It must be proportionate to the aggression. So it would
depend on the nature and extent or gravity of the aggression.
The reasonableness would depend on the existence of
aggression. If there is no aggression there is no basis for
repelling.

3. Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the Part of the Person
Defending Himself

Q. What is provocation?
A. It is something that would steal somebody to action.

Q. What is lack of provocation?
A. Even if the accused gave the provocation, it was not
sufficient.
Meaning: kung wala syang ginawang provocation that could
have illicited the aggression from the private offended party
(POP) or magbigay man sya ng provocation, it was not
sufficient to illicit such unlawful aggression from the POP.

PAR. 2 - DEFENSE OF RELATIVES
Requisites:
1. Unlawful aggression from the victim
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression
3. In case the provocation was given by the person
attacked, that the one making the defense (the accused)
had no part therein / even if the relative being defended
gives the provocation, it is important that the person
defending had no part in the provocation.

Q. Who are the relatives?
A. Spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the
same degrees, relatives by consanguinity within the fourth
civil degree.

Note: If not included in the list, you are simply acting in
defense of a stranger.

Spouse must be Legitimate Spouse
The spouse must be a legitimate spouse. If common law
spouse, that is defense of stranger. There should be
legitimate relationship between you and the spouse.

Note: The concept of unlawful aggression and reasonable
necessity in SD is the same in DR.

3. Even if the Relative Being Defended Gives the
Provocation, it is Important that the Person Defending had
no Part in the Provocation

Example
Gerard (brother of Ayce) saw Ayce on the ground about to be
hit by the group of Chat. Gerard did not know that Ayce gave
the provocation but it was Ayce who started it all. Gerard
thought that it was Ayce who was the victim. So what Gerard
did, he assaulted the group of Chat. Gerard was acting in
defense of a relative even if Ayce was the one who gave the
provocation. What is important is that it Gerard was not part
of the provocation.
PAR. 3 - DEFENSE OF STRANGERS
Requisites:
1. Unlawful aggression from the victim
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel the unlawful aggression
3. the person defending the stranger was not motivated
by hate, revenge, resentment or other evil motives.

Q. Who is a stranger?
A. A person who is not listed under the concept of relatives.

Note: The concept of unlawful aggression and reasonable
necessity in SD is the same in DS.

3. The Person Defending the Stranger was not Motivated by
Hate, Revenge, Resentment or other Evil Motives


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
9

Most of these are circumstantial. It is a matter of proof.

Example
Ariel saw Jessica (a stranger) being mauled by Ayce. Ayce is
Ariel’s mortal enemy. Ariel assaulted Ayce. Ariel claimed
that he is defending Jessica who was assaulted by Ayce.
Nobody knew that Ayce is the mortal enemy of Ariel so it is a
matter of proof. What is important is that the person
defending was not motivated by hate, revenge, resentment
or other evil motives.

PAR 4 - STATE OF NECESSITY OR AVOIDANCE OF GREATER
INJURY / EVIL
Requisites:
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.

G.R.: There is no but there is civil liability
EXC: Paragraph 4. Meaning there is no crime, there is no civil
liability.

Example
Faye was driving her Jaguar car in the zigzag road, head on
collision with a bus. If she swerves her car to the left, she
would hit a pedestrian. If she swerves her car to the right,
she would fall and would die. This is avoidance of greater
injury, and naturally, greater injury would be her life. So she
swerved her car to the left. This is self-preservation.
Faye is relieved of criminal liability because she acted in
avoidance of greater injury. Hence, she has to bear the civil
liability for any damages that she caused to the victim.

OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED BY A SUPERIOR
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Rules:
1. It must be obedience to a lawful order of a superior.
It is not a blind obedience. It must be proved that it
is a lawful order of superior.
2. If the accused complied with an unlawful order
under a mistake of fact, he has no liability. He will
not be criminally responsible.
3. If he acted in compliance with an order which is
clearly and patently 7unlawful, he cannot invoke
the defense of acting in obedience to a lawful
order.

Q. What if he acted in obedience to an unlawful order but
he acted in obedience because of an irresistible force or
under a compulsion of an uncontrollable fear?
A. He is not justified but he will be exempt under Art. 12.

ARTICLE 12
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

The following are exempt from criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or insane person unless the latter has
acted during a lucid interval.
2. A person under nine years of age.
3. A person over nine (fifteen na as amended by RA
9344) years of age and under fifteen (eighteen RA
9344) unless he has acted with discernment, in
which case such minor shall be proceeded against in
accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of this
Code.
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.
5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of
irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by
law, when prevented by some lawful or insuperable
cause.

1. An Imbecile or Insane Person Unless the Latter has
Acted During a Lucid Interval

Imbecility – the person has the mentality of a child 2 to 7
years old. It is not the chronological age.

Lucid – aware of what he is doing

Insanity – the act must have been performed by the accused
in a state of total deprivation of intelligence. Insanity would
include schizophrenia and epilepsy.

Example
Gerard does not know what he is doing at the time he
committed the crime because even if he has been declared
insane but at the time he committed the act, he was acting
during lucid interval that is not exempting. Because if he did
it under lucid interval (sane or aware of what he was doing)
from his insanity (declared or diagnosed insane) → not
exempt.

Note: Burden of proof is on the accused to prove that he is
exempt / insane

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 this Code.

Minority – under the RPC, if he is under 9 he is exempt. But
by virtue of R.A. 9344 or The Juvenile Justice and Welfare
Act of 2006 (Kiko Pangilinan Law) → under 9 or over 9 but
under 15, exempt from criminal liability.

15 or under at the time of the commission of the offense
shall be exempt from criminal liability but the child shall be
subjected to an intervention program.

Q. What about above 15 but below 18 (16 to 17 years old)?
A. Exempt but the child shall be subjected to an intervention
program in accordance with a particular act unless he acted
with discernment (he knows what is right and wrong), in
which case, he shall be subjected to the appropriate
proceeding in accordance with law.

The exemption from criminal liability under R.A. 9344 shall
not include exemption from civil liability which shall be
enforced in accordance with law.

Before R.A. 9344 → Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M.
by SC) – it is still consistent. It provides that a minor under 9

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
0

at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt
from criminal liability. Over 9 under 15 at the time of the
commission of the offense, he shall be committed to the care
of his father or mother or the nearest relative or family
friend. If however, the prosecution proved that he acted with
discernment, he shall be subjected to appropriate
proceedings in accordance with law.

Prevailing Rule → R.A. 9344 because it was promulgated
2006.

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

*Relate this with criminal negligence.

Q. Why will I be penalized for something I did not intend to
do?
Because we said that felony is an act or omission punishable
by law committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also
by means of fault (culpa)

Concept of Accident as an Exempting Circumstance
Accident as an Exempting Circumstance → there is no
criminal liability but in Accident (plain) → there is criminal
liability under Article 365 of the RPC.
Note: To be exempt from criminal liability, the offender must
be performing a lawful act with due care causing injury to
another or damage to the property of another.

Q. If Charles has a license to drive, he drives his vehicle
and in the course of his driving, he hit another vehicle or
run over somebody, liable under Art. 365. But why he
would liable? (He never wanted that to happen.)
A. Because it is in the way that he performed his lawful act.
He has a license and he is driving → he is performing a lawful
act, but if he caused injury because he performed the lawful
act recklessly without due care, then he is criminally liable.

It is only when you perform a lawful act with due care can
you make use of accident as an exempting circumstance.
Example
Licensed driver ka and you are driving in the highway, ang
bagal bagal mo na nga 20 km/hour, you are reckless? No.

Saskia is driving inside the compound of San Sebastian at 70-
100 km/hour. She is licensed to drive but she is driving in an
area where there are kids playing → that is reckless.

5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of
irresistible force.

6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.

Irresistible force & uncontrollable fear – they are connected
because both have the same concept.

Rationale
Q. Why is the offender exempt from criminal liability if he
commits a crime while acting under the impulse of an
irresistible force (IF) or compulsion of an uncontrollable
fear (UF)?
A. IF means actual physical force exerted on the person of
the offender. UF means you are being threatened but the
force to be exerted on the person of the accused or the
threat or intimidation that is employed on the accused that
could have prompted him to commit the crime simply
reduced him to a mere instrument. He has no choice but to
do it.

IF → for it to be exempting, always remember did this
physical force reduced him to simply being a tool or
instrument? He has no choice but do it.
Example:
Bugbog sarado na sya… Pasasabugin mo ba ito o hindi? Pak!
Pak! Pak! Pasasabugin mo ba yung building o hindi? Pak! Pak!
Pak! O sige, pasasabugin ko na… ®

Note: Common denominator of UF / IF → reduced to being a
mere instrument
Note: It does not mean that he has no more intelligence but
it should be he has no more will power or choice.

UF
Example:
You kill this particular person otherwise I will kill your wife
or child. He has no choice because it would mean the death
of his wife or child.

IF / UF → always remember for these to be exempting, he
was reduced or the force to be exerted in his person or the
intimidation employed was simply reduced him to being an
instrument. He has no choice but do it.

7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law,
when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause.

Insuperable Cause – it is a cause that cannot be overcome.

Example
Joan gave birth in the forest so she was so weak and she has
to leave her baby to seek for help. She was not able to come
back because she was seriously ill, the baby died. She was
subsequently, sued for infanticide. Joan said she was
exempt. Is Joan correct? Yes. Because she was seriously ill at
the time (cause that you cannot overcome) making her go
back to her child.

Liability in Exempting Circumstance
If there is an exempting circumstance, there is a crime and
therefore there is civil liability because there is a source
from which you get the civil liability except paragraph 4
(accident) and paragraph 7 (insuperable cause). This means
that if the exempting circumstance is paragraph 4 or
paragraph 7, there is no criminal liability and no civil
liability.

ABSOLUTORY CAUSES

Absolutory – means the offender is relieved.

Entrapment vs. Instigation
Entrapment – the person is engaged in an unlawful activity or
the offender is actually doing the crime only that he cannot
be arrested so ways and means are resorted to by the police
officers to catch him in the act or in flagrante delicto. A
common form of entrapment is a buy bust operation.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
1


Instigation – it is in the nature of inducement. The offender
or the one who committed the crime did not even think of
committing the crime only that he was instigated to commit
the crime and then when he committed the crime, the police
officers arrested him. The police officer simply induced him
to commit the crime, the offender never even thought of
committing the crime from the very beginning.

Q. What could be the absolutory cause as between
instigation and entrapment?
A. Instigation because the offender is simply induced or lead
to commit the crime. It is not entrapment because
entrapment is valid the police officers are simply catching
the offender in the act. The offender had been doing the act
before.

ARTICLE 13
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

The following are Mitigating Circumstances:
1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances.
2. Minority / senility (Wala na kasi exempt na)
3. Praeter intentionem
4. Sufficient provocation or threat
5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation
7. Voluntary surrender
8. Voluntary plea of guilt
9. Deaf and dumb, blind or other physical defect.
10. Illness
11. Analogous circumstances

Q. What is the effect of mitigating circumstance (MC)?
A. It is either to reduce the penalty by period or by degrees.

Kinds of Mitigating Circumstances
1. Ordinary MC – it serves to reduce the period of the
penalty.
In cases of divisible, it serves to reduce the penalty in its
minimum.
Note: We talk of the periods of the penalty if it is divisible
because a period is one of the three equal portions of
divisible penalty. But it may have an effect with respect to
indivisible not single indivisible, if the penalty consists of 2
indivisible penalties.

We do not talk of periods in cases of indivisible penalty.
Example
Death penalty is indivisible. There is no death minimum,
death maximum!

2. Privileged MC – it serves to reduce the penalty by degrees.
Reduces the penalty by 1 or 2 degrees.
Example
1 penalty is 1 degree
R Temporal → Prision Mayor

Kinds of Privilege MC:
A. Incomplete Justifying
B. Incomplete Exempting
A & B – meaning not all the conditions are present. Majority
of the conditions are present.

G.R. For purposes of Incomplete Justifying and Incomplete
Exempting as a Privileged Mitigating Circumstances, the
majority of the requisites should be present.

Note: if there are 2 or more mitigating and there is no
aggravating, it is already a privileged MC, which means it will
reduce the penalty by 1 degree.
Note: In SD / DS / DR → unlawful aggression should always be
present. Even if the majority of the requisites are present for
as long as the unlawful aggression is not present → no
incomplete justifying.

6. Passion or Obfuscation

Passion or obfuscation is an ordinary MC.

Obfuscation – is confusion.

If you commit an offense under passion or obfuscation, it
can be mitigating.
Jurisprudence: for passion or obfuscation to be mitigating, it
must have arisen from lawful sentiments.
Example:
A man witnessed a woman taking a bath. He was so aroused
that after the woman took a bath, when the woman came
out, he raped the woman. The man admitted but he
contended that he acted under passion.
Held: The Supreme Court said that the man did not act under
passion. He acted under lust. Lust was never a lawful
sentiment.

Q. What if a girl acted because of jealousy?
A. Generally, jealousy is an unlawful sentiment but it will be
mitigating if it has a legitimate basis.

7. Voluntary Surrender and Confession of Guilt

Voluntary Surrender
Requisites:
1. The surrender must be voluntary
2. The surrender must be unconditional
3. It must be a surrender of oneself.

Discussion: There is no problem that in voluntary surrender,
the offender acknowledges having committed the crime. The
liability is mitigated because by voluntary surrendering, the
offender unconditionally placed himself subject to the
custody of the authorities. The offender saved the
government from the time and expense in looking for him.
The offender is given a concession – his liability is mitigated.


Surrender must be Voluntary
Q. When is voluntary surrender mitigating?
A. It must be made immediately after the commission of the
crime.

Example
Paparating na ang mga pulis, the you said, ―I surrender‖.
This is not mitigating because what prompted you to
surrender yourself is not because you really wanted save the
government from the time and expense in looking for you but
because palapit na sila.

Surrender of Oneself

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
2

Note: You do not surrender the instrument of the crime but
yourself

Example
You killed somebody then pumunta ka sa police station and
you said ―Ito sinu-surrender ko na yung bolo, may dugo dugo
pa, pinatay ko si Mr. X.‖
This is not mitigating because you simply surrendered the
instrument of the crime and not yourself.

8. Voluntary plea of guilt

Confession of Guilt (at the arraignment or during the pre-
trial) / Admission of Guilt
Discussion: If you offer to plea guilty to a lesser offense and
your offer to plea guilty to a lesser offense is accepted by the
public prosecutor and by the private offended party, it is
valid and you will be allowed to plea guilty to a lesser
offense.

Q. Murder under the original information at the time of the
pre-trial, you offered to plea guilty to a lesser offense of
homicide. Since you pleaded guilty and since you made a
confession of guilt in open court, will it be considered as
mitigating in your favor?
A. No more. For it to be mitigating, it must be a plea of guilt
or confession of guilt only to the offense as originally charged
in the information and that plea should be a plea of guilt to a
lesser offense.

9. Deaf and dumb, blind or other physical defect.

Physical defects – you committed it when you are blind or
deaf.

11. Analogous mitigating circumstances

Analogous – means similar

Example
Extreme poverty – if you commit theft under extreme
poverty, it is analogous to state of necessity. This is self-
preservation, you have to live and eat.

If you voluntarily surrendered the stolen property, the
Supreme Court said that it would be analogous to voluntary
surrender in a prosecution for theft or robbery.

Note: There are only analogous mitigating circumstances but
there are no analogous aggravating circumstances.
Example
The judge considered rape as analogous to ignominy or
physical injuries as analogous to cruelty.
SC said: by express provision of Article 13, there are only
analogous mitigating circumstances but no analogous
aggravating circumstances. (People vs. Regala, December
2000)

ARTICLE 14
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances
1. Generic
2. Specific
3. Inherent
4. Qualifying
5. Special

1. Generic
Applies to all kinds crimes
Examples
Recidivism, habituality

2. Specific
They apply only to particular cases
Examples
Evident premeditation, treachery and cruelty, they are
aggravating circumstances but specifically applied to crimes
against persons
3. Inherent
They are necessarily present in the crime but they are not
used in the definition of the crime. They are part of the
crime.
Examples
Abuse of authority / public office is inherent in bribery.
Fraud is an aggravating circumstance inherent in estafa.
Deceit is inherent in simple seduction. Unlawful entry in
trespass to dwelling

4. Qualifying
It changes the nature of the crime
Examples
Abuse of superior strength, cruelty

When killing is attended by qualifying aggravating
circumstances, that killing will be qualified from homicide to
murder.
Simple theft can be qualified to qualified theft.

Example of Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances –
treachery, evident premeditation, abuse of superior
strength, cruelty.

5. Special
They arise under special conditions in order to increase the
penalty but they cannot be offset by any mitigating
circumstances.
Example
Quasi-recidivism (Article 160 RPC), if after having been
convicted of final judgment or before serving sentence or
while serving sentence, the offender commits another (new)
crime and therefore he will be imposed a penalty with a
maximum of the imposable penalty for the new crime.

If a crime is committed by a syndicate – syndicated estafa,
syndicated illegal recruitment, membership in an organized
syndicated crime group.

The following are aggravating circumstances:
1. Taking advantage of official position
2. In contempt of or insult to public authorities
3. Age, sex, rank, dwelling
4. Abuse of confidence / obvious ungratefulness
5. Committed in the palace of the chief executive,
etc.
6. Nighttime, uninhabited place, band
7. On the occasion and by means of calamity or
misfortune
8. Committed with the aid of armed men
9. Recidivism

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
3

10. Habituality
11. Price, promise or reward
12. Inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a
vessel etc.
13. Evident premeditation
14. Craft, fraud or disguise
15. Abuse of superior strength
16. Treachery
17. Ignominy
18. Unlawful Entry
19. Breaking of wall, roof, floor, door or window
20. Aid of minor, use of motor vehicle
21. Causing other wrong not necessary for its
commission

1. Taking advantage of official position

2. In contempt of or insult to public authorities
This is a generic aggravating circumstance.

Public Authorities – do not include the agents of persons in
authority.

3. Age, sex, rank, dwelling

Dwelling
Q. When is dwelling aggravating?
A. If the crime is committed in the dwelling of the offended
party who has not given provocation.

Q. The mother was walking along the street where a house
is situated where her daughter is working as a household
helper. The mother heard the daughter crying (the
daughter was verbally and physically abused). The mother
entered the dwelling of the employer of the daughter and
assaulted the employer. Is dwelling aggravating?
A. No. Because the offended party here, who is the employer
gave the provocation. Note that the mother is still liable only
that her liability will not be aggravated.

Q. If the offender enters the dwelling of another person
who has not given provocation. Inside the dwelling he
dragged the victim. Outside the dwelling, he assaulted the
victim. Can dwelling be appreciated against him?
A. Yes. For as long as the violence or assault started inside
the dwelling. Against the offended party who has not given
the provocation.

Q. What if from the outside, there is no entry into the
dwelling, but from the outside “nibaril nya” yung private
offended party who was there inside. No provocation on
the part of the private offended party. Is dwelling
aggravating?
A. Yes. The violence was committed there although from the
outside and the victim gave no provocation.

Note: Burden of proof → prosecution

4. Abuse of confidence / obvious ungratefulness

5. Committed in the palace of the chief executive, etc.

Situations:
1. Committed in the palace
2. Committed in the palace in the presence of the president
3. Committed anywhere in the presence of the president

Q. What if the crime was committed in the Arlgeui
Residence which is situated in the Malacanan grounds?
A. It is not aggravating (unless in the presence of the
president) because the term “palace” contemplates
Malacaňan Palace only.

Note: The Arlegui Residence was built during the time of
President Corazon Aquino because Pres. Aquino does not
want to live in Malacaňan Palace so a house was built for her
inside the Malacaňan grounds.


6. Nighttime, uninhabited place, band

Discussion: For these three aggravating circumstances to be
appreciated against the accused, the crime was committed in
order to facilitate the crime.

Nighttime
It is not enough that the crime was simply committed at night
time.

Example
You killed somebody now (nighttime) but there is no showing
that you purposely waited for night time to facilitate the
commission of the crime. It just simply happens that the
crime was committed at nighttime. Nighttime in this case is
not aggravating.

Nighttime will only be aggravating to increase the criminal
liability of the accused if it can be shown that it was
purposely sought for to facilitate the commission of the
crime.

Q. Why?
A. Because pag night time mas mahirap ang identification lalo
na kung maitim sya ©

The Crime is Committed in an Uninhabited Place
Example
You want to kill him in a far place, in a warehouse or
bodega, wala syang means of escape or he cannot ask help
from anybody. In this case, uninhabited place was purposely
sought for the commission of the crime.

The burden of proof - is in the prosecution that it is an
uninhabited place. Na hinanap yan or dinala sya don for the
victim not to be able to seek help from anybody.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
By a Band
This is not a rock band ©
This is a criminal band.

Q. When is a crime considered to have been committed by
a band?
A. If there are more than 3 armed male factors who
committed the crime.

Note: 4 male factors - 3 of them armed and 1 not armed →
no band

Note: There is another aggravating circumstance that speaks
of armed men (No. 8 of Article 14).

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
4

If the crime is committed with the aid of armed men that is a
different aggravating circumstance but if you notice whether
committed by a band or with the aid of armed men, the men
in those circumstances are armed.

Q. What would make a band as an aggravating
circumstance?
A. 1. The (whole) band or all of them must be armed.
2. At least 4 or more than 3 armed malefactors must have
participated in the commission of the crime.
3. They must be principals by direct participation in the
commission of the crime.

Q. If 4 sila but only 3 directly participated in the
commission of the crime 1 participated by virtue of
inducement. Can you appreciate band as an aggravating
circumstance?
A. No. because at least 4 armed malefactors must have
directly participated in the commission of the crime. All of
them must be principals by direct participation.

Q. How is it different from the aggravating circumstance of
the crime being committed with the aid of armed men?
A. 1. With the aid of armed men – the armed men need not
necessarily take part on the commission of the crime. This
aggravating circumstance is appreciated only against the very
person who committed the crime. So ang nag-direct
participate ay yung taong nag-rely sa kanila.
If the crime is committed by a band – it will be appreciated
against all of them because they are all principals by direct
participation.
2. With the aid of armed men – this aggravating circumstance
will only be taken against the very person who committed the
crime and the armed men who aided him will be considered
as accomplices not conspirators because it was not
mentioned what kind of aid. As long as they are there, they
are accomplices.
If the crime is committed by a band – All must have
participated directly in the commission of the crime so that
will be appreciated against all of them.

7. On the occasion and by means of calamity or misfortune

Q. What is the purpose of committing the crime?
A. You are taking advantage of the misfortune.

Example
In the course of relief operations, nagnanakaw ka pa. Super
criminal ka! ©

8. Committed with the aid of armed men

9. Recidivism

Forms of Repetition
1. Recidivism
2. Habituality or Reiteracion
3. Habitual Delinquency (Art. 62)
4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160)

1. Recidivism – if the offender after having been previously
convicted by final judgment is now on trial for a new offense
embraced in the same title of the code.

Q. If he has been previously convicted of theft by final
judgment and after which he killed somebody. Is he a
recidivist?
A. No. Because theft is a crime against property and the
killing or homicide is a crime against persons. Both crimes
must be embraced in the same title of the code.

Q. What if the person after having been previously
convicted of homicide, kills another person. Is he a
recidivist?
A. Not necessarily because he has not been previously
convicted by final judgment. Note that at the time of his trial
for the new crime which is embraced in the same title, he
must have been previously convicted by final judgment to
make him a recidivist.

Q. When is judgment by conviction final?
A. After the expiration of the 15-day period reckoned from
notice of promulgation of judgment without any appeal taken
from the judgment.

10. Habituality

2. Habituality or Reiteracion – the offender has been
previously punished for an offense to which the law attaches
an equal or greater penalty than the penalty for the new
crime or he has been previously punished for 2 or more
crimes to which the law attaches a lighter penalty.

Punished for an Offense to which the Law Attaches an
Equal or Greater Penalty
Q. Serious physical injuries – it turns out that before he
committed serious physical injuries, records show that he
has been previously punished or he has served sentence
for homicide. Is there habituality?
A. Yes. Because what he committed is equal or greater than
homicide.

Note: pag baliktad hindi pwede.
Example
He commits homicide now and he has been previously
punished of physical injuries.

Note: homicide to homicide → pwede kasi equal.

Note: In habituality, we are talking about the penalty, if it is
greater or equal than the new crime.

Two or More Offenses to which the Law Attaches a Lighter
Penalty
Q. He has been previously punished for 2 counts of slight
physical injuries. He now stands trial for maltreatment. Is
there habituality? Is he punished for 2 or more crimes to
which the law attaches a lighter penalty?
A. Yes. Lighter than the new crime.

He has been previously punished for less physical injuries
(light offense) to which the law attaches a lighter penalty.
He is now on trial, he commits slight physical injuries. Is
there habituality?
A. None. Light yan eh!

Note: Lagyan nyo lagi ng “than”. Equal or greater than what?
Than the new penalty for the new offense. Lighter than the
penalty for the new offense.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
5


3. Habitual Delinquency (Art. 62) – if within a period of 10
years reckoned from the date of his last release or last
conviction of the crimes of:
a. Serious physical injuries
b. Less serious physical injuries
c. Robbery
d. Theft
e. Estafa
f. Falsification
he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
oftener.

Note: “Any of the said Crimes”

Example
He has been convicted of robbery, convicted for 10 years. He
has been found guilty of serious physical injuries. He is a
habitual delinquent.

The 3
rd
time or Oftener – 3
rd
, 4
th
, 5
th
, 6
th

Q. Why is this aggravating?
A. (In a way this is a special aggravating circumstance).
Because under Art. 62, if it is committed for the third time or
any of the six crimes → this is penalty for the new crime
“plus” “plus”. The penalty will be increased or added.

4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) – after having been previously
convicted by final judgment or before serving sentence or
while serving sentence, he commits a new crime.

Example
Hindi pa sya nakaka-serve or he has not finished serving his
sentence by final judgment, nag commit na naman sya ng
new crime, there is quasi-recidivism.

Note: Please remember pareho lang sila ng apelido ng
recidivism but they are totally different.

Recidivism vs. Quasi-recidivism
Recidivism – the second crime must have been embraced in
the same title of the code as the previous crime of which he
was convicted by final judgment.
Quasi-recidivism – there is no such requirement

11. Price, promise or reward

12. Inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a
vessel etc.

13. Evident Premeditation
Requisites:
1. Time – when the offender has decided to commit
the crime.
2. Act – manifestly indicating that he has clung to his
determination to commit the crime.
3. Sufficient lapse of time – from the time he decided
to commit the crime up to the time he actually
executed his clung to commit the crime.

Example
He decided to kill somebody after his decision to kill
somebody he makes preparation – he conducted a survey –
where does his intended victim reside? What time does he go
back to the house? Then he buys the instrument for killing →
these are acts manifestly indicating his clung or
determination to commit the crime.

Evident Premeditation – meaning that there is sufficient
lapse of time. Note that evident premeditation is not
presumed.

Premeditation – there is “cool” reflection.
Example
Isip?! Isip?! Itutuloy ko ba?

If you kill somebody, you will be liable but your penalty will
be increased. You could have desisted from doing it but the
fact that you deliberated on it and you have sufficient time
to reflect on it – Evident premeditation is very obvious. May
criminal perversity ka because you sought / thought to do it
you planned to do it

Q. If the offender says “I plan and I have decided to kill the
first person I meet on the street”. He gets an instrument of
the crime. He goes out of his house and sees somebody
who is walking and kills that somebody. Can evident
premeditation be appreciated?
A. Yes. The 3 elements are present.

Q. What if he says “I plan to kill Mr. X”. I made the
necessary preparations. I have decided to kill Mr. X. I
purchased the necessary instrument jungle bolo to kill Mr.
X. I conducted the necessary moves with which to execute
my plan to kill Mr. X. On the day when I am supposed to
kill Mr. X, I saw somebody and I killed that somebody. It
turned out that somebody is not Mr. X but Mr. Y. Will I be
liable for the death of Mr. Y?
A. Yes. But evident premeditation will not be appreciated
against me if I killed another person because my plan was to
kill X. I killed Mr. Y so with respect to the killing there is no
evident premeditation.

14. Craft, fraud or disguise
Craft – cunning presentation

Fraud – misrepresentation

Disguise – Intended to make identification more difficult.
Example
You put a mask to commit a crime

Q. What is the purpose for resorting to this? Why is it
aggravating?
A. It would show a greater criminal perversity on the part of
the offender. When an offender resorted to craft or fraud or
disguise to deceive the victim and he was able to accomplish
the plan → criminal perversity.

15. Abuse of superior strength
It means greater strength. It is a notorious inequality of
forces between the victim and the aggressor. It does not
refer to numerical superiority.

Example
3 offenders and 1 victim – it does not necessarily mean that
there is abuse of superior strength


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
6

1 on 1 – your victim is parang hindi kumain ng 10 araw,
victim mo lelembot lembot. Ikaw incedible hulk – you abuse
your superior strength. There is abuse of superior strength.
The offender took advantage of his greater strength.

16. Treachery
Treachery applies only to crimes against persons.

Note: There is a deviation. A case decided by SC (People vs.
Escote, 2003). In this case treachery was considered in a case
of robbery with homicide (eh di ba ang robbery with homicide
is a special complex crime?) What is the main crime in this
case? Di ba robbery? Robbery with homicide is a crime against
property and yet in this case treachery was considered only
to increase the penalty for homicide. How can they increase?
Eh special complex crime nga yan eh. 1 penalty lang binibigay
dyan eh. This case is a deviation.

For Purposes of Determining Whether there is Treachery –
Remember 2 things – these must Concur:
1. Mode of attack must have been consciously
adopted by the accused.
2. To make sure that at the time of the attack, the
victim is defenseless.

Mode of Attack
The mode of attack must have been consciously adopted by
the accused meaning that the mode of attack must have been
deliberately chosen by the accused. It is not an impulsive
attack. It is not simply an impulsive reaction of the accused
to any provocation on the part of the victim.

Q. It must have been consciously adopted by the accused
or deliberately chosen by the accused, for what purpose?
A. To ensure the accomplishment of his purpose (without
risking self), arising from any defense that the victim might
put up and to make sure that at the time of the attack, the
victim was defenseless.
For as long as it was shown that the victim was defenseless at
the time of the attack – treachery is there.

Q. What if X and Y quarreled. After their fight, X attacked
Y from behind. Is there treachery? (People vs. Samson)
A. No. The SC said that the fact that they quarreled, it must
have put the victim Y on guard that something is going to be
done after the fight.

Note: Even if the victim was attacked in front but the attack
was sudden and that at the time of the attack, the victim had
no weapon (defenseless) → treachery

17. Ignominy

Ignominy vs. Cruelty
Ignominy – you committed the crime but in the commission
of the crime you still do something to add to the moral
suffering of the victim.

Note: Generally, ignominy is not applied to crimes against
chastity.

Cruelty – You commit a crime and you still do something else
in addition to the crime that would add to the physical
suffering of the victim.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Example
Case of grave coercion – an old woman was asked to show her
underwear. That act adds to the moral suffering of the old
woman.

People vs. Yao (March 2000) – when you committed rape in
dog style position. This is ignominy. But note that rape is a
crime against person.

Note: In cruelty, at the time you do other acts, the victim
must have been alive kasi nga it adds to the physical suffering
of the victim. The manner is to augment the victim’s physical
sufferings.

New SC Decision: The number of wounds sustained by the
victim is not determinative of existence of cruelty in the
commission of the crime. It must be proved that those
wounds were inflicted in a manner that would add to the
physical suffering of the victim.

People vs. Salvador (1987) – victim sustained 56 stabbed
wounds. The offender was convicted of murder. Is there
cruelty?
Held: No cruelty. It must be shown by the prosecution that
those wounds were inflicted to augment the victim’s physical
sufferings. Homicide not murder.

Example
If the wounds were inflicted successively and the victim is
still alive, usually, if it is successive, hindi mo na
nararamdaman. It must be proved that such wounds were
inflicted to augment the physical sufferings of the victim.
There must be circumstantial evidence to show that – tsak!
Aray! Tsak! Aray! Tsak! Ang sakit!

18. Unlawful Entry

19. Breaking of wall, roof, floor, door or window

20. Aid of minor, use of motor vehicle

Use of Motor Vehicle
Differentiate if the offense was committed with the use of a
motor vehicle → it is aggravating but if the offense was
committed inside a motor vehicle → not aggravating.

Crime was Committed Under 15 Years of Age
Mahirap na kasi di ba lahat ng 15 exempt?

It is hard to prosecute kasi sino nagsabi sa kanila na gawin
nila?

21. Causing other wrong not necessary for its commission

ARTICLE 15
ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES

Alternative (“either” “or”) – meaning that it may either be
mitigating or aggravating or even empting.

1. Relationship
2. Intoxication
3. Degree of Instruction or Education of the Offender

Q. Why 1, 2, 3 are alternative circumstances?

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
7

A. Meaning that relationship could either be aggravating or
mitigating, intoxication could either be aggravating or
mitigating, degree of instruction could either be aggravating
or mitigating. It would depend on the circumstances that
would be established.

1. Relationship
Generally, mitigating in crimes against property although
relationship may be exempting in theft, estafa or swindling,
malicious mischief, if the crime is committed mutually by the
relatives.

Relatives – mutually committed between:
1. Spouses – the husband and the wife, ascendants,
descendants, relatives by affinity in the same line
Example
Darling nasan na yung alahas ko? Di ka na man nag aalahas
ha. Binigay mo siguro sa babae mo. (Nagnakawan sila)
2. The widowed spouse
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law,
if living together. (Art. 332)

Other Rules:
1. Relationship is aggravating if the victim is a relative
of a higher or equal degree than the accused.
2. Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating if
relationship is an ingredient of the crime.
Example – parricide

2. Intoxication
Intoxication of the offender is mitigating - if the offender has
committed a felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is
not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit a felony.

If intoxication is habitual (G.S.M. Blue - morning, noon and
night©) or intentional – it is aggravating but it must be
subsequent to the plan to commit the crime.

Q. Why is it aggravating?
A. If it is subsequent to the plan or after your plan to commit
the crime, uminom ka in order for you to commit the crime
→ this is aggravating. But if intoxication is subsequent to the
commission of the crime → this is not aggravating because
you already committed the crime. Your purpose for drinking
is that you are “celebrating” ©

3. Degree of Instruction or Education of the Offender
Generally, it is mitigating if the offender has a low degree of
instruction or education but definitely not mitigating or
aggravating in crimes against property or crimes against
chastity, even in treason. Why? Because no need to be a
lawyer to commit rape or robbery or theft.

ARTICLE 16
WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE?

Persons criminally liable
1. Principals
2. Accomplices
3. Accessories

ARTICLE 17
PRINCIPALS

Principals:
1. Principals by direct participation – material
perpetrator of the crime. The one who actually
committed the crime.
2. Principals by inducement – offering promises to
another to commit the crime. The inducement must
be the determining factor for the commission of
the crime.
3. Principals by indispensable cooperation – without
him or without his cooperation, the crime would
not have been committed. (relate this to
accomplice)

1, 2, 3 – for these principals to be liable, there must be
evidence of conspiracy. Why? Because the act of 1 is the act
of all. Even if you induced him and he was not induced, he is
not liable.

If no evidence of conspiracy – only the one who materially
perpetrated the crime is liable.

Principals by indispensable cooperation vs. Accomplice
Both cooperates only that in principals by indispensable
cooperation the crime could not have been accomplishes
without him or without his cooperation.

Example
He was the only 1 who owns a banca that could bring the
offender to a very remote island. The crime could not have
been accomplished without him.

ARTICLE 18
ACCOMPLICES

Accomplice – cooperates but even without his cooperation,
the crime could still have been committed. The cooperation
of the accomplice is merely necessary to facilitate the
commission of the crime.

Rule: If there is a doubt with respect to the liability of a
person who gives cooperation, whether he is a principal by
indispensable cooperation or accomplice, doubt should be
resolved in favor of the accused being considered as an
accomplice. Use this principle only when there is doubt.
Analyze if his cooperation is necessary.

ARTICLE 19
ACCESSORIES

Accessories – takes part subsequent to the commission of the
crime. He is an accessory after the fact of the commission of
the crime.

Note: PD 1612 – Anti Fencing Law.
Yung fence takes part subsequent to the commission of
robbery or theft. This person will be charged as a fence under
PD 1612 or if he takes part subsequent to the commission of
robbery or theft.
Example
Sold articles – if he profits.
If the offender takes part subsequent to the commission of
any other crime other than robbery or theft. He will be
charged as an accessory under the RPC.

Importance

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
8

This is important because if you take part subsequent to the
commission of robbery or theft, you are a fence, you are
charged under special law → the penalty is higher.
But if you take part subsequent to the commission of any
other crime other than theft or robbery, you will be charged
as an accessory under RPC → entitled to a penalty of 2
degrees lower.

Accomplice – 1 degree lower than the penalty of the
principal

Accessory – 2 degrees lower but that would apply to
accessories under the law and not those of taking part
subsequent to the commission of theft or robbery.

Q. Can there be conviction of an accomplice or accessory
even without prosecution or conviction of the principal?
A. Yes. If let us say that principal is acquitted because he is
exempt from criminal liability. The importance is you have
established the fact of the commission of the crime.

Q. What if the principal is unknown or his whereabouts is
unknown or the principal is at large or the principal is
being tried separately, can there be a conviction of an
accessory?
A. Yes. For as long as the act of the commission of the crime
had been established. For as long as corpus delicti have been
established.

Corpus delicti – means the fact of the commission of the
crime.

ARTICLE 20
ACCESSORIES WHO ARE EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Accessories under Art. 20 who are exempt from criminal
liability → exempt with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural, adopted brothers and
sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degree except
if they are accessories who profited by the effects of the
crime or who assisted the offender to profit by the effects of
the crime.

Meaning: They are exempt with respect to 2 and 3 (of Article
19) from criminal liability.

ARTICLE 21
NO FELONY SHALL BE PUNISHABLE BY ANY PENALTY NOT
PRESCRIBED BY LAW PRIOR TO ITS COMMISSION

Even if the act appears to be illegal or immoral if there is no
law punishing it, the same cannot be penalize if its not even
defined or constitutive of a crime and there is no penalty
provided by the law, hence cannot be penalize.

ARTICLE 22
EXCEPTION – WHEN THE LAW SHALL BE GIVEN
RETROACTIVE APPLICATION

ARTICLE 23
PARDON BY THE OFFENDED
PARDON

1. By the Chief Executive (Art. 36)
a. extinguishes criminal liability (absolute
pardon)
b. does not extinguish civil liability because
the president cannot give away anything
which does not belong to him/her
2. By the Offended party
a. Does not extinguish criminal liability
because the offended party is simply a
witness in a criminal case.
b. Extinguishes civil liability if the offended
party waives the claim to such civil
liability.

ARTICLE 24
MEASURES OF PREVENTION NOT CONSIDERED AS PENALTY



ARTICLES 25 - 113
PENALTIES
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
PROBATION
_________________________________________

SCALES OF PENALTIES under RPC (3)

1. Art 25
Penalties which may be impose (Principal and Accessory
Penalities)

2. Art 70
Successive Service of Sentence (Penalties According to their
Severity)

3. Art 71
Graduated Scales of Penalties

It is in this article where we would see the penalty next
higher or lower in degree.

Example
If in the problem there exist a privilege mitigating
circumstance and the imposable penalty is Reclusion
Temporal it will be lowered to one (1) degree and to
find out what is one (1) degree lower that Reclusion
Temporal we would rely on Art. 71, which is Prision
Mayor.

We only have scales of penalties under the Revised Penal
Code and none under Special Law, therefore as far as
modifying circumstance are concerned, they are not to be
considered in criminal actions involving violation of special
law due absence of scale of penalties. As for violations of RPC
the modifying circumstances should be considered since there
is scale of penalties provided for in the same.

DURATION OF PENALTIES

Reclusion Perpetua :
20 years and 1 day – 40 years

Reclusion Temporal :
12 years and 1 day – 20 years

Prision Mayor :

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
1
9

and Temporary Disqualification :
6 years and 1 day – 12 years
Prision Correccional, Suspension and Destierro:
6 months and 1 day – 6 years

Arresto Mayor:
1 month and 1 day – 6 months

Arresto Menor:
1 day – 30 days

Bond to keep the peace:
Such period of time as the court may determine.

Reclusion Perpetua
Reclusion Perpetua (RP) has been given a duration (20 years
and 1 day – 40 years), by virtue of RA 7695 (Heinous Crime
Law), upon its promulgation there has been a confusion.
Everyone knows that RP is a indivisible penalty, hence no
period. It is only in divisible penalty where we consider
period, which consist of (3 periods, minimum; medium;
maximum), in other words one period of a divisible penalty is
one of 3 equal portions of periods.

Nonetheless, RP remains to be an indivisible penalty, as
enunciated by the Supreme Court (SC) in the case of Pp. v
Lucas; the duration of RP was only for the purpose of
determining the number of years when may a person be
incarcerated or imprisoned.


Reclusion Perpetua Life Imprisonment
1. A penalty under the RPC 1. Under the Special Law

2. as to duration: 20 years
and 1 day – 40 years
2. Indefinite

3. Has an accessory penalty 3. None


Article 25 – Classification of Penalties


Principal Penalty


Accessory Penalty
1. Prescribe by the RPC for
the offense charge
e.g. treason (RP –death),
espionage (Pri. Cor)
1. Perpetual or temporary
absolute or special
disqualification, forfeiture,
confiscation, civil
interdiction.

2. Has to be expressly
impose in the judgment
2. Need not be express since
it is deemed impose in every
judgment. e.g.
“is hereby sentence to
suffer the RP with all the
accessory penalties
pertinent thereto pursuant
to the RPC”






Preventive Imprisonment Subsidiary Imprisonment
1. There is yet no judgment
or the accused is
charged with a non-bailable
offense or even if bailable,
has no property or fund with
which to post bail, who is
being detained during trial.

1. Only after judgment has
been rendered
2. This is not a penalty. If
convicted he will given a
credit for the period that he
was detained.
2. This is a principal
penalty, if convict is
sentence to pay fine, but
there is no fund to enable
him to pay, he may be
imprisoned. Being a
principal penalty must be
expressly imposed in the
decision.
Example
If in the judgment it is
stated that “he is hereby
imposed to pay a fine of
P10K with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of
insolvency” (expressly
imposed)

Example
If it is stated only “he is
hereby imposed to pay a
fine of P10K” → no express
declaration as to subsidiary
imprisonment, hence, he
cannot be made to undergo
subsidiary imprisonment
since it is not stated in the
judgment

× Confiscation and Forfeiture of Proceeds of a
crime: an accessory penalty hence need not be expressly
imposed in the judgment.

COMPLEX CRIME
1. Regular (Article 48)
a. Compound Crime – one act producing 2 or more grave or
less grave felonies (Concurso Ideal)
Example
throwing of hand grenade (Pp. v. Hernandez), the single act
of throwing the grenade, killing several and seriously
wounding others (multiple homicide, multiple physical
injuries)

As distinguished from Continuing, Continued, Continuous
Crime – there is a single crime consisting of series of crime,
all arising from one criminal resolution, committed at or
about the same time and place. (Concurso Real). In our
jurisdiction, this concept is no longer adopted. What is being
used instead is the concept of Transitory Crimes, which
usually contemplates prosecution, and where several
elements or a crime occurred in different places for purposes
of venue.

b. Complex Crime Proper – one crime is a necessary means
to commit the other crime.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
0

Example
Estafa thru falsification of public document; forcible
abduction with rape

2. Special - arising in the course of, by reason of, on occasion
of: (the law specifically provides what penalty is to be
imposed). E.g. in the course of, by reason of, on occasion of
robbery someone is killed “Robbery with homicide”; in the
course of, by reason of, on occasion of robbery someone is
rape “ Robbery with rape”

Compound Crime
Q. What if one act produces 2 or more grave, less grave
and light felonies, will there be a compound crime?
A. Yes, with respect to the grave and the less grave and the
light felony would be segregated which cannot be complex.

People vs. Lawas (1960)
Involves a single act of pulling the trigger of an machine gun
which produces several bullets and so several persons were
killed. SC in this case held that the single act of producing
the trigger and producing several deaths is a compound
crime. In this case there were several accused holding a
machine gun, and all of them fired at the same time and it
cannot be determine, from whose gun the bullets came from.
In this case it was considered a compound complex crime.

Pp. v. Tabaco (1992)
`Involves gunfire from a rifle, which resulted to 4 killings. It
cannot be considered as compound complex crime even a
single act of pulling the trigger, it is not the act of pulling the
trigger and producing several deaths because that is the
determining factor but the number of bullets which are
actually fired and produces several death that would be
determinative whether it is complex or not. Each person hit
by different bullets is a victim of separate homicide or
murder. In this there is only one accused, so he has been
identified as the person who killed several persons from
whose gun the bullets were fire. In Pp. v. Lawas it cannot be
determined from whose gun the bullets came so what the SC
held is that the crime involves a compound crime.

Q. What if one of the components of a complex crime has
not been proved? What is the effect? Can the accused
nevertheless be held liable of the other crime?
A. Yes, provided that the other crime is proven beyond
reasonable doubt and the other crime not proven he shall be
deemed acquitted.

Q. What if both crimes were proved? What is the penalty?
A. The penalty for the most serious offense shall be imposed
in its maximum period. There lies the difference between a
regular and special complex crime for in the latter, the law
specifically provides a penalty for that special complex
crime. While in the former, the penalty for the most serious
crime in its maximum period shall be imposed.

Divisible Penalty – it is composed of 3 periods, 1 period of a
divisible penalty is one of the 3 equal portions of a divisible
penalty (Period: Minimum, Medium, Maximum). A period is
different from a degree.

A period is one of the 3 equal portions of a divisible penalty,
a PENALTY is 1 DEGREE. However if one penalty consist of a
period; For example the penalty is PRISION MAYOR MAXIMUM
as illustrated below:


Prision Maximum 1 period 2 periods
Mayor Medium
Minimum

Q. If 1 penalty is 1 degree, what is the penalty next lower
in degree?
A. Prision Mayor Medium

If penalty consist of 2 periods, then the penalty next lower in
degree would be that 2 periods lower as well. For instance,
the penalty prescribe by the law for the offense charged is
PM medium and maximum, that is one penalty, one degree
lower consist of 2 periods, then 2 periods down so the
penalty next lower in degree of PM medium and maximum,
would be PRISION CORRECIONAL MAXIMUM AND PRISION
MAYOR MINIMUM.

If the penalty consist of the whole extent of PRISION
MAYOR, one degree lower consist of 3 periods is
PRISION CORRECIONAL.

Penalty for the Principal (P), Accessory (*A) and
Accomplices (A)
The numbers represent the degrees

Consummated Frustrated Attempted
P 0 1 2
A 1 2 3
*A 2 3 X
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum

The basis in determining the imposable penalty would always
be the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge.
That penalty is always imposed on the principal; the penalty
for the principal in the consummated stage of the felony is
the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge,
represented in the table as 0. (Whenever the law prescribes
a penalty for a felony, in general terms it shall be
understood as applicable to the consummated felony). The
reckoning point is penalty prescribe by law for the principal
in the consummated stage, which is the penalty prescribe by
the code for the offense charge

=The penalty for the accomplice in the consummated stage
of the felony is 1 degree lower than that prescribe by the
code for the offense charged.

Example
The penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge is
Reclusion Temporal (for the principal in the consummated
stage)

Accomplice-Consummated (Prision Mayor) – 1 degree lower
than the penalty prescribe by for the principal in the
consummated stage

Accessory- Consummated (Prision Correcional) – 2 degrees
lower than that prescribe by for the principal in the
consummated stage


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
1


Principal Frustrated – 1 degree lower than the penalty
prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage

Accomplice Frustrated – 2 degrees lower than the penalty
prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage

Accessory Frustrated – 3 degrees lower than the penalty
prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage

Principal Attempted - 2 degrees lower than the penalty
prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage

Accomplice Attempted - 3 degrees lower than the penalty
prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage

Rules for the Applicable of Indivisible Penalties (Article 63)

The ff are Indivisible Penalties (where there are no
Periods)
1. Death
2. Reclusion Perpetua

1
st
Paragraph: in all cases where the law prescribes a single
indivisible penalty, it shall be impose regardless of any
mitigating or aggravating circumstance that may have
attended the commission of the deed.

Example
If the court says, the penalty for this offense is RP (single
indivisible); impose the same irrespective of any mit / agg
circumstance except: if it is a privilege mitigation which
operates to, lower the same to one degree.

The law itself did not qualify, but in jurisprudence, it held
that in cases where the law prescribes a single indivisible
penalty, it shall be applied by the courts regardless of
agg/mit cir. except: if it is a privilege mitigation (incomplete
justifying exempting) which operates to, lower the same to
one degree.

In this case, RP lower by one degree is RT.

If on the other hand the law says the penalty for this offense
is RP and there is in attendance voluntary surrender, still is
RP because voluntary surrender is only Mitigating.

2
nd
Paragraph: in all cases in which the law prescribes a
penalty compose of 2 indivisible penalties the following rule
shall be observed

Example
If one penalty consist of two indivisible penalties RP TO
DEATH, now consider the following circumstance:

1M  0A = impose the lesser penalty
0M + 1A = impose the greater penalty
0M + 0A = impose the lesser penalty


Rules for the Applicable of Divisible Penalties (Article 62)
Divisible Penalty (Where it contain periods)

Successive Service of Sentences
(Article 70)

1
st
Paragraph: When the offender has to serve 2 or more
penalties he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of
the penalties will so permit.

Example
Q. If has to serve 10 yrs, 3 years, 2, years and fine of
10,000, can this be serve simultaneously?
A. Yes, with respect to fine pay them then imprisonment.

Example
Q. If has to serve 10 yrs, 5 years, 3 years, 2 years of
imprisonment, Can he serve them successively?
A. No. It has to be served successively.


If it cannot be served simultaneously, serve it in accordance
with order of their severity in the following:
- Death
- Reclusion Perpetua
- Reclusion Temporal
- Prision Mayor
- Prision Correccional
- Arresto Menor
- Destierro
- Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
- Temporary Absolute Disqualification
- Suspension from Public Office, the
right to vote and be voted for, the
right to follow a profession or calling
- Public Censure

Note: Notwithstanding the following rule, the maximum
duration of the convict’s sentences shall not be more than
“three-fold,” the length of time corresponding to the most
sever of the penalties impose upon him.

Requirements:
1. The convict has serves at least 4 sentences/penalties
2. The total sentences exceed the most sever times 3 but in
no case exceeds 40 years

Example
10 yrs, 20 yrs, 6 yrs, 10 yrs = 46 ; the most sever is 20 x 3 =
60 (3-fold length of time)

In this case, the three-fold service of sentence rule does not
apply because the total sentence is 46 and it does not exceed
60. But in no case it should still exceed 40 yrs in the case

In case where it would be the other way around, where the
three fold length of time is 46 and the total sentence is 60
yrs, then adopt the three fold length of time which is 46, but
still in no case it would exceed 40 yrs, so in this case, the
year of imprisonment is still 40.

INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW

Purpose: redeem valuable human material, the offender is
given another chance, in case where he had served the
minimum of the indeterminate penalty he would be eligible
of parole.

This law does not apply to:

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
2

a. indivisible penalties of Death, Life
Imprisonment, Reclusion Perpetua (pursuant to
Article 63 par. 1) that when the penalty impose
is single and indivisible, the same shall be
imposed without regard to any of modifying
circumstance
b. Prison terms: of not more than 1 year.
c. Crimes of: Treason, Proposal or Conspiracy to
Commit Treason, Misprision of Treason,
Rebellion, Espionage, Sedition, Piracy.
d. Offenders who are: Habitual delinquents,
escapees from confinement, evaders of
sentence violators of conditional pardon
granted by the Chief Executive.
e. Non-prision sentences of: destierro,
disqualification etc.

Note: it happen it the Bar, where the examinees are asked to
compute the imposable indeterminate penalty, they went
through the motions of computing. when in fact the offender
involve is disqualified.

Application

 Always remember that the indeterminate penalty
always consist of 2 penalties, the maximum and
the minimum. For purposes of indeterminate
penalty this are not considered as periods of a
divisible penalties, but are considered penalties in
itself.

 The indeterminate sentence law applies to both
crimes penalized by the RPC and other special
law, but only that the application would differ,
but both always consist of 2 penalties still.

 the application of ISL is mandatory provided that
the offender does not fall to any of those
disqualified under the ISL

 How to get the Minimum and Maximum.
Example
In the bar where a question gives a penalty (which is
considered the reckoning point: the penalties
prescribe by the code for the offense charge is the
reckoning period)

 Application in Special law: Take note that:
Special law has no scale of penalties, so one does
not consider the modifying circumstances, since it
provides its own penalty for the violation of such
law.

Ex: 2 years to 10 years imprisonment (as given in
the problem). Determine now the imposable
indeterminate penalty. The rules said that if it’s an
offense penalize under the special law, the
minimum of the indeterminate penalty should not
be below the minimum provided in the law and the
maximum should not be beyond the maximum
provided in the law

o So the penalty that may be imposed is: “he
is hereby sentence to suffer the
indeterminate penalty of 2 years as
minimum to 8 years as maximum.

o What is indicative that the penalty given is
indeterminate? The phrase: “as minimum”
“as maximum”

 Application if RPC: Take note that: Even if a crime
is penalized under the RPC one cannot deviated
from the rule that indeterminate penalty always
consist of 2 penalties (minimum and maximum)

Example
If the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge
is RT (always the reckoning point as given in the exam).
Apply now the ISL, or determine the imposable
indeterminate penalty.

To get the minimum: it is fixed at 1 degree lower that the
maximum penalty impose of RT in this case 1 degree lower is
Prision Mayor (6 yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs).

So the minimum is anywhere within the range of the penalty
next lower in degree that that prescribe the code in the
offense charge. (within: 6yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs “as
minimum”)

To get the maximum: is determined by considering the
presence of modifying circumstances applying Rule 64.
Remember that Privilege Mitigating Circumstance must be
first considered before applying the said rules. The basis is
still the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge
which here is RT.

1M  0A = minimum
0M + 1A = maximum
0M + 0A = medium

 So for instance if there is 1M,0A the
indeterminate penalty would be:
o ―the convict is hereby sentence
to suffer the indeterminate
penalty of, anywhere within the
range of PM as minimum to RT
minimum as maximum (6 yrs.
And 1 day as minimum to RT
minimum as maximum)

Another Example
The penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge is
Prision Mayor

Minimum: (1 degree agad) = Prision Correccional – 6 mon.
and 1 day to 6 yrs.

Maximum: (0M + 0A) = Prision Mayor medium

Indeterminate Penalty: is anywhere within the range of PC
as minimum to PM medium as maximum

Q. What if in the problem there is an attendance of
Privilege Mitigating Circumstance?
A. Lower the penalty impose to 1 degree at the beginning
before applying the same rule.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
3


Example
The penalty imposed is RT, with attendance of privilege
mitigating circumstance, determine the indeterminate
penalty.
^ Immediately lower to 1 degree, which is PM (now
would be the reckoning point)

Minimum: (1 degree agad) = Prision Correccional – 6 mon.
and 1 day to 6 yrs.

Maximum: (0M + 1A) = Prision Mayor maximum

Indeterminate Penalty: is anywhere within the range of PC
as minimum to PM maximum as maximum.

Execution of Penalty:
 No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of Final
Judgment. The judgment must have attained finality
before I may be executed.

Q. When does a judgment attain its finality:
A.
- If one failed to file notice of appeal within the
reglementary period of 15 days, reckoned from
promulgation or notice of judgment.
- there is waiver of right to appeal,
- total or partial service of sentence
- filing application for probation

Suspension of Sentence
15-18 years old acting with discernment (suspended
sentence)

Suspension of Sentence in case of Insanity
- When a convict becomes insane or imbecile after
final sentence has been pronounce, execution of
sentence only as regards the personal penalty not
payment of his civil or pecuniary liability. If he
recovers reason his sentence shall be executed
unless the penalty has prescribe
- If while serving sentence becomes insane, above
provision applies.

Death sentence shall be suspended when:
- Woman while pregnant
- Woman within 1 year from delivery
- Person over 70 yrs of age
- Convict who becomes insane, after final sentence of
death has been pronounced.

Total Extinction of Criminal Liability
D - death of convict that occurred before final judgment Only
as to his personal liability
A - absolute Pardon of Chief Executive
S - service of sentence\
P - prescription of offense
A - amnesty (extinguishes the penalty and all its effects)
M - marriage of the offended woman with the offender in the
crimes of rape, seduction, abduction, and
acts of lasciviousness that must be contracted in good faith
P - prescription of penalty

Effect of death of the Accused pending appeal of his
Conviction
 The death of the accused pending the appeal of
his conviction will extinguish his criminal
liability as well as his civil liability arising from
the crime committed.
 However, civil liability arising from sources
other than the crime committed survives and
maybe pursued in separate civil action. (law,
contract, quasi contract, quasi delict)

Prescription of Crimes: is the forfeiture or loss of the right
of the State to prosecute the offender, after lapse of certain
time. Commence to run on the date discovered by the
offended party, authorized person or agents. Base on penalty
prescribe by RPC

1. Crimes punishable by:
a. Death, reclusion perpetua, reclusion
temporal - 20 years
b. Afflictive penalties - 15 years
c. Correccional penalties – 10 years, except:
Arresto Mayor – 5 years
When the penalty prescribe by law is
a compound one, the highest penalty
shall be made the basis of the
application of the rules contained
above.
2. Crime of Libel – 1 year
3. Crime Oral defamation and Slander by Deed – 6
months
a. Simple Slander – 2 months
b. Grave Slander – 6 months
4. Light Offenses – 2 months
5. Crimes punishable by fines:
a. If the fine is afflictive – 15 years
b. If the fine is correccional – 10 years
c. If it is light – 2 months.
 The subsidiary penalty for
nonpayment of fine should not be
considered in determining the period
of such crimes
 When fine is an alternative penalty
higher than the on the penalty which
is imprisonment, prescription of the
crime is base on the fine

Prescription of Penalties: loss or forfeiture of the right of
the State to execute the final sentence or penalty after
certain lapse of time.

1. Death and RP – 20 years
2. Other Afflictive Penalties – 15 years
3. Correccional Penalties – 10 years except; Arresto
Mayor – 5 years
4. Light Penalties – 1 years

 Pursuant to the rule that a judgment is executed
only when it becomes final, hence we only talk of
prescription of penalty after the judgment has
become final
 The penalty must be imposed by final judgment.
Hence, when the convict appealed and thereafter
fled to the mountain, the penalty impose upon him

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
4

would never prescribe, because pending the appeal,
the sentence is not final.
 In prescription of crimes – It is the penalty prescribe
by law that should be considered
 In prescription of penalty – it is the penalty imposed
that is considered.

Commence to run: from the date when the culprit evaded
the service of sentence.

Interrupted when the convict:
 Surrenders
 Arrested
 Goes to a foreign country with which we have no
extradition treaty, or
 Commits any crime before the expiration of the
period of prescription

Within the he period of prescription of penalty it has to be
executed, the convict would have to be made to serve the
penalty


Difference between Amnesty and Absolute Pardon

Amnesty
1. Applies only to Political Offenses
2. Looks backward and abolishes the offense, and the
person would stand before the law as though he
committed no offense. Makes an ex-convict no
longer a recidivist, because it obliterates the crime
itself
3. Granted by presidential proclamation with
concurrence of the Congress and there for it has to
be taken judicial notice of by the courts. Ones the
court takes judicial notice of such fact, one does
not have to present evidence to prove such fact. It
is an official act of the Chief Executive.
4. Amnesty may be granted even before trial or during
investigation, a conviction is not necessary.

Pardon
1. includes any crime
2. Looks forward and relieves the offender from the
consequence of his conviction
3. Private act on the part of the Chief Executive,
therefore it must be pleaded and proved by the
person who has been pardoned.
4. Pardon applies only when the person has already
been convicted

Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable. This
means he is civilly liable only for the consequence of the
crime, which is the basis of the criminal action. This is the
only civil action which is impliedly instituted with the
criminal action, the civil action flowing from the crime
subject of the criminal case.

Subsidiary Liability

Subsidiary Liability of the employer of the
convict;
a. Is not automatic. If the accused-employee fails to
pay, the subsidiary liability of the employer will set
in. It is not automatic in the sense that there must
first be conviction of the employee.
b. A reservation to prosecute the employer for his
subsidiary liability is not necessary. The subsidiary
liability of the employer is not determined in the
same criminal case against the employee; hence
there is no need to reserve.

What Civil Liability Includes:

1. Restitution – the thing itself must be restored, even
though it is found in possession of third person who
acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his
action against the proper person who may be liable
to him.
2. Reparation – the court shall determine the amount
of damage, taking into consideration the price of
the thing whenever possible, and its special
sentimental value to the injured party.
3. Indemnification of consequential damages –
include not only those caused the injured party, but
also those suffered by his family or by a third person
by reason of the crime

Set Indemnification (by jurisprudence)
a. Homicide, murder – 50,000php
b. Rape of the first form – 50,000php +
moral damages of 50,000php
c. Rape of the second form – 25,000php +
moral damages of 25,000php
d. Rape committed under the
circumstances where previously
punishable by death – 75,000php+ moral
damages 75,0000php
e. Rape with homicide – 100,000php +
100,000 moral damages

Partial Extinction
1. Conditional Pardon
2. Commutation of Sentence
3. Good Conduct allowances which the culprit may
earn while he is serving his sentence
4. Parole – because after you shall have served the
minimum indeterminate penalty, he could be
release.


BOOK TWO

CRIMES AGAINST
NATIONAL SECURITY

Crimes Covered:
1. Treason
2. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Treason
3. Misprision of Treason
4. Espionage
5. Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisal
6. Violation of Neutrality
7. Correspondence with Hostile Country
8. Flight to Enemy Country
9. Piracy and Mutiny

Crimes Against National Security

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
5

1. Treason (Art. 114);
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art. 115);
3. Misprision of treason (Art. 116); and
4. Espionage (Art. 117).
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Crimes Against the Law of Nations
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals (Art. 118);
2. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119);
3. Corresponding with hostile country (Art. 120);
4. Flight to enemy's country (Art. 121);
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high
seas (Art. 122).

Crimes Against National Security are Committed During a
State of War except for:
1. Espionage
2. Inciting to War and Giving Motives for
Reprisal
3. Violation of Neutrality
4. Mutiny and Piracy

ARTICLE 114
TREASON

+ Committed only in times of war

B. Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort
within the Philippines or elsewhere

Requirements of levying war
1. Actual assembling of men;
2. To execute a treasonable design by force;
3. Intent is to deliver the country in whole or in part to the
enemy; and
4. Collaboration with foreign enemy or some foreign
sovereign

Two ways of proving treason
1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to the same overt
act; or
Note: The 2-witness rule is restrictive. They must testify
to the same overt acts of treason committed in the same
place, time and occasion.
2. Confession of the accused in open court.

ARTICLE 115
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON

Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. At least two persons come to an agreement to –
a. levy war against the government; or
b. adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort;
3. They decide to commit it.

Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. At least one person decides to –
A. LEVY WAR AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT; OR
B. adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort;
3. He proposes its execution to some other persons.

Kinds of Conspiracy
1. Conspiracy as a Crime – expressly made a crime under RPC.
2. Conspiracy as a Mode of Incurring Criminal Liability – not
stated in the RPC.

Examples
A, B and C conspired to kill D but failed to kill D. A, B and C
liable? It is not expressly made a crime

A proposed to commit treason to B. B refuses, is A liable?
Yes, because it is expressly proposal to commit treason.

A proposes to C to kill B. C agreed. But C was the one who
killed, A liable? Yes, because of conspiracy.
Q. Why is there conspiracy?
A. The fact that he already accepted the proposal, there is
already an agreement.

Q. What if Treason has already been committed?
A. It will not fall under Art. 115.

Q. Is the 2-witness rule applicable in conspiracy and
proposal to commit treason?
A. No. because it is a separate crime

Note: Any conspiracy to overthrow government in times of
peace → rebellion

ARTICLE 116
MISPRISION OF TREASON

- Not yet committed
- Committed by a native or local
- The person is aware of the conspiracy of treason
and does not disclose it to authorities
- Article 20 (Accessories who are exempt from
criminal liability) does not apply

Elements
1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, and not a
foreigner;
2. He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason
against the government;
3. He conceals or does not disclose and make known the
same as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the
province in which he resides, or the mayor or fiscal of
the city in which he resides.

Q. What if treason is actually committed. You learned the
commission but you did not report. Are you liable?
A. No. Liable as accessory only.

ARTICLE 117
ESPIONAGE

Acts punished
1. By entering, without authority therefore, a
warship, fort or naval or military establishment
or reservation to obtain any information, plans,
photograph or other data of a confidential
nature relative to the defense of the
Philippines;
Elements
a. Offender enters any of the places mentioned;
b. He has no authority therefore;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
6

c. His purpose is to obtain information, plans,
photographs or other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines.

2. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign
nation the contents of the articles, data or information
referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, which he had
in his possession by reason of the public office he holds.
Elements
a. Offender is a public officer;
b. He has in his possession the articles, data or
information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article
117, by reason of the public office he holds;
c. He discloses their contents to a representative of a
foreign nation.

This crime is committed in times of war and peace

Q. The offender goes to Camp Crame and gets confidential
information relative to national security. Is he liable?
A. No. Crame or PNP is not a military establishment or
institution.

*ARTICLE 118
INCITING TO WAR OR GIVINING MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS

*ARTICLE 119
VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY

*ARTICLE 120
CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY

ARTICLE 121
FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY

Elements
1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
2. Offender must be owing allegiance to the government;
3. Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country;
4. Going to the enemy country is prohibited
by competent authority.

ARTICLE 122 & 123
Amended by R.A. 7659 or Heinous Crime Law

ARTICLE 122
PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS OR IN
PHILIPPINE WATERS

Acts Punished as Piracy
1. Attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in
Philippine waters;
2. Seizing in the vessel while on the high seas
or in Philippine waters the whole or part of its
cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of
its complement or passengers.

Elements of Piracy
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters;
2. Offenders are neither members of its complement nor
passengers of the vessel;
3. Offenders either –
a. attack or seize a vessel on the high seas or in
Philippine waters; or
b. seize in the vessel while on the high seas or in
Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement
or passengers;
4. There is intent to gain.

Originally, the crimes of piracy and mutiny can only be
committed in the high seas, that is, outside Philippine
territorial waters. But in August 1974, Presidential Decree
No. 532 (The Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of
1974) was issued, punishing piracy, but not mutiny, in
Philippine territorial waters. Thus came about two kinds of
piracy: (1) that which is punished under the Revised Penal
Code if committed in the high seas; and (2) that which is
punished under Presidential Decree No. 532 if committed in
Philippine territorial waters.
Amending Article 122, Republic Act No. 7659 included therein
piracy in Philippine waters, thus, pro tanto superseding
Presidential Decree No. 532. As amended, the article now
punishes piracy, as well as mutiny, whether committed in the
high seas or in Philippine territorial waters, and the penalty
has been increased to reclusion perpetua from reclusion
temporal.
But while under Presidential Decree No. 532, piracy in
Philippine waters could be committed by any person,
including a passenger or member of the complement of a
vessel, under the amended article, piracy can only be
committed by a person who is not a passenger nor member of
the complement of the vessel irrespective of venue. So if a
passenger or complement of the vessel commits acts of
robbery in the high seas, the crime is robbery, not piracy.
Note, however, that in Section 4 of Presidential Decree No.
532, the act of aiding pirates or abetting piracy is penalized
as a crime distinct from piracy. Said section penalizes any
person who knowingly and in any manner aids or protects
pirates, such as giving them information about the movement
of the police or other peace officers of the government, or
acquires or receives property taken by such pirates, or in any
manner derives any benefit therefrom; or who directly or
indirectly abets the commission of piracy. Also, it is
expressly provided in the same section that the offender shall
be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders
and punished in accordance with the Revised Penal Code.
This provision of Presidential Decree No. 532 with respect to
piracy in Philippine water has not been incorporated in the
Revised Penal Code. Neither may it be considered repealed
by Republic Act No. 7659 since there is nothing in the
amendatory law is inconsistent with said section. Apparently,
there is still the crime of abetting piracy in Philippine waters
under Presidential Decree No. 532.
Considering that the essence of piracy is one of robbery, any
taking in a vessel with force upon things or with violence or
intimidation against person is employed will always be piracy.
It cannot co-exist with the crime of robbery. Robbery,
therefore, cannot be committed on board a vessel. But if the
taking is without violence or intimidation on persons of force
upon things, the crime of piracy cannot be committed, but
only theft.

PIRACY is a crime against humanity (hostes humanes generis)

Notes:
¬PD 532 – offenders are passengers and committed in
territorial waters.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
7

Vessel – includes bancas, rafts, or any water raft used in
transporting people who commute from one place to another.

Mutiny vs. Piracy
1. Piracy is the unlawful taking of personal property
(basically its robbery) with intent to gain while mutiny is the
raising of commotion to defy authorities.
2. As to offenders
Mutiny is committed by members of the complement or the
passengers of the vessel.
Piracy is committed by persons who are not members of the
complement or the passengers of the vessel. (Comes from
outside the vessel)
Note: What is important is that the principal offender is
neither a passenger nor a member. Strength of the offender
is immaterial.
3. As to criminal intent
In mutiny, there is no criminal intent.
In piracy, the criminal intent is for gain.

ARTICLE 123
QUALIFIED PIRACY

Elements
1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters;
2. Offenders may or may not be members of its
complement, or passengers of the vessel;
3. Offenders either –
a. attack or seize the vessel; or
b. seize the whole or part of the cargo, its
equipment., or personal belongings of the crew or
passengers;
The preceding were committed under any of
the following circumstances:
a. whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or
firing upon the same;
b. whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims
without means of saving themselves; or
c. whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries or rape

Q. Why is it “qualified”?
A. Because it has circumstances.

Note: Irrespective of the number of persons murdered,
injured or raped in the course of piracy.
There is only one composite crime of piracy.

CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE

Crimes against the fundamental laws of the State
1. Arbitrary detention (Art. 124);
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to
the proper judicial authorities (Art. 125);
3. Delaying release (Art. 126);
4. Expulsion (Art. 127);
5. Violation of domicile (Art. 128);
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and
abuse in the service of those legally
obtained (Art. 129);
7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130);
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of
peaceful meetings (Art. 131);
9. Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132); 10. Offending
the religious feelings (Art. 133);

ARTICLE 124
ARBITRARY DETENTION

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person;
3. The detention is without legal grounds.

Meaning of absence of legal grounds
1. No crime was committed by the detained;
2. There is no violent insanity of the detained person; and
3. The person detained has no ailment which requires
compulsory confinement in a hospital.

Notes:
· The offender is a public officer or employee who has the
authority to detain a person
· Detention is unlawful from the beginning
· Consider the period of detention for purposes of imposing
the penalty
· If detention is with legal ground, do not consider the
period of detention (legal grounds – commission of a
crime, insanity)

ARTICLE 125
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE
PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He detains a person for some legal ground;
3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial
authorities within –
a. 12 hours for light penalties;
b. 18 hours for correctional penalties; and
c. 36 hours for afflictive or capital penalties

Notes:
- The detention is legal in the beginning but it
becomes illegal after the lapse of a certain period
of time
- Applies only in cases of warrantless arrest (but take
note of the exceptions – ROC – arrest is legal even if
without warrant of arrest)

Sec. 5, Rule 113, Rules of Court:
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 believe based on personal knowledge of
facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has
committed it.
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
d.) Sec. 13, Rule 113 – 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.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
8


- There is a legal ground for detention
- Arrest is legal if it is effected with warrant of arrest
- The person lawfully arrested must be brought to the
fiscal for purposes of inquest
- The fiscal is not a judicial officer so he cannot issue
a warrant of arrest or confinement

Q. Arresting officer Charles lawfully arrested Ayce without
a warrant. She was brought to Fiscal Saskia xxx What if
Fiscal Saskia did not act on the case, can the arresting
officer be held liable for Art. 125?
A. Yes. Because the fiscal is not a judicial authority.

Note: If fiscal did not act on the case, sue the him
administratively

*ARTICLE 126
DELAYING RELEASE

ARTICLE 127
EXPULSION

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He either –
a. expels any person from the Philippines; or
b. compels a person to change residence;
3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law.

Note: Only the President can order expulsion

ARTICLE 128
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the
dwelling or to make a search therein for papers or other
effects.

Acts punished
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the owner
thereof;
2. Searching papers or other effects found therein without
the previous consent of such owner; or
3. Refusing to leave the premises, after having
surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after having
been required to leave the same

Q. When it is unlawful?
A. Without will or consent of the occupant, surreptitiously,
with express or implied prohibition

Art. 128 vs. Art. 280
Art. 128 Art. 280
Offender is a public officer
or employee

Offender is a private
individual

Notes:
· Warrant of arrest makes the arrest of a person lawful
· Search warrant makes the entry lawful
· If with search warrant but it was used with excessive
authority or caused unnecessary damage or destruction,
officers will be liable for violation of domicile

ARTICLE 129
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN
THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED

Acts punished
1. Procuring a search warrant without just cause;
Elements
a. Offender is a public officer or employee;
b. He procures a search warrant;
c. There is no just cause.
2. Exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity
in executing a search warrant legally procured.
Elements
a. Offender is a public officer or employee;
b. He has legally procured a search warrant;
c. He exceeds his authority or uses unnecessary
severity in executing the same.

Notes:
· Still liable in addition to whatever liability attaching to the
offender for the commission of any other offense
· Application of search warrant is made under oath in the
court

Q. What if the public officer obtained a search warrant but
made a false statement under oath, what are his liabilities?
A. Art. 129 + perjury (maliciously obtained)

*ARTICLE 130
SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESS

*ARTICLES 131
PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND DISSOLUTION OF
PEACEFUL MEETINGS

*ARTICLE 132
INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP

*ARTICLE 133
OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS

CRIMES AGAINST
PUBLIC ORDER

Crimes against public order
1. Rebellion or insurrection (Art. 134);
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion (Art. 136);
3. Disloyalty to public officers or employees (Art. 137);
4. Inciting to rebellion (Art. 138);
5. Sedition (Art. 139);
6. Conspiracy to commit sedition (Art. 141);
7. Inciting to sedition (Art. 142);
8. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of Congress and
similar bodies (Art. 143);
9. Disturbance of proceedings of Congress or similar bodies
(Art. 144);
10. Violation of parliamentary immunity (Art. 145);
11. Illegal assemblies (Art. 146);
12. Illegal associations (Art. 147);
13. Direct assaults (Art. 148);
14. Indirect assaults (Art. 149);

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
2
9

15. Disobedience to summons issued by Congress, its
committees, etc., by the constitutional commissions, its
committees, etc. (Art. 150);
16. Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or
the agents of such person (Art. 151);
17. Tumults and other disturbances of public order (Art.
153);
18. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful
utterances (Art. 154);
19. Alarms and scandals (Art. 155);
20. Delivering prisoners from jails (Art. 156);
21. Evasion of service of sentence (Art. 157);
22. Evasion on occasion of disorders (Art. 158);
23. Violation of conditional pardon (Art. 159);
24. Commission of another crime during service of penalty
imposed for another previous offense (Art. 160).

ARTICLE 134
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Purpose: to overthrow the duly constituted government
Elements
1. There is a public uprising and taking arms against the
government;
2. The purpose of the uprising or movement is
a. to remove from the allegiance to the government or
its laws Philippine territory or any part thereof, or
any body of land, naval, or other armed forces; or
b. to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly
or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.

Notes:
- Always with public uprising
- If committed for private purpose without any
political reason – separate
- The purpose is to overthrow the government
- Civilians backed-up by military
- Common crimes committed in pursuance of
rebellion are absorbed in rebellion (absorption
theory). It is absorbed because it is part of the
commission of rebellion

Common Crimes with Rebellion:
1. Murder
2. Homicide
3. Physical Injuries
4. Theft
· illegal possession of firearms – if done or used in the
commission of murder or homicide, shall be considered as
aggravating (it is not treated separately) but if used in
committing another crime other than murder or homicide,
absorbed in rebellion
· Simple illegal possession – penalty depending on the
caliber

ARTICLE 134-A
COUP D’ ETAT

Elements
1. Offender is a person or persons belonging to the military
or police or holding any public office or employment;
2. It is committed by means of a swift attack accompanied
by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth;
3. The attack is directed against the duly constituted
authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or any
military camp or installation, communication networks,
public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise
and continued possession of power;
4. The purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish state
power.

Rebellion vs. Coup d’ etat
Rebellion Coup d’ etat
1. Purpose is to overthrow
the duly constituted
government
1. Purpose is not to
overthrow but to diminish
state powers
2. Always with public
uprising
2. By violence, intimidation
or threat
3. Persons involved are
civilians backed up by
military
3. Persons involved are
military backed up by
civilians


ARTICLE 136
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ ETAT,
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion are two
different crimes, namely:
1. Conspiracy to commit rebellion; and
2. Proposal to commit rebellion.

Conspiracy to commit rebellion - when two or more persons
come to an agreement to rise publicly and take arms against
government for any of the purposes of rebellion and decide
to commit it.

*ARTICLE 137
DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES

ARTICLE 138
INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION

Elements
1. Offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility
against the government;
2. He incites others to the execution of any of the acts of
rebellion;
3. The inciting is done by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other
representations tending to the same end.

Inciting – urging the people to rise-up

ARTICLE 139
SEDITION
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Elements
1. Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously;
2. Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other means
outside of legal methods;
3. Purpose is to attain any of the following objects:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any
law or the holding of any popular election;
b. To prevent the national government or any
provincial or municipal government, or any public
officer from exercising its or his functions or
prevent the execution of an administrative order;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
0

c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the
person or property of any public officer or
employee;
d. To commit, for any political or social end, any act
of hate or revenge against private persons or any
social classes;
e. To despoil for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the national
government of all its property or any part thereof.

Notes:
· Memorize the objects of sedition
· Sedition – creating commotion, no purpose of
overthrowing, to express dissent
· Maybe for political reasons
· Public uprising + objects of sedition = sedition
· Common crimes committed are not absorbed (no
absorption theory) so they are penalized separately

Rebellion vs. Sedition
Rebellion Sedition
To overthrow the
government / there must be
taking up or arms against
the government

Public uprising but not to
overthrow / sufficient that
the public uprising be
tumultuous.

The purpose is always
political.

Purpose may be political or
social

Persons liable for sedition under Article 140
1. The leader of the sedition; and
2. Other person participating in the sedition.

ARTICLE 141
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION

There must be an agreement and a decision to rise publicly
and tumultuously to attain any of the objects of sedition.

There is no proposal to commit sedition.

ARTICLE 142
INCITING TO SEDITION

Acts punished
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts
which constitute sedition by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.;
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to
disturb the public peace;
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels
against the government or any of the duly constituted
authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the public
peace.

Elements
1. Offender does not take direct part in the crime of
sedition;
2. He incites others to the accomplishment of any of the
acts which constitute sedition;
3. Inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other
representations tending towards the same end.

Rules relative to seditious words:
1. Clear and Present Danger Rule – the words must be of
such nature that by uttering them there is a danger of a
public uprising and that such danger should be both clear and
imminent. There must be reasonable ground to believe that
the danger apprehended is imminent and that the evil to be
prevented is a serious one. There must be probability of
serious injury to the State. Present refers to time element.
The danger must not only be probable but very likely
inevitable.
2. Dangerous Tendency Rule – if the words used tend to
create a danger of public uprising then those words could
properly be the subject of a penal clause. There is inciting to
sedition when the words uttered or published could easily
produce disaffection among the people and a state of feeling
in them incompatible with a disposition to remain loyal to the
Government and obedient to the laws.

Note:
R.A. 1700 did not repeal all other laws relating to subversion

*ARTICLE 143
ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE
CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SIMILAR BODIES

*ARTICLE 144
DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS

*ARTICLE 145
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY

ARTICLE 146
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES

Acts punished
1. Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose
of committing any of the crimes punishable under the
Code;
Elements
a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
whether in fixed place or moving;
b. The meeting is attended by armed persons;
c. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the
crimes punishable under the Code.
2. Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed or
not, is incited to the commission of the crime of treason,
rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or assault upon
person in authority or his agents.
Elements
a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
whether in a fixed place or moving;
b. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to
the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or
insurrection, sedition or direct assault.

Notes:
· There must be an assembly – actual assemblage of persons
whether armed or unarmed
· Offender should have attended the assembly

ARTICLE 147
ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
Illegal associations

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
1

1. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose
of committing any of the crimes punishable under the
Code;
2. Associations totally or partially organized for
some purpose contrary to public morals

Persons liable
1. Founders, directors and president of the association;
2. Mere members of the association.

Note: It is the purpose that makes it illegal

ARTICLE 148
DIRECT ASSAULT

Acts punished
1. Without public uprising, by employing force or
intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes
enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and
sedition;
Elements
a. Offender employs force or intimidation;
b. The aim of the offender is to attain any of the
purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of the
objects of the crime of sedition;
c. There is no public uprising.
2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing
force or by seriously intimidating or by seriously resisting
any person in authority or any of his agents, while
engaged in the performance of official duties, or on
occasion of such performance.
Elements
a. Offender makes an attack, employs force, makes a
serious intimidation, or makes a serious resistance;
b. The person assaulted is a person in authority or his
agent;
c. At the time of the assault, the person in authority
or his agent is engaged in the actual performance of
official duties, or that he is assaulted by reason of
the past performance of official duties;
d. Offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a
person in authority or his agent in the exercise of
his duties.
e. There is no public uprising.

Forms of Direct Assault:
1. Shall employ force or intimidation xxx

Rebellion vs. Direct Assault
Rebellion Direct Assault
With public uprising Without public uprising (1
st

form of direct assault)

2. Shall attack, employs force, makes a serious intimidation
xxx
· Persons in authority – see Art. 152
· Agent – must also be performing an official duty
· Engaged in the performance – motive is immaterial so
whatever is the reason of the attack or even if it is a
private matter and nothing to do with the functions of the
person
· On the occasion of such performance or past performance
(must prove that the motive to assault was because of past
performance)
· If not past performance – physical injuries not assault
Example
Judge Faye was attacked by an ex-convict (judge was the one
who sentenced the convict)

ARTICLE 149
INDIRECT ASSAULT

Elements
1. A person in authority or his agent is the victim of any of
the forms of direct assault defined in Article 148;
2. A person comes to the aid of such authority or his agent;
3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such
person coming to the aid of the authority or his agent.

Notes:
· Can only be committed when there is direct assault
· There are 3 persons involved
· Agents of persons in authority – when the agent is
performing his own official duty and not acting as a third
person

Example
A teacher (person in authority) was attacked and somebody
helped the teacher and was also attacked. No indirect
assault. Note that teachers and professors will apply only to
Articles 148 and 151 only.

*ARTICLE 150
DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY CONGRESS, ITS
COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES, BY THE
CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, ITS COMMITTEES,
SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS

*ARTICLE 151
RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN
AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH PERSON

Who are deemed persons in authority and agents of
persons in authority under Article 152

Person in authority - one directly vested with jurisdiction,
that is, the power and authority to govern and execute the
laws.

An agent of a person in authority is one charged with:
(1) the maintenance of public order and
(2) the protection and security of life and property.
Examples of persons in authority
Municipal mayor;
Division superintendent of schools;
Public and private school teachers;
Teacher-nurse;
President of sanitary division;
Provincial fiscal;
Justice of the Peace;
Municipal councilor;
Barrio captain and barangay chairman.

Note:
The third paragraph is not applicable to indirect assault
because it is only for the purpose of Articles 148 and 151.
Hence, when a person comes to the aid of a teacher there is
no indirect assault.
*ARTICLE 153

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
2

TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBCANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER

*ARTICLE 154
UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND
UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES

ARTICLE 155
ALARMS AND SCANDALS

Acts Punished
1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other
explosive within any town or public place, calculated to
cause (which produces) alarm of danger;
2. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or
other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility;
3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at
night or while engaged in any other nocturnal
amusements;
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places while
intoxicated or otherwise, provided Article 153 in not
applicable.

When a person discharges a firearm in public, the act may
constitute any of the possible crimes under the Revised
Penal Code:
(1) Alarms and scandals if the firearm when discharged
was not directed to any particular person;
(2) Illegal discharge of firearm under Article 254 if the
firearm is directed or pointed to a particular person
when discharged but intent to kill is absent;
(3) Attempted homicide, murder, or parricide if the
firearm when discharged is directed against a
person and intent to kill is present.

Notes:
· Crime against public order, hence, offender cannot avail
of probation
· Not aimed at anybody and discharged
· If aimed and not discharged – grave threats
· If aimed (must be particular) at someone and discharged
but no intent to kill – Art. 254 (Discharge of firearm)
· If directed at someone with intent to kill and it was
discharged – attempted homicide or murder

Art. 155 vs. Art. 254 (Discharge of firearm)

Art. 155 Art. 254
Purpose is to scare Purpose is to shoot another.
It is aimed & discharged but
with no intent to kill.


ARTICLE 156
DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL

Elements
1. There is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment;
2. Offender removes therefrom such person, or helps the
escape of such person.

Note:
Preventive imprisonment – non-bailable offense or with bail
but the person has no money to bail.

Art. 156 vs. Art. 157
Art. 156 Art. 157
Without final judgment With final judgment. Does
not cover detention period.


ARTICLE 157
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Elements
1. Offender is a convict by final judgment;
2. He is serving sentence which consists in the deprivation
of liberty;
3. He evades service of his sentence by escaping during the
term of his imprisonment.

Notes:
· There must be final judgment.
· Does not apply to detention prisoners.

*ARTICLE 158
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF
DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES OR OTHR
CALAMITIES

ARTICLE 159
OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE

Elements of violation of conditional pardon
1. Offender was a convict;
2. He was granted pardon by the Chief Executive;
3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon.

Notes:
· Violation of conditional pardon
· There must be conviction of a new crime before it can be
applicable

ARTICLE 160
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING SERVICE OF
PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE

Elements
1. Offender was already convicted by final judgment of one
offense;
2. He committed a new felony before beginning to serve
such sentence or while serving the same.

Notes:
- Quasi-recidivism
- Person after having been convicted by final
judgment shall commit a new felony before
beginning to serve such sentence or while serving
the same
- The penalty for the new crime in its maximum,
mitigating circumstance will not be considered
- Second crime must be a felony

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST

Crimes against public interest

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
3

1. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the
Philippines (Art. 161);
2. Using forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp
(Art. 162);
3. Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163);
4. Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of
mutilated coins (Art. 164);
5. Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance
(Art. 165);
6. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents
payable to bearer, importing and uttering of such false
or forged notes and documents (Art. 166);
7. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not
payable to bearer (Art. 167);
8. Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank notes
and other instruments of credit (Art. 168)
9. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170);
10. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary (Art.
171);
11. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified
documents (Art. 172);
12. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone
messages and use of said falsified messages (Art. 173);
13. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or
service (Art. 174);
14. Using false certificates (Art. 175);

15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or
implements for falsification (Art. 176);
16. Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177);
17. Using fictitious name and concealing true name (Art.
178);
18. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 179);
19. False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180);
20. False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181);
21. False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182);
22. False testimony in other cases and perjury (Art. 183);
23. Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184);
24. Machinations in public auction (Art. 185);
25. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art.
186);
26. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or
merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious
metals or their alloys (Art. 187);
27. Substituting and altering trademarks and trade names or
service marks (Art. 188);
28. Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of
trademark or trade name, or service mark; fraudulent
designation of origin, and false description (Art. 189).

*Article 161
Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippine Islands, Forging the Signature or Stamp of the
Chief Executive

*Article 162
Using Forged Signature or Counterfeit Seal or Stamp

*Article 163
Making and Importing and Uttering False Coins

*Article 164
Mutilation of Coins
Reducing the quality of coins. Reduction of content.

*Article 165
Selling of False or Mutilated Coin, without Connivance

*Article 166
Forging Treasury or Bank Notes or Other Documents
Payable to Bearer; Importing and Uttering Such False or
Forged Notes and Documents

Utterance – you deliver or issue

*Article 167
Counterfeiting, Importing, and Uttering Instruments Not
Payable to Bearer

ARTICLE 168
ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR
BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT

Elements
1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other
obligation and security payable to bearer, or any
instrument payable to order or other document of credit
not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by another
person;
2. Offender knows that any of those instruments is forged
or falsified;
3. He either –
a. uses any of such forged or falsified instruments; or
b. possesses with intent to use any of such forged or
falsified instruments

Note:
It is not enough that you caught him in possession xxx make
sure that it is falsified

How forgery is committed under Article 169
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned
therein, the appearance of a true and genuine
document;
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering
by any means the figures, letters, words, or sign
contained therein.


*Article 170
Falsification of Legislative Documents

ARTICLE 171
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY
OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public;
2. He takes advantage of his official position;
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the
following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting,
signature or rubric;
b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated
in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact
so participate;
c. Attributing to persons who have participated in an
act or proceeding statements other than those in
fact made by them;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
4

d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
e. Altering true dates;
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine
document which changes its meaning;
g. Issuing in an authenticated form a document
purporting to be a copy of an original document
when no such original exists, or including in such a
copy a statement contrary to, or different from,
that of the genuine original; or
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the
issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official
book.
4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister who
shall commit any of the offenses enumerated, with
respect to any record or document of such character
that its falsification may affect the civil status of
persons.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Example - No. 3 (b)
Deed of Sale executed by A and B in favor of C. A and B did
not really sell the property.

Example – No. 3 (g)
Attesting or certifying to the fact that the document is
genuine. Making a false statement of a document.

Example – No. 3 (h)
Omitting words or inserting words. Volume 3 making it
volume 5.

Art. 171 vs. Art. 172
Art. 171 Art. 172
Both refer to falsification
Offender is a public officer,
employee, notary public,
ecclesiastical minister
Offender is a private
individual
It covers public documents It covers public or private
documents

ARTICLE 172
FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL AND USE OF
FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS

Acts punished
1. Falsification of public, official or commercial document
by a private individual;
2. Falsification of private document by any person;
3. Use of falsified document.

Elements under paragraph 1
1. Offender is a private individual or public officer or
employee who did not take advantage of his official
position;
2. He committed any act of falsification;
3. The falsification was committed in a public, official, or
commercial document or letter of exchange.

Elements under paragraph 2
1. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification
except Article 171(7), that is, issuing in an authenticated
form a document purporting to be a copy of an original
document when no such original exists, or including in
such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from,
that of the genuine original;
2. Falsification was committed in any private document;
3. Falsification causes damage to a third party or at least
the falsification was committed with intent to cause
such damage.

Note:
Intent to cause damage is not an element for a public
document

Elements under the last paragraph
In introducing in a judicial proceeding –
1. Offender knew that the document was falsified by
another person;
2. The false document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He introduced said document in evidence in any judicial
proceeding.

Notes:
· For possession, use or introduction
· Establish first that the document is falsified
· Perjury also contains false statements. Perjury should
relate to the subject matter of the litigation while
falsification is making a false statement whether or
not it is material to the investigation.
· If notarized and made under oath – public document

Regular Complex Crimes:
1. Compound crime
2. Complex crime proper - one crime is a necessary
means to commit the other crime.
Example
Estafa thru falsification of public document. You first
commit falsification then estafa (2 crimes). Please correct
page 29 under complex crime proper. This should be the
example.

Q. Why is there no complex crime of estafa thru
falsification of private documents?
A. Because falsification under Art. 172 and estafa have the
same element which is intent to cause damage. A single
element cannot be used for 2 crimes. Note that intent to
cause damage is not an element of a public document.

*Article 173
Falsification of Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and Telephone
Messages, and Use of Said Falsified Messages

*Article 174
False Medical Certificates, False Certificates of Merits or
Service, Etc.

*Article 175
Using False Certificates

*Article 176
Manufacturing and Possession of Instruments or
Implements for Falsification

ARTICLE 177
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS

Acts punished
1. Usurpation of authority;
Elements
a. Offender knowingly and falsely represents himself;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
5

b. As an officer, agent or representative of any
department or agency of the Philippine government
or of any foreign government.
2. Usurpation of official functions.
Elements
a. Offender performs any act;
b. Pertaining to any person in authority or public
officer of the Philippine government or any foreign
government, or any agency thereof;
c. Under pretense of official position;
d. Without being lawfully entitled to do so.

2 Crimes:
1. Usurpation of authority – any person who knowingly and
falsely represent himself. What is penalized is your false
representation. Representation is verbal.
Example
Buksan nyo ito pulis ako! Then the police committed
robbery. (Verbal false representation)

2. Usurpation of official functions – you perform an act in
pretense of an official function.
Example
Akin na ang lisensya mo! Titiketan kita! (but you have no
authority)

*Article 178
Using Fictitious Name and Concealing True Name
Purpose: to conceal a crime / evade execution of judgment
or cause damage

*Article 179
Illegal Use of Uniforms or Insignia

ARTICLE 180
FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT

Elements
1. There is a criminal proceeding;
2. Offender testifies falsely under oath against the
defendant therein;
3. Offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.
4. Defendant against whom the false testimony is given is
either acquitted or convicted in a final judgment.

Three forms of false testimony
1. False testimony in criminal cases under Article 180
and 181;
2. False testimony in civil case under Article 182;
3. False testimony in other cases under Article 183.

ARTICLE 181
FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT

Elements
1. A person gives false testimony;
2. In favor of the defendant;
3. In a criminal case.

ARTICLE 182
FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES

Elements
1. Testimony given in a civil case;
2. Testimony relates to the issues presented in said case;
3. Testimony is false;
4. Offender knows that testimony is false;
5. Testimony is malicious and given with an intent to affect
the issues presented in said case.

ARTICLE 183
FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION

Acts punished
1. By falsely testifying under oath;
2. By making a false affidavit.

Elements of perjury
1. Offender makes a statement under oath or executes an
affidavit upon a material matter;
2. The statement or affidavit is made before a competent
officer, authorized to receive and administer oaths;
3. Offender makes a willful and deliberate assertion of a
falsehood in the statement or affidavit;
4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is
required by law, that is, it is made for a legal purpose.

Two Crimes:
1. False testimony in other cases – making untruthful
statements
2. Perjury in solemn affirmation – false statement
material to the subject matter. Not simply
pertinent to the issue.
Material matter – subject of investigation or
resolution of an issue

Notes:
· Applies to other cases other than civil and criminal cases
· Competent person – typing clerk not included
· Perjury – there is an execution of a sworn statement or
affidavit which is untruthful and material to the subject of
the inquiry; deliberate assertion of falsehood contained in
a sworn affidavit upon a material matter before a person
authorized to administer oath
· Untruthful statements in documents – falsification

Q. What is the effect if you swore a document before a
typing clerk? Is it perjury?
A. No. Because a typing clerk is not authorized to administer
oath

Subornation of perjury – when you induced somebody to
execute an affidavit containing a false statement upon a
material matter (different from pertinent matter). This is not
a crime but the one who induced shall be liable for perjury as
principal by inducement and the one induced for perjury as
principal by direct participation. Note: liable only when
conspiracy is proven.

Q. What if the person induced executed the affidavit? Is
the person who induced the other liable for subornation?
A. The person who induced the other is not liable. There is no
subornation of perjury. But he will be liable for perjury by
inducement because there is conspiracy between them.

Q. What if the person induced refused to execute the
document, will he be held liable?
A. No.


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
6

Art. 180 vs. Art. 181 vs. Art. 182 vs. Art. 183
Art. 180 Art. 181 Art. 182 Art. 183
Criminal
cases
Criminal
Case
Ordinary
civil cases
Other cases other
than criminal case
and ordinary civil
cases Ex. special
proceedings –
hospitalization of
insane person
Against
the
defendant
In favor of
the
defendant


*ArtIcle 184
Offering False Testimony in Evidence

ARTICLE 185
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS

Purposes:
1. To cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned.
2. To prevent bidders to take part in the auction.

Acts punishable:
1. By soliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for
refraining from taking part in any public auction
2. By attempting to cause bidders to stay away from an
auction by threats, gifts, promises or any other artifice.

Elements of soliciting gift or promise:
1. That there be a public auction.
2. That the accused solicited any gift or a promise from any
of the bidders
3. That such gift or promise was the consideration for his
refraining from taking part in the public auction.
4. That the accused had the intent to cause the reduction of
the price of the thing auctioned.

Elements of attempting to cause bidders to stay away:
1. That there be a public auction
2. That the accused attempted to cause the bidders to stay
away from that public auction
3. That it was done by threats, gifts, promises or any other
artifice
4. That the accused had the intent to cause the reduction of
the price of the thing auctioned.

Example
There is a public auction and you threaten the other bidder
so he will not participate in the auction.


ARTICLE 186
MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAIN OF TRADE

Acts punished:
1. Combination to prevent free competition in the market.
2. Monopoly to restrain free competition in the market.
3. Manufacturer, producer, or processor or importer
combining, conspiring or agreeing with any person to make
transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or to increase
the market price of merchandise.

Monopoly – controlling one industry in restraint of trade.
Combination – join forces to exclude others in restraint of
trade.

Example
You try to control one business or industry. Note that the
mere monopoly is not penalized but there should be
monopoly in restraint of trade.

*Article 187
Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or
merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious metals
or their alloys

*Article 188
Substituting and altering trademarks, trade names or
service marks.

*Article 189
Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of trade name,
trademark or service mark, fraudulent designation of
origin and false description

Articles 188 and 189 are covered by the Intellectual Property
Code.

Articles 190, 191, 192 and 193 were repealed by R.A.
9165 known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002

CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
1. Gambling (Art. 195
2. Importation, sale and possession of lottery tickets or
advertisements (Art. 196)
3. Betting in sport contests (Art. 197)
4. Illegal betting on horse races (Art. 198)
5. Illegal cockfighting (Art. 199)
6. Grave scandal (Art. 200)
7. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions
(Art. 201)
8. Vagrancy and prostitution (Art. 202)

*Note: The provisions of Article 195-199 as well as those of
PD 483 and 449, which are inconsistent with PD 1602 are
repealed

ARTICLE 200
GRAVE SCANDAL

Elements:
1. That the offender performs an act or acts
2. That such act or acts be highly scandalous as offending
against decency or good customs
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not expressly falling
within any other article of this Code.
4. That the act or acts complained of be committed in a
public place or within the public knowledge or view.

Grave Scandal – consists of acts which are offensive to
decency and good customs which having been committed
publicly, have given rise to public scandal to persons who
have accidentally witnessed the same.

ARTICLE 201
IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND
EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
7


This offense in any of the forms mentioned in the article is
committed only when there is publicity.

ARTICLE 202
VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES

Vagrants must be either –
1. An idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame
2. Ruffian or pimp
3. One who habitually associates with prostitutes

Q. Who are prostitutes?
A. A woman is a prostitute when:
1. She habitually indulges in
a.) sexual intercourse or
b.) lascivious conduct
2. for money or for profit


CRIMES COMMITTED BY
PUBLIC OFFICERS

1. Knowingly rendering unjust judgment (Art. 204);
2. Judgment rendered through negligence (Art. 205);
3. Unjust interlocutory order (Art. 206);
4. Malicious delay in the administration of justice (Art.
207);
5. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance (Art.
208);
6. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor – Revelation
of secrets (Art. 209);
7. Direct bribery (Art. 210);
8. Indirect bribery (Art. 211);
9. Qualified bribery (Art. 211-A);
10. Corruption of public officials (Art. 212);
11. Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses
(Art. 213);
12. Other frauds (Art. 214);
13. Prohibited transactions (Art. 215);
14. Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer (Art.
216);
15. Malversation of public funds or property – Presumption of
malversation (Art. 217)
16. Failure of accountable officer to render accounts (Art.
218);
17. Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts
before leaving the country (Art. 219);
18. Illegal use of public funds or property (Art. 220);
19. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property (Art.
221);
20. Conniving with or consenting to evasion (Art. 223);
21. Evasion through negligence (Art. 224);
22. Escape of prisoner under the custody of a person not a
public officer (Art. 225);
23. Removal, concealment or destruction of documents (Art.
226);
24. Officer breaking seal (Art. 227);
25. Opening of closed documents (Art. 228);
26. Revelation of secrets by an officer (Art. 229);
27. Public officer revealing secrets of private individual (Art.
230);
28. Open disobedience (Art. 231);
29. Disobedience to order of superior officer when said order
was suspended by inferior officer (Art. 232);
30. Refusal of assistance (Art. 233);
31. Refusal to discharge elective office (Art. 234);
32. Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235);
33. Anticipation of duties of a public office (Art. 236);
34. Prolonging performance of duties and powers (Art. 237);
35. Abandonment of office or position (Art. 238);
36. Usurpation of legislative powers (Art. 239);
37. Usurpation of executive functions (Art. 240);
38. Usurpation of judicial functions (Art. 241);
39. Disobeying request for disqualification (Art. 242);
40. Orders or requests by executive officers to any judicial
authority (Art. 243);

41. Unlawful appointments (Art. 244); and
42. Abuses against chastity (Art. 245).

Requsites to be a public officer under Article 203

1. Taking part in the performance of public functions in the
government;
or
Performing in said government or in any of its branches
public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate
official, or any rank or class;
2. His authority to take part in the performance of public
functions or to perform public duties must be –
a. By direct provision of the law;
b. By popular election; or
c. By appointment by competent authority.

ARTICLE 204
KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT

Elements
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for
decision;
3. Judgment is unjust;
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust.

Notes:
Articles 204 – 207 are committed by judges of trial courts
and not judges of CA, SC and Sandiganbayan
to correct errors of judgment ¬ appeal
. simple error in judgment is not penalized because there is
appeal

ARTICLE 205
JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE

Elements
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for
decision;
3. The judgment is manifestly unjust;
4. It is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance.

ARTICLE 206
UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Elements
1. Offender is a judge;
2. He performs any of the following acts:
a. Knowingly rendering an unjust interlocutory order or
decree; or

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
8

b. Rendering a manifestly unjust interlocutory order or
decree through inexcusable negligence or
ignorance.

Note:
Interlocutory order is made during the pendency of action
(but it is not final)

ARTICLE 207
MALICIOUS DELAY IN ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

Elements
1. Offender is a judge;
2. There is a proceeding in his court;
3. He delays in the administration of justice;
4. The delay is malicious, that is, with deliberate intent to
inflict damage on either party in the case.

Note:
+Exceeding 90 days and it should be malicious (there should
be malicious intent)

*Article 208. Prosecution of Offenses; Negligence and
Tolerance

*Article 209. Betrayal of Trust by An Attorney or Solicitor
– Revelation of Secrets

ARTICLE 210
DIRECT BRIBERY

Acts punished
1. Agreeing to perform, or performing, in consideration of
any offer, promise, gift or present – an act constituting a
crime, in connection with the performance of his official
duties;
2. Accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an
act which does not constitute a crime, in connection
with the performance of his official duty;
3. Agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing
something which it is his official duty to do, in
consideration of gift or promise.

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer within the scope of Article
203;
2. Offender accepts an offer or a promise or receives a gift
or present by himself or through another;
3. Such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or present
received by the public officer –
a. With a view to committing some crime; or
b. In consideration of the execution of an act which
does not constitute a crime, but the act must be
unjust; or
c. To refrain from doing something which it is his
official duty to do.
4. The act which offender agrees to perform or which he
executes be connected with the performance of his
official duties.

Kinds of Bribery:
1. Direct
2. Indirect
3. Qualified

Forms of Direct Bribery
1. In consideration of a price (agrees only or agrees to
perform an act) – accepting consideration and
actually performed the duty
2. Mere agreement without accepting the
consideration
3. Accepted the consideration and he refrains from
doing his official duty (because there is a
consideration)

Note:
× No frustrated bribery. Only attempted and consummated.

ARTICLE 211
INDIRECT BRIBERY

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He accepts gifts;
3. The gifts are offered to him by reason of his office.

Notes:
- He accepts the gift offered to him and he is not
asked to refrain from doing his official duty
- In anticipation of future favors
- The offender must perform an act to show that he is
the owner of the gift
- The public officer need not do anything but it
simply given a gift and accepted it by reason of his
office

Mendoza Case
Facts: The teacher was arrested through entrapment (inaabot
pa lang yung envelope tapos inaresto)
Held: That is not indirect bribery because the teacher did not
intend to own the money
·Pag inabot tapos nilagay sa bag then it is indirect bribery

ARTICLE 211-A
QUALIFIED BRIBERY

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer entrusted with law
enforcement;
2. He refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender
who has committed a crime;
3. Offender has committed a crime punishable by reclusion
perpetua and/or death;
4. Offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or present.

Law Enforcement – police officer or fiscal

Notes:
If he asks or demands for a gift, the penalty is death

*Article 212
Corruption of Public Officials

*Article 213
Frauds Against the Public Treasury and Similar Offenses

*Article 214
Other Frauds


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
3
9

*Article 215
Prohibited Transactions

*Article 216
Possession of Prohibited Interest By A Public Officer

ARTICLE 217
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY –
PRESUMPTION OF MALVERSATION

Acts punished
1. Appropriating public funds or property;
2. Taking or misappropriating the same;
3. Consenting, or through abandonment or negligence,
permitting any other person to take such public funds or
property; and
4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.

Elements common to all acts of malversation under Article
217
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He had the custody or control of funds or property by
reason of the duties of his office;
3. Those funds or property were public funds or property
for which he was accountable;
4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or,
through abandonment or negligence, permitted another
person to take them.

Malversation – committed by public officer
+Public funds or properties entrusted to a public
Officer who is accountable for such public funds and he used
it for personal use

Notes:
- In estafa there is abuse of confidence and it is by
- means of deceit
- Malversation in relation to estafa – see Art. 315
- paragraph 1 (something is given in trust to
somebody)
- Abuse of trust and confidence are both present in
- malversation and estafa
- Arts. 217 and 315 – no transfer of ownership (only
physical and juridical possession)
- Circumstantial Evidence – if he cannot return or the
fund entrusted upon demand, the presumption is
that it was for personal purpose/s. The presumption
arises when there is no doubt at all that the fund or
property should be in the possession of the public
officer and that said fund was not utilized by the
government for any other purpose. When there is a
need to audit, the presumption will arise once the
audit is complete. It must be thorough.

Malversation vs. Estafa
M – public officer is accountable
E – offender is a private individual

Q. Can a private individual commit malversation? Solely?
A. Yes. But not solely
If he acted in conspiracy with a public officer in
- the misappropriation of public funds (Art. 222) but
private individual cannot be held liable alone
- Benefited from the misappropriation
- Malversation may be committed by a private person
who was constituted a custodian of property placed
under cutodia legis which gives it the character if
public property accountability of the government.

*Article 218
Failure of Accountable Officer to Render Accounts

*Article 219
Failure of A Responsible Public Officer to Render Accounts
before Leaving the Country

ARTICLE 220
ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. There are public funds or property under his
administration;
3. Such fund or property were appropriated by law or
ordinance;
4. He applies such public fund or property to any public use
other than for which it was appropriated for.

Concept: In malversation the public officer benefits by
misappropriating the public funds but in technical
malversation the public officer does not benefit. Any public
officer who shall apply any public funds or property under his
administration to any public use other than that for which
such funds or property were appropriated by laws or
ordinances.

Notes:
O This article is also known as technical malversation
O No personal benefit on the part of the public officer
O Damage is not an element
O If funds were not yet appropriated by law or ordinance -
was applied to a public purpose by the custodian, the crime
is plain and simple malversation, not technical malversation.
O If the funds had been appropriated for a particular public
purpose, but the same was applied to private purpose, the
crime committed is simple malversation only
O In technical malversation the fund or property is allotted
by specific law

Example
A fund according to a law or ordinance was allotted to a ―D‖
project but the public officer used it for ―E‖ project.

Q. May technical malversation be committed by a private
individual?
A. Yes

ARTICLE 223
CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO EVASION

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He had in his custody or charge a prisoner, either
detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
3. Such prisoner escaped from his custody;
4. He was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter’s
escape.

Notes

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
0

- Usually committed by the jail warden
- This is betrayal of obligation

ARTICLE 224
EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of a
prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
3. Such prisoner escapes through negligence.

Notes
- Usually committed by a jail warden
- In this article the prisoner escapes but it is not
within the knowledge or consent of the public
officer
- Negligence must be proved. There must be
total lack of performance of his obligation

Example
Gerard (a prisoner) asked the permission of jail warden
Kristoff that he will go to the comfort room. Jail
warden Kristoff accompanied Gerard and checked the
former checked the comfort room if there are possible
exit points and waited outside. After few minutes
Kristoff found out that Gerard escaped. Jail Warden
Kristoff cannot be held liable under Article 224 because
there was no negligence on his part.

*Article 225
Escape of Prisoner under the Custody of a Person not a
Public Officer

*Article 226
Removal, Concealment, or Destruction of Documents

*Article 227
Officer Breaking Seal

*Article 228
Opening of Closed Documents

*Article 229
Revelation of Secrets by An Officer

*Article 230
Public Officer Revealing Secrets of Private individual
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
*Article 231
Open Disobedience

*Article 232
Disobedience to Order of Superior Officer When Said Order
Was Suspended by Inferior Officer

*Article 233
Refusal of Assistance

*Article 234
Refusal to Discharge Elective Office
ARTICLE 235
MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS

Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee;
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention prisoner;
3. He maltreats such prisoner in either of the following
manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or handling of
a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge
either –
(1) By the imposition of punishment not authorized
by the regulations;
(2) By inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel and humiliating manner;
or
b. By maltreating such prisoners to extort a confession
or to obtain some information from the prisoner.

Notes:
This is in addition to his liability for the physical injuries or
damage caused. “In addition” means that he will be liable for
another crime connected to Art. 235.

Example
He burned the things of the prisoners ¬ Art. 235 + Arson
What is penalized is the conduct of the public officer in
handling the prisoners.

Example
Using violence to correct the behavior of the prisoner

Q. What if the prisoner is unruly, so the public officer shot
the prisoner because he cannot handle the prisoner. The
prisoner died. Is the public officer liable for Art. 235?
A. No. The public officer will be liable for murder or
homicide because intent to kill is not an element of Art. 235

*Article 236
Anticipation of Duties of A Public Office

*Article 237
Prolonging Performance of Duties and Powers

*Article 238
Abandonment of Office or Position

*Article 239
Usurpation of Legislative Powers

*Article 240
Usurpation of Executive Functions

*Article 241
Usurpation of Judicial Functions

*Article 242
Disobeying Request for Disqualification

*Article 243
Orders or Request by Executive Officers to Any Judicial
Authority

*Article 244
Unlawful Appointments


ARTICLE 245
ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
1


Acts punished
1. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a
woman interested in matters pending before the
offending officer for decision, or with respect to which
he is required to submit a report to or consult with a
superior officer;

2. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a
woman under the offender’s custody;

3. Soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to the
wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same degree
by affinity of any person in the custody of the offending
warden or officer.

Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He solicits or makes immoral or indecent advances to a
woman;
3. Such woman is –
a. interested in matters pending before the offender
for decision, or with respect to which he is required
to submit a report to or consult with a superior
officer; or
b. under the custody of the offender who is a warden
or other public officer directly charged with the
care and custody of prisoners or persons under
arrest; or
c. the wife, daughter, sister or relative within the
same degree by affinity of the person in the custody
of the offender.

Notes:
- In relation to Sexual Harassment Act – work area /
school.
- Offender takes advantage of his position in order to
solicit or make immoral or indecent advances
- Mere solicitation consummates the act

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS

1. Parricide (Art. 246);
2. Murder (Art. 248);
3. Homicide (Art. 249);
4. Death caused in a tumultuous affray (Art. 251);
5. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray (Art.
252);
6. Giving assistance to suicide (Art. 253);
7. Discharge of firearms (Art. 254);
8. Infanticide (Art. 255);
9. Intentional abortion (Art. 256);

10. Unintentional abortion (Art. 257);
11. Abortion practiced by the woman herself or by her
parents (Art. 258);
12. Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and
dispensing of abortives (Art. 259);
13. Duel (Art. 260);
14. Challenging to a duel (Art. 261);
15. Mutilation (Art. 262);
16. Serious physical injuries (Art. 263);
17. Administering injurious substances or beverages (Art.
264);
18. Less serious physical injuries (Art. 265);
19. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment (Art. 266); and
20. Rape (Art. 266-A).

ARTICLE 246
PARRICIDE

Elements
1. A person is killed;
2. The deceased is killed by the accused;
3. The deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other
ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate
spouse, of the accused.

Notes:
- Father / mother / child – legitimate or illegitimate
- Ascendants / descendants / spouse - legitimate
- If the ascendants, descendants or spouse is
illegitimate – homicide or murder
- Legitimacy of marriage is determined if it is under
the Civil Law or Code of Muslim and Personal Laws
for Muslims

Q. How about a Muslim – Muslims are allowed to have four
wives, if the Muslim kills his first wife?
A. Parricide

Q. What if the Muslim contracts marriages under the Code
of Muslim and Personal Laws and kills his 2
nd
to 4
th
wife?
A. 4 counts of parricide. (Please check – because the Supreme
Court ruled that Muslim husbands with several wives can be
convicted of parricide only in case the first wife is killed.
There is no parricide if the other wives are killed although
their marriage is recognized as valid. This is so because a
Catholic man can commit the crime only once. If a Muslim
husband could commit this crime more than once, in effect,
he is being punished for the marriage which the law itself
authorized him to contract)

ARTICLE 247
DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER
EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Elements
1. A legally married person, or a parent, surprises his
spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18 years of age
and living with him, in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person;
2. He or she kills any or both of them, or inflicts upon any
or both of them any serious physical injury in the act or
immediately thereafter;
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his
wife or daughter, or that he or she has not consented to
the infidelity of the other spouse.

Two stages contemplated before the article will apply:
(1) When the offender surprised the other spouse with
a paramour or mistress. The attack must take place
while the sexual intercourse is going on. If the
surprise was before or after the intercourse, no
matter how immediate it may be, Article 247 does
not apply. The offender in this situation only gets
the benefit of a mitigating circumstance, that is,
sufficient provocation immediately preceding the
act.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
2

(2) When the offender kills or inflicts serious physical
injury upon the other spouse and/or paramour while
in the act of intercourse, or immediately
thereafter, that is, after surprising.


Notes:
- Legally married – legitimate spouse
- Penalty: destierro only because of the circumstance
of actual sexual intercourse
- Kill them while they are doing it or kill them
immediately thereafter
- Even if he killed his first spouse after 1 hour. The
interval of time is allowed for as long as it can be
proved that the physical injuries or killing is the by -
product or result of the outrage felt by the spouse
in discovering the infidelity of the other spouse.
- Art. 247 is not a license to commit any other crime
other than those contemplated in Art. 247.

Q. M finds his wife having sexual intercourse with X. M
burned the house of X. Can M invoke Art. 247?
A. No. because what is contemplated in Art. 247 is murder or
physical injuries and not arson.

Q. J saw his wife having sexual intercourse with R but J’s
wife is struggling “pumapalag”. J killed his wife. Can J
invoke Art. 247?
A. No. because under Art. 247 the sexual intercourse should
be consensual. J committed parricide.

Q. What if J killed R instead, can J invoke Art. 247?
A. No. It may be treated as a justifying circumstance –
defense of relatives or defense of stranger if common law
spouse.

ARTICLE 248
MURDER

Elements
A person was killed;
Accused killed him;
The killing was attended by any of the following qualifying
circumstances –
With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with
the aid or armed men, or employing means to weaken the
defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity;

B. IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD OR
PROMISE;
c. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means
of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other
means involving great waste and ruin;
d. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in
the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone,
epidemic, or any other public calamity;
e. With evident premeditation;
f. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging
or scoffing at his person or corpse.
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.

Notes:
- Abuse of superior strength – 3 offenders against 1
victim does not necessarily mean there is abuse of
superior strength. It does not refer to superiority in
numbers but in notorious inequality of force.
- Premeditation – study the elements: T.A.S.
- Cruelty – the number of wounds inflicted on the
victim does not necessarily determine cruelty. It is
how the infliction of wounds adds to the physical
suffering. There must be clear evidence that the
victim is still alive when cruelty is inflicted.
Successive stabbing does not necessarily mean there
is cruelty.
- Ignominy – moral suffering – not qualifying
- Absence of any qualifying circumstance – only Art.
249
- Euthanasia – murder if the victim does not want to
die. In Art. 253, the victim wants to die

ARTICLE 249
HOMICIDE

Elements
1. A person was killed;
2. Offender killed him without any justifying
circumstances;
3. Offender had the intention to kill, which is presumed;
4. The killing was not attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or
infanticide

Notes:
- With intent to kill
- Frustrated – mortal wound was inflicted

Q. What if the victim survived and there was intent to kill?
A. Attempted or frustrated homicide.

Q. What if there is no intent to kill?
A. Physical injuries

ARTICLE 251
DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY

Elements
1. There are several persons;
2. They do not compose groups organized for the common
purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
reciprocally;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
3

3. These several persons quarreled and assaulted one
another in a confused and tumultuous manner;
4. Someone was killed in the course of the affray;
5. It cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased;
6. The person or persons who inflicted serious physical
injuries or who used violence can be identified.

Notes:
· Basta join forces not necessarily gang
· Tumultuous – armed or exerted violence

*Article 252
Physical Injuries Inflicted in A Tumultuous Affray


ARTICLE 253
GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE

Acts punished
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide
is consummated or not;
2. Lending his assistance to another to commit suicide to
the extent of doing the killing himself.

Q. What is the crime committed if the patient is suffering
but the patient does not want to die but you pulled off his
life saving device?
A. Murder.

Q. What if you pulled off his life saving device with his
consent?
A. Art. 253

*Article 254
Discharge of Firearms

ARTICLE 255
INFANTICIDE

Elements
1. A child was killed by the accused;
2. The deceased child was less than 72 hours old.

Note:
The child is less than 3 days of age

ARTICLE 256
INTENTIONAL ABORTION

Acts punished
1. Using any violence upon the person of the pregnant
woman;

2. Acting, but without using violence, without the consent
of the woman. (By administering drugs or beverages
upon such pregnant woman without her consent.)

3. Acting (by administering drugs or beverages), with the
consent of the pregnant woman.

Elements
1. There is a pregnant woman;
2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered,
or that the accused otherwise acts upon such pregnant
woman;
3. As a result of the use of violence or drugs or beverages
upon her, or any other act of the accused, the fetus
dies, either in the womb or after having been expelled
therefrom;
4. The abortion is intended.

Intentional – exerted violence on the pregnant woman and
the person who exerted violence knew of the pregnancy and
the exertion of violence was to cause abortion.

Unintentional – what is intended is the exertion of violence
but abortion is not intended

ARTICLE 257
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION

Elements
1. There is a pregnant woman;
2. Violence is used upon such pregnant woman without
intending an abortion;
3. The violence is intentionally exerted;
4. As a result of the violence, the fetus dies, either in the
womb or after having been expelled therefrom.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
*Article 258
Abortion Practiced by the Woman Herself or by Her
Parents

*Article 259
Abortion Practiced by A Physician or Midwife and
Dispensing of Abortives

*Article 260
Responsibility of Participants in A Duel

ARTICLE 261
CHALLENGING TO A DUEL

Acts punished
1. Challenging another to a duel;
2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a duel;
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for having
refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel.

Note:
Pari delicto not applicable

ARTICLE 262
MUTILATION

Acts punished
1. Intentionally mutilating another by depriving him, either
totally or partially, of some essential organ for
reproduction;

Elements
a. There be a castration, that is, mutilation of organs
necessary for generation, such as the penis or
ovarium;
b. The mutilation is caused purposely and deliberately,
that is, to deprive the offended party of some
essential organ for reproduction

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
4

2. Intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by lopping
or clipping off any part of the body of the offended
party, other than the essential organ for reproduction,
to deprive him of that part of his body.

Mutilation - is the lopping or clipping off of some part of the
body.

Q. Is esterectomy performed by doctors considered
mutilation?
A. No. because there is no lopping off. There is removal and
there is consent.

*Article 263
Serious Physical Injuries

*Article 264
Administering Injurious Substances or Beverages

ARTICLE 265
LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES

Matters to be noted in this crime
1. Offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10 days or
more (but not more than 30 days), or needs medical
attendance for the same period of time;
2. The physical injuries must not be those described in the
preceding articles.

Qualified as to penalty
1. A fine not exceeding P 500.00, in addition to arresto
mayor, shall be imposed for less serious physical injuries
when –
a. There is a manifest intent to insult or offend the
injured person; or
b. There are circumstances adding ignominy to the
offense.
2. A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is either –
a. The offender’s parents, ascendants, guardians,
curators or teachers; or
b. Persons of rank or person in authority, provided the
crime is not direct assault.

*Article 266
Slight Physical Injuries and Maltreatment

ARTICLE 266 – A
RAPE, WHEN AND HOW COMMITTED

Elements under paragraph 1
1. Offender is a man;
2. Offender had carnal knowledge of a woman;
3. Such act is accomplished under any of the following
circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation;
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse
of authority; or
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented.

Elements under paragraph 2
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault;
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of the
following means:
a. By inserting his penis into another person's mouth or
anal orifice; or
b. By inserting any instrument or object into the
genital or anal orifice of another person;
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under any of
the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation; or
b. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; or
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse
of authority; or
d. When the woman is under 12 years of age or
demented.

Kinds of Rape:
1. Ordinary Rape – sexual intercourse
2. Object Rape - Sexual Assault as a form of rape

1. Ordinary Rape
Even a prostitute may be a victim of ordinary rape as long as
the sexual intercourse was with force or intimidation

When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious
Example – when the offended party is given drugs

When the woman is under 12 years of age or demented
- This is also known as statutory rape
- Irrespective of whether or not the child consented

2. Object Rape
- Irrespective of either sex
- Insertion of a part of human body is considered rape
(before R.A. 8353 it is not rape)

Notes:
- No more frustrated rape. Only consummated and
attempted rape.
- Consummated – slightest penetration
- Attempted – with intent to rape or with intent to
have carnal knowledge

Rape vs. Acts of Lasciviousness

Between Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness the difference lies
in the intent of the perpetrator deducible from his external
acts. When the touching of the vagina by the offender’s penis
is coupled with the intent to penetrate, attempted rape is
committed, otherwise it is acts of lasciviousness. (People vs.
Collado, 2001)

ARTICLE 266 – B
PENALTIES

Qualified Rape – Circumstances (Memorize)
Rape is qualified by the presence of the following
circumstances:
1. With the use of a deadly weapon or by 2 or more persons;
2. The victim becomes insane on the occasion or by reason of
the rape;
3. The rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by
reason or on the occasion of;


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
5

Or when any of the 10 qualifying circumstances attended the
rape:
(1) Where the victim is under 18 years of age and the
offender is her ascendant, stepfather, guardian, or
relative by affinity or consanguinity within the 3rd
civil degree, or the common law husband of the
victim’s mother; or
(2) Where the victim was under the custody of the
police or military authorities, or other law
enforcement agency;
(3) Where the rape is committed in full view of the
victim’s husband, the parents, any of the children
or relatives by consanguinity within the 3rd civil
degree;
(4) Where the victim is a religious, that is, a member of
a legitimate religious vocation and the offender
knows the victim as such before or at the time of
the commission of the offense;
(5) Where the victim is a child under 7 yrs of age;
(6) Where the offender is afflicted with AIDS or other
sexually transmissible diseases, and he is aware
thereof when he committed the rape, and the
disease was transmitted;
(7) Where the offender is a member of the AFP, its
paramilitary arm, the PNP, or any law enforcement
agency and the offender took advantage of his
position;
(8) Where the victim has suffered permanent physical
mutilation;
(9) Where the pregnancy of the offended party is
known to the rapist at the time of the rape; or
(10) Where the rapist is aware of the victim’s mental
disability, emotional disturbance or physical
handicap.

Note: The penalty is still reclusion perpetua with the advent
of R.A. 9346. The crime however remains heinous.

ARTICLE 266 – C
EFFECT OF PARDON

1. The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and
the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the
penalty imposed;
2. In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or penalty: Provided that
the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not
be abated if the penalty is void ab initio.

Notes:
Marriage between the offender and the offended party – will
only favor the principal
¡ Subsequent forgiveness of the wife – note that the wife
was raped. It should be legal marriage.

ARTICLE 266 – D
PRESUMPTIONS
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act
of rape in any degree from the offended party, or when the
offended party is so situated as to render him/her incapable
of giving valid consent, may be accepted as evidence in the
prosecution of the acts punished under Art. 266-A.

Note:
Any degree of resistance or any form
Example
Basta sabihin nyang ―Huwag wag!‖… Kahit hindi sya
binugbog, basta may resistance.

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL
LIBERTY AND SECURITY

Crimes against liberty
1. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention (Art. 267);
2. Slight illegal detention (Art. 268);
3. Unlawful arrest (Art. 269);
4. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor (Art. 270);
5. Inducing a minor to abandon his home (Art. 271);
6. Slavery (Art. 272);
7. Exploitation of child labor (Art. 273);
8. Services rendered under compulsion in payment of debts
(Art. 274).

Crimes against security
1. Abandonment of persons in danger and abandonment of
one's own victim (Art. 275);
2. Abandoning a minor (Art. 276);
3. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his
custody; indifference of parents (Art. 277);
4. Exploitation of minors (Art. 278);
5. Trespass to dwelling (Art. 280);
6. Other forms of trespass (Art. 281);
7. Grave threats (Art. 282);
8. Light threats (Art. 283);
9. Other light threats (Art. 285);
10. Grave coercions (Art. 286);
11. Light coercions (Art. 287);
12. Other similar coercions (Art. 288);
13. Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination
of capital or labor through violence or threats (Art. 289);
14. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence
(Art. 290);
15. Revealing secrets with abuse of office (Art. 291);
16. Revealing of industrial secrets (Art. 292).

ARTICLE 267
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;
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the following
circumstances is present:
a. The kidnapping lasts for more than 3 days;
b. It is committed simulating public authority;
c. Any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the
person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him
are made; or
d. The person kidnapped or detained is a minor,
female, or a public officer.

Art. 267 vs. Art. 270
Art. 267 – any kidnapping of a minor (offender – any private
individual.
Art. 270 – any person who being entrusted with the custody of
a minor person


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
6

Notes:
Ransom – any consideration given for the release of a person.

Q, If there is a demand for ransom but the ransom
demanded has not been given or paid. Is it kidnapping for
ransom?
A. Yes. The mere demand for ransom constitutes kidnapping
for ransom.

With deprivation of liberty
Example
If a person was kidnapped but he is free to roam, there is no
illegal detention

Last paragraph – special complex crime of kidnapping with
murder or with rape as the case may be.
Example
When the rape victim died – special complex crime

*Article 268
Slight Illegal Detention

ARTICLE 269
UNLAWFUL ARREST

Elements
1. Offender arrests or detains another person;
2. The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the
proper authorities;
3. The arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there
is no reasonable ground therefore.

Note:
4 The purpose is to deliver the offended party to the proper
authority; If not, then that is kidnapping.

Q. What if he arrested a person without a legal ground and
after the arrest he did not deliver him to proper
authorities, unlawful arrest?
A. No. Illegal detention.

*Article 270
Kidnapping and Failure to Return A Minor

*Article 271
Inducing A Minor to Abandon His Home

*Article 272
Slavery

ARTICLE 273
EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR

Elements
1. Offender retains a minor in his services;
2. It is against the will of the minor;
3. 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.

Note:
Relate this article to Republic Act No. 7610 (Special
Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act)

*Article 274
Services Rendered under Compulsion in Payment of Debt

*Article 275
Abandonment of Persons in Danger and Abandonment of
One’s Own Victim

*Article 276
Abandoning A Minor

*Article 277
Abandonment of Minor by Person Entrusted with His
Custody; Indifference of Parents

*Article 278
Exploitation of Minors

*Article 279
Additional Penalties for other Offenses

ARTICLE 280
QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING

Elements
1. Offender is a private person;
2. He enters the dwelling of another;
3. Such entrance is against the latter’s will.

Notes:
¬ The offender is a private person. A private individual
enters the dwelling of another
¬ Public officer without a search warrant or with void search
warrant enters the dwelling of another - violation of domicile

*Article 281
Other forms of trespass


ARTICLE 282
GRAVE THREATS

Acts punished:
1. Threatening another with the infliction upon his person,
honor or property or that of this family of any wrong
amounting to a crime and demanding money or imposing
any other condition, even though not unlawful, and the
offender attained his purpose;
2. Making such threat without the offender attaining his
purpose;
3. 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
Even if the threat is so serious for as long as the person
making the threat subsequently did not do anything to show
that he is not persisting his idea, this will result to light
threats only.

ARTICLE 283
LIGHT THREATS

Elements
1. Offender makes a threat to commit a wrong;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
7

2. The wrong does not constitute a crime;
3. There is a demand for money or that other condition is
imposed, even though not unlawful;
4. Offender has attained his purpose or, that he has not
attained his purpose
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
*Article 284
Bond for Good Behavior

*Article 285
Other Light Threats

ARTICLE 286
GRAVE COERCIONS

Acts punished
1. Preventing another, by means of violence, threats or
intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by
law;
2. Compelling another, by means of violence, threats or
intimidation, to do something against his will, whether it
be right or wrong.

Elements
1. A person prevented another from doing something not
prohibited by law, or that he compelled him to do
something against his will; be it right or wrong;
2. The prevention or compulsion be effected by violence,
threats or intimidation; and
3. The person that restrained the will and liberty of
another had not the authority of law or the right to do
so, or in other words, that the restraint shall not be
made under authority of law or in the exercise of any
lawful right.

Coercion – means compulsion or prevention

Grave Coercion – at the time (at the very moment) the
compulsion is made, there must have been violence, force,
intimidation or threat. Violence exerted from the beginning
at the time of the compulsion.

Note:
No violence – unjust vexation only

ARTICLE 287
LIGHT COERCIONS

Elements
1. Offender must be a creditor;
2. He seizes anything belonging to his debtor:
3. The seizure of the thing be accomplished by means of
violence or a display of material force producing
intimidation;
4. The purpose of the offender is to apply the same to the
payment of the debt.

Note:
Par. 2 – the exertion of violence or intimidation or force was
after the compulsion or prevention

*Article 288
Other Similar Coercions

*Article 289
Formation, Maintenance, and Prohibition of Combination
of Capital or Labor through Violence or Threats

*Article 290
Discovering Secrets through Seizure of Correspondence

*Article 291
Revealing Secrets with Abuse of Office

*Article 292
Revelation of Industrial Secrets


CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

1. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
(Art. 294);
2. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under
certain circumstances (Art. 297);
3. Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation
(Art. 298);
4. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice
devoted to worship (Art. 299);
5. Robbery in an inhabited place or in a private building (Art.
302);
6. Possession of picklocks or similar tools (Art. 304);
7. Brigandage (Art. 306);
8. Aiding and abetting a band of brigands (Art. 307);
9. Theft (Art. 308);
10. Qualified theft (Art. 310);
11. Theft of the property of the National Library and National
Museum (Art. 311);
12. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in
property (Art. 312);
13. Altering boundaries or landmarks (Art. 313);
14. Fraudulent insolvency (Art. 314);
15. Swindling (Art. 315);
16. Other forms of swindling (Art. 316);
17. Swindling a minor (Art. 317);
18. Other deceits (Art. 318);
19. Removal, sale or pledge of mortgaged property (Art.
319);
20. Destructive arson (Art. 320);
21. Other forms of arson (Art. 321);
22. Arson of property of small value (Art. 323);
23. Crimes involving destruction (Art. 324);
24. Burning one’s own property as means to commit arson
(Art. 325);
25. Setting fire to property exclusively owned by the offender
(Art. 326);
26. Malicious mischief (Art. 327);
27. Special case of malicious mischief (Art. 328);
28. Damage and obstruction to means of communication (Art.
330);
29. Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or
paintings (Art. 331).

*Article 293
Who Are Guilty of Robbery

ARTICLE 294
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF
PERSONS

Acts punished

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
8

1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery (taking of
personal property belonging to another with intent to gain),
the crime of homicide is committed;

2. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional
mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason of on occasion of such robbery, any of the
physical injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency
or blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason or on occasion of 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 theretofore habitually engaged is inflicted;
5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission
of the robbery is carried to a degree unnecessary for the
commission of the crime;
6. 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 sue
thereof or becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance
of the work in which he is habitually engaged for more than
90 days or the person injured becomes ill or incapacitated for
labor for more than 30 days;
7. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause
any of the serious physical injuries defined in Article 263, or
if the offender employs intimidation only.

Notes:
- Similarity of robbery and theft – there is taking of
personal property with intent to gain and no consent
from the victim
- Difference – in robbery, the taking is with the
attendance of force upon things or violence against the
person
- Special complex crime
- It is still a crime against property even if with homicide,
rape or SPI – the original plan is to rob and in the course
of or by reason of robbery (in the occasion of) somebody
is killed or raped or wounded, otherwise, liable only for
the resulted crime, even if death supervened by
accident
- If there is a conspiracy to rob and one is left as look out
– still included to the special complex crime for as long
as the look-out did not prevent it but if it was prevented
¬ only robbery

ARTICLE 295
ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES COMMITTED IN AN
UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A BAND

Robbery with violence against or intimidation of person
qualified is qualified if it is committed
1. In an uninhabited place;
2. By a band;
3. By attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle, or
airship;
4. By entering the passengers’ compartments in a train, or
in any manner taking the passengers thereof by surprise
in the respective conveyances; or
5. 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 Article 294.

Notes:
- All must be armed
- Last paragraph – “as principal” - because of conspiracy

ARTICLE 296
DEFINITION OF A BAND AND PENALTY INCURRED BY THE
MEMBERS THEREOF

Requisites for liability for the acts of the other members of
the band
1. He was a member of the band;
2. He was present at the commission of a robbery by that
band;
3. The other members of the band committed an assault;
4. He did not attempt to prevent the assault.

Band - when at least four armed malefactors take part in the
commission of a robbery.

2
nd
Par – any member of a band who is present at the
commission of a robbery by the 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.

*Article 297
Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under
certain circumstances

ARTICLE 298
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR
INTIMIDATION

Elements
1. Offender has intent to defraud another;
2. Offender compels him to sign, execute, or deliver any
public instrument or document.
3. The compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation.

Example
Blank deed and somebody is forcing you to sign it

Note:
If not with violence – estafa because of the intent to defraud
Art. 298 vs. Estafa
Art. 298 – with violence or intimidation
Estafa – without violence or intimidation

ARTICLE 299
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC BUILDING OR
EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP

Elements under subdivision (a)
1. Offender entered an inhabited house, public building
2. 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.

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
4
9

3. Once inside the building, offender took personal
property belonging to another with intent to gain.

Elements under subdivision (b):
1. Offender is inside a dwelling house, public building, or
edifice devoted to religious worship, regardless of the
circumstances under which he entered it;
2. 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.

Q. If you break or open the window and you scoop with
your hands anything you can get, is that robbery?
A. No. The whole body must be inside otherwise, theft.

*Article 300
Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band

*Article 301
What is an inhabited house, public building, or building
dedicated to religious worship and their dependencies

*Article 302
Robbery in An Uninhabited Place or in A Private Building

*Article 303
Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an uninhabited
place or private building

*Article 304
Possession of Picklock or Similar Tools

*Article 305
False keys

ARTICLE 306
WHO ARE BRIGANDS

Elements of brigandage
1. There are least four armed persons;
2. They formed a band of robbers;
2. 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
c. To attain by means of force and violence any other
purpose.
Brigandage under the Revised Penal Code vs, highway
robbery/brigandage under Presidential Decree No. 532:
Art. 306 P.D. 532
To commit a specific
robbery on the highway
(planned)
To commit indiscriminately,
your victim is anyone
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.
Mere forming of a band,
(requires at least four
armed persons, if for any of
the criminal purposes stated
in Article 306) gives rise to
brigandage
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.


Brigandage – highway robbery
P.D. No. 532 - refers to the actual commission of the robbery
on the highway and can be committed by one person alone

*Article 307
Aiding and Abetting A Band of Brigands

*Article 308
Who Are Liable for Theft

*Article 309
Penalties

ARTICLE 310
QUALIFIED THEFT

Theft is qualified if
1. Committed by a domestic servant;
2. Committed with grave abuse of confidence;
3. The property stolen is a motor vehicle, mail matter, or
large cattle;
4. The property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the
premises of a plantation;
5. The property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond or
fishery; or
6. If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake,
typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity,
vehicular accident, or civil disturbance.

Notes Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum
Fututorum
Committed by domestic servant

Example
Pinakain mo na tapos ninakawan ka pa
1.) Theft of a motor vehicle – qualified theft
2.) Theft of a motor vehicle – Carnapping – no element of
transfer of possession from the owner
Difference between 1 and 2
Example

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
0

Inutusan mo yung driver mo magpa-gas tapos hindi na nya
binalik – theft (there should be temporary possession)
Pagnaka-park lang at ninakaw - carnapping

*Article 311
Theft of the Property of the National Library or National
Museum

ARTICLE 312
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. Offender takes possession of any real property or usurps
any real rights in property;
2. The real property or real rights belong to another;
3. Violence against or intimidation of persons is used by the
offender in occupying real property or usurping real
rights in property;
4. There is intent to gain.

Robbery vs. Art. 312
Robbery – personal property
Art. 312 – real property

Squatting vs. Usurpation
S – No intention to own the property
U – Offender intends to own the real property

*Article 313
Altering Boundaries or Landmarks

*ARTICLE 314
FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY

Elements
1. Offender is a debtor, that is, he has obligations due and
payable;
2. He absconds with his property;
3. There is prejudice to his creditors.

Note
Art. 314 – Pretending to be insolvent by simply keeping the
property

ARTICLE 315
SWINDLING (ESTAFA)

Elements in general
1. Accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by
means of deceit; and
This covers the three different ways of committing
estafa under Article 315; thus, estafa is committed –
a. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence;
b. By means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts; or
c. Through fraudulent means.

Elements of estafa with unfaithfulness of abuse of
confidence under Article 315 (1)

Under paragraph (a)
1. Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver
something of value;
2. He alters its substance, quantity, or quality;
3. Damage or prejudice is caused to another.

Under paragraph (b)
1. Money, goods, or other personal property is received by
the offender is 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. There is misappropriation or conversion of such money or
property by the offender, or denial on his part of such
receipt;
3. Such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the
prejudice of another; and
There is a demand made by the offended party to the
offender.

Under paragraph (c)
1. The paper with the signature of the offended party is in
blank;
2. Offended party delivered it to the offender;
3. Above the signature of the offended party, a document
is written by the offender without authority to do so;
4. The document so written creates a liability of, or causes
damage to, the offended party or any third person.

Elements of estafa by means of false pretenses or
fraudulent acts under Article 315 (2)

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.

Under paragraph (b)
Altering the quality, fineness, or weight of anything
pertaining to his art or business.

Under paragraph (c)
Pretending to have bribed any government employee,
without prejudice to the action for calumny which the
offended party may deem proper to bring against the
offender.

Under paragraph (d)
1. Offender postdated a check, or issued a check in payment
of an obligation;
2. Such postdating 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

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
1

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
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
2 Ways
1. Abuse of confidence (trust)
2. By means of deceit

Examples
You bought a ring for P25,000 but the ring is only worth
P18,000 – abuse of confidence

In entrusting (not ownership) your property, the very same
shall be returned to you. If he did not give it back or cannot
explain why he cannot give it back – abuse of trust

If you transfer the ownership ―I give it to you‖ – this is not
estafa. But there may be civil obligation

―A‖ sold pieces of jewelry to ―B‖ on installment but the
latter did not pay. A asked B to return it – as long as there is
transfer of ownership even if it is not paid it is not estafa.

Estafa by means of deceit - fraudulent manifestation.
Example
You were able to get money because of false pretense. In
illegal recruitment the offender, by virtue of false pretenses
was able to obtain money.

Art. 315 (2) (d) by post dating a check or issuing a check in
payment of an obligation xxx vs. B.P. 22
-issuance of a check with a representation that it is funded
Art. 315 (2) (d) B.P. 22
Check was issued at the
time the obligation was
contracted.
Note: If the check was
issued after or ahead of
when the obligation was
contracted or payment of a
pre-existing obligation – not
estafa but there is civil
obligation
Mere fact of issuance of a
check which is not fully
funded. There is a
presumption that the
offender had knowledge
that his check had no funds
– if the check bounced
within a period of 90 days
Crime against property Crime against public
interest
The gravamen of the
offense is the deceit
employed
The gravamen of the
offense is the issuance of
the check
Deceit and damage are
material
Deceit and damage are
immaterial
Knowledge by the drawer of
insufficient funds is not
required
Knowledge by the drawer of
insufficient funds is
required
There is criminal liability if the check is drawn for non-pre-
existing obligation

Q. If the check bounced after 90 days, is there BP 22?
A. Yes. 90 days is only a presumption and it does not affect
criminal liability. The presumption will not apply if he pays
the value of the check or make arrangements with the bank
(from the time the drawer receive the notice of dishonor) for
the payment of the check within 5 banking days (Hence, not
liable for BP 22)

Notes:
- If after 30 days not yet paid – BP 22
- In BP 22, there must be proof that the drawer received
the notice of dishonor. If the addressee refused to
accept, the sender should execute an affidavit that the
addressee refused to accept the notice.
- The same check can be the basis of 2 prosecutions and
yet not double jeopardy because estafa is under RPC and
BP 22 is a special penal law.

*Article 316
Other Forms of Swindling

*Article 317
Swindling A Minor

ARTICLE 318
OTHER DECEITS

Acts punished
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any other deceit not
mentioned in the preceding articles;
2. Interpreting dreams, by making forecasts, by telling
fortunes, or by taking advantage of the credulity of the
public in any other similar manner, for profit or gain.

Note:
· Any conceivable deceit
Example – Madam Auring

*Article 319
Removal, Sale or Pledge of Mortgaged Property

ARTICLE 320
DESTRUCTIVE ARSON

Notes:
- Malicious burning of property of other persons

Q. If you burn your own property, are you liable for arson?
A. It does not follow that you are liable for arson. But if the
property is situated in a vast tract of land, it is not arson. But
if you burn your property located in a congested area, it is
arson because it endangers the lives of others.

Q. What if you burn your property and somebody was
killed, what was the crime committed?
A. Arson only. No complex crime of arson. Homicide is
absorbed in the crime of arson.

*Article 321
Other Forms of Arson

*Article 322
Cases of arson not included in the preceding articles

*Article 323
Arson of property of small value

*Article 324
Crimes involving destruction


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
2

*Article 325
Burning one’s own property as means to commit arson

*Article 326
Setting fire to property exclusively owned by the offender

*Article 326 – A
In cases where death resulted as a consequence of arson

*Article 326 – B
Prima facie evidence of arson

ARTICLE 327
WHO ARE LIABLE FOR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

Elements
1. Offender deliberately caused damage to the property of
another;
2. Such act does not constitute arson or other crimes
involving destruction;
3. The act of damaging another’s property was committed
merely for the sake of damaging it;

Notes
- Malicious mischief – if deliberately caused damage and
motivated by hate, revenge or resentment
- Malicious – cause damage deliberately
- Caused damage but with no intent to damage – criminal
negligence Art. 365
- Causes damage under circumstances of accident and
performed with diligence (required) – Art. 12 par. 4

Article 328. Special Case of Malicious Mischief

*Article 329
Other Mischiefs

*Article 330
Damage and Obstruction to Means of Communication

*Article 331
Destroying or Damaging Statues, Public Monuments, or
Paintings

*Article 332
Persons Exempt from Criminal Liability

CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY

1. Adultery (Art. 333);
2. Concubinage (Art. 334);
3. Acts of lasciviousness (Art. 336);
4. Qualified seduction (Art. 337);
5. Simple seduction (Art. 338);
6. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended
party (Art. 339);
7. Corruption of minors (Art. 340);
8. White slave trade (Art. 34);
9. Forcible abduction (Art. 342);
10. Consented abduction (Art. 343).

Crimes against chastity – the crime cannot be prosecuted de
officio. The offender cannot be prosecuted except upon
complaint of the offended party.
Example
Adultery – complaint of the husband
Concubinage – complaint of the wife

ARTICLE 333
WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY

Elements
1. The woman is married;
2. She has sexual intercourse with a man not her husband;
3. As regards the man with whom she has sexual
intercourse, he must know her to be married

Notes:
- Even if the marriage be subsequently declared void
– presumed valid marriage
- As long as at the time the sexual intercourse was
committed (other than his husband) – she is married
- “For each sexual intercourse, one count of
adultery” – this should be rationalized, it should not
be taken literally
- The married woman and the lover – both guilty
- The pardon must be extended to both offenders to
extinguish criminal liability

ARTICLE 334
CONCUBINAGE

Acts punished
1. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
2. Having sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances;
3. Cohabiting with her in any other place.

Elements
1. The man is married;
2. He is either –
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling;
b. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances with a woman who is not his wife; or
c. Cohabiting with a woman who is not his wife in any
other place;
3. As regards the woman, she knows that the man is
married.

3 Ways of committing concubinage (either of the following
circumstances)
1. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling
2. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances
with a woman not his wife
3. Cohabiting with her in any other place

Conjugal dwelling – is meant the house of the husband and
wife even if wife happens to be temporarily absent on any
account.
-house constructed from the proceeds of the sale of conjugal
property of the spouses especially where they had intended it
to be so is a conjugal dwelling and the fact that the wife
never had a chance to reside therein and that the husband
used it with his mistress instead, does not detract from its
nature.

Cohabit – married man is living with the woman under the
same roof and they are living together as husband and wife.

Scandalous – how it is perceived by the people

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
3


Notes:
´ This does not mean that they do it in public
´ Pardon for adultery after the act – to extinguish criminal
liability it must be extended to both offenders
´ If there is a prior agreement to separate such agreement is
null and void but it can be used as a defense but cannot be
used as an enforceable agreement.

*Article 335
Rape
Repealed by Republic Act No. 8353 or the Anti-Rape Law of
1997.

ARTICLE 336
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS

Elements
1. Offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness;
2. It is done under any of the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived or reason of
otherwise unconscious; or
c. When the offended party is another person of either
sex.

Two kinds of acts of lasciviousness under the Revised Penal
Code:
(1) Article 336
(2) Article 339.

Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness - The offended party
may be a man or a woman. 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. 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.

Article 339. Acts of Lasciviousness with the Consent of the
Offended Party -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.

Rape vs. Acts of Lasciviousness (both with force)
R – may be committed with sexual intercourse
AL – without sexual intercourse

ARTICLE 337
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION

Acts punished
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and under 18 years of
age by certain persons, such as a person in authority,
priest, teacher; and
Elements
a. Offended party is a virgin, which is presumed if she
is unmarried and of good reputation;
b. She is over 12 and under 18 years of age;
c. Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
d. There is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender.
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother, or descendant by
her ascendant, regardless of her age or reputation.
Persons liable
1. Those who abused their authority
a. Person 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 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

ARTICLE 338
SIMPLE SEDUCTION

Elements
1. Offender party is over 12 and under 18 years of age;
2. She is of good reputation, single or widow;
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her;
4. It is committed by means of deceit.

Art. 337 vs. Art. 338 vs. Art. 339
Art. 337
Qualified
Seduction
Art. 338
Simple
Seduction
Art. 339
Consented Acts of
Lasciviousness
With sexual
intercourse
With sexual
intercourse
No sexual
intercourse but
only lascivious
acts.
Abuse of
authority,
relationship or
moral
ascendancy
Through deceit
in the form of
promise of
marriage
With consent of
the offended
party. With abuse
of authority,
relationship or
moral ascendancy.
Through deceit.
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Notes:
- If married man makes a promise of marriage and the
minor knows he is married – that is not deceit
- In rape and seduction – the offspring is entitled to
support

*Article 340
Corruption of Minors
Relate to R.A. 7610

*Article 341
White Slave Trade

ARTICLE 342
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION


NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
4

Elements
1. The person abducted is any woman, regardless or her
age, civil status, or reputation;
2. The abduction is against her will;
3. The abduction is with lewd designs.

Notes:
+ Whether forcible or consented – no sexual intercourse
+ Consented – Art. 343 – under 18 years old
+ It is a crime against chastity because the taking away is
with lewd design. If no lewd design – kidnapping
Example – Maggie dela Riva case – forcible abduction with
rape
+ If woman was taken with lewd design and was raped –
forcible abduction with rape. Subsequent rapes are
considered as separate kinds of rape (People vs. Bulaong,
1972)

By virtue of R.A. 8353 The following crimes cannot be
prosecuted de officio (CASADA)
2. Adultery
3. Seduction
4. Abduction
5. Defamation / Slander
6. Acts of Lasciviousness

*Article 343
Consented Abduction

*Article 344
Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage,
seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness

ARTICLE 345
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY OF CRIMES AGAINST
CHASTITY
Persons guilty of rape, seduction or abduction, shall also
be sentenced:
1. To indemnify the offended woman
2. To acknowledge the offspring unless the law should
prevent him from doing so
3. In every case to support the offspring

Notes:
- To acknowledge in case of multiple rape - there is no
obligation to acknowledge
- Indemnify the offended woman
Example
Rape of the first form – P50K + P50K moral damages

*Article 346
Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers, or other persons
entrusted with the custody of the offended party

CRIMES AGAINST THE
CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS

1. Simulation of births, substitution of one child for another
and concealment or abandonment of a legitimate child (art.
347);
2. Usurpation of civil status (Art. 348);
3. Bigamy (Art. 349);
4. Marriage contracted against provisions of law (Art. 350);
5. Premature marriages (Art. 351);
6. Performance of illegal marriage ceremony (Art. 352).

ARTICLE 347
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF ONE CHILD FOR
ANOTHER AND CONCEALMENT OF 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
intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.

Simulation – the woman pretends to be pregnant
Example
X pretends to be pregnant and registered as if it is her child

Abandonment of child – committed by the father or the
mother to lose the civil status

Art. 347 vs. Child Trafficking under R.A. 7610
Art. 347 – leave the child somewhere (in a public place)
R.A. 7610 – selling a child by the father or barter of a child

Q. What if the baby is in the tummy of the mother and the
mother intends to sell it?
A. Attempted Child trafficking

*Article 348
Usurpation of Civil Status

ARTICLE 349
BIGAMY

Elements
1. Offender has been legally married;
2. 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. He contracts a second or subsequent marriage;
4. The second or subsequent marriage has all the essential
requisites for validity.

Bigamy – 2 marriages. The second marriage was contracted
while the first marriage is subsisting. The 2 marriages must
be valid – complete with formal and essential requisites.

Notes:
- If no judicial declaration of presumptive death or no
judicial declaration of nullity or annulment – bigamy
- The second marriage for purposes of bigamy must be
valid
- Prejudicial Question – study notes in civil review 1 ©

*Article 350
Illegal Marriage

*Article 351
Premature Marriage

*Article 353
Performance of Illegal Marriage Ceremony

CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

1. Libel by means of writings or similar means (Art. 355);

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
5


2. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent such
publication for compensation (Art. 356);
3. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of
official proceedings (Art. 357);
4. Slander (Art. 358);
5. Slander by deed (Art. 359);
6. Incriminating innocent person (Art. 363);
7. Intriguing against honor (Art. 364)

ARTICLE 353
DEFINITION OF LIBEL

Libel - public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a
vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
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.

Elements
1. There must be an imputation of a crime, or of a vice or
defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
condition, status, or circumstance;
2. The imputation must be made publicly;
3. It must be malicious;
4. The imputation must be directed at a natural or juridical
person, or one who is dead;
5. The imputation must tend to cause the dishonor,
discredit or contempt of the person defamed.

Notes
- Libel – written defamation
- Slander – oral defamation
- Publicity – as long as the defamation has come to the
attention of 3
rd
persons
- If nobody heard it – no publicity
- Malicious imputation of a crime – every defamatory
imputation is presumed to have done with malice
(presumption in law) except privileged communication

*Article 354
Requirement for Publicity

*Article 355
Libel by Means of Writings or Similar Means

*Article 356
Threatening to Publish and Offer to Prevent Such
Publication for A Compensation

*Article 357
Prohibited Publication of Acts Referred to in the Course of
Official Proceedings

*Article 358
Slander

ARTICLE 359
SLANDER BY DEED

Elements
1. Offender performs any act not included in any other
crime against honor;
2. Such act is performed in the presence of other person or
persons;
3. Such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt upon the
offended party.

Slander by deed - to performance of an act, not use of
words. Oral defamation.

Kinds of slander by deed
1. Simple slander by deed; and
2. Grave slander by deed, that is, which is of a serious
nature.

Notes
E R.A. 7691 (1994) – despite 7691, libel is still within the
jurisdiction of the MTC because RPC is a substantive law
E BP 129 (1980) – MTC – offenses where the imposable
penalty is up to 6 years

*Article 360
Persons Responsible

ARTICLE 361
PROOF OF THE TRUTH

- Proof of the truth is not admissible except Art. 361 if it
appears that the matter charged as libelous is true and
published with good motives and for justifiable ends. The
defendant shall be acquitted.

*Article 362
Libelous Remarks

ARTICLE 363
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSONS

Performs an act and plant evidence against somebody

Elements
1. Offender performs an act;
2. By such an act, he incriminates or imputes to an
innocent person the commission of a crime;
3. Such act does not constitute perjury.

ARTICLE 364
INTRIGUING AGAINTS HONOR

Associated to slander

Slander vs. Art. 364
S – with plot or definite source
Art. 364 – not identifiable (who will you prosecute? Prosecute
everybody)

CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

ARTICLE 365
IMPRUDENCE AND NEGLIGENCE

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;

NOTES IN CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW (2008)
Justice Ma. Cristina Cornejo

1969-2008 39 years of excellence and superiority
P
a
g
e
5
6

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.

Reckless imprudence -lack of foresight, care or precaution

Examples
Reckless imprudence resulting to homicide
Reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property
Lex Talionis Fraternitas, Inc. Sodalitas Ducum Fututorum
Q. Could there be reckless imprudence resulting in
frustrated homicide?
A. No.

Last Clear Chance – the contributory negligence of the party
injured 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.

Contributory Negligence – this defense does not apply in
criminal cases through reckless imprudence since one cannot
allege the negligence of another to evade the effects of his
own negligence.
Except: Proximate cause of death is the negligence of the
deceased himself and not the negligence of the accused.

Emergency Rule / Doctrine – a person who is confronted with
a sudden emergency may be left no time for thought, must
make speedy decision based largely upon impulse or instinct
and cannot be held to the same conduct as one who has had
an opportunity to reflect even though it later appears that he
made the wrong decision.
→ The doctrine is applicable only where the situation which
arises to confront the actor is sudden and unexpected and is
such as to deprive him of all opportunity for deliberation.
→ This is a defense but what is necessary to be shown is that
he must not have been negligent.

Notes
= If with due care – accident
= If intentional – malicious mischief

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

R.A. 9165 THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT
OF 2002

Notes
- covers actual and constructive possession of drugs.
- By-bust operation or entrapment – no exchange of money
and drugs – it is consensual contract – can be prosecuted
- Sale – consensual contract – possession is included in sale
but if after the “kapkapan” saw another drug – separate
crime - possession
- No plea bargaining in drugs cases
- No probation in drugs cases
- If drugs are confiscated for another individual, the court
should conduct ocular inspection then immediately the
drugs will be burned and retain some of it for evidence
- Assets will be confiscated – like motor vehicles – within 5
days
- Government officials will be prosecuted if the received
proceeds of drugs
- Request for voluntary rehabilitation will be filed in PDEA

R.A. 8294 ANTI - ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS,
AMMUNITION OR EXPLOSIVES LAW

Includes actual and constructive possession

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful