Ateneo de Manila University

Law school is tough enough as it is. Let’s lift each

other up. A candle loses nothing by lighting another
candle.
---
Reviewer in It’s not about the big things that you do the week or
the night before the exams, but the little things that
criminal law 2 you do patiently and consistently every day.

- Joval
Joanne Marie R. Valles, CPA

References:
1. Revised Penal Code Book 2- Reyes
2. Republic Act 3815
PAY IT FORWARD.

Last edit: 10 September 2022

 Table of Contents
TITLE ONE: CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS ............................................................... 1
TITLE TWO: CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE ......................................................................... 6
SECTION ONE ................................................................................................................................................................................6
SECTION TWO................................................................................................................................................................................8
SECTION THREE ........................................................................................................................................................................... 10
SECTION FOUR. ........................................................................................................................................................................... 11
TITLE THREE: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER ..............................................................................................................12
CHAPTER ONE: REBELLION, SEDITION AND DISLOYALTY ........................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER TWO: CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR REPRESENTATION ................................................................................................ 17
CHAPTER THREE: ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND ASSOCIATIONS ...................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER FOUR: ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND THEIR AGENTS ... 19
CHAPTER FIVE: PUBLIC DISORDERS ............................................................................................................................................ 21
TITLE FOUR: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST ...........................................................................................................25
CHAPTER ONE: FORGERIES......................................................................................................................................................... 25
Section One ......................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Section Two......................................................................................................................................................................... 25
Section Three ...................................................................................................................................................................... 26
CHAPTER TWO: OTHER FALSITIES ............................................................................................................................................... 34
CHAPTER THREE: FRAUDS ........................................................................................................................................................... 38
TITLE SEVEN: CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS ...............................................................................................40
TITLE EIGHT: CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS ......................................................................................................................56
CHAPTER ONE: DESTRUCTION OF LIFE ....................................................................................................................................... 56
CHAPTER TWO: PHYSICAL INJURIES............................................................................................................................................ 62
CHAPTER THREE: RAPE ................................................................................................................................................................ 64
TITLE NINE: CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY ..................................................................................67
TITLE TEN: CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY ........................................................................................................................79
CHAPTER ONE: ROBBERY IN GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................... 79
CHAPTER TWO: BRIGANDAGE .................................................................................................................................................... 88
CHAPTER THREE: THEFT .............................................................................................................................................................. 89
CHAPTER FIVE: CULPABLE INSOLVENCY ..................................................................................................................................... 94
CHAPTER SIX: SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS ....................................................................................................................... 94
CHAPTER SEVEN: CHATTEL MORTGAGE ................................................................................................................................... 104
CHAPTER EIGHT: ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS ............................................................................. 105
CHAPTER NINE: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF ..................................................................................................................................... 106
CHAPTER TEN: EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY ........................................................ 108
TITLE ELEVEN: CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY.................................................................................................................. 109
CHAPTER ONE: ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE ...................................................................................................................... 109
CHAPTER TWO: RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS ............................................................................................................. 110
CHAPTER THREE: SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE.............................................................. 111
CHAPTER FOUR: ABDUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 113
CHAPTER FIVE: PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS OF TITLE ELEVEN........................................................ 115
TITLE TWELVE: CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS .................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER ONE: SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS ..............................................................................1
CHAPTER TWO: ILLEGAL MARRIAGES ............................................................................................................................................1
TITLE THIRTEEN ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR ............................................................................................................................................. 1
CHAPTER ONE: LIBEL .....................................................................................................................................................................1
CHAPTER TWO INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS ........................................................................................................................7
TITLE FOURTEEN: QUASI-OFFENSES ............................................................................................................................... 1

Last edit: 10 September 2022

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL security ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

exceed P100,000 pesos. (As amended by Sec. 2, RA 7659, which took • The citizenship may also be proved by the testimony of
BOOK TWO effect on 31 December 1993.) witnesses who know him to have been born in the PH of
CRIMES AND PENALTIES Filipino parents.
Elements • Treason may be committed by Filipino citizens and
1. Offender is a Filipino citizen or an alien residing in the PH
Title One: CRIMES AGAINST 2. There is a war in which the PH is involved
aliens.
o Treason by a Filipino can be committed outside of
NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE 3. The offender either the PH.
a. Levies war against the government or
LAW OF NATIONS b. Adheres to the enemies giving them aid or comfort
o Treason by an alien must be committed in the PH.

Two modes of committing treason

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY
1. Treason
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
3. Misprision of treason
4. Espionage
CRIMES AGAINST LAW OF NATIONS
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
2. Violation of neutrality
3. Correspondence with hostile country
4. Flight to enemy’s country
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in PH
waters
Chapter One
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY
Section One. - Treason and espionage
ARTICLE 114
Treason.
Any FILIPINO citizen who levies war against the Philippines or
adheres to her enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the
Philippines or elsewhere, shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to
death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P100,000 pesos.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of
TWO WITNESSES at least to the same overt act or on
CONFESSION of the accused in open court.
Likewise, an ALIEN, residing in the Philippine Islands, who commits
acts of treason as defined in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be punished
by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay a fine not to
TREASON
Treason is a breach of allegiance to a government, committed by a
person who owes allegiance to it.
• In its general sense, it is the violation by a subject of his
allegiance to his sovereign or to the supreme authority of the
State.
• Treason is a continuous offense. Treason is of such a
nature that it may be committed by one single act, by a series
of acts, or by several series hereof, not only in a single time,
but in different times, it being a continuous crime. All overt
acts the accused has done constitute but a single offense.
• Note that when killings and other common crimes are charged
as overt acts of treason, they cannot be regarded as separate
crimes or as complexed with treason. They become
identified with the crime of treason.
• Treason is a war crime. Treason cannot be committed in
time of peace. It is a war crime and punished by the State as a
measure of self-defense and self-preservation.
ALLEGIANCE
This is the obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individuals
owe to the government under which they live or to their sovereign, in
return for the protection they receive.
• Allegiance may be permanent or temporary. An alien owes
permanent allegiance to his own country. At the same time, he
owes temporary allegiance to the country where he resides.
CITIZENSHIP
• The fact of being a Filipino citizen may be proved by the
prison record of the accused, which sets out his personal
circumstances properly identified as having been filled out
with data supplied by the accused himself.
1. LEVYING WAR AGAINST GOVERNMENT
• Requisites. (1) That there be an actual assembling of men (2)
For the purpose of executing a treasonable design by force.
o If a body of men be actually assembled for the
purpose of effecting by force a treasonable design,
all those who perform any part, however minute or
remote from the scene of action, and who are
actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are
considered to be traitors.
• It is not necessary that there be any formal declaration of the
existence of a state of war to justify the conclusion that those
engaged in such attempt are levying war and therefore guilty
of treason.
• The war must be directed against the government. It
must be with the intent to overthrow the government as such
and not merely to resist a particular statute or to repel a
particular officer.
• It matters not how vain and futile the attempt was and how
impossible the accomplishment. It is not necessary that those
attempting to overthrow the government by force of arms
should have the apparent power to succeed in their design in
whole or in part. US v Lagnason
• It is necessary that the purpose of levying war is to deliver the
country in whole or in part to the enemy. Levying war as an
act of treason must be for the purpose of executing a
treasonable design by force.
• Levying war must be in collaboration with a foreign
enemy. Hence, if the levying of war is merely a civil uprising,
without any intention of helping external enemy, the crime is
not treason. The offenders may be liable for rebellion.
2. ADHERING TO ENEMIES and GIVING AID/
COMFORT

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 1

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL security
• Requisites. (1) Adherence to the enemy and (2) rendering
him aid and comfort.
• Adherence and giving aid or comfort must concur.
Adherence alone, without giving the enemy aid or comfort,
does not constitute treason.
o Emotional or intellectual attachment or sympathy to
the enemy, without giving the enemy aid or comfort,
is not reason.
o When there is no adherence to the enemy, the act
which may do aid or comfort to the enemy does not
amount to treason.
o But giving information to, or commandeering
foodstuff for, the enemy is evidence of both
adherence and aid or comfort.
• Adherence to enemy. This means intent to betray. There is
adherence to the enemy when a citizen intellectually or
emotionally favors the enemy and harbors sympathies or
convictions disloyal to his country’s policy or interest.
• Aid or comfort. This means an act which strengthens or tends
to strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war against the
traitor’s country and an act which weakens or tends to weaken
the power of the traitor’s country to resist or attack the enemy.
o The aid or comfort must be a deed or physical
activity. It must not be a mere mental operation. It
must be an act that has passed from the realm of
thought into the realm of action. (Example:
furnishing the enemy with arms, troops, supplies,
information, or means of transportation.)
o As a general rule, to be treasonous, the extent of the
aid and comfort given to the enemies must be to
render assistance to them as enemies and not merely
as individuals and, in addition, be directly in
furtherance of the enemies’ hostile designs.
o Act committed need not actually strengthen the
enemy. It is not essential that the effort to aid be
successful, provided overt acts are done which if
successful would advance the interest of the enemy.
It is not the degree of success, but rather the aim for
which the act was perpetrated, that determines the
commission of treason.
o The aid or comfort given to the enemies must be
after the declaration of war. The enemies referred
to by the provision must be the subject of a foreign
power. Hence, this does not embrace rebels in
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
insurrection of their own country, because they are
still citizens and not enemies.
Sample Jurisprudence
• Commandeering of women to satisfy the lust of the
enemy is not treason. The acts were not calculated to
strengthen the Japanese empire or its army or to cripple the
defense and resistance of the other side. People v Perez
• Examples of acts of aid or comfort:
o Serving as informer and active member of the
Japanese Police, arresting guerilla suspect in an
attempt to suppress the underground movement.
People v Fernando
o Serving in the Japanese Army as agent or spy and
participating in the raid of guerilla hideout. People v
Muñoz
o Taking active part in the mass killing of civilians by
the Japanese soldiers by personally tying the hands
of the victims. People v Canibas
o Being a Makapili or placing one’s self at the enemy’s
call to fight side by side with him when the
opportune time came even though an opportunity
never presented itself. Such membership by its very
nature gave the enemy aid and comfort. People v
Adriano
• The acceptance of public office and discharge of official
duties under the enemy do not constitute per se the
felony of treason. But when the positions to which the
accused was appointed were not only responsible positions
but also policy-determining, because they defined the norm of
conduct that all the offices and officials under the departments
he headed had to adopt and enforce, and help in the
propagation of the creed of the invader, and the acts and
utterances of the accused while holding such position were an
earnest implementation of such policy, the act constitutes
treason. People v Sison
• Mere governmental work during the Japanese regime is not an
act of treason.
• Membership in the police force during occupation is not
treason; but active participation with the enemies in the
apprehension of guerillas and infliction of ill-treatments make
such member liable for treason. People v Dizon
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• But when the arrest of persons alleged to have been guerillas
was due to their commission of a common crime like arson,
the accused who made the arrest is not liable for treason.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses
at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused in open court.
• Discussion: Based on the wording of the provision, the 2-
witness rule applies to levying war, adherence, and to giving
aid. However, it does not apply to adherence.
WAYS OF CONVICTING ONE OF TREASON
1. Testimony of 2 witnesses, at least, to the same overt act.
2. Confession of the accused in open court.
• Treason cannot be proved by circumstantial
evidence or by the extrajudicial confession of the
accused.
ARTICLE 115
Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason; Penalty.
The CONSPIRACY or PROPOSAL to commit the crime of treason
shall be punished respectively, by prision mayor and a fine not
exceeding P10,000 pesos, and prision correccional and a fine not
exceeding P5,000 pesos.
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TREASON
This is committed when in time of war, two or more persons come to
an agreement to levy war against the Government or to adhere to the
enemies and to give them aid or comfort, and decide to commit it.
PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON
This is committed when in time of war a person who has decided to
levy war against the Government or to adhere to the enemies and to
give them aid or comfort, proposes its execution to some other person
or persons.
The two-witness rule does not apply to conspiracy or proposal to commit treason,
because this is a separate and distinct offense from that of treason.
ARTICLE 116
Misprision of treason.
Every person owing allegiance to the Government of the Philippine
Islands, without being a foreigner, and having knowledge of any
conspiracy against them, conceals or does not disclose and make known
2
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL security ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

the same, as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province,
or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides, as the case may
be, shall be punished as an accessory to the crime of treason.
Elements
1. The offender must be owing allegiance to the Government
and not a foreigner
2. He has knowledge of any 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:
a. Governor or fiscal of the province in which he
resides
b. Mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides
Notes
1. Misprision of treason cannot be committed by a resident
alien. The law says without being a foreigner.
2. What is concealed or not reported is conspiracy to commit
treason.
• The provision does not apply when the crime of
treason is already committed by someone and the
accused does not report its commission to the
proper authority.
3. Article 116 is an exception to the rule that mere silence does
not make a person criminally liable.
• The offender is a principal in the crime of misprision
of treason, although he is punished as an
ACCESSORY to treason (2 degrees lower).
ARTICLE 117
Espionage.
The penalty of prision correccional shall be inflicted upon ANY
PERSON who:
1. Without authority therefor, ENTERS a warship, fort, or
naval or military establishment or reservation to OBTAIN
any information, plans, photographs, or other data of a
confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine
Archipelago; or
2. Being in POSSESSION, by reason of the public office he
holds, of the articles, data, or information referred to in the
preceding paragraph, DISCLOSES their contents to a
representative of a foreign nation.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed if the offender be a
public officer or employee.
ESPIONAGE
This is the offense of gathering, transmitting, or losing information
respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the
information is to be used to the injury of the Republic of the PH or to
the advantage of any foreign nation.
Paragraph 1
ENTERING a warship, fort, or naval or military establishment or
reservation to OBTAIN any information, plans, photographs, or other
data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippine
Archipelago.
Elements
1. The offender enters any of the places mentioned therein.
2. He has no authority therefor
3. The purpose is to obtain information, plans, photographs, or
other data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of
the PH.
Notes:
1. To be liable under this paragraph, the offender must have the
intention to obtain information relative to the defense of
the PH.
• If the accused has no such intention, even if he takes
possession of plans or photographs referred to in
paragraph 1, he is not liable under that provision.
2. It is not necessary that information is obtained. It is
sufficient that he has the purpose to obtain any of them when
he entered the warship, fort, or naval or military
establishment.
3. Persons liable under this paragraph may be a private
individual or a public officer.
Paragraph 2
Being in POSSESSION, by reason of the public office he holds, of the
articles, data, or information referred to in the preceding paragraph,
DISCLOSES their contents to a representative of a foreign nation.
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He has in his possession the articles, data, or information
referred to in paragraph 1, by reason of the public office he
holds.
3. He discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign
nation
Persons liable under this paragraph are public officers who possess
article, data or information by reason of the public office he holds.
Section Two
Provoking war and disloyalty in case of war
Crimes classified as provoking war and disloyalty in case of war:
1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
2. Violation of neutrality
3. Correspondence with hostile country
4. Flight to enemy’s country
ARTICLE 118
Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals.
The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any public
officer or employee, and that of prision mayor upon any private
individual, who, by UNLAWFUL OR UNAUTHORIZED ACTS
provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or liable to involve
the Philippine Islands or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property.
Elements
1. The offender performs unlawful or unauthorized acts
2. Such acts:
a. Provokes or gives occasion for a war involving or
liable to involve the PH or
b. Expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons
or property.
ARTICLE 119
Violation of neutrality
The penalty of prision correccional shall be inflicted upon anyone who,
on the occasion of a war in which the Government is not involved,
violates any regulation issued by competent authority for the purpose
of enforcing neutrality.
Elements

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 3

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL security
1. There is a war in which the PH is NOT involved
2. There is a regulation issued by competent authority for
the purpose of enforcing neutrality
3. The offender violates such regulation
NEUTRALITY
A nation or power which takes no part in a contest of arms going on
between others is referred to as neutral.
• But note that there must be a regulation issued by competent
authority for the enforcement of neutrality.
• It is the violation of such regulation which constitutes the
crime.
ARTICLE 120
Correspondence with hostile country.
Any person who in time of war, shall have correspondence with an
enemy country or territory occupied by enemy troops shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional, if the correspondence has been
prohibited by the Government;
2. By prision mayor, if such correspondence be carried on in
ciphers or conventional signs; and
3. By reclusion temporal, if notice or information be given
thereby which might be useful to the enemy. If the offender
intended to aid the enemy by giving such notice or
information, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal
to death.
Elements
1. It is in time of war in which the PH is involved
2. The offender makes correspondence with an enemy country
or a territory occupied by enemy troops
3. The correspondence is either
a. Prohibited by the government
b. Carried in ciphers or conventional signs
c. Containing notice or information which might be
useful to the enemy
CORRESPONDENCE
This is communication by means of letter; it may refer to the letters
which pass between those who have friendly or business relations.
• Even if the correspondence contains innocent matters, if the
correspondence has been prohibited by the government, it is
punishable.
• But prohibition is not essential in paragraphs 2 and 3
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
CIRCUMSTANCE QUALIFYING THE OFFENSE
The following must concur:
1. The notice or information might be useful to the enemy
2. The information is intended to aid the enemy.
Note that the concurrence of these elements amounts to treason, hence,
the penalty is the same with treason.
Discussion: Ciphers or confidential signs. Second paragraph- no
need for prohibition by the government. Why speak in codes if
nothing’s up?
ARTICLE 121
Flight to enemy country.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be inflicted upon ANY PERSON
who, OWING ALLEGIANCE to the Government, attempts to flee or
go to an enemy country when PROHIBITED by competent authority.
Elements
1. There is a war in which the PH is involved
2. The offender must be owing allegiance to the Government
3. The offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country
4. The going to enemy country is prohibited by competent
authority
Notes:
1. There must be a war. The provision uses the term enemy.
There can be no enemy without a war.
2. Alien resident may be guilty. The law says any person.
Therefore, the allegiance contemplated by the provision is
either temporary or natural allegiance.
3. Mere attempt to flee or go to enemy country
consummates the crime. The offender need not actually be
able to leave the country.
4. Article 121 must be implemented by the Government. If
fleeing or going to an enemy country is not prohibited by
competent authority, the crime defined under this provision
cannot be committed.
5. Allegiance to the government. Permanent and temporary
allegiance contemplated here. Therefore, resident aliens are
covered.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Section Three
Piracy and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters
ARTICLE 122
Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas.
The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be inflicted upon ANY
PERSON who, on the high seas or in Philippine waters, shall attack
or seize a vessel or, not being a member of its complement nor a
passenger, shall seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment, or personal belongings of its complement or passengers.
The same penalty shall be inflicted in case of mutiny on the high seas
or in Philippine waters.
1. PIRACY
It is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas, without lawful
authority and done with animo furandi and in the spirit and intention
of universal hostility.
• Animo furandi is intention to steal.
• Piracy is a crime not against any particular state but against all
mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal of
any country where the offender may be found or into which
he may be carried. Nor does it matter that the crime was
committed within the jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign
state. People v Lol-lo and Saraw.
TWO WAYS OF COMMITTING PIRACY
1. Attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in PH
waters
2. Seizing the whole or part of the vessel’s cargo, its equipment
or personal belongings of its complement or passengers.
Elements
1. A vessel is on the high seas or PH waters
2. The offenders are not members of its complements or
passengers of the vessel
3. The offender does the acts enumerated above.
Complement of the vessel. This means the crew. The offender must
not be a passenger or a crew.
• Passengers taking property of another passenger or member
of the complement may amount to theft or robbery.
4
CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL security ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

may be prompted by a desire to Commission of those acts in PH waters was punished as

VESSEL
Any watercraft used for transport of passengers and cargo from one
place to another through PH waters. It shall include all kinds and types
of vessels or boats to be used in fishing.
HIGH SEAS
Any waters on the sea coast which are without the boundaries of low-
water mark, although such waters may be in the jurisdictional limits of
a foreign government.
o It does not mean that the crime be committed beyond the 3-
mile limit of any state.
o The Convention on the Law of the Sea defines high seas
as parts of the seas that are not included in the exclusive
economic zone, in the territorial seas, or in the internal waters
of the state, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic
state.
CONSTI NOTES
1. Internal waters- waters around, between, and connecting the
islands of the archipelago, irrespective of their breadth and
dimensions, form part of the internal waters of the Philippines
2. Territorial sea- belt of nautical waters extending 12 nautical
miles from the baseline
3. Exclusive economic zone- belt of nautical waters extending
200 nautical miles from the baseline
2. MUTINY
The unlawful resistance to a superior officer, or the raising of
commotions and disturbances on board a ship against the authority of
its commander.
• Mutiny is usually committed by the other members of the
complement and may be committed by the passengers of the
vessel.
PIRACY V MUTINY
PIRACY MUTINY
The persons who attack the The persons who attack the
vessel or seize its cargo are vessel or seize its cargo are
strangers to said vessels. members of the crew are
passengers.
There is intent to gain. Offenders may only intend to
ignore the ship’s officers or they
commit plunder. piracy under PD 532.
5. Special complex crime. Qualified piracy is a special complex
PIRACY AND MUTINY AS TERRORISM crime punishable by reclusion perpetua to death, regardless of
Under RA 9372 or the Human Security Act of 2007, a person who the number of victims.
commits an act punishable as piracy and mutiny under Article 122 of
the RPC thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce
the government to give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the
crime of terrorism.
ARTICLE 123
Qualified piracy.
The penalty of reclusion temporal to death shall be imposed upon those
who commit any of the crimes referred to in the preceding article, under
any of the following circumstances:
1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by BOARDING or
FIRING upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have ABANDONED their victims
without means of saving themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied by MURDER,
HOMICIDE, PHYSICAL INJURIES or RAPE. (As
amended by RA 7659)
Notes:
1. Crimes referred to in the preceding article. This phrase
refers to piracy and mutiny on the high seas.
2. Paragraph 2 of Article 123. It specifically mentions pirates,
thereby excluding mutineers. However, it would seem that the
qualification must be made in paragraph 1 instead of
paragraph 2, because in paragraph 1, the mutineers, being
already in the vessel, cannot seize the vessel by boarding or
firing upon the same.
3. Accomplice to piracy. Any person who knowingly and in
any manner aids or protects pirates, such as giving them
information about the movement of 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; any person who directly or indirectly abets the
commission of piracy, shall be considered as an accomplice.
Knowledge shall be presumed unless otherwise proved.
4. Prior to amendment by RA 7659. Prior to amendment, only
piracy and mutiny on high seas were covered by the RPC.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 5

CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
Title Two: CRIMES AGAINST THE
FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE
STATE
They are called crimes against the fundamental laws of the State because
they violate certain provisions of the Bill of Rights.
Chapter One
ARBITRARY DETENTION OR EXPULSION, VIOLATION
OF DWELLING, PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND
DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS AND CRIMES
AGAINST RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
Section One
Arbitrary detention and expulsion
Classes of Arbitrary Detention
1. Arbitrary detention by detaining a person without legal
ground.
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial
authorities.
3. Delaying release.
Note that the penalties for the 3 classes of arbitrary detention are the same.
ARTICLE 124
Arbitrary detention.
Any PUBLIC OFFICER or EMPLOYEE who, without legal
grounds, detains a person, shall suffer;
1. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period, if the detention has not
exceeded three days;
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the detention has continued more than
three but not more than fifteen days;
3. The penalty of prision mayor, if the detention has continued
for more than fifteen days but not more than six months;
and
4. That of reclusion temporal, if the detention shall have
exceeded six months.
The commission of a crime, or violent insanity or any other ailment
requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in a hospital, shall
be considered LEGAL GROUNDS for the detention of any person.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Note that the law does not fix a minimum period of detention. One can be liable
even if the detention was only for less than an hour.
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer or employee.
2. He detains a person.
3. The detention is without legal grounds.
#1. OFFENDER IS A PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE
• The public officer liable for arbitrary detention must be
vested with authority to detain or order the detention of
persons accused of a crime, but when they detain a person,
they have no legal grounds therefor.
• If the detention is perpetrated by other public officers, the
crime committed is illegal detention, because they are acting
in their personal capacity.
• If the offender is a private individual, the crime committed
is illegal detention under Article 267 or Article 268.
o But private individuals who conspired with public
officers in detaining another are guilty of arbitrary
detention.
#2. HE DETAINS A PERSON
DETENTION is the actual confinement of a person in an enclosure,
or in any manner detaining and depriving him of his liberty.
• Even if the persons could move freely in and out of their
prison cell and could take their meals outside the prison,
nevertheless, if they were under the surveillance of the guards
and they could not escape for fear of being apprehended again,
there would still be arbitrary detention. People v Camerino
• There is arbitrary detention when the mayor refused to allow
the people to go home and such refusal was followed by the
arrival of armed military enforcement. Restraint resulting
from fear is evident. The intent to prevent the departure of
the people against their will is clear. Astorga v People
#3. DETENTION IS WITHOUT LEGAL GROUNDS
The following are considered legal grounds:
1. When the person detained committed a crime
2. When the person detained is suffering from violent insanity or
any other ailment requiring confinement in a hospital
• Other ailments: SARS outbreak
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Sample jurisprudence
In the following cases, the detention was held to be without legal
ground:
• The barrio lieutenant saw his servant quarreling with his
daughter, seized the servant and sent him to the Justice of
Peace where he was detained for 4 hours.
o Merely quarrelling is not a crime. US v Gellaga
• Aquilino Taruc was arrested because of the suspicion that he
might be implicated in the plot to assassinate the president and
that he was related to Luis Taruc.
o Mere suspicion of his connection with any
murderous act is not a ground recognized by law for
restraining the freedom of any individual. Taruc v
Carlos
• The complainant overtook another vehicle and was arrested
without warrant.
o The complainant was not committing a crime and
had not committed a crime in the presence of the
arresting person. Illegal warrantless arrest and
detention. Cayao v del Mundo
• Arrest without warrant is the usual cause of arbitrary
detention.
o The officer arrested a man who was acting
suspiciously but did not say what particular
circumstance aroused his suspicion. He arrested the
man because he only wanted to know if he was
committing a crime. No legal ground if the officer
only wants to know the commission of crime. US v
Hachaw
WARRANTLESS ARREST
General rule:
A peace officer must have a warrant of arrest properly issued by the
court in order to justify an arrest. If there is no such warrant, the arrest
of a person may constitute arbitrary detention.
Exception:
Section 5, Rule 113, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure
Arrest without warrant- when lawful
A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a
person:
6
CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
1. IN FLAGRANTE DELICTO. When, in his presence, the
person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing,
or is attempting to commit an offense.
• In his presence. When the officer sees the offense
being committed, although at a distance, or hears the
disturbance created thereby and proceeds at once to
the scene, or when the offense is continuing or has
not been consummated at the time the arrest is
made, the offense is said to be committed in his
presence. US v Samonte
2. HOT PURSUIT. When an offense has in fact just been
committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on
personal knowledge of facts and circumstances that the
person to be arrested has committed it.
• Personal knowledge. Police officers have personal
knowledge of the actual commission of the crime
when it had earlier conducted surveillance activities
of the accused.
• Probable cause. Such facts and circumstances
which could lead a reasonably discreet and prudent
man to believe that an offense has been committed
and that the object sought in connection with the
offense are in the place sought to be searched.
o It must be based on the personal
knowledge of the complainant or the
witnesses he may produce and not on mere
hearsay. The fact of commission must be
undisputed.
• A crime must in fact or actually have been
committed first.
o The obligation to make an arrest by reason
of crime does not presuppose the
indubitable existence of a crime. Probable
cause is sufficient.
o The legality of the detention does not
depend upon the juridical and much less
the judicial fact of the crime (the elements
of the felony are present and they were so
found by the court), but upon the nature of
the deed.
o The characterization of such deed as a
crime may reasonably be inferred by the
officer to whom the law AT THE
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
MOMENT leaves the decision for the
urgent purpose of suspending the liberty of
a person.
3. ESCAPING PRISONERS. When the person to be arrested
is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or a
place where he is serving final judgment or temporarily
confined while the case is pending or has escaped while being
transferred from one confinement to another.
• This right of warrantless arrest is founded on the
principle that at the time of arrest, the escapee is in
the continuous act of committing a crime- evading
the service of his sentence. Paraluman v Director of
Prison
ARTICLE 125
Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities.
The penalties provided in the next preceding article shall be imposed
upon the PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE who shall
DETAIN any person for some legal ground and shall FAIL TO
DELIVER such person to the proper judicial authorities within the
period of; twelve (12) hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by light
penalties, or their equivalent; eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or
offenses punishable by correctional penalties, or their equivalent and
thirty-six (36) hours, for crimes, or offenses punishable by afflictive
or capital penalties, or their equivalent.
#3. FAILURE TO DELIVER TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL
In every case, the person detained shall be INFORMED of the cause
of his detention and shall be ALLOWED upon his request, to
communicate and confer at any time with his attorney or counsel. (As
amended by E.O. Nos. 59 and 272, Nov. 7, 1986 and July 25, 1987,
respectively).
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer or employee
2. That he has detained a person for some legal ground
3. That he fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial
authorities within:
a. 12 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by light
penalties or their equivalent
b. 18 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by
correctional penalties or their equivalent
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
c. 36 hours for crimes or offenses punishable by
afflictive penalties or capital penalties or their
equivalent
#2. DETENTION FOR SOME LEGAL GROUND
• The provision contemplates an arrest that is legal in the
beginning because the person detained was arrested under any
of the circumstances where arrest without warrant is
authorized by law.
o The detention becomes illegal after a certain period
of time because the offended party is not delivered
to the proper judicial authority within the prescribed
time.
• Article 125 does not apply when the arrest is by virtue of a
warrant of arrest. It applies only in lawful warrantless arrests.
o This is because of a person is arrested by virtue of a
warrant of arrest, he can be detained indefinitely
until his case is decided by the court or he posts a
bail for his temporary release.
o When there is a warrant of arrest, it is no longer
necessary to deliver the person arrested to the court
because there is already a complaint or information
filed against him before the court that issued the
warrant.
• If the detention is without legal ground, it will be a case of
arbitrary detention under Article 124.
AUTHORITIES
• What constitutes a violation of this article is the failure to
deliver the person arrested to the proper judicial authority
within the prescribed time.
o If the information is filed beyond the prescribed
period, the detention becomes illegal.
o The illegality of such detention is not cured by the
filing of the information in court. In such case, the
detaining officer is liable under Article 125 because a
violation had already been committed before the
information was filed.
• DELIVERY. What constitutes delivery is the making of an
accusation or charge or filing of an information against
the person arrested with the corresponding court or judge,
whereby the latter acquires jurisdiction to issue an order of
release or of commitment of the prisoner. It is not physical
delivery that will satisfy the requirement of this article.
7
CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
o But note that unless he ordered the or induced
the arresting officer to hold and not release the
prisoner after the expiration of the period, the
city fiscal is not liable under this article if he does not
file the information within the prescribed period.
This is because he is not the one who has arrested
and illegally detained the person arrested.
• Section 7, Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure. When a person is lawfully arrested without a
warrant involving an offense which requires a preliminary
investigation, the complaint or information may be filed by a
prosecutor without the need of such investigation provided
an inquest has been conducted in accordance with existing
Rules. In the absence or unavailability of an inquest
prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party
or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis
of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or
person.
o INQUEST. Summary proceeding by prosecutor to
determine WON there is probable cause to file an
information against the accused.
• Proper judicial authorities. This refers to the Supreme
Court and such inferior courts as may be established by law.
The phrase refers to the courts of justice or judges of said
courts vested with the judicial power to order the temporary
detention or confinement of a person charged with having
committed a public offense.
o A detained person should be released when a judge
is not available.
• Waiver of the provisions of Article 125. Before the filing of
the complaint or information, he may ask for a preliminary
investigation but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of
Article 125 of the RPC in the presence of his counsel.
o Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail
and the investigation must be terminated within 15
days from its inception.
CIRCUMSTANCES CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING
LIABILITY OF OFFICER
1. Means of communication
2. Hour of arrest
3. Other circumstances such as the time of surrender and the
material possibility for the fiscal to make the investigation and
file in time the necessary information.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
RIGHTS OF THE PERSON DETAINED
1. He shall be informed of the cause of his detention
2. He shall be allowed, upon his request, to communicate and
confer at anytime with his attorney.
• A public officer or employee is liable for preventing
the exercise of the right of attorneys to visit and
confer with persons arrested.
PURPOSE OF ARTICLE 125
This provision is intended to prevent any abuse resulting from
confining a person without informing him of his offense and without
permitting him to go on bail.
• As opposed to Article 124 where the detention is illegal from
the start, detention under this provision is legal in the
beginning but subsequently becomes illegal after the
expiration of the prescribed periods without the detained
prisoner having been delivered to the proper judicial authority.
• Note that the time for delivery of detained persons prescribed
in Article 125 does not apply to suspected terrorists who are
detained under RA 9372, in which case the detainee must be
delivered within 3 days from the time of detention.
ARTICLE 126
Delaying release
The penalties provided for in Article 124 shall be imposed upon any
public officer or employee who delays for the period of time specified
therein the performance of any judicial or executive order for the
release of a prisoner or detention prisoner, or unduly delays the service
of the notice of such order to said prisoner or the proceedings upon
any petition for the liberation of such person.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Delaying the performance of a judicial or executive order for
the release of a prisoner
2. Unduly delaying the service of the notice of such order to said
prisoner
3. Unduly delaying the proceedings upon any petition for the
liberation of such person.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. There is a judicial or executive order for the release or a
prisoner or detention prisoner, or that there is a proceeding
upon a petition for the liberation of such person.
3. Without good reason, the offender delays.
Wardens and jailers are the public officers most likely to violate Article 126.
Petition for liberation. This does not pertain to petition for bail, but
rather a petition for habeas corpus.
ARTICLE 127
Expulsion.
The penalty of prision correccional shall be imposed upon any public
officer or employee who, not being thereunto authorized by law, shall
EXPEL any person from the Philippine Islands or shall COMPEL
such person to change his residence.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Expelling a person from the PH
2. Compelling a person to change his residence
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He expels any person from the PH or compels him to change
his residence
3. The offender is not authorized to do so by law.
Only a court by final judgment can order a person to change his residence.
Section Two
Violation of domicile
Crimes known as violation of domicile
1. Entering a dwelling against the will of the owner or making
search without previous consent of the owner
2. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service
of those legally obtained
3. Searching domicile without witnesses
ARTICLE 128
Violation of domicile.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon any public officer or employee who, not being
authorized by judicial order, shall ENTER any dwelling against the will
8
CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
of the owner thereof, SEARCH papers or other effects found therein
without the previous consent of such owner, or having surreptitiously
entered said dwelling, and being required to leave the premises, shall
REFUSE to do so.
If the offense be committed in the night-time, or if any papers or
effects not constituting evidence of a crime be not returned
immediately after the search made by the offender, the penalty shall be
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the owner
2. Searching papers or other effects found therein without the
previous consent of such owner
3. Refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously
entered said dwelling and after having been required to leave
same.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the dwelling
and/or to make a search therein for papers or other effects
3. He does any of the acts enumerated above
Notes:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee. If the offender is
a private individual, trespass to dwelling is committed.
2. Authorized by judicial order. A public officer is authorized
by judicial order if he is armed with a judicial warrant duly
issued by the court.
• A peace officer without search warrant cannot
lawfully enter the dwelling against the will of the
owner, even if he knew that someone in the dwelling
is having unlawful possession of opium.
3. Entrance against the will of the owner. The crime is not
committed if the entrance is only without the consent of the
owner or if such owner consented. There must be opposition or
prohibition, whether express or implied.
4. Search without consent. When the detectives secured the
previous consent of the owner of the house to search without
a warrant, they are not liable. The owner who gives such
consent is precluded from later complaining thereof.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• Silence of the owner of the dwelling before and
during the search, without search warrant, by a
public officer, may show implied waiver.
• But the failure of the owner to object or resist did
not amount to an implied waiver when the people
making the search were armed and intimidated the
owner. Rojas v Spouses Matillano.
5. Search. In People v Ella, it was held that merely looking at what
was in the sala and the kitchen is not the search contemplated
in this article. But inspecting the jars and basket in the house
is deemed a violation of the domicile as held in US v Macaspac.
It means to go over or look through for the purpose of finding
something; to examine.
6. Papers and effects found therein. The papers and effects
must be found inside the dwelling. Article 128 is not
applicable when a public officer searched a person outside his
dwelling without a search warrant and such person is not
illegally arrested for an offense. In such case, the officer may
be liable for grave coercion if violence or intimidation is
used, or unjust vexation if there is no violence or
intimidation.
CIRCUMSTANCES QUALIFYING THE OFFENSE
1. If the offense is committed at nighttime
2. If any papers or effects not constituting evidence of a crime
are not returned immediately after the search made by the
offender.
ARTICLE 129
Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally
obtained.
In addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the commission
of any other offense, the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period
to prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding P1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any public officer or
employee who shall PROCURE a search warrant without just cause,
or, having legally procured the same, shall EXCEED his authority or
use UNNECESSARY SEVERITY in executing the same.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Procuring a search warrant without just cause.
2. Exceeding his authority or using unnecessary severity in
executing a search warrant legally procured.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
SEARCH WARRANT
It is an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the PH,
signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to
search for personal property described therein and bring it before the
court.
• Sec 3, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. A
It may be issued for the search and seizure of the following
personal property:
1. Subject of the offense
2. Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds or fruits of
the offense
3. Used or intended to be used as the means of
committing an offense.
• Sec 4, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. A
search warrant shall not issue except upon probable cause in
connection with one specific offense to be determined
personally by the judge after examination under oath or
examination of the complainant and the witnesses he may
produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched
and the things to seized which may be anywhere in the PH.
• Sec 5, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The judge must, before issuing the warrant, personally
examine in the form of searching questions and answers, in
writing and under oath, the complainant and the witnesses
he may produce on facts personally known to them and
attach to the record their sworn statements together with any
affidavits submitted.
• Sec 7, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The officer, if refused admittance to the place of directed
search after giving notice of his purpose and authority, may
break open any outer or inner door or window of a house
or any part of a house or anything therein to execute the
warrant or liberate himself or any person lawfully aiding him
when unlawfully detained therein.
• Sec 8, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. No
search of a house, room or any other premises shall be made
except in the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or any
member of his family or in the absence of the latter, in the
presence of 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion
residing in the same locality.
• Sec 10, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. A
search warrant shall be valid for 10 days from its date.
Thereafter, it shall be void.
9
CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
• Sec 11, Rule 126, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
The officer seizing property under the warrant must give a
detailed receipt for the same to the lawful occupant of the
premises in whose presence the search and seizure were made,
or in the absence of such occupant, must, in the presence of
at least 2 witnesses of sufficient age and discretion residing in
the same locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found
the seized property.
PROCURING WARRANT WITHOUT JUST CAUSE
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He procures a search warrant
3. There is no just cause
WITHOUT JUST CAUSE
• When without just cause. A search warrant is said to have
been procured without just cause when it appears on the face
of the affidavits filed in support of the application therefor, or
through other evidence, that the applicant have every reason
to believe that the search warrant sought for was unjustified.
o The true test of lack of just cause is whether the
affidavit filed in support of the application for search
warrant has been drawn in such a manner that
perjury can be charged thereon and affiant be held
liable for damages caused.
o The oath required must refer to the truth of the facts
within the personal knowledge of the applicant for
search warrant or his witnesses, and not to facts
“reported to me by person whom I consider to be
reliable.”
• Liability of public officer. The public officer procuring a
search warrant without a just cause may also be held liable for
perjury if they a willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood
in the affidavits fled in support of the application for search
warrant.
o Note that even if perjury is a necessary means for
committing the crime of search warrant maliciously
obtained, they cannot form a complex crime. They
are separate and distinct crimes, to be punished with
their respective penalties.
• Non-exclusionary rule. When papers or effects are obtained
during unreasonable searches and seizures, or under a search warrant
issued without probable cause and not in accordance with the
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
procedure prescribed, or in violation of the privacy of communication
and correspondence, the papers or effects thus obtained are not
admissible if presented as evidence.
• Valid warrantless search and seizure.
1. Search and seizure without warrant as an
incident to a lawful arrest is legal.
2. Search and seizure of vessels and aircraft for
violations of the customs law have been the
traditional exception to the constitutional
requirement of a search warrant, because the
vessel can be quickly moved out of the locality
or jurisdiction in which the search warrant must
be sought before such warrant could be secured.
3. Peace officers may enter the house of an
offender who committed an offense in their
presence, provided the unlawful conduct is such
as to affect the public peace.
EXCEEDING HIS AUTHORITY OR USING
UNNECESSARY SEVERITY
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has legally procured a search warrant
3. He exceeds his authority o uses unnecessary severity in
executing the same
Example, exceeding authority. The public officer had a search
warrant for opium but seized books, personal letters, and other
property having a remote or no connection with opium. Uy Kheytin, et
al. v. Villareal, et al
Example, using unnecessary severity. If in searching a house, the
public officer destroys furniture therein without any justification at all.
ARTICLE 130
Searching domicile without witnesses
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods shall
be imposed upon a PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE who, in
cases where a search is proper, shall search the domicile, papers or
other belongings of any person, in the absence of the latter, any member
of his family, or in their default, without the presence of two witnesses
residing in the same locality.
Elements
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He is armed with a search warrant legally procured
3. He searches the domicile, papers, or other belongings of any
person
4. The owner, or any member of his family, or 2 witnesses
residing in the same locality are not present
Notes:
1. Search. It means to go over or look through for the purpose
of finding something; to examine.
2. Proper search. A search is proper if, at the time of the search,
the public officer is armed with a search warrant legally
procured.
3. Search in the dwelling. The provision does not apply to
searches of vehicles or other means of transportation, because
the searches are not made in the dwelling. The papers or other
belongings must be in the dwelling of the owner at the time is
made.
Section Three
Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings
ARTICLE 131
Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon any public officer or employee who, without legal
ground, shall PROHIBIT or INTERRUPT the holding of a peaceful
meeting, or shall DISSOLVE the same.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon a public officer or employee
who shall HINDER any person from joining any lawful association or
from attending any of its meetings.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee
who shall PROHIBIT or HINDER any person from addressing,
either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities for
the correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Prohibiting or interrupting, without legal ground, the holding
of a peaceful meeting, or by dissolving the same.
2. Hindering any person from joining any lawful association or
from attending any of its meetings.
10
CRIMES AGAINST fundamental laws of the state
3. Prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either
alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities
for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He performs any of the acts enumerated above
Note:
1. Only a public officer or employee can commit this crime.
A private individual cannot commit this crime. If the offender
is a private individual, the crime is disturbance of public order
under Article 153.
o But note that the offender must be a stranger, and
not a participant, in the peaceful meeting.
2. To violate the 1st paragraph, the public officer must act
without legal ground and the meeting must be peaceful.
o When the meeting to be held is not peaceful, there is
legal ground for prohibiting it. Thus, the denial of
the permit of the Communist Party to hold a meeting
was justified considering that seditious speeches
were delivered in order to overthrow the
government. Evangelista v Earnshaw.
o There is no legal ground to prohibit the holding of a
meeting when the danger apprehended is not
imminent and the evil to be prevented is not a
serious one. Primicias v Fugoso.
3. Limitations on the fundamental rights. The exercise of the
rights to freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble and
petition the government for redress of grievances may be
regulated so that it shall not be injurious to the equal
enjoyment of others having equal rights nor injurious to the
community or society. The rights are subject to the State’s
exercise of police power, or the power to prescribe regulations
to promote the good order or safety and general welfare of the
people.
4. Meetings of municipal council not covered. Interrupting
and dissolving the meeting of municipal council by a public
officer is a crime against a legislative body, not punished under
Article 131.
Section Four.
Crimes against religious worship
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Crimes against religious worship
1. Interruption of religious worship
2. Offending the religious feelings
ARTICLE 132
Interruption of religious worship.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall PREVENT
or DISTURB the ceremonies or manifestations of any religion.
If the crime shall have been committed with violence or threats, the
penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. Religious ceremonies or manifestations of any religion are
about to take place or are going on
3. The offender prevents or disturbs the same
Violence and threats qualify the offense.
Notes:
1. Reading of bible and then attacking certain churches in a
public plaza is not a ceremony or manifestation of a religion,
but only a meeting of a religious sect. Hence, stopping such
meeting is a violation of Article 131, not Article 132.
2. But the reading of some verses of the Bible in a private house
by a group of people is a religious service. There is no
provision of law which requires religious service to be
conducted in approved orthodox style to merit protection
against interference and disturbance. Hull v State
ARTICLE 133
Offending the religious feelings.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon ANYONE
who, in a place devoted to religious worship or during the celebration
of any religious ceremony shall perform acts NOTORIOUSLY
OFFENSIVE to the feelings of the faithful.
Elements
1. The acts were performed:
a. In a place devoted to religious worship
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
b. During the celebration of any religious ceremony
2. The acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
faithful
Notes:
1. Place devoted to religious worship. It is not necessary that
there is a religious ceremony going on when the offender
performs acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the
faithful.
a. Note that the phrase during the celebration is separated
by the word or from the phrase place devoted to religious
worship. This indicates that the religious ceremony
need not be celebrated in a place of worship.
2. Religious ceremonies. These are the religious acts
performed outside of a church, such as processions and
special praters for burying dead persons.
3. Acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.
The acts must be directed against religious practice or dogma
or ritual for the purpose of ridicule, as mocking or scoffing at
or attempting to damage an object of religious veneration.
There must be deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the
faithful.
a. Throwing stone at the minister of the INC while he
was preaching before a crowd. People v Migallos
b. Remarks that those who believed that Christ is God
are anti-Christ, that all the members of the Roman
Catholic Church are marked by a demon, and that
the pope is the Commander of Satan. People v
Mandorio
4. Offense to the feelings is judged from the complainant’s point
of view.
• A catholic priest filed a complaint against 3 persons
for causing the funeral of a member of Church of
Christ, being held in accordance with the rights of
that sect, to pass through the churchyard fronting
the parish church, over the opposition of the catholic
priest.
• This was held to constitute the offense punished in
Article 133. Whether an act constitutes an offense to
the feelings of the Catholics should be viewed or
judged from the complainant’s POV and not from
that of the offender.
11
Crimes against public order ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Title Three: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC Used when the object of the
movement is to completely
Used in reference to a
movement which seeks merely
This always involves taking up
arms against the government.
Treason may be committed by
mere adherence to the enemy by
ORDER overthrow and supersede the to effect some change of minor giving him aid and comfort.
existing government importance, or to prevent the Giving moral aid or comfort is Giving moral aid or comfort is
Chapter One: REBELLION, SEDITION AND exercise of governmental NOT criminal in rebellion or criminal in treason.
authority with respect to insurrection.
DISLOYALTY particular matters or subjects.
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION WHEN CONSIDERED
ARTICLE 134
AS TERRORISM
Rebellion or insurrection; How committed.
Under RA 9372 or the Human Security Act of 2002, a person who
The crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising publicly
NATURE OF THE CRIME commits an act punishable as rebellion or insurrection, thereby sowing
and taking arms against the Government for the purpose of removing
and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and
from the allegiance to said Government or its laws, the territory of • The crime of rebellion or of inciting it is by nature a crime of
panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give
the Philippine Islands or any part thereof, of any body of land, naval or masses, of a multitude- it is a vast movement of men and a
in to unlawful demand, shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism.
other armed forces, depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature, complex net of intrigues and plots.
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives. (As amended • Terrorism is now the most severely punished crime: 40 years
• Rebellion evokes not merely a challenge to the constituted
by R.A. 6968). of imprisonment, without the benefit of parole.
authorities, but also civil war on a bigger or lesser scale.
• Prosecution under RA 9372 shall be a bar to another
• Actual clash of arms with the forces of the Government is not
Elements prosecution under the RPC or any Special Penal Laws.
necessary to convict the accused who is in conspiracy with
1. That there be a public uprising and taking arms against the others actually taking arms against the Government.
government CONSPIRACY. There is conspiracy when 2 or more persons come to
o It is enough that the accused knowingly identified
2. The purpose of the uprising or movement is either: an agreement concerning the commission of the crime and decide to
himself with the Huk organization that was openly
a. To remove from the allegiance to said Government commit it. The general rule is that conspiracy is not punished. In the
fighting to overthrow the Government. People v Cube
or its laws: following cases, conspiracy is punished:
o Those merely acting as couriers or spies for the
i. the territory of the Philippine Islands or a. Conspiracy to commit treason
rebels are also guilty of rebellion.
any part thereof, or b. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat
• It is not necessary that the purpose of the rebellion be c. Conspiracy to commit rebellion or insurrection
ii. any body of land, naval or armed forces accomplished. However, the purpose of the uprising must
b. To deprive the Chief Executive or the Legislature, d. Conspiracy to commit sedition
be shown. Note that the conspirators should not actually commit the crime. If they commit
wholly or partially, of any of their powers or o It is not necessary for the rebels to succeed in
prerogatives the crime, they will be held liable for the commission of the crime and the conspiracy
overthrowing the government. they had before committing the crime is only a manner of incurring criminal liability.
o Rising publicly and taking arms against the It is not a separate offense.
Example: Government is the normative element of the
People v Almazan offense, while the intent or purpose to overthrow is
400 Sakdals fought the Constabulary Soldiers and thereafter took ARTICLE 134-A
the subjective element. Coup d'etat; How committed.
possession of the municipal building and proclaimed independence of
the PH Republic. The elements of rebellion are present. The crime of coup d'etat is a swift attack accompanied by violence,
Discussion: Purpose need not be achieved as long as there was public intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth, directed against duly
• There is public uprising and taking arms against the uprising and taking of arms.
government when the men fought the Constabulary soldiers. constituted AUTHORITIES of the Republic of the Philippines, or
any MILITARY CAMP OR INSTALLATION,
• By proclaiming the independence, they removed the locality REBELLION VS TREASON COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK, PUBLIC UTILITIES or
under their control from allegiance to the Government or its REBELLION TREASON OTHER FACILITIES NEEDED FOR THE EXERCISE AND
laws. Levying of war against the Levying of war against the CONTINUED POSSESSION OF POWER, singly or
Government during peace time Government to aid the enemy. simultaneously carried out anywhere in the Philippines by any person
REBELLION V INSURRECTION for the purposes enumerated in or persons, belonging to the military or police or holding any public
REBELLION INSURRECTION Article 134. office or employment with or without civilian support or participation

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 12

Crimes against public order
for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power. (As amended
by R.A. 6968).
Elements
1. That the offender is a person or persons belonging to the
military or police or holding any public office of employment
2. That it is committed by means of a swift attack accompanied
by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
3. That the attack is directed against duly constituted authorities
of the Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or
installation, communications network, public utilities or other
facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of
power
4. That the purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish state
power.
Note:
1. The crime of coup d’etat may be committed with or without
civilian participation.
2. Under RA 9372 or the Human Security Act of 2002, a
person who commits an act punishable as coup d’etat, thereby
sowing and creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to
coerce the government to give in to unlawful demand, shall
be guilty of the crime of terrorism.
3. See Oakwood Mutiny by Trillanes and friends for example of
a coup.
ARTICLE 135
Penalty for rebellion, insurrection or coup d'etat
• Any person who PROMOTES, MAINTAINS, or HEADS
rebellion or insurrection shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua.
• Any person merely participating or executing the commands
of others in a rebellion shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
temporal.
• Any person who LEADS or in any manner DIRECTS or
COMMANDS others to undertake a coup d'etat shall suffer
the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
• Any person in the government service who participates, or
executes directions or commands of others in undertaking a
coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
maximum period.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• Any person not in the government service who participates,
or in any manner supports, finances, abets or aids in
undertaking a coup d'etat shall suffer the penalty of reclusion
temporal in its maximum period.
• When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat shall be under
the command of unknown leaders, any person who in fact
directed the others, spoke for them, signed receipts and
other documents issued in their name, or performed similar
acts, on behalf of the rebels shall be deemed a leader of such
a rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat. (As amended by R.A.
6968, approved on October 24, 1990).
PERSONS LIABLE
1. The leaders
a. Any person who promotes, maintains or heads a
rebellion or insurrection
b. Any person who leads, directs, or commands others
to undertake a coup.
Note: When the rebellion, insurrection, or coup
d'etat shall be under the command of unknown
leaders, any person who in fact directed the others,
spoke for them, signed receipts and other documents
issued in their name, as performed similar acts, on
behalf or the rebels shall be deemed a leader of such
a rebellion, insurrection, or coup d'etat.
2. The participants
a. Any person who participates or executes the
commands of others in rebellion or insurrection
b. Any person in the government service who
participates or executes the commands of others in a
coup
c. Any person not in the government service who
participates, supports, finances, abets, or aids in
undertaking a coup.
Notes:
1. Public officer must take active part to be liable. Mere
silence or omission is not punishable in rebellion.
• The municipal president of Agusan knew that there
were insurgents in Manila. His position requires him
to report said fact to the senior officer of the
province, but he did not do so, nor did he take steps
to pursue or denounce the insurgents or to protect
the people from their probable depredations.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
However reproachful the silence may be, it cannot in
itself constitute the crime of insurrection. US v
Ravidas
2. It is not a defense in rebellion that the accused never took the
oath of allegiance to, or that they never recognized the
government.
• Such a defense would be nothing less than a negation
of the right of the Government to maintain its
existence and authority against a certain class of the
population. US v del Rosario
3. There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder and other
common crimes because Article 48 requires the commission
of at least 2 crimes and rebellion (and the consequent acts)
constitute only one single crime.
People v Hernandez
One of the means by which rebellion may be committed is by
engaging in war against the forces of the government and
committing serious violence. These expressions imply
everything that was connotes:
• Resort to arms
• Requisition of property and services
• Collection of taxes and contributions
• Restraint of liberty
• Damage of property
• Physical injuries
• Loss of life
DOCTRINE: Therefore, the commission of common
crimes are part and parcel of rebellion itself and cannot
be considered as giving rise to separate crimes that may
be complexed with rebellion.
Enrile v Salazar
In this case, an issue was raised as to WON the ruling in
Hernandez above is applicable to all offenses committed in
the course of rebellion, whether or not necessary to its
commission or in furtherance thereof.
• The SC held that the ruling in Hernandez that
rebellion cannot be complexed with other common
crimes should not be limited to crimes committed as
a necessary means to the commission of rebellion.
13
Crimes against public order
• DOCTRINE: It should be interpreted as
prohibiting the complexing of rebellion with
other offense committed on the occasion
thereof, either as a means to its commission or
as an unintended effect of an activity that
constitutes rebellion.
4. Acts committed in furtherance of rebellion are absorbed in
one single act of rebellion.
5. Membership in a rebel organization, by itself, does not
automatically qualify the criminal acts as absorbed in the crime
of rebellion which carries a lighter penalty under the law. The
accused has the burden of proving that his acts were
committed in furtherance of rebellion. People v Lovedioro
6. POLITICAL OFFENSE DOCTRINE: Common crimes
perpetrated in furtherance of a political offense are divested
of their character as common crimes and assume the political
complexion of the main crime of which they are mere
ingredients, and, consequently, cannot be punished separately
from the principal offense, or complexed with the same.
• Thus, when the killings are politically motivated, the
crime is not murder or homicide but rebellion.
• But killing, robbing, and other crimes for private
purposes or for profit, without any political
motivation, would be separately punished and
would not be absorbed in the rebellion.
• POLITICAL CRIMES are those directly aimed
against the political order.
Discussion: Absorption is not automatic. Accused must
show that the crime was committed in pursuance of
insurrection/rebellion.
Discussion: What the government does instead is to file
multiple common crimes instead of a single crime of rebellion
wherein such common crimes will be absorbed.
ARTICLE 136
Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d'etat, rebellion or insurrection
The CONSPIRACY and PROPOSAL to commit coup d'etat shall
be punished by prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine which
shall not exceed eight thousand pesos (P8,000.00).
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
The CONSPIRACY and PROPOSAL to commit rebellion or
insurrection shall be punished respectively, by prision correccional in
its maximum period and a fine which shall not exceed five thousand
pesos (P5,000.00) and by prision correccional in its medium period and
a fine not exceeding two thousand pesos (P2,000.00). (As amended by
R.A. 6968, approved October 24, 1990).
CRIMES DEFINED AND PENALIZED
1. Conspiracy to commit rebellion
2. Proposal to commit rebellion
3. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat
4. Proposal to commit coup d’etat
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT A FELONY
There is conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement
to commit a crime and decide to commit it.
PROPOSAL TO COMMIT A FELONY
When a person decides to commit a felony and proposes its execution
to some other person or persons.
Notes:
1. Merely agreeing and deciding to rise publicly and take arms
against the Government for the purposes of rebellion or merely
proposing the commission of said acts is already subject to
punishment.
a. Organizing a group of soldiers, soliciting membership in,
and soliciting funds from the people for, the
organization, show conspiracy to overthrow the
government. US v Vergara
2. When there is no agreement and no decision to commit
rebellion, there is no conspiracy. In the following cases, there
is no conspiracy:
a. The fact that some of the accused had made and
designed flags for the Sakdalista Party does not
necessarily show that they did it with the intention of
joining an uprising against the constituted government.
People v Bautista
b. The mere fact of giving and rendering speeches favoring
Communism would not make the accused guilty of
conspiracy, because there was no evidence that the
hearers of his speeches of propaganda then and there
agreed to rise up in arms for the purpose of obtaining
the overthrow of the democratic government as
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
envisaged by the principles of Communism. People v
Hernandez
ARTICLE 137
Disloyalty of public officers or employees.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon PUBLIC OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES who have
failed to resist a rebellion by all the means in their power, or shall
continue to discharge the duties of their offices under the control of
the rebels or shall accept appointment to office under them.
(Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
Notes:
• The offender must be a public officer or employee
• Acts of disloyalty which are punished:
1. By failing to resist a rebellion by all the means in their
power
2. Continuing to discharge the duties of their offices
under the control of the rebels
3. By accepting appointment to office under them
• The crime of disloyalty of public officers presupposes the
existence of rebellion by other persons
• The offender under Article 137 must not be in conspiracy with
the rebels. Otherwise, he will be guilty of rebellion, not merely
disloyalty, because in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of
all.
ARTICLE 138
Inciting a rebellion or insurrection.
The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed
upon any person who, without taking arms or being in open hostility
against the Government, shall incite others to the execution of any of
the acts specified in article 134 of this Code, by means of speeches,
proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other
representations tending to the same end. (Reinstated by E.O. No.
187).
Elements
1. That the offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility
against the Government
2. That he incites others to the execution of any of the acts of
rebellion
14
Crimes against public order
3. That the inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending
to the same end
INCITING TO REBELLION V PROPOSAL
INCITING PROPOSAL
In both crimes, the offender induces another to commit rebellion.
It is not required that the Person who proposes has
offender has decided to commit decided to commit rebellion
rebellion
The act of inciting is done The person who proposes the
publicly execution of the crime uses
secret means
In both proposal and inciting to commit rebellion, the crime of
rebellion should not be actually committed by the persons to
whom it is proposed or who are incited. Otherwise, the proponent
or the one inciting becomes a principal inducement in the crime of
rebellion.
ARTICLE 139
Sedition; How committed
The crime of sedition is committed by persons who RISE publicly and
tumultuously in order to ATTAIN by force, intimidation, or by
other means outside of legal methods, any of the following objects:
1. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election;
2. To prevent the National Government, or any provincial or
municipal government or any public officer thereof from
freely exercising its or his functions, or prevent the execution
of any administrative order;
3. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or
property of any public officer or employee;
4. To commit, for any political or social end, any act of hate or
revenge against private persons or any social class; and
5. To despoil, for any political or social end, any person,
municipality or province, or the National Government (or the
Government of the United States), of all its property or any
part thereof.
Elements
1. That the offenders rise publicly and tumultuously
2. That they employ force, intimidation, or other means
outside of legal methods
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
3. That the offenders employ any of those means 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 thereof from freely exercising its or his
functions, or prevent the execution of any
administrative order;
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 class; and
e. To despoil, for any political or social end, any
person, municipality or province, or the National
Government (or the Government of the United
States), of all its property or any part thereof.
SEDITION
• In its general sense, it is the raising of commotions or
disturbances in the State
• The ultimate object of sedition is a violation of the public
peace or at least such a course of measures as evidently
engenders it.
• Sedition cannot be committed by one person. The law says
that it has to be committed by persons who rise publicly and
tumultuously.
o The disturbance is deemed TUMULTUOUS if
caused by more than 3 persons who are armed or
provided with means of violence.
• The public uprising and the object of sedition must concur.
o There is no sedition in the absence of any of the
elements.
• Common crimes are not absorbed in sedition.
o In People v Umali, it was held that the crimes
committed were those of sedition, multiple murder,
arson, frustrated murder and physical injuries.
o In the case of People v Cabrera, the Constabulary men
who, to inflict an act of revenge upon the policeman,
murdered 6 policemen and 2 private citizens and
1seriously wounded 3 civilians were found guilty of
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
the separate crimes of sedition in one case, and
multiple murder with grave injuries in the other case.
REBELLION V SEDITION
REBELLION SEDITION
In both rebellion and sedition, there must be public uprising
There must be taking up of arms In sedition, it is sufficient that
against the Government the public uprising is tumultuous
Purpose is always political Purpose is political or social
What distinguishes sedition from rebellion is not the extent of the territory covered by
the uprising but rather the object at which the uprising aims.
TREASON V SEDITION
TREASON SEDITION
In its more general sense, it is the In its general sense, it is the
violation by a subject of his raising of commotions or
allegiance to his sovereign or disturbances in the State.
liege, lord, or to the supreme
authority of the State.
ARTICLE 140
Penalty for sedition
The LEADER of a sedition shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor in
its minimum period and a fine not exceeding 10,000 pesos.
Other PERSONS PARTICIPATING therein shall suffer the penalty
of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine not exceeding
5,000 pesos. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
PERSONS LIABLE FOR SEDITION
1. Leader of the sedition
2. Other persons participating in the sedition
ARTICLE 141
Conspiracy to commit sedition.
Persons conspiring to commit the crime of sedition shall be punished
by prision correccional in its medium period and a fine not exceeding
2,000 pesos. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
15
Crimes against public order
• There must be an agreement and a decision to rise
publicly and tumultuously to attain any of the objects of
sedition
o Thus, an agreement and a decision to attain an object
of sedition without any agreement to rise publicly
and tumultuously is not conspiracy to commit
sedition.
• Note that there is no crime of proposal to commit
sedition. The provision punishes only conspiracy to commit
sedition
Note: No such thing as proposal to commit sedition. It is not punished.
ARTICLE 142
Inciting to sedition.
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine
not exceeding 2,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who,
without taking any direct part in the crime of sedition, should INCITE
others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute
sedition, by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems,
cartoons, banners, or other representations tending to the same end,
or upon any person or persons who shall UTTER seditious words or
speeches, WRITE, PUBLISH, OR CIRCULATE scurrilous libels
against the (Government of the United States or the Government of
the Commonwealth of the Philippines) or any of the duly constituted
authorities thereof, or which tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful
officer in executing the functions of his office, or which tend to
instigate others to cabal and meet together for unlawful purposes, or
which suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots, or which lead
or tend to stir up the people against the lawful authorities or to disturb
the peace of the community, the safety and order of the Government,
or who shall knowingly CONCEAL such evil practices. (Reinstated by
E.O. No. 187).
DIFFERENT ACTS OF INCITING TO SEDITION
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which
constitute sedition by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other
representations.
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb
public peace.
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the
government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof,
which tend to disturb public peace.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
4. Knowingly concealing such evil practices
Note that under numbers 2 and 3, the purposes of sedition are not necessary to
constitute a violation of Article 142. It is enough that the words uttered, or speeches
delivered, or scurrilous libels published have the tendency to disturb any lawful officer
in executing the functions of the office, etc.
Note: Disturbance or disorder is not necessary in inciting to sedition.
The law is not aimed merely at actual disturbance, as its purpose is also
to punish utterances which may endanger public order.
• Legislature has the authority to forbid the advocacy of a
doctrine designed and intended to overthrow the government
without waiting until there is a present and immediate danger
of the success of the plan advocated.
#1. INCITING TO SEDITION TO ACCOMPLISH ANY OF
ITS OBJECTS
Elements
1. The 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. The inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations
tending to the same end.
Note: It is not inciting to sedition under the first way if it is not proved
that the defendant incited the people to rise publicly and tumultuously
in order to attain any of the ends mentioned in Article 139.
• Example: Proposal to throw hand grenades in a public place,
intended to cause commotion and disturbance, as an act of
hate and revenge against the police force, is inciting to sedition
o It cannot be sedition because it was not shown that
the people actually rose publicly and tumultuously
o It cannot be proposal to commit sedition because it
was not shown that the offender decided to commit
sedition at the time he proposed to do the act.
#2 & #3. UTTERING SEDITIOUS WORDS OR SPEECHES
AND WRITING, PUBLISHING OR CIRCULATING
SCURRILOUS LIBELS
These acts are punishable when:
1. They tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in
executing the functions of his office
2. They tend to instigate others to cabal and meet together for
unlawful purposes
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
3. They suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots
4. They lead or tend to stir up the people against the lawful
authorities or to disturb the peace of the community, the
safety and order of the Government.
Note: It is not necessary, in order for the word or speech to be
seditious, that the words used should in fact result in a rising of the
people against the constituted authorities.
• The law is not aimed merely at actual disturbance, as its
purpose is also to punish utterances which may endanger
public order.
SCURRILOUS. This means, low, vulgar, mean, or foul.
Example: The accused had his picture taken, making it appear that he
was hanging lifeless at the end of a piece of rope suspended from a tree.
Copies of the photo were sent to newspapers, with a suicide not
addressed to the accused’s wife. The note contained words that he
committed suicide because he was not pleased with the administration
of President Roxas and he instructed his children to burn pictures of
Roxas if and when they come across them.
• Held: The letter is a scurrilous libel against the government.
• DOCTRINE: Writings which tend to overthrow or
undermine the security of the government or weaken the
confidence of the people in the government are against
public peace, and are criminal not only because they
tend to incite to a breach of peace but because they are
conducive to the destruction of the government itself.
#4. KNOWINGLY CONCEALING SUCH EVIL PRACTICES
• This is one of the ways of violating Article 142.
• Knowingly concealing such evil practices is ordinarily an
act of an accessory, but under this provision, the act is
treated and punished as that of a principal.
TWO RULES RELATIVE TO SEDITIOUS WORDS
1. CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER RULE
The words must be of such a nature that by uttering them
there is a danger of public uprising and that such danger
should be both clear and imminent.
• Clear. 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 a probability of injury to the State.
16
Crimes against public order ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

• Present. This refers to the time element. The
danger must not only be probable but very likely
inevitable.
2. DANGEROUS TENDENCY RULE
The words uttered must tend to create a danger of public
uprising.
• The words uttered could easily produce
dissatisfaction 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.
UNLAWFUL RUMOR-MONGERING AND SPREADING
FALSE INFORMATION
This is committed by any person who shall offer, publish, distribute,
circulate and spread rumors, false news and information and gossip, or
cause the publication, distribution, circulation, or spreading of the same,
which cause or tend to cause panic, divisive effects among the people,
discredit of or distrust for the duly constituted authorities, undermine
the stability of the Government and the objectives of the new society,
endanger public order or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State.
Chapter Two: CRIMES AGAINST POPULAR
REPRESENTATION
1. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of the National Assembly
and similar bodies
2. Disturbance of proceedings
3. Violation on parliamentary immunity
Note that the offender in all these crimes is ANY PERSON, with the sole
exception of the second offense in Article 145, which is search and arrest of a member
of a Congress.
Section One
Crimes against legislative bodies and similar bodies
ARTICLE 143
Act tending to prevent the meeting of the Assembly and similar bodies.
The penalty of prision correccional or a fine ranging from 200 to 2,000
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who, by FORCE
or FRAUD, prevents the meeting of the National Assembly
(Congress of the Philippines) or of any of its committees or
subcommittees, constitutional commissions or committees or
divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or municipal
council or board. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
Elements
1. There is a projected or actual meeting of the National
Assembly or any of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional committees or divisions thereof, or of any
provincial board or city or municipal council or board
2. The offender, who is any person, PREVENTS such meeting
by force or fraud.
ARTICLE 144
Disturbance of proceedings
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who DISTURBS the meetings of the
National Assembly (Congress of the Philippines) or of any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional commissions or
committees or divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or
municipal council or board, or in the presence of any such bodies
should behave in such manner as to INTERRUPT its proceedings or
to IMPAIR the respect due it. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
Elements
1. There is a meeting of the National Assembly or any of its
committees or subcommittees, constitutional committees or
divisions thereof, or of any provincial board or city or
municipal council or board
2. The offender does any of the following acts:
a. He disturbs any of such meetings
b. He behaves, while in the presence of any such
bodies, in such a manner as to interrupt its
proceedings or to impair the respect due it.
Notes:
1. It must be a meeting of a legislative body or of a provincial
board or city or municipal council or board which is disturbed
• Example: A meeting of municipal officials attended
by the chief of police wherein the latter kept on
talking although he had been asked by the mayor to
sit down and there ensued a heated exchange of
words, said chief of police was held to be not guilty
of violating Article 144 but only of unjust vexation
because the meeting was not a meeting of a
municipal council. The chief -of police attended such
meeting while not being a member of the council.
2. The complaint for disturbance of proceedings may be filed by
a member of a legislative body.
3. The one who disturbs the proceedings of the National
Assembly may also be punished for contempt by the
Assembly.
Section Two
Violation of parliamentary immunity
ARTICLE 145
Violation of parliamentary immunity
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall use FORCE, INTIMIDATION, THREATS, or FRAUD to
prevent any member of the National Assembly (Congress of the
Philippines) from attending the meetings of the Assembly (Congress)
or of any of its committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, from expressing his
opinions or casting his vote; and the penalty of prision correccional
shall be imposed upon any public officer or employee who shall,
while the Assembly (Congress) is in regular or special session, arrest or
search any member thereof, except in case such member has
committed a crime punishable under this Code by a penalty higher than
prision mayor.
ACTS PUNISHED BY THE PROVISION AND THEIR
ELEMENTS
Using FORCE, INTIMIDATION, THREATS, or FRAUD to
prevent any member of the National Assembly (Congress of the
Philippines) from attending the meetings of the Assembly (Congress)
or of any of its committees or subcommittees, constitutional
commissions or committees or divisions thereof, from expressing his
opinions or casting his vote.
Elements
1. Offender uses force, intimidation, threats or fraud
2. The purpose of the offender is to prevent any member of the
National Assembly from:
a. Attending the meetings
b. Expressing his opinions
c. Casting his vote

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 17

Crimes against public order
Notes:
It is not necessary that the member of the Assembly is actually
prevented from attending the meeting. It is sufficient that the offender
has the purpose of doing the actions enumerated above.
Arresting or searching any member thereof while the National
Assembly is in regular or special session, except in case such member
has committed a crime punishable under the Code by a penalty higher
than prision mayor.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He arrests or searches any member of the National Assembly
3. The Assembly, at the time of arrest or search, is in regular or
special session
4. The member arrested or searched has not committed a crime
punishable under the Code by a penalty higher than prision
mayor.
Notes:
1. Parliamentary immunity guarantees the legislator complete
freedom of expression without fear of being made responsible
in criminal or civil actions before the courts or any other
forum OUTSIDE of the Congressional Hall.
• But it does not protect him from responsibility
before the legislative body itself whenever his words
and conduct are considered by the latter disorderly
or unbecoming of a member thereof.
• Such member may be censured, committed to
prison, suspended, or even expelled by vote.
2. To be consistent with the Constitution, the phrase “by a
penalty higher than prsion mayor” should be amended to read:
“by the penalty of prision mayor or higher.”
Chapter Three: ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES AND
ASSOCIATIONS
ARTICLE 146
Illegal assemblies.
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision
mayor in its medium period shall be imposed upon the
ORGANIZERS or LEADERS of any meeting attended by armed
persons for the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
under this Code, or of any meeting in which the audience is incited
to the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition or assault upon a person in authority or his agents. Persons
merely present at such meeting shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor,
unless they are armed, in which case the penalty shall be prision
correccional.
If any person present at the meeting carries an unlicensed firearm, it
shall be presumed that the purpose of said meeting, insofar as he is
concerned, is to commit acts punishable under this Code, and he
shall be considered a LEADER OR ORGANIZER of the meeting
within the purview of the preceding paragraph.
As used in this article, the word "meeting" shall be understood to
include a gathering or group, whether in a fixed place or moving.
(Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES
Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of
committing any of the crimes punishable under the Code.
Elements
1. That there is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
whether in a fixed place or moving
2. The meeting is attended by armed persons
3. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the crimes
punishable under the code
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 a person in authority or his
agents.
Elements
1. That there is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons,
whether in a fixed place or moving
2. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the
commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition or direct assault.
Notes:
1. A MEETING is a gathering or group, whether in a fixed
place or moving.
2. Armed persons. That the audience is armed is required only
in the first form of illegal assembly. Hence, if unarmed persons
gather together in a meeting for the purpose of committing
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
theft, illegal assembly is not committed. At most, there is
conspiracy to commit theft, which is not punishable.
• Note that not all the persons present at the meeting
of the first form of illegal assembly must be armed.
• But even an unarmed person merely present at the
meeting of the first form of illegal assembly is also
liable, but with lesser penalty.
3. Audience must be incited in the second form. That the
audience is actually incited to the commission of any of the
crimes of sedition, rebellion, etc. seems to be a necessary
element.
• If in a meeting the audience is incited to the
commission of rebellion or sedition, the crimes
committed are:
a. Illegal assembly as regards the organizers or
leaders and persons merely present, AND
b. Inciting to rebellion or sedition insofar as the
one inciting them is concerned.
4. Persons present must have a common intent to commit
the felony of illegal assembly. The absence of such intent
may exempt the person present from criminal liability. Thus,
a person who happens to be present out of curiosity is not
liable for illegal assembly.
5. Penalties:
a. leader or organizer- prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period
b. armed attendee- prision correccional.
c. unarmed attendee- arresto mayor
ARTICLE 147
Illegal associations.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon the
FOUNDERS, DIRECTORS, and PRESIDENTS of associations
totally or partially organized for the purpose of committing any of the
crimes punishable under this Code or for some purpose contrary
to public morals. Mere members of said associations shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor. (Reinstated by E.O. No. 187).
ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS
1. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose of
committing any of the crimes punishable under the RPC.
18
Crimes against public order ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

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
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY V ILLEGAL ASSOCIATION
ILLEGAL ASSEMBLY ILLEGAL ASSOCIATION
Actual meeting or assembly is Not necessary that there be an
necessary actual meeting
It is the meeting and attendance It is the act of forming or
at such meeting that are organizing and membership in
punished the association that are punished
Persons liable are the organizers Persons liable are the founders,
and leader and the persons directors and president, and the
present members
Chapter Four: ASSAULT UPON, AND
RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO,
PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND THEIR
AGENTS
ARTICLE 148
Direct assaults.
Any person or persons who, without a public uprising, shall employ
FORCE or INTIMIDATION for the attainment of any of the
purpose enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition, or
SHALL ATTACK, EMPLOY FORCE, or SERIOUSLY
INTIMIDATE or RESIST any person in authority or any of his
agents, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on
occasion of such performance, shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine not
exceeding P1,000 pesos, when the assault is committed with a weapon
or when the offender is a public officer or employee, or when the
offender lays hands upon a person in authority. If none of these
circumstances be present, the penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine not exceeding P500 pesos shall be imposed.
WAYS OF COMMITTING DIRECT ASSAULT
Without a public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for
the attainment of any of the purpose enumerated in defining the
crimes of rebellion and sedition.
Elements
1. Offender employs force or intimidation
2. The aim of the offender is to attain any of the purposes of the
crime of REBELLION or any of the objects in the crime of
SEDITION
3. There is no public uprising
Note: It is not necessary under the first form of direct assault that the
offended party be a person in authority or his agent. It may be a private
individual or a person belonging to a social class.
US v Dirain
The chief of police compelled the municipal president by force to go to
the municipal building because their salaries had been in arrears for
some time. This is direct assault of the first kind. There is no public
uprising, there is force, and the use of the force was to inflict an act of
hate or revenge upon a public officer (which is an object of sedition).
Without a public uprising, by attacking, by employing force, or
by seriously intimidating or 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
1. The offender makes an attack, employs force, makes a serious
intimidation, or makes a serious resistance
2. The person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent.
3. 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.
4. The offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a person
in authority or his agent in the exercise of his duties.
5. There is no public uprising.
Notes:
1. Attack. This includes any offensive or antagonistic movement
or action of any kind.
2. Force. The force employed must be of a serious character as
to indicate determination to defy the law and its representative
at all hazards if the offended party is only an agent of a person
in authority. But the force employed need not be serious
when the offended party is a person in authority,
3. Intimidation or resistance. The intimidation or resistance
must be serious whether the offended party is an agent only
or he is a person in authority. Hence, the resistance must be
active.
• Intimidating by pointing a gun is serious
intimidation. But threatening to give a fist blow is
not serious intimidation.
4. Person in authority or his agent. Not every public officer is
at the same time a person in authority or an agent of authority.
• A PERSON IN AUTHORITY is any person
directly vested with jurisdiction. That is, he has the
power and authority to govern and execute the laws.
(barangay captain and barangay chairman,
postmaster general, president of sanitary division)
Note that the powers and duties vested in him by law should
be determined.
• An AGENT OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY
is one who, by direct provision of law or by
election or by appointment by competent
authority, is charged with the maintenance of public
order and the protection and security of life and
property, and any person who comes to the aid of
persons in authority. (policeman, municipal
treasurer, postmaster, rural policeman, sheriff,
agents of BIR, Malacanang confidential agent,
barangay tanod)
Note that the functions of the person in authority or
his agent must be clearly shown in the information.
• The status as person in authority, being a matter of
law, ignorance thereof is no excuse.
5. Performance of duty or by reason thereof. The
performance of the official duty of the fiscal includes his
travelling to the place where he was going to conduct an
investigation of a certain treason case.
• But when the persons in authority or their agents
descended to matters which are private in nature, an
attack made by one against the other is not direct
assault.
• Even when the person in authority or his agent
agrees to fight, the attack would still constitute direct
assault because the character of a person in authority
or his agent is not assumed or laid off at will, but
attaches to him until he ceases to be in office.
• The scope of the respective powers of public officers
and their agents is fixed. If they go beyond it and they

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 19

Crimes against public order
violate any recognized rights of the citizens, the latter
may resist the invasion, especially when it is clear and
manifest. The resistance must be coextensive with
the excess and should not be greater than what is
necessary to repel the aggression.
• When the person in authority or his agent makes
unnecessary use of force or violence to make him
respected, he goes beyond the limits of his powers
and from that moment, acts as a private person.
• There can be no assault upon or disobedience to one
authority to another when they both contend in the
exercise of their respective duties.
6. On occasion of such performance. This means that the
impelling motive of the attack is the performance of duty.
There can be direct assault even if at the very time of the
assault no official duty was being performed if the reason is
because of past performance of official duty.
7. Information must allege knowledge of the accused of the
position of authority held by the person attacked. The
reason is because in direct assault, the offender must have the
intention to offend, injure, or assault the offended party as a
person in authority or agent of authority.
8. Disregard of respect due to offended party on account of rank
is inherent in direct assault. Hence, the circumstance can no
longer be considered as aggravating.
9. When motive is material. Evidence of motive of the
offender is important when the person in authority or his
agent who is attacked or seriously intimidated is not in the
actual performance of his official duty. But when a person in
authority or his agent is in the actually in the performance of
his official duty, the motive of the offender is immaterial.
10. The crime of serious physical injury is absorbed in direct
assault. It is the necessary consequence of the force or
violence inherent in all kinds of assault.
11. Qualifying circumstances. The assault is qualified when:
a. The assault is committed with a weapon
b. The offender is a public officer or employee
c. The offender lays hands upon a person in
authority.
Discussion: If retired can no longer fall in this article. If he is retired
already, then he was no longer a person in authority at the time of
assault. But he can file such case (assuming it has not prescribed) even
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
after he has retired as long as he was assaulted at the time when he was
still a person in oublic authority.
ARTICLE 149
Indirect assaults.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding P500 pesos shall be imposed upon any person
who shall make use of force or intimidation upon any person coming
to the aid of the authorities or their agents on occasion of the
commission of any of the crimes defined in the next preceding
article.
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:
1. Indirect assault can be committed only when direct
assault is also committed. The law provides: on occasion of the
commission of any of the crimes defined in the next preceding article.
2. The offended party in indirect assaults may be a private
person. The law provides: upon any person coming to the aid of the
authorities or their agents.
• A private person who comes to the rescue of an
authority or his agent enjoys the privileges of the
latter, and any person who uses force or intimidation
upon such person under the circumstances is guilty
of indirect assault.
ARTICLE 150
Disobedience to summons issued by the National Assembly, its committees or
subcommittees, by the Constitutional Commissions, its committees, subcommittees
or divisions.
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from two hundred to one
thousand pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment shall be imposed
upon any person who, having been duly summoned to attend as a
witness before the National Assembly, (Congress), its special or
standing committees and subcommittees, the Constitutional
Commissions and its committees, subcommittees, or divisions, or
before any commission or committee chairman or member authorized
to summon witnesses, REFUSES, without legal excuse, to obey such
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
summons, or being present before any such legislative or constitutional
body or official, REFUSES to be sworn or placed under affirmation
or to answer any legal inquiry or to produce any books, papers,
documents, or records in his possession, when required by them to do
so in the exercise of their functions. The same penalty shall be imposed
upon any person who shall RESTRAIN another from attending as a
witness, or who shall INDUCE DISOBEDIENCE to a summon or
refusal to be sworn by any such body or official.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Refusing, without legal excuse, to obey summons of the
Congress, its special or standing committees and
subcommittees, the Constitutional Commissions and its
committees, subcommittees or divisions, or by any
commission or committee chairman or member authorized to
summon witnesses.
2. Refusing to be sworn or placed under affirmation while being
before such legislative or constitutional body or official
3. Refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to produce any books,
papers, documents or records in his possession, when
required by them to do so in the exercise of their functions
4. Restraining another from attending as a witness in such
legislative or constitutional body
5. Inducing disobedience to a summons or refusal to be sworn
by any such body or official
Notes:
1. Without legal excuse. This phrase means that only
disobedience without legal excuse is punishable. Hence,
Article 150 may not apply when the papers or documents may
be used in evidence against the owner thereof, because it
would be equivalent to compelling him to be witness against
himself. Uy Khaytin v Villareal
2. In the exercise of their functions. The testimony of the
persons summoned must be upon matters into which the
legislature has jurisdiction to inquire. When the purpose of
investigation is to pass a legislative measure, such investigation
comes under the province of the committee of the House or
Senate.
• But note that it is not a requisite that a bill or law
must come out as a result of the investigation.
3. Any of the acts punished under this article may also
constitute contempt of the National Assembly. The power
of inquiry- with the process to enforce it- is an essential and
20
Crimes against public order
appropriate auxiliary to the legislative functions. Experience
has shown that mere requests for certain information are often
unavailing and also that information which is volunteered is
not always accurate or complete; so some means of
compulsion is essential to obtain what is needed. Arnault v
Nazareno
4. The court may take any action not amounting to a release
of a prisoner of the National Assembly. The fact that a
person is a prisoner of the Senate does not exclude other
departments during his incarceration from trying or
investigating him in matters pertaining to their spheres, in
much the same way that a prisoner by judgment of a court of
justice is not placed beyond the reach of the legislature and the
executive to summon for examination and to allow in relation
to the investigation to go anywhere under guard to get such
evidence as the investigator or the prisoner may deem
important. Arnault v Pecson
ARTICLE 151
Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or the agents of such person.
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who not being included in the provisions of
the preceding articles shall RESIST or SERIOUSLY DISOBEY any
person in authority, or the agents of such person, while engaged in
the performance of official duties.
When the disobedience to an agent of a person in authority is not of a
serious nature, the penalty of arresto menor or a fine ranging from 10
to P100 pesos shall be imposed upon the offender.
Paragraph 1
Elements
1. A person in authority or his agent is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. Offender resists or seriously disobeys such person in authority
or his agent
3. The act of the offender is not included in the provision of
Articles 148, 149, and 150.
Paragraph 2
Elements
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. An agent of a person in authority is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. Offender disobeys such agent
3. The disobedience is not of a serious in nature
Notes:
1. Disobedience of direct order. The crime consists in a failure
to comply with orders directly issued by the authorities in
the exercise of their official duties. Failure to comply with legal
provisions of general character or with judicial decisions
merely declaratory of rights or obligations, or violations of
prohibitory decisions do not constitute the crime of
disobedience to the authorities.
US v Ramayrat
In the writ of execution issued, the justice of peace directed
the sheriff to place the plaintiff in possession of the land
involved. The third person in possession of said land refused
to deliver it to the plaintiff.
• Held: The third person, who is the accused, cannot
be guilty of disobedience. A person cannot be guilty
of disobedience to an order which is not addressed
to him.
2. While engaged in the performance of official duties. In
the crime of resistance or disobedience, the person in
authority or the agent of such person must be in the actual
performance of his official duties. There can be no resistance
or disobedience when there is nothing to resist or disobey
ARTICLE 152
Persons in authority and agents of persons in authority; Who shall be deemed as
such
In applying the provisions of the preceding and other articles of this
Code, any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an
individual or as a member of some court or governmental corporation,
board, or commission, shall be deemed a PERSON IN
AUTHORITY. A barrio captain and a barangay chairman shall also be
deemed a person in authority.
A person who, by direct provision of law or by election or by
appointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance
of public order and the protection and security of life and property,
such as a barrio councilman, barrio policeman and barangay leader and
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority, shall be
deemed an AGENT OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY.
In applying the provisions of Articles 148 and 151 of this Code,
teachers, professors and persons charged with the supervision of public
or duly recognized private schools, colleges and universities, and
lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance, shall be deemed persons in authority.
(As amended by PD No. 299, Sept. 19, 1973 and Batas Pambansa Blg.
873, June 12, 1985).
Notes:
1. To be an agent of a person in authority, one must be charged
with (1) the maintenance of public order, and (2) the
protection and security of life and property.
2. Professors of private colleges and universities, etc. are persons
in authority for the purpose of Article 148 and 151 ONLY.
3. The offender need not be a pupil or the parent of the pupil.
The purpose of CA No 578 is to give teachers protection,
dignity, and respect while in the performance of their official
duties. This protection extends not only against pupils and
their parents, but against all persons who knowingly attack
a teacher while engaged in the performance of duties.
Chapter Five: PUBLIC DISORDERS
Crimes classified under public disorders:
1. Tumults and other disturbances of public order
2. Unlawful use and means of publication and unlawful
utterances
3. Alarms and scandals
4. Delivering prisoners from jails
ARTICLE 153
Tumults and other disturbance of public orders; Tumultuous disturbance or
interruption liable to cause disturbance.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional
in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who shall cause any SERIOUS
DISTURBANCE in a public place, office, or establishment, or shall
INTERRUPT or DISTURB public performances, functions or
gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in the
provisions of Articles 131 and 132.
21
Crimes against public order
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon persons
causing any disturbance or interruption of a tumultuous character.
The disturbance or interruption shall be deemed to be tumultuous if
caused by more than three persons who are armed or provided with
means of violence.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any person who in
any meeting, association, or public place, shall make any OUTCRY
tending to incite rebellion or sedition or in such place shall DISPLAY
PLACARDS OR EMBLEMS which provoke a disturbance of the
public order.
The penalty of arresto menor and a fine not to exceed P200 pesos shall be
imposed upon these persons who in violation of the provisions
contained in the last clause of Article 85, shall BURY WITH POMP
the body of a person who has been legally executed.
TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC
ORDER
1. Causing any SERIOUS DISTURBANCE in a public place,
office, or establishment,
2. INTERRUPTING or DISTURBING public
performances, functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings,
if the act is not included in the provisions of Articles 131 and
132
3. Making any OUTCRY tending to incite rebellion or sedition
4. DISPLAYING PLACARDS OR EMBLEMS which
provoke a disturbance of the public order.
5. BURY WITH POMP the body of a person who has been
legally executed.
Notes:
1. Serious disturbance must be planned or intended
2. Article 153 in reference to Article 131 and 132. If the act of
disturbing or interrupting a meeting or religious ceremony is
not committed by public officers, or if committed by public
officers and they are participants therein, Article 153 should
be applied.
3. OUTCRY means to shout subversive of provocative words
tending to stir up people to obtain by means of force or
violence the objects of rebellion or sedition.
• For an outcry or the displaying of emblems or
placards to constitute inciting to commit rebellion or
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
sedition, it is necessary that the offender should have
done the act with the idea aforethought of inducing
his hearers or readers to commit the crime of
rebellion or sedition.
• But if the outcry is more or less an unconscious
outburst which, although rebellious or seditious in
nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce
others to commit rebellion or sedition, it is only
public disorder.
ARTICLE 154
Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances.
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine ranging from P200 to P1,000
pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who by means of printing, lithography, or any
other means of publication shall publish or cause to be
published as news any false news which may endanger the
public order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State;
2. Any person who by the same means, or by words, utterances
or speeches shall encourage disobedience to the law or to the
constituted authorities or praise, justify, or extol any act
punished by law;
3. Any person who shall maliciously publish or cause to be
published any official resolution or document without proper
authority, or before they have been published officially; or
4. Any person who shall print, publish, or distribute or cause to
be printed, published, or distributed books, pamphlets,
periodicals, or leaflets which do not bear the real printer's
name, or which are classified as anonymous.
Notes:
1. Actual public disorder or actual damage to the credit of
the State not necessary. The mere possibility of such danger
or damage is sufficient.
2. The offender must know that the news is false. Otherwise, the
offender is not liable under this article there being no criminal
intent on his part.
ARTICLE 155
Alarms and scandals
The penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding P200 pesos shall be
imposed upon:
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Any person who within any town or public place, shall
discharge any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosives
calculated to cause alarm or danger;
2. Any person who shall instigate or take an active part in any
charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility;
3. Any person who, while wandering about at night or while
engaged in any other nocturnal amusements, shall disturb the
public peace; or
4. Any person who, while intoxicated or otherwise, shall cause
any disturbance or scandal in public places, provided that the
circumstances of the case shall not make the provisions of
Article 153 applicable.
Notes:
1. The discharge of the firearm should not be aimed at a person.
Otherwise, it would fall under Article 254, punishing discharge
of firearm.
2. The phrase calculated to cause alarm or danger is an erroneous
translation. It is not the intent, but rather, the result that
counts. The act must produce alarm or danger.
3. The provision does not make a distinction as to the particular
place in the town or public place where the discharge is
effected. As long as the discharge in the town produces alarm
or danger, it falls in this provision.
4. CHARIVARI includes a medley of discordant voices, a mock
serenade of discordant noises made on kettles, tins, horns,
etc., designed to annoy and insult.
5. Disturbance of serious nature falls under Article 153.
ARTICLE 156
Delivery of prisoners from jails.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period of prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person
who shall REMOVE from any jail or penal establishment any person
confined therein or shall HELP THE ESCAPE of such person, by
means of violence, intimidation, or bribery. If other means are used, the
penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed.
If the escape of the prisoner shall take place outside of said
establishments by taking the guards by surprise, the same penalties shall
be imposed in their minimum period.
Elements
1. There is a person confined in a jail or penal establishment
22
Crimes against public order
2. The offender removes therefrom such person, or helps the
escape of such person
Notes:
1. Prisoner may be under detention only or may also be by final
judgment.
2. A hospital or asylum is considered an extension of jail or
prison.
3. The offender is any person- an outsider, an employee of the
penal establishment, or another prisoner. But if the offender
is a public officer who had the prisoner under his custody or
charge, he is liable for infidelity in the custody of a prisoner.
But the guard who is off-duty may be held liable for
delivering prisoner from jail.
4. Violence, intimidation or bribery is not necessary, it just
increases the penalty.
5. Bribery as contemplated in this provision is the offender’s act
of employing bribery as a means of removing or delivering the
prisoner from jail and not the act of receiving or agreeing to
receive a bribe as a consideration for committing the offense,
which can only serve as a generic aggravating circumstance.
6. A person delivering a prisoner from jail may be held liable as
an accessory if the crime committed by the prisoner for which
he is serving sentence is treason, murder, parricide or an
attempt on the life of the chief executive. Article 19,
paragraph 3.
7. If the escape of the prisoner takes place outside of said
establishments by taking the guards by surprise, the penalty is
the minimum period of that prescribed.
8. If the prisoner removed or whose escape is made possible by
the commission of the crime of delivering prisoner from jail is
a detention prisoner, such prisoner is not criminally liable.
• A prisoner is criminally liable for leaving the penal
institution only when there is evasion of the service
of his sentence, which can only be committed by a
convict of final judgment.
Chapter Six
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
ARTICLE 157
Evasion of service of sentence.
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods shall be imposed upon any CONVICT who shall evade service
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
of his sentence by escaping during the term of his imprisonment by
reason of final judgment.
However, if such evasion or escape shall have taken place by means of
unlawful entry, by breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs, or
floors, or by using picklocks, false keys, deceit, violence or intimidation,
or through connivance with other convicts or employees of the penal
institution, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its maximum
period.
Elements
1. Offender is convicted by final judgment
2. He is serving his sentence which consists in deprivation of
liberty
3. He evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the
term of his sentence
LOST IN TRANSLATION
1. Imprisonment should be deprivation of liberty. Hence,
convicts sentenced to destierro who go to the prohibited
places are also liable under this article.
2. Unlawful entry should mean climbing or scaling the wall.
It would be absurd for a convict to escape by means of
unlawful entry.
Notes:
1. The sentence must be by reason of final judgment.
a. If the convict escapes within 15 days from the
promulgation or notice of the judgment, without
commencing to serve the sentence or without
expressly waiving in writing his right to appeal, he is
not liable under Article 157.
b. Detention prisoners cannot be held liable for
evasion of service of sentence because they are not
convicts by final judgment since they are only
detained pending the investigation or the trial of the
case against them.
c. If the accused escaped while the sentence of
conviction was under appeal, he is not liable here,
the judgment not having become final. This is true
even if the appeal was later dismissed because he has
escaped.
2. The sentence must consist of deprivation of liberty.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Hence, the provision is not applicable to sentence
executed by deportation.
b. However, the provision is applicable to sentence of
destierro. There is deprivation of liberty in destierro
because one is deprived of the liberty to enter a
particular place or area.
3. To ESCAPE means to flee from, to avoid, to get out of the
way, as to flee to avoid arrest. It is the unlawful departure of
the prisoner from the limits of his custody.
CIRCUMSTANCE QUALIFYING THE OFFENSE
If the evasion or escape takes place-
1. By means of unlawful entry (scaling or climbing)
2. Breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs, or floors
3. By using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit, violence or
intimidation
4. Through connivance with other convicts or employees of the
penal istuttution.
ARTICLE 158
Evasion of service of sentence on the occasion of disorder, conflagrations,
earthquakes, or other calamities.
A CONVICT who shall evade the service of his sentence, by leaving
the penal institution where he shall have been confined, on the occasion
of disorder resulting from a conflagration, earthquake, explosion, or
similar catastrophe, or during a mutiny in which he has not participated,
shall suffer an increase of one-fifth of the time still remaining to be
served under the original sentence, which in no case shall exceed six
months, if he shall fail to give himself up to the authorities within forty-
eight hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief
Executive announcing the passing away of such calamity.
Convicts who, under the circumstances mentioned in the preceding
paragraph, shall give themselves up to the authorities within the above
mentioned period of 48 hours, shall be entitled to the deduction
provided in Article 98.
Elements
1. Offender is a convict by final judgment, who is confined in a
penal institution,
2. There is a disorder resulting from:
a. Conflagration
b. Earthquake
c. Explosion
23
Crimes against public order
d. Similar catastrophe
e. Mutiny in which he has participated
3. The offender evades the service of his sentence by leaving the
penal institution where he is confined, on the occasion of such
disorder or during the mutiny
4. The offender fails to give himself up to the authorities within
48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief
Executive announcing the passing away of such calamity.
Notes:
1. The offender must be a convict by final judgment.
2. What is punished is not leaving, but the failure to surrender
after the issuance of the proclamation.
a. If the offender fails to surrender, the increase is 1/5
of the remaining time to be served.
b. If he surrenders, the deduction is 1/5 of the original
period of the sentence.
3. MUTINY implies an organized unlawful resistance to a
superior; a sedition; a revolt. Hence, there is no mutiny if the
officers disarmed the guards and escaped because the guards
are not their superiors. Such prisoners are liable for evasion of
service of sentence under Article 157.
ARTICLE 159
Other cases of evasion of service of sentence. - The penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon the convict
who, having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive,
shall violate any of the conditions of such pardon. However, if the
penalty remitted by the granting of such pardon be higher than six
years, the convict shall then suffer the unexpired portion of his original
sentence.
Elements
1. The offender was a convict
2. He was granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive
3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon.
PENALTIES
1. Prision correccional in its minimum period- if the penalty
remitted does not exceed 6 years
2. The unexpired portion of the original sentence- if the penalty
remitted is higher than 6 years
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
But this is without prejudice to the authority conferred upon the president by
Section 64(1) of the Revised Administrative Code to recommit him to
serve the unexpired portion, unless it exceeds 6 years in which case no penalty
shall be imposed, but to serve only the unexpired portion.
Notes:
1. Violation of conditional pardon is a separate crime. If a
person violates the conditional pardon, he shall be liable under
this article as well as for the crime he commits. The violation
of the conditional pardon is committed in the place where the
subsequent offense is perpetrated.
2. Condition extends to special laws. Violation of special laws
will result to violation of the conditional pardon as well.
3. Offender must be found guilty of subsequent offense before
he can be prosecuted under this article.
4. The period when the convict was at liberty is not deducted in
case he is recommitted.
5. The duration of the conditions in the pardon is limited only
to the remaining period of the sentence. This means that if the
convict commits a crime in violation of the condition but he
does so after his sentence, he will be liable for such crime, but
not under this provision.
6. Under Section 64(1) of the Revised Administrative Code ,
the president has the specific power to authorize the arrest and
reincarceration of any convicted person granted pardon or
parole hwo, in his judgment, shall fail to comply with the
conditions of the pardon or parole.
Chapter Seven
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING SERVICE
OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS
OFFENSE
ARTICLE 160
Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another offense;
Penalty.
Besides the provisions of Rule 5 of Article 62, any person who shall
commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment,
before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same, shall
be punished by the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law
for the new felony.
Any convict of the class referred to in this article, who is not a habitual
criminal, shall be pardoned at the age of seventy years if he shall have
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
already served out his original sentence, or when he shall complete it
after reaching the said age, unless by reason of his conduct or other
circumstances he shall not be worthy of such clemency.
QUASI-RECIDIVISM is a special aggravating circumstance where a
person, after having been convicted by final judgment, shall commit a
new felony before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving
the same.
Elements
1. The 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:
1. Before beginning to serve such sentence. This is possible
if he commits the felony while being taken to jail.
2. While serving the same. This applies if the convict by final
judgment commits a new felony while serving sentence for the
first offense.
3. The second crime must be a felony. Hence, this article will
not apply if the convict commits an act punishable by a special
law. However, the first crime for which the offender is serving
sentence need not be a felony.
4. The new offense need not be of different character from
that of the former offense. The use of the word another does
not mean that the felony committed should be different from
the crime for which the convict is serving sentence.
5. Quasi-recidivism does not require that the 2 offenses are
embraced in the same title of the Code. It is only required
in recidivism.
6. As opposed to reiteracion, quasi-recidivism does not require
that the offender against whom it is considered shall have
served out his sentences for the prior offenses.
7. Quasi-recidivism cannot be offset by ordinary mitigating
circumstances.
8. A quasi-recidivist may be pardoned at age of 70 years, but only
one who is not a habitual criminal may be pardoned.
24
Crimes against public interest
Title Four: CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC
INTEREST
Chapter One: FORGERIES
Section One
Forging the seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, the signature or stamp
of the Chief Executive.
ARTICLE 161
Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging
the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.
The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any person
who shall forge the Great Seal of the Government of the Philippine
Islands or the signature or stamp of the Chief Executive.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Forging the Great Seal of the PH government
2. Forging the signature of the President
3. Forging the stamp of the President
NOT FALSIFICATION. When in a Government document the
signature of the President is forged, it is not called falsification.
• Article 161 supplied a specific provision to govern the case.
• The crime is forging the signature of the Chief Executive.
o The crime is imitating or counterfeiting the signature
of the President on what is made to appear as an
official document of the Republic of the
Philippines.
o Hence, if the President left with his secretary a
signature in blank and a document is written above
it, the crime is not covered by the provision.
Revised Administrative Code
Section 14
ARMS AND GREAT SEAL
1. The Arms shall have paleways of two (2) pieces, azure and
gules; a chief argent studded with three mullets equidistant
from each other; and, in point of honor, ovoid argent over all
the sun rayonnant with eight minor and lesser rays. Beneath
shall be a scroll with the words "Republic of the Philippines,
" or its equivalent in the national language, inscribed thereon.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. The Great Seal shall be circular in form, with the arms as
described in the preceding paragraph, but without the scroll
and the inscription thereon, and surrounding the whole, a
double marginal circle within which shall appear the words
"Republic of the Philippines," or its equivalent in the national
language. For the purpose of placing the Great Seal, the color
of the arms shall not be deemed essential.
THE GREAT SEAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PH
Section 15.
USE AND CUSTODY OF GREAT SEAL
The Great Seal shall be affixed to or placed upon:
1. All commissions signed by the President and
2. Such other official documents and papers of the Republic of
the Philippines as may be required by custom and usage.
The PRESIDENT shall have custody of the Great Seal.
ARTICLE 162
Using forged signature or counterfeit seal or stamp
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall knowingly make use of the counterfeit seal or forged signature or
stamp mentioned in the preceding article.
Elements
1. The Great Seal of the Republic was counterfeited, or the
signature or stamp of the Chief executive was forged by
another person.
2. The offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery.
3. The offender used the counterfeit seal or forged signature or
stamp.
NOTES:
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Under this provision, the offender should not be the forger.
Otherwise, he would be punished under Article 161 because
the forging in the said provision encompasses the use thereof.
2. This is actually an act of an accessory punishable by 2 degrees
lower, but by express provision of the law, it is punished by a
penalty one degree lower only.
Section Two
Counterfeiting Coins
1. Making and importing and uttering false coins
2. Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated
coins
3. Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance.
ARTICLE 163
Making and importing and uttering false coins.
Any person who makes, imports, or utters, false coins, in connivance
with counterfeiters, or importers, shall suffer:
1. Prisión correccional in its minimum and medium periods and
a fine not to exceed Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000),
if the counterfeited coins be any of the coinage of the
Philippines.
2. Prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to
exceed Two hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000), if the
counterfeited coin be currency of a foreign country. (As
amended by R.A. No. 10951)
Elements
1. There are false or counterfeited coins
2. The offender made, imported or uttered such coins
3. In case of uttering such false or counterfeited coins, he
connived with the counterfeiters or importers.
KINDS OF COINS THE COUNTERFEITING OF WHICH
IS PUNISHED
1. Silver coin
2. Minor coinage
3. Coin of the currency of a foreign country
4. Former coins withdrawn from circulation
• This is because of the harm that may be caused to
the public once they go into circulation again and the
possibility that the counterfeiter may later apply his
trade to the making of coins in actual circulation.
25
Crimes against public interest
• Note that the provisions mention coin without
qualifying it as current.
COIN
• It is a piece of metal stamped with certain marks and made
current at a certain value.
• Piece of metal with an official stamp used as money.
FALSE OR COUNTERFEITED
A coin is false or counterfeited if it is forged or if it is not authorized
by the Government as legal tender, regardless of its intrinsic value.
• Counterfeiting means imitating a legal or genuine coin.
• Counterfeiting means creating a spurious coin.
• There must be imitation of the design of a genuine coin.
IMPORT. This means to bring to port or introduce into the
Philippines ports such false or counterfeited coins.
• The importation is complete before entry at the Customs
House.
UTTER. This means to pass counterfeited coins. It includes the
delivery and the act of giving them away. A counterfeited coin is uttered
when:
1. It is paid
2. When the offender is caught counting them in preparatory to
the act of delivering them, even though the utterer may not
obtain the gain that he intended.
ARTICLE 164
Mutilation of coins; Importation and utterance of mutilated coins
The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum period and a fine
not to exceed Four hundred thousand pesos (₱400,000) shall be
imposed upon any person who shall mutilate coins of the legal
currency of the Philippines or import or utter mutilated current coins,
or in connivance with mutilators or importers."
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency, with further
requirement of intent to damage or defraud another.
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated coins
o With further requirement that there must be
connivance with the mutilator or importer in
case of uttering.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
MUTILATION. It means to take off part of the metal by filling it or
substituting it for another metal of inferior quality.
• It means to diminish by ingenuous means the metal in the
coin.
• The offender does so not merely for the sake of doing so, but
to take advantage of the metal abstracted or to appropriate the
metal of the coin.
• Hence, the coin diminishes in intrinsic value.
COIN MUST BE LEGAL TENDER. This is the only provision in
this chapter that requires legal tender as an indispensable element.
COINS OF FOREIGN COUNTRY NOT INCLUDED
• The coin mutilated must be genuine and has not been
withdrawn from circulation.
• The coin must be of the legal currency or current coins of the
PHILIPPINES.
• Therefore, if the coin mutilated is legal tender of a foreign
country, it is not a crime of mutilation under the RPC.
ARTICLE 165
Selling of false or mutilated coin, without connivance.
The person who knowingly, although without the connivance
mentioned in the preceding articles, shall possess FALSE or
MUTILATED coin with intent to utter the same, or shall actually utter
such coin, shall suffer a penalty lower by one degree than that
prescribed in said articles.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Possession of the coin, counterfeited or mutilated by another
person, with intent to utter the same, knowing that it was
false or mutilated.
Elements
a. Possession
b. With intent to utter
c. Knowledge
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated coin, knowing the
same to be false or mutilated.
Elements
a. Knowledge
b. Actually uttering
IN RELATION TO PREVIOUS PROVISIONS
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
This article speaks of FALSE and MUTILATED coins, related to 2
other provisions in the RPC.
a. FALSE COINS
Possession or uttering of false coin does not require that such
coin be of legal tender.
b. MUTILATED COINS
Possession or uttering of mutilated coin requires that the coin
be of legal tender, because of Article 164 to which Article 165
is related.
POSSESSION
• This includes not only actual or physical possession, but
constructive possession as well. Otherwise, the culprits could
easily evade the law by mere expedient of placing other
persons in actual physical possession of the coin.
• Possession of counterfeiter or importer is NOT punished
as a separate offense.
o If the false or mutilated coins are found in the
possession of the counterfeiters or mutilators or
importers, such possession does not constitute a
separate offense, but is identified with the
counterfeiting or mutilating or importation.
KNOWLEDGE. Note that in both possession and uttering, the
offender must have actual knowledge that the coin is false. This may be
inferred from the acts of the offender.
Section Three
Forging treasury or bank notes, obligations and securities; importing and uttering
false or forged notes, obligations and securities
.
ARTICLE 166
Forging treasury or bank notes on other documents payable to bearer; importing,
and uttering such false or forged notes and documents.
The forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or certificates or
other obligations and securities payable to BEARER and the
importation and uttering in connivance with forgers or importers of
such false or forged obligations or notes, shall be punished as follows:
1. By reclusion temporal in its minimum period and a fine not to
exceed P2M pesos, if the document which has been falsified,
counterfeited, or altered, is an obligations or security of the
Philippines.
o The word "OBLIGATION OR SECURITY of
the Philippine Islands" shall be held to mean all
26
Crimes against public interest ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

bonds, certificates of indebtedness, national bank • Even though the obligations or securities of the US seem to Why is forging and falsification of bank notes and of documents
notes, fractional notes, certificates of deposit, bills, be covered by the provision, they are no longer covered of credit payable to bearer and issued by the State punished more
checks, or drafts for money, drawn by or upon because the provision of Article 166 relative to US obligations severely than counterfeiting of coins?
authorized officers of the Philippines, and other have been repealed upon the grant of independence to the PH. • Because the former tends to bring such documents into
representatives of value, of whatever denomination, • In the case of People v Santiago, where script money or discredit and the offense produces lack of confidence on the
which have been or may be issued under any act of military certificated used as legal tender payable to bearer in part of the holders of said documents to the prejudice of the
the Congress of the United States or of the place of the dollar currency, was used, it should have been interests of the society and of the State.
Philippine Legislature. considered as document issued by a foreign government • It is easier to forge such documents than to counterfeit coins,
2. By prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine not to under Paragraph No. 3 or Article 166 instead of obligations and the profit derived therefrom is greater.
exceed P1M pesos, if the falsified or altered document is a of the US. • Hence, the incentive for the commission of such crime is
circulating note issued by any banking association duly higher.
authorized by law to issue the same. OBLIGATION OR SECURITY OF THE PH BEARER INSTRUMENT VS ORDER INSTRUMENT
3. By arresto mayor in its medium period and a fine not to This includes all- BEARER INSTRUMENT ORDER INSTRUMENT
exceed P5,000 pesos, if the falsified or counterfeited 1. Bonds Section 9, NIL Section 8, NIL
document was issued by a foreign government. 2. Certificates of indebtedness An instrument is payable to An instrument is payable to
4. By prision mayor in its minimum period and a fine not to 3. National bank notes bearer when: order when it is drawn payable
exceed P1M pesos, when the forged or altered document is a 4. Coupons 1. It is expressed to be so to:
circulating note or bill issued by a foreign bank duly authorized 5. Treasury notes payable 1. The order of a
therefor. 6. Fractional notes 2. It is payable to a person specified person
7. Certificates of deposits named therein or 2. Him or his order
ACTS PENALIZED 8. Bills bearer
1. Forging or falsification of treasury or bank notes or other 9. Checks 3. It is payable to the
documents payable to bearer 10. Drafts for money order of a fictitious
2. Importation of such false or forged obligations and notes 11. Other representatives of value issued under any Act of person or non-existing
3. Uttering of such false or forged obligations or notes in Congress person, and such fact
connivance with the forgers or importers NOTE: was known to the
• Money bills issued by BSP are national bank notes person making it so
NOTES AND OTHER OBLIGATIONS AND SECURITIES
• PNB checks are commercial documents, not covered by payable
THAT MAY BE PENALIZED UNDER ARTILE 166
Article 166. 4. The name of the payee
1. Treasury or bank notes
o Falsification of these will fall under Article 172 in does not purport to be
2. Certificates
connection with Article 171 of the RPC. the name of any person
3. Other obligations and securities, payable to bearer
5. The only or the last
FORGING V FALSIFICATION indorsement is an
KINDS OF FORGED TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR
FORGING FALSIFICATION indorsement in blank
OTHER DOCUMENTS
1. Obligation or security issued by the Government of the PH FORGING is committed by FALSIFICATION is
2. Circulating note issued by any banking association duly giving an instrument the committed by erasing,
authorized by law to issue the same appearance of a true and genuine substituting, counterfeiting, or
3. Document issued by a foreign government document. altering by any means, the
4. Circulating note or bill issued by a foreign bank duly ✓ To forge an instrument figures, letters, words, or signs
is to make false contained therein. Negotiated by mere delivery. Negotiated by delivery and
authorized to issue the same indorsement.
instrument intended to
be passed for the Use this to compare Articles 166 and 167.
OBLIGATION OR SECURITY OF THE US
genuine one.
ARTICLE 167

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 27

Crimes against public interest
Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer.
Any person who shall FORGE, IMPORT or UTTER, in
connivance with the forgers or importers, any instrument payable to
order or other document of credit not payable to bearer, shall suffer
the penalties of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and a fine not exceeding P1.2M.
This article covers instruments and other documents of credit issued by a foreign bank
or government, the law not specifying the country or government issuing them.
Elements
1. That there be an instrument payable to order or other
document of credit not payable to bearer
2. That it be forged, imported or uttered.
3. That in case of uttering, he connived with the forger or
importer.
But when the utterer is the forger, connivance is not required.
ARTICLE 168
Illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of
credit.
Unless the act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of
the preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly use or have in
his possession, with intent to use any of the false or falsified
instruments referred to in this section, shall suffer the penalty next
lower in degree than that prescribed in said articles.
Elements
1. That there be a 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, which is forged or falsified by another person
2. The offender knows that any of those instruments as forged
or falsified.
3. That he performs any of these acts-
a. Use any of such forged or falsified instruments
b. Possess with intent to use any of such forged or
falsified instruments.
POSSESSION
• Mere possession does not constitute an offense.
o It must be coupled with the intent to use
o But if the accused, having intent to use the forged
instrument, threw it away instead of carrying out his
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
intention, is not liable. The law will not close the
door of repentance on him, who, having set foot on
the path of crime, retraces his steps before it is too
late.
• A person in possession of falsified document and who makes
use of the same is presumed to be the material author of
falsification.
o This is especially true if the use or uttering of the
forged document was so closely connected in time
with the forgery that the user or possessor may be
proved to have the capacity of committing the
forgery, or to have close connection with the forgers,
and therefore, had complicity in the forgery.
• It is incumbent upon the person in possession thereof to
satisfactorily explain his innocence for said possession, it
being a fact relied upon him as justification or excuse. People v
Perez
o Failure of the accused to explain satisfactorily his
possession of counterfeit bills means that he either:
1. Forged them himself
2. Knows who falsified them, but does not want
to divulge them.
NO IMPOSSIBLE CRIME UNDER THIS PROVISION
If the instruments were falsified in such a way that they carry an inherent
impossibility for anyone to accept them as genuine money, there is no
impossible crime.
• Note that under Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the RPC, the act
performed would have been an offense against persons or
property. Forging or falsification is neither.
ARTICLE 169
How forgery is committed.
The FORGERY referred to in this section may be committed by any
of the following means:
1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument, payable
to bearer or order mentioned therein, the appearance of a
true genuine document.
2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or altering by any
means the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein.
Paragraph 1
• This includes the creation of a spurious, false or fake
document. Meaning, creating a fake something out of nothing.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o Example: giving fake checks the appearance of true
and genuine documents.
• This also includes situations involving originally true and
genuine documents which have been withdrawn or
demonetized or have outlived their usefulness. People v Galano.
Paragraph 2
Example: A found on the floor a promissory note payable to the order
of B (note that this has to be indorsed by B because it is an order
instrument). And so A signs the name of B at the back of the note to
make it appear that B indorsed the same.
• This falls under paragraph 2 because A had converted the note
from an order instrument to a bearer instrument. It had the
effect of deleting the phrase to the order.
Section Four
Falsification of legislative, public, commercial, and privatedocuments, and wireless,
telegraph, and telephone message.
5 classes of falsification:
1. Falsification of legislative documents
2. Falsification of a document by a public officer, employee, or
notary public
3. Falsification of a public or official, or commercial document
by a private individual
4. Falsification of a private document by any person
5. Falsification of wireless, telegraph, and telephone messages
ARTICLE 170
Falsification of legislative documents
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine
not exceeding P1.2M pesos shall be imposed upon any person who,
without proper authority therefor ALTERS any bill, resolution, or
ordinance enacted or approved or pending approval by either House
of the Legislature or any provincial board or municipal council.
Elements
1. There is a bill, resolution, or ordinance enacted or approved
or pending approval by either House of the Legislature or any
provincial board or municipal council
2. The offender alters the same
3. The offender had no proper authority
4. The alteration has changed the meaning of the document
28
Crimes against public interest ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Note: Although the provision does not seem to cover those passed by
the city council, such issuances are deemed included. The words
municipal council should include city council or municipal board.
Notes:
1. The bill presupposes the existence of a genuine bill,
resolution, or ordinance.
o Fabricated or simulated legislative document is not
covered under this provision.
2. The offender is any person who does not have authority to
alter the document.
3. The act punished here is limited to making alterations that
change the documents’ meaning.
ARTICLE 171
Falsification by public officer, employee or notary or ecclesiastic minister.
The penalty of prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P1M pesos shall
be imposed upon any public officer, employee, or notary who,
taking advantage of his official position, shall falsify a document by
committing any of the following acts:
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or
rubric;
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act
or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or
proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document
which changes its meaning;
7. 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
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance
thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any ecclesiastical minister
who shall commit any of the offenses enumerated in the preceding
paragraphs of this article, with respect to any record or document of
such character that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons.
Elements
1. The offender is a:
a. Public officer commission—if he does so by taking advantage of his position, he is
b. Public employee liable under Article 171. Otherwise, he is liable under Article 172.
c. Notary public A public official takes advantage of his official position on falsifying a
2. He takes advantage of his official position document when:
3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the following 1. He has the duty to make or prepare or otherwise to intervene
acts: in the preparation of the document OR
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, 2. He has the official custody of the document
signature or rubric;
b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated ELEMENT 3:
in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so OFFENDER FALSIFIES A DOCUMENT
participate; DOCUMENT
c. Attributing to persons who have participated in an • This is any written statement by which a right is established,
act or proceeding statements other than those in fact or an obligation extinguished.
made by them; • It is a writing to an instrument by which a fact may be proven
d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts; and affirmed.
e. Altering true dates; • The document falsified must be complete or must have the
f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine appearance of a true and genuine document.
document which changes its meaning; o It must be of apparent legal efficacy
g. Issuing in an authenticated form a document o Thus, making a writing which is invalid on its face
purporting to be a copy of an original document (such that no one can be deceived thereby) is not
when no such original exists, or including in such a falsification.
copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that
• The document referred to in this article is necessarily a public
of the genuine original; or
document, even if the law does not specify the kind.
h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the
o This is because when the document is executed with
issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official
intervention of a public officer, employee, or notary
book
public, the document is necessarily a public
4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister, the act of
document.
falsification is committed with respect to any record or
document of such character that its falsification may affect the
IS THE PRIOR EXISTENCE OF A GENUINE DOCUMENT
civil status of persons.
REQUIRED?
A genuine document is needed only in the following:
ELEMENT 1:
1. Paragraph 6
PERSONS LIABLE
2. Paragraph 7, second part
1. Public officer
3. Paragraph 8
2. Public employee
In other paragraphs, falsification may be committed by absolute
3. Notary public
simulation or fabrication of a document.
4. Ecclesiastical minister under specific circumstances
FALSIFICATION. This is done by giving a document the appearance
ELEMENT 2:
of a true and genuine one.
OFFENDER TAKES ADVANTAGE OF HIS OFFICIAL
POSITION • Falsification need not be made on an official form. It is
A public officer or employee can be held liable under either Article 171 sufficient that the document is given the appearance of, or
or 172 for falsification of documents. The difference is the manner of made to appear similar to, the official form.
Paragraph 1

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 29

Crimes against public interest ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

COUNTERFEITING OR IMITATING ANY 2. The offender caused it to appear that such person participated This means that there is a law requiring the disclosure of the facts
HANDWRITING, SIGNATURE OR RUBRIC in an act or proceeding narrated.
• Legal obligation to disclose the truth is inherent in the very
2 WAYS OF COMMITTING FALSIFICATION IN THIS Discussion: Imitation of signature not required here. nature and purpose of a residence certificate.
PARAGRAPH
1. Counterfeiting Paragraph 3 FALSITY
o This is imitating any existing handwriting, signature ATTRIBUTING TO PERSONS WHO HAVE • The person making the narration of facts must be aware of the
or rubric PARTICIPATED IN AN ACT OR PROCEEDING falsity of the facts narrated by him.
2. Feigning STATEMENTS OTHER THAN THOSE IN FACT MADE BY • The narration of facts must be absolutely false
o Simulating a signature, handwriting, or rubric that THEM o The rule is that if the statements are not altogether
does not in fact exist Elements false, there being some colorable truth in such
o Making it appear that a person who does not know 1. There is a person who participated in the act or proceeding statements, the crime of falsification is not deemed
how to write has signed the document may be 2. Such person made statements in that act or proceeding to have been committed.
considered feigning of signature 3. The offender, in making a document, attributed to such
• The fact that one’s consent to a contract was obtained by
person or persons statement other than those in fact made by
means of violence does not make the facts narrated therein
Mere drawing up of a false document is not sufficient to constitute the crime of such person or persons.
false. US v Milla
falsification. The signature, handwriting, or mark of another person must be signed
o The signatures of the parties are genuine.
or made by the offender, without authority to do so. Discussion: Imitation of signature not required here.
Discussion: This would include omission of certain things stated.
WRONGFUL INTENT REQUIRED
REQUISITES OF COUNTERFEITNG
1. There must be an attempt to imitate Paragraph 4 • There can be no lability for falsification for perversion of truth
2. The forged and the genuine signature must have some MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A in the narration of facts if one acted in good faith.
resemblance NARRATION OF FACTS • But wrongful intent is not essential when the document
o The resemblance must be such that it is likely to Elements falsified is a public document.
deceive an ordinary person receiving or dealing with 1. That the offender makes in a document statement in a o This distinction is necessary because the acts
the document. narration of facts enumerated in Article 171 are applicable also in
2. That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts Article 172.
If there is sufficient resemblance, it can be concluded that the accused had the intention narrated
and attempted to imitate the signature of the offended party. But imitation need not 3. The facts narrated are absolutely false Paragraph 5
be perfect, just enough to deceive another. 4. The perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made ALTERING TRUE DATES
with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person. There is falsification under this paragraph only when the dates are
Discussion: sIn case the 2 requisites above are absent, but the offender essential.
nevertheless signs in a document the name of another person, he may NARRATION OF FACTS NOT CONCLUSION OF LAW • The alteration must affect either the veracity of the document
be found guilty under Article 171, paragraph 2 instead. He made it • Claiming to be eligible in one’s certificate of candidacy despite or the effects thereof.
appear that the person participated in the act when they did not in fact the fact that she was only 23 years old, is a conclusion of law, • Example: changing date of arrest so that police will not be held
so participate. not covered by the provision. People v Yanza liable for the delivery of the person arrested.
o She believed that she was eligible despite her age. She
Paragraph 2 was making a conclusion. Paragraph 6
CAUSING IT TO APPEAR THAT PERSONS HAVE • However, if she wrote 30 years old to make it appear that she MAKING ANY ALTERATION OR INTERCALATION IN A
PARTICIPATED IN ANY ACT OR PROCEEDING WHEN was eligible, then she is liable for falsification. (own example GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS
THEY DID NOT IN FACT SO PARTICIPATE lang lol) MEANING
Elements Elements
1. There is a person who did not participate in the act or LEGAL OBLIGATION 1. That there be an alteration (change) or intercalation (insertion)
proceeding on a document

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 30

Crimes against public interest
2. That it was made on a genuine document
3. The alteration or intercalation has changed the meaning of the
document
4. The change made the document speak something false
Notes:
• Alteration which speaks the truth is not falsification. The
word alteration has inherent in it the idea of deception.
• The alteration must affect the integrity or change the
effects of the document. To be an alteration in violation of
the law, it must be one which causes the instrument to speak
a language different in legal effect from that which it originally
spoke.
• Alteration is change; intercalation is insertion.
Paragraph 7
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
The acts of falsification mentioned in this paragraph cannot be committed by a
private individual or by a notary public or a public officer who does not take
advantage of his official position.
These acts can be done only by a public official or notary public who takes
advantage of his position because the authentication of a document can only be done
by the custodian or one who prepared and retained a copy of the original document.
FALSIFICATION PUNISHED
1. Issuing in authenticated form a document purporting to be a
copy of the original when no such original exists
• The notary public made a supposed copy of a
deed of sale which was never executed and of
which he had no copy
2. Including in a copy a statement contrary to or different from
that of the genuine original
• A civil registrar stated in a certified copy of a
record of birth that the person mentioned
therein was legitimate when there was no such
statement in the original
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL’S LIABIITY. A private person who
cooperates with a public official in the falsification of a public document
is guilty of this crime and incurs the same liability and penalty as
the public officer.
INTENT TO GAIN NOT NECESSARY. It is the interest of the
community which is intended to be guaranteed by the strict faithfulness
of the officials charged with the preparation or preservation of the acts
in which they intervene.
Paragraph 7
Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in
a protocol, registry, or official book.
Discussion: Changing or falsification is not made in the genuine
document, but rather in the protocol, registry or official book.
o Example: Insertion of a document in the notarial book to
make it appear that the document is notarized at a certain date.
ARTICLE 172
Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents.
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and a fine of not more than P5,000 pesos shall be imposed
upon:
1. Any private individual who shall commit any of the
falsifications enumerated in the next preceding article in any
PUBLIC OR OFFICIAL document or LETTER OF
EXCHANGE or any other kind of COMMERCIAL
document; and
2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the
intent to cause such damage, shall in any PRIVATE
DOCUMENT commit any of the acts of falsification
enumerated in the next preceding article.
3. Any person who shall knowingly introduce in evidence in any
judicial proceeding or to the damage of another or who, with
the intent to cause such damage, shall use any of the false
documents embraced in the next preceding article, or in any
of the foregoing subdivisions of this article, shall be punished
by the penalty next lower in degree.
ACTS PUNISHED UNDER ARTICLE 172
1. Falsification of public, official, or commercial document by
a private individual
2. Falsification of private documents by any person.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Use of falsified document.
Paragraph 1
FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC, OFFICIAL, OR
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT BY A PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
Elements
1. The offender is a private individual or a public officer or
employee who did not take advantage of his official position
2. He committed any of the acts of falsification in 171.
3. The falsification was committed in a public or official or
commercial document
Notes:
1. The offender should not be a public officer, employee or
notary public who takes advantage of his official position
2. The acts of falsification are the same as those in Article 171.
4 KINDS OF DOCUMENT
1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT
• This is a document created, executed, or issued by a
public official in response to the exigencies of the public
service, or in the execution of which a public official
intervened.
• It can also be any instrument authorized by a notary
public or a competent public official
2. OFFICAL DOCUMENT
• This falls under the bigger class of public documents
• This is a document issued by a public official in the
exercise of the functions of his office.
• Examples:
a. Receipt issued by the department of assessments and
collections of the City of Manila for taxes collected
b. Burial permit issued by the Board of Public Health
of the City of Manila
c. Official receipt prescribed by the Government to be
issued upon the receipt of money for public
purposes
d. Official cashbook kept by the disbursing officer of
the Coast Guard
e. Official receipt- it is invested with the character of
an official document because it was printed in
accordance with the standard forms required by the
Government.
31
Crimes against public interest
f. A petition for habeas corpus duly described and
sworn to before the clerk of court
g. All pleadings filed with the court are public or official
documents
3. PRIVATE DOCUMENT
• This is a deed or instrument executed by a private person
without the intervention of a notary public or other
person legally authorized, by which document some
disposition or agreement is proved, evidenced, or set
forth.
4. COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT
• It is any document defined and regulated by the Code of
Commerce or any other commercial law.
• It is a document or instrument used by merchants or
businessmen to promote or facilitate trade.
• Examples:
a. Letters of exchange, letters of credit, drafts, trade
acceptances, nots, quedans, books of accounts
b. Customer’s order to a stockholder
c. Bank checks
d. Cash files, deposit slips, and bank statements
e. Surety, journal books, ledgers
f. Airway bills
But cash vouchers are not commercial documents. They are not
negotiable instruments and they are not regulated by the Code of
Commerce.
Note:
1. Mere blank form of an official document is not covered. In
order to come within the purview of this provision, it is
necessary that the blank spaces be filled and the signature
of a party purported to be authorized to issue it be written
by another.
2. The possessor of a falsified document is presumed to be the
author of falsification.
• But this presumption does not apply when the
evidence on the alleged forged document is
extremely doubtful.
3. In Paragraph 1of Article 172, damage or intent to cause
damage is not necessary.
• What is punished in falsification of public document
is principally the undermining of the public faith and
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
the destruction of the truth as solemnly proclaimed
therein.
• In this crime, the controlling consideration lies in the
public character of the document.
• The existence of prejudice to 3rd persons becomes
immaterial.
• This also applies to commercial documents, because
as to them, a credit is sought to be protected.
4. Lack of malice or criminal intent is a defense in falsification of
public documents.
PUBLIC AND PRIVATE WRITINGS UNDER RULES OF
COURT
Sec 19, Rule 132, Revised Rules of Court
For the purpose of their presentation evidence, documents are either
public or private.
Public documents are:
a. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the
sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public
officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
b. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last
wills and testaments; and
c. Public records kept in the Philippines, of private documents
required by law to the entered therein.
All other writings are private.
PRIVATE DOCUMENT CONSIDERED PUBLIC
DOCUMENT
1. A private document acquires the character of public
document when it becomes part of official record and is
certified by a public officer duly authorized by law.
2. When a deed is acknowledged before a notary public.
Paragraph 2
FALSIFICATION OF PRIVATE DOCUMENT
Elements
1. The offender committed any of the acts of falsification in
Article 171, except paragraph 7.
2. Falsification was done on a private document
3. The falsification caused damage to a 3rd person or was done
with intent to cause damage
MERE FALSIFICATION NOT ENOUGH
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
There are two things required to warrant conviction in this provision:
1. The offender counterfeited the false document
2. The offender performed an independent act to make use
of it, which operates to the prejudice of a third person
• Hence, if the offender falsifies a private document
but keeps it and does not use it, he is not liable.
DAMAGE
• The damage caused need not be material.
• Damage to one’s honor is included.
• It is not necessary that the offender profited or had hoped to
profit.
FALSIFICATION AS A NECESSARY MEANS TO COMMIT
OTHER CRIMES
1. Estafa through falsification of a public document
2. Theft through falsification of official document
3. Estafa through falsification of commercial document by
reckless imprudence
4. Malversation through falsification of public document
NOTES
1. There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification
of a private document
• This is because the immediate effect of falsification
or private document is the same as that of estafa.
• The falsification of a private document cannot be
said to be a means to commit estafa because with or
without estafa, there is damage caused by
falsification of private document alone
2. Hence, if a private document was falsified to obtain money or
other personal property from another, and the offender later
misappropriated the same, the crime committed is
falsification of private document only.
3. If a private document is falsified to conceal misappropriation
of money or property which has been in the possession of
the offender, the crime committed is estafa with abuse of
confidence only.
• If the estafa was already consummated or the falsification
of private document was committed for the purpose of
concealing the estafa, falsification is not punishable
because as regards the falsification of private
32
Crimes against public interest
document, there was no damage or intent to cause
damage.
• The limited damage that resulted was caused by estafa.
4. There is no falsification of private document through reckless
imprudence
• Falsification of private document requires malice or
intent to damage.
5. The crime is falsification of public document even if the
falsification took place before the private document becomes
part of the public records,
• This rule is applicable if the document s intended by
law to be part of the public or official record, the
preparation of which being in accordance with the
rules and regulations issued by the government.
• The private character of that document at the time
of falsification is disregarded.
STAGES OF FALSIFICATION
As a general rule, there is no attempted or frustrated falsification.
• But there may be a frustrated stage if the falsification is
imperfect.
Paragraph 3
USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENT
PRESUMPTION OF FALSIFICATION
The user of the falsified document is deemed the author of falsification
if:
1. The use was so closely connected in time with the falsification
2. The user had capacity of falsifying the document.
INTORDUCING IN A JUDICIAL PROCEEDING
Elements
1. The offender knew that a document was falsified by another
person
2. The false document is embraced in Article 171 or in any
subdivisions No. 1 and 2 of Article 172
3. The offender introduced said documents in evidence in any
judicial proceeding
Damage or intent to cause damage not essential here.
USE IN ANY OTHER TRANSACTION
Elements
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. The offender knew that a document was falsified by another
person
2. The false document is embraced in Article 171 or in any
subdivisions No. 1 and 2 of Article 172
3. The offender introduced said documents (not in judicial
proceeding)
4. The use of such document caused damage to another or it was
used with intent to cause such damage.
But note that if the one who used the falsified document is the
same person who falsified it, the crime is only falsification and the
use of the same is not a separate crime.
• But it does not necessarily mean that the use of false document
is included in the crime of falsification.
ARTICLE 173
Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages, and use of said
falsified messages.
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods shall be imposed upon officer or employee of the
Government or of any private corporation or concern engaged in
the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable or telephone message
who UTTERS a fictitious wireless, telegraph or telephone message of
any system or FALSIFIES the same.
Any person who shall USE such falsified dispatch to the prejudice of a
third party or with the intent of cause such prejudice, shall suffer the
penalty next lower in degree.
ACTS PUNIHSED UNDER THIS ARTICLE
1. Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph, or telephone message
2. Falsifying wireless, telegraph, or telephone message
3. Using such falsified message
UTTERING FICTITIOUS MESSAGE OR FALSIFYING THE
SAME
Elements
1. The offender is an officer or employee of the Government or
an officer or employee of a private corporation, engaged in
the service of sending or receiving wireless, cable, or
telephone messages.
2. The offender commits any of the following:
a. Uttering fictitious wireless, telegraph, or telephone
message
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Falsifying wireless, telegraph, or telephone message
Note: The public officer, to be liable, must be engaged in the service
of sending or receiving wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message.
✓ Example: Bureau of Posts or operator of government
telephone
Example:
The accused was a telegraph operator who received 2 telegrams for
transmission, reduced the number of words of the message by 12 words
without having the authority to do so. He pocketed the difference in
the prices charged. He is guilty of falsification of telegraph messages.
US v Romero.
USE OF FALSIFIED MESSAGES
Elements
1. The accused knew that the wireless, cable, telegraph, or
telephone message was falsified by any of the persons
specified in the first paragraph
2. The accused used such falsified dispatch
3. The use resulted in the prejudice of a third party, or the use
was with intent to cause prejudice.
Note: A private individual cannot be a principal by direct
participation in falsification of telegraphic dispatches under Article
173, unless he is an employee of a corporation engaged in the business
of sending or receiving wireless, cable, telegraph, or telephone message.
✓ But he can be liable as principal by inducement.
✓ But if he knowingly uses any falsified telegraph, wireless or
telephone messages to the prejudice of a third person, or with
intent to cause such prejudice, it is not necessary that he be
connected with such corporation.
Wtf this portion is really unnecessary. The main point lang is, if private citizen,
whether connected to a corporation engaged in this business or not, can be held liable
under this article as long as the requisites are present.
Section Five
Falsification of medical certificates, certificates of merit or services and the like.
ARTICLE 174
False medical certificates, false certificates of merits or service, etc.
The penalties of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to exceed P1,000
pesos shall be imposed upon:
33
Crimes against public interest
1. Any PHYSICIAN OR SURGEON who, in connection with
the practice of his profession, shall issue a false certificate; and
2. Any PUBLIC OFFICER who shall issue a false certificate
of merit of service, good conduct or similar circumstances.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any PRIVATE
PERSON who shall falsify a certificate falling within the classes
mentioned in the two preceding subdivisions.
CERTIFICATE. It is any writing by which testimony is given that a
fact has or has not taken place.
PERSONS WHO MAY BE MADE LIABLE
1. Physician or surgeon who, in connection with the practice of
his profession, issued a false certificate
✓ The crime is false medical certificate by a
physician
2. Public officer who issued a false certificate or merit or service,
good conduct or similar circumstances
✓ The crime is false certificate of merit or service by
a public officer
✓ Certificate of large cattle is not included in other
circumstances. Must be related to merit, service, or goof
conduct.
✓ Certificate of residence for voting purposes is
certificate of similar circumstances.
3. Private individual who falsified a certificate falling in the
classes mentioned in numbers 1 and 2.
✓ The crime is false medical certificate by a private
individual or false certificate of merit or service
by a private individual
ARTICLE 175
Using false certificates.
The penalty of arresto menor shall be imposed upon any one who shall
knowingly use any of the false certificates mentioned in the next
preceding article.
Elements
1. That a physician or surgeon had issued a false medical
certificate, or a public officer had issued a false certificate of
merit, service, or good conduct, or similar circumstances, or a
private person had falsified any of said certificates.
2. The offender knew that the certificate was false
3. That he used the same
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
When any of the false certificates mentioned in Article 174 is used in
the judicial proceeding, Article 172 does not apply, because the use of
false document in judicial proceeding under Article 172 is limited to
those false documents embraced in Articles 171 and 172.
Note: No damage required.
Section Six
Manufacturing, importing and possession of instruments or implements intended for
the commission of falsification.
ARTICLE 176
Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification.
The penalty of prison correctional in its medium and maximum periods
and a fine not to exceed P10,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any
person who shall make or introduce into the Philippine Islands any
stamps, dies, marks, or other instruments or implements intended to be
used in the commission of the offenses of counterfeiting or falsification
mentioned in the preceding sections of this Chapter. Any person who,
with the intention of using them, shall have in his possession any of
the instruments or implements mentioned in the preceding paragraphs,
shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that provided therein.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Making or introducing into the PH any stamps, dies, marks,
or other instruments or implements for counterfeiting or
falsification
2. Possessing with intent to use the instruments or
complements for counterfeiting or falsification made in or
introduced into the PH by another person.
IMPLEMENTS CONFISCATED NEED NOT FORM A
COMPLETE SET
In order to secure a conviction under the second paragraph of Article
176, it is not necessary that the implements confiscated form a complete
set for counterfeiting, it being enough that they may be employed by
themselves or together with other implements to commit the crime
of falsification.
POSSESSION
Constructive possession is also punished. What is punished is
possession in general, that is, not only actual, physical possession, but
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
also constructive possession or the subjection of the thing to one’s
control.
Chapter Two: OTHER FALSITIES
Section One
Usurpation of authority, rank, title, and improper use of names, uniforms and
insignia.
ARTICLE 177
Usurpation of authority or official functions
Any person who shall knowingly and falsely REPRESENT himself
to be an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of
the Philippine Government or of any foreign government, or who,
under pretense of official position, shall PERFORM any act pertaining
to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine
Government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof, without
being lawfully entitled to do so, shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
2 CRIMES IN THIS PROVISION
1. Usurpation of authority
2. Usurpation of official functions
Notes: Article 177 in general.
1. Article 177 may be violated by a public officer.
• The operation of this provision is not restricted to
private individuals. The law says any person.
• For example, this was committed by a councilor who
discharged the functions of the mayor after the latter
instructed him to do so when he went on an official
business trip. Said councilor refused to surrender the
position despite repeated demands by the vice mayor
who had the right to assume the position under the
Revised Administrative Code. Said councilor was
charged with usurpation of authority and official
functions. People v Hilvano.
• Note that while at first his claim to the position may
be argued to be with color of title, he cannot now
claim good faith after he was shown the law, the
letter of the executive secretary, and the opinion of
the provincial fiscal.
2. Article 177 does not apply to an occupant under color of
title
34
Crimes against public interest
• The provision punishes a usurper or one who acts
under false pretenses, and not one who acts under a
colorable claim of title.
• A USURPER is one who introduces himself to an
office that is vacant, or who, without color of title,
ousts the incumbent and assumes to act as an officer
by exercising some of the functions of the office.
People v Buencaflor
3. Based on the provision, usurpation of authority or official
functions of any officer of any foreign government is also
punished.
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY
Knowingly and falsely REPRESENTING himself to be an officer, agent
or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or of
any foreign government
1. The mere act of representation is sufficient, and it is not
required that the offender performs acts pertaining to a public
officer.
2. There must be a positive, express, and explicit representation.
• The crime is not committed if the accused merely did
not deny that he is an agent of the PH government
when introduced as such. People v Calinisan.
3. There must be an existing department or agency, and the
offender must knowingly and falsely represent himself to be
an officer, agent or representative of such.
• Hence, a person who pretended to be an agent of the
PH Board of Safety is not liable under this article
considering that the PH Board of Safety is not a
department or agency of the PH government. People
v Belarmino
4. False representation does not consist only in oral
representation. False representation may be shown by
acts.
• A person’s acts of blowing his whistle, stopping
buses, and ordering drivers to step down their
passenger vehicles and produce their driver’s licenses
can make him liable for usurpation of authority.
People v Reyes
USURPATION OF OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
PERFORMING any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer 2 CRIMES IN THIS PROVISION
of the Philippine Government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof, 1. Using fictitious name
without being lawfully entitled to do so 2. Concealing true name and other circumstances
• It is essential that the offender should have
performed an act pertaining to an authority or USING FICTITIOUS NAME
public officer. Elements
1. The offender uses a name other than his real name
RELATED SPECIAL LAWS 2. He does so publicly
1. RA No. 75 3. The purpose is:
• This provides additional penalty for usurping the a. To conceal a crime
authority of diplomatic or consular or any other b. To evade the execution of a judgment
official of a foreign government duly accredited as c. To cause damage to public interest
such to the Government of the PH, provided that *note that the purpose must be to cause damage to public
the offender had intent to defraud either interest. Otherwise, the crime is estafa.
government.
• Using the uniform, decoration, or regalia of foreign Notes:
state with intent to deceive or mislead is likewise 1. Any other name which a person publicly applies to himself
punished by this law. without authority of law is a FICTITIOUS NAME.
2. RA No. 10 2. Examples:
a. Taking the place of another who was convicted by
• Any person, who with or without pretense of official position,
final judgment.
shall perform any act pertaining to the Government,
or to any person in authority or public officer, • In this case, the prisoner who is replaced
without being lawfully entitled to do so shall be uses the name of another to evade
punished with imprisonment of not less than 2 years execution of judgment against him.
nor more than 4 years. • The person that replaces him uses a
• The act performed, without the offender being fictitious name to conceal the crime of
lawfully entitled to do so, must pertain to the delivering a prisoner from jail
government, to any person in authority, or to any b. Signing fictitious name in an application for
public officer. passport.
• This is similar to the second sentence of Article 177,
CONCEALING TRUE NAME
but this law applies only to members of seditious
Elements
organization engaged in subversive activities.
1. The true offender conceals:
a. His true name
ARTICLE 178
b. All other personal circumstances
Using fictitious name and concealing true name
2. The purpose is only to conceal his identity
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not to exceed 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who shall publicly use a FICTITIOUS
USE OF FICTITIOUS NAME VS CONCEALING TRUE
NAME for the purpose of concealing a crime, evading the execution of a
NAME
judgment or causing damage.
USE OF FICTITIOUS CONCEALING TRUE
NAME NAME
Any person who CONCEALS his true name and other personal
circumstances shall be punished by arresto menor or a fine not to exceed Element of publicity necessary Element of publicity not
200 pesos. necessary
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 35
Crimes against public interest
The purpose is any of the 3 The purpose is merely to
above. conceal identity
USE OF UNREGISTERED ALIASES
1. The use of pseudonyms is allowed only where it is normally
accepted practice:
a. Literary
b. Cinema
c. TV
d. Radio or other entertainment purposes
e. Athletic events
2. Any person desiring to use an alias shall apply for authority
therefor in proceedings like those legally provided to obtain
judicial authority for a change of name, and no person shall be
allowed to secure such judicial authority for more than one
alias.
3. Any person who is allowed to use an alias shall state or affix
his real name when he represents himself in any public or
private transaction or when he signs or executes any public or
private document.
4. The use of an alias, to be considered public, must be made
openly, or in an open manner or place, or cause it to become
generally known. The intent to publicly use the alias must be
manifest.
• In the case of People v Estrada, Estrada was not held
liable under this Article when he signed in the
presence of Lacquian and Chua name of Jose
Velarde to open a trust account. The manifest
intent to use the alias publicly was absent in view
of the fact that the former was a chief of staff with
whom Estrada shared confidential matters and the
latter was a lawyer-friend bound by his oath and ties
of friendship to keep the privacy and secrecy of his
affairs.
Discussion: Is it possible to commit the 2nd act (concealing true name)
without using a fictitious name? Perhaps when one pretends that he
cannot read, write, and hear.
ARTICLE 179
Illegal use of uniforms or insignia
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall
publicly and improperly MAKE USE of insignia, uniforms or
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
dress pertaining to an office not held by such person or to a class of
persons of which he is not a member.
Elements
1. The offender makes use of insignia, uniform, or dress
2. Such insignia, uniform or dress pertains to:
a. An office not held by the offender, or
b. A class of persons of which he is not a member
3. The use is made publicly and improperly
Notes:
1. Wearing the uniform of an imaginary office is not punishable
because the second element requires the insignia, uniform, or
dress to pertain to an office or a class of persons.
2. The exact imitation of a uniform or dress is unnecessary.
a. A woman, roaming around and asking for alms for
orphans in the name of the Daughters of St. Paul
while wearing the habit of the nuns of said
organization, when in fact said organization had no
orphans and asking for alms was not its mission, was
held liable under this article. People v Romero
b. A colorable resemblance calculated to deceive the
common run of people- not those thoroughly
familiar with every detail or accessory thereof, is
sufficient. Exact imitation not necessary. People v
Romero
3. Wearing insignia, badge or emblem of rank of the members of
the AFP or PC is punished under RA 493.
4. The illegal manufacture, sale, distribution and use of PNP
uniforms, insignias, and other accoutrements are punished by
EO 297.
Discussion: If a professor, in a graduation ceremony (by invitation
only), wears a toga of a school from which he/she did not graduate.
Would it be a public/improper use of a toga? Public means enough that
is seen by a number of people. It need not be super public.
Section Two
False testimony
FALSE TESTIMONY. This is committed by a person who, being
under oath and required to testify as to the truth of a certain matter
at a hearing before a competent authority, shall deny the truth or say
something contrary to it.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
3 forms of false testimony
1. False testimony in criminal cases.
2. False testimony in civil cases.
3. False testimony in other cases.
False testimony is punished not because of the effect it actually produces, but because
of its tendency to favor or prejudice the defendant.
ARTICLE 180
False testimony against a defendant.
Any person who shall give false testimony AGAINST the defendant in
any criminal case shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if the defendant in said case
shall have been sentenced to death;
2. The penalty of prision mayor, if the defendant shall have been
sentenced to reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua;
3. The penalty of prision correccional, if the defendant shall have
been sentenced to any other afflictive penalty; and
4. The penalty of arresto mayor, if the defendant shall have been
sentenced to a correctional penalty or a fine, or shall have been
acquitted.
In cases provided in subdivisions 3 and 4 of this article the offender
shall further suffer a fine not to exceed 1,000 pesos.
Elements
1. That there be a criminal proceeding
2. The offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant
therein
3. The offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false.
4. That the defendant against whom the false testimony is given
is either acquitted or convicted in a final judgment.
Notes:
1. The 4 cases enumerated in Article 180 uniformly presuppose
a final judgment of conviction or acquittal as a prerequisite to
the actionability of the crime of false testimony against the
defendant.
2. The penalty depends upon the sentence of the defendant
against whom false testimony was given.
3. In order for this provision to apply, the defendant must be
sentenced at least to a correctional penalty, or a fine, or must
be acquitted.
36
Crimes against public interest
a. Hence, if the defendant is sentenced to arresto
menor, the person making a false testimony will not
be liable under this article.
4. The law punishes the mere giving of the false testimony.
a. Hence, a person who gives a false testimony is liable
even if his testimony was not considered by the
court.
b. This is because the law punishes the false witness
even if the defendant in the principal in the case is
acquitted.
ARTICLE 181
False testimony favorable to the defendants.
Any person who shall give false testimony IN FAVOR of the
defendant in a criminal case, shall suffer the penalties of arresto mayor in
its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period a
fine not to exceed 1,000 pesos, if the prosecution is for a felony punishable
by an afflictive penalty, and the penalty of arresto mayor in any other
case.
Notes:
1. While false testimony in favor of an accused may be less
obnoxious than false testimony against him, both forms of
false testimony are equally repugnant to the orderly
administration of justice and deserve to be rigorously
repressed.
2. The false testimony in favor of defendant need not
directly influence the decision of acquittal. It is sufficient
that the was given with the intent to favor the accused.
• The star witness in this case was a victim of robbery
who decided that he was no longer interested in
prosecuting the case against the accused. When the
fiscal refused to dismiss the case, the witness, when
asked to identify his robber, said that he could no
longer remember the face. This testimony led to the
acquittal of the robber. People v Reyes
• The testimony given is covered by this article
because it is not necessary that the testimony directly
influence the decision of acquittal. People v Reyes
3. The false testimony favorable to the defendant need not
benefit the defendant.
• A person falsely testified against the accused, but the
accused was nevertheless convicted. Even though
the accused was not benefited by the false testimony,
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
the person making such testimony is still liable. US v
Adolfo
• It is sufficient that the testimony was given with the
intent to favor the defendant. US v Adolfo
4. Conviction or acquittal of defendant in principal case is
not necessary. It is sufficient that the defendant in the
principal case is prosecuted for a felony punishable by
afflictive penalty or other penalty.
5. The defendant who falsely testified in his own behalf in
a criminal case is guilty of false testimony favorable to
the defendant.
• A defendant charged with estafa testified that the
extrajudicial confession attributed to him was
procured by the police by the use of force and
intimidation. He was acquitted on the basis of his
testimony. He is liable under this article. People vs
Soliman
6. Rectification made spontaneously after realizing the
mistake is not false testimony. The witness is not liable,
there being no sufficient evidence that he acted with malice or
with criminal intent to testify falsely. People v Ambal
ARTICLE 182
False testimony in civil cases.
Any person found guilty of false testimony in a CIVIL CASE shall
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and a
fine not to exceed 6,000 pesos, if the amount in controversy shall
exceed 5,000 pesos, and the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not to
exceed 1,000 pesos, if the amount in controversy shall not exceed said
amount or cannot be estimated.
Elements
1. The testimony must be given in a civil case
2. The testimony must relate to the issues presented in the said
case
3. The testimony must be false
4. The false testimony must be given by the defendant knowing
the same to be false
5. The testimony must be malicious and given with the intent to
affect the issues presented in said case
Note that Article 182 is not applicable when the false testimony is given in special
proceedings. It applies only to ordinary civil cases.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Example: Abraham sued Vasquez for the collection of a sum of money
(civil case). Vasquez the presented a receipt which, according to him,
has been signed and delivered by Abraham. He also testified under oath
tat he had paid Abraham the amount written in the receipt. However,
the receipt was not genuine. Vasquez is liable under Article 182. People
vs Vasquez
ARTICLE 183
False testimony in other cases and perjury in solemn affirmation.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person,
who knowingly makes untruthful statements and not being included
in the provisions of the next preceding articles, shall testify under oath,
or make an affidavit, upon any material matter before a competent
person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which the law so
requires.
Any person who, in case of a solemn affirmation made in lieu of an
oath, shall commit any of the falsehoods mentioned in this and the three
preceding articles of this section, shall suffer the respective penalties
provided therein.
TWO WAYS OF COMMITTING PERJURY
1. Falsely testifying under oath
2. Making a false affidavit
Note that falsely testifying under oath should not be in a judicial
proceeding.
Elements
1. The accused made a statement under oath or executed an
affidavit upon a material matter
2. The statement or affidavit was made before a competent
officer, authorized to receive and administer oath.
3. In the statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and
deliberate assertion of falsehood
4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is
required by law.
OATH. It is any form of attestation by which a person signifies that he
is bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully and truthfully.
• Example: B made a statement falsely charging A of estafa, that
is A received something in trust but denied having received it
after B demanded its return, when in fact no such incident
37
Crimes against public interest
really happened. B made the statement under oath in a
preliminary investigation before the Justice of Peace. All
elements of perjury are present in this case.
AFFIDAVIT . It is a sworn statement in writing; a declaration in
writing made upon oath before an authorized magistrate or officer.
MATERIAL MATTER. It is the main fact which is the subject of the
inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove that fact, or any fact
or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen the testimony
relative to the subject of inquiry, or which legitimately affects the credit
of any witness who testifies.
ARTICLE 184
Offering false testimony in evidence
Any person who shall knowingly offer in evidence a false witness or
testimony in any judicial or official proceeding, shall be punished as
guilty of false testimony and shall suffer the respective penalties
provided in this section.
Elements
1. The offender offered in evidence a false witness or false
testimony
2. That he knew the witness or the testimony was false
3. The offer was made in a judicial or official proceeding
OFFER OF EVIDENCE. Insofar as testimonial evidence is
concerned, offer of evidence begins the moment a witness is called to
the witness stand and interrogated by counsel. Section 35, Rule 132 of
the Rules of Court.
• The witness must have to testify.
• If the witness does not testify, the person who offers is liable
for attempted offering false testimony in evidence.
• The witness who desisted during the attempted state of
execution is an absolutory cause which exempts him from
criminal liability.
• The party who presented him, not having desisted, is
criminally liable.
Discussion: The offering of evidence should not be interpreted in the
strict sense as defined in the Rules of Court. If we do that, only the
prosecutor can be held liable. The provision is broad enough to cover
other persons who go to the prosecutor and offer false witness or
testimony.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Note: Article 184 applies when the offender, without inducing a
witness, but knowing him to be a false witness, presented him, and the
latter testified falsely in a judicial or official proceeding.
• If there is an inducement, Articles 180-183, in relation to
Article 7, paragraph 2, will apply.
PENALTY. The penalty is that for false testimony if committed in a
judicial proceeding or that for perjury if committed in other official
proceeding.
FALSE WITNESS V FALSE TESTIMONY. False witness was
never present in the scene of the crime. False testimony means the
witness was present, but gave a wrong testimony.
Chapter Three: FRAUDS
Section One
Machinations, monopolies and combinations
ARTICLE 185
Machinations in public auctions
Any person who shall SOLICIT any gift or promise as a
consideration for refraining from taking part in any public auction,
and any person who shall ATTEMPT TO CAUSE BIDDERS TO
STAY AWAY from an auction by threats, gifts, promises, or any other
artifice, with intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing
auctioned, shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum period and a fine ranging from 10 to 50 per centum of the
value of the thing auctioned.
ACTS PUNISHED UNDER THE PROVISION
1. Soliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining
from taking part in any public auction.
2. Attempting to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by
threats, gifts, promises, or any other artifice.
SOLICITING GIFTS OR PROMISE
Elements
1. 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.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
4. That the accused has the intent to cause the reduction of the
price of the thing auctioned.
Notes:
1. This is consummated by mere solicitation. It is not
required that the person making the proposal actually refrains
from taking part in the public auction.
2. If the person to whom the solicitation is made agrees to
pay or gives the gift or makes the promise, then he
becomes a principal in the crime. His act will be similar to
the second way of committing the crime.
ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE BIDDERS TO STAY AWAY
Elements
1. 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, or promises or any other
artifice
4. That the accused has the intent to cause the reduction of the
price of the thing auctioned.
Notes:
1. This is consummated by mere attempt
2. The threat need not be effective nor the offer or gift accepted
for the crime to arise
Example of machination in public auction
Facts: Mendezona is indebted to Diaz so she executed a mortgage on
her property in favor of the latter. Upon failure to pay, the property was
foreclosed and was set to be sold in a public auction. Kapunan was
ready to bid for 16, 000 but nevertheless started to bid at 12,000. Diaz
bid for 12, 500 and the bidding stopped there because Kapunan and
Diaz entered into an agreement Diaz will offer him a premium of 1, 000
if the former withdrew from the bidding. Kapunan withdrew.
Held: this is exactly the situation covered by Article 185 of the RPC.
Diaz v Kapunan
ARTICLE 186
Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade
This has been repealed by RA No. 10667 or the Philippine
Competition Act.
38
Crimes against public interest ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Section Two
Frauds in commerce and industry RA 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the PH,
repealed Articles 188 and 189 of the RPC which are inconsistent
ARTICLE 187 therewith.
Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold,
silver, or other precious metals or their alloys RA 8293:Intellectual Property Code of the PH
The penalty of prision correccional or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 ACTS COVERED: Infringement, Unfair competition, False
pesos, or both, shall be imposed on any person who shall knowingly designation of origin and false description or representation.
IMPORT or SELL or DISPOSE of any article or merchandise made
of gold, silver, or other precious metals, or their alloys, with stamps,
brands, or marks which fail to indicate the actual fineness or quality of
said metals or alloys.

Any stamp, brand, label, or mark shall be deemed to fail to indicate the
actual fineness of the article on which it is engraved, printed, stamped,
labeled or attached, when the rest of the article shows that the quality
or fineness thereof is less by more than one-half karat, if made of gold,
and less by more than four one-thousandth, if made of silver, than what
is shown by said stamp, brand, label or mark. But in case of watch cases
and flatware made of gold, the actual fineness of such gold shall not be
less by more than three one-thousandth than the fineness indicated by
said stamp, brand, label, or mark.

ARTICLES OR MERCHANDISE INVOLVED

Those made of:
1. Gold
2. Silver
3. Other precious metals
4. Their alloys

Elements
1. The offender imports, sells, or disposes of any of the articles
or merchandise above
2. The stamps, brands, or marks of those articles or merchandise
fail to indicate the actual fineness or quality of said metals or
alloys
3. The offender knows that the stamps, brands, or marks fail to
indicate the actual fineness or quality of said metals or alloys

ARTICLE 188
Subsisting and altering trade-mark, trade-names, or service marks.
ARTICLE 189
Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of trade-mark, trade-name or service
mark, fraudulent designation of origin, and false description.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 39

Crimes committed by public officers
Title Seven: CRIMES COMMITTED BY
PUBLIC OFFICERS
Chapter One
PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
ARTICLE 203
Who are public officers
For the purpose of applying the provisions of this and the preceding
titles of this book, any person who, by direct provision of the law,
popular election or appointment by competent authority, shall take
part in the performance of PUBLIC FUNCTIONS in the
Government of the Philippine Islands, or shall perform in said
Government or in any of its branches PUBLIC DUTIES as an
employee, agent or subordinate official, of any rank or class, shall be
deemed to be a public officer.
Requisites
To be a public officer, one must be
1. Taking part in the performance of public functions in the
Government, or
o performing in said government or in any of its
branches public duties as an employee, agent, or
subordinate official, of any rank or class.
2. That this 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
Notes:
1. One appointed as laborer in the government is not a public
officer
2. But temporary performance of public functions by a laborer
makes him a public officer
o Example: A laborer in the Bureau of Posts is not a
public officer. But if he were temporarily assigned as
a sorter and filer of money orders, he becomes a
public officer because the sorting or filing of money
orders is obviously a public duty.
Chapter Two
MALFEASANCE AND MISFEASANCE IN OFFICE
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
MISFEASANCE. This is the improper performance of some act
which might lawfully be done.
MALFEASANCE. This is the performance of some act which ought
not to be done.
NONFEASANCE. This is the omission of an act which ought to be
performed.
Section One
Dereliction of duty
ARTICLE 204
Knowingly rendering unjust judgment
Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust judgment in any
case submitted to him for decision, shall be punished by prision mayor
and perpetual absolute disqualification.
Elements
1. The offender is a judge
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision
3. The judgment is unjust
4. The judge knows that his judgment is unjust
Notes:
1. A JUDGMENT is the final consideration and determination
of a court of competent jurisdiction upon the matters
submitted to it in an action or proceeding.
2. UNJUST. A judgment is unjust if it is contrary to law, or is
not supported by the evidence, or both.
a. Sources of unjust judgment: (a) error or (b) ill-will or
(c) revenge or (d) bribery.
b. There must be evidence that the judgment is unjust-
it cannot be presumed. This is because there is a
presumption of regularity in the performance of
public functions.
3. KNOWINGLY. It is made knowingly if it is made
deliberately and maliciously. It means consciously,
intelligently, or willfully.
a. There must be evidence that the judge knew that the
judgment is unjust.
b. The rule requires that the judgment should be
rendered by the judge with conscious and deliberate
intent to do an injustice.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
4. Note that bad faith is the ground of liability
a. It is well-settled that a judicial officer, when required
to exercise his judgment or discretion, is not liable
criminally for any error which he commits, provided
he acts in good faith.
5. This provision does not apply to members of a collegiate
court.
a. Rendering knowingly an unjust judgment refers to an
individual judge
b. This does not apply to members of a collegiate court
who reach their conclusions in consultation and
accordingly render their collective judgment after
due deliberation.
ARTICLE 205
Judgment rendered through negligence
Any judge who, by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance shall
render a manifestly unjust judgment in any case submitted to him for
decision shall be punished by arresto mayor and temporary special
disqualification.
Elements
1. The offender is a judge
2. He renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision
3. The judgment is manifestly unjust
4. That it is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance
Notes:
1. A MANIFESTLY UNJUST JUDGMENT is one that is
manifestly contrary to law, that even a person having a meager
knowledge of the law cannot doubt the injustice.
2. Abuse of discretion or mere error of judgment is not
punishable.
a. Abuse of discretion by a trial court does not
necessarily mean ulterior motive, arbitrary conduct
or willful disregard of a litigant’s rights.
b. Mere error of judgment cannot serve as basis for a
charge of knowingly rendering an unjust judgment,
where there is no proof or even allegation of bad
faith, or ill motive, or improper consideration.
ARTICLE 206
Unjust interlocutory order
Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust interlocutory order
or decree shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period
40
Crimes committed by public officers
and suspension; but if he shall have acted by reason of inexcusable
negligence or ignorance and the interlocutory order or decree be
manifestly unjust, the penalty shall be suspension.
Elements
1. The offender is a judge
2. He performs the following acts:
a. Knowingly renders unjust interlocutory order or
decree
b. Renders a manifestly unjust interlocutory order or
decree through inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
An INTERLOCUTORY ORDER is an order which is issued by the
court between the commencement and the end of a suit or action and
which decides some point or matter, but which, however, is not a final
decision of the matter in issue.
• Test: Does it leave something to be done in the trial court
with respect to the merits of the case? If it does, it is
interlocutory. If it does not, it is final.
• Example: An order granting preliminary injunction or an
order appointing a receiver.
ARTICLE 207
Malicious delay in the administration of justice
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be
imposed upon any judge guilty of malicious delay in the administration
of justice.
Elements
1. The offender is a judge
2. There is a proceeding in his court
3. He delays the administration of justice
4. The delay is malicious, that is, the delay caused by the judge
with deliberate intent to inflict damage on either party in the
case.
Mere delay without malice is not a felony under this article.
Note: Under Article 8, Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution, decision
must be rendered within:
Supreme Court 24 months
Lower Collegiate Court 12 months
Other Lower Courts 3 months
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
ARTICLE 208
Prosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and
suspension shall be imposed upon any public officer, or officer of the
law, who, in dereliction of the duties of his office, shall
MALICIOUSLY REFRAIN from instituting prosecution for the
punishment of violators of the law, or shall TOLERATE the
commission of offenses.
ACTS PUNIHSABLE
1. By maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against
violators of the law.
2. By maliciously tolerating the commission of offenses.
Note that the word negligence, as used in the title of the provision, does not mean
the mere lack of foresight or skill. It means the neglect of duties by
maliciously failing to move the prosecution and punishment of
the delinquent.
DERELICTION IN PROSECUTION
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer or officer of the law who has
a duty to cause the prosecution of, or to prosecute, offenses.
• PUBLIC OFFICER extends to officers of the
prosecution department, whose duty is to institute
criminal proceedings for felonies upon being
informed of their perpetration.
• OFFICER OF THE LAW includes all those who,
by reason of the position held by them, are duty
bound to cause the prosecution and punishment of
the offenders.
2. There is dereliction of the duties of his office, that is:
a. knowing the commission of the crime, he does not
cause the prosecution of the criminal
b. knowing that a crime is about to be committed, he
tolerates its commission
3. The offender acts with malice and deliberate intent to favor
the violator of the law
Notes:
1. There must be a duty on the part of the public officer to
prosecute or to move the prosecution of the offender
• Chief of police and barrio lieutenant have such duty.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Maliciously signifies deliberate evil intent. A dereliction of duty
caused by poor judgment or honest mistake is not punishable.
3. The crime must be proved to have been committed
before dereliction can arise. Otherwise, there would be no
duty and the officer could not be said to have been remiss of
such duty.
• If the guilt of the law-violator is not proved, the
person charged with dereliction of duty under this
article is not liable.
4. Examples:
a. A chief of police who, in breach of official duty,
failed to prosecute a jueteng collector, in that he
failed to file the corresponding criminal action
against the latter who was caught possessing jueteng
lists is liable under Article 208. People v Mina
b. A barrio lieutenant or barrio captain who, in neglect
of his duty, fails to move the prosecution of, and
punishment for, a crime of arson, of which he is
informed, would, in case the alleged crime was
afterwards duly proven, be guilty of
PREVARICACION in Article 208. US v Mendoza
c. A fiscal who, knowing that the evidence against the
accused is more than sufficient to secure his
conviction in court, drops the case, is liable and may
be punished under Article 208.
o But the fiscal or the city attorney, as
prosecuting officer, is under no
compulsion to file the corresponding
information based upon a complaint,
where he is not convinced that the evidence
gathered or presented would warrant the
filing of an action in court.
d. Shall tolerate the commission of offenses. A
approached the Chief of Police of a town and asked
him not to raid his gambling house for 2 days.
Because A was his friend, the Chief of Police
acceded to the request. Gambling games were played
in A’s house. CoP is liable as principal in Article 208,
not merely as an accessory.
5. This provision is not applicable to revenue officers, who are
punished under the Internal Revenue Law.
ARTICLE 209
Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor. Revelation of secrets
41
Crimes committed by public officers
In addition to the proper administrative action, the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any attorney-at-law or solicitor
( procurador judicial) who, by any malicious breach of professional
duty or of inexcusable negligence or ignorance, shall PREJUDICE
his client, or REVEAL any of the secrets of the latter learned by him
in his professional capacity.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon an attorney-at-law or solicitor
(procurador judicial) who, having undertaken the defense of a client or
having received confidential information from said client in a case, shall
UNDERTAKE THE DEFENSE OF THE OPPOSING PARTY
IN THE SAME CASE, without the consent of his first client.
ACTS PUNISHED AS BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY
ATTORNEY
1. By causing damage to his client, either by:
a. Any malicious abuse of his employment
b. Inexcusable negligence or ignorance
2. By revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by him in
his professional capacity.
• Damage is not necessary here.
3. By undertaking the defense of the opposing party in the same
case, without the consent of his first client, after having
undertaken the defense of said first client or after having
received confidential information from said client.
• If the client consents to the attorney’s taking the
defense of the other party, there is no crime.
Note: There is no solicitor or procurador judicial under the Rules of
Court.
• A procurador judicial is a person who had some
practical knowledge of law and procedure, but not a
lawyer, and was permitted to represent a party in a
case before an inferior court.
• Under the RoC, in the court of a justice of the peace,
a party may conduct his litigation in person, with the
aid of an agent or a friend or with the aid of an
attorney.
Section Two
Bribery
ARTICLE 210
Direct bribery
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Any public officer who shall AGREE to perform an act constituting a
crime, in connection with the performance of this official duties, in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present received by such
officer, personally or through the mediation of another, shall suffer the
penalty of prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods and a
fine of not less than the value of the gift and] not less than three times
the value of the gift in addition to the penalty corresponding to the
crime agreed upon, if the same shall have been committed.
If the gift was ACCEPTED by the officer in consideration of the
execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, and the officer
EXECUTED said act, he shall suffer the same penalty provided in the
preceding paragraph; and if said act shall not have been accomplished,
the officer shall suffer the penalties of prision correccional, in its
medium period and a fine of not less than twice the value of such gift.
If the object for which the gift was received or promised was to make
the public officer REFRAIN FROM DOING SOMETHING
WHICH IT WAS HIS OFFICIAL DUTY TO DO, he shall suffer
the penalties of prision correccional in its maximum period and a fine
of not less than the value of the gift and not less than three times the
value of such gift.
In addition to the penalties provided in the preceding paragraphs, the
culprit shall suffer the penalty of special temporary disqualification.
The provisions contained in the preceding paragraphs shall be made
applicable to assessors, arbitrators, appraisal and claim commissioners,
experts or any other persons performing public duties. (As amended by
Batas Pambansa Blg. 871, approved May 29, 1985).
ACTS PUNISHABLE IN DIRECT BRIBERY
1. By agreeing to perform, or by 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. By a 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. By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining, from doing
something which it is his official duty to do, in consideration
of a gift or promise.
Elements
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. The offender is a public officer within the scope of Article
203.
2. The offender accepts an offer or a promise or receives a gift
or present by himself or through another
3. That 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. That the act which the offender agrees to perform or which
he executes be connected with the performance of his official
duties.
Note: the elements under the first and second paragraph are the same, with the sole
exception that the act intended by the officer, although unjust and is connected with
the performance of his official duty, does not amount to a crime.
PUBLIC OFFICER
1. It is comprehensive enough to embrace every public servant
from the highest to the lowest rank.
2. For the purpose of bribery, the temporary performance of
public functions is sufficient to constitute a person as a public
officer.
GIFT- HOW GIVEN OR RECEIVED
• In bribery, the gift or present must be given to the public
officer to corrupt him.
• Bribery exists when:
1. The gift is offered voluntarily by a private person
2. When the gift is solicited by a public officer and the
private person voluntarily delivers it to the public officer
3. When the gift is solicited by a public officer as the
consideration for his refraining from the performance of
an official duty and the private person gives the gift for
fear of the consequences which would result if the officer
performs his functions.
• Does the gift have to be accepted?
1. First paragraph: a promise of gift to a public officer
who accepts such promise is sufficient to consummate
the crime. (meaning, it is sufficient that the public officer
42
Crimes committed by public officers
agrees to perform the crime, regardless of WON he
actually performs it)
▪ So basically, two elements must concur to
be liable under this paragraph: promise to
give gift to a public officer and promise
to commit an unlawful act
▪ If the public officer does not accept the
offer, he is not liable for any crime. The
person making the offer shall be liable for
attempted corruption of public officer.
▪ It is not necessary that the evidence shows
an express promise. It is sufficient if from
all the circumstances in the case, such
promise can be implied. US v Richard.
2. Second paragraph: the gift must be accepted by the
public officer. He is liable for mere acceptance of the gift,
regardless of whether he executes the act or not. The
penalty is higher if he executes the act.
▪ The second paragraph presupposes an
over act, an outward act done in pursuance
and in manifestation of an intent or design,
brought to completeness.
3. Third paragraph: the provision says “the gift is received
or promised”. No discussion on this.
▪ But note that the first form of bribery is
committed if by refraining from doing an
act the public officer commits a crime.
• The gift or present must have a value or be capable of
pecuniary estimation (because the penalty depends on the
value of the gift)
IN CONNECTION WITH THE PERFORMANCE OF
OFFICIAL DUTIES
1. The act which the public officer agreed to perform must
be an act in discharge of his legal duty.
• If it is not in connection to his duties, that is, he has
no power or authority to do the act promised, he
may be liable for estafa.
• Example: a barrio lieutenant accepted gifts under the
promise to relive the persons from whom he had
obtained them of the obligation to perform such
duties. Said barrio lieutenant had no authority to
relieve the duties of said people. He is liable for
estafa for pretending to possess authority. US v Jader
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. However, the act need not be a statutory duty. It is
sufficient if the action to be affected by the bribe be part of
the established procedure of a government agency.
3. It is not bribery if the act is in discharge of a mere moral
duty. Dishon v Smith
4. It is not bribery if the act agreed to be performed is so foreign
to the duties of the office as to lack even color of authority,
there is no bribery. Gunning v People
5. Prevaricacion distinguished from bribery. The two felonies are
similar in that they are both committed by refraining from
doing something which pertains to the official duty of the
officer. However, the element of doing so in consideration
of a gift or promise is not present in prevaricacion.
INVOLVES MORAL TURPITUDE
The fact that an offender agrees to accept a gift to do an unjust act,
commit a crime, or refrain from a lawful duty denotes malicious intent
to renege on his duties.
PENALTY
The penalty to be imposed is penalty corresponding to bribery under
this provision in addition to the penalty of the crime actually
committed, if any.
Example: A court stenographer accepted a promise of 100
from an individual and promised to alter the notes taken by
him during the trial of a case.
o Stenographer is liable for bribery under the first
paragraph.
o If he alters his notes, he will be liable for bribery and
falsification under Article 171.
ARTICLE 211
Indirect bribery.
The penalties of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods, and public censure shall be imposed upon any public officer
who shall ACCEPT gifts offered to him by reason of his office. (As
amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 871, approved May 29, 1985).
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He accepts gifts
3. Said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Notes:
1. The gift is usually given to the public officer in anticipation
of future favor from the public officer.
2. The public officer must accept the gifts offered to him.
a. This is an essential element of indirect bribery.
b. There must be a clear intention on the part of the
public officer to take the gift so offered and consider
the same as his own property from then on (putting
the gift away for safekeeping or pocketing the same).
c. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any other
sign, circumstance, or act to show such acceptance is
not sufficient to lead the court to conclude that
indirect bribery has been committed.
3. There is no attempted or frustrated indirect bribery. The
crime is consummated by accepting the gifts offered to the
public officer by reason of his office. If he accepts them, he is
liable. If he does not, he is not liable.
4. Receiving of gifts by public officials and employees, and
giving of gifts by private persons, on any occasion,
including Christmas is punishable.
a. The prohibition includes throwing of parties or
entertainments in honor of the official or employee
or of his immediate relatives.
DIRECT BRIBERY V INDIRECT BRIBERY
DIRECT BRIBERY INDIRECT BRIBERY
Public officer receives gift
There is an agreement between Usually, no such agreement
the public officer and the giver exists
of the gift
The public officer agrees to It is not necessary that the
perform or performs an act or officer should do any particular
refrains from doing something act or even promise to do an act.
because of the gift
It is sufficient that he accepts the
gifts offered to him by reason of
his office.
The difference of indirect bribery and direct bribery under the second
paragraph is that in the latter, the act executed must be unjust.
ARTICLE 211-A
43
Crimes committed by public officers
Qualified bribery
If any public officer is entrusted with law enforcement and he
REFRAINS from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has
committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in
consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present, he shall suffer
the penalty for the offense which was not prosecuted.
If it is the public officer who ASKS OR DEMANDS such gift or
present, he shall suffer the penalty of death. (As added by Sec. 4, RA
No. 7659).
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with law
enforcement
2. The offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting an
offender who has committed a crime punishable by reclusion
perpetua to death
3. The offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting the
offender in consideration of any promise, gift or present.
No further discussion.
ARTICLE 212
Corruption of public officials.
The same penalties imposed upon the officer corrupted, except those
of disqualification and suspension, shall be imposed upon any person
who shall have MADE the offers or promises or GIVEN the gifts or
presents as described in the preceding articles.
Elements
1. The offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts or
presents to a public officer
2. The offers or promises are made or the gifts or presents given
to a public officer, under circumstances that will make the
public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect bribery.
Notes:
1. The offender in corruption of public officer is the giver of gift
or offeror of promise.
2. The person who made the offer or promise or gave the gift is
punished under this provision even if the gift was
demanded by the public officer and the offer was not
made voluntarily prior to the said demand by the public
officer.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
3. In view of the fact that it is hard to prove bribery, for the
briber himself is punished by law and he is usually the only
one who could give direct evidence, ways and means are
resorted to catch the public officer while he is in the act of
obtaining bribes. Bribery is usually proved by evidence
acquired in entrapment.
Chapter Three
FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS AND
TRANSACTIONS
ARTICLE 213
Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium period to prision
mayor in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 10,000
pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any PUBLIC OFFICER who:
1. In his official capacity, in dealing with any person with regard
to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the
adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public
property or funds, shall ENTER into an agreement with any
interested party or speculator or make use of any other
scheme, to DEFRAUD the Government;
2. Being entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees
and other imposts, shall be guilty or any of the following acts
or omissions:
a. DEMANDING, directly, or indirectly, the payment
of sums different from or larger than those
authorized by law.
b. FAILING VOLUNTARILY TO ISSUE A
RECEIPT, as provided by law, for any sum of
money collected by him officially.
c. COLLECTING OR RECEIVING, directly or
indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise things or
objects of a nature different from that provided by
law.
When the culprit is an officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal
Revenue or the Bureau of Customs, the provisions of the
Administrative Code shall be applied.
ACTS PUNISHABLE AS FRAUDS AGAINST PUBLIC
TREASURY AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS
1. Entering into an agreement with any interested party or
speculator or making use of any other scheme to defraud the
Government, in dealing with any person with regard to
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment
or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds.
2. Demanding, directly, or indirectly, the payment of sums
different from or larger than those authorized by law in the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
3. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for
any sum of money collected by him officially, in the collection
of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
4. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of
payment or otherwise things or objects of a nature different
from that provided by law, in the collection of taxes, licenses,
fees and other imposts.
FRAUDS AGAINST PUBLIC TREASURY
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He took advantage of his office, that is, he intervened in the
transaction in his official capacity
3. He entered into an agreement with any interested party or
speculator or make use of any other scheme to defraud the
Government with regard to:
a. Furnishing supplies
b. The making of contracts
c. The adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to
public property or funds.
4. The accused had intent to defraud the government
Notes:
1. The public officer must act in his official capacity. The
offender must have the duty as public officer to deal with any
person with regard to furnishing supplies, the making of
contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating
to public property or funds.
2. Intent to defraud is sufficient. It is not necessary that the
Government is actually defrauded by reason of the
transaction. The crime of frauds against public treasury is
consummated by merely entering into an agreement with
interested party or speculator or by merely making use of any
other scheme to defraud the government.
ILLEGAL EXACTIONS
Elements
44
Crimes committed by public officers
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with the collection
of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts
2. He is guilty of the following acts or omissions:
a. Demanding, directly, or indirectly, the payment of
sums different from or larger than those authorized
by law.
b. Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by
law, for any sum of money collected by him
officially.
c. Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way
of payment or otherwise things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law.
Notes:
1. Mere demand for larger or different amount is sufficient
to consummate the crime. It is not necessary for the
taxpayer to actually pay the sum larger than or different from
that required by law.
2. When there is deceit in demanding greater fees than those
prescribed by law, the crime committed is estafa and not
illegal exaction.
a. When the municipal treasurer, by means of deceit,
collected from several residents of the municipality
greater fees than those prescribed by law for the
branding and registering cattle, the crime is estafa
and not illegal exaction. US v Lopez
3. Collecting officer must issue official receipts. Otherwise, he
becomes liable under this provision.
4. A tax collector who collected a sum larger than that authorized
by law and spent all of them is guilty of illegal exaction and
malversation.
• The difference between the amount fixed by law and
the amount actually collected, having been paid in
the concept of tax and received as such by the
collector, forms part of public funds.
• The government may refund the difference.
5. Officers or employers of BIR and BoC are covered by NIRC
or the Administrative Code.
ARTICLE 214
Other frauds.
In addition to the penalties prescribed in the provisions of Chapter Six,
Title Ten, Book Two, of this Code, the penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual special
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
disqualification shall be imposed upon any public officer who, taking
advantage of his official position, shall commit any of the frauds or
deceits enumerated in said provisions.
Elements
1. The offender is a public officer
2. He takes advantage of his position
3. He commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in articles
315 to 318.
a. Estafa
b. Other forms of swindling
c. Swindling a minor
d. Other deceits
Note: RTC has jurisdiction when this article is involved regardless of
the amount or penalty.
ARTICLE 215
Prohibited transactions
The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period or a fine
ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any
APPOINTIVE PUBLIC OFFICER who, during his incumbency,
shall directly or indirectly become interested in any transaction of
exchange or speculation within the territory subject to his jurisdiction.
Elements
1. Offender is an appointive public officer
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any
transaction of exchange or speculation
3. The transaction takes place within the territory subject to his
jurisdiction
4. That he becomes interested during is incumbency
EXCHANGE OR SPECULATION
Example: Buying and selling stocks, land, etc., hoping to take
advantage of an expected rise or fall in price.
• But purchasing shares of stocks or shares in a company within
the territory subject to his jurisdiction is simply an investment
and is not a violation of this article.
• What makes it speculation is buying securities for resale
regularly. An appointive public officer should not devote
himself to commerce.
• Appointive public officers include:
o justices, judges or fiscals and
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o employees engaged in the collection and
administration of public funds.
ARTICLE 216
Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional
in its minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon a PUBLIC OFFICER who directly or
indirectly, shall become interested in any contract or business in which
it is his official duty to intervene.
This provisions is applicable to experts, arbitrators and private
accountants who, in like manner, shall take part in any contract or
transaction connected with the estate or property in appraisal,
distribution or adjudication of which they shall have acted, and to
the guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to
their wards or estate.
PEOPLE LIABLE FOR POSSESSION OF PROHIBITED
INTEREST
1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, shall become
interested in any contract or business in which it is his official
duty to intervene
2. Experts, arbitrators and private accountants who, in like
manner, shall take part in any contract or transaction
connected with the estate or property in appraisal, distribution
or adjudication of which they shall have acted
3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property
belonging to their wards or estate.
Notes:
1. Actual fraud is not necessary. The act is punished because
of the possibility that fraud may be committed or that the
officer may place his own interest above that of the
government or the party he represents.
2. Intervention must be by virtue of public office held. An
official who intervenes in contracts or transactions which have
no connection with his office cannot commit the crime
defined in article 216.
• Example: V mortgages his property to the Pension
Board, and subsequently transferred such property
to O. The accused was the secretary and executive of
the Pension Board and acquired the property from
45
Crimes committed by public officers
O and assumed the obligation concerning the
mortgage originally instituted by V.
o The accused did not intervene in his official
capacity.
Section 14, Article 6 of the 1987 Constitution
No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally
appear as counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies. Neither
shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract
with, or in any franchise or special privilege granted by the
Government, or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its
subsidiary, during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any
matter before any office of the Government for his pecuniary benefit
or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office.
Section 13, Article 7 of the 1987 Constitution
The President, Vice-President, the Members of the Cabinet, and their
deputies or assistants shall not, unless otherwise provided in this
Constitution, hold any other office or employment during their tenure.
They shall not, during said tenure, directly or indirectly, practice any
other profession, participate in any business, or be financially interested
in any contract with, or in any franchise, or special privilege granted by
the Government or any subdivision, agency, or instrumentality thereof,
including government-owned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries. They shall strictly avoid conflict of interest in the conduct
of their office.
Section 2, Article IX-A of the 1987 Constitution
No member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure,
hold any office or employment. Neither shall he engage in the practice
of any profession or in the active management or control of any
business which in any way may be effected by the functions of his
office, nor shall he be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in an
contract with, or in any franchise or privilege granted by the
government, or any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities,
including government-owned or controlled corporations or their
subsidiaries.
Chapter Four
MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
ARTICLE 217
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
Malversation of public funds or property; Presumption of malversation. 4. He appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented, or
Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is through abandonment or negligence, permitted another
accountable for public funds or property, shall APPROPRIATE the person to take them.
same or shall TAKE OR MISAPPROPRIATE or shall CONSENT,
through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to ACTS PUNISHABLE
take such public funds, or property, wholly or partially, or shall 1. Appropriating funds or property
otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such 2. Taking or appropriating the same
funds or property, shall suffer: 3. Consenting, or through abandonment or negligence,
1. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and permitting any other person to take such public funds or
maximum periods, if the amount involved in the property
misappropriation or malversation does not exceed two 4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
hundred pesos. malversation of such funds or property.
2. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium Notes:
periods, if the amount involved is more than two hundred 1. EMBEZZLEMENT. Malversation is also called
pesos but does not exceed six thousand pesos. embezzlement. This is evident in the 2nd to the last paragraph
3. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to of Article 217, which says that the fine is equal to the amount
reclusion temporal in its minimum period, if the amount of property embezzled.
involved is more than six thousand pesos but is less than 2. Nature of the duties is controlling. The nature of the duties
twelve thousand pesos. of the public officer, not the name of the office, is controlling.
4. The penalty of reclusion temporal, in its medium and The law says who, by reason of the duties of his office. Therefore, an
maximum periods, if the amount involved is more than twelve emergency employee entrusted with the collection and/or
thousand pesos but is less than twenty-two thousand pesos. If custody of public funds may be held liable for malversation.
the amount exceeds the latter, the penalty shall be reclusion 3. Funds or property must be received in official capacity.
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Otherwise, the crime committed is estafa.
In all cases, persons guilty of malversation shall also suffer the penalty ESTAFA MALVERSATION
of perpetual special disqualification and a fine equal to the amount of The offender misappropriates The offender appropriates
the funds malversed or equal to the total value of the property funds or property for which he funds or property for which he
embezzled. had no authority to receive. had authority to receive/ had
custody thereof and for which
The failure of a public officer to have DULY FORTHCOMING any he had the obligation to
public funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by account.
any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has Municipal councilor who Municipal president spent for
put such missing funds or property to personal use. (As amended by received from another person P5 himself P60 which he had
RA 1060). for a permit to slaughter animals received from the
under a promise to secure a superintendent of schools as a
Elements receipt therefor but rent for a house owned by the
1. Offender is a public officer misappropriated the same is municipality was guilty of
2. He had custody or control of funds or property by reason of guilty of estafa, not malversation, said amount
his office malversation. US v Radaza having been received by him by
3. The funds or property were public funds or property for reason of his office. US v Togonon
which he was accountable Ask yourself: is it part of his duty to receive such money or property?
4. Qualified charge of funds or property does not make one
liable for estafa. A public officer having only a qualified
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 46
Crimes committed by public officers
charge of Government property without authority to part with
physical possession of it unless upon order from his
immediate superior cannot be held liable for malversation.
Such person, however, can be held liable for theft or its
kindred offenses.
US v Webster
Defendant was a forge master having charge of Government
forage in the corral in Manila. But he could not issue a forage
without the orders of the quartermaster, who was directly
responsible to the Government. Without the orders of such
quartermaster, he sent out of the warehouse 186 bales of hay
and 138 sacks of oat. Defendant held guilty of theft.
➢ Note that in this case, the offender had no authority
to receive the property and was therefor not an
accountable officer.
5. Webster Doctrine above not applicable when accused
had authority to receive money pertaining to the
government.
US vs Velasquez
Defendant argued that although he was accountable for the
public funds in question, he cannot be held liable for
malversation because he could not disburse such funds
without authority from his superior.
Held: Defendant guilty of malversation. As opposed to the
Webster case, defendant had the authority to receive money
pertaining to the Government. He was an accountable officer.
It is the nature of his duties, and not his performance of those
duties (WON he can disburse with authority), that determines
the character of his offense. Further, in the Webster case, the
only responsibility of the accused was towards his superior,
who, in turn, was the one directly responsible to the
government.
6. When private individuals guilty of malversation. A private
person conspiring with an accountable public officer in
committing malversation is also guilty of malversation. The
same is true with a public officer who is not an accountable
officer.
7. Public funds and property.
• Public funds include revenue funds and trust funds.
• Public properties include firearms or explosives
seized from persons not authorized to possess them,
which are in the custody of peace officers.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
8. Private property may be involved in malversation. The
provisions of Article 217 applicable to administrator or
depository of funds or property attached, seized, or deposited
by public authority, even if such property belongs to a private
individual.
9. In malversation not committed through negligence, lack
of criminal intent or good faith may be interposed as a
defense.
People v Elvina
A municipal officer, who in good faith paid out of public
funds, persons in accordance with the resolution of the
municipal council, but the payments were made in violation of
the law because of insufficient vouchers or improper
evidence, is only civilly liable, there being no criminal intent.
10. Presumption of malversation from failure to have duly
forthcoming public funds or property upon demand. The
failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public
funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand
by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence
that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use.
• An accountable public officer may be convicted of
malversation even if there is no direct evidence of
misappropriation and the only evidence is that there
is a shortage in his accounts which he has not been
able to explain satisfactorily. People v Mingoa
• The demand can be made orally.
• But if the accountable officer AT ONCE presents
the money the very moment the shortage is
discovered, no prima facie evidence of malversation
can be established.
11. Demand not necessary. Demand is not an element of
malversation. It is only necessary in establishing a prima facie
case of malversation.
12. Return of malversed funds mitigating. The return of the
funds malversed is only mitigating circumstance, not
exempting.
13. Damage to government not necessary. The law uses the
word involved. The penalty for malversation in the article is
based on the amount involved in the embezzlement and not
the amount of damage caused.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
1. Appropriating funds or property
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
To APPROPRIATE includes every attempt to dispose of the same
without right.
US v Calimag
Accused was municipal treasurer and deputy provincial treasurer who
advanced his salary out of the funds he was accountable for. SC held
that he is guilty of malversation. He had no authority to pay himself his
salary as deputy provincial treasurer.
2. Taking or appropriating the same
To TAKE in malversation means to take as in theft. Hence,
malversation is consummated without the offender having been able to
dispose of the funds or property taken.
• Example: A is a teller in the office of the city treasurer. He
was leaving the office with the public funds which he collected
from certain taxpayers but he was arrested by an NBI agent.
He is guilty of consummated malversation.
To MISAPPROPRIATE in malversation means to spend for his
personal benefit certain amount of money forming part of funds under
the accountable officer’s charge.
3. Consenting, or through abandonment or negligence,
permitting any other person to take such public funds
or property
NEGLIGENCE is the omission to do something which a reasonable
man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the
conduct of human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which
a prudent and reasonable man would do.
• Test for negligence. Did the defendant, in doing the alleged
negligent act, use that reasonable care and caution which an
ordinary prudent person would have used in the same
situation? If not, he is guilty of negligence.
o The measure of negligence is the standard of care
commensurate with the occasion.
• Where a public officer, accountable for public funds or
property, violates regulations of his office, that violation is
evidence of negligence.
• But in malversation, the negligence of the accountable public
officer must be positively and clearly shown to be inexcusable,
approximating malice or fraud.
No negligence
People v Bernas
Defendant had under his custody more than 200 sacks of rice under his
custody. It was almost harvest season, therefore, there was a need to
47
Crimes committed by public officers
briskly dispose of the stock, otherwise, the prices would considerably
fall. To effect a swifter disposal of the large stock of rice, he sold such
rice on credit without the authority to do so. Also, at the said time, he
had no safe place to keep the rice and there was an impending typhoon.
• Held: Defendant cannot be reasonably accused of having
consented, through abandonment or negligence, permitted
other persons to take public funds or property in his custody
simply because in selling the rice on credit, he disposed of the
cereal for valuable consideration. This fact negates negligence
or criminal abandonment. However, as the sales on credit
were made in violation of existing regulations, said
transactions are deemed to have been undertaken at his own
risk and he may be held civilly liable therefor.
• Doctrine: Negligence of the accountable public officer
must be positively and clearly shown to be inexcusable,
approximating malice or fraud.
With negligence
People v Pili
The postmaster was short of P24,476.34 in his cash
accountability. He said that the said amount, consisting of
cash, warrants, and checks, were taken when the drawer of his
table was forced open. The items were supposed to be in his
iron safe but he failed to return them because it was so dark
(his petromax light has ran out).
• Held: Accused was negligent. This negligence
consisted in his failure to take the necessary
precaution in returning the items to the combination
safe to safeguard them. If he were not negligent, he
could have asked the policeman on duty to furnish
him the necessary light so that he may be able to
return the items to the safe where they rightfully
belonged.
People v Torres
Torres was a 1stLt in the PA and was assigned as a special
disbursing officer of the 22nd Battalion Combat Team. By
virtue of his office, it was his duty to collect the GSIS
insurance premiums by deducting the same from the base pay
of the employees. He personally made the remittances at first,
but later on, he commissioned Sgt De la Cruz, accompanied
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
by Torres’ driver, to make the remittances. More than P56k
was malversed.
• Held: Torres was negligent. The fact that he ordered
his trusted driver to accompany De la Cruz to GSIS
in making the remittances cannot exonerate him.
Entrusting a mere driver, the task of supervising the
proper delivery of big sums of money is, to say the
least, a proof of negligence rather than of diligence
expected of an AFP official. Also, he knew as a
finance officer that the meager pay of a sergeant in
the PA is barely enough to modestly maintain a
family. De la Cruz was sporting a car and kept a
mistress. Yet, Torres never bothered to investigate
WON the sergeant faithfully delivered to GSIS the
amounts in question.
4. Being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.
ARTICLE 218
Failure of accountable officer to render accounts
Any PUBLIC OFFICER, whether in the service or separated
therefrom by resignation or any other cause, who is REQUIRED by
law or regulation to render account to the Insular Auditor (now COA),
or to a provincial auditor and who FAILS to do so for a period of two
months after such accounts should be rendered, shall be punished by
prision correccional in its minimum period, or by a fine ranging from
200 to 6,000 pesos, or both.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer, whether in the service or
separated therefrom
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He is required by law or regulation to render accounts to the
COA or to a provincial auditor
4. He fails to do so for a period of 2 months after such accounts
should be rendered
Notes:
1. Demand not necessary. The provision does not require that
the COA demand for an accounting from a public officer. It
is sufficient that the law or regulation requires such public
officer to render account.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Misappropriation not necessary. It there is
misappropriation, offender is liable under Article 217.
ARTICLE 219
Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts before leaving the country.
Any public officer who unlawfully LEAVES or ATTEMPTS to leave
the Philippine Islands without securing a certificate from the Insular
Auditor showing that his accounts have been finally settled, shall be
punished by arresto mayor, or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos or
both.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
property
3. He must have unlawfully left (or be on the point of leaving)
the PH without securing from the COA a certificate showing
that his accounts have been finally settled.
Notes:
The act of leaving the country must be unauthorized or not permitted
by law.
ARTICLE 220
Illegal use of public funds or property.
Any public officer who shall APPLY any public fund or property
under his administration to any PUBLIC USE other than for which
such fund or property were appropriated by law or ordinance shall
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a
fine ranging from one-half to the total of the sum misapplied, if by
reason of such misapplication, any damages or embarrassment shall
have resulted to the public service. In either case, the offender shall also
suffer the penalty of temporary special disqualification.
If no damage or embarrassment to the public service has resulted, the
penalty shall be a fine from 5 to 50 per cent of the sum misapplied.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. There is public fund or property under his administration
3. Such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or
ordinance
48
Crimes committed by public officers
4. He applies the same to public use other than that for which
such fund or property has been appropriated by law or
ordinance.
Notes:
1. This is also known as TECHNICAL MALVERSATION.
2. The funds or property must be appropriated by law or
ordinance for a public purpose. Otherwise, there is no
technical malversation.
3. Criminal intent is not an element of technical
malversation. The offense is mala prohibita. It is the
commission of an act as defined by law, and the character or
effect thereof, that determines whether or not the provision
has been violated.
ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY
DISTINGUISHED FROM MALVERSATION
ILLEGAL USE MALVERSATION
Offenders are accountable public officers in both crimes.
Offender does not derive any Offender profits from the
personal gain or profit proceeds of the crime
Public fund or property is Public fund or property is
applied to another public use applied to personal use and
benefit of the offender or any
other person
Technical malversation is not included in nor does it necessarily include
the crime of malversation of public funds.
ARTICLE 221
Failure to make delivery of public funds or property.
Any public officer under obligation to make payment from
Government funds in his possession, who shall fail to make such
payment, shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine from 5 to 25 per
cent of the sum which he failed to pay.
This provision shall apply to any public officer who, being ordered by
competent authority to deliver any property in his custody or under
his administration, shall refuse to make such delivery.
The fine shall be graduated in such case by the value of the thing,
provided that it shall not be less than 50 pesos.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. By failing to make payment by a public officer who is under
obligation to make such payment from Government funds in
his possession
2. By refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has been
ordered by competent authority to deliver any property in his
custody or under his administration
Elements
1. Public officer has government funds in his possession
2. He is under obligation to make payment from such funds
3. He fails to make payment maliciously
Note: The refusal must be malicious. Hence, a stenographer who
retains in his possession the stenographic notes taken by him for the
purpose of transcribing the same does not commit a violation of this
article.
ARTICLE 222
Officers included in the preceding provisions.
The provisions of this chapter shall apply to PRIVATE
INDIVIDUALS who in any capacity whatever, have charge of any
insular (now national), provincial or municipal funds, revenues, or
property and to any ADMINISTRATOR or DEPOSITORY of
funds or property attached, seized or deposited by public authority,
even if such property belongs to a private individual.
Notes:
1. Purpose. The purpose of this provision is to extend the
provisions of the RPC on malversation to private individuals.
2. Sheriffs and receivers fall under the term administrator.
3. Judicial administrator not covered by this article. The
word administrator here used does not include judicial
administrator appointed to administer the estate of a deceased
person, because he is not in charge of any property attached,
impounded, or placed in deposit by public authority.
• Conversion of effects in his trust makes him liable
for estafa.
4. Private property is included, provided it is attached, seized or
deposited by public authority.
Chapter Five
INFIDELITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS
Section One.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Infidelity in the custody of prisoners
ARTICLE 223
Conniving with or consenting to evasion.
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who shall consent to the escape of a
prisoner in his custody or charge, shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods
and temporary special disqualification in its maximum period
to perpetual special disqualification, if the fugitive shall have
been sentenced by final judgment to any penalty.
2. By prision correccional in its minimum period and temporary
special disqualification, in case the fugitive shall not have been
finally convicted but only held as a detention prisoner for any
crime or violation of law or municipal ordinance.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He had in his custody or charge, a prisoner, either a detention
prisoner or a prisoner by final judgment
3. Prisoner escaped from his custody
4. He was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter’s escape.
Notes:
1. Connivance is an essential element. The officer must
consent to or connive with the prisoner. In the case where a
policeman allowed the prisoner under his guard to buy some
cigarettes and the latter used that opportunity to escape, the
policeman was not held liable under this article there being no
connivance.
• Leniency or laxity is not infidelity. Thus, where a
prisoner was allowed to eat better meals in other
places while he was heavily guarded but still managed
to escape, the officer in charge of him is not liable
for infidelity.
• Relaxation of imprisonment is infidelity. But
there is real and actual evasion of service where the
custodian permitted the prisoner to obtain relaxation
of his imprisonment and to escape the punishment
of being deprived of his liberty, thus making the
penalty ineffectual, although the prisoner may not
have fled.
o An example is when the officer allowed the
prisoner to sleep in his house and eat there
during the period of the sentence.
49
Crimes committed by public officers
2. Detention prisoner. A detention prisoner is a person in legal
custody, arrested for, and charged with, some crime or public
offense.
3. Release of a detention prisoner who could not be
delivered to the judicial authority within the time fixed
by law is not infidelity in the custody of prisoner. This is
because of the officer does not release the prisoner, he may be
liable under Article 125.
ARTICLE 224
Evasion through negligence.
If the evasion of the prisoner shall have taken place through the
NEGLIGENCE of the officer charged with the conveyance or
custody of the escaping prisoner, said officer shall suffer the penalties
of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period and temporary special disqualification.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He is charged with the conveyance or custody of the prisoner,
either detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment
3. Such prisoner escapes through his negligence
Notes:
1. What is punished is non-performance of duty. What is
punished in evasion by negligence is such a definite laxity as
all but amounts to deliberate non-performance of duty on the
part of the guard. Not every negligence or distraction of a
guard is penalized.
2. Recapture of prisoner does not result to exculpation. The
fact that the public officer recaptured the prisoner who had
escaped from his custody does not afford complete
exculpation.
3. Liability of escaping prisoner:
a. Prisoner by final judgment is liable for evasion of
service of the sentence under Article 157.
b. Detention prisoner does not incur liability.
ARTICLE 225
Escape of prisoner under the custody of a person not a public officer.
Any PRIVATE PERSON to whom the conveyance or custody or a
prisoner or person under arrest shall have been confided, who shall
commit any of the offenses mentioned in the two preceding articles,
shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed for the
public officer.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Elements
1. Offender is a private person 2.
2. The conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under
arrest is confided to him
3. The prisoner or person under arrest escapes
4. The offender consents to the escape of prisoner or person
under arrest, or that the escape takes place through his
negligence
Notes:
Article 225 is not applicable if a private person was the one who made
the arrest and he consented to the escape of the person he arrested. 3.
Section Two. 4.
Infidelity in the custody of document
ARTICLE 226
Removal, concealment or destruction of documents.
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who shall REMOVE, DESTROY or
CONCEAL documents or papers officially entrusted to him, shall
suffer:
1. The penalty of prision mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000
pesos, whenever serious damage shall have been caused
thereby to a third party or to the public interest.
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos,
whenever the damage to a third party or to the public interest
shall not have been serious.
In either case, the additional penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual disqualification
shall be imposed.
Elements
5.
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He removes, conceals, or destroys documents or papers
3. Said documents or papers should have been entrusted to such
public officer by reason of his office.
Any public officer charged with the custody of papers or property
4. Damage, whether serious or not, should have been caused to
SEALED by proper authority, who shall break the seals or permit them
a third person or to public interest
to be broken, shall suffer the penalties of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, temporary special disqualification and
Notes:
a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos.
1. Public officer must be officially entrusted with the
documents or papers. A stenographer who destroys court
Elements
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
records kept by the clerk of court (who is officially entreated
with such records) is not liable under this article.
Document must be complete and one which a right
could be established or an obligation could be
extinguished. A DOCUMENT is a written instrument by
which something is proven or made of record.
• A municipal president who destroys the payroll of
the town cannot be held liable under this article
when such payroll has not yet been approved and
signed by him, as required by law.
• Books, periodicals, pamphlets, etc., are not
documents
Papers. Papers include checks, promissory notes, and paper
money. Letters in the mail and money bills are also included.
Distinct acts. The three acts punished are removing,
concealing OR destroying. It is not necessary for the 3 acts to
concur.
• Removal must be for an illicit purpose. The
removal is for an illicit purpose when the intention
of the offender is to tamper with it, profit by it, or
commit an act constituting a breach of trust.
o Removal when consummated. Removal
is consummated upon the removal of the
paper or document or secreting it away
from its usual place. It is immaterial WON
the offender accomplished the illicit
purpose for which he removed the
document.
• Concealing or destroying need not require proof
of illicit purpose. The offender may have lawful
motives in removing a document, bur in destroying
or concealing them, the offender could not have a
good motive.
Damage is an essential element.
ARTICLE 227
Officer breaking seal.
50
Crimes committed by public officers ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

1. Offender is a public officer ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who shall REVEAL any secret known to but not with the custody of the papers, he is not liable under
2. He is charged with the custody of papers or property him by reason of his official capacity, or shall WRONGFULLY this provision.
3. These papers or property are sealed by proper authority DELIVER papers or copies of papers of which he may have charge 3. Damage is an essential element of this provision.
4. He breaks the seals or permits them to be broken and which should not be published, shall suffer the penalties of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods, perpetual special ARTICLE 230
Note: Damage or intent to cause damage is not necessary. It is disqualification and a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos if the revelation of Public officer revealing secrets of private individual
sufficient that the seal is broken, even if the contents are not tampered such secrets or the delivery of such papers shall have caused serious Any public officer to whom the secrets of any private individual shall
with. damage to the public interest; otherwise, the penalties of prision become known by reason of his office who shall reveal such secrets,
Discussion: To seal mean to make an effort to make sure that the correccional in its minimum period, temporary special disqualification shall suffer the penalties of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 1,000
document is not tampered with. and a fine not exceeding 50 pesos shall be imposed. pesos.
• An example is when an envelope is sealed with an adhesive
and the flap thereof is signed. ACTS PUNISHABLE AS REVELATION OF SECRETS BY Elements
AN OFFICER 1. The offender is a public officer
ARTICLE 228 1. Revealing secrets known to the offending public officer 2. He knows of a secret of a private individual by reason of his
Opening of closed documents. by reason of his official capacity. office
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER not included in the provisions of the next Elements 3. He reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable reason.
preceding article who, without proper authority, shall open or shall a. Offender is a public officer
permit to be opened any CLOSED papers, documents or objects b. He knows of a secret of his official capacity Notes:
entrusted to his custody, shall suffer the penalties or arresto mayor, c. He reveals such secret without authority or 1. Revelation to one person is sufficient, for public revelation
temporary special disqualification and a fine of not exceeding 2,000 justifiable reasons is not required.
pesos. d. Damage, great or small, be caused to the public 2. When the offender is an attorney-at-law or a solicitor, Article
interest. 230 is not applicable. Article 209 is applicable.
Elements 2. Delivering wrongfully papers or copies of papers of 3. Damage to private individuals is not necessary.
1. Offender is a public officer which he may have charge and which should not be
2. Any closed papers, documents, or objects are entrusted to his published. Chapter Six
custody Elements OTHER OFFENSES OR IRREGULARITIES BY PUBLIC
3. He opens or permits to be opened said closed papers, a. Offender is a public officer OFFICERS
documents or objects b. He has charge of papers
4. That he does not have proper authority c. Those papers should not be published ARTICLE 231
d. He delivers those papers or copies thereof to a Open disobedience
Notes third person Any JUDICIAL or EXECUTIVE officer who shall openly refuse to
1. Custody. Custody means guarding or keeping safe; care. e. Delivery is wrongful execute the judgment, decision or order of any superior authority
2. Closed documents must be entrusted to the custody of the f. Damage be caused to public interest made within the scope of the jurisdiction of the latter and issued with
accused by reason of his office. all the legal formalities, shall suffer the penalties of arresto mayor in its
3. The act should not fall under Article 227. Notes: medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period,
4. Damage or intent to cause damage is not an element of the 1. First act. Secrets must affect public interests. But temporary special disqualification in its maximum period and a fine not
offense. espionage is not contemplated in this article. This article exceeding 1,000 pesos.
punishes minor official betrayals, infidelities of little
Section Three consequence, affecting usually the administration of justice, Elements
Revelation of secrets executive or official duties, or the general interest of the public 1. That the offender is a judicial or executive officer
order. 2. There is a judgment, decision or order of a superior authority
ARTICLE 229 2. Second act. The offender must have charge of papers or 3. Such judgment, decision or order was made within the scope
Revelation of secrets by an officer copies of papers. He must have control or custody. of jurisdiction of the superior authority and issued with all the
Therefore, it the offender is merely entrusted with the papers legal formalities

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 51

Crimes committed by public officers
4. The offender without any legal justification openly refuses to
execute said judgment, decision, or order, which he is duty-
bound to obey.
Example:
• Refusal to obey an order. A municipal secretary who openly
refuses to deliver to the mayor, after having been repeatedly
requested to do so, the keys of the doors of the municipal
building and the seal under his custody.
ARTICLE 232
Disobedience to order of superior officers, when said order was suspended by inferior
officer.
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who, having for any reason suspended
the execution of the orders of his superiors, shall disobey such
superiors after the latter have disapproved the suspension, shall suffer
the penalties of prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods and perpetual special disqualification.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. An order is issued by his superior for execution
3. He has for any reason suspended the execution of such order
4. His superior disapproves the suspension of the execution of
the order
5. Offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval of the
suspension.
Notes:
1. Rationale. The law considers the fact that the superior may
err. Because of this, the subordinate is entitled to suspend the
execution of an order given by a superior to give the latter time
to reconsider. At this point, no crime is committed by the
subordinate yet.
• But if the superior disapproves of the suspension
and reiterates his order to the subordinate, the latter
is obliged to comply and refusal to do so amounts to
contempt.
2. Article does not apply if the order of the superior is
illegal. If the order is illegal, the subordinate has a legal right
to refuse to execute such order because said subordinate may
be held criminally liable.
ARTICLE 233
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Refusal of assistance.
The penalties of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision
correccional in its minimum period, perpetual special disqualification
and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos, shall be imposed upon a PUBLIC
OFFICER who, upon demand from competent authority, shall fail to
lend his cooperation towards the administration of justice or other
public service, if such failure shall result in serious damage to the
public interest, or to a third party; otherwise, arresto mayor in its medium
and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. A competent authority demands from the offender that he
lend his cooperation towards the administration of justice or
other public service.
3. The offender fails to do so maliciously
Notes:
1. Demand from competent authority. If the chief of police
received from a private party a subpoena, issued by a fiscal,
with a request to serve it upon a person to be a witness, and
the chief maliciously refused to do so, the latter is not liable.
The subpoena was received from a private party and not from
a competent authority.
2. Damage to public interest essential. If there is no damage
to public interest, the officer is not liable.
3. Example. Chief of police who flatly refuses to serve
summons of a provincial fiscal after having been officially
requested to do so by the latter.
• Crime cannot be open disobedience of an order
because the provincial fiscal is not the superior of the
chief of police.
ARTICLE 234
Refusal to discharge elective office.
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon ANY PERSON who, having been elected by
popular election to a public office, shall refuse without legal motive
to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
Elements
1. Offender is elected by popular election to a public office
2. He refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said
office
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
3. There is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in to
discharge the duties of said office
Notes:
1. Rationale. Once an individual is elected by the will of the
people, discharge of the duties of the said office becomes a
matter of duty and not a matter of right.
2. Article 234 not applicable to appointive officer.
ARTICLE 235
Maltreatment of prisoners.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional
in its minimum period, in addition to his liability for the physical
injuries or damage caused, shall be imposed upon ANY PUBLIC
OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE who shall overdo himself in the
correction or handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his
charge, by the imposition of punishment not authorized by the
regulations, or by inflicting such punishment in a cruel and humiliating
manner.
If the purpose of the maltreatment is to extort a confession, or to obtain
some information from the prisoner, the offender shall be punished by
prision correccional in its minimum period, temporary special
disqualification and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos, in addition to his
liability for the physical injuries or damage caused.
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. Overdoing himself in the correction or handling of
a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge
either-
i. By the imposition of punishments not
authorized by the regulations
ii. Inflicting such punishments (those
authorized) in a cruel and humiliating
manner
b. Maltreating such prisoner to extort a confession or
to obtain some information from the prisoner.
Notes:
1. The public officer must have actual charge of the prisoner
to hold him liable for maltreatment of prisoner. Hence, a
52
Crimes committed by public officers ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

mayor cannot be held liable under this article if the prisoner is 4. He has not taken his oath of office and/or given the bond 1. There must be a written or formal resignation. Hence, the
under the custody of the police. Punzalan v People required by law. provision does not cover an employee or officer who did not
2. Offended party must be a convict by final judgment or a resign at all (like AWOL and never returned).
detention prisoner. ARTICLE 237 • Verbal statement that official is resigning is not the
• To be a detention prisoner, the person arrested Prolonging performance of duties and powers. form of resignation contemplated by the law.
must be placed in jail even for a short while. KAPIT-TUKO Written or formal resignation is an indispensable
Hence, a person who was suspected for having Any public officer shall CONTINUE to exercise the duties and requisite.
committed a crime and was maltreated by the powers of his office, employment or commission, beyond the period 2. Qualifying circumstance. If the abandonment of the office
policemen in the cemetery does not fall under this provided by law, regulation or special provisions applicable to the case, has for its purpose to evade the discharge of the duties of
provision because he has not yet been booked in the shall suffer the penalties of prision correccional in its minimum period, preventing, prosecuting, or punishing to evade crimes
office of the police and placed in jail even for a special temporary disqualification in its minimum period and a fine not falling within Title 1 and Chapter 1 of Title 3 of Book 2 of the
moment. Policemen guilty only of physical exceeding 500 pesos. RPC.
injuries. People v Baring • Crimes covered:
3. Maltreatment must relate to the correction or handling of Elements 1. Treason
the prisoner or must be for the purpose of extorting a 1. Offender is holding public office 2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
confession or of obtaining some information from the 2. The period provided by law, regulations or special provisions 3. Misprision of treason
prisoner. Hence, if the purpose of maltreatment is for for holding such office, has already expired 4. Espionage
personal grudge, jailer is liable for physical injuries only. 3. He continues to exercise the duties and powers of such office 5. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisal
4. Offender may also be liable for physical injuries or 6. Violation of neutrality
damage caused. There is an additional penalty. There is no Note: A public officer who has been suspended, separated, declared 7. Correspondence with hostile country
complex crime of maltreatment of prisoners with serious or overaged or dismissed cannot continue to perform the duties of his 8. Flight to enemy country
less serious physical injuries. office. 9. Piracy and mutiny
10. Coup d’etat
Section Two ARTICLE 238 11. Conspiracy and proposal to commit coup d’etat
Anticipation, prolongation and abandonment of the duties and powers Abandonment of office or position or rebellion
of public office. Any public officer who, before the acceptance of his resignation, 12. Disloyalty of public officers
shall ABANDON his office to the detriment of the public service shall 13. Inciting to rebellion
ARTICLE 236 suffer the penalty of arresto mayor. 14. Sedition
Anticipation of duties of a public office. 15. Conspiracy to commit sedition
EAGER BEAVER; ATAT TO WORK If such office shall have been abandoned in order to evade the discharge 16. Inciting to sedition
Any person who shall ASSUME the performance of the duties and of the duties of preventing, prosecuting or punishing any of the crime
powers of any public officer or employment without first being sworn falling within Title One, and Chapter One of Title Three of Book Two ABANDONMENT OF NEGLIGENCE AND
in or having given the bond required by law, shall be suspended from of this Code, the offender shall be punished by prision correccional in OFFICE TOLERANCE IN
such office or employment until he shall have complied with the its minimum and medium periods, and by arresto mayor if the purpose of (Article 238) PROSECUTION
respective formalities and shall be fined from 200 to 500 pesos. such abandonment is to evade the duty of preventing, prosecuting or (Article 208)
punishing any other crime. Committed by any public officer Committed by those who have
Elements the duty to institute prosecution
1. Offender is entitled to hold a public office or employment Elements for the punishment of the
either by election or by appointment 1. Offender is a public officer violations of the law.
2. The law requires that he should first be sworn in and/or 2. He formally resigns from his position Officer abandons to evade Officer does not abandon his
should first give a bond 3. His resignation has not yet been accepted discharge of duty duty but fails to prosecute an
3. He assumes the performance of the duties and powers of such 4. He abandons his office to the detriment of the public service offense by dereliction of duty or
office by malicious tolerance of the
Notes: commission of offenses.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 53

Crimes committed by public officers
Section Three
Usurpation of powers and unlawful appointments
Articles 239 to 241 punish interference by officers of one of the three
departments of government with functions of officers of another
department.
• Purpose: To maintain separation and independence of the 3
departments and to keep them within the legitimate confines
of their respective jurisdictions and the officers thereof within
the lawful scope of their lawful authority.
ARTICLE 239
Usurpation of legislative powers
The penalties of prision correccional in its minimum period, temporary
special disqualification and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos, shall be
imposed upon ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who shall encroach upon
the powers of the legislative branch of the Government, either by
making general rules or regulations beyond the scope of his authority,
or by attempting to repeal a law or suspending the execution thereof.
Elements
1. Offender is an executive or judicial officer
2. He does any of the following acts:
a. Makes general rules or regulations beyond the scope
of his authority
b. He attempts to repeal a law
c. He suspends the execution thereof
ARTICLE 240
Usurpation of executive functions
Any JUDGE who shall assume any power pertaining to the executive
authorities or shall obstruct the latter in the lawful exercise of their
powers, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayorin its medium period to
prision correccional in its minimum period.
Elements
1. Offender is a judge
2. He does any of the following acts:
a. He assumes a power pertaining to the executive
authorities
b. He obstructs the executive authorities in the lawful
exercise of their powers
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Legislative officers not liable for usurpation of executive powers.
Thus, a councilor who assumes a power pertaining to the mayor or
obstructs him in the lawful exercise of his power isnot liable under
Article 240 because only a judge is liable here.
• However, such councilor is liable under Article 177 of the
Code.
ARTICLE 241
Usurpation of judicial functions.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional
in its minimum period and shall be imposed upon any OFFICER OF
THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH of the Government who shall
assume judicial powers or shall obstruct the execution of any order or
decision rendered by any judge within its jurisdiction.
Elements
1. Offender is an officer of the executive branch of the
government
2. He does any of the following acts:
a. He assumes judicial powers
b. He obstructs the execution of any order or decision
rendered by any judge within his jurisdiction
Example: Mayor is guilty under this article if he investigates a case
while the justice of the peace was discharging his office in the
municipality. People v Valdehuesa
ARTICLE 242
Disobeying request for disqualification.
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who, before the question of jurisdiction is
decided, shall continue any proceeding after having been lawfully
required to refrain from so doing, shall be punished by arresto mayor and
a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. A proceeding is pending before such officer
3. There is a question brought before the proper authority
regarding his jurisdiction, which is not yet decided
4. He has been lawfully required to refrain from continuing the
proceeding
5. He continues the proceeding
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Lawfully required. Note that this must not refer to court decisions.
Otherwise, it would be open disobedience.
ARTICLE 243
Orders or requests by executive officers to any judicial authority
Any EXECUTIVE OFFICER who shall address any order or
suggestion to any judicial authority with respect to any case or
business coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of justice
shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500
pesos.
Elements
1. Offender is an executive officer
2. He addresses any order or suggestion to any case or business
coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of
justice
Notes:
1. Purpose of the provision is to maintain independence of
the judiciary. The judicial branch is intended to be free and
secure from executive dictations. The courts cannot, under
their duty to the sovereign power, permit themselves to be
subordinated to any person or official to which their creator
did not itself subordinate them.
2. Legislative or judicial officers not liable under Article
243. Thus, a congressman who wrote a letter to a judge,
requesting the latter to decide the case pending before him one
way or the other, or a judge who made a suggestion to another
judge, is not liable under this article.
ARTICLE 244
Unlawful appointments.
ANY PUBLIC OFFICER who shall knowingly nominate or
appoint to any public office any person lacking the legal qualifications
therefor, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding
1,000 pesos.
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer
2. He nominates or appoints a person to public office
3. Such person lacks legal qualifications therefor
4. The offender knows that his nominee or appointee lacks the
qualifications at the time he made such nomination or
appointment
54
Crimes committed by public officers ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Notes: 2. He solicits or makes immoral or indecent advances to a

1. Recommending not a crime. Nominating is different from
recommending.
2. Lacking legal qualifications. In order to be liable under this
article, there must be a law providing for the qualifications of
a person to be nominated or appointed to a public office, and
such person must not be able to meet such qualifications.
Section Four
Abuses against chastity
ARTICLE 245
Abuses against chastity; Penalties
The penalties of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and temporary special disqualification shall be imposed:
1. Upon any PUBLIC OFFICER who shall solicit or make
immoral or indecent advances to a woman interested in
matters pending before such officer for decision, or with
respect to which he is required to submit a report to or
consult with a superior officer;
2. Any WARDEN OR OTHER PUBLIC OFFICER
DIRECTLY CHARGED with the care and custody of
prisoners or persons under arrest who shall solicit or make
immoral or indecent advances to a woman under his custody.
If the person solicited be the wife, daughter, sister of relative within
the same degree by affinity of any person in the custody of such
warden or officer, the penalties shall be prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods and temporary special disqualification.
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
b. Under the custody of the offender
c. The wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same
degree by affinity of the person in the custody of the
offender
Note that the mother of the person in the custody of the offender is not included.
Notes:
1. Solicit. To solicit means to propose earnestly or persistently
something unchaste and immoral to a woman.
2. Consummated by mere proposal. The crime of abuses
against chastity is consummated by mere proposal. It is not
necessary for the woman to have yielded to the solicitation of
the offender.
3. Proof of solicitation not necessary when there is sex. It
would be a strange interpretation of the law to say that failure
to prove solicitation was sufficient to relieve the defendant
from responsibility, when the act solicited was consummated.

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. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a
woman under the offender’s custody.
3. By 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. The offender is a public officer

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 55

Crimes against persons ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

TITLE EIGHT: CRIMES AGAINST CORPUS DELICTI. This is the actual commission of the crime Spouse Legitimate only
charged, and not to the literal body of a murdered person. • The best proof is the
PERSONS marriage certificate
ARTICLE 246 • Oral evidence that is
Parricide Parricide. - Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child, not objected to may
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or also be considered by
Murder descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be the court
Homicide punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.
Death caused in a tumultuous affray General Rule:
Physical injuries caused in a tumultous affray • Essential element: relationship. Relationship must be Parricide is punished by reclusion perpetua to death
alleged in the information.
Giving assistance to suicide
• Knowledge of relationship immaterial. The law does Exceptions:
Discharge of firearms NOT require knowledge of the relationship between the 1. Parricide by negligence
Infanticide offender and the victim. 2. Parricide by mistake
Intentional abortion o Hence, parricide may be committed by mistake. 3. When committed under exceptional circumstances (Art 247)
o If one killed his spouse thinking that it was someone
Unintentional abortion
else, Article 49 will apply as to the proper imposable ARTICLE 247
Abortion practiced by the woman herself or her penalty. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. - Any legally
parents • Blood relationship is necessary. Adoptive parent and married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of
Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife adoptive son not included in the provision. committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of
• Stranger who cooperates. A stranger who cooperates in the them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict
and dispensing of abortives upon them any serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of
killing will be liable for homicide or murder, as the case may
Duel be, the relationship being absent. destierro.
Challenging to a duel
Mutilation Elements: If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind, he shall
1. A person is killed be exempt from punishment.
Serious physical injuries
2. The person is killed by the accused
Administering injurious substances or beverages 3. The deceased is any of the following: These rules shall be applicable, under the same circumstances, to
Less serious physical injuries parents with respect to their daughters under eighteen years of age, and
The father, mother or child legitimate or illegitimate their seducer, while the daughters are living with their parents.
Slight physical injuries and maltreatment
1. When parents are
Rape killed, proof of Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife
Summary of penalties found in the last page of crime against legitimacy is not or daughter, or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the
persons. required other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of this article.
2. Illegitimate children
Chapter One: DESTRUCTION OF LIFE include all children • Indispensable requisite: Surprising the spouse or the young
born out of wedlock daughter in the act of sex. To surprise means to come upon
Section One. - Parricide, murder, homicide 3. The child should not suddenly and unexpectedly.
be less than 3 days o Without surprise, this article has no application.
In all crimes against persons in which the death of the victim is an old. (So 3 days and • When not applicable. This provision is not applicable when
element of the offense, there must be evidence of : above) the accused did not see the act of sexual intercourse with
1. Fact of death Any other ascendants or Legitimate only another person.
2. Identity of the victim descendants (excluding the
parents and the children)

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 56

Crimes against persons
o However, it is enough that the circumstances show
reasonably that the carnal act is being committed or
has just been committed.
• There must be actual sexual intercourse, and not merely
preparatory acts.
o However, in the dissent of Laurel in People v Gonzales,
he said that the interpretation that the husband must
continue to look in the mean time and wait for actual
coitus to happen, is far from being rational and
contrary to the reason and purpose of the law.
• Defense, not penal provision. This is not a penal provision;
it does not define and penalize a felony. The crime is parricide
and/or homicide or serious physical injuries. This is a defense
in order that the sentence destierro.
ACTIONS COVERED
1. Killing any of the parties or both of them
2. Inflicting serious physical injuries upon them
TO WHOM IT APPLIES
1. Legally married spouse
• Not applicable to common-law spouses
• This article is applicable to both husband and wife.
• Crime need not happen in the conjugal dwelling.
2. Parents with respect to:
a. Their daughters under eighteen years of age, while
the daughters are living with their parents
▪ The parent need not be legitimate.
▪ The daughter must be single. If she is
married, only the husband can claim
benefits under this paragraph.
▪ Must the crime happen in the residence of
the parents? No. Law does not require.
b. The seducer
TO WHOM IT DOES NOT APPLY
1. Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of
his wife or daughter, or
2. Any person who shall otherwise have consented to the
infidelity of the other spouse
WHEN THE KILLING OR SERIOUS PI SHOULD BE
INFLICTED
1. In the act of sexual intercourse
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. Immediately thereafter
• The law does not say that the act should be
committed instantly thereafter.
• It only requires that the death caused be the
proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the
accused after chancing upon the spouse in the basest
act of infidelity.
• But the killing should have actually been motivated
by the same blind impulse and must not have been
influenced by external factors.
o The killing must be by reason of having
surprised the spouse while having sex with
another person.
• It is not necessary that the deceased be killed in the
place where he was caught but in another place
nearby, as long as the discovery, the pursuit and the
killing must form part of one continuous act. US v
Alano
People vs Abarca. but sir does not agree
ARTICLE 248
Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article
246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death, if committed with any of the following
attendant circumstances:
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the
aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense
or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity.
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck,
stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a street car or
locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other means involving great waste and
ruin.
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the
preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a
volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity.
5. With evident premeditation.
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the
suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person
or corpse.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
MURDER. This is the unlawful killing of a person, which is not
parricide or infanticide, and attended by the qualifying circumstances
above.
Elements :
1. A person was killed
2. The accused killed him
3. The killing is attended by any of the qualifying circumstances
in the provision.
4. Killing is not parricide or infanticide.
RULES FOR APPLICATION OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES
WHICH QUALIFY THE KILLING TO MURDER
1. The presence of one circumstance is enough
o When more than one is present, the others are
considered generic aggravating.
2. When the other circumstances are absorbed or included in one
qualifying circumstance, they cannot be considered as generic
aggravating.
o Treachery and evident premeditation are inherent in
murder by poison, and as such, they cannot be
considered as aggravating.
3. The qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the
information.
TREACHERY. This occurs when the offender commits any of the
crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the
execution thereof, which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the
offended party might make.
• Element of surprise marks the presence of treachery. It
means that the offended party was not given the opportunity
to make the defense
• Identity of victim unnecessary. In treachery, the identity of
the victim is not necessary. That is, the perpetrator is liable for
his acts even if the victim of the attack was not the person
whom he intended to kill.
• This qualifying circumstance exists when an adult illegally
attacks a child of tender years and causes his death.
Requisites:
1. At the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to
defend himself
57
Crimes against persons
2. Offender consciously adopted the particular means, method
or form of attack employed by him
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
Requisites:
1. Time that the offender was determined to kill
2. Act manifestly showing that he clung to his determination
3. Lapse of time between #2 and the killing.
AID OF ARMED MEN
Requisites:
1. The armed men took part directly or indirectly
o The casual presence of armed men near the place
where the crime was committed does not constitute
as an aggravating circumstance if it is not shown that
the offender did not avail himself of their aid or rely
upon them to commit the crime.
2. The accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them
when the crime was committed
CRIME COMMITTED IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRIICE,
REWARD OR PROMISE
Requisites:
1. There must be 2 or more principals:
a. One who offers the price- he directly induces the latter
to commit the crime; principal by inducement
b. One who accepts the price- he directly commits the
crime
2. The price, reward or promise must be for the purpose of
inducing another to perform the deed.
o It should not be taken as an aggravating
circumstance if the reward was given after the
commission of the crime as an appreciation
This aggravating circumstance affects equally the offeror and the acceptor.
IMPUNITY. This means the employment of means that prevent his
being recognized to secure himself against detection and punishment.
CRUELTY. This exists when the culprit enjoys and delights in making
his victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing him unnecessary physical
pain in the consummation of the criminal act.
Requisites:
1. Injury is deliberately increased by causing the other wrong
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. The other wrong is unnecessary for the execution of the
purpose of the offender.
OUTRAGING OR SCOFFING
1. OUTRAGING means to commit an extremely vicious or
deeply insulting act
2. SCOFFING means to jeer, and implies a showing of
irreverence.
ARTICLE 249
Homicide. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article
246, shall kill another without the attendance of any of the
circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed
guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal.
HOMICIDE. This is the unlawful killing of a person, which is not
murder, parricide, nor infanticide, and not attended by the qualifying
circumstances above.
• Note that if the victim is under 12 years old, the penalty is
reclusion perpetua
Elements :
1. A person was killed
2. The accused killed him
3. The killing is NOT attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances in the provision.
4. The accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed
INTENT TO KILL
1. When victim dies, intent is CONCLUSIVELY presumed
o Even if there is no intent to kill, as long as death
resulted, the crime is homicide and not merely
physical injuries because in crimes of personal
violence, the penal law looks particularly to the
material results following the unlawful act and holds
the aggressor responsible for the consequences
thereof.
2. If victim did not die, evidence of intent to kill is
important.
o Evidence of intent to kill is important only in
frustrated or attempted homicide
o This is shown by the kind of weapon used and part
of the body aimed at.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o This must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
▪ This is the same degree of certainty as all
the other elements of the crime.
Notes:
1. There is no crime of frustrated homicide through
imprudence. This is because the element of intent to kill in
frustrated homicide incompatible with negligence or
imprudence.
2. Wounds causing death. Where the wounds that caused the
death were inflicted by two different persons, each one of
them is guilty of homicide even if they are not in conspiracy.
The one who inflicted a wound that contributed to the death
of the victim is equally liable.
3. Use of unlicensed firearm is an aggravating circumstance in
homicide, instead of being a separate offense.
4. ACCIDENTAL HOMICIDE is the death of a person
brought about by a lawful act performed by proper care and
skill and without homicidal intent.
ARTICLE 250
Penalty for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide. - The courts, in view of
the facts of the case, may impose upon the person guilty of the
frustrated crime of parricide, murder or homicide, defined and
penalized in the preceding articles, a penalty lower by one degree than
that which should be imposed under the provision of Article 50.
• This simply means that for frustrated parricide, murder, or
homicide, the courts MAY impose a penalty 2 degrees lower
than that prescribed for consummated.
The courts, considering the facts of the case, may likewise reduce by
one degree the penalty which under Article 51 should be imposed for
an attempt to commit any of such crimes.
• This simply means that for frustrated parricide, murder, or
homicide, the courts MAY impose a penalty 3 degrees lower
than that prescribed for consummated.
The provisions are permissive and not mandatory.
ARTICLE 251
Death caused in a tumultuous affray. - When, while several persons, not
composing groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting
and attacking each other reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in
a confused and tumultuous manner, and in the course of the affray
58
Crimes against persons
someone is killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the
deceased, but the person or persons who inflicted serious physical
injuries can be identified, such person or persons shall be punished by
prision mayor.
If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical injuries on
the deceased, the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon all those who shall have used
violence upon the person of the victim.
Elements:
1. There are several persons
2. They do not compose groups organized for the common
purpose of assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally
3. Quarrel and assault each other in a confused and
tumultuous manner
4. Someone is killed in the course of the affray
5. It cannot be ascertained who killed the deceased
6. It can be identified who:
a. Inflicted serious physical injuries
b. Used violence
TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY. This exists when at least four persons
took part.
• No tumultuous affray among identified groups. When
there are 2 identified groups of men who assaulted each other,
there is no tumultuous affray. Hence, the provision is not
applicable when the quarrel is between 2 well-known groups
of men. US v Tandoc
o Discussion: Sir does not agree. The mere fact that
the groups were identified is not enough. They must
have been organized for the purpose of attacking
each other to remove them from the coverage of the
provision.
• Confusion necessary: there must be no unity of purpose
or intention. When there was confusion in the fight and the
person who inflicted the mortal wounds could not be
identified, the crime is death caused in a tumultuous affray.
o If the one who inflicted the fatal wound is known, it
becomes homicide.
o It follows therefore that the wound caused by the
one who inflicted serious physical injuries should not
be the cause of death of the accused. Otherwise, it is
homicide.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• The person killed need not be one of the participants in
the affray
WHO ARE LIABLE FOR DEATH IN A TUMULTUOUS
AFFRAY?
1. person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries
2. If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical
injuries on the deceased, those who shall have used violence
upon the person of the victim.
ARTICLE 252
Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray. - When in a tumultuous affray
as referred to in the preceding article, only serious physical injuries are
inflicted upon the participants thereof and the person responsible
thereof cannot be identified, all those who appear to have used violence
upon the person of the offended party shall suffer the penalty next
lower in degree than that provided for the physical injuries so inflicted.
When the physical injuries inflicted are of a less serious nature and the
person responsible therefor cannot be identified, all those who appear
to have used any violence upon the person of the offended party shall
be punished by arresto mayor from five to fifteen days.
Elements:
1. There is a tumultuous affray
2. Some participants thereof suffer serious or less serious
physical injuries
3. The persons responsible for the physical injuries cannot be
identified
4. Those who appear to have used violence are known
Notes:
1. The person who caused the injuries must not be known.
Otherwise he shall be liable for such physical injuries actually
committed, and not the ones who merely used violence.
2. The injuries must be inflicted on the participants. Unlike
in the preceding article where the injuries could be inflicted
against anyone.
ARTICLE 253
Giving assistance to suicide. - Any person who shall assist another to
commit suicide shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor; if such person
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
lends his assistance to another to the extent of doing the killing himself,
he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal.
However, if the suicide is not consummated, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its medium and maximum periods, shall be imposed.
ACTS PUNISHABLE AS ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether consummated
or not
o This involves furnishing someone with the means to
commit suicide.
o If consummated, prison mayor
o If not, arresto mayor
2. Lending his assistance to another to the extent of doing the
killing himself
o If consummated, reclusion temporal
o The penalty is lower by one or two degrees
depending on whether the suicide is attempted of
frustrated.
▪ The second sentence referring to suicides
not consummated only pertains to the first
kind of assistance.
Notes:
1. Relationship immaterial. The law does not distinguish with
respect to the relationship of the offender and the one
committing suicide. The punishment is the same as with
strangers.
2. Suicide itself is not a felony. A pregnant woman who tries
to commit suicide and does not die but the fetus in her womb
is expelled is not liable for abortion.
o This is because in order to be liable for consequences
one did not intend, one must be committing a felony.
Suicide is not a felony.
ARTICLE 254
Discharge of firearms. - Any person who shall shoot at another with any
firearm shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods, unless the facts of the case are such that the act
can be held to constitute frustrated or attempted parricide, murder,
homicide or any other crime for which a higher penalty is prescribed by
any of the articles of this Code.
Elements:
1. The offender discharges a firearm against or at another person
59
Crimes against persons
2. The offender has no intention to kill that person
SHOOT AT ANOTHER (to fire at him)
• The act constituting the offense is shooting at another person
without intent to kill him.
• The crime is discharge of firearm, even if the gun was not
pointed at the offended party when it fired, as long as it was
initially aimed by the accused at or against the offended party.
• Discharge towards the house of the victim is not illegal
discharge of firearm.
o The mere assertion that the shot was directed at the
house where he was is not sufficient proof that the
shot was aimed at or fired at him
o It is essential for the prosecution to prove in a
positive way that the discharge of a firearm was
directed precisely against the offended party.
o Firing a gun against the house of the victim at
random, not knowing what part of the house the
people inside were, is only alarm.
• No intent to kill. There must be no intention to kill, the
purpose only to intimidate or frighten the victim. This element
is taken from the unless clause of the provision.
Section Two. - Infanticide and abortion.
ARTICLE 255
Infanticide. - The penalty provided for parricide in Article 246 and for
murder in Article 248 shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill
any child less than three days of age.
If the crime penalized in this article be committed by the mother of the
child for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, she shall suffer the
penalty of prision mayor, and if said crime be committed for the same
purpose by the maternal grandparents or either of them, the penalty
shall be reclusion temporal.
Elements:
1. A child was killed
2. The accused killed the child
3. Child is less than 3 days old.
INFANTICIDE. This is the killing of any child less than 3 days of
age, whether the killer is the parent or grandparent, any other relative
of the child, or a stranger.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• Same banana. The penalty is reclusion perpetua to death, but
the name of the crime is infanticide.
o If killed by either parents or a legitimate grandparent,
equivalent to parricide
o If killed by a stranger, equivalent to murder.
o Both are RP to death
• Child must be alive. No crime of infanticide is committed
where the child was born dead, or although born alive, it could
not sustain an independent life when it was killed.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE OF CONCEALING
DISHONOR
1. The mitigating circumstance is applicable only to the mother
and maternal grandparents of the infant.
2. Note that the mother claiming this must be of good
reputation. If she is a prostitute, she cannot claim lesser
liability
3. However, concealing dishonor is not an element of
infanticide. Rather, it merely reduces the liability.
ARTICLE 256
Intentional abortion. - Any person who shall intentionally cause an
abortion shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he shall use any violence
upon the person of the pregnant woman.
2. The penalty of prision mayor if, without using violence, he
shall act without the consent of the woman.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the woman shall have consented.
Elements of intentional abortion:
1. There is a pregnant woman
2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered, or
that the accused acts upon such pregnant woman
3. As a result, the fetus dies either in the womb or after being
expelled therefrom
4. The abortion is intended.
ABORTION. This is the willful killing of the fetus in the uterus, or the
violent expulsion of the fetus from the material womb, which results in
the death of the fetus.
• The fetus may be over or less than 6 months old
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• If abortion is intended and the fetus does not die, it is
frustrated intentional abortion when all acts of execution have
been performed
• If abortion is not intended and the fetus does not die, the
crime may only be physical injuries.
o There is no frustrated unintentional abortion
because there is no intent to abort.
PERSONS LIABLE
• Persons, other than the mother herself, who intentionally
caused abortion are liable under 256.
o Therefore, this provision applies only to third persons other
than the mother herself who cause abortion intentionally.
• If the mother consented, she is liable under 258. Otherwise, if
she did not consent, she is not liable.
ABORTION VS INFANTICIDE
• There is abortion if the fetus could not sustain and
independent life after its separation from the maternal womb,
and it is killed.
• Otherwise, it is infanticide.
ARTICLE 257
Unintentional abortion. - The penalty of prision correccional in its
minimum and medium period shall be imposed upon any person who
shall cause an abortion by violence, but unintentionally.
Elements of unintentional abortion:
1. There is a pregnant woman
2. Violence is exerted, but without intent to abort
3. Violence was intentionally exerted
4. As a result, the fetus dies either in the womb or after being
expelled therefrom
• Unintentional abortion is committed ONLY through
violence. Hence, if a person threatens a pregnant woman who
suffers a miscarriage due to extreme fright, the offender is
guilty of threats only.
• Offender is liable for unintentional abortion even if he
did not know of the woman’s pregnancy. However, in
Spanish decisions, it is necessary that the offender knew that
the woman was pregnant, even in unintentional abortion.
60
Crimes against persons
ARTICLE 258
Abortion practiced by the woman herself or by her parents. - The penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be
imposed upon a woman who shall practice abortion upon herself or
shall consent that any other person should do so.
Any woman who shall commit this offense to conceal her dishonor,
shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods.
If this crime be committed by the parents of the pregnant woman or
either of them, and they act with the consent of said woman for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor, the offenders shall suffer the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Elements
1. There is a pregnant woman who suffers abortion
2. The abortion is intended
3. The abortion is caused by:
a. The woman herself
b. Any other person with her consent
c. Any of her parents, with her consent, for the purpose
of concealing her dishonor.
TO WHOM APPLICABLE:
1. Note that this article only applies to the woman herself, when
she commits the abortion herself or if she consent that any
other person should do so.
a. Note also that the penalty suffered by a woman who
consents to abortion on herself is the same as the
person who committed by the person she consented:
prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods
b. It’s just that as to the third person, 256 applies. Same
penalty, different provisions.
2. The maternal grandparents who do so with the consent of
the mother and for the purpose of concealing her dishonor.
a. However, if without consent, 256 will apply.
b. If with consent but not for the purpose of concealing
dishonor, 256 will also apply.
c. Both requisites must be met for 258 to apply.
3. There is no mitigation if the abortion is caused by the maternal
grandparents. Only the mother enjoys said mitigation.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
ARTICLE 259
Abortion practiced by a physician or midwife and dispensing of abortives. - The
penalties provided in Article 256 shall be imposed in its maximum
period, respectively, upon any physician or midwife who, taking
advantage of their scientific knowledge or skill, shall cause an abortion
or assist in causing the same.
Any pharmacist who, without the proper prescription from a physician,
shall dispense any abortive shall suffer arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 100,000 pesos.
Elements as to physicians and midwives
1. There is a pregnant woman who suffers abortion
2. The abortion is intended
3. The abortion is caused by a physician or midwife
4. The physician or midwife takes advantage of his or her
scientific knowledge or skill
The reason for the imposition of the maximum penalties is that these people incur a
heavier guilt for using their knowledge in the destruction of human life where it should
be used only for its preservation.
Elements for pharmacists
1. The offender is a pharmacist
2. There is no proper prescription from a physician
3. The offender dispenses an abortive
What is punished is the act of dispensing without proper
prescription.
• The law does not require that such pharmacist knows that the
purpose is to cause abortion.
o If with knowledge, accomplice to abortion.
• The law does not require that the drug shall primarily be for
abortion. It is enough that it may cause abortion.
Section Three. – Duel
ARTICLE 260
Responsibility of participants in a duel. - The penalty of reclusion temporal
shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill his adversary in a duel.
If he shall inflict upon the latter physical injuries only, he shall suffer
the penalty provided therefor, according to their nature.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor,
although no physical injuries have been inflicted.
The seconds shall in all events be punished as accomplices.
DUEL. This is a formal or regular combat previously concerted
between two parties in the presence of 2 or more seconds of lawful ae
on each side, who make the selection of arms and fix all the other
conditions of the fight.
ACTS PUNISHED IN A DUEL
1. Killing the adversary
2. Inflicting physical injury upon the adversary
3. Making a combat
Notes
1. If death results, the same penalty as homicide
2. The general rule is that when there is intent to kill, inflicting
of physical injuries is either attempted of frustrated homicide.
a. If there is an agreement to fight to death (obviously
there is intent to kill) and only physical injuries are
inflicted, the law actually makes an exception and
disregards the intent to kill.
b. Hence, the offender is liable only for such physical
injuries.
3. When slight physical injuries are inflicted, the corresponding
penalty is arresto menor.
4. The third paragraph of article 260 applies only when no
physical injuries are inflicted by either of the combatants on
the other, in which case, both combatants shall be punished
by arresto mayor.
ARTICLE 261
Challenging to a duel. - The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
period shall be imposed upon any person who shall challenge another,
or incite another to give or accept a challenge to a duel, or shall scoff at
or decry another publicly for having refused to accept a challenge to
fight a duel.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Challenging another to a duel
2. Inciting another to give or accept a challenge to a duel
61
Crimes against persons
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly for having refused to
accept a challenge to fight a duel
A challenge to fight, without contemplating a duel, is not challenging to a duel. The
person making the challenge must have in mind a formal combat to be concerted in
the presence of 2 or more seconds.
• Example: “Come down, let us measure your prowess, we shall see whose
intestines will come out. You are a coward if you do not come down”
• This is not challenging to a duel, but mere light threats.
Chapter Two: PHYSICAL INJURIES
ARTICLE 262
Mutilation. - The penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua
shall be imposed upon any person who shall intentionally mutilate
another by depriving him, either totally or partially, of some essential
organ of reproduction.
Any other intentional mutilation shall be punished by prision mayor in
its medium and maximum periods.
MUTILATION. This means the lopping or the clipping off of some
part of the body.
• Hence, putting out of an eye does not fall under this
definition. There is no mutilation when a robber stabs a
woman in one eye and as a result of the wound she lost the
use of the eye.
• Essential element: specific intent to deprive the victim of
the body part. If mutilation is not caused purposely and
deliberately so as to deprive the offended party a particular
part of his body, the case will only be that of physical injuries.
• Any other intentional mutilation. What is involved is a part
of the body other than an organ for reproduction. This must
also be done with the intent to deprive such person of such
part of the body.
o When the victim of other intentional mutilation is
under 12 years of age, the penalty is reclusion
perpetua
Elements of the first intentional mutilation:
1. Castration or mutilation of organs necessary for generation,
such as penis or ovarium.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. The mutilation is caused purposely and deliberately, that is to
deprive the offended party of some organ for reproduction
o If the castration is done without intent, there is no
mutilation.
ARTICLE 263
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES: HOW COMMITTED
1. By wounding
2. By beating
3. By assaulting
4. By administering injurious substance
In any of the ways above, there must be no intent to kill. Otherwise, the
crime is frustrated or attempted parricide, murder, or homicide.
Serious physical injuries. - Any person who shall WOUND, BEAT, or
ASSAULT another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical
injuries and shall suffer:
Paragraph 1
The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of the physical injuries
inflicted, the injured person shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or
blind;
• IMPOTENCE means the inability to copulate. It is
synonymously used with sterility.
• When the victim of SPI under this paragraph is below 12 years
old, the penalty is reclusion perpetua.
• The BLINDNESS contemplated here is blindness of both
eyes. Blindness must be complete, and not mere weakness of
vision.
Paragraph 2
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person
injured shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell,
or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg or shall have
lost the use of any such member, or shall have become incapacitated
for the work in which he was theretofor habitually engaged;
• The LOSS OF THE POWER TO HEAR contemplated
here is loss of hearing in both ears. Loss of power to hear in
one ear is only loss of use of other part of the body, in
paragraph 3.
• Under this paragraph, the loss or incapacity must be
permanent.
• The parts of the body enumerated here are the principal parts.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Paragraph 3
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person
injured shall have become deformed, or shall have lost any other part
of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or
incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he as habitually
engaged for a period of more than ninety days;
• DEFORMITY is meant physical ugliness, permanent and
definite abnormality. It must be conspicuous and visible.
o Hence, if a scar is usually covered by clothes, it
cannot be said to be conspicuous and visible.
o Deformity by loss of teeth refers to injury which
cannot be repaired by action of nature. The fact
that the offended party may have artificial teeth does
not repair the injury.
o Loss of both ears is deformity and also loss of the
power to hear. Loss of the lobule of the ear is
deformity.
• This covers any member which is not a principal member of
the body.
o Loss of power to hear in one ear is only loss of use
of other part of the body, as opposed to loss of
hearing of both ears.
• There is ILLNESS for a certain period of time when the
wound inflicted did not heal within that period.
• But medical attendance is not important in serious
physical injuries. The law requires illness or incapacity for
labor, and not medical attendance.
• The term WORK includes studies or preparation for a
profession.
o Incapacity for certain work, and not all, falls under
paragraphs 2 or 3.
o There is no incapacity to work if the injured
party could still engage in his work although less
effectively than before.
• More than 90 days. So start counting at 91.
Paragraph 4
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period, if the physical injuries inflicted shall
have caused the illness or incapacity for labor of the injured person for
more than thirty days.
• This speaks of incapacity for any kind of labor.
62
Crimes against persons
• Injury requiring hospitalization for more than 30 days is
serious physical injuries. Although medical attendance is
not required, the fact that there was medical attendance for
that period of time shows that the injuries were not cured for
that length of time.
• More than 30 days. 31-90 days of incapacity.
Note that when the category of offense of serious physical injuries depends on the
period of illness or incapacity for labor, there must be evidence of the
length of that period. Otherwise, the offense is only slight physical injuries.
• The length of the period must be proved beyond reasonable doubt in much
the same manner as the main act charged.
Paragraph 5
If the offense shall have been committed against any of the persons
enumerated in Article 246, or with attendance of any of the
circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case covered by
subdivision number 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion
temporal in its medium and maximum periods; the case covered by
subdivision number 2 by prision correccional in its maximum period to
prision mayor in its minimum period; the case covered by subdivision
number 3 by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods;
and the case covered by subdivision number 4 by prision correccional
in its minimum and medium periods.
Paragraph 6
The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a
parent who shall inflict physical injuries upon his child by excessive
chastisement.
ORDINARY PI V MUTILATION
• There is specific intent to lop or clip off some part of the body
so as to deprive the victim thereof
• This is absent in the other kinds of physical injuries.
ARTICLE 264
Administering injurious substances or beverages. - The penalties established by
the next preceding article shall be applicable in the respective case to
any person who, without intent to kill, shall inflict upon another any
serious physical injury, by knowingly administering to him any injurious
substance or beverages or by taking advantage of his weakness of mind
or credulity.
Elements:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. The offender inflicts serious physical injury
2. It was done by:
a. knowingly administering to him any injurious
substance or beverages or
b. taking advantage of his weakness of mind or
credulity
3. That he had no intent to kill
• Essential element: no intent to kill. It is essential that there
is no intent to kill. Otherwise, if there is intent to kill, the crime
would be frustrated murder, the injurious substance
considered as poison.
• Administering injurious substance must cause SPI.
Hence, this article is inapplicable if the physical injuries
inflicted are less serious or slight.
• By knowingly administering injurious substance
o Knowingly: If the accused did not know of the
injurious nature of the substances he administered,
he is not liable under this article. Thus, mistake of
fact can be a defense.
o Administering: this means introducing the
substance into the body. Throwing poisons on the
face is not covered. (It may be in other P.I.)
• Discussion: Weakness of mind or credulity of the victim. It
is not necessary that injurious substance/ beverage be
administered. The injury must be SPI. The accused must have
kwon of and taken advantage of the weakness of
mind/credulity. Thus, the weakness of mind + credulity must
be proven as well.
o Ex: Magnetism or witchcraft
o Ex: Quack doctor who suggests a particular cure
ARTICLE 265
Less serious physical injuries. - Any person who shall inflict upon another
physical injuries not described in the preceding articles, but which shall
incapacitate the offended party for labor for ten days or more, or shall
require medical assistance for the same period, shall be guilty of less
serious physical injuries and shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.
Whenever less serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted with the
manifest intent to insult or offend the injured person, or under
circumstances adding ignominy to the offense in addition to the penalty
of arresto mayor, a fine not exceeding 50, 000 pesos shall be imposed.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Any less serious physical injuries inflicted upon the offender's parents,
ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers, or persons of rank, or persons
in authority, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods, provided that, in the case of persons in authority,
the deed does not constitute the crime of assault upon such person.
Elements
1. The offended party must be incapacitated for labor for ten
days or more but up to 30 days only, or shall require medical
assistance for the same period
o The crime is less serious physical injuries even if
there was no incapacity, but the medical treatment is
for 13 days
o If there is no medical attendance or incapacity for
labor, only slight physical injuries
o As regards medical attendance, what is referred to is
actual medical attendance. There must be proof
as to the period of the required medical attendance.
2. The physical injuries must not be those described in the
preceding articles.
QUALIFIED LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
1. arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 50k pesos
a. there is manifest intent to insult or offend the injured
person, or
b. there are circumstances adding ignominy to the
offense
2. higher penalty of prision correccional when the offense is
committed against:
a. Parents, ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers
b. persons of rank, or persons in authority, provided
that the offense is not direct assault
VS slander by deed. The injury should just be slight physical injuries.
ARTICLE 266
Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. - The crime of slight physical
injuries shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical
injuries which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor
from one to nine days, or shall require medical attendance
during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 40k pesos and censure
when the offender has caused physical injuries which do not
63
Crimes against persons ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual
work nor require medical assistance.
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding
5k pesos when the offender shall ill-treat another by deed
without causing any injury.
Notes:
1. When there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only slight
physical injuries.
2. Doctrine of supervening event. Supervening event
converting the crime into serious physical injuries after the
filing of the information for slight physical injuries can still be
the subject of a new charge, without placing the accused in
double jeopardy.
Chapter Three: RAPE
ARTICLE 266-A
Rape: When And How Committed. - Rape is committed:
Paragraph 1
ORGAN RAPE OR PENILE RAPE
By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of
the following circumstances:
a. Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
authority
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or
is demented, even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
Elements:
1. Offender is a man
2. He had carnal knowledge of a woman
3. The act is accomplished under any of the circumstances in a
to d.
Notes:
1. Penetration, even partial is necessary. Touching the labia
majora or the labia minora of the pudendum constitutes
consummated rape.
• Grazing of the surface of the female organ or touching
the mons pubis (rounded eminence that becomes hairy
after puberty) of the pudendum is not sufficient.
2. But proof of emission is not necessary. The absence of
spermatozoa in the vagina does not negate rape.
3. A broken hymen is not an essential element of rape.
Studies show that the hymen may not be broken despite
repeated coitus. The strength and dilatability of the hymen
varies from one woman to another.
4. Exact date of sexual assault is not an essential element
of rape. It is the carnal knowledge through force and
intimidation that is the gravamen of the offense.
5. Only one of the 4 circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 is
sufficient.
6. There is no frustrated rape. From the moment the offender
has carnal knowledge, he actually attains his purpose and all
the essential elements have been accomplished.
7. A rape is attempted if there is no penetration but the offender
commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
8. The character of the offended woman is immaterial
Statutory rape. This is the term used when the victim is under 12 years
of age, even if such child consented. The reason for this is that the
consent given is not considered by the law as voluntary. To convict the
accused of statutory rape, prove:
a. Age of the offended party
b. Identity of the accused
c. Sexual intercourse between the 2
Paragraph 2
The second paragraph is a product of the enactment of RA 8353 or the
Anti-Rape Law of 1997, which recognizes sexual violence on sex-
related orifices other than a woman’s organ, as well as gender-free rape.
The transformation consisted of the:
1. Classification of rape as crime against persons and
2. Introduction of rape by sexual assault
RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT; INSTRUMENT OR OBJECT
RAPE; GENDER-FREE RAPE
By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in
paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting
his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument
or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.
Elements:
1. The offender commits an act of sexual assault.
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by:
a. Inserting his penis into another person's mouth or
anal orifice, or
b. 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. Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse
of authority
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years
of age or is demented, even though none of the
circumstances mentioned above be present.
A violation of the body orifices by the fingers is within the expanded definition of
rape under Republic Act No. 8353.
FORCE
1. When the accused stated that she defended herself against the
accused as long as she could, but he overpowered her and held
her till her strength gave out, then accomplished his vicious
purpose, there is sufficient force. People v Momo
2. The force need not be irresistible. People v Savellano. It is
enough that the force used is sufficient to consummate the
culprit’s purpose of copulating with the offended woman. The
force or violence necessary in rape is naturally a relative term,
depending on the age, size, and strength of the parties.
THREAT, & INTIMIDATION
1. The test is whether the threat or intimidation produces a
reasonable fear in the mind of the victim that if she resists or
does not yield to the desires of the accused, the threat would
be carried out. People v Las Pinas
2. Where resistance would be futile, offering none at all
does not amount to consent.
a. It is not necessary that the victim should have
resisted unto death or sustained physical injuries in
the hands of the rapist.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 64

Crimes against persons
b. It is enough that intercourse took place against her
will or if she yields because of genuine apprehension
of harm if she did not do so. People v Sending
3. Intimidation should be viewed in light of the victim’s
perception and judgment at the time of rape
4. Intimidation includes the moral kind such as the fear caused
by threatening girl with a knife or pistol
5. In a long line of cases, moral ascendancy or influence has
been held to substitute for the element of physical force
or intimidation.
a. Fathers against daughters; stepfathers against
stepdaughters; godfather against goddaughter;
uncles against nieces; first cousin of victim’s mother
b. When the offender has ascendancy or influence, it is
not necessary that she put up a determined resistance
c. The kind of force, threat or intimidation as between
a father and a daughter need not be of such nature
and degree as would be required in other cases, for
the father exercises strong moral and physical
influence and control over his daughter. People v
Rinion
DEPRIVED OF REASON; UNCONSCIOUS
The deprivation of reason contemplated by law need not be complete, mental
abnormality or deficiency is sufficient.
1. If the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious,
the victim has no will.
2. Sex with an insane is rape
3. Sex with a feebleminded, idiotic woman is rape
4. Intercourse with a deaf-mute is not rape, in the absence of
proof that she is an imbecile
5. The term DEMENTED refers to a person with dementia,
which is a condition of deteriorated mentality, characterized
by marked decline from the individual’s former intellectual
level.
a. demented is a subset of deprived of reason
6. The phrase DEPRIVED OF REASON includes suffering
from mental abnormality, deficiency or retardation.
7. In the following cases, there is rape because of
unconsciousness:
a. Asleep
b. Woman is in lethargy (drowsiness) produced by
sickness
c. Woman knocked unconscious
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
d. Narcotic was administered 3. When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse,
e. Potion was given to the woman parent, any of the children or other relatives within the
third civil degree of consanguinity;
Discussion: If the drug made the victim horny, is it covered here? No.
But drugs today are more complex. Just because the drugs incited 4. When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious
passion, it does not mean that the victim wanted to have sex. It lessens vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the
the mental power of the victim. There is still no valid consent. offender before or at the time of the commission of the crime;
PRINCIPLES IN REVIEWING EVIDENCE FOR RAPE 5. When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
1. An accusation for rape can be made with facility, is difficult to
prove, but is more difficult for the person accused, though 6. When the offender knows that he is afflicted with the Human
innocent, to disprove. Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune
2. In view of the nature of the crime where only 2 persons are Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to
scrutinized with extreme caution the victim;
3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own
merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the 7. When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of
weakness of evidence for the defense. the Philippines or para-military units thereof or the
Philippine National Police or any law enforcement
Rape may be proved by the uncorroborated testimony of the offended woman. agency or penal institution, when the offender took advantage
However, it must be conclusive, logical, and probable. of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime;
ARTICLE 266-B 8. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has
RAPE Par 1 Par 2 suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;
Rape under any of the 4 circumstances reclusion perpetua Prision Mayor 9. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended
Deadly weapon or by 2 or more persons reclusion perpetua to death Prision Mayor to reclusion temporal party at the time of the commission of the crime; and
Becomes insane reclusion perpetua to death reclusion temporal
10. When the offender knew of the mental disability,
Attempted rape + homicide reclusion perpetua to death reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the
Rape with homicide death reclusion perpetua offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
Rape + qualifying circumstances death reclusion temporal
RAPE WITH HOMICIDE
1. This is a special complex crime
QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES OF RAPE 2. It is rape with homicide even if the deceased is not the victim
Results in the imposition of death penalty of the rape.
1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the 3. The term HOMICDE is to be understood in its generic
offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative sense. It includes:
by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the a. Murder and slight physical injuries committed by
common-law spouse of the parent of the victim; reason or on the occasion of rape.
b. Hence, even if any of the qualifying circumstance for
2. When the victim is under the custody of the police or murder are alleged, the same will not qualify the
military authorities or any law enforcement or penal killing to murder.
institution;
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 65
Crimes against persons
c. In such case, the aggravating circumstance will be
considered as generic aggravating circumstance only.
4. When the rapist was suffering from gonorrhea infected the
victim who died as a result, it is also rape with homicide.
5. However, if the homicide is not by reason or on the
occasion of rape, it is a separate crime. To distinguish this
from rape with homicide, check the original intent.
• If original intent was to rape someone and a person
dies in the process, rape with homicide.
• But if the intent was other than to rape, such as to
kill someone, and while that person was dying, the
accused raped the victim. The crime is murder, and
the rape is a form of ignominy.
INDEMNITY IN RAPE
1. The award of civil indemnity in rape is mandatory after the
finding that rape took place.
o It is not only a reaction to the apathetic societal
perception of the penal law and the financial
fluctuations over time, but also an expression of the
displeasure of the court over the incidence of
heinous crimes against chastity (now persons).
2. If any of the qualifying circumstances are present, the
amount of indemnity shall be increased.
3. The award of moral damages is automatically granted in rape
cases without need of further proof other than the
commission of the crime because it is assumed that the rape
victim has actually suffered moral injuries entitling her to such
award.
4. The award of exemplary damages is also justified under Article
2230 if there is an aggravating circumstance.
LAWS UNDER WHICH RAPE SHOULD BE PROSECUTED
1. Victim below 12 years old
o Statutory Rape under Article 266-A(1)(d) of the RPC
penalized with reclusion perpetua
2. Victim is 12 years or older
o Sexual abuse under RA 7610 section 5(b) or
o Rape under Article 266-A, except that pertaining to
statutory rape.
However, the offender cannot be accused of both
crimes for the same act because his right against
double jeopardy will be prejudiced.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
o Neither can it be a complex crime. A felony under
the RPC cannot be complexed with an offense
penalized by special law.
RA 7610
Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse of lascivious
conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual
abuse;
o Provided, That when the victims is under twelve (12) years of
age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335,
paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as
amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious
conduct, as the case may be:
o Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the
victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period; and
ARTICLE 266-C
EFFECT OF SUBSEUQENT VALID MARRIAGE
The subsequent valid marriage between the offended party shall
extinguish:
1. The criminal action or
2. The penalty imposed.
This only benefits the principal (the husband) and not the accessories and accomplices.
• The reason for this is because rape is already a crime against persons and
the forgiveness that benefits the accessories and accomplices applies only to
crime against chastity.
EFFECT OF FORGIVENESS WHEN OFFENDER IS THE
LEGAL HUSBAND
GENERAL RULE: Forgiveness by the offended party shall not
extinguish penal action in crimes against persons.
o It applies only to crimes against chastity (seduction, abduction,
acts of lasciviousness).
EXCEPTION: 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 the penalty. (Article 26-C, paragraph
2)
• Provided, That the crime shall not be extinguished or the
penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• Example: If marriage not entered into in good faith, cannot
extinguish criminal liability.
ARTICLE 266-D
EVIDENCE WHICH MAY BE ACCEPTED IN THE
PROSECUTION FOR RAPE
1. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act
of rape in any degree from the offended party or
2. Where the offended party is so situated as to render her/him
incapable of giving valid consent.
Rationale for the provision: To make sure courts do not exclude
evidence. This is because our rules on evidence are exclusionary in
nature.
Note: Rape is a material crime—it can be done in stages. However,
there is only attempted and consummated. There is no frustrated rape.
• Attempted when there are overt acts showing the intent to
penetrate. Accused must have commenced the act of
penetrating his sexual organ to that of the victim but for some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance,
the penetration however slight, is not completed.
Rape vs acts of lasciviousness. There must be an overt acts showing
the intent to rape.
Rape example:
Scenario 1 -- perpetrator after first penetration, offender made another
different position. Made a different penetration. One count. One
criminal resolution. People vs Aaron
Scenario 2 - perpetrator penetrated 3 times, rested for 5 minutes and
penetrated victim and rested then raped again. 3 counts of rape.
Appellant should be convicted of three (3) counts of rape.1âwphi1 It
appears from the facts that the [appellant] thrice succeeded in inserting
his penis into the private part of [AAA]. The three (3) penetrations
occurred one after the other at an interval of five (5) minutes wherein
the [appellant] would rest after satiating his lust upon his victim and,
after he has regained his strength, he would again rape [AAA]. People vs
Lucena
66
Crimes against personal liberty and security
Title Nine: CRIMES AGAINST
PERSONAL LIBERTY AND SECURITY
Chapter One
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
Section One
Illegal Detention
ARTICLE 267
Kidnapping and serious illegal detention
Any private individual who shall KIDNAP or DETAIN another, or
in any other manner DEPRIVE HIM OF HIS LIBERTY, shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death:
1. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than
three days.
2. If it shall have been committed simulating public authority.
3. If any serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained; or if threats to kill
him shall have been made.
4. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except
when the accused is any of the parents, female or a public
officer.
The penalty shall be death where the kidnapping or detention was
committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from the victim or any
other person, even if none of the circumstances above-mentioned were
present in the commission of the offense.
When the victim is KILLED or dies as a consequence of detention, or
is RAPED or is subjected to TORTURE or DEHUMANIZING
ACTS, the maximum penalty shall be imposed.
Elements
1. The offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any manner deprives the
latter of his liberty
3. The act of detention or kidnapping shall be illegal
4. In the commission of the offense, any of the following
circumstances is present:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
a. If the kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more
than three days.
b. If it shall have been committed simulating public
authority.
c. If any serious physical injuries shall have been
inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained; or
if threats to kill him shall have been made.
d. If the person kidnapped or detained shall be a
minor, except when the accused is any of the
parents, female or a public officer.
Notes:
1. Offender is private individual or public officer not
charged with duty to detain. If the offender is a public
officer who has a duty under the law to detain person, the
crime is arbitrary detention.
• But a public officer who has no authority or duty
under the law to detain another person shall be liable
under this article for illegal detention.
2. Intention to deprive the victim of his liberty is essential
in the crime of kidnapping. The accused is not liable when
there is lack of motive to resort to kidnapping, such as in a
case where the accused merely wanted to make the victim
answer for the murders that the latter committed.
• Purpose is immaterial when any of the circumstances
in Article 267 paragraph 1 is present.
People v Ablaza
A woman was detained in order to coerce her into
withdrawing her previous charge against the accused.
There is kidnapping under Article 267. The crime
was consummated when the female was actually
restrained or deprived of her freedom.
• But when kidnapping or detention was committed
for the purpose of extorting ransom, the
circumstances in the first paragraph need not be
present.
• As long as kidnapping or detention was committed
for the purpose of extorting ransom, actual demand
for ransom is not necessary.
3. Carrying away of the victim may be made forcibly or
fraudulently. What is controlling is the act of the accused in
detaining the victim against his or her will after the offender is
able to take the victim in his custody.
People v Santos
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Doctrine: The element of deprivation of liberty is not
removed by the fact that the victim voluntarily went with
the accused due to the false inducement employed by
the latter.
In this case, the accused voluntarily boarded the car because
he was under the impression that the people inside were to be
trusted and he was assured by the accused about that matter.
4. Detention or locking up of victim is essential. There must
be actual confinement or restriction of the person of the
offended party. People v Ching Suy Siong
• If the alleged victim had the freedom to leave the
premises where she was allegedly confined, there
being no evidence that the doors were locked or
closed in such a way as to prevent her from going
out had she wanted to, the crime of illegal detention
cannot rise because there was no deprivation of
liberty. US v Quevengco
• But leaving a child in the house of another, where he
had the freedom of locomotion but not the freedom
to leave it at will, deprives him of liberty. People v
Acosta
• But the restraint need not be permanent.
5. The detention must be illegal. It is necessary to emphasize
this element because there are instances when it is lawful to
detain another. For instance, a private person can arrest one
who commits a crime in his presence.
• The detention is illegal when not ordered by
competent authority or not permitted by law.
6. Special complex crime of Kidnapping with Murder. The
rule is that when a person kidnapped is killed in the course of
detention, regardless of whether the killing was purposely sought
or was merely an afterthought, the kidnapping and homicide can
no longer be complexed under Article 48 nor be treated as
separate crimes, but shall be punished as a special complex
crime under the last paragraph of Article 267.
• But where the victim is taken from one place to
another solely for the purpose of killing him, the
crime committed is murder, absorbing the
kidnapping. Note that in this case there was no
intention to detain the victim.
• Specific intent is determinative of whether the crime
committed is murder or kidnapping. SPECIFIC
INTENT is the particular purpose or specific
intention in doing the prohibited act and may be
67
Crimes against personal liberty and security
proved by direct evidence or by circumstantial
evidence.
7. Qualifying circumstance. If the purpose of the kidnapping
or detention is to extort ransom from the victim or any other
person, even if none of the circumstances mentioned in
Article 267 is present, the penalty is death. It shall be imposed
regardless of the present of ordinary mitigating circumstances.
• RANSOM is money, price, or consideration paid or
demanded for redemption of a captured person or
persons, a payment that releases from captivity.
8. Imposition of maximum penalty. The maximum penalty
shall be imposed if:
a. The purpose of kidnapping is to extort ransom
b. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence
c. When the victim is raped
d. When the victim is subjected to torture or
dehumanizing acts
9. Special complex crime of Kidnapping with Rape. The rule
is that when a person kidnapped is raped in the course of
detention, the crime committed is special complex crime of
kidnapping with rape. But note that this only applies where a person
illegally detained or kidnapped is raped. It does not provide for a complex
crime of rape with serious illegal detention.
• There is no complex crime of kidnapping with
attempted rape because there is no single act that
results to 2 or more grave or less grave felonies.
Neither is illegal detention a necessary means for
committing rape.
ARTICLE 268
Slight illegal detention
The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be imposed upon any private
individual who shall commit the crimes described in the next
preceding article without the attendance of any of circumstances
enumerated therein.
The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone who shall furnish the
place for the perpetration of the crime.
If the offender shall voluntarily release the person so kidnapped or
detained within three days from the commencement of the detention,
without having attained the purpose intended, and before the institution
of criminal proceedings against him, the penalty shall be prision mayor
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
in its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding seven
hundred pesos.
Elements
1. The offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any manner deprives the
latter of liberty
3. The act of kidnapping or detention is illegal
4. The crime is committed without the attendance of any of the
circumstances enumerated in Article 267.
Notes:
1. Accomplice punished as principal. The penalty of a person
who furnishes the place for the perpetration of the crime is
raised to that of a real co-principal. But if he performs acts
other than furnishing the place for the perpetration of the
crime, the penalty should be one degree lower than that for
the crime of slight illegal detention.
2. Privileged mitigating circumstance in slight illegal
detention. Penalty one degree lower shall be imposed when
the following requisites concur:
a. Offender voluntarily releases the person kidnapped
or detained within 3 days from commencement
b. The purpose has not been attained
c. Before the institution of criminal proceedings
However, it must also be shown by the offender that he was in a position
to prolong detention for more than 3 days and yet he released the person
detained within that time.
- Note that voluntary release as a privileged mitigating
circumstance is applicable only in slight illegal detention,
and not in serious illegal detention. Hence, it is not
applicable when the victim is a minor, a woman, or public
officer, or when Article 267 is applicable.
ARTICLE 269
Unlawful arrest
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who, in any case other than those authorized
by law, or without reasonable ground therefor, shall arrest or detain
another for the purpose of delivering him to the proper authorities.
Elements
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Offender arrests or detains another person
2. The purpose of the offender is to deliver him to proper
authorities
3. The arrest is not authorized by law or there is no reasonable
ground therefor.
Notes:
1. Offender is any person, whether a public officer or a
private individual.
a. Unlawful arrests by public officers should be
punished as arbitrary detention if the public officer
has the authority to arrest and detain a person, but
the arrest is without legal ground.
b. If the public officer has no authority to arrest and
detain a person, or if he did not act in his official
capacity, the crime is illegal detention.
Tip: in case there is detention, check immediately who the offender is,
and then check how long the detention was, and then check the motive or
intent for detention.
2. Arrest with warrant. There is no unlawful arrest when the
arrest is authorized by a warrant issued by the court.
3. Unlawful arrest vs other illegal detention. If the purpose
of locking up or detaining the victim is to deliver him to the
proper authorities, and it develops that the detention is
unlawful, then the offense committed is unlawful arrest. In
any other case, the detention will render the culprit liable for
other illegal detention.
4. Motive of the offender is controlling. If the detention is
more than three days, the motive of the offender is controlling
in determining if it falls under Article 267 or 269. If the
purpose is to deliver the person arrested unlawfully to the
proper authorities, it is unlawful arrest. In the absence of this
motive, the crime is illegal detention.
Section Two
Kidnapping of minors
ARTICLE 270
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor
The penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person
who, being entrusted with the custody of a minor person, shall
deliberately fail to restore the latter to his parents or guardians.
Elements
1. The offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor person
68
Crimes against personal liberty and security
2. He deliberately fails to restore the said minor to his parents or
guardians
Notes:
1. Age of a minor. A minor is anyone under 18 years of age.
2. Kidnapping vs kidnaping and failure to return a minor.
In Article 267, kidnapping is performed by an offender not
entrusted with the custody of such minor. In Article 270,
kidnapping and failure to return a minor is committed by
someone who is entrusted with the custody of the minor.
3. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor under Article 270 is
necessarily included in Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention.
4. Discussion: Entrusted with the custody of the minor.
Custody as referred to in this element should be taken in a
loose sense. No official documents are necessary.
ARTICLE 271
Inducing a minor to abandon his home.
The penalty of prision correccional and a fine not exceeding seven
hundred pesos shall be imposed upon anyone who shall induce a
minor to abandon the home of his parent or guardians or the persons
entrusted with his custody.
If the person committing any of the crimes covered by the two
preceding articles shall be the father or the mother of the minor, the
penalty shall be arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding three hundred
pesos, or both.
Elements
1. The minor is living in the home of his parents or guardian or
the person entrusted with his custody.
2. The offender induces the minor to abandon such home
Notes:
1. The inducement must be actual, committed with criminal
intent, and determined by a will to cause damage. The phrase
to induce means to influence, to prevail on, to move by
persuasion, or to incite by motives.
2. What constitutes the crime is the inducement. It is not
necessary for the minor to actually leave the home.
3. Discussion: The author is of the opinion that the penalty for
serious illegal detention committed by the parents is the same
as in this article.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Section Three
Slavery and Servitude
ARTICLE 272
Slavery
The penalty of prision mayor and a fine of not exceeding 10,000 pesos
shall be imposed upon anyone who shall PURCHASE, SELL,
KIDNAP or DETAIN a human being for the purpose of enslaving
him.
If the crime be committed for the purpose of assigning the offended
party to some immoral traffic, the penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
Elements
1. The offender purchases, sells, kidnaps, or detains a human
being.
2. The purpose of the offender is to enslave such human
being.
Notes:
1. Qualifying circumstance. If the purpose of the offender is
to assign the offended party to some immoral traffic, the
penalty is higher.
2. Purpose is controlling. To distinguish slavery from
kidnapping or illegal detention, the purpose or specific intent
must be determined. If the purpose is to enslave, the crime is
slavery. Otherwise, it is kidnapping or illegal detention.
3. The employment or custody of a minor with the consent
of a guardian or through the child’s own will cannot be
considered as involuntary servitude.
• But where the offended party was obliged to render
service in the house of the offender without
remuneration whatever and to remain there as long
as she has not paid her debt, there is slavery.
ARTICLE 273
Exploitation of child labor
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon anyone who,
under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an
ascendant, guardian or person entrusted with the custody of a minor,
shall, against the latter's will, retain him in his service.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
1. The offender retains a minor in his service
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
Notes:
1. The service of the minor must be against his will. If the
minor consents to the offender’s retaining his services, there
is no violation of this article.
2. Indebtedness is not a ground for detention. The existence
of an indebtedness constitutes no legal justification for
holding a person and depriving him of his freedom to live
where he wills.
ARTICLE 274
Services rendered under compulsion in payment of debt.
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any person
who, in order to require or enforce the payment of a debt, shall
compel the debtor to work for him, against his will, as household
servant or farm laborer.
Elements
1. The offender compels a debtor to work for him, either as
household servant or farm laborer
2. It is against debtor’s will
3. The purpose is to require or enforce the payment of a debt.
Note:
1. Specific job required by law. Note that the law is specific-
the person must work as a household servant or farm laborer.
Hence, if the work is as office janitor, there is no violation of
this provision. But the accused may be liable for slavery under Article
272.
2. 273 vs 274. In Article 273, the minor is compelled to work
for the supposed debt of his parent or guardian. Under Article
274, the debtor himself is compelled to work for the offender.
Chapter Two
CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY
69
Crimes against personal liberty and security
Section One
Abandonment of helpless persons and exploitation of minors.
ARTICLE 275
Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one's own victim.
The penalty of arresto mayor shall be imposed upon:
1. Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any person
whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in
danger of dying, when he can render such assistance without
detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute a
more serious offense.
2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another
whom he has accidentally wounded or injured.
3. Anyone who, having found an ABANDONED child under
seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child to the
authorities or to his family, or shall fail to take him to a safe
place.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender
finds in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying
when he can render such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission constitute a more serious
offense.
Elements:
a. The place is not habited
b. The accused found a person wounded or in danger
of dying
c. He can render assistance without detriment to
himself
d. The accused fails to render assistance
2. By failing to help or render assistance to another whom the
offender has accidentally wounded or injured
3. By failing to deliver a child, under 7 years of age whom the
offender has found abandoned, to the authorities or to his
family, or failing to take him to a safe place.
Notes:
1. Person found wounded or in danger of dying. This
provision is not applicable to an offender who purposely
wounds his victim in an uninhabited place.
2. Shall constitute a more serious offense. This provision is
not applicable when the omission is a more serious offense.
If, for example, a person has custody of a minor and fails to
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
render assistance to such minor who died as a result, the
penalty is higher.
3. Accidentally injured by the accused. This provision is not
applicable to an offender who purposely stabs or injures
another and does not render him assistance.
4. Child under 7 years. It is immaterial that the offender did
not know that the child is under 7 years.
• And since the law speaks of taking the child to a safe
place, the offender must have found said child in an
unsafe place.
ARTICLE 276
Abandoning a minor
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any one who shall abandon a child under seven years
of age, the custody of which is incumbent upon him.
When the DEATH of the minor shall result from such abandonment,
the culprit shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods; but if the life of the minor shall have been in
DANGER only, the penalty shall be prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.
The provisions contained in the two preceding paragraphs shall not
prevent the imposition of the penalty provided for the act committed,
when the same shall constitute a more serious offense.
Elements
1. Offender has custody of a child
2. Child is under 7 years of age
3. He abandons such child
4. He has no intent to kill such child when he abandoned the
latter
Notes:
1. Purpose of the offender. The purpose of abandoning the
minor under his custody is to avoid the obligation of taking
care of the minor. There must be no intent to kill. Otherwise,
the crime is murder, parricide, or infanticide, as the case may
be, if the child dies.
2. A permanent, conscious and deliberate abandonment is
required in this article. The abandonment referred to in this
article is not the leaving of a child but the abandonment which
deprives him of the care and protection from danger to his
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
person. The act is punished so long as there is an interruption
of the care and protection he needs by reason of his tender
age.
3. Qualifying circumstances. The offense is qualified when as
a result of the abandonment, the child dies or is placed in
danger.
4. Parents guilty of abandoning their minor children shall be
deprived of parental authority.
ARTICLE 277
Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his custody; indifference of parents. -
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon anyone who, having charge of the rearing or education
of a minor, shall deliver said minor to a public institution or other persons,
without the consent of the one who entrusted such child to his care or
in the absence of the latter, without the consent of the proper
authorities.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon the parents who shall neglect
their children by not giving them the education which their station in life
requires and financial conditions permit.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Abandonment of minor by one charged with the rearing
or education of said minor.
Delivering a minor to public institutions or other person
without the consent of the one who entrusted such minor to
the care of the offender, or in the absence of that one, without
the consent of proper authorities
Elements
a. Offender has charge of the rearing or education
of the minor
b. He delivers said minor to a public institution or
other persons
c. He does so without the consent of one who has
entrusted the child to him, or in the absence of
the latter, without the consent of proper
authorities.
Notes:
• Only the person charged with the rearing or
education of the minor is liable. One who finds a
child in the forest and brings such child to Manila
70
Crimes against personal liberty and security ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

and gives him to another person as he could not
support her is not guilty under this article.
• To rear means to bring to maturity by educating,
nourishing, etc.
2. Indifference of parents.
Neglecting the offender’s children by not giving them the
education by which their station in life requires and the
financial condition permits.
Elements
a. Offender is a parent
b. He neglects his children by not giving them
education
c. His station in life requires such education and
his financial condition permits it
Notes:
1. Obligation to educate children terminates if mother and
children refuse without good reason to live with the
accused.
2. Failure to give education must be due to deliberate desire
to evade such obligation. Article 277 contemplates cases
in which the parents, having the means, deliberately fails
to give their children the education required by their
station in life and permitted by their financial condition.
3. Children in this paragraph need not be minors. (own
interpretation based on the elements)
ABANDONMENT UNDER ARTICLE 276 V 277
ARTICLE 276 ARTICLE 277
Custody is stated in general. Custody is specifically to rear
and educate a minor.
Child is under 7 years old. Child is under 18 years old.
Abandonment is such a way as Abandonment is to deliver the
to deprive the minor of the care child to a public institution or to
and protection that his tender another person.
years need.
So what is the crime if a child who is 10 years old is abandoned?
ARTICLE 278
Exploitation of minors.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl under sixteen
years of age to perform any dangerous feat of balancing,
physical strength, or contortion.
2. Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker,
diver, wild-animal tamer or circus manager or engaged in a
similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions of these kinds
children under sixteen years of age who are not his children
or descendants.
3. Any person engaged in any of the callings enumerated in the
next paragraph preceding who shall employ any descendant of
his under twelve years of age in such dangerous exhibitions.
4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher or person entrusted in any
capacity with the care of a child under sixteen years of age,
who shall deliver such child gratuitously to any person
following any of the callings enumerated in paragraph 2
hereof, or to any habitual vagrant or beggar.
If the delivery shall have been made in consideration of any
price, compensation, or promise, the penalty shall in every
case be imposed in its maximum period.
In either case, the guardian or curator convicted shall also be
removed from office as guardian or curator; and in the case of
the parents of the child, they may be deprived, temporarily or
perpetually, in the discretion of the court, of their parental
authority.
5. Any person who shall induce any child under sixteen years
of age to abandon the home of its ascendants, guardians,
curators, or teachers to follow any person engaged in any of
the callings mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or to accompany
any habitual vagrant or beggar.
Notes:
1. Circumstance qualifying the offense. The penalty is higher
if the delivery of the child is made in consideration of any
price, compensation or promise.
2. The offender shall be deprived of parental authority or
guardianship.
ARTICLE 271 V ARTICLE 278 PARAGRAPH 5
ARTICLE 271 ARTICLE 278
Inducing a minor to abandon Exploitation of minors
his home
Purpose is to merely induce a Purpose is to follow any person
minor to abandon his home engaged in any of the callings of
being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-
walker, etc.
Victim is minor under 18 years Victim is a child under 16 years
of age. of age.
ARTICLE 279
Additional penalties for other offenses.
The imposition of the penalties prescribed in the preceding articles,
shall not prevent the imposition upon the same person of the penalty
provided for any other felonies defined and punished by this Code.
Section Two.
Trespass to dwelling
ARTICLE 280
Qualified trespass to dwelling.
Any private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the
latter's will shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding
1,000 pesos.
If the offense be committed by means of violence or intimidation,
the penalty shall be prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos.
The provisions of this article shall not be applicable to any person who
shall enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing some
serious harm to himself, the occupants of the dwelling or a third
person, nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a
dwelling for the purpose of rendering some service to humanity or
justice, nor to anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inn and other
public houses, while the same are open.
Elements
1. Offender is a private person
2. He enters the dwelling of another
3. The entrance is against the latter’s will
DWELLING
• This is any building or structure EXCLUSIVELY devoted for
rest and comfort, as distinguished from places devoted to
business or office.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 71

Crimes against personal liberty and security
• Use determines character. A barn may be converted into a
dwelling and vice versa. Hence, a store of cheap goods, which
was also used as a dwelling place of the owner thereof, is
considered a dwelling.
• Dwelling includes a room when occupied by another
person. The nature of the crime or the responsibility of its
perpetrator is not altered by the fact that the accused was
living as a boarder in the same house of which the room of
the offended occupant he entered was a part.
Notes:
1. Offender is a private person. If the offender is a public
person, the entrance into the dwelling against the will of the
occupant is a violation of domicile.
2. Entrance must be against the will of the owner or the
occupant. Mere absence of consent is not enough to
constitute the crime of trespass to dwelling. The entrance
must be effected against the presumed or express prohibition
of the occupant. There must be opposition to the entry.
• Rationale: With utmost good faith, a person, to
whom entrance has not been denied beforehand,
may suppose that the owner of the house has no
objection receiving him in it.
• Implied opposition during wee hours. It is a well-
settled rule that whoever enters the dwelling of
another at the late hour of the night after the inmates
have retired and closed their does so against their
will. Under such a circumstance, express prohibition
is not necessary, as it is presumed.
• Implied prohibition in entrance to window.
There is implied prohibition when entrance is
effected through means not intended for ingress.
• Prohibition must be inexistence prior to or at the
time of entrance.
3. Generally, all members of a household must be
presumed to have authority to extend an invitation to
enter the house. Thus, an invitation to enter a dwelling made
by a girl who was an inmate thereof was held sufficient to
justify the claim that the entry was not made against the
occupant’s will, in the absence of express prohibition on his
part. US v Dulfo
4. What is intended to be protected and preserved by the law in
punishing trespass is the privacy of one’s dwelling.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
5. Qualifying circumstance. If the offense is committed by
means of violence or intimidation, the penalty is higher.
• Intimidation refers to persons. Violence refers to
persons and things. Hence, a person who wounds
the owner of the house using a bolo immediately
after entrance is guilty of trespass by means of
violence.
• Prohibition not necessary when violence or
intimidation is employed by the offender.
Trespass is qualified as long as there is violence or
intimidation employed, notwithstanding the fact that
the door of the house was already open and there
was no express prohibition to entry.
• The law which forbids entry into the dwelling of
another relates not only to the method by which one
may pass the threshold of the dwelling of another,
but also the conduct immediately after entrance
of one who so enters.
US v Arceo
The offender entered the dwelling of the spouses
without obtaining prior permission. Once inside, the
accused wounded the husband. Qualified trespass
was committed.
6. Trespass may be committed by the owner of a dwelling.
An example is when the owner leases the building to a third
person. The fact that the building belonged to him did not
authorize him to do anything with or enter the house against
the will of the actual occupant. He could have invoked the aid
of the court for the exercise or protection of his property
rights. People v Almeda.
7. Overt act of another crime necessary to charge the
accused of said crime. All trespassers ordinarily have the
intention to commit another crime, but if there is not overt
act of the crime intended to be committed, the crime is only
trespass to dwelling.
• Defendants had desire to have carnal relation with
the mother and her 2 daughters when they entered
the house, but they desisted from their original
intention and left the house. They were only guilty of
trespass to dwelling.
• The culprit who entered a dwelling through the
window to steal personal property, but was caught
by the owner before he could take any personal
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
property is guilty of trespass to dwelling and not
attempted robbery.
8. When trespass to dwelling is a separate offense. What
determines whether it shall be charged as a separate offense is
the intent of the offender.
People v Medina
The accused entered the dwelling of a captain by forcing his
way through the window and thereafter inflicted mortal
wounds on the latter. There being no intent to kill, the
accused is guilty of 2 separate crimes: trespass to dwelling and
frustrated homicide, with dwelling and unlawful entry as
aggravating circumstances.
CASES WHERE THE PROVISION IS NOT APPLICABLE
1. If the entrance to another’s dwelling is made for the purpose
of preventing some serious harm to himself, the occupants of
the dwelling or a third person.
2. If the purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice
3. If the place where entrance is made is a café, tavern, inn, and
other public houses, while the same are open.
ARTICLE 281
Other forms of trespass
The penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon any person who shall enter the closed premises
or the fenced estate of another, while either or both of them are
uninhabited, if the prohibition to enter be manifest and the trespasser
has not secured the permission of the owner or the caretaker thereof.
Elements
1. Offender enters the closed premises or the fenced estate of
another
2. The entrance is made while either of them is uninhabited
3. The prohibition to enter is manifest
4. The trespasser has not secured the permission of the owner
or the caretaker thereof
PREMISES
Premises signifies a distinct and definite locality. It may mean a room,
shop, building, or definite area, but in either case, locality is fixed.
• Under the provision, entering a warehouse may be trespass
because a warehouse is a closed premise. If it is uninhabited,
prohibition is manifest and no permission is given, the
entrance into the same is other form of trespass.
72
Crimes against personal liberty and security ad majorem dei gloriam
any other condition, even though not unlawful, and the
TRESSPASS TO DWELLING V OTHER FORMS OF offender attained his purpose.
TRESPASS 2. By threatening another with the infliction upon his person,
DWELLING OTHER FORMS honor, or property or that of his family of any wrong
Offender is a private person Offender is any person amounting to a crime and demanding money or imposing
Offender enters a dwelling Offender enters a closed any other condition, even though not unlawful, without the
premise or a fenced estate offender attaining his purpose.
Place entered is inhabited Place entered is uninhabited 3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his person,
Act punished is entering Act punished is entering a closed honor, or property or that of his family of any wrong
dwelling against the will of the premise or fenced estate without amounting to a crime, the threat not being subject to a
owner securing permission condition.
Prohibition to enter is express or Prohibition is manifest
implied Elements (first 2 kinds)
1. The offender threatens another person with the infliction
upon the latter’s person, honor or property, or upon that of
the latter’s family, any wrong
2. The wrong amounts to a crime
3. There is a demand for money or that another condition is
Section Three imposed even though not unlawful
Threats and Coercion 4. Offender either attains his purpose or not
ARTICLE 282 Elements (third kind)
Grave threats 1. The offender threatens another person with the infliction
Any person who shall threaten another with the infliction upon the upon the latter’s person, honor or property, or upon that of
PERSON, HONOR or PROPERTY of the latter or of his family of the latter’s family, any wrong
any wrong amounting to a crime, shall suffer: 2. The wrong amounts to a crime
1. The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law 3. There is NO demand for money or condition imposed
for the crime be threatened to commit, if the offender shall
have made the threat demanding money or imposing any Note:
other condition, even though not unlawful, and said offender 1. Threat to inflict a wrong must amount to a crime. The
shall have attained his purpose. If the offender shall not threat must be to inflict a wrong amounting to a crime upon
have attained his purpose, the penalty lower by two degrees the person, honor, or property of the offended party or that
shall be imposed. of the family. But it is not necessary that the threat to be
If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman, the inflicted amounts to a crime against person, honor, or
penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. property.
2. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 • Threatening to kidnap one’s child in exchange for
pesos, if the threat shall not have been made subject to a cash is considered grave threats. Kidnapping,
condition. although a crime against liberty, amounts to a crime
that affects the person of a member of the family of
ACTS PUNISHED the offended party.
1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his person, • Examples: Threat to kill (homicide), burn one’s
honor, or property or that of his family of any wrong property (arson).
amounting to a crime and demanding money or imposing • But threatening to enforce a legal action is not grave
threats, because the law says that the act threatened
JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
to be committed must be wrong and that wrong
must amount to a crime.
2. Imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful.
An example is threatening to kill someone if the latter does
not marry the former’s daughter. The condition is for the
offended party to marry the offender’s daughter, which is not
unlawful.
• But note that if the condition is not proved, it is
grave threats of the third kind, as if there was no
condition imposed.
3. Grave threat not subject to a condition. This third form of
grave threats must be serious and deliberate and that the
offender persists in the idea involved in his threats. The threats
are those made with the deliberate purpose of creating in the
mind of the person threatened the belief that the threats will
be carried into effect. There must neither be a demand for
money or a condition imposed to fall under this type.
Caluag v People
The offended party witnessed the mauling of her husband and
decided to report it. The offender caught her, pointed a gun
to her forehead, and uttered the following words: San ka
pupunta? Gusto mo to? The acts enounce a threat to kill or inflict
serious physical injuries on her person. The threat is not
subject to a condition. It falls under the third kind of grave
threats.
4. Grave threats when complainant was absent. Grave
threats may be committed by indirect challenge to a gunfight,
even if the complainant was absent when the challenge was
made. As the crime consists in threatening another with
some future harm, it is not necessary that the offended party
was present at the time the threats were made. It is sufficient
that the threats, after they had been made in his absence, came
to the knowledge of the offended party.
5. The crime of grave threats is consummated as soon as
the threats come to the knowledge of the person
threatened. Whether the offender attained his purpose or
not, the crime of grave threats is consummated. But the
penalty is higher when he attains said purpose.
6. Threats made in connection with the commission of
other crimes are absorbed by the latter. If there is another
crime actually committed or the objective of the offender is
another crime, and the threat is only a means to commit it or
a mere incident in its commission, the threat is absorbed by
the other crime.
73
Crimes against personal liberty and security
• But if the threat was made with the deliberate
purpose of creating in the mind of the person
threatened, the belief that the threat would be
carried into effect, the crime committed is grave
threats, and the minor crime which accompanied it
should be disregarded. So look at intent!
• Threat employed by the offender to commit acts of
lasciviousness or robbery is not a separate crime
because it is the constitutive element of intimidation
in those crimes.
US v Sevilla
The defendant struck the offended parties while saying at the
same time that he will kill them if they do not accede to his
demands. The threat was part of the assault.
7. Penalty to be imposed for grave threats. If the offender
attains his purpose, the penalty one degree lower of the crime
threatened to be committed is imposed. If he does not, the
penalty is 2 degrees lower.
• But if the threat is not subject to a condition, the
penalty is fixed at arresto mayor.
8. No on-the-spot demand of cash or personal property. The
offender in grave threats does not demand the delivery on the
spot of the money or other personal property asked by him.
Otherwise, the crime becomes robbery with intimidation.
9. Qualifying circumstance. If the threat is made in writing or
through a middleman, the penalty is to be imposed in its
maximum period.
ARTICLE 283
Light threats
Any threat to commit a wrong not constituting a crime, made in the
manner expressed in subdivision 1 of the next preceding article, shall
be punished by arresto mayor.
Elements
1. The offender makes a threat to commit a wrong
2. The wrong does not constitute a crime
3. There is a demand for money or that other condition is
imposed, even though not lawful
4. The offender either attains his purpose or not
Notes:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. Act threatened does not amount to a crime. Light threats
are committed in the same manner as grave threats, except
that the act threatened to be committed should not be a crime.
People v Hao Chao, et al
Chao accused Dee of tax evasion in connection with the
purchase of a land and threatened to report the matter to the
BIR and the NBI for which she would be prosecuted and
deported, unless she pays P1,000. The crime committed is
light threats.
2. When threat is not subject to any condition, not light
threats. The provision refers to the first paragraph of Article
282, which speaks only of threats subject to condition or
demand for money. However, it may fall under other light
threats.
ARTICLE 284
Bond for good behavior
In all cases falling within the two next preceding articles, the person
making the threats may also be required to give bail not to molest the
person threatened, or if he shall fail to give such bail, he shall be
sentenced to destierro.
CASES WHEN A PERSON MAY BE REQUIREDTO GIVE
BAIL NOT TO MOLES ANOTHER
1. Grave threats
2. Light threats
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE V BOND FOR GOOD
BEHAVIOR
BOND TO KEEP THE BOND FOR GOOD
PEACE BEHAVIOR
Not made applicable to certain Applicable to certain cases only
cases
Failure results to detention to Failure results to sentencing to
not exceeding 6 months (if destierro
prosecuted for a grave or less
grave felony)
Notes:
1. Bond to keep the peace is a distinct penalty.
2. The giving of bail is an additional penalty.
3. The law says may also be required.
ARTICLE 285
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Other light threats
The penalty of arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not
exceeding 200 pesos shall be imposed upon:
1. Any person who, without being included in the provisions of
the next preceding article, shall THREATEN another with a
weapon or DRAW such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in
lawful self-defense.
2. Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall orally threaten
another with some harm not constituting a crime, and who by
subsequent acts show that he did not persist in the idea
involved in his threat, provided that the circumstances of the
offense shall not bring it within the provisions of Article 282
of this Code.
3. Any person who shall orally threaten to do another any
harm not constituting a felony.
Any person who, without being included in the provisions of the next preceding
article, shall THREATEN another with a weapon or DRAW such weapon in
a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-defense.
• Without being included in the provisions of the next
preceding article. This means that there is no demand for
money or that there is no condition imposed when the
offender threatens another with a weapon.
• 2 acts punished here:
o Threatening another with a weapon, even when
there is no quarrel.
o Drawing a weapon in a quarrel, which is not in lawful
self-defense
Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall orally threaten another with some
harm not constituting a crime, and who by subsequent acts show that he did not
persist in the idea involved in his threat, provided that the circumstances of the offense
shall not bring it within the provisions of Article 282 of this Code.
1. This is an erroneous translation of the Spanish text. The word
NOT should be eliminated. The threat must constitute a
crime.
• Hence, a person who, in the heat of anger,
threatened to kill another without persisting the idea
involved his threat is liable under paragraph 2 of
Article 285.
2. Threats which are ordinarily grave threats, if made in the heat
of anger, may be other light threats.
3. Did not persist in the idea involved in his threats. This
was exemplified in a case where the accused threatened to kill
74
Crimes against personal liberty and security
the offended party. He went back to his home to get his
revolver and returned to the place, looking for the offended
party who had concealed himself in his house in the meantime.
Later on, the accused phoned the house of the offended party,
implored pardon, alleging that the threat was made without
premeditation. The offense is other light threats because the
accused showed by subsequent acts that he did not persist in
the idea involved in his threat. US v Estrada
Any person who shall orally threaten to do another any harm not
constituting a felony.
This is similar to light threats under Article 283 in that the harm
threatened to be committed is not a crime.
• The difference lies in the fact that in Article 283 requires
demand of money or imposition of condition.
• Hence, if the threat does not amount to a crime and there is
no condition imposed or money is not demanded, it may fall
under this provision.
ARTICLE 286
Grave coercions
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who, without authority of law, shall, by
means of VIOLENCE, THREAT, or INTIMIDATION, prevent
another from doing something not prohibited by law, or compel him
to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.
If the coercion be committed in violation of the exercise of the right of
suffrage, or for the purpose of compelling another to perform any
religious act or to prevent him from so doing, the penalty next higher
in degree shall be imposed.
2 WAYS OF COMMITTING GRAVE COERCIONS
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 be it
right or wrong.
Elements
1. That a person prevented another from doing something not
prohibited by law or that he compelled him to do something
against his will, whether be it right or wrong.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. The prevention or compulsion is effected by violence, threat
or intimidation
3. The person that restrained the will and liberty of another had
NOT the authority of law or the right to do so.
Notes:
1. Preventing lawful act. What is prevented must not be
prohibited by law. No coercion is committed by one who
prevents an unlawful act.
• In grave coercion, the act of preventing by force
must be made at the time the offended party was
doing or about to do the act to be prevented. If the
act was already done when violence is exerted, the
crime is unjust vexation.
2. Compelling another to do something includes the
offender’s act of doing it himself while subjecting
another to his will.
People v Juan, et al
The sergeant of police and the municipal president of a town
wanted to cross a private bridge which was closed. They were
refused passage because they were on a heavy truck. What they
did was to open the bridge, grab and push the caretaker who
fell to the ground. The crime committed is grave coercion.
Through violence, the caretaker was compelled to allow them
to cross the private bridge.
3. When the complainant is in the actual possession of a thing,
even if he has no right to that possession, compelling him by
means of violence (or threat or intimidation) to give up the
possession, even by the owner himself, is grave coercion.
• But the owner of a thing who is in actual possession
of the property has a right to use such force as may
be reasonably necessary to prevent others from
dispossessing him of his property. He acts in defense
of property.
4. Not grave coercion when violence used to seize property
of debtor of offender. When violence is used to seize
property belonging to the creditor’s debtor, it is light
coercion.
5. No intimidation by display of force if arms are not used.
The mere fact that the defendant showed up with 8 other
armed men and told the complainant to desist from
constructing a house on a piece of land does not constitute
coercion. There is no violence, intimidation, or display of
material force. The arms were not even used.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• But surrounding the complainant in a
notoriously threatening attitude is sufficient.
6. The owner of a thing has no right to prevent interference with
it when interference is necessary to avert greater damage.
7. There is no grave coercion when the accused acts in good
faith in the performance of his duty. In a case where the
municipal mayor authorized the fencing of a barbershop
which has been recommended for closure by the municipal
health officer for noncompliance with certain health and
sanitation requirements, the SC held that the mayor incurred
no criminal liability for having acted in good faith in the
performance of his duty as he merely implemented the
recommendation of the health officer. Timoner v People
8. A person who takes the law into his hands with violence,
is guilty of grave coercion. The main purpose of the
principle that no person may take the law into his hands, and
that our government is one of law, not of men.
9. Coercion is consummated even if the offended party did
not accede to the purpose of the coercion. The fact that an
individual was maltreated for the purpose of compelling him
to confess a crime which was attributed to him, constitutes the
crime of consummated coercion even if the agents of the
authorities who carried out the maltreatment did not
accomplish their purpose to draw from him a confession.
Punzalan v People
• But note that if the offended party was a prisoner,
extorting information from him through violence
falls under Article 235 or Maltreatment of
Prisoner.
10. Coercion versus detention. Coercion is distinguished from
illegal detention, when there is no clear deprivation of liberty,
by the purpose of the offender.
11. When there is prevention of the meeting of a legislative body
or provincial board or city or municipal council or board, the
offenders are not liable grave coercion through arbitrary
detention, even if there is compulsion and detention.
12. When prision mayor is imposed.
• Violation of the exercise of right of suffrage.
A is running against B for mayor in a certain
municipality. C, A’s bodyguard, learns that the
residents of barangay D shall all vote for B during
the elections. C orders the residents of barangay D
75
Crimes against personal liberty and security
not to vote during the elections with the threat that
the houses of those who shall vote shall be burned.
• Coercion is committed to compel another to
perform any religious act.
• Coercion is committed to prevent another from
performing a religious act.
US v Morales
Where the procession of the Catholics was
disbanded by force by certain followers of the
Aglipayan Church, acting in the belief that the
Aglipayan faith should be the only one to
predominate the locality, the accused was held guilty
of grave coercion.
GRAVE THREATS VS GRAVE COERCION
When a person threatens to inflict upon another person an act
amounting to a crime and he attains his purpose, thereby compelling
another person to do something against his will, does it not amount to
grave coercion?
o The difference between the two lies in the fact that in grave
coercion, the force or violence must be immediate, actual,
or imminent.
o In the crime of grave threats, the crime consists of threatening
to do some future harm.
People v Rimando
The taxi driver threatened to bump his car to kill himself and his female
passenger if she would not go with him to a night club. The crime was
grave coercion.
Note: In this case, the accused wanted the offended party to go with
him to the night club at the time he made the threat.
People v Romero
The accused threatened the complainant that if he would not pay his
debt, he would be taken again and brought to a camp where he would
be killed. The following day, the complainant returned and delivered
the amount due. The crime is grave threats.
o Note: The delivery of the money was the effect of the threat
made the day before. There being no actual or imminent force
or violence exerted upon the complainant when he delivered
the amount, the accused cannot be held liable for coercion.
ARTICLE 287
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Light coercions
Any person who, by means of violence, shall SEIZE anything
belonging to his debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the
payment of the debt, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its
minimum period and a fine equivalent to the value of the thing, but in
no case less than 75 pesos.
Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be punished by arresto
menor or a fine ran
ging from 5 pesos to 200 pesos, or both.
Elements
1. The offender is a creditor
2. He seizes anything belonging to his debtor
3. The seizure is accomplished by means of violence or a display
of material force producing intimidation
4. The purpose of the creditor is to apply the thing to the
payment of debt
US v Tupular
The accused demanded payment from a Chinaman, but he had no
money. With his cargadores, the accused took from the store of the
Chinaman all the goods which the latter had, ignoring the opposition of
the Chinaman who could not do anything because he had a revolver.
The goods were taken forcibly. The crime is light coercion.
Notes:
1. Paragraph 1 of Article 287 is limited to a case where the
offender seized anything belonging to his debtor by means of
violence to APPLY the same as payment of his debt.
• Hence, if the property is seized for the purpose of
securing payment of one’s debt, this article is not
applicable.
2. Offender must NOT be a co-owner. Hence, an offender
who is a co-owner of the thing seized cannot be held liable
under this article.
3. Actual physical violence need not be employed. It is
sufficient that the attitude of the offender in seizing the
property of his debtor is notoriously menacing as to amount
to a grave intimidation or create such situation as would
necessarily intimidate the victim.
4. Paragraph 2 of Article 287 talks about unjust vexation.
UNJUST VEXATION includes any human conduct which,
although not productive of some physical or material harm
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
would, unjustly annoy or vex an innocent person. The
paramount question is whether the offender’s act caused
annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress, or
disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed.
• There is no violence or intimidation in unjust
vexation.
• Taking possession of the thing belonging to the
debtor, through deceit and misrepresentation, for
the purpose of applying the same to the payment of
the debt, is unjust vexation under Paragraph 2 of
Article 287.
• Kissing a girl without performing acts of
lasciviousness is unjust vexation.
ARTICLE 288
Other similar coercions(Compulsory purchase of merchandise and payment of wages
by means of tokens.)
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos, or
both, shall be imposed upon any PERSON, AGENT or OFFICER,
of any association or corporation who shall force or compel, directly
or indirectly, or shall knowingly permit any laborer or employee
employed by him or by such firm or corporation to be forced or
compelled, to purchase merchandise or commodities of any kind.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person who shall pay the
wages due a laborer or employee employed by him, by means of tokens
or objects other than the legal tender currency of the laborer or
employee.
ACTS PUNISHED AS OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS
1. Forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or knowingly
permitting the forcing or compelling of the laborer or
employee of the offender to purchase merchandise or
commodities of any kind from him.
Elements
a. Offender is any person, agent, or officer of any
association or corporation
b. He or such firm or corporation has employed
laborers or employees
c. He forces or compels directly or indirectly, or
knowingly permits the forcing or compelling of the
laborer or employee of the offender to purchase
76
Crimes against personal liberty and security
merchandise or commodities of any kind from him
or such firm
2. Paying the wages due his laborer or employee by means of
tokens or objects other than the legal tender currency of the
PH, unless expressly requested by such laborer or employee.
Elements
a. The offender pays the wages due a laborer or
employee employed by him by means of tokens or
objects
b. Those tokens or objects are not legal tender
c. The employee or laborer does not expressly
request that he be paid by means of tokens or
objects
But inducing an employee to give up any part of his wages by force,
stealth, intimidation, threat or by any other means is unlawful under
Article 116 of the Labor Code, not under the RPC.
ARTICLE 289
Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of capital or labor through
violence or threats.
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 300 pesos shall be
imposed upon any person who, for the purpose of ORGANIZING,
MAINTAINING or PREVENTING coalitions or capital or labor,
strike of laborers or lock-out of employees, shall employ violence or
threats in such a degree as to COMPEL or FORCE the laborers or
employers in the free and legal exercise of their industry or work, if the
act shall not constitute a more serious offense in accordance with the
provisions of this Code.
Elements
1. The offender employs violence or threats, in such a degree as
to compel or force the laborers or employers in the free and
legal exercise of their industry or work
2. The purpose is to organize, maintain, or prevent:
a. Coalitions of capital or labor
b. Strike of laborers or
c. Lockout of employers
Notes
1. The act should not be a more serious offense. If death or
some serious physical injuries are caused in an effort to curtail
the exercise of the rights of the laborers and employers, the
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
act should be punished in accordance with the other
provisions of the code.
2. Peaceful picketing is not prohibited because it is part of
freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution. But
employing violence or making threat by picketers may make
them liable for coercion. But the right to picket should be
confined strictly and in good faith to gaining information
and to peaceful persuasion and argument.
People v Carballo
The picketers stopped a truck emerging from the company’s
premises, refused to allow it to proceed peacefully on its way,
and threatened that if he would go his way he would be hurt.
The crime is coercion. The picketers’ act of remaining in the
passageway when the trucks of the company were going inside
its premises is not part of picketing protected by law.
3. Preventing employee from joining any registered labor
organization is punished under the Labor Code and not under
the RPC.
Article 259, Labor Code
It shall be unlawful for the employer to:
a. Interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the
exercise of their right to self-organization.
b. Require as a condition of employment that a person or
employee shall not join a labor organization or shall
withdraw from one to which he belongs.
Chapter Three
DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS
ARTICLE 290
Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon any private
individual who in order to discover the secrets of another, shall
SEIZE his papers or letters and REVEAL the contents thereof.
If the offender shall not reveal such secrets, the penalty shall be arresto
mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.
The provision shall not be applicable to parents, guardians, or
persons entrusted with the custody of minors with respect to the
papers or letters of the children or minors placed under their care or
study, nor to spouses with respect to the papers or letters of either of
them.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
1. The offender is a private individual or even a public officer
not in the exercise of his official function
2. He seizes papers or letter of another
3. The purpose is to discover the secrets of such other person
4. The offender is informed of the contents or the papers or
letters seized
SEIZE
To seize means to place in the control of someone a thing or to give
him the possession thereof. It is not necessary that in the act, there
should be force or violence.
• The manner of giving the items to the offender must be
involuntary. Hence, if the accused accepted from a
messenger a radiogram addressed to another person, he did
not seize such radiogram, because it was voluntarily delivered
to him. People v Singh.
• The purpose of the offender must be to discover the
secrets of another. Such intent must precede the opening of
a closed paper. Hence, a person who opens such closed paper
by mistake does not make him liable under this article.
• Prejudice is not an element of the offense.
• Revelation not required. The act punished is the seizure of
correspondence with the intent to discover the secrets of
another. Revelation of secrets discovered is merely a qualifying
circumstance.
ARTICLE 291
Revealing secrets with abuse of office
The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed upon any manager, employee, or servant who, in such
capacity, shall LEARN the secrets of his principal or master and shall
REVEAL such secrets.
Elements
1. Offender is a manager, employee, or servant
2. He learns the secret of his principal or master in such capacity
3. He reveals such secrets
Notes:
1. Secrets must be learned by reason of their employment
2. Secrets must be revealed by the offender.
77
Crimes against personal liberty and security ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

3. Damage is not necessary

ARTICLE 292
Revelation of industrial secrets.
The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods
and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon the person
in charge, employee or workman of any manufacturing or
industrial establishment who, to the prejudice of the owner thereof,
shall REVEAL the secrets of the industry of the latter.

Elements
1. Offender is a person in charge, employee, or workman of a
manufacturing or industrial establishment
2. Such establishment has a secret of the industry which the
offender has learned
3. The offender reveals such secrets
4. Prejudice is caused to the owner

Notes:
1. Secrets must relate to the manufacturing processes. The
secrets must be those that relate to the manufacturing
processes of the manufacturer and used only in his factory or
in a limited number of them. Otherwise, when such processes
are generally used, they will not be secret.
2. The act constituting the crime is revealing the secret of
the industry. Hence, a person in charge, employee or
workman who uses the secret only for his personal advantage
does not incur any liability under this provision.
3. The revelation may be made after the employee or
workman had ceased to be connected with the
establishment. The provision does not state the time of the
revelation of the industrial secrets. What is important is that
he was an employee or workman of the manufacturing or
industrial establishment when he learned the secrets.
4. Prejudice is an element of the offense.

Penalty is to be imposed in its maximum period when torture attends

the commission of any crime punishable under Title 8 (Crimes Against
Persons) and Title 9 (Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security).

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 78

Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

TITLE TEN: CRIMES AGAINST o But an owner of the property may be guilty of • Unlawful taking means the property was taken unlawfully,
robbery when he takes it from the bailee, with the then misappropriated unlawfully.
PROPERTY intent to charge the bailee with its value. (robbery of o When the taking is lawful (for example there is a
the money) warrant for search and seizure) and the
Chapter One: ROBBERY IN GENERAL • Since it must belong to another, a co-owner or a partner misappropriation was subsequent to such lawful
cannot commit robbery or theft with regard to properties taking, it is estafa or malversation. US v Atienza
ARTICLE 293 owned by the co-ownership or the partnership
Who are guilty of robbery. - Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take • The person from whom the property is taken need not be the WHEN UNLAWFUL TAKING IS COMPLETE
any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence or owner thereof; mere possession is enough. Robbery with violence From the moment the offender
intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything shall be guilty against or intimidation of gains possession of the thing,
of robbery. NAMING OF OWNER persons even if the culprit had not
robbery with intimidation Not necessary, as long as the opportunity to dispose of the
ROBBERY. Unlawful taking of property belonging to another, with against or violence resulting personal property taken does same, the unlawful taking is
intent to gain, by means of violence or intimidation of any person, or only in PI not belong to accused complete.
using force upon anything shall be guilty of robbery. robbery by the use of force Not necessary, as long as the Robbery with force upon When the offender takes the
upon things, personal property taken does things thing out of the building to
Classification of robbery not belong to accused consummate the crime.
1. by means of violence or intimidation of any person, or robbery with homicide Necessary*
2. by using force upon anything (4) THERE IS INTENT TO GAIN
*The allegation of the real offended party is an essential description of • Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of
Elements: the crime because if robbery is not proven, the complex crime of personal property.
1. There is personal property robbery with homicide cannot be sustained. People v Sto. Tomas o Intent to gain is an internal act and cannot be
2. It belongs to another • The law is construed strictly in favor of the accused in view of established by direct evidence, except in case of
3. There unlawful taking the seriousness of the crime. confession by the accused.
4. There is intent to gain o It must be deduced from the surrounding
5. There is violence against or intimidation of any person or (3) THERE IS UNLAWFUL TAKING circumstances
force upon anything. • The personal property is TAKEN by the offender against the • Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal
will of the owner property grave coercion if there is violence used.
(1) THERE IS PERSONAL PROPERTY o Thus, running away with jewels held for safekeeping • The elements of personal property belonging to another and
• If the property is real property, the crime is usurpation. is not robbery because the things were not taken. that of intent to gain must concur.
• Prohibitive articles may be the subject of robbery (opium, US v Alcantara o Hence, if a person, with intent to gain, took personal
other drugs) o Therefore, there is no robbery when the property is property from another, but said property turned out
• Classification of personal property under the Civil Code does voluntarily given to the accused, even though the to be his own, there is no robbery.
not apply. The test is whether the object is susceptible to latter unlawfully keeps it with intent to gain (personal o If he took personal property from another, using
appropriation and transportation. conclusion). violence, and under the belief that it was his own,
o Discussion: Object considered as real property • Taking, as an element of robbery means depriving the there is also no robbery.
under Article 415 of the CC can be subject of offended party of ownership of the thing with the character
robbery. of permanency. (5) THERE IS VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION
o Discussion: Same answer even if you need a truck o Hence, if a person unlawfully takes the personal OF ANY PERSON OR FORCE UPON ANYTHING
or forklift to take the item away. property of another by use of force upon things but • The violence must be against the person of the offended party,
uses the same to threaten the latter and not to not upon the thing taken
(2) IT BELONGS TO ANOTHER deprive the latter of its ownership, he is not guilty o If the accused snatches the bag of the victim and
• It is not robbery if the person takes his own property from the of robbery. People v Kho Choc does nothing else, it is merely theft.
depositary

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 79

Crimes against property
o If the accused punches the victim or pushes the latter
after the snatching, it becomes robbery.
• INTIMIDATION exists when it causes the fear or fright of
the victim.
o Threat of arrest or pointing a knife or a gun are
examples.
o Intimidation need not be threat of bodily harm.
o But it refers to objective fright, not mere
temperament
• The taking of the personal property need not be immediately
after the intimidation
• USING FORCE UPON ANYTHING means that the
culprit used force to enter a house or a building.
o He must enter and not merely introduced his hand
into the broken glass to remove the watches from
the show-window. People v Adorno.
o Entrance into the building must be effected by any
of the means in Articles 299 and 302.
General rule:
The violence or intimidation must be present before the taking of
personal property is complete.
• But it is not necessary that violence or intimidation should be
present from the very beginning.
• If a person runs away with the wallet of the victim and
thereafter punches him in the face AFTER the taking of the
property, he is liable for 2 crimes: theft and physical injuries.
Exception:
But when violence results in:
1. homicide,
2. rape
3. intentional mutilation, or
4. any of the serious physical injuries in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of
Article 263,
the taking of personal property is robbery complexed with any of those
crimes under Article 294, even if the taking was already complete
when the violence was used by the offender.
NOTE: When both violence against or intimidation and force upon
things are present, the classification is robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• This is because robbery characterized by violence against, or
intimidation of persons is evidently graver than using force
upon things.
• There is greater disturbance to the order of society and to the
security of the individual.
CARNAPPING. Unlawful taking of motor vehicle belonging to
another, with intent to gain, without the latter’s consent, or by means
of violence or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.
Penalties are as follows:
No violence, force, 20 years 1 day – 30 years
intimidation
With violence, intimidation, or 30 years & 1 day to 40years
force
Owner, driver, or occupant of Life imprisonment
the vehicle is killed or raped in
the course of the commission
of carnapping
Section One. - Robbery with violence or intimidation of persons.
ARTICLE 294
Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons; Penalties. - Any person
guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any
person shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason or
on occasion of the robbery, the crime of homicide shall have
been committed; or when the robbery shall have been
accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to
reclusion perpetua when by reason or on occasion of such
robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision
1 of Article 263 shall have been inflicted;
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on
occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized
in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next preceding
paragraph, shall have been inflicted.
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to
reclusion temporal in its medium period, if the violence or
intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall
have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
commission of the crime, or when the course of its execution,
the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries
covered by sub-divisions 3 and 4 of said Article 23.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to
prision mayor in its medium period in other cases. (As
amended by R. A. 7659).
Note: This Article punishes special complex crimes.
Paragraph 1:
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
HOMICIDE BY REASON OF OR ON THE OCCASION OF
ROBBERY
This portion focuses on how to distinguish between a complex crime and separate
crimes when someone is killed in a robbery.
• This means that homicide was committed because of or in the
course of robbery.
o Otherwise, robbery and homicide are separate
offenses.
• It is committed by reason of or on the occasion of robbery if
it is committed:
a. To facilitate the robbery or the escape of the
culprit
b. To preserve the possession by the culprit of the
loot
c. To prevent the discovery of the robbery
d. Eliminate witnesses to the commission of the
crime,
• Essential for the conviction of robbery with homicide is proof
of direct relation, an intimate connection between the
robbery and the killing, whether the killing be prior or
subsequent to the robbery, or whether they are committed at
the same time.
o It is immaterial that death would supervene by mere
accident or that the victim of the homicide is other
than the victim of robbery, or that 2 or more persons
are killed.
• Where the original design comprehends robbery, and
homicide is perpetrated by reason or on occasion of the
consummation of the former, the crim committed is robbery
with homicide.
80
Crimes against property
o If the original design is not to commit robbery, but
robbery is committed after the homicide as an
afterthought and a minor incident in the
homicide, the criminal acts should be viewed as 2
distinct offenses.
• Conviction for robbery with homicide requires that robbery
was the main purpose and objective and the killing was
merely incidental, resulting merely by reason or on the
occasion of robbery.
o It is not necessary that robbery be committed prior
to the killing. The killing may take place before,
during, or after the robbery.
o However, an intent to take the personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain must
precede the killing.
o This makes sense because robbery should be the
main purpose.
o So if mauna ang killing, as long as in the culprit’s
mind, there is already intent to take the property of
another, robbery na.
• It is immaterial that the offenders had also a desire to avenge
grievances against the person killed.
• When homicide is not proved, the crime is only robbery.
• When robbery is not proved, the crime is only homicide.
• When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of
robbery, the crime is robbery with homicide and rape, the rape
to be considered as an aggravating circumstance only (likened
to ignominy).
HOMICIDE
• This is to be understood in its generic sense as to include
parricide and murder.
o Hence, treachery will not qualify the crime to
murder, but will only be appreciated as a generic
aggravating circumstance.
o There is no such crime as robbery with murder.
• The law does not require that the victim of the robbery be also
the victim of the homicide
DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
• All who participated in the robbery as principals are principals
in the single and indivisible crime of robbery with homicide
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
although they did not take part in the killing, unless it clearly
appears that they endeavored to prevent the same.
• In robbery with homicide, the person charged as an accessory
need not have knowledge of the commission of the homicide,
if he is already an accessory to the robbery.
o This is because Article 53 provides that the penalty
to be imposed upon the accessories is 2 degrees
lower than that prescribed by law for the principals.
o If we were to say that a person who is an accessory
to the robbery but did not have knowledge as to the
homicide, there will be no basis for imposing upon
the accessory the penalty lower by 2 degrees than
that prescribed by robbery only.
o Robbery cannot be separated from homicide in
the complex crime of robbery with homicide.
o But note that this is contrary to the ruling in People v
Doble wherein the accessory to the crime of robbery
was left in the banca was convicted as a accessory to
the crime of robbery and not robbery with homicide.
HIGHWAY ROBBERY
• Highway robbery requires proof that several accused were
organized for the purpose of committing it indiscriminately
• The purpose of the special law (PD 532) is to deter and punish
lawless elements who commit acts of depredation upon
persons and properties of innocent and defenseless
inhabitants who travel from one place to another.
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
• The law says accompanied by rape.
o Discussion: The use of accompanied instead of by
reason or on occasion of is because there can be no
situation wherein rape arises by reason or on
occasion of the robbery. Rape is such an unrelated
activity.
• The offender must have the intent to take the personal
property belonging to another with intent to gain, and such
intent must precede the rape, (same with homicide)
• Even if the rape was committed in another place, it is still
robbery with rape.
• It is not necessary that the rape be committed prior to or
simultaneous with the robbery.
• There can be no crime as robbery with attempted rape.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o Neither of the 2 is necessary for the commission of
the other.
o Both crimes cannot be the result of a single act.
• When the taking of personal property of a woman is an
independent act following defendant’s failure to
consummate the rape, there are 2 distinct crimes
committed: attempted rape and theft.
o It cannot be robbery with violence against persons
because the violence committed upon the person of
the woman was independent of the robbery. It was
not done to facilitate the robbery.
• Additional rapes committed on the same occasion of robbery
will not increase the penalty
o There is no law providing that the additional rapes
or homicides should be considered as aggravating
circumstances.
o The remedy lies with the legislature.
• When the taking of property after the rape is not with the
intent to gain, neither theft nor robbery is committed.
o Example is when there was rape but the things were
taken as a souvenir only.
Paragraph 4:
ROBBERY WITH UNNECESSARY VIOLENCE AND
INTIMIDATION
• Tying the victim and leaving him tied to a tree after taking his
money is an example.
• If it is shown that the beating is for the purpose of compelling
the victim to show the accused the place where money was
kept, the violence and intimidation is considered necessary
• Unnecessary degree; violence or intimidation cannot
happen after deprivation. Violence or intimidation in the
first case need not be present before or at the exact moment
when the object is taken. The violence or intimidation may be
committed at any time before the owner is finally deprived of
his property.
• Victim: Must not be the one responsible for robbery.
o Compare: In the preceding paragraphs, the victim
may be a co-robber.
o Injury: The injuries must be inflicted during the
robbery. They cannot be those inflicted after
robbery.
81
Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

INFLICTING SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES 2. Acts done by the accused which, either by their own nature or prosecution to deprive him of money or gift to avoid arrest or
(PARAGRAPHS 3 AND 4 OF ART 263) UPON ANY PERSON by reason of the circumstances under which they are executed, his personal property prosecution.
NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS COMMISSION inspire fear in the person against whom they are directed. Victim is deprived of his Victim parts with his money or
property by force or property voluntarily; the
Requisites: INTIMIDATION IN ROBBERY VS THREATS intimidation transaction is mutual and
1. SPI in Art 263 paragraphs 3 and 4 inflicted in the course of ROBBERY THREATS voluntary.
the robbery Intimidation is actual and Intimidation is conditional or
2. Any of them was inflicted upon any person not responsible immediate future (not immediate) ARTICLE 295
for the commission of the robbery Intimidation is personal Intimidation may be through QUALIFIED ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
an intermediary INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
• This does not cover a robber who inflicts serious physical Directed only to the person of Directed to the person, honor, Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
injuries on another robber, which resulted to the latter’s the victim or property of the victim or that or with the use of firearm on a street, road or alley.
deformity. of his family If the offenses mentioned in subdivisions three, four, and five of the
o The former is liable for the separate crimes of Gain of the culprit is immediate Gain of the culprit is not next preceding article shall have been committed:
robbery and serious physical injuries, immediate 1. in an uninhabited place or
• It would seem that the import of this particular phrase is 2. by a band, or
serious physical injuries inflicted on the victims or bystanders ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE V GRAVE COERCION 3. by attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle or
(personal interpretation). ROBBERY GRAVE COERCION airship, or
o Any person other than the robbers. VIOLENCE IS USED 4. by entering the passenger's compartments in a train or, in any
• The serious physical injuries under paragraphs 3 and 4 must There is intent to gain No intent to gain; the purpose manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the
be inflicted in the course of the execution of the robbery. is to compel another to do respective conveyances, or
o Hence, if they were inflicted after the taking of the something against his will, 5. on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is
personal property, the serious physical injuries without authority of law, but made with the use of a firearm
mentioned should be considered as a separate believing himself to be the *the use of a firearm specifically qualifies robbery on street, road, highway,
offense. owner or creditor, and thereby or alley.
seizes the property. PENALTY: the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of
Paragraph 5: Hence, the only distinction is intention the proper penalties.
ROBBERY WITH THE USE OF VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
INTIMIDATION OF ANY PERSON Example: A lost his watch. He saw B using it afterwards. Recognizing the watch, In the same cases, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed
• This is simple robbery. A demanded its return from B. because B refused, A drew a pistol and told B that upon the leader of the band.
• This is applicable when the injuries inflicted are only less if B did not give him the watch, A would kill him.
a. The crime cannot be robbery because there is no intent to gain. A thought Notes:
serious or slight physical injuries.
he owns the watch. 1. These qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the
• If the less serious or slight PI were committed after the information and proved during the trial.
robbery was consummated, that would constitute a b. The crime cannot be threats because in threats, the intimidation is not
actual and immediate. 2. Cannot be offset by a generic mitigating circumstance.
separate offense. 3. The presence of 2 or more qualifying aggravating
• Discussion: vs paragraph 4: violence/intimidation is c. The crime is grave coercion. There is no intent to gain, the effect of
intimidation is immediate, and the offended party is compelled to do circumstance will qualify the offense. The others will be
necessary here. considered as generic aggravating circumstance.
something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.
4. The circumstances may be appreciated independently and
INTIMIDATION. This exists when the acts executed, or words need not concur.
uttered by the offender are capable of producing fear in the person ROBBERY VS BRIBERY
threatened. ROBBERY BRIBERY
WHEN NOT APPLICABLE:
1. Pointing a revolver while poking the victim’s back with a hard When the victim did not When the victim has
1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime
object commit a crime and he is committed a crime and gives
homicide is committed
intimidated with arrest or

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 82

Crimes against property
2. When the robbery is accompanied by rape, intentional
mutilation, or arson
3. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of the
serious physical injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility,
impotency, or blindness is inflicted.
ARTICLE 296
Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members thereof. - When more
than three armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery,
it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. When any of the
arms used in the commission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm,
the penalty to be imposed upon all the malefactors shall be the
maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law, without
prejudice of the criminal liability for illegal possession of such
unlicensed firearms.
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.
ROBBERY BY A BAND. When more than three armed malefactors
take part in the commission of a robbery, it shall be deemed to have
been committed by a band (at least 4).
WHEN ARMS USED ARE ILLEGAL. When any of the arms used
in the commission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm:
1. The penalty to be imposed upon all the malefactors shall be
the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law,
o It is not an ordinary aggravating circumstance
2. Without prejudice of the criminal liability for illegal possession
of such unlicensed firearms.
o This means that in addition to the criminal liability
for robbery by a band, the accused is also liable for
illegal possession of firearm, which is penalized by
PD 1866.
o PD 1866 was amended by RA 8294, which considers
the use of an unlicensed firearm for murder or
homicide merely a special aggravating circumstance
and not a separate crime.
DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
GENERAL RULE: 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.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Requisites:
1. He is a member of the band
2. Present at the commission of a robbery by the band
Hence, a principal by inducement who does not go with the
band, cannot be liable for robbery with homicide, there being
no evidence that he gave instructions to commit the same.
3. The other members of the band committed an assault
4. He did not prevent the assault
Application of the provision: If all the members of the band are
present when the homicide occurred (even though the conspiracy was
for robbery only), and none of them attempted to prevent the homicide,
all are liable for robbery with homicide.
• It appears that there is a presumed conspiracy.
EXCEPTION: If it be shown that he attempted to prevent the same.
o In this case, there must be proof of the same.
WHEN ROBBERY NOT COMMITTED BY A BAND
Then there is no presumption of conspiracy.
1. The robber who did not take part in the assault by another is
not liable for that assault
2. If it was not committed by a band and homicide was
committed but it was not determined by the accused when
they plotted the crime, the one who did not participate in the
killing is liable for robbery only.
3. But when there is conspiracy to commit homicide and
robbery, all the conspirators, even if less than 4 armed men,
are liable for the special complex crime of robbery with
homicide.
WHEN RAPE NOT CONSIDERED AS ‘ANY OF THE
ASSAULTS OMMITTED BY THE BAND’
When, in the course of robbery by a band, the offended woman was
taken by one of the accused to a place away from the house where
the robbery was committed, and there he raped her without the
knowledge of his companions, he ALONE is guilty of robbery with
rape.
• The members of the band liable for the assault at the commission of the
robbery, not necessarily at the commission of the assault (meaning, it is
not necessary that they see it or that they know it).
Notes:
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Proof of conspiracy is not necessary when four or more armed
persons committed the robbery (meaning no proof of
conspiracy to hold a member of the band liable).
2. There is no crime as robbery with homicide in band
o The crime is still robbery with homicide, but the fact
that it was committed by a band is a generic
aggravating circumstance
3. The special aggravating circumstance of use of unlicensed
firearm is not applicable to robbery with homicide committed
by a band.
4. The use of firearm, whether licensed or unlicensed, in making
intimidation is a qualifying circumstance when the robbery
defined in any of paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of article 294 is
committed on a street, road, highway, or alley.
o Article 295 does not distinguish, hence, the firearm
may be licensed or unlicensed.
o The robbery must be that penalized in any of
paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of article 294
o But the crime must not be:
1. Robbery with rape
2. Robbery with intentional mutilation
3. Robbery with serious physical injuries
where the person became insane, imbecile,
impotent, or blind.
Discussion: In homicide or murder, the use of unlicensed
firearm is actually just an aggravating circumstance and no
longer subject of a separate offense. Article 296 is an
exception.
Super important note: The robbery by a band contemplated here
is the robbery within the contemplation of Article 295, which is
not applicable to the circumstances in paragraphs 1 and 2 or
Article 294.
• Hence, even if unlicensed firearms were used in the
robbery and the victim is killed, raped, mutilated, or
suffers injuries under paragraph 1 of Article 263, Article
296 will NOT apply.
Discussion: If robbery was committed by a bond and rape/homicide
is committed, Article 296 is not applicable because the same does not
apply to circumstances under Article 295 (1) and (2). Assault should be
considered as physical injuries only, bearing in mind the provisions of
Article 295.
83
Crimes against property
Discussion: Difference of Article 14 band and Article 296 is that:
1. The former can be offset by mitigating circumstances and the
latter cannot.
2. Under the former, when homicide/rape is committed by the
band but the same was not part of a plan, other band
members are not liable therefor.
ARTICLE 297
Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under certain circumstances. - When
by reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a
homicide is committed, the person guilty of such offenses shall be
punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua, unless the homicide committed shall deserve a higher penalty
under the provisions of this Code.
HOMICIDE
• This is used in a generic sense
• It includes multiple homicide, murder, parricide, or even
infanticide.
• The phrase unless the homicide committed shall deserve a higher penalty
means that if the killing is qualified.
o If, example, the killing was qualified by treachery,
penalty for murder shall be imposed and this article
will not apply.
Note that whether the robbery is attempted or frustrated, the penalty is the
same.
Notes:
1. If there is no overt act of robbery, robbery cannot be charged.
Charge the appropriate offense.
2. Article 296 is applicable to attempted robbery with homicide
by a band.
3. There is only one crime of attempted robbery with homicide
even if slight physical injuries were inflicted on other persons
on the occasion or by reason of the robbery.
a. The slight physical injuries should be disregarded in
the designation of the offense, for there is no such
crime as attempted robbery with homicide and slight
physical injuries
b. Article 297 talks about attempted or frustrated
robbery with homicide.
4. When the crime is robbery with frustrated homicide, the
penalty for the most serious crime, frustrated homicide,
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
should be imposed in its maximum period, in view of Article
48.
a. But note that attempted homicide or attempted
murder is absorbed in robbery with homicide
ARTICLE 298
Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation. - Any person who, with
intent to defraud another, by means of violence or intimidation, shall
compel him to sign, execute or deliver any public instrument or
documents, shall be held guilty of robbery and punished by the penalties
respectively prescribed in this Chapter.
Elements:
1. Offender has intent to defraud another
2. Offender compels him to sign, execute or deliver any public
instrument or documents
3. The compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation,
Notes:
1. Shall be guilty of robbery and punished by the penalties prescribed in this
chapter
a. If the violence led to the death of the person to be
defrauded, the penalty is that corresponding to
robbery with homicide.
b. If the robbery was only attempted or frustrated but
resulted to homicide, it shall be punished by the
penalty prescribed in Article 297.
2. The term public refers to the word instrument only.
a. Hence, this article applies even if the document
signed, executed or delivered is a private or
commercial document.
b. But this article shall not apply if the document is
void.
Section Two. - Robbery by the use of force upon things
Those liable for robbery by use of force upon things do not employ
violence against or intimidation of persons. Otherwise, they become
liable under Article 294.
This kind of robbery is committed only by:
1. Entering a house or building through the means specified in
Article 299 and Article 302.
2. Even without such entrance, if he broke a wardrobe, chest, or
any other kind of locked or closed or sealed receptacle in the
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
house or building, or he took it away to be broken or forced
open outside.
ARTICLE 299
Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to worship. -
Any armed person who shall commit robbery in an inhabited house
or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship, shall be
punished by reclusion temporal, if the value of the property taken shall
exceed 50k pesos, and if:
A. The malefactors shall enter the house or building in which the
robbery was committed, by any of the following means:
1. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress.
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door
or window.
3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools.
4. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority.
Or if -
B. The robbery be committed under any of the following
circumstances:
1. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle;
2. By taking such furniture or objects to be broken or forced
open outside the place of the robbery.
When the offenders do not carry arms, and the value of the property
taken exceeds 50k pesos, the penalty next lower in degree shall be
imposed.
The same rule shall be applied when the offenders are armed, but the
value of the property taken does not exceed 50k pesos.
When said offenders do not carry arms and the value of the property
taken does not exceed 50k pesos, they shall suffer the penalty prescribed
in the two next preceding paragraphs, in its minimum period.
If the robbery be committed in one of the dependencies of an inhabited
house, public building, or building dedicated to religious worship, the
penalties next lower in degree than those prescribed in this article shall
be imposed.
SUBDIVISION A
Elements of Subdivision A:
84
Crimes against property
1. Offender entered an inhabited house or public building or
edifice devoted to religious worship
2. 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.
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending the
exercise of public authority.
3. Once inside the building, the offender took personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain.
ENTERING
• The accused must enter the building or inhabited house
o Mere insertion of the hand for the taking only
amounts to theft
o Entering a parked automobile by breaking the
window only amounts to theft because the
automobile is not a house or a biding.
• INHABITED HOUSE includes any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons even though
the inhabitants thereof are temporarily absent therefrom when
the robbery is committed.
• PUBLIC BUILDING is every building owned by the
government or belonging to a private person but rented by the
government, although temporarily unoccupied by the same.
o What makes a building public is not its inauguration
for the purpose intended, but the fact of the State or
any of its agencies having title thereto.
• Proof of entrance must likewise be proved. Otherwise, the
crime is only theft.
• Note that the means enumerated in subdivision a of Article 299 must be
resorted to for entrance and not for exit.
A. OPENING NOT INTENDED FOR ENTRANCE OR
EGRESS
• The whole body must be inside the building to constitute
entering.
• If the culprit entered the house through an open door and the
owner, not knowing that the culprit was inside, closed and
locked the door, and thereafter the culprit took personal
properties and made exit through the window, it is only theft.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
B. BREAKING ANY WALL, ROOF, OR FLOOR, OR
BREAKING ANY DOOR OR WINDOW
• The breaking must be used as a means for entering
o There must be an actual breaking or smashing in
opening the door.
• The force used must be actual and not constructive
• The breaking must be made before entrance.
o Hence, the broken wall must be an outside wall and
not an inside wall.
o But if the room is occupied by a person as his
separate dwelling, the breaking of its inside wall may
give rise to robbery.
• The outside door must be broken.
o This is more than mere forcing open of a door or
window.
o Hence, if the door was only forced open and not
broken, the crime is only theft.
o It is only theft if the door itself is left intact, but the
hinges or hooks to which the padlocks were attached
and the lock of the door knob was removed.
o If a window is forced open, the culprit can still be
liable for robbery by effecting entrance in an opening
not intended for such purpose.
C. BY USING FALSE KEYS, PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR
TOOLS
• FALSE KEYS are genuine keys stolen from the owner r any
keys other than those intended by the owner for use in the
lock forcibly opened by the offender.
o The genuine keys must be stolen, and not taken by
force or intimidation, from the owner.
o Otherwise, it becomes robbery with intimidation of
persons.
• PICKLOCKS or SIMILAR TOOLS are those specially
adopted to the commission of the crime of robbery.
o The false keys or the picklocks must be used to enter
the building, and not to open a trunk in the house or
drawer of a cabinet.
o It is only theft when used to open wardrobe or
locked receptacle or drawer or inside door.
D. USE OF FICTITIOUS NAME
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• The use of fictitious name or the act of pretending to
exercise authority must be to enter the building.
o Not employed when already inside the building.
When in doubt, always refer to what the law says: “the malefactor enters the house
or building… by any of the following means…”
SUBDIVISION B
Elements of Subdivision B:
1. Offender is inside an inhabited house or public building
or edifice devoted to religious worship, regardless of the
circumstances under which he entered it
2. The offender takes personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain, under the following circumstances:
a. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any
other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle;
b. By taking such furniture or objects to be broken or
forced open outside the place of the robbery.
Notes:
1. Entrance into the building by any of the means mentioned in
subdivision a is not required under subdivision B.
2. The term door in paragraph 1 of subdivision b of Article
299 refers only to doors, lids, or opening sheets of furniture
or other receptacles, and not to inside doors of house or
building.
3. Breaking the keyhole of a door of a wardrobe, which is locked,
is breaking a locked furniture.
4. When a sealed box or receptacle is taken out of the house or
building for the purpose of breaking it outside, it is not
necessary that it is actually opened.
a. A person who carries away a sealed box or receptacle
for the purpose of breaking the same and taking out
its contents is guilty of consummated robbery even
though he does not succeed in opening the box.
5. It is estafa or theft if the locked or sealed receptacle is not
forced open in the building where it is kept or taken therefrom
to be broken outside.
a. It is estafa if such locked or sealed receptacle has
been confided in his custody and the culprit takes the
money or personal property contained therein.
b. It is theft when a locked receptacle is found on the
side of the street and it is forcibly opened and the
contents thereof are taken.
85
Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

6. Discussion: If the robbery was committed through unlawful • As opposed to robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, The term "PUBLIC BUILDING" includes every building owned by
entrance under A and also under B, what will you charge? which must be committed in an uninhabited place or by a band to be the Government or belonging to a private person not included used or
Charge B and then the circumstances under A will be qualified under Article 295. rented by the Government, although temporarily unoccupied by the
aggravating. same.
ARTICLE 301
PENALTY. The penalty for robbery with force upon things depends What is an inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious worship Discussion: The length of time that the owner has not lived in the
on the value of the thing taken and WON the offender carries arm. and their dependencies. - house can be considered. Hence, if the house has been put up for sale
ARMED? EXCEEDS 250? Penalty for a very long time and has not been sold, the n the house is not just
Yes Yes Reclusion temporal INHABITED HOUSE means any shelter, ship or vessel constituting temporarily inhabited. the house can be an uninhabited house.
No Yes Prision Mayor the dwelling of one or more persons, even though the inhabitants
Yes No Prision Mayor thereof shall temporarily be absent therefrom when the robbery is Discussion: For public building, as long as it is owned by the
No No Prision Mayor, Min committed. government, regardless of WON it has not been used for a long time,
In a dependency* Penalty next lower than ↑ • A ship is covered by the term inhabited house. Article 300 will still apply.
*See Article 301 o Hence, if a ship containing silver currency in
sealed boxes sinks, without it being abandoned ARTICLE 302
Notes on penalty: by its owner, and a person takes those boxes, Robbery is an uninhabited place or in a private building. - Any robbery
such person is guilty of robbery. committed in an uninhabited place or in a building other than those
• A bolo is not an arm when used by a servant to open a trunk
• The place is still inhabited house even if the occupant was mentioned in the first paragraph of Article 299, if the value of the
in his master’s house.
absent. property taken exceeds 50k pesos, shall be punished by prision
• Arm carried must not be used to intimidate, otherwise it correccional if any of the following circumstances is present:
becomes robbery with intimidation of persons. o Notwithstanding the fact that for a period of
almost a month, the house where the robbery 1. If the entrance has been effected through any opening not
• The liability for carrying arms while robbing an inhabited house is intended for entrance or egress.
extended to each of the offenders who take part in the robbery even if some was committed was actually uninhabited, it is
still robbery in an inhabited house within the 2. If any wall, roof, flour or outside door or window has been
of them do not carry arms. broken.
• The reason why the law punishes more severely the robbery meaning of Articles 299 and 301, because the
building in question was ordinarily inhabited 3. If the entrance has been effected through the use of false keys,
in a house used as a dwelling than that in an uninhabited place, picklocks or other similar tools.
because of the possibility that the inhabitants in the former and intended as a dwelling.
4. If any dorm, wardrobe, chest or by sealed or closed furniture
might suffer bodily harm during the commission of the or receptacle has been broken.
robbery. DEPENDENCIES. All interior courts, corrals, warehouses,
granaries, barns, coach-houses, stables or other departments or 5. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as mentioned in the
enclosed places contiguous to the building or edifice, having an interior preceding paragraph, has been removed even if the same to
ARTICLE 300 broken open elsewhere.
Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band. - The robbery mentioned in entrance connected therewith, and which form part of the whole, shall
the next preceding article, if committed in an uninhabited place and by be deemed dependencies of an inhabited house, public building or
building dedicated to religious worship. When the value of the property takes does not exceed 50k pesos, the
a band, shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty penalty next lower in degree shall be imposed.
provided therefor. • Orchards and other lands used for cultivation or production
are not included in the terms of the next preceding paragraph,
In the cases specified in Articles 294, 295, 297, 299, 300, and 302 of this
What qualifies robbery in an inhabited house, public building or even if closed, contiguous to the building and having direct
Code, when the property taken is mail matter or large cattle, the
edifice devoted to religious worship: connection therewith.
offender shall suffer the penalties next higher in degree than those
1. Committed in an uninhabited place provided in said articles.
o The inhabited house, public building, or edifice Requisites:
devoted to religious worship must be located in an 1. Contiguous to the building
Elements:
uninhabited place. 2. Has an interior entrance connected therewith
1. Entered an uninhabited place or building that is not:
2. Committed by a band 3. Forms part of the whole
a. A dwelling house
The 2 requisites must concur and must be alleged in the information to qualify the b. Public building
offense.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 86

Crimes against property
c. An edifice devoted to religious worship
2. Any of the following circumstances are present:
a. If the entrance has been effected through any
opening not intended for entrance or egress.
b. If any wall, roof, flour or outside door or window
has been broken.
c. If the entrance has been effected through the use of
false keys, picklocks or other similar tools.
d. If any dorm, wardrobe, chest or by sealed or closed
furniture or receptacle has been broken.
e. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as mentioned in
the preceding paragraph, has been removed even if
the same to broken open elsewhere.
Note that these are similar to those enumerated in Article 299, except for
pretending to be a public authority.
• This is because the place is uninhabited and no one can be deceived
thereby. Hahahaha lol onga naman.
3. With intent to gain, the offender took personal property
belonging to another
UNINHABITED PLACE
• This place is necessarily a building, because paragraphs 1 to 3
speak of entrance.
o Building is included in any kind of structure used for
storage of safekeeping of personal property, like a
freight car or a warehouse.
o But a pigsty is not included as it is a habitable
building.
Example:
The servant of an owner of an oil mill takes away the key of the
warehouse and hands it to another, who in turn opens the warehouse
with that key and takes away oil from the warehouse.
• The crime is robbery in an uninhabited house.
• The provider of the key is a principal by conspiracy.
Notes:
1. Circumstances 1-3 require an entrance into the building
2. Circumstances 4-5 do not require and entrance
3. Unnailing of cloth over door of freight car is breaking by force
4. The penalty is based only on the value of the property taken,
without reference to whether the offender is armed or not
o This is because no one could be injured or killed in
an uninhabited place.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
RECEPTACLE
• The receptacle must be closed or sealed
o In 299, it is either locked or sealed
• There must be breaking of the receptacle to constitute robbery
o Paragraphs 4 and 5, respectively, use has been broken
and be broken open.
o Although the phrase even if the same be broken open
elsewhere does not indicate a condition or requisite
that the closed or sealed receptacle be broken after
removing it, this kind of robbery requires at least an
intention to open it by force.
Example:
2 persons at night entered the office and store of a corporation.
Entrance was effected through the door, without breaking the same. A
closed steel safe was removed from the building and taken to another
place where it was forced open, and the 2 persons took the contents
thereof.
• The crime is robbery under paragraph 5 or Article 302.
MAIL MATTER OR LARGE CATTLE
• The taking of mail matter or large cattle in any kind makes the
penalty higher by one degree
o This is not exactly qualified robbery.
o But since it operated to make the penalty one degree
higher, it may be called qualified robbery.
• Motor vehicles, coconuts, and fish are not included
o Hence, if the culprit breaks the door of the garage
which is a dependency of the house, and there he
took a jeep, the penalty is not one degree higher.
ROBBERY IN A STORE
Store used as dwelling Article 299
Store not actually occupied at the time of Article 302
robbery and was not used as a dwelling because
the owner lived in a separate house
Store located on the ground floor of the house Article 299
belonging to the owner of the store, having an
interior entrance connected therewith
ARTICLE 303
Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an uninhabited place or private building. -
In the cases enumerated in Articles 299 and 302, when the robbery
consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the culprit shall
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in said
articles.
This article is applicable only in robbery with force upon things.
CEREALS are seedlings which are the immediate product of the soil.
• Hence, the taking of sacks of hulled rice does not fall under
this article, but the penultimate paragraph of Article 302.
• Palay is included here. But the palay must be kept by the owner
as seedling or taken for that purpose by the orbbers.
ARTICLE 304
Possession of picklocks or similar tools. - Any person who shall without lawful
cause have in his possession picklocks or similar tools especially
adopted to the commission of the crime of robbery, shall be punished
by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
minimum period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who shall make
such tools. If the offender be a locksmith, he shall suffer the penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Elements:
1. The offender has in his possession picklocks or similar tools
2. These picklocks or similar tools especially adopted to the
commission of the crime of robbery
3. The offender does not have lawful cause for such possession
Use not necessary. Note that mere possession is punished. Actual use
of picklocks or similar tools is not necessary.
PENALTY
Mere possessor Arresto mayor max to prision
correccional min
Maker (not locksmith) Arresto mayor max to prision
correccional min
Maker is a locksmith Prision correccional med and
max
ARTICLE 305
FALSE KEYS. The term "false keys" shall be deemed to include:
1. The tools mentioned in the next preceding articles.
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner.
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner for use in
the lock forcibly opened by the offender.
Possession of false keys in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 305 is not
punishable.
87
Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Chapter Two: BRIGANDAGE 1. The existence of any purposes mentioned in Article 206 is knowingly, unless the contrary is proven. Under PD 532, such person
sufficient, and it is not necessary to show that a member or is deemed an accomplice.
ARTICLE 306 members of the band actually committed highway robbery to
Who are brigands; Penalty. convict them PD 532
2. The arms carried by the members of the band may be any HIGHWAY ROBBERY/BRIGANDAGE
BRIGANDS deadly weapon, not necessarily a firearm. The seizure of any person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful
1. When more than three armed persons 3. The main objective of the law is to prevent the formation of purposes, or the taking away of the property of another by means of
band of robbers. violence against or intimidation of person or force upon things of other
2. form a band of robbers
unlawful means, committed by any person on any Philippine Highway.
3. for the purpose of:
BRIGANDAGE V ROBBERY IN A BAND
a. committing robbery in the highway, or
BRIGANDAGE ROBBERY IN A BAND normal reclusion temporal in its
b. kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or
Both require that the offenders form a band of robbers minimum
to obtain ransom or
c. for any other purpose to be attained by means of Purposes are enumerated in The purpose is only to commit physical injuries or other crimes reclusion temporal in its
force and violence, Article 306 robbery, not necessarily in a are committed during or on the medium and maximum
they shall be deemed highway robbers or brigands. highway occasion of the commission of
Mere formation is sufficient to It is necessary that the band robbery or brigandage
PENALTY be penalized actually committed robbery kidnapping for ransom or death
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be punished by prision mayor extortion, or murder or
in its medium period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period if the ARTICLE 307 homicide, or rape is committed
act or acts committed by them are not punishable by higher penalties, Aiding and abetting a band of brigands. - Any person knowingly and in any as a result or on the occasion
in which case, they shall suffer such high penalties. manner aiding, abetting or protecting a band of brigands as described
in the next preceding article, or giving them information of the PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY. It shall refer to any road, street, passage,
PRESUMPTION OF BRIGANDAGE movements of the police or other peace officers of the Government (or highway and bridges or other parts thereof, or railway or railroad within
If any of the arms carried by any of said persons be an unlicensed of the forces of the United States Army), when the latter are acting in the Philippines used by persons, or vehicles, or locomotives or trains
firearms, it shall be presumed that said persons are highway robbers or aid of the Government, or acquiring or receiving the property taken by for the movement or circulation of persons or transportation of goods,
brigands, and in case of convictions the penalty shall be imposed in the such brigands shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium articles, or property or both
maximum period. period to prision mayor in its minimum period.
It shall be presumed that the person performing any of the acts
HIGHWAY provided in this article has performed them knowingly, unless the
• This includes city streets. contrary is proven.
• Streets within, as well as roads outside the cities are covered
Elements
by the word highway.
1. There is a band of brigands
2. The offender knows the band of brigands
WHAT MUST BE PROVED
3. He does any of the following acts:
1. That there is an organization of more than 3 armed persons
a. aids, abets or protects a band of brigands
forming a band of robbers
b. gives them information of the movements of the
2. The purpose is as enumerated above
police or other peace officers of the Government (or
3. They went upon the highway or roamed upon the country for
of the forces of the United States Army),
that purpose
c. acquires or receives the property taken by such
4. The accused is a member of that band
brigands
The previous activities (history) of the band are considering in determining the
existence of brigandage.
ACCOMPLICE TO BRIGANDAGE. When any person does the
abovementioned acts, the law presumes that he has performed them
Notes

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 88

Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam
Chapter Three: THEFT • Taking away or carrying away is not required
o Theft is consummated from the moment the
ARTICLE 308 culprits take possession of the thing taken
Who are liable for theft. o Consummation of theft takes place upon the
voluntary and malicious taking of the property
Paragraph 1 belonging to another which is realized by the
THEFT. Theft is committed by any person who, with intent to gain material occupation of the thing whereby the thief
but without violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon places is under his control and in such a situation as
things, shall take personal property of another without the latter's he could dispose of it at once.
consent. ▪ Note that it is not necessary for the thief to
*there are more forms of theft in the second paragraph. have an opportunity to dispose of the
thing.
Elements: ▪ The ability to freely dispose is not an
6. There is taking of personal property element of theft.
7. It belongs to another o Note that this is the same with the rule when it
8. There is intent to gain comes to robbery with violence against or
9. Taking is done without consent of the owner intimidation of persons.
10. There is NO violence against or intimidation of any person or o Because theft is consummated from the time of
force upon anything. possession, there could be no crime of
FRUSTRATED THEFT. Valenzuela v People
What distinguishes theft from robbery is that the offender does not use violence or ▪ Even if we argue that there can be no true
intimidation and does not enter a house or building through the means in Article taking if one is unable to dispose of the
299 and Article 302. thing taken, the effect would be to
- Hence, if prosecution is unable to prove violence, intimidation, or force downgrade the crime to its attempted stage
upon things, there can only be theft and not robbery. and not frustrated.
- Also, in theft, the thing is taken only without the owner’s consent. But in ▪ This is because not all acts of execution
robbery, the property is taken against the will of the owner. have yet been performed.
• There is taking even if the offender received the thing from
SUMMARY the offended party
ROBBERY THEFT o The actual transfer of physical possession of the
Violence against persons None thing may not always be and by itself constitute the
Intimidation of persons None unlawful taking, but an act done soon after by the
Force upon things (entry) None offender which may result in unlawful taking or
Property taken against will Property taken w/o consent asportation.
▪ In such case, the thing is deemed to have
TAKING been taken, even if in the beginning, it was
• The element of taking referred to is the act of depriving in fact given to and received by the
another of the possession and dominion of the movable thing, offender.
coupled with the intention, at the time of taking, of ▪ Note that in robbery, there must be
withholding it with the character of permanency. unlawful taking against the will of the
o The offender must have the intention of placing the owner.
property taken under his control and making himself o But if the accused received the thing from another
the owner of the thing taken. person in trust or on commission, or for
administration, or under a quasi-contract or a
JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
contract of bailment, and later misappropriated the
thing or converted it to the prejudice of another, the
crime committed is estafa, wherein juridical
possession, not physical possession, of the thing is
transferred to the offender.
• Note that theft is not a continuing offense.
o This is because the element of taking away (which is
an essential element in larceny, which is a continuing
offense) is not present in theft.
PERSONAL PROPERTY
Personal or movable property, as opposed to real or immovable property.
Examples:
1. Electricity and gas are included because they are valuable
articles of merchandise bought and sold like other personal
property and are capable of appropriation by another.
a. Misreading the electric meter of a consumer,
allowing the culprit to misappropriate electric
current
b. Using jumper to deflect the current from the house
electric meter.
2. Business of providing telecommunication and telephone
service
3. International Simple Resale (ISR), a method of routing and
completing international long-distance calls.
4. Promissory note and check may also be misappropriated.
BELONGING TO ANOTHER
• Selling or the share of a partner or joint owner is not theft.
o This is because prior to the dissolution of the
partnership or division of properties held in
common, no part of the property of the partnership
belongs to a partner or co-owner.
• Ownership is not transferred before the goods are weighed or
measured.
o Therefore, in the sale of goods (which are usually
tried, measured, or weighed), the purchaser
appropriates the same before the measuring or
weighing without the consent of the owner, such
purchaser is liable for theft.
• Employee is not the owner of separation pay which is not
actually delivered from him.
89
Crimes against property
o Entitlement to separation pay does not automatically
vest ownership of the money without prior delivery
to them.
INTENT TO GAIN
• Gain is not only the acquisition of the thing useful for the
purposes of life but also the benefit which in any other
sense may be derived or expected from the act which is
performed. People v Hernandez
o There is intent to gain even if the act was done for
revenge.
• This is presumed from the unlawful taking of the personal
property
o But if a person takes personal property from another
believing it to be his ow, the presumption is rebutted
• One who takes personal property openly and avowedly under
claim of title made in good faith is not guilty of theft even
though the claim of ownership is untenable.
o If the property has been judicially adjudged as
belonging to another, and one still takes such
property, he no longer acts in good faith. He is liable
for theft.
• There can be intent to gain even if the culprit takes the
property not for his personal use.
• But note that actual or real gain is not necessary in theft.
o It is sufficient that on taking the property, the culprit
was actuated by the desire or intent to gain. People v
Mercado
WITHOUT CONSENT
• The consent referred to is consent freely given, and not merely
lack of opposition.
• Note that the law does not way without the knowledge of the owner.
o Hence, even if the owner had knowledge but did not
consent to the taking, the perpetrator is liable for
theft.
• The allegation of owner’s lack of consent cannot be dispensed
with in charging an ordinary theft.
o It is true that in the ordinary course of events the
owner would not consent to the taking of personal
property without consideration, there is still a
possibility of consent and the law demands that it be
negated in the information.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
o Otherwise, the charge may be quashed for failure to
allege an essential element of the crime.
• Note that for robbery to exist, there must be unlawful taking.
In theft, it is necessary that the thing is taken without the
consent of the owner.
NO VIOLENCE, INTIMIDATION, OR FORCE UPON
THINGS
• If the violence or force was employed AFTER the taking, the
crime is theft and not robbery.
o However, remember that the case is different when
the violence results in homicide, rape, intentional
mutilation, or SPI as defined in paragraphs 1 and 3
of Article 263.
• There is also no robbery, but merely theft, if the force or
violence employed was for a reason entirely foreign to the act
of taking.
o Like when the officer, suspecting that A had
concealed a band of robbers, tied A in his house as
punishment. Several hours later, the officer took the
money of B.
• Unless the force upon things is used to enter a building, the
taking of personal property belonging to another (even if
removed by force) only amounts to theft and not robbery.
PRESUMPTION AS TO POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS
• When a person has in possession, part of the recently stolen
property, he is presumed to be the thief of ALL. US vs Ungal
o But this ruling applies only when all the goods were
stolen at the same time, in the same place, and on the
same occasion
o It does not apply if the things disappeared piece by
piece, at different times, and on different occasions
in the absence of proof that he had the opportunity
to take the rest at other times.
o It also does not apply when ALL the recently stolen
effects (carabaos in this case) have been discovered,
one in the possession of the accused and the other
in the pasture, untied. People v Beltran
▪ It is not reasonable to believe that the
accused had retained one in possession and
released the others.
o The presumption regarding possession of stolen
property does not refer exclusively to actual physical
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
possession thereof but may include prior
unexplained possession.
▪ Hence, when the stolen property is not
found in the possession of the accused, his
prior possession may be proved by
circumstantial or direct evidence of his
disposal of the property.
o This ruling only applies if the property is recently
stolen.
Paragraph 2
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to
deliver the same to the local authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the
property of another, shall remove or make use of the fruits or
object of the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate or a field where
trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another and without
the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon the same or
shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm products.
1. FINDER OF LOST PROPERTY
To prove this kind of theft, it is necessary to prove:
1. The time of the seizure of the thing
2. That it was a lost property belonging to another
3. The accused, having had the opportunity to deliver the same
to the authorities or its owner, refrained from doing so.
• The term LOST is generic in nature and embraces loss by
stealing or by any act of a person other than the owner, as well
as by the act of the owner himself or through some casual
occurrence.
o The term lost property embraces loss by stealing.
o Hence, the accused who kept in his possession one
male horse belonging to another person, knowing
that the said horse was stolen, and deliberately failed
to deliver the same to the authorities or its owner, is
guilty of theft. People v Rodrigo
• Delay in the delivery of lost property to the local authorities is
immaterial, when the finder surrendered it voluntarily to the
owner when the latter came to get it. People v Carani
• But this paragraph is not limited only to the actual finder, or
the finder in fact. The finder in law, or the person to whom
90
Crimes against property
it was confided for delivery to its owner, assumes by voluntary
substitution, as to both the property and its owner, the place
occupied by the finder. People v Avila
o Hence, when A found the watch of B and delivered
it to policeman C with a request to give it back to B,
but C thereafter does not return it, C is liable for
theft as finder in law.
o But C cannot b held liable for estafa because A (from
whom he got the watch) only had physical and not
juridical possession. C assumes whatever form of
possession A had over the property. The spring
cannot rise above its source.
o The gist of this provision is the furtive taking and
misappropriation of the property found.
• The law does not require for the finder to know who the
owner of the lost property is.
o As long as the accused knew or had reason to know
that the property was lost, it was his duty to return it
to the authorities.
• Intent to gain is inferred from the deliberate failure to deliver
the lost property to the proper person.
• The finder of a hidden treasure who misappropriated the share
pertaining to the owner of the property is guilty of theft as
regards that share.
o This is because the finder of hidden treasure on the
property of another and by chance is entitled to ½
thereof.
2.REMOVING OR MAKING USE OF FRUITS OR
OBJECT OF PROPERTY MALISCIOUSLY
DAMAGED
A defendant who shot, killed, and slaughtered the cattle of another,
which had destroyed defendant’s plantation, and distributed the meat
among himself and his neighbors is guilty of simple theft.
3. HUNTING, FISHING, OR GATHERING FRUITS,
ETC. IN ENCLOSED ESTATE
Elements:
1. There is an enclosed estate or field where trespass is
forbidden, or which belongs to another
2. The offender enters the same
3. The offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits,
cereals, or other forest or farm products in the estate or field.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
4. Such hunting, fishing, or gathering is without the consent of
the owner.
*the fishing should not be in the fishpond within the field or estate,
otherwise it would be qualified theft under Article 310.
Note: The American rule that larceny is a continuing offense does not
apply to theft because carrying away is an essential element of the former,
and not of the latter.
ARTICLE 309
Penalties. - Any person guilty of theft shall be punished by:
1. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium
periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more than 1.2M
pesos but does not exceed 2.2M pesos, but if the value of the
thing stolen exceeds the latter amount the penalty shall be the
maximum period of the one prescribed in this paragraph, and
one year for each additional 1M pesos, but the total of the
penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed 20 years. In
such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties
which may be imposed and for the purpose of the other
provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision
mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more than
600k pesos but does not exceed 1.2M pesos.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the value of the property stolen is more
than 20K pesos but does not exceed 600K pesos.
4. Arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in
its minimum period, if the value of the property stolen is over
5k pesos but does not exceed 20k pesos.
5. Arresto mayor to its full extent, if such value is over 500 pesos
but does not exceed 5k pesos.
6. Arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such
value does not exceed 500 pesos.
7. Arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20k pesos, if the theft
is committed under the circumstances enumerated in
paragraph 3 of the next preceding article and the value of the
thing stolen does not exceed 500 pesos. If such value exceeds
said amount, the provision of any of the five preceding
subdivisions shall be made applicable.
8. Arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding
5k pesos, when the value of the thing stolen is not over 500
pesos, and the offender shall have acted under the impulse of
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for
the support of himself or his family.
BASIS OF PENALTY IN THEFT
1. Value of the thing stolen
2. The value and nature of the property taken in some cases
3. The circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to
commit the crime in some cases
Notes:
1. Offender is liable for the value of the whole car taken to
another place, even if only the tires were taken out.
• Since the thieves effectively deprived the owner of
the possession of the entire automobile, the offense
consisted the whole car.
• The deprivation of the owner and the trespass upon
his right or possession were complete as to the entire
car.
• However, if the car was not taken to another place,
but the tires were removed while it was parked, the
thieves are liable only for the value of the tires.
2. The amount of the property taken must be proven for
computing the penalty imposable.
• Prosecution must present more than uncorroborated
estimate
• In the absence of independent and reliable
corroboration of the estimate, the courts may either:
a. Apply the minimum penalty under Article 309
b. Fix the value of the property taken based on the
attendant circumstances of the case.
3. In fixing the value, the court may take judicial notice of the
value of the goods which are matters of public knowledge or
are capable of unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be
known to judges because of their judicial function. Sec 2,
Rule 129 of Rules of Court.
ARTICLE 310
Qualified theft. - The crime of theft shall be punished by the penalties
next higher by two degrees than those respectively specified in the next
preceding article, if committed by a domestic servant, or with grave
abuse of confidence, or if the property stolen is motor vehicle, mail
matter or large cattle or consists of coconuts taken from the premises
of the plantation or fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or if property
is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic
91
Crimes against property
erruption, or any other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance.
(As amended by R.A. 120 and B.P. Blg. 71. May 1, 1980).
Theft is qualified:
1. If committed by a domestic servant,
2. If committed with grave abuse of confidence,
3. If the property stolen is motor vehicle, mail matter or large
cattle
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the
premises of the plantation
5. If 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.
(1) IF COMMITTED BY A DOMESTIC SERVANT
• This is always qualified
• It is not necessary to show that the crime was committed with
grave abuse of confidence.
(2) IF COMMITTED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE
• The abuse of confidence must be grave
• There must be allegation in the information and proof of a
relation, by reason of dependence guardianship, or vigilance,
between the accused and the offended party, that has
created a high degree of confidence between them, which the
accused abused.
• It is not necessary that the grave abuse of confidence is
premeditated. Its presence in the commission of theft is
enough.
• But where the accused took advantage of his position but did
not act with grave abuse of confidence because his boss never
gave him the possession of the machines involved or allowed
him to take hold of them, and it does not appear that the boss
had confidence, in him, the accused cannot be convicted of
qualified theft.
• Theft by a housemate is not always qualified because while
living together constituted a certain abuse of confidence, it is
not necessarily grave.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
o The fact of living together in the same house may be
accidental and the goods might not have been
entrusted to the custody or vigilance of the accused.
• The mere circumstance that the accused worked as a laborer
in the place where the theft was committed does not
sufficiently establish the existence of confidence and intimacy
that the law requires.
• But note that the confidence gravely abused must be that
existing between the offended party and the offender.
o Hence, if the bank manager entrusts the code of the
safe to his cousin and the latter opens it and takes
the money therein, there is no qualified theft.
o No confidence exists between the offended party
(bank) and the culprit (cousin of manager).
• Examples:
1. Theft by truck driver or by shepherd or by one who had
access to the place where the stolen property is kept is
qualified theft.
2. Use of safe combination learned by confidential clerk is
grave abuse of confidence.
3. Taking money in his possession by receiving teller of
bank is qualified theft.
4. When the accused considered the deed of sale a sham and
he had intent to gain, his absconding with the jeep is
qualified theft.
(3) IF THE PROPERTY STOLEN IS MOTOR VEHICLE,
MAIL MATTER OR LARGE CATTLE
Motor vehicle
• The unlawful taking of motor vehicles is now covered by the
anti-carnapping law and not by the provisions of robbery and
theft.
• The Anti-Carnapping Law particularly deals with the theft and
robbery of motor vehicles.
• The theft of motor vehicle by the person who received it
depends upon the circumstance:
1. If the vehicle is held the culprit under the boundary system
as a public utility, the subsequent sale of the vehicle by
the culprit constitutes qualified theft.
2. But if it was received under a contract of lease, there is
estafa.
Mail matter
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• What makes the theft of mail matter qualified is the fact that
the subject thereof is mail matter, regardless of whether the
offender is a postal employee or a private individual.
• When a clerk in charge of receiving packages takes from the
said packages, he is liable for qualified theft, the property
stolen being male matter.
• But a postmaster who takes the postal money order to be
forwarded by registered mail is guilty of faithlessness in the
custody of documents.
o If done by a private individual, the crime is qualified
theft, the property taken being mail matter.
Large cattle
• CATTLE includes horses, asses, mules, sheep, goats, and
swine.
• LARGE CATTLE includes cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass,
or other domesticated member of the bovine family.
o Buffalo, gazelle
• To constitute the crime of qualified theft by taking large cattle,
the animal must be taken alive.
o Thus, killing the cow on the spot where it was found
and taking its meat is simple theft, before there was
no taking of the cow, but only its meat.
• Theft of large cattle by the person who receives it.
o If the culprit has juridical possession (by virtue of a
contract), the crime is estafa.
o If there is physical possession, as when the accused
slaughtered one of the cows under his care and took
the meat is guilty of qualified theft.
• Taking at the same time several cows is only one crime, as the
intention and the criminal act is not susceptible of division.
People v Tumlos.
(4) IF THE PROPERTY STOLEN CONSISTS OF
COCONUTS TAKEN FROM THE PREMISES OF THE
PLANTATION
• The coconuts must be taken from the premises of a
plantation.
o This is an exception to the rule that mere taking and
not taking away constitutes theft.
• stealing of the coconuts when they are still in the tree or
deposited on the ground within the plantation is qualified
theft.
92
Crimes against property
• When the coconuts are taken in another place, such as a store
or a house, it is only simple theft.
• The reason for providing a heavier penalty for the theft of
coconut is to encourage and protect the development of the
coconut industry as one of the sources of the national
economy.
(5) IF THE PROPERTY STOLEN IS FISH TAKEN FROM A
FISHPOND OR FISHERY
• FISH includes other aquatic animals as well.
o Crabs, prawns, shrimps, lobsters, clams, mussels,
scallops, snails, oysters, mollusks, fish.
• A FISHERY is a place where fish are bred or caught.
o Being an industry that cannot be efficiently watched
in view of its location, the taking of fish from the fish
corral is qualified theft.
Timber smuggling from, and illegal cutting of logs in, public
forest and forest reserves are punished as qualified theft by PD
330.
PENALTY
The penalty is 2 degrees higher than those respectively specified
in the preceding article.
ANTI-FENCING LAW
P.D. 1612
FENCING is the act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself
or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or
dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any
article, item, object or anything of value which he KNOWS, or
SHOULD BE KNOWN TO HIM, to have been derived from the
proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
FENCE includes any person, firm, association corporation or
partnership or other organization who/which commits the act of
fencing.
• Section 4. Liability of Officials of Juridical Persons. If the
fence is a partnership, firm, corporation or association, the
president or the manager or any officer thereof who knows or
should have known the commission of the offense shall be
liable.
PRESUMPTION OF FENCING
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Section 5. Presumption of Fencing. Mere possession of any good,
article, item, object, or anything of value which has been the subject of
robbery or thievery shall be PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF
FENCING.
• Presentation of sales invoice or receipt provides proof of a
legitimate transaction, which is disputable or may still be
rebutted by proving that the transaction is not legitimate.
• Prosecution must prove that the accused knew or should have
known that the item he acquired and later sold was derived
from theft or robbery and theft he intended to obtain some
gain out of his acts.
o Should know denotes the fact that a person of
reasonable prudence and intelligence would
ascertain that such fact exists.
CLEARANCE/ PERMIT OT SELL SEOCNDHAND
ARTICLES
All stores, establishments or entities dealing in the buy and sell of any
good, article, item, object, or anything of value obtained from an
unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof, shall before offering the same for
sale to the public, secure the necessary clearance or permit from the
station commander of the PNP in the town or city where such store,
establishment or entity is located.
COMPARISON
THEFT/ROBBERY ANTI-FENCING
Mala in se- hence, good faith Mala prohibita- good faith may
may be raised as a defense not be raised as a defense
When one is convicted, that is, When one is convicted, he is
he possesses a stolen item with convicted as a principal.
knowledge that it was stolen, he
may be convicted as an accessory
(at most).
Notes:
1. Prior to the anti-fencing law, a fence can only be liable as an
accessory, as defined in Article 19.
2. But noting the rampancy of thievery and robbery, and that
such have become profitable on the part of lawless elements,
because of the existence of ready buyers of stolen properties,
PD 1612 was enacted to impose heavier penalties.
3. Hence, the accessory to the crime of robbery and theft can be
prosecuted as such or as principal to the crime of theft under
PD 1612, but not both,
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
ARTICLE 311
Theft of the property of the National Library and National Museum. - If the
property stolen be any property of the National Library or the National
Museum, the penalty shall be arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 40k to
100k pesos, or both, unless a higher penalty should be provided under
other provisions of this Code, in which case, the offender shall be
punished by such higher penalty.
• Note that theft of property on National Library and Museum
has a fixed penalty regardless of its value.
• But if the crime is committed with grave abuse of discretion,
the penalty for qualified theft shall be imposed because Article
311 says, unless a higher penalty should be provided under other
provisions of this Code.
Chapter Four: USURPATION
CRIMES UNDER USUSRPATION
1. Occupation of real property or usurpation real rights in
property
2. Altering boundaries or landmarks
ARTICLE 312
Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property. - Any person
who, by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, shall take
possession of any real property or shall usurp any real rights in property
belonging to another, in addition to the penalty incurred for the acts of
violence executed by him, shall be punished by a fine from 50 to 100
per centum of the gain which he shall have obtained, but not less than
15k pesos.
If the value of the gain cannot be ascertained, a fine of from 40k to
100k pesos shall be imposed.
ACTS PUNISHABLE UNDER ARTICLE 312
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 by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons
Elements
1. Offender takes possession of any real property or shall usurp
any real rights in property
2. The real property or real rights belong to another
93
Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

3. That violence against or intimidation of person is used
4. There is intent to gain
Notes:
1. The real property or real rights must belong to another.
• If the accused was the owner and the offended party
was just a possessor, there is no usurpation. An
owner cannot usurp his own property.
• If, in taking possession, said owner used violence or
intimidation, the crime is grave coercion.
2. Violence or intimidation must be the means used in occupying
the real property or usurping real right belonging to another.
• Article 312 will not apply if the violence or
intimidation is employed subsequent the entry in to
the property.
3. There is only civil liability of there is no violence or
intimidation in taking possession of real property.
• If the person takes possession of the real property by
strategy or stealth during the absence of the owner
or person in charge, there is only civil liability.
4. Open defiance of the writ of execution issued in a forcible
entry case is not contemplated here.
• The crime becomes contempt of court.
5. Criminal action for usurpation of real property is not a bar to
civil action for forcible entry.
6. When the occupation of real property is committed by means
of violence or intimidation of persons, the accused may be
prosecuted under an information for violation of Article 312,
and not for a separate offense involving violence or
intimidation.
• However, if by reason or on occasion of such crime,
rape, homicide, etc, shall result, he shall be sentenced
to suffer the penalty therefor.
USURPATION V THEFT OF ROBBERY
USURPATION THEFT/ROBBERY
Occupation or usurpation Taking
Real property Personal property
There is intent to gain.
ARTICLE 313
Altering boundaries or landmarks. - Any person who shall alter the
boundary marks or monuments of towns, provinces, or estates, or any
other marks intended to designate the boundaries of the same, shall be
punished by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20k pesos, or both.
Elements
1. There be:
a. boundary marks OR monuments of towns, provinces, or
estates, or
b. any other marks intended to designate the boundaries of
the same.
2. The offender alters the said boundary marks.
Notes:
1. Intent to gain is not required. Mere alteration is punishable.
2. Fraudulent intent is not required.
3. The offense consists in carrying out a felonious intent to usurp
realty, and this intent must be established as the moral element
before the penalty fixed in article 313 can be applied.
4. Alteration includes destruction of stone monument or taking
it to another place.
Chapter Five: CULPABLE INSOLVENCY
ARTICLE 314
Fraudulent insolvency. - Any person who shall abscond with his property
to the prejudice of his creditors, shall suffer the penalty of prision
mayor, if he be a merchant and the penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period, if he be not a
merchant.
Elements
1. Offender is a debtor, that is, he has obligations due and
payable
2. He absconds with his property
3. There be prejudice to his creditors
Notes:
1. Actual prejudice, not intention alone, is required.
• Hence, if the debtor disposes of his property, unless
it is shown that such disposal has actually prejudiced
his creditor, conviction will not lie.
• Fraudulent concealment of property is not sufficient
of the creditor has some other property with which
to satisfy his obligation.
2. Being a merchant is not an essential element of this offense
3. The word abscond does not require that the debtor should
depart to physically conceal his property
• Hence, real property can be subject of culpable
insolvency
• It is sufficient that real property is transferred to
another, regardless of whether there is consideration
or if the simulation is merely simulated.
4. The person prejudiced must be the creditor of the offender
ARTICLE 314 V INSOLVENCY LAW
INSOLVENCY LAW CULPABLE
INSOLVENCY
Requires that the criminal act No such requirement; not
should have been committed necessary that the defendant
after the institution of the should have been adjudged
insolvency proceedings insolvent or bankrupt
Chapter Six: SWINDLING AND OTHER
DECEITS
ARTICLE 315
Swindling (estafa). - Any person who shall defraud another by any of the
means mentioned hereinbelow shall be punished by:
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to
prision mayor in its minimum period, if the amount of the fraud is over
2.4M pesos but does not exceed 4.4M pesos, and if such amount
exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be
imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each additional
2M pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed
20 years. In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties
which may be imposed under the provisions of this Code, the penalty
shall be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may
be.
2nd. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods, if the amount of the fraud is over 1.2M pesos but does not
exceed 2.4M pesos;

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 94

Crimes against property
3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period if such amount is over 40k pesos
but does not exceed 1.2M pesos; and
4th. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum period, if such
amount does not exceed 40k pesos, provided that in the four cases
mentioned, the fraud be committed by any of the following means:
1. WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE, namely:
a. By altering the substance, quantity, or quality or
anything of value which the offender shall deliver by
virtue of an obligation to do so, even though such
obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration.
b. By misappropriating or converting, to the
prejudice of another, money, goods, or any other
personal property received by the offender in trust
or on commission, or for administration, or under
any other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even though such
obligation be totally or partially guaranteed by a
bond; or by denying having received such money,
goods, or other property.
c. By taking undue advantage of the signature of the
offended party in blank, and by writing any
document above such signature in blank, to the
prejudice of the offended party or of any third
person.
2. By means of any of the following FALSE PRETENSES OR
FRAUDULENT ACTS EXECUTED PRIOR TO OR
SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE COMMISSION OF
THE FRAUD:
a. By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to
possess power, influence, qualifications, property,
credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or
by means of other similar deceits.
b. By altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything
pertaining to his art or business.
c. By pretending to have bribed any Government
employee, without prejudice to the action for
calumny which the offended party may deem proper
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
to bring against the offender. In this case, the
offender shall be punished by the maximum period
of the penalty.
d. By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in payment
of an obligation when the offender therein were not
sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The
failure of the drawer of the check to deposit the
amount necessary to cover his check within three (3)
days from receipt of notice from the bank and/or
the payee or holder that said check has been
dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall be
prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false
pretense or fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A.
4885, approved June 17, 1967.)
e. By obtaining any food, refreshment or
accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
house, lodging house, or apartment house and the
like without paying therefor, with intent to defraud
the proprietor or manager thereof, or by obtaining
credit at hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house,
lodging house, or apartment house by the use of any
false pretense, or by abandoning or surreptitiously
removing any part of his baggage from a hotel, inn,
restaurant, boarding house, lodging house or
apartment house after obtaining credit, food,
refreshment or accommodation therein without
paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
3. Through any of the following FRAUDULENT MEANS:
a. By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any
document.
b. By resorting to some fraudulent practice to insure
success in a gambling game.
c. By removing, concealing or destroying, in whole or
in part, any court record, office files, document or
any other papers.
Elements of estafa in general
1. The accused defrauded another by abuse of confidence or by
means of deceit
2. The damage or prejudice to the offended party or 3 rd person
is capable of pecuniary estimation
3 WAYS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Estafa with abuse of confidence
• In this type of estafa, deceit is not an essential
requisite.
2. Estafa by means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts
3. Estafa through fraudulent means
2nd and 3rd can collectively be called estafa by means of deceit.
Basis of penalty is monetary damage. It is necessary that the damage
or prejudice is capable of pecuniary estimation because the amount of
damage or prejudice is the basis of the penalty of estafa.
(1) UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE
By ALTERING the substance, quantity, or quality or anything of
value which the offender shall deliver by virtue of an obligation to do
so, even though such obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration.
Elements
1. Offender has the onerous obligation to deliver something of
value
2. He alters the substance, quantity or quality
3. Damage or prejudice is caused to another
Notes:
1. The obligation to deliver was by virtue of an onerous
obligation, meaning that it has already been paid for or the
offended party has already given something in exchange for
the delivery.
• Hence, if the thing had not been fully or partially
paid for, there can be no estafa despite the alteration
because there is no damage caused.
2. Altering substance- delivering molasses instead of opium
• When the fraud committed consists in the
adulteration of any health product (foods, drugs,
cosmetics, devices, biologicals, vaccines, etc), or
other products that may have an effect on health
which require regulations as determined by the FDA,
it also mounts to the violation of Food, Drug, and
Cosmetics Act or RA 3720.
• Fraud which consists in the adulteration of any food,
drug, or cosmetic may also amount to a violation of
the Consumer Act of the Philippines.
95
Crimes against property
3. Altering quantity- delivering 2,000 sacks of rice instead of
100,000
4. Altering quality- delivering class a hand bags instead of
originals
• But when there is no agreement as to the quality of
the thing to be delivered, the delivery of the thing
not acceptable to the complainant is not estafa.
5. The crime of estafa may arise even if the thing to be delivered
is not subject of a lawful commerce.
By MISAPPROPRIATING or CONVERTING, to the prejudice of
another, money, goods, or any other personal property received by
the offender in trust or on commission, or for administration, or
under any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of
or to return the same, even though such obligation be totally or
partially guaranteed by a bond; or by DENYING having received such
money, goods, or other property.
Elements
1. That money, goods, or property be received by the offender
in trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any
obligation involving the duty to make delivery of, or return the
same
2. There be misappropriation or conversion by the offender, or
denial on his part of such receipt
3. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the
prejudice of another
4. That demand be made by the offended party to the offender
But this last element is not necessary when there is evidence of
misappropriation of goods.
Notes:
1. Check is included in the definition of money.
a. The credit represented by it in stated monetary value
is capable of appropriation
b. The delivery of the check marks the creation of a
fiduciary relation between the parties. Such relation,
whether in the form of a trust, commission or
administration, is an essential element of the crime
of estafa by misappropriation or conversion.
2. Money, goods, or other personal property must be received
by the offender.
• Hence, if the thing is taken without the consent of
the owner, the crime committed is theft.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• But there are also times when the crime is theft even
if the thing was received by the offender. In such
cases, only the PHYSICAL POSSESSION of the
thing transferred. In estafa, the JURIDICAL
POSSESSION of the thing is transferred.
3. The transaction must transfer juridical possession of the thing.
• JURIDICAL POSSESSION is the possession that
gives the transferee a right over the thing which the
transferee may set up even against the owner.
• When the thing is received by the offended party in
trust, or on commission, or for administration, the
offender acquires both material or physical
possession and juridical possession.
4. Presumption: When the delivery of a chattel does not have
the effect of transferring the juridical possession thereof or the
title thereto, it is presumed that the possession of and the title
to the thing so delivered remain in the owner. US v De Vera
5. Thing was received in trust- the tenants of a land harvested
coconut and received money after the sale- ½ of the proceeds
belong to them and the other half they held in trust for the
owner of the land.
a. If they misappropriate it, they are liable for estafa.
b. In the same vein, failure to turn over to the bank the
proceeds of the sale of goods covered by trust
receipts is estafa.
c. The failure of an entrustee to turn over the proceeds
or instruments covered by a trust receipt is estafa
through misappropriation.
6. Thing was received in commission- when a person is
commissioned to deliver something but instead
misappropriates the same thing
• A gave B 20,000 with the instruction to use the same
to pay for the clothes that A ordered. Instead of
doing so, B spent the money to buy books for
herself. B is guilty of estafa.
7. Thing was received for administration- when the
administrator collected a sum of money as rentals from the
different tenants of his employer and thereafter spent the
same, he is guilty of estafa.
8. The phrase or under any obligation involving the duty to make delivery
of, or return the same, includes quasi-contracts and certain
contracts of bailment
• In quasi-contracts, the person who receives the thing
acquires juridical possession of the thing received
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o By mistake, the courier delivered to B’s
house, the Lazada parcel that A ordered.
Thereafter, B denied having received the
same.
o B is guilty of estafa for having received the
parcel under such circumstances that give
rise to an obligation to return the same.
• In contracts of bailment, the receiver of the thing
acquires juridical possession of the thing. The
contracts require the return of the same thing
received.
• Examples:
o Contract of deposit
o Lease- A was leasing the truck of B, but A
sold it to another person. A is guilty of
estafa.
o Commodatum or loan for use. The owner
or bailor retains ownership of the thing
loaned. Therefore, if the borrower or the
bailee sells the thing borrowed, he or she is
liable for estafa.
9. The obligation to return or deliver the thing must be
contractual, without transferring to the accused the
ownership of the thing received.
• Hence, a debtor cannot be held liable for estafa for
merely refusing to pay or denying having contracted
the debt
• Loan of money is mutuum, a loan for consumption,
wherein the ownership of the thing loaned passes to
the borrower.
• Under the transaction, the accused did not receive
the money or thing under the obligation involving the duty
to make delivery or, or to return the same, money or thing.
o In estafa under Article 315 (1)(b), there is
an obligation to return the very same thing
received.
• A person receiving money from another and failing to return it
does not commit estafa unless it is clearly demonstrated that he
received it for safekeeping, on commission, or for
administration, or under any other circumstances giving rise to
the obligation to make delivery or return the same.
10. When the ownership of the thing is transferred to the person
who has received it, his failure to return it will give rise to civil
liability only.
96
Crimes against property
• Under Article 1477 of the Civil Code, the
ownership of the thing sold shall be transferred to
the vendee upon actual or constructive delivery
thereof. Therefore, if the seller delivers to the thing
and the buyer thereafter sells it to another person
and refuses to pay the vendor, there can only be civil
liability. Ownership had already been transferred.
o This is true even if the thing is received
under a contract of sale on credit.
• Under Article 1482 of the Civil Code, whenever
earnest money is given in a contract of sale, it shall
be considered as part of the price and as proof of the
perfection of the contract. If the buyer had already
made partial payment and the seller thereafter
refuses to deliver the thing sold, the is also only civil
liability.
11. If the transaction of purchase and sale fails, there is no estafa
if the accused refused to return the advance payment.
• This is because advance payment is subject of the
disposal of the vendor.
• If the transaction fails, the liability arising is only of
a civil and not criminal character.
12. There is no estafa when the money or other personal property
received by the accused is not to be used for a particular
purpose or to be returned.
13. When a person authorized to sell something in behalf of the
owner was explicitly prohibited to appoint a sub-agent
appoints a sub-agent, he is liable for estafa.
• But if there is no such express prohibition, there is
no estafa.
14. An agent authorized to deduct his commission from amounts
collected dos not commit estafa.
• In the absence of such authority, he is liable for
estafa because the right to commission does not
make the agent a joint owner, with a right to the
money collected.
ESTAFA AND NOVATION
1. The novation of the contract does not affect the criminal
liability of estafa.
• Therefore, the fact that the accused and the offended
party agreed that the former will pay the rentals of
the latter until the full amount of the
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
misappropriation has been covered, does not
obliterate the criminal liability already incurred, for it
is a public offense which must be prosecuted ad
punished by the state at its own volition.
• In order that novation of a contract may relive the
accused of criminal liability, the novation must take
place before the criminal liability is incurred.
2. But the novation of contract from one of agency to sale or to
one of loan (before filing of the complaint), relieves the
defendant from criminal liability under the first contract.
• The novation theory applies prior to the filing of the
criminal information in court by the state
prosecutors
• But after the judicial authorities have taken
cognizance of the crime and instituted an action in
court, the offended party may no longer divest the
prosecution of its power to exact criminal liability.
3. After the money has been misappropriated or converted, the
offended party’s acceptance of a promissory note or extension
of the time of payment does not constitute novation.
ESTAFA AND PARTNERSHIP
1. Partners are not liable for estafa of money or property
received for the partnership when the business commenced
and profits accrued.
• The action that lies with the partner who furnished
the capital for the recovery of his money is not a
criminal action for estafa, but a civil one arising from
a partnership contract for a liquidation of the
partnership and a levy on its assets should there be
any.
2. Failure of a partner to account for partnership funds may give
rise to a civil obligation only, not estafa.
• It is a debt due from a partner, part of the receivables
of the partnership.
3. But the misappropriation of by a partner of the share of
another partner in the profits would constitute estafa through
misappropriation.
• The same is true with a co-owner, who is not liable
for estafa, but he is liable for estafa if, after the
termination of the co-ownership, he misappropriates
the thing which has become the exclusive property
of the other.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
4. When the money or property had been received by a partner
for specific purpose and he later misappropriated it, such
partner is guilty of estafa.
WAYSOF COMMITING ESTAFA W ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE UNDER ARTICLE 315 (1)(B)
1. Misappropriating the thing received
2. Converting the thing received
3. Denying that the thing was received
MISAPPROPRIATION
• It means to own, to take something for one’s own benefit.
• Includes not only conversion to one’s personal advantage but
also every attempt to dispose of the property of another
without right.
• Both conversion and misappropriation connote an act of
using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s own
or devoting it to a purpose different from that agreed upon.
• Note that the law makes no distinction between permanent
and temporary misappropriation.
CONVERSION
• It means using another’s property as if it were one’s own.
o It also includes every attempt to dispose of the
property of another without right.
o An example of this would be selling items on credit
when the instruction of the owner was to sell only
for cash. US v Panes
• It presupposes that the thing has been devoted to a purpose
or use different from what was agreed upon.
o Hence, if a piece of jewelry was delivered to an agent
to be shown to prospective buyers but was instead
delivered to a subagent for the same purpose, there
is no conversion.
The crime of estafa under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) is not committed when there
is neither misappropriation nor conversion.
DEMAND
• Estafa by misappropriation or conversion is the only kind of
estafa where demand may be required.
97
Crimes against property
o This is not required in estafa by means of deceit
because the offender obtains delivery of the thing
wrongfully from the very beginning.
o In estafa by abuse of confidence, the offender
receives the thing from the offended party under a
lawful transaction.
• Demand is not required by law, it is necessary because failure
to account upon demand is circumstantial evidence of
misappropriation.
o But the presumption of misappropriation arises only
when the explanation of the accused is absolutely
devoid of merit
o If it is meritorious, it may cast a reasonable doubt
that he had misappropriated the amount.
o But demand is no longer necessary when there is
proof of misappropriation.
• Even if the offender cannot be located, or there was
agreement upon specific time for delivery or return of the
thing received, demand cannot be dispensed with.
o But if the offender is in hiding, prior demand is not
necessary.
ESTAFA THROUGH NEGLIGENCE
There is no estafa through negligence.
• In estafa, the profit or gain must be obtained by the accused
personally, through his own acts, and his mere negligence in
permitting another to take advantage or benefit from the
entrusted chattel cannot constitute estafa.
• Example: A was entrusted by B with P100M for the purchase
of a car. Later, through A’s negligence, his business partners
absconded with the money. A is not guilty of estafa.
ESTAFA W/ ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE V THEFT
ESTAFA THEFT
Juridical possession of the Material or physical possession
thing of the thing
Offender receives the thing Offender takes the thing
General test to distinguish estafa from theft
THEFT ESTAFA
If, upon delivery of the thing to When the owner does not
the offender, the owner expects expect the immediate return of
an immediate return of the the thing he delivered to the
thing to him, it is theft. accused
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
Exception: when a servant received money or other personal o This is because the offender made it appear that the
property from the master, with the obligation to deliver it to a other party participated in a transaction
third person, and instead of doing so, misappropriated it to the o This cannot be estafa, because not having been
prejudice of the owner, the crime is qualified theft. entrusted with said signature in blank, the offender
could not have acted with abuse of confidence,
ESTAFA W/ ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE V which is the element of this form of estafa.
MALVERSATION
ESTAFA MALVERSATION BY MEANS OF ANY OF THE FOLLOWING FALSE
Private funds or property Public funds or property PRETENSES OR FRAUDULENT ACTS EXECUTED PRIOR
Offender is a private individual Offender is public individual TO OR SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE COMMISSION OF
or public individual not accountable for public funds THE FRAUD
accountable for public funds
Crime is committed by Crime is committed by ESTAFA BY FALSE PRETENSE V ESTAFA BY
misappropriating, converting, appropriating, taking or FRAUDELENT ACTS
or denying having received misappropriating, or • False pretenses consist of the use of deceitful words
goods consenting, or though • Fraudulent acts consists of deceitful acts
abandonment or negligence, But they both have to be performed prior to or simultaneously with the commission
permitting another person to of the fraud. The offender must be able to obtain something from the offended party
take the public funds or because of the fraudulent acts, without which, the offended party would not have
property. parted with it.
In both offenses, the offender is entrusted with public funds or
property. Both are continuing offenses. ESTAFA BY FALSE PRETENSES
Example: misappropriation of firearms received by a policeman is estafa By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power, influence,
if not involved in the commission of a crime; it is malversation if qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by
involved in the commission of a crime. means of other similar deceits.
By TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE of the signature of the BREAKDOWN OF PROVISION. There are 3 ways to commit
offended party in blank, and by WRITING any document above such estafa under this provision:
signature in blank, to the prejudice of the offended party or of any third 1. By using fictitious name,
person. 2. By falsely pretending to possess power, influence,
qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary
Elements transactions
1. The paper with the signature of the offended party is in blank 3. By means of other similar deceits.
2. The offended party delivered the paper to the offender
3. A document is written by the offender on top of the signature INDISPENSABLE REQUISITE. Since this falls under the second
4. The document so written creates a liability of, or causes paragraph, it is indispensable that the element of deceit be made prior
damage to the offended party. to or simultaneously with the delivery of the thing by the complainant.
• This means that the false statement or false representation
DELIVERY constitutes the very cause or the only motive which induces
• Delivery is an essential element the complainant to part with the thing.
• If there is no delivery, as when the offended party takes the • If there be no such prior or simultaneous false statement or
blank paper with signature from the drawer of the offended false representation, any subsequent act of the accused,
party, the crime is falsification. however, fraudulent and suspicious it may appear, cannot
serve as basis for prosecution of that class of estafa.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 98
Crimes against property
FICTITIOUS NAME. This is the use of name other than the
offender’s name
FALSE PRETENSES. The pretense must be false.
• In the absence of proof that the representation of the accused
was actually false, criminal intent to deceive cannot be
inferred.
• The reckoning point of determining false pretense is at the
time of making the false pretense. Meaning, was he telling the
truth at that time?
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT V THEFT
• There are times when the manner of commission of the crimes
is the same
• In such case, the distinguishing factor is whether only material
possession or both the juridical and physical possession of the
thing was transferred.
o If only physical possession, theft.
o If both, estafa.
• If a commission salesman took back the machines from
prospective customers (by saying that he was acting in behalf
of his employer when in fact he was not) and misappropriated
them, the crime committed is theft, not estafa.
o The physical possession did not vest in such person
the juridical possession necessary for the crime of
estafa
By altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything pertaining to his art or business.
No discussion in the book.
By 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. In this case, the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the
penalty.
Notes:
1. This is committed by any person who would ask money from
another for the alleged purpose of bribing a government
employee, when in fact he wanted to convert said money for
his personal use.
2. If the money is indeed given to any government employee, the
crime is corruption of public officer.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
ESTAFA BY FRAUDULENT ACTS
By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an obligation when the
offender therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure of
the drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check within three
(3) days from receipt of notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder that said
check has been dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie
evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A.
4885, approved June 17, 1967.)
Elements
1. Offender postdated a check, or issued a check in payment of
an obligation
2. Said postdating or issuance was done when the offender had
no funds in the bank, or his funds deposited therein were not
sufficient to cover the amount of check.
NUANCES
• The check must be postdated or issued in payment of an
obligation contracted at the time of the issuance and delivery
of the check
o Said issuance must have been the efficient cause for
the contract. Meaning, had the offender not issued
the check, there would be no contract
o The deceit should be the efficient cause of the
defraudation. It may be employed either be prior to,
or simultaneous with the act of fraud
• This provision will not apply for payment of existing
obligations
o When the check is issued in substitution of a
promissory note, it is in payment of a pre-existing
obligation
• The accused must be able to obtain something from the
offended party by means of the check he issues and delivers.
• When the accused did not have to assure the payee that the
checks would be sufficiently funded on maturity, there is no
estafa.
o When PDCs are issued and intended by the parties
only as promissory notes, there is not estafa even if
there are no sufficient funds in the bank to cover the
same. This is because the checks were not intended
for presentation and encashment with the bank; they
are delivered a mere security.
• When the check was issued by a guarantor, there is no estafa
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o The check was not issued in payment of an
obligation
• The mere fact that the offender had insufficient or no funds
is enough to make him liable for estafa.
o Knowledge is not necessary
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF DECEIT. The failure of the
drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check
within THREE (3) DAYS FROM RECEIPT OF NOTICE from
the bank and/or the payee or holder that said check has been
dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie
evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or fraudulent act.
• Despite the fact of dishonor, the accused will not be liable for
estafa if he was able to fund his account within 3 days from
receipt of notice of dishonor.
ESTAFA UNDER 2(D) VS BP 22
ESTAFA BP 22
The offender employed deceit This is mala prohibita, so no
and the deceit that is deiceit, required
contemplated is the post-dating
or issuance of worthless check
The payee who received the Damage not needed
check must be defrauded or
damaged for having parted with
something of value in exchange
for the check
It does not cover issuance of It may cover issuance of checks
checks for existing obligation for existing obligations
Can one be prosecuted for both? YES. This can only happen if there is
deceit employed prior to or simultaneous to the contract.
By obtaining any food, refreshment or accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant,
boarding house, lodging house, or apartment house and the like without paying
therefor, with intent to defraud the proprietor or manager thereof, or by obtaining
credit at hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging house, or apartment house by
the use of any false pretense, or by abandoning or surreptitiously removing any part
of his baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging house or
apartment house after obtaining credit, food, refreshment or accommodation therein
without paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
BREAKDOWN OF PROVISION. There are 3 ways of committing
estafa under this provision:
99
Crimes against property
1. By obtaining any food, refreshment or accommodation at a
hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging house, or
apartment house and the like without paying therefor, with
intent to defraud the proprietor or manager thereof,
2. by obtaining credit at hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house,
lodging house, or apartment house by the use of any false
pretense,
3. by abandoning or surreptitiously removing any part of his
baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house, lodging
house or apartment house after obtaining credit, food,
refreshment or accommodation therein without paying for his
food, refreshment or accommodation
No discussion in the book
Note: Left out by RA 10951 in increasing penalty or fine.
THROUGH ANY OF THE FOLLOWING FRAUDULENT
MEANS
By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any document.
Elements:
1. Offender induced another to sign a document
2. Deceit is employed to make him sign
3. Offended party personally signs the document
4. There is prejudice caused
INDUCEMENT
• There must be inducement. That is, the deceit employed by
the offender was the efficient cause of signing.
o This is deceit that causes one to sign the document
• Without inducement, as when the offended party was willing
and ready to sign the document, but there is deceit as to the
contents of the document because the contents are not those
that the offended party told the offender to write, there is no
estafa.
o The crime is falsification.
By resorting to some fraudulent practice to insure success in a gambling game.
The rule in Civil Law that no action can be filed on an immoral or illegal
contract has no application in the prosecution for estafa, even if the
offended party consented to the fraudulent scheme.
By removing, concealing or destroying, in whole or in part, any court record, office
files, document or any other papers.
Elements
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
1. There are court records, office files, document or any other
papers
2. The offender removed, concealed, or destroyed any of them
3. The offender had intent to defraud another
INTENT TO DEFRAUD
• What sets this crime apart from malicious mischief is the
intent to defraud
• In the absence of this last element, the crime becomes
malicious mischief.
ESTAFA 3(C) VS INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF
DOCUMENTS
Estafa under 3(c) Infidelity in the custody
Offender is a private individual Offender is a public officer
or public officer not officially officially entrusted with the
entrusted with the documents documents
Intent to defraud None
Manner of commission is the same
ELEMENT OF DAMAGE. The element of damage may consist in:
1. Deprivation of money or property
2. Disturbance in property rights
3. Temporary prejudice
DISTURBANCE IN PROPERTY RIGHTS. It is not necessary
that the offended party be permanently or wholly deprived of his
property for the offender to be liable in estafa.
• This is because as long as the enjoyment or use of property is
disturbed as a result of the actions discussed above, there is
estafa.
• Hence, if through fraudulent means a person was able to part
with the car of the offended party, but said offended party
was subsequently able to recover the car, there is still estafa.
SOME NOTES:
1. The accused cannot be convicted of estafa with abuse of
confidence under an information alleging estafa by means of
deceit
2. A private person who procures a loan by means of deceit
through a falsified public document of mortgage, but who
effects full settlement of the loan within the period agreed
upon, does not commit the crime of estafa
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• For estafa to exist, there must be disturbance with
property rights and there must be a person who is
defrauded.
• The crime committed is only falsification of public
document.
ARTICLE 316
Other forms of swindling. - The penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium period and a fine of not less than the value of the damage
caused and not more than three times such value, shall be imposed
upon:
1. Any person who, pretending to be owner of any real
property, shall convey, sell, encumber or mortgage the same.
2. Any person, who, knowing that real property is
encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although such
encumbrance be not recorded.
3. The owner of any personal property who shall wrongfully
take it from its lawful possessor, to the prejudice of the
latter or any third person.
4. Any person who, to the prejudice of another, shall execute any
fictitious contract.
5. Any person who shall accept any compensation given him
under the belief that it was in payment of services rendered or
labor performed by him, when in fact he did not actually
perform such services or labor.
6. Any person who, while being a surety in a bond given in a
criminal or civil action, without express authority from the
court or before the cancellation of his bond or before being
relieved from the obligation contracted by him, shall sell,
mortgage, or, in any other manner, encumber the real property
or properties with which he guaranteed the fulfillment of such
obligation.
Paragraph 1
PRETENDING TO BE OWNER OF REAL PROPERTY
Any person who, pretending to be owner of any real property, shall convey, sell,
encumber or mortgage the same.
Elements
1. The thing is immovable
2. The offender is not the owner of said property but represents
himself to be the owner thereof
3. Offender executed an act of ownership (selling, encumbering,
mortgaging, leasing, etc.)
100
Crimes against property
4. The act is to the prejudice of the owner or 3rd person
Immovable or real property. The real property contemplated is an
existing real property.
• If the offender sells a non-existent land, he is guilty of estafa
by means of false pretenses under paragraph 2(a) of Article
315.
• What is contemplated are true buildings, and not the
structures merely superimposed on the soil.
Pretending. Deceit consisting in false pretense as to ownership of the
real property must be employed by the offender.
• Not those who claim ownership. The ones punished under
this act are those who PRETEND to be the owner of the
land, and not those who claim ownership. When a person
claims ownership, especially when he has a Certificate of Title,
it cannot be said that he pretended to be the owner thereof,
even if his ownership is defective. People v Adriatico
• Even if the deceit is practiced against the second purchaser
and the damage is incurred by the first purchaser, there is a
violation of Paragraph 1 of Article 316.
o This happens, for example, in double sale. When a
person sells real property to two people, but for
some reasons the latter buyer acquires better rights
to the real property as compared to the first buyer.
o In this case, the practice is directed against the
second buyer but the first buyer is the one
prejudiced.
o The offender is nevertheless liable for estafa.
Actual damage; mere intent not enough. The penalty of the fine
prescribed under this article is based on the value of the damage caused.
Hence, there must be ACTUAL damage caused. Mere intent to cause
damage is not enough.
ARTICLE 316 (1) V ARTICLE 315 (2)(a)
Article 316 (1) Article 315 (2)(a)
Only real property is involved Either personal or real property
is involved.
The offender exercises or Mere pretending is enough.
executes, as part of the false
representation, some act of
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
dominion or ownership over
the real property
Discussion: A owned a building and mortgaged it to the bank. The
building was being leased to B. It was foreclosed and title was
consolidated in the bank. A nevertheless renewed the lease with B.
Estafa under 316 (1).
Paragraph 2
DISPOSING OF ENCUMBERED REAL PROPERTY
Any person, who, knowing that real property is encumbered, shall dispose of the
same, although such encumbrance be not recorded.
Elements
1. The thing disposed of is real property
2. The offender knew that the real property was encumbered,
regardless of whether such encumbrance was recorded or not
3. There must be express representation by the offender that the
real property is free from encumbrance
4. The act of disposing of the real property be made to the
damage of another.
Note that it is necessary that the victim did not know of the existing encumbrance.
Otherwise, there would be no deceit to speak of.
DISPOSE. This means selling, and includes encumbering or
mortgaging.
• Example: A owes B P1M, secured by a mortgage on his land.
Subsequently, A sells the same land to C, who did not know
of the unregistered mortgage.
• Since there is no registration, B cannot foreclose the mortgage
in case of non-payment by A because C is a buyer in good
faith who cannot be disturbed of the peaceful possession of
such property.
• The remedy of B is to file a civil case for collection against A
or file a criminal case under Article 316(2) because he was
prejudiced by the disposition made by A.
REAL PROPERTY. If the thing disposed of is personal property,
Article 319 will apply.
KNOWLEDGE OF ENCUMBRANCE. If the accused did not
know that the property he acquired had been mortgaged and sold the
same as free from encumbrance, the accused is not criminally liable.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• It is possible for this crime to be committed even though the
prior encumbrance is already recorded.
• True, recording of a prior encumbrance is constructive notice
to the whole world of such encumbrance.
o But for purposes of this article, actual knowledge is
required.
o This ruling finds basis in the wording of the law,
although such encumbrance be not recorded.
o This obviously implies that the crime is committed
whether the encumbrance before was recorded or
not.
ENCUMBRANCE. This includes every right or interest in the land
which exists in favor of third persons.
• Examples: ordinary lease, an attachment, the lien of a
judgment, and an execution sale subject to redemption.
• But usurious loan with equitable mortgage is not an
encumbrance on the property.
EXPRESS REPRESENTATION. This element requires
misrepresentation, fraud, or deceit.
o This involves acts or spoken or written words by a
party to mislead another into believing something to
be true when in fact it is not.
• The aggrieved party must have been deceived, that is, he
would not have granted the loan had he known that the
property was encumbered.
o Therefore, when the loan had already been granted
when the defendant offered the property as security
for the payment of the loan, Article 316(2) is not
applicable.
o The false representation as to the freedom from
encumbrance must have been the primary
inducement for the granting of the loan.
• This element of fraud cannot be implied.
o This is because the mere fact that encumbered real
property is disposed of again by the owner does not
in itself constitute swindling or estafa.
o Fraud cannot be disposed of from the mere fact that
there was a second sale- the law does not prohibit
the sale of encumbered property.
o What is penalized is the fraud or deceit committed
by the vendor in representing that the property is not
encumbered.
101
Crimes against property
• Silence as to encumbrance does not involve a crime
• When the element of misrepresentation is not established,
there is no crime.
ALTHOUGH SUCH ENCUMBRANCE IS NOT RECORDED
• In prior cases decided, it was held that an attachment does not
constitute an encumbrance until it is registered.
o A mortgage on land, when not registered, is void.
• However, recent jurisprudence now holds that for purposes
of the violation of Article 316, it is immaterial whether the
encumbrance is considered a deed of sale with a right to
repurchase or an equitable mortgage and whether said
encumbrance is registered and annotated in the title
o Under Article 316, it is not necessary that
encumbrance be registered.
o Registration or non-registration does not affect the
character of estafa.
ACTUAL DAMAGE. The penalty of the fine prescribed under this
article is based on the value of the damage caused. Hence, there must be
ACTUAL damage caused. Mere intent to cause damage is not enough.
• But the act need not be done to the prejudice the owner. The
damage can be for another person.
Paragraph 3
OWNER OF PERSONAL PROPERTY WRONGFULLY
TAKES IT FROM LAWFUL POSSESSOR
The owner of any personal property who shall wrongfully take it from its lawful
possessor, to the prejudice of the latter or any third person.
Elements
1. Offender is the owner of the personal property
2. Said personal property is in the lawful possession of another
3. The offender wrongfully takes it from the lawful possessor
4. Prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or 3 rd persons
OWNER OF PERSONAL PROPERTY
• If the offender is not the owner and the taking was for the
purpose of returning it to the owner, the crime committed is
theft, since the abstraction was made with the intent that
another might profit thereby.
• If the owner, after taking the thing without the consent of the
possessor and thereafter charges the possessor with the value
of the property, is guilty of theft. US v Albao
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
o It is true that one cannot be liable for theft of one’s
own property
o But in charging the lawful possessor of its value, he
intends to take the money of such possessor with the
intent to gain.
IN THE LAWFUL POSSESSION OF ANOTHER. If the
property taken is not in the lawful possession of another person
(example it was stolen), the owner cannot be liable in this article.
• Example: A knew that B found a ring belonging to C. A took
the ring. A cannot be liable under this paragraph. But he may
be liable for theft.
WRONGULLY TAKEN. A thing is wrongfully taken if it is taken:
1. Without the consent of the possessor or
2. When the deceit is employed by the owner
The taking must not have violence or intimidation. Otherwise,
the crime changes.
1. If there is violence coupled with intent to gain, the crime is
robbery. (But remember you can’t commit robbery with
respect to your own property)
2. But if there is violence but no intent to gain, the crime is
grave coercion.
Discussion; vs 315(1)(b). In the latter, the perpetrator is the person
who has juridical person possession of the thing. In 316(3), on the other
hand, the owner is the offender.
Paragraph 4
FICTITIOUS CONTRACT
Any person who, to the prejudice of another, shall execute any fictitious contract.
• An example is when a person simulates conveyance of his
property to another for the purpose of defrauding his
creditors.
• But if there is actual transfer, whether the consideration is real
or fictitious, the crime is fraudulent insolvency under Article
314.
o Vs Article 314. In 314, there is an intention to
defraud creditors by pretending that one is insolvent.
In this case, the mere execution of a fictitious
contract is punishable in this case, even without
intent to defraud creditors.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
o Regardless of consideration. Regardless of WON
there was a valid consideration, if the purpose is to
remove the property out of reach of creditors, 314
on fraudulent insolvency will govern.
• What is fictitious is the contract itself.
Paragraph 5
ACCEPT COMPENSATION WITHOUT REDENRING
SERVICE
Any person who shall accept any compensation given him under the belief that it was
in payment of services rendered or labor performed by him, when in fact he did not
actually perform such services or labor.
• This crime consists in accepting any compensation given the
accused who did not render the service or perform the labor
for which payment was made.
o What constitutes estafa under this paragraph is the
malicious failure to return the compensation
received.
• This kind of estafa requires fraud as an important
element. If there is no fraud, this simply becomes solutio
indebiti under the Civil Code, with the obligation to return
payment received by mistake.
• Note that this article talks about services and labor.
Hence, if the money in payment of a debt was delivered to a
wrong person who does not return it to the owner, Article
315(1)(b) will apply.
Paragraph 6
SURETY WHO DISPOSES SECURITY WITHOUT
AUTHORITY
Any person who, while being a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil action,
without express authority from the court or before the cancellation of his bond or
before being relieved from the obligation contracted by him, shall sell, mortgage, or,
in any other manner, encumber the real property or properties with which he
guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation.
Elements
1. The offender is a surety in a bond given in a criminal or civil
action
2. That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation with his
real property or properties
3. He sells, mortgages, or in any other manner encumbers said
real property
4. Such sale, mortgage, or encumbrance is made:
102
Crimes against property
a. Without express authority from the court
b. Before the cancellation of his bond
c. Before being relieved from the obligation contracted
by him
ACTUAL DAMAGE
• The penalty of the fine prescribed under this article is based
on the value of the damage caused.
o Hence, there must be ACTUAL damage caused.
o Mere intent to cause damage is not enough.
• But the act need not be done to the prejudice the owner.
o The damage can be for another person.
Remedy for the surety. He can dispose of the property:
1. If he files a motion/authority from the court
2. If he files a cash bond instead
3. If the bond itself is cancelled
SYNDICATED ESTAFA
PD 1689, Section 1
Any person or persons who shall commit estafa or other forms of
swindling as defined in Article 315 and 316 of the Revised Penal Code,
as amended, shall be punished by life imprisonment to death if the
swindling (estafa) is committed by a syndicate consisting of five or more
persons formed with the intention of carrying out the unlawful or illegal
act, transaction, enterprise or scheme, and the defraudation results in
the misappropriation of money contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks, cooperative, “samahang nayon(s)”, or farmers
association, or of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public.
When not committed by a syndicate as above defined, the penalty
imposable shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua if the
amount of the fraud exceeds 100,000 pesos.
Elements
1. Estafa or other forms of swindling as defined in Articles 315
and 316 is cimmitted
2. Estafa is committed by a syndicate of 5 or more persons
3. The defraudation results in the misappropriation of money
contributed by stockholders, or members of rural banks,
cooperative, “samahang nayon(s)”, or farmers association, or
of funds solicited by corporations/associations from the
general public.
4.
SYNDICATED ESTAFA THROUGH PONZI SCHEME
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
This is a type of investment fraud that involves the payment of
purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new
investors.
• Organizers solicit investors by promising high returns with
little or no risk.
• It works by attracting new money to make promised payments
to earlier investors to create the false appearance that investors
are profiting from a legit business
• The conman collects his money from his investors and then
absconds before anyone else shows up to collect
The elements of syndicated estafa are present:
1. More than 5 perpetrators
2. False pretenses and representations made prior to or
simultaneous with the commission of fraud
3. Relying on the same, complainants invest their money
4. The incorporators or perpetrators run away, to the prejudice
of the investors.
ARTICLE 317
Swindling a minor. – Any person who taking advantage of the
inexperience or emotions or feelings of a minor, to his detriment, shall
induce him to assume any obligation or to give any release or execute a
transfer of any property right in consideration of some loan of money,
credit or other personal property, whether the loan clearly appears in
the document or is shown in any other form, shall suffer the penalty
of arresto mayor and a fine of a sum ranging from 10 to 50 per cent of
the value of the obligation contracted by the minor.
Elements
1. Offender takes advantage of the inexperience or emotions or
feelings of a minor
2. He induces the minor to
a. assume any obligation or
b. to give any release or
c. execute a transfer of any property right
3. The consideration is
a. some loan of money,
b. credit or
c. other personal property
4. The transaction is to the detriment of such minor
Notes:
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Actual proof of deceit or misrepresentation is not
essential, as it is sufficient that the offender takes advantage
of the inexperience or emotions of the minor.
2. Real property is not included as consideration
• This is because it cannot be made to disappear
• A minor cannot convey real property without judicial
authority
3. A person is considered a minor if he or she is below 18 years
old
• This is the age of majority as per RA 6809.
ARTICLE 318
Other deceits. – The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine of not less than the
amount of the damage caused and not more than twice such amount
shall be imposed upon any person who shall defraud or damage another
by any other deceit not mentioned in the preceding articles of this
chapter.
Any person who, for profit or gain, shall interpret dreams, make
forecasts, tell fortunes, or take advantage of the credulity of the public
in any other similar manner, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor or a
fine not exceeding 40k pesos.
Other deceits:
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any other deceit not
mentioned in the preceding articles
2. By 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
Notes:
1. Hiring and using public vehicle without money to pay the
vehicle is estafa under this article
2. The deceits in this article include false pretenses and
fraudulent acts
• Deceiving people as to the real value of coins by
whitening such coins with quicksilver
• Presenting oneself as a domestic helper to advance
some money and later leaves the service
3. Discussion: Provision does not require deceit. The act of
taking advantage of credulity of the public is punished
independently. As long as the act is done for profit or gain.
103
Crimes against property ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Chapter Seven: CHATTEL MORTGAGE 5. There is no written consent of the: c. Noted on the record in the register of deeds
a. Mortagee or 2. Damage is not essential
ARTICLE 319 b. Executors/administrators or • The sale or subsequent pledging without consent is
Removal, sale or pledge of mortgaged property. – The penalty or arresto mayor or c. Assigns punished
a fine amounting to twice the value of the property shall be imposed 3. Chattel mortgage may give rise to estafa by means of deceit
upon: Notes: • When a person is induced to grant a loan to another
1. Any person who shall knowingly remove any personal 1. If the chattel mortgage is not registered, there is no violation person on account of the chattel mortgage as
property mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage Law to any of this provision security for the debt, when in fact such property has
province or city other than the one in which it was located at • This is because Article 2140 of the New Civil Code already been pledged to another, there exists estafa
the time of the execution of the mortgage, without the written makes it indispensable that the document evidencing by means of deceit.
consent of the mortgagee, or his executors, administrators or the Chattel Mortgage be recorded.
assigns. 2. There is no felonious intent when the transfer of personal ARTICLE 316 V ARTICLE 319(2)
2. Any mortgagor who shall sell or pledge personal property property is due to change of residence ARTICLE 316 ARTICLE 319(2)
already pledged, or any part thereof, under the terms of the • It would be absurd to hold that in transferring Real property Personal property
Chattel Mortgage Law, without the consent of the mortgagee residence, the family should leave their valuable Property is sold under express Selling or pledging without
written on the back of the mortgage and noted on the record items behind just because they are used as security. representation that it is free from obtaining consent is enough
hereof in the office of the Register of Deeds of the province • Bona fide change of residence negates intent to encumbrance, even though
where such property is located. defraud consent of mortgagee was
3. The removal of the mortgaged personal property must be obtained
OBJECTIVE OF ARTICLE 319 coupled with intent to defraud Protects the purchasers Protects the mortgagee
This provision is meant to safeguard the parties of a loan secured by 4. Filing a civil action for collection instead of foreclosure of
chattel mortgage: chattel mortgage relieves the accused of criminal responsibility
1. Deters the mortgage debtors from violation of the terms • This has the effect of abandoning the mortgage as
2. Protects the mortgage creditors against loss or inconvenience basis for relief.
resulting from the wrongful removal or sale of the mortgaged
property. Paragraph 2
Selling or pledging personal property already pledged, or any part thereof,
Paragraph 1 under the terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law, without the consent of the
Knowingly removing any personal property mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage mortgagee written on the back of the mortgage and noted on the record hereof
Law to any province or city other than the one in which it was located at the in the office of the Register of Deeds of the province where such property is located.
time of the execution of the mortgage, without the written consent of the
mortgagee, or his executors, administrators or assigns. Elements
1. The personal property is pledged under the terms of the
Note: Note that the offender is any person, regardless of whether such Chattel Mortgage Law
person is the mortgagor or a third person. 2. The offender, who is the mortgagor, sells or pledges the
same or any part thereof
Elements 3. There is no consent of the mortgagee written on the back of
1. Personal property is mortgaged under the Chattel Mortgage the mortgage and noted on the record thereof in the office of
Law the register of deeds.
2. Offender knows that it is mortgaged
3. Offender removes such property to any province or city other Notes:
than the one in which it was located at the time of the 1. Consent must be:
execution of the mortgage a. Written
4. The removal is permanent b. On the back of the mortgage

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 104

Crimes against property
Chapter Eight: ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES
INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS
Articles 320-326-B have been repealed by PD 1613.
KINDS OF ARSON
1. Simple Arson (Sec 1, PD 1613)
2. Destructive Arson (Article 320, emended by RA 7659)
3. Other cases of arson (Sec 3, PD 1613)
SIMPLE ARSON
Sec 1, PD 1613
a. Any person who burns or sets fire to the property of another
shall be punished by Prision Mayor.
b. The same penalty shall be imposed when a person sets fire to
his own property under circumstances which expose to
danger the life or property of another.
ARSON
• This is the malicious destruction of property by fire.
• It includes public and private structures regardless of size-
houses, dwellings, government building, farms, mills,
plantations, railways, bus stations, airports, etc.
ATTEMPTED, FRUSTRATED, CONSUMMATED
Arson is a material crime.
1. ATTEMPTED
• a person intending to burn a wooden structure,
collects some rags, soaks them in gasoline, and places
them beside the wooden wall of a building. As he
was about to light the match, he was discovered and
chased away.
2. FRUSTRATED
• the person was able to set fire to the rags but was put
out before any part of the building was burned.
• Discussion: There is fire already, but no part of the
building has been burned yet.
3. CONSUMMATED
• before the fire was put out, part of the building was
burned.
• Charring of the wood of the building, whereby the
fiber of the wood is destroyed, is sufficient.
• Not necessary that the wood should be ablazed.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• But the mere fact that a building is scorched or
discolored by heat is not sufficient to constitute
consummated arson.
• Setting fire to the contents of a building constitutes
the consummated crime of setting fire to a building,
even if no part of the building was burned.
• If part of the building commence to burn, arson is
consummated, regardless of the portion of the
building burned.
OTHER CASES OF ARSON
Sec 3, PD 1613
Section 3. Other Cases of Arson. The penalty of Reclusion Temporal to
Reclusion Perpetua shall be imposed if the property burned is any of
the following:
1. Any building used as offices of the government or any of its
agencies;
2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
3. Any industrial establishment, shipyard, oil well or mine shaft,
platform or tunnel;
4. Any plantation, farm, pastureland, growing crop, grain field,
orchard, bamboo grove or forest;
5. Any rice mill, sugar mill, cane mill or mill central; and
6. Any railway or bus station, airport, wharf or warehouse.
If the property is an inhabited house or dwelling, it is not required
that the house be occupied by one or more persons and that the
offender knew it when the house was burned.
DESTRUCTIVE ARSON
Article 320, as amended by RA 7659
Art. 320. Destructive Arson. - The penalty of reclusion perpetua to
death shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent to one
single act of burning, or as a result of simultaneous burnings,
committed on several or different occasions.
2. Any building of public or private ownership, devoted to the
public in general or where people usually gather or congregate
for a definite purpose such as, but not limited to, official
governmental function or business, private transaction,
commerce, trade, workshop, meetings and conferences, or
merely incidental to a definite purpose such as but not limited
to hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public conveyances or
stops or terminals, regardless of whether the offender had
knowledge that there are persons in said building or edifice at
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
the time it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the
building is actually inhabited or not.
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or airplane,
devoted to transportation or conveyance, or for public use,
entertainment or leisure.
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and any
appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to the service of
public utilities.
5. Any building the burning of which is for the purpose of
concealing or destroying evidence of another violation of law,
or for the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or defrauding
creditors or to collect from insurance.
Irrespective of the application of the above enumerated qualifying
circumstances, the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall likewise
be imposed when the arson is perpetrated or committed by two (2) or
more persons or by a group of persons, regardless of whether their
purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or the burning merely
constitutes an overt act in the commission or another violation of law.
The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall also be imposed upon
any person who shall burn:
1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder or
fireworks factory, ordnance, storehouse, archives or general
museum of the Government.
2. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
inflammable or explosive materials.
If as a consequence of the commission of any of the acts penalized
under this Article, death results, the mandatory penalty of death shall
be imposed."
SIMPLE ARSON V DESTRUCTIVE ARSON
• Nature of property destroyed. The classification is based on
the kind, character and location of the property burned,
regardless of the value of the damage caused.
• The nature is distinguished by the degree of perversity or
viciousness of the criminal offender.
o The acts under destructive arson are considered as
heinous crimes for being grievous, odious and
hateful offenses and which, by reason of their
inherent or manifest wickedness, are outrageous to
the common standards and norms of decency and
morality.
105
Crimes against property
o Simple arson, on the other hand, involves less
significant social, economic, political ,and national
security implications than destructive arson.
SPECIAL AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES IN ARSON
Section 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances in Arson. The penalty in any
case of arson shall be imposed in its maximum period;
1. If committed with intent to gain;
2. If committed for the benefit of another;
3. If the offender is motivated by spite or hatred towards the
owner or occupant of the property burned;
4. If committed by a syndicate.
The offense is committed by a SYNDICATE if its is planned or carried
out by a group of three (3) or more persons.
WHEN DEATH RESULTS
Section 5. Where Death Results from Arson. If by reason of or on the
occasion of the arson death results, the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua
to death shall be imposed.
- Because of this provision, there is no complex crime of arson
with homicide
- The crime of homicide is absorbed.
Arson vs murder. In cases where both burning or death occur, in order
to determine what crime/crimes was/were perpetrated, one must
ascertain the main objective of the malefactor:
Main objective is burning and Arson; homicide is absorbed
death results by reason or on (no complex crime of arson
occasion of with homicide)
Main objective was to kill a Murder
person in a building or
edifice and fire was used as
means to accomplish it
Objective is to kill and the 2 distinct crimes: homicide or
offender had already done so; murder + arson
fire used to cover up the
killing
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF ARSON
Section 6. Prima Facie evidence of Arson. Any of the following
circumstances shall constitute prima facie evidence of arson:
1. If the fire started simultaneously in more than one part of the
building or establishment.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. If substantial amount of flammable substances or materials are
stored within the building not necessary in the business of the
offender nor for household use.
3. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other flammable or
combustible substances or materials soaked therewith or
containers thereof, or any mechanical, electrical, chemical, or
electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or ashes or
traces of any of the foregoing are found in the ruins or
premises of the burned building or property.
4. If the building or property is insured for substantially more
than its actual value at the time of the issuance of the policy.
5. If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire insurance
policy more than two fires have occurred in the same or other
premises owned or under the control of the offender and/or
insured.
6. If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of the effects
insured and stored in a building or property had been
withdrawn from the premises except in the ordinary course of
business.
7. If a demand for money or other valuable consideration was
made before the fire in exchange for the desistance of the
offender or for the safety of the person or property of the
victim.
Standing alone, unexplained or uncontradicted, any of the above
circumstances is sufficient to establish the fact of arson.
Section 7. Conspiracy to commit Arson. Conspiracy to commit arson shall
be punished by Prision Mayor in its minimum period.
Section 8. Confiscation of Object of Arson. The building which is the object
of arson including the land on which it is situated shall be confiscated
and escheated to the State, unless the owner thereof can prove that he
has no participation in nor knowledge of such arson despite the exercise
of due diligence on his part.
ARSON AS TERRORISM
RA 9372 or Human Security Act of 2007
Any person who commits an act punishable as arson, thereby sowing
and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and
panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give
in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of the crime of terrorism and
shall suffer the penalty of forty (40) years of imprisonment, without the
benefit of parole as provided for under Act No. 4103, otherwise known
as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Article 324. Crimes involving destruction. - Any person who shall
cause destruction by means of
1. explosion,
2. discharge of electric current,
3. inundation, sinking or stranding of a vessel, intentional
damaging of the engine of said vessel,
4. taking up the rails from a railway track,
5. maliciously changing railway signals for the safety of moving
trains,
6. destroying telegraph wires and telegraph posts, or those of any
other system, and,
7. in general, by using any other agency or means of destruction
as effective as those above enumerated,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal if the commission has
endangered the safety of any person, otherwise, the penalty of prision
mayor shall be imposed.
Chapter Nine: MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
ARTICLE 327
Who are liable for malicious mischief. - Any person who shall deliberately
cause the property of another any damage not falling within the terms
of the next preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious mischief.
MALISCIOUS MISCHIEF. This is the willful damaging of another’s
property for the sake of causing damage due to hate, revenge, or other
evil motive.
Elements
1. Deliberate causing of damage to the property of another
2. Does not constitute arson or other crimes involving
destruction
3. The act of damaging another’s property is committed merely
for the sake of damaging it
• This presupposes that the offender acted due to hate,
revenge, or other evil motive
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF V OTHER CRIMES. What delineates
malicious mischief from other crimes is the causing of damage merely
for the sake of damaging it due to hate, revenge, or other evil motive.
• Killing the cow of another
o If motivated by revenge, malicious mischief
o If motivated by intent to gain, as when the meat is
divided among the offenders, it is theft.
106
Crimes against property
• Destroying the car of another
o If motivated by revenge, malicious mischief
o If motivated by the mere pleasure of destroying it, it
is destruction
DAMAGE . This may mean loss or diminution of what is a man’s own.
Therefore, defacing the house of a man is damage.
• Note that damaging of property in malicious mischief must
not result from a crime (breaking of things in robbery, etc.)
o If it does, only civil liability arises
KINDS OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF AS REGARDS MEANS
EMPLOYED AND NATURE OF DAMAGED PROPERTIES
1. Special cases of malicious mischief- Article 328
2. Damage and obstruction to means of communication
Article 330
3. Destroying or damaging statutes, public monuments, or
paintings Article 331
Note: 327 only defines malicious mischief. Penalties in 328 and 329.
ARTICLE 328
Special cases of malicious mischief. - Any person who shall cause damage to
obstruct the performance of public functions, or using any poisonous
or corrosive substance; or spreading any infection or contagion among
cattle; or who cause damage to the property of the National Museum
or National Library, or to any archive or registry, waterworks, road,
promenade, or any other thing used in common by the public, shall be
punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods,
if the value of the damage caused exceeds 200k pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the
abovementioned amount but it is over 40k pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 40l pesos.
QUALIFIED MALICIOUS MISCHIEF OR
SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
1. causing damage to obstruct the performance of public
functions,
2. or using any poisonous or corrosive substance
3. or spreading any infection or contagion among cattle or
4. causing damage to the property of the National Museum or
National Library, or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the
public
OBSTRUCTING PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC FUNCTION.
If the element of public and tumultuous uprising is present, the crime
becomes sedition, not merely malicious mischief
POISONOUS OR CORROSIVE SUBSTANCE
The poisonous substance may be used to:
1. Kill large cattle or other animals of the offended party
2. Cause rust on a machine or destroy property through the
action of chemicals
3. Other destruction of property
Discussion: Damage need not be permanent. For example, throwing
mud on the road to make it unpassable can fall under the 4th act,
damaging of road.
ARTICLE 329
Other mischiefs. - The mischiefs not included in the next preceding article
shall be punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if the
value of the damage caused exceeds 200k pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if such
value is over 40k pesos but does not exceed 200k pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of the damage
caused and not more than 40k pesos, if the amount involved
does not exceed 40k pesos or cannot be estimated.
Other mischiefs are punished according to the value of damage caused, even if the
amount of damage cannot be estimated.
Vs estafa. The penalties for both are based on the amount of damage.
But in malicious mischief, there is a penalty even if the amount of the
damage cannot be estimated.
ARTICLE 330
Damage and obstruction to means of communication. - The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
upon any person who shall damage any railway, telegraph or
telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or other
accident, the penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed, without
prejudice to the criminal liability of the offender for the other
consequences of his criminal act.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the electric wires,
traction cables, signal system and other things pertaining to railways,
shall be deemed to constitute an integral part of a railway system.
DAMAGE TO MEANS OF COMMUNICATION
• This is committed by damaging railway, telegraph or
telephone lines.
• This is qualified when: it shall result in any derailment of cars,
collision, or other accident
o But such derailment or collision must have resulted
from damage to railway, telegraph or telephone lines
o If the derailment of collision was purposely sought
for, it involves the crime of destruction.
• The telegraph or telephone lines must pertain to railway
system
• When persons are killed, the crime charged depends on the
intent:
o If there is no intent to kill, it is damages to means of
communication with homicide
o If there is intent to kill, it is murder.
Discussion: Is a light railway contemplated? Yes.
ARTICLE 331
Destroying or damaging statues, public monuments or paintings. - Any person
who shall destroy or damage statues or any other useful or ornamental
public monument shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium
period to prision correccional in its minimum period.
Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or ornamental
painting of a public nature shall suffer the penalty of arresto menor or
a fine not exceeding 40k pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment, in
the discretion of the court.
Subject matter of destruction:
1. Statues
2. Public monument
3. Painting of a public nature
Discussion: The items above do not necessarily mean government-
owned. It means used by the public. Examples:
1. Walls with painting in BGC
2. walls with painting in EDSA (MMDA Art)
107
Crimes against property
Chapter Ten: EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL
LIABILITY IN CRIMES AGAINST
PROPERTY
ARTICLE 332
Persons exempt from criminal liability. - No criminal, but only civil liability,
shall result from the commission of the crime of theft, swindling or
malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by the following
persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity
in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which
belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have
passed into the possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if
living together.
The exemption established by this article shall not be applicable to
strangers participating in the commission of the crime.
CRIMES INVOLVED
1. Theft
2. Swindling (Estafa)
3. Malicious mischief
Note that this list is exclusive. Exemption applies only to the simple crimes
enumerated above, and not where any of the said crimes is complexed with another
crime.
- Hence, this cannot apply to estafa through falsification of documents. To
apply the provision would mistakenly treat the crime of estafa as a
separate simple crime, not as a component crime.
PERSONS EXEMPTED FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity
in the same line.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which
belonged to the deceased spouse before the same shall have
passed into the possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if
living together.
But the benefits of this article does not extend to strangers who participate in the
commission of the crime.
Notes:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
1. Spouse- this includes the legal spouse, common-law spouse, 1. The property belongs to the deceased spouse
concubine, or paramour 2. It has not passed into the possession of third persons
2. Ascendants- stepfather and stepmother are included as The requisites must concur.
ascendants by affinity
3. Descendants- adopted and natural children are included SIBLINGS
Brothers, sisters, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law must be living
COMMITTED OR CAUSED MUTUALLY together at the time of the commission of theft, estafa, malicious
This means that the offender and the offended party must both belong mischief.
to the list of persons enumerated above.
• Example: A owes B. C, son of B, told A that B asked him to
collect. A paid C.
o In this example, Article 332 is not applicable because
A, the offended party is a stranger to C.
• Suppose in the same example A had already paid B, and B
placed the cash in his drawer. Seeing that there was money in
the drawer, C took it without B’s consent.
o This is simple theft. This is covered by Article 332.
B and C, being ascendants and descendants, are
likewise covered. Hence, C is exempt from criminal
liability.
o But suppose that D, C’s friend and not in anyway
related to B, helped C take the cash from the drawer,
D will still be liable because he is not one of those
enumerated in the provision.
IMPLICATIONS
• There is only civil liability
• As an act of grace, the State waives its right to prosecute the
offender for said crimes.
o But the waiver does not apply when the violation of
the right to property is achieved through a breach of
the public interest in the integrity and presumed
authenticity of public documents.
• The State recognizes presumed co-ownership of property
between the offender and the offended party.
EFFECT OF DEATH ON RELATIONSHIP BY AFFINITY
AS ABSOLUTORY CAUSE
The relationship by affinity created between the surviving spouse and
the blood relatives of the deceased spouse survives the death of either
party to the marriage which created the affinity.
WIDOWED SPOUSE
To be exempt from criminal liability, it is required that:
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 108
Crimes against chastity
TITLE ELEVEN: CRIMES AGAINST
CHASTITY
Chapter One: ADULTERY AND
CONCUBINAGE
ARTICLE 333
ADULTERY. Adultery is committed by any married woman who shall
have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by the man
who has carnal knowledge of her knowing her to be married, even if
the marriage be subsequently declared void.
Penalty:
• Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional in its
medium and maximum periods.
• If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while
being abandoned without justification by the offended spouse,
the penalty next lower in degree than that provided in the next
preceding paragraph shall be imposed.
Elements:
1. Woman is married (even if later marriage is declared void)
2. She has sexual intercourse with a man not her husband
3. As regards the man with whom she had sexual intercourse, he
knew her to be married.
The third element pertains only to the kabit-man. The woman can be liable for
adultery even if the man whom she had sex with did not know she was married.
Notes:
1. The acquittal of one of the offenders does not result to the
acquittal of the other.
2. Under the law, there can be no accomplice in the crime of
adultery.
3. Discussion: Possibilities to exculpate the client or mitigate
liability
a. Liability mitigated if adulterous wife was abandoned
without justification by the husband (paramour also)
4. Husband cannot sue wife if he consented. Bugayong v Ginez
VALID MARRIAGE
• The legitimacy of the marriage relation between the offended
husband and the defendant wide is one of the circumstances
which must necessarily attend the crime.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
o The declaration of the husband is sufficient proof
o A witness who was present at the time of marriage is
also a competent witness
• The offended husband must be legally married to the
offending wife at the time of the criminal case
• Even if the marriage is subsequently void, there can be
adultery even if the offense was committed before the
declaration of nullity.
o This is because the offense to the vows taken and the
attack on the family nevertheless exist.
o The essence is the violation of the marital vow.
• GIST OF THE CRIME: The gist of the crime is the danger
of introducing spurious heirs into the family, where the rights
of the real heirs may be impaired, and a man may be charged
with the maintenance of a family not his own. Edi waw.
SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
• Carnal knowledge may be proved by circumstantial
evidence. It must be of such nature as will lead the guarded
discretion of a reasonable and just man to the conclusion that
the criminal act of adultery has been committed.
Examples:
o Pictures showing intimate relations of the two
accused and testimony of a witness to the effect that
the two accused were in a scant apparel and sleeping
together. US v Feliciano
o Love letters signed by paramour, being together in
different places, and the fact that they were surprised
in a well-known assignation house which the accused
woman admitted having visited 6 times with her
paramour. US v Legaspi
o Direct proof not necessary because in the very
nature of things, it is seldom that adultery can be
established by direct evidence
• Each sexual intercourse constitutes a crime of adultery.
Hence, when the husband pardons his wife for adultery, such
pardon affects only the acts prior to it because the acts after
such pardon are considered distinct and separate.
ABANDONMENT WITHOUT JUST CAUSE
If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense while being abandoned without
justification by the offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that
provided is imposed.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• This is only a mitigating circumstance. Both offenders are
entitled to this mitigating circumstance.
• Abandonment could not serve as her excuse to free her from
criminal responsibility arising from her infidelity because as
the wife, she had the means within the law to compel him to
fulfill the duties imposed upon him by marriage.
• Total abandonment is the abandonment contemplated.
OFFENDING MAN: 3RD PARTY
• The man must have knowledge that the woman is married to
be liable for adultery.
• He can be single or married
o If he is married and he did not know that the
woman was married, he is liable for concubinage
only.
o If he is married and he knew that the woman was
married, he is liable for concubinage and adultery.
PARDON
This obliterates the action arising from the offense. It requires the
following:
1. It must be made before the institution of the criminal action
2. Both offenders must be pardoned. Pardon of only one of
them will not prosper.
Forms of pardon:
1. Express- agreement to have an open relationship
2. Implied
• Acts of intercourse subsequent to adulterous conduct, with
the husband knowing such, is an implied pardon.
• If the husband does not assert his rights as husband after
having knowledge of the adulterous actions of his wife, he is
deemed to have consented thereto.
• Also, if the parties agree to separate, while the agreement is
void in the eyes of the law, is competent evidence to explain
the husband’s inaction after he knew of his wife’s living with
her co-accused.
EFFECT OF DEATH
• If either one of the offender dies, it will not bar the
prosecution of the other offender.
109
Crimes against chastity
o The requirement that both offenders should be
included in the complaint is absolute only when the
two offenders are alive.
• If the offended party dies:
o The case cannot go on if he dies before the filing of
the complaint because no one can sign and file the
complaint in behalf of him. Note that adultery is personal
to the offended spouse. Only the legal spouse can file such case.
o If he dies after the filing, this will not bar prosecution
of the offenders.
ARTICLE 334
CONCUBINAGE. Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the
conjugal dwelling, or shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with
her in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods.
• The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
Elements:
1. The man is married
2. He commits the following acts:
a. By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling
b. By having sexual intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or
c. By cohabiting with her in any other place
3. As regards the woman, she must know the man to be married.
The third element pertains only to the kabit-woman. The man can be liable for
concubinage even if the woman whom he had sex with did not know he was married.
NOTE THAT A MARRIED MAN IS NOT LIABLE FOR
CONCUBINAGE FOR MERE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH
A WOMAN NOT HIS WIFE
Putangina naman talaga
OFFENDING WOMAN: 3RD PARTY
• The woman must have knowledge that the man is married.
• She can be single or married
o If she is married and she did not know that the man
was married, she is liable for adultery only.
o If she is married and he knew that the man was
married, she is liable for adultery and concubinage.
KEEPING A MISTRESS IN THE CONJUGAL DWELLING
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
Scandalous circumstances are not necessary to make a husband guilty by keeping a
mistress in the dwelling.
CONJUGAL DWELLING. This is the home of the husband and
wife even if the wife is temporarily absent on any account.
MISTRESS. The mistress is the concubine. The husband must take
her in as a concubine, and not merely as a friend, adopted child, etc.
HAVING SEX UNDER SCANDALOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
It is only when the mistress is kept elsewhere, or outside the conjugal dwelling that
scandalous circumstances become an element of the crime.
SCANDAL. This is any word or deed that is considered reprehensible
and offends public conscience, redounds to the detriment of the
feelings of honest persons and gives occasion to the neighbor’s spiritual
damage or ruin.
• The qualifying expression under scandalous circumstance refers to
the act of sexual intercourse, which may be proved by
circumstantial evidence.
• The people in the vicinity are the best witnesses to prove
scandalous circumstances
o But when spies are involved, and none of the people
living in the vicinity has observed any suspicious
conduct, there is no evidence of scandalous
circumstances.
o In US v Casipong, it was held that when a wife saw her
husband and the other woman lying side by side and
on several occasions saw them going together to
different places, is not sufficient to convict them of
concubinage.
• For the existence of concubinage under scandalous
circumstances, the offender must be so imprudent and
wanton as to offend modesty and that innate sense of morality
and decency of the people in the neighborhood.
COHABITING IN ANY OTHER PLACE
Proof of scandalous circumstances not necessary.
COHABIT. It means to dwell together, in a manner of husband and
wife, for some period of time, as distinguished from occasional,
transient interview for some unlawful intercourse. People v Pitoc
• It means dwelling together as husband and wife, or in sexual
intercourse, and comprises a continued period of time. Hence
the offense is not the single act of adultery; it is cohabiting in
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
a state of adultery; and it may be a week, a month, a year, or
longer, but still it is one offense only
• To "cohabit" means to dwell together, inhabit or reside in
company, or in the same place or country. Specifically, "to
dwell or live together as husband and wife," often with
reference to persons not legally married, and usually, but not
always, implying sexual intercourse. (Cox vs. State, 23 South.,
806; 117 Ala., 103; 41 L.R.A., 760; 67 Am. St. Rep., 166 [quo
No concubinage here:
1. Wife surprises husband having sex with another woman in a
motel (not a scandalous circumstance)
2. Keeping a mistress in an apartment furnished by the husband
(not in conjugal dwelling)
3. Wife proves that husband is the father of a child of another
woman.
Chapter Two: RAPE AND ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
For rape, see discussion under crimes against persons.
ARTICLE 336
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
Acts of lasciviousness. - Any person who shall commit any act of
lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by
prision correccional.
Elements
1. Offender commits an act of lasciviousness or lewdness
2. The act is committed against persons of either sex
3. It is done under any of the following circumstances:
a. Using force or intimidation
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious
c. Means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
authority
d. When the offended party is under 12 years or is
demented.
Note that when acts of lasciviousness are performed on a child 12 years old to
below 18 years old, who is exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse, punished under RA 7610.
110
Crimes against chastity ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Discussion: Is flashing considered here? No. There must be physical There is force or intimidation, N/A RAPE SEDUCTION
acts or contact committed upon the person of another for purposes of deprived of The 4 circumstances (force, N/A
sexual gratification. Example: touching delicate parts. reason/unconscious, fraudulent threat, intimidation, etc.) are
machination, under 12 years or present
LEWD. This is defined as obscene, lustful, indecent, lecherous. It demented.
signifies the form of immorality which has relation to moral impurity or 2 kinds of seduction:
that which is carried on a wanton manner. In relation to RA 7610; RPC if below 12 yrs old. When acts of 1. Qualified seduction (Art 337)
• Motive of lascivious act is not important because the essence lasciviousness are performed on a child 12 years old to below 18 years 2. Simple seduction (Art 338)
of lewdness is in the very act itself. old, who is exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse,
• The presence or absence of lewd design is inferred from the punished under RA 7610, Section 5b. relevant provisions are as follow: ARTICLE 337
nature of the acts themselves and the environmental Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse. – Children, QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
circumstances. whether male or female, who for money, profit, or any other Qualified seduction. - The seduction of a virgin over twelve years and
consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate under eighteen years of age, committed by any person in public
Abuses against chastity v offenses against chastity or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are authority, priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any
ABUSES AGAINST OFFENSES AGAINST deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse. person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
CHASTITY CHASTITY • (b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse of custody of the woman seduced, shall be punished by prision
Offender is a public officer In the majority of cases, offender lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
is a private individual subject to other sexual abuse; Provided, That when the
Mere immoral or indecent Actual act of lasciviousness victims is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon any person
proposal made earnestly and should have been executed by shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for who shall seduce his sister or descendant, whether or not she be a virgin
persistently is sufficient the offender. rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the or over eighteen years of age.
Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the
Acts of lasciviousness v attempted rape case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is committed when the
ACTS OF ATTEMPTED RAPE conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age offender has carnal knowledge of any of the persons and under the
LASCIVIOUSNESS shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period; and circumstances described herein.
If the acts of the offender show
that clearly his intent was to lie Elements under this special law Elements
or have sex with the offended 1. Accused commits acts of sexual intercourse or acts of 1. Offended is a virgin, which is presumed if she is unmarried
party, the crime is A/F rape. lasciviousness and of good reputation
2. Performed with a child exploited in prostitution or 2. Offended party is over 12 and under 18 years old
Lascivious acts are themselves Lascivious acts are but
the final objective sought; there preparatory to the act of rape subjected to other sexual abuse 3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her
is no intent to have sex with the 3. Child is 12-18 years old. (but not below 12years old) 4. There is abuse of authority, confidence, or relationship on the
offended party part of the offender.
Chapter Three: SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION Unlike simple seduction, deceit is not an element of qualified seduction. It is replaced
SIMILARITIES
by the fourth requisite above.
Performance of lascivious acts common to both OF MINORS AND WHITE SLAVE TRADE
Offended party is either sex OFFENDERS IN QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
Manner of commission the same: force intimidation; fraudulent SEDUCTION. This means enticing a woman to unlawful sexual 1. Those who abuse their authority
machination, etc. intercourse by promise of marriage or other means of persuasion a. Person in authority
without use of force. b. Guardian
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS V UNJUST VEXATION c. Teacher
ACTS OF UNJUST VEXATION There must always be sex in seduction. If only acts of lewdness are performed, the d. Person, who, in any capacity, is entrusted with the
LASCIVIOUSNESS crime is act of lasciviousness. education or custody of the woman seduced
There are lewd designs Just to irritate 2. Those who abuse their confidence
Rape v seduction

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 111

Crimes against chastity ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

a. Priest
b. House servant
c. Domestic
3. Those who abuse their relationship
a. Brother who abused his sister
b. Ascendant who abused his descendant
What makes the crime qualified seduction is that the acts would not be punished
were it not for the character of the person committing the same, as shown in the list
above.
Paragraph 1
Abuse of authority or confidence
VIRGINITY. Virginity does not mean not having had sexual
intercourse. The definition includes a virtuous woman of good
reputation.
• This is presumed is the woman is unmarried and of good
reputation.
• A woman who has had carnal relations with different men
puts into question her chaste character. She is more or less a
public woman.
CONSENT. In seduction, it is presumed that consent is given because
of abuse of authority, confidence, or relationship.
• Since consent or lack thereof is not an element of the crime,
it cannot be raised as a defense.
DOMESTIC. This is a person usually living under the same roof,
pertaining to the same house.
• This includes all persons residing with the family and who are
members of the same household, regardless of the fact that
their residence may only temporary or that they may be paying
for their board and lodging.
o The owner who seduced a servant girl in the house
is a domestic
o But a man merely stopping at a public inn or tavern
is not a domestic.
• The reason for punishment is because of the sentimental and
confidential manifestation of intimacy exchanged between
members of the same household.
• A domestic is distinct from a house servant.
TEACHER. It is enough that the teacher and the student are from the
same school.
Paragraph 2
Abuse of relationship
SEDUCING A SISTER OR DESCENDANT
• Virginity of the sister or descendant is not required.
• The sister or descendant may be over 18 years old.
• The relationship need not be legitimate
ARTICLE 338
SIMPLE SEDUCTION
Simple seduction. - The seduction of a woman who is single or a widow
of good reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years of age,
committed by means of deceit, shall be punished by arresto mayor.
Elements
1. Offended party is over 12 and under 18 years old
2. Offended party must be of good reputation, single or widow.
3. Offender has sexual intercourse with her
4. The crime is committed by means of deceit.
Note that a widow can never be a victim of this crime. This law
was enacted prior to the effectivity of the Family Code when minors
were allowed to get married. Now, only people aged 18 and above may
validly marry.
VIRGINITY. Virginity is not required. The woman must be of good
reputation. If she is a woman of loose morals, the act would not be
penalized by the Code.
DECEIT. Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled promise of
marriage
• But it can also be committed by other means of deceit.
• But note that a when a minor had sex on the promise of giving
her jewels, there is no seduction. She has loose morals. She is
a high-class prostitute.
• A promise of marriage after sex does not constitute deceit.
o The promise must be the moving factor for the
consent.
Purpose of law in punishing simple seduction. This is to punish the
seducer who by means of a promise of marriage, destroys the chastity
of an unmarried female of previous chaste character.
• Even if the man was willing to marry the minor but he knew
that the victim cannot legally marry him, it could still be simple
seduction.
ARTICLE 339
Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party. - The penalty
of arresto mayor shall be imposed to punish any other acts of
lasciviousness committed by the same persons and the same
circumstances as those provided in Articles 337 and 338.
Note: Penalty is higher by 1 degree than that imposed by law when the
victim is under 12 years of age.
Elements
1. The offender commits acts of lasciviousness or lewdness
2. The acts are committed upon a woman who is virgin or single
of good reputation, under 18 but over 12, or sister or
descendant of the offender, regardless of reputation or age.
3. The offender accomplishes the acts by:
a. Abuse of authority, confidence or relationship
b. Deceit
OFFENDED PARTY
• Only a woman can be a victim of this crime
• Although a man may be a victim of acts of lasciviousness, this
specific provision does not mention persons of either sex as the
offended party.
UNDER THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES IN 337 AND 338
• This means that the crime is committed under circumstances
that would make it simple or qualified seduction, except that
there is no sexual intercourse but mere acts of lewdness.
CONSENT. It is presumed that consent is given because of abuse of
authority, confidence, or relationship, or by means of deceit.
• Since consent or lack thereof is not an element of the crime,
it cannot be raised as a defense.
ARTICLE 336 V ARTICLE 339
ARTICLE 336 ARTICLE 339
Acts are committed under Acts are committed under
circumstances which, had there circumstances which, had there
been sex, would amount to rape been sex, would amount to
simple or qualified seduction.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 112

Crimes against chastity
ARTICLE 340
CORRUPTION OF MINORS
Corruption of minors. - Any person who shall promote or facilitate the
prostitution or corruption of persons underage to satisfy the lust of
another, shall be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a pubic
officer or employee, including those in government-owned or
controlled corporations, he shall also suffer the penalty of temporary
absolute disqualification. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 92).
Note: Penalty is higher by 1 degree than that imposed by law when the
victim is under 12 years of age.
PIMPING
• The provision pertains to acts performed to satisfy the lust of
another¸ and not for own sexual gratification.
• Mere proposal consummates the offense
o A father who proposes to his daughter that she
accompany a man to satisfy the lust of the latter
commits a consummated crime of corruption of
minors.
• Discussion: Nothing in the Article suggests that the minor
should be of good reputation.
VICTIM
• Under the New Family Code, a minor is under 18 years old.
• The victim must be a person of good reputation, not a
prostitute or a corrupted person.
• The victim may be a girl or a boy
Note: If falling under Article 340 and RA 7610, charge under Article
340 in relation to RA 7610, and apply penalties of RA 7610 for victims
under 12 years old. Note that RA 7610 provides basis for imposing a
higher penalty. Usually one can be prosecuted under both RPC and SPL
if there is a distinct element.
CHILD PROSTITUTION: RA 7610
Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse. – Children,
whether male or female, who for money, profit, or any other
consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate
or group, indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are
deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse.
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed upon the following:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
(a) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or induce child
prostitution which include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Acting as a procurer of a child prostitute;
2. Inducing a person to be a client of a child prostitute
by means of written or oral advertisements or other
similar means;
3. Taking advantage of influence or relationship to
procure a child as prostitute;
4. Threatening or using violence towards a child to
engage him as a prostitute; or
5. Giving monetary consideration goods or other
pecuniary benefit to a child with intent to engage
such child in prostitution.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse of lascivious
conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual
abuse;
• Provided, That when the victims is under twelve (12)
years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted
under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article
336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal
Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may
be:
• Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct
when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age
shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period; and
(c) Those who derive profit or advantage therefrom, whether as
manager or owner of the establishment where the prostitution takes
place, or of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of entertainment or
establishment serving as a cover or which engages in prostitution in
addition to the activity for which the license has been issued to said
establishment.
Section 6. Attempt To Commit Child Prostitution. – There is an
attempt to commit child prostitution under Section 5, paragraph (a)
hereof when:
1. any person who, not being a relative of a child, is found alone
with the said child inside the room or cubicle of a house, an
inn, hotel, motel, pension house, apartelle or other similar
establishments, vessel, vehicle or any other hidden or secluded
area under circumstances which would lead a reasonable
person to believe that the child is about to be exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse.
2. There is also an attempt to commit child prostitution, under
paragraph (b) of Section 5 hereof when any person is receiving
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
services from a child in a sauna parlor or bath, massage clinic,
health club and other similar establishments. A penalty lower
by two (2) degrees than that prescribed for the consummated
felony under Section 5 hereof shall be imposed upon the
principals of the attempt to commit the crime of child
prostitution under this Act, or, in the proper case, under the
Revised Penal Code.
ARTICLE 341
White slave trade. - The penalty of prision mayor in its medium and
maximum period shall be imposed upon any person who, in any
manner, or under any pretext, shall engage in the business or shall profit
by prostitution or shall enlist the services of any other for the purpose
of prostitution (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 186.)
ACTS PENALIZED AS WHITE SLAVE TRADE
1. Engaging in the business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the services of women for prostitution
Habituality is not an element. Performing any of the acts above once is sufficient.
Note: Penalty is higher by 1 degree than that imposed by law when the
victim is under 12 years of age.
Notes:
1. Offender need not be the owner of the house. The person
responsible is the person who maintains or engages in the
business. It is not a defense that he is only the manager or the
man in charge of the house.
2. Maintainer or manager of house of ill-repute need not be
present therein at the time of arrest
3. Discussion: Habituality not a necessary element of a crime
4. Discussion: Under any pretext means that when certain acts are
done to mask the real scheme of prostitution, the same will be
punished under this provision.
Chapter Four: ABDUCTION
ABDUCTION. This is taking away of a woman from her house or
the place where she may be for the purpose of carrying her to another
place with intent to marry or to corrupt her.
ARTICLE 342
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
113
Crimes against chastity ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Forcible abduction. - The abduction of any woman against her will and • Husband is not liable for abduction of his wife, as lewd design Actual illicit relations with the Lecherous acts must have
with lewd designs shall be punished by reclusion temporal. is wanting woman abducted need not be actually been committed
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the female abducted • This is important because this element will distinguish shown
be under twelve years of age. abduction from other crimes Offended party is a woman Offended party is man or
woman
Elements Nature of the crime. In the crime of forcible abduction, the act of the These crimes have different elements. The conviction on one of them is not double
1. The person is a woman, regardless of her age, civil status, or offender is violative of the individual liberty of the abducted, her honor jeopardy. Hence, conviction of acts of lasciviousness will not bar conviction of forcible
reputation and reputation, and of public order. abduction.
2. The abduction is against her will
3. The abduction is with lewd designs FORCIBLE ABDUCTION V GRAVE CORCION ARTICLE 343
Virginity is not an essential element. Woman may even be married. FORCIBLE ABDUCTION GRAVE COERCION CONSENTED ABDUCTION
There is violence and intimidation used by the offender and the Consented abduction. - The abduction of a virgin over twelve years and
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY WHERE AGE AND offended party is compelled to do something against her will. under eighteen years of age, carried out with her consent and with lewd
REPUTATION OF VICTIM ARE IMMATERIAL There are lewd designs NA designs, shall be punished by the penalty of prision correccional in its
1. Forcible abduction minimum and medium periods.
If there are no lewd designs, it is coercion, provided that there is no deprivation of
2. Rape liberty for an appreciable length of time.
3. Acts of lasciviousness against the will or without the consent Elements
of the offended party 1. Offended party is a virgin
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION V KIDNAPPING
4. Qualified seduction of sister or descendant 2. She is over 12 but under 18
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION KIDNAPPING
There is taking of a person There is taking of a person 3. The taking away is consented, after solicitation or cajolery by
TAKING AWAY the offender
Taking is motivated by lewd NA; But there is deprivation of
• It must be against her will- force or intimidation is used by 4. The taking away must be with lewd designs
designs liberty
offender. If the offended party is under 12 years, old it is automatically forcible abduction.
• It may be accomplished by means of deceit first then by means FORCIBLE ABDUCTION AND RAPE
of violence and intimidation. TAKING AWAY
• There can only be one complex crime of forcible abduction
• But if the female abducted is under 12 years old, the crime is • The taking away of the girl need not be with some character
with rape.
forcible abduction, even if she voluntarily goes with her of permanence
o All the other acts of rape are considered separate
abductor. It is not necessary to take her against her will. o No matter how short is the taking away, the crime
crimes
exists
o Forcible abduction is necessary only for the first
LEWD DESIGNS rape. • The offended party need not be taken from her house
• Lewd designs may be shown by the conduct of the accused. • There is no crime of forcible abduction with attempted rape • The abductor need not actually and personally have taken the
o Sex is not necessary. o The attempt to rape is absorbed by the abduction, abducted female from her parent’s home, or induced her to
• Lewd designs may be present in hurried ceremony of marriage being the lewd design of the latter. abandon it
by force. o It is sufficient that he was instrumental in her escape
• Commission of other crimes during the confinement of victim
o This is true when the ceremony is merely an artifice o The shock, anxiety, shame, and evils suffered by the
is immaterial to charge of kidnapping with serious illegal
by which the accused sought to escape the criminal family are not greater when the starting point of the
detention.
consequences of his acts. abduction is the home where she lives than when it
• Note that rape may absorb forcible abduction if the main has its beginning somewhere else.
o This is also true when the offender knows that the
objective was to rape the victim.
girl cannot legally give consent because of minority. • The accused must be an active physical agency instrumental in
o But intention to marry does not constitute unchaste causing the female to leave or abandon her house.
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION V ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
designs when both defendant and the woman have • When there was no solicitation or cajolery and no deceit and
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION LASCIVIOUSNESS
the required age for consenting to the marriage. the girl voluntarily went with the man, there is no crime
• When there are several defendants, it is enough that one of committed even if they had sex.
them had lewd designs.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 114

Crimes against chastity
Purpose of the law. The purpose of the law is to prescribe punishment
for the disgrace to her family and the alarm caused by the disappearance
of the one who is, by her age and sex, susceptible of cajolery and deceit.
Chapter Five: PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO
THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS OF TITLE
ELEVEN
ARTICLE 344
Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and
acts of lasciviousness. - The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not
be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without
including both the guilty parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any
case, if he shall have consented or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed
by the offended party or her parents, grandparents, or guardian ,
nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by the
above named persons, as the case may be.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and rape,
the marriage of the offender with the offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already
imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph shall also be
applicable to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the
fact of the above-mentioned crimes.
PROSECUTION OF CRIMES
1. Adultery and concubinage- complaint signed by the offended
spouse
2. Seduction, abduction, rape, acts of lasciviousness- complaint
signed by:
a. Offended party
b. Her parents
c. Grandparents
d. Or guardians in the order they are named above.
3. Prostitution- may be prosecuted de oficio because she
committed an offense against public morals, or moral
degeneracy far exceeding that involved in the maintenance of
adulterous relations.
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY CANNOT BE
PROSECUTED DE OFICIO
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• This means that the state cannot file an action in behalf of the
offended party
• This is out of consideration for the offended woman and her
family who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather
than go through the scandal of a public trial.
• But since rape is now a crime against persons, it may be
prosecuted de oficio.
o It may even be filed by any person
PROSECUTION OF ADULTERY AND CONCUBINAGE
• Both parties, if both alive, must be included in the complaint
• Both parties must be included even if one of them is not guilty.
o It is not for the offended spouse to determine guilt
or innocence.
PROSECUTION OF SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, RAPE,
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
• The offended party has the right to institute prosecution
independently of her parents, grandparents, or guardians, even
if she is a minor, unless she is incompetent or incapable of
doing so based on other grounds other than minority.
• But if the offended party is of age and is in complete
possession of her mental and physical faculties, she alone can
file the complaint.
• The father is not preferred to the mother in the filing of the
complaint.
o But this rule applies only when the mother instituted
the action without contradiction from the father.
• The guardian is one legally appointed by the court, not the
natural guardian
o It is sufficient that a person affirms under oath that
he is the guardian of the minor
• The complaint, which must be signed by the offended party,
must be filed in court, not with the fiscal.
• When complexed with another crime, complaint need not be
signed by the offended woman.
o In case of a complex crime where one of the
component offenses is a public crime, the criminal
prosecution may be instituted by the fiscal
o The reason is because the public crime affects public
interest, which is always paramount to private
interest.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
PARDON IN CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
ADULTERY/CONCUBINAGE
Pardon is a bar to prosecution
• Express or implied pardon
• Both offenders must be pardoned
• Parent of offender cannot pardon on behalf of the offended
party
• When there is consent, neither of the spouses can prosecute
the other for adultery or concubinage
o Consent gives the parties unbridled license for the
commission of adultery or concubinage
o Agreement to live separately is an example.
o Note that consent is given before the commission of
the crime while pardon is given after.
• But condonation is not the same as pardon
o It is based upon the presumption and belief that the
guilty party has repented.
o Any subsequent acts of the offender showing that
there was no repentance will not bar prosecution.
• Mere delay in the filing of the complaint does not indicate
pardon if it is satisfactorily explained
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, RAPE, ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
• Express pardon only
• Parent of offender cannot pardon on behalf of the offended
party
o It is only when the offended party is dead or
otherwise incapacitated to grant pardon that her
parents, grandparents, or guardians may do it in her
behalf.
• Pardon by the offended party who is a minor must have the
concurrence of parents.
o But when the offended girl has no parents who could
concur, she can validly extend a pardon despite her
minority.
• Marriage of the offender with the offended party extinguishes
criminal action or remits the penalty already imposed
o This benefits the co-principals, accomplices, and
accessories.
▪ But note that in rape, only the offender
who was married by the offended party is
benefited.
115
Crimes against chastity ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

o Actual marriage, and not mere intent to marry
extinguishes the criminal liability
o The marriage must be entered into in good faith and
with the intent of fulfilling marital obligations
ARTICLE 345
Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes against chastity. - Person 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 so doing.
3. In every case to support the offspring.
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided for in Articles 333
and 334 may also be sentenced, in the same proceeding or in a separate
civil proceeding, to indemnify for damages caused to the offended
spouse.
CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS GUILTY OF RAPE,
SEDUCTON, OR ABDUCTION
1. To indemnify the offended woman.
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should prevent
him from so doing.
3. In every case to support the offspring.
• In multiple rape, all the accused must support the
offspring.
Under the RPC, there is no civil liability for acts of lasciviousness.
• Article 2219 of the Civil Code provides that moral damages 5. Any other person who cooperates as accomplice by abuse of
may be recovered in seduction, abduction, rape, or other authority or confidential relationships,
lascivious acts, as well as in adultery and concubinage.
• The offended party and her parents may recover moral
damages.
CIVIL LIABILITY IN RAPE. In rape of a married woman, only
indemnity is allowed. The defendant cannot be sentenced to
acknowledge or support the offspring if the woman or the man is
married.
ARTICLE 346
Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers, or other persons entrusted with the
custody of the offended party. - The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers
and any person who, by abuse of authority or confidential relationships,
shall cooperate as accomplices in the perpetration of the crimes
embraced in chapters, second, third and fourth, of this title, shall be
punished as principals.
Teachers or other persons in any other capacity entrusted with the
education and guidance of youth, shall also suffer the penalty of
temporary special disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual
special disqualification.
Any person falling within the terms of this article, and any other person
guilty of corruption of minors for the benefit of another, shall be
punished by special disqualification from filling the office of guardian.

CIVIL LIABILITY OF ADULTERER AND CONCUBINE COVERED CRIMES

The adulterer and the concubine can be sentenced only to indemnify 1. Rape
for damages caused to the offended spouse. 2. Acts of lasciviousness
Reason: Acknowledgment of the offspring is not legally possible, 3. Qualified seduction
because only children born of parents who could marry at the time of 4. Simple seduction
conception may be acknowledged. 5. Acts of lasciviousness with consent of the offended party
• But note that there is no further need for the prohibition 6. Corruption of minors
against the acknowledgement of the offspring by the offender 7. White slave trade
who is married because under the New Family Code, children 8. Forcible abduction
are classified only as legitimate or illegitimate, with no further 9. Consented abduction
positive act required of the parent as the law itself provides
the child’s status. ACCOMPLICES BUT LIABLE AS PRINCIPAL
1. Ascendants
MORAL DAMAGES 2. Guardians
3. Curators,
4. Teachers and

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 116

Crimes against civil status of persons
Title Twelve: CRIMES AGAINST THE
CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
Chapter one: SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS
ARTICLE 347
Simulation of births, substitution of one child for another and concealment or
abandonment of a legitimate child.
The SIMULATION of births and the SUBSTITUTION of one
child for another shall be punished by prision mayor and a fine of not
exceeding 1,000 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person who shall
CONCEAL or ABANDON any legitimate child with intent to cause
such child to lose its civil status.
Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in violation of the
duties of his profession or office, shall cooperate in the execution of
any of the crimes mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs, shall
suffer the penalties therein prescribed and also the penalty of temporary
special disqualification.
ACTS PUNISHABLE
The commission of any of the acts defined in this provision must have for its object
the creation of a false civil status. The purpose is to cause the loss of any trace
as to the filiation of the child.
1. Simulation of births
SIMULATION OF BIRTH takes place when the woman pretends
to be pregnant when in fact she is not, and on the day of the supposed
delivery, takes the child of another as her own.
• Both the woman who simulates birth and the one who
furnishes the child are responsible as principals.
• Mere pretending is not enough. The simulation which is a
crime is that which alters the civil status of a person. A woman
who pretends to be pregnant just to prove sterility but does
not in fact introduce a child into the family is not enough.
• The fact that the child will be benefited by the simulation is
not a defense.
2. Substitution of one child for another
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
• This may be committed by switching children or by placing a
live child of a woman in place of a dead child of another
woman.
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with
intent to cause such child to lose its civil status
Elements
a. Child is legitimate
b. Offender conceals or abandons such child
c. Offender has intent to cause such child to lose its civil
status
ABANDONMENT is leaving the child at a public place where other
people may find it, causing the child to lose its civil status. Thus, a father
who sells his child to a Chinese couple for money is not liable under
this article.
• The child must be legitimate and a fully developed and living
being, as the child born not capable of living has no status nor
can he transmit any right whatsoever.
ABANDONMENT IN ARTICLE 276 V 347
ARTICLE 276 ARTICLE 347
CRIME AGAINST CRIME AGAINST CIVIL
SECURITY STATUS
Offender has custody of a child Offender is any person.
under 7 years old
Purpose is to avoid the Purpose is to cause the child to
obligation of rearing and caring lose its civil status
for the child
ARTICLE 348
Usurpation of civil status
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall USURP THE CIVIL STATUS of another, should he do so for
the purpose of defrauding the offended party or his heirs; otherwise,
the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods
shall be imposed.
Notes:
1. USURPING THE CIVIL STATUS of another is
committed by representing himself to be another and
assuming the filiation, or the parental or conjugal rights of
another.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. CIVIL STATUS includes one’s public station, or the rights,
duties, and capacities and incapacities which determine a
person to a given class. Hence, usurpation of profession
may be punished under Article 348.
3. There must be intent to enjoy the rights arising from the civil
status of another. Otherwise, the offender is liable only under
Article 178 for assuming or using fictitious name, or under
Article 315 for estafa.
4. Usurpation of civil status is punishable regardless of the
purpose. But if the purpose is to defraud the offended party
or his heirs, the penalty is higher.
Chapter Two: ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
ARTICLE 349
Bigamy.
The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former
marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has
been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered
in the proper proceedings.
Elements
1. Offender has been legally married
2. Marriage has not been legally dissolved or the absent spouse
could not yet be presumed dead
3. Offender contracts a second or subsequent marriage
4. Second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites
for validity
Notes:
1. Nullity of prior marriage is not a defense in bigamy
charge. For void marriages, there must be a prior judicial
declaration of nullity before contracting a second marriage,
otherwise the second marriage will be void. The parties cannot
be allowed to presume the nullity of their marriage.
2. Judicial declaration of nullity AFTER contracting
subsequent marriage. The subsequent declaration of nullity
does not exculpate one from liability because at the time the
subsequent marriage was celebrated, bigamy was already
consummated.
3. Prior declaration of nullity, the validity of first marriage
is beyond question. Only the courts have the authority to
judge the nullity of a previous marriage. All that is required for
1
Crimes against civil status of persons
the charge of bigamy to prosper is that the first marriage be
subsisting at the time the second marriage is contracted.
4. Legally dissolved. The following may cause the legal
dissolution of the first marriage.
a. Death of one of the contracting parties
b. Judicial declaration of nullity of a void marriage
c. Judicial decree annulling a voidable marriage
5. Presumptive death. The absent spouse is presumed dead if
he has been absent for 4 consecutive years and the spouse
present had a well-founded belief that he is already dead. In
case of disappearance where there is danger of death, an
absence of only 2 years will be sufficient. But in all cases, a
declaration of presumptive death should first be obtained
from the courts.
6. Second marriage must have all the essential requisites for
validity. This means that the second marriage would have
been valid were it not for the subsistence of the first marriage.
But if the second marriage was void based on grounds other
than the existence of the first valid marriage (psychological
incapacity, minority, etc.), there is legally no second marriage
and therefore there can be no bigamy.
7. Judgment of annulment precludes verdict of guilt in a
charge for bigamy. Thus, if the second marriage is annulled,
8. Second spouse is not necessarily liable for bigamy.
However, the second spouse who knew of first marriage is an
accomplice.
9. Witness who falsely vouched for the capacity of either of
the contracting parties is also an accomplice. But if the
witness merely attested to the marriage ceremony and did not
vouch nor assert anything as to the personal condition of the
contracting parties, he is not liable.
10. A person convicted of bigamy may still be prosecuted for
concubinage. Concubinage and bigamy are 2 distinct
offenses.
ARTICLE 350
Marriage contracted against provisions of laws.
The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods shall be imposed upon any person who, without being included
in the provisions of the next proceeding article, shall contract marriage
knowing that the requirements of the law have not been complied
with or that the marriage is in disregard of a legal impediment.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the consent of the
other by means of violence, intimidation or fraud, he shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty provided in the next
preceding paragraph.
Elements
1. Offender contracted marriage
2. He knew at the time that-
a. The requirements of the law have not yet been
complied with
b. Marriage was in disregard of a legal impediment.
Notes:
1. Offender must not be guilty of bigamy. The law says without
being included in the provisions of the next preceding article.
2. Qualifying circumstances. If either of the contracting
parties shall obtain the consent of the other by means of
violence, intimidation, or fraud, the penalty is in the
maximum.
3. Requirements for a valid marriage. These can be found in
Articles 2 and 3 of the Family Code.
a. Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a
male and a female.
b. Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing
officer
c. Authority of the solemnizing officer
d. A valid marriage license, except in marriages of
exceptional character.
e. A marriage ceremony which takes place with the
appearance of the contracting parties before the
solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that
they take each other as husband and wife in the presence
of not less than 2 witnesses of legal age.
Relevance: The knowledge of the absence of essential
requisites for the validity of a marriage makes one liable under
this article.
4. Conviction of a violation of Article 350 involves moral
turpitude.
ARTICLE 351
Premature marriages
Any widow who shall marry within three hundred and one days from
the date of the DEATH of her husband, or before having delivered if
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
she shall have been pregnant at the time of his death, shall be punished
by arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos.
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any woman whose marriage
shall have been annulled or dissolved, if she shall marry before her
delivery or before the expiration of the period of three hundred and
one day after the LEGAL SEPARATION.
ARTICLE 3 HAS BEEN REPEALD BY RA 10655, AN ACT
REPEALING THE CRIME OF PREMATURE MARRIAGES.
Notes:
1. 301 days relevant only if the woman is not pregnant.
2. 301 days may be disregarded if the first husband was impotent
or sterile.
ARTICLE 352
Performance of illegal marriage ceremony
Priests or ministers of any religious denomination or sect, or civil
authorities who shall PERFORM or AUTHORIZE any illegal
marriage ceremony shall be punished in accordance with the
provisions of the Marriage Law.
Notes:
1. Offender must be authorized to solemnize marriages.
This provision presupposes that the priest or minister or civil
authority is authorized to solemnize marriages. If he has no
such authority, he is liable under Article 177.
2. Marriage ceremony. Article 6 of the Family Code provides
that no prescribed form or religious rite for the solemnization
of the marriage is required. However, the law sets minimum
requirements constituting a marriage ceremony, which are: (1)
personal appearance of the contracting parties before a
solemnizing office and (2) their declaration in the presence of
not less that 2 witnesses that they take each other as husband
and wife. Hence, if these acts are performed, it is said to be a
marriage ceremony.
3. A clergyman who performed a marriage ceremony, not
knowing that one of the contracting parties is a minor, is
not liable. If a man, desiring to marry a woman, may be
excused from criminal prosecution upon the ground that he
has been deceived and mistaken as to her age, it would seem
that the clergyman, who knows neither of the parties and must
rely on an independent investigation to determine their
2
Crimes against civil status of persons ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

respective ages, would be in a far better position to invoke the

protection of the principle than would the husband.

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 3

quasi offenses
Title Thirteen
CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
Chapter One: LIBEL
Section One
Definitions, forms, and punishment of this crime.
ARTICLE 353
Definition of libel
A libel is PUBLIC and MALICIOUS imputation of a crime, or of a
vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status,
or circumstance 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. The imputation must be malicious
4. The imputation must be directed to a natural or juridical
person or one who is dead
5. The imputation must tend to case the dishonor, discredit or
contempt of the person defamed
Why libel is punished: The law recognizes the enjoyment of private
reputation as much a constitutional right as the possession of life,
liberty, or property.
1. DEFAMATION. This includes libel and slander. It is the
offense of injuring a person’s character, fame or reputation
through false and malicious statements. It is an invasion of a
relational interest since it involves the opinion which others in
the community may have, or tend to have, of the plaintiff. Note
that under Article 353, the proper term is defamation and not libel.
a. LIBEL- this is defamation by means of writing,
printing, lithography, and other means in Article 355.
But seditious libel is punished in Article 142.
b. SLANDER- this is defamation committed orally.
This is punished under Article 358.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
2. Test of defamatory character of the words used. The
words must be construed in their entirety and taken in their
plain, natural, and ordinary meaning as they would naturally be
understood by persons reading them, unless it appears that
they were used and understood in another sense. Novicio v
Aggabao
• Words calculated to induce suspicion are
sometimes more effective to destroy reputation
than false charges directly made. A charge is
sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the
hearers to suppose and understand that the person
to whom they were uttered was guilty of certain
offenses, or sufficient to impeach the honesty, virtue
or reputation or to hold him up for public ridicule.
US v O’Connell
• Meaning of the writer is immaterial. It is not the
intention of the writer or speaker or the
understanding of the plaintiff or of any hearer or
reader that is relevant in determining the actionable
quality of the words. Rather, it is the meaning that
the words in fact conveyed on the minds of
persons of reasonable understanding, discretion
and candor, taking into consideration the
surrounding circumstances which were known
to the hearer or reader.
3. Imputation of a crime. This may be implied from the acts
and statements of the accused. For example, the accused utters
the following words loudly and in the presence of many
people: tayong dalawa lang naman ang pumunta dito, tapos pagka-alis
mo nawala na agad yung pera ko. The accused did not directly call
the offended party a thief, but the implication of her acts and
statements are to that effect.
• But note that the imputation of a criminal
intention is not libelous.
• An expression of opinion by one affected by the act
of another and based on actual fact is not libelous if
it is made in the performance of a legal, moral, or
social duty.
4. PUBLICATION. This is the communication of the
defamatory matter to some third person or persons. A third
person is any person other than the writer or the person
defamed.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
• There is publication of defamatory letter if it is not
shown that such letter was sealed before it was sent
to the addressee.
• Mere composition of a libel is not actionable unless
it is published.
• The communication of the libelous matter to the
person defamed alone does not amount to
publication, for that cannot conjure his reputation.
A man’s reputation is the estimate in which others
hold him, and not the good opinion that he has of
himself. People v Atencio
5. MALICE. This means that the offender is prompted by
personal ill-will or spite and speaks not in response to duty,
but merely to injure the reputation of the person defamed.
a. Malice in law- this is presumed from a defamatory
information. It is not required to prove malice in law.
However, this presumption is only rebuttable and
may be overcome by proof of truth, good intention
and justifiable motive. This is true even if the
publication is injurious.
b. Malice in fact- in cases where malice in law is not
presumed (privileged communication under Article
354), malice in fact must be proved by proof of ill-
will, hatred, or purpose to injure.
6. Identification of the offended party is required, but it is
not required that he be named. It is not sufficient that the
offended party recognized himself as the person attacked or
defamed. It must be shown that at least a third person could
identify him as the object of libelous publication.
• Libel published in different parts may be taken
together to establish the identification of the
offended party.
• If the matter charged as libelous is only an incident
in an act which has another objective, the crime is
not libel.
Example: The chief of police, in good faith, filed a
complaint against X for illegal possession of drugs.
X was later on acquitted. The charge cannot be said
to be libelous because the imputation of a crime was
merely an incident in the making of the complaint
intended to cause a punishment of the violation of
the law.
1
quasi offenses
• The statements must be all-embracing or sufficiently
specific for the victim to be identifiable.
Kunkle v Cablenews-American
An article was published, describing a Chinese society whose
aim was to induce the Chinese to boycott Japanese goods as
having offered money in a secret meeting for the life of the
Chinese consul-general.
Doctrine: Defamatory imputations directed at a class or
group of persons in general language are not actionable
by individuals composing the class or group unless the
statements are sweeping.
7. Dishonor, discredit, contempt.
a. Dishonor- disgrace, shame, or ignominy
b. Discredit- loss of credit or reputation; disesteem
c. Contempt- state of being despised
8. A libel on two or more persons contained in one writing and
published as a single act constitutes but one offense so as to
warrant a single indictment therefor. Hence, if utterance is
made one against a family of lawyers (you, Merrerra lawyers, are
stealers…shameless…impolite) designated by their common
surname, not separately mentioned, there is only one offense.
ARTICLE 354
Requirement for publicity
Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it
be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is
shown, except in the following cases:
1. A private communication made by any person to another in
the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any
comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other
official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of
any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings,
or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise
of their functions.
SIMPLIFIED
General rule: There is a presumption of malice every time a defamatory
imputation is published. This is malice in law and need not be proved
as it is presumed. But this presumption can be overcome if the
following are proved:
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
a. It is true (in case the law allows proof of the truth of the
imputation)
b. There is good intention for publication
c. There is justifiable motive for publication
Exception: No presumption of malice arises in privileged
communications. The defense of QUALIFIEDLY privileged
communication can be overcome if the following are proved:
a. The defendant acted with malice in fact or
b. There is no reasonable ground to believe the charge to be true.
There are 2 kinds of privileged communication:
a. Absolutely privileged communication- this is not
actionable even if the author has acted in bad faith.
1) Statements made by members of Congress in the
discharge of their functions as such
2) Official communications made by public officers in
the performance of their duties
3) Allegations or statements made by the parties or
their counsel in their pleadings or motions or during
the hearing in judicial proceedings, provided that the
allegations or statements are relevant to the issue.
4) Answers given by witnesses in response to questions
propounded to them in the course of judicial
proceedings, provided that the answers are pertinent
to the questions propounded.
b. Conditionally or qualifiedly privileged communication-
these are actionable only if malice or bad faith is proved. These
are enumerated under Article 354.
c. Fair commentaries on matters of public interest. The
enumeration in Article 354 is not an exclusive list of qualifiedly
privileged information but is rendered more expansive by the
constitutional guarantee of the freedom of the press. Fair
commentaries on matters of public interest are likewise
privileged, as established in Borjal v CA.
#1.
PRIVATE COMMUNICATION IN PERFORMANCE OF
LEGAL, MORAL, OR SOCIAL DUTY
Elements
1. The person who made the communication had a legal, moral
or social duty to make the communication, or at least, he had
an interest to be upheld.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. The communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or
superior, having some interest or duty in the matter.
3. The statements are made in good faith and without malice.
Notes:
1. This exemption is grounded in the fact that it is the right and
duty of a citizen to make a complaint of any misconduct of
the part of public officials to those charged with the
supervision over them. However, if proved to be malicious,
it can be libelous. But note that the privilege covers also complaints
against individuals who are not public officers, like the priests.
2. The communication need not be in a private document to be
considered private communication.
3. Unnecessary publicity destroys good faith. Accusation
aired in a public meeting is not private communication.
4. Legal duty. This presupposes a provision of law conferring
upon the accused the duty to communicate.
5. Moral duty. This depends upon the relationship between the
giver and receiver of the communication and whether said
communication is voluntarily given or not.
• Example: The members of a religious organization
have a moral duty to bring to the attention of the
church authorities such misbehavior of their spiritual
leaders or fellow members.
6. Social duty. This depends upon the relationship between the
sender and recipient of the communication.
7. Note that the communication must be addressed to an officer
or superior having some interest or duty in the matter. But
communication to the wrong person due to honest mistake
does not take the case out of the privilege.
8. Malice in fact. Malice in fact may be shown by extrinsic
evidence that the defendant bore a grudge against the
offended party, or that there is rivalry or ill-feeling between
them at the time of publication, or that there was an intent to
injure the reputation of the other as shown by the words and
surrounding circumstances attending the publication.
9. Reasonable ground for believing the charge to be true.
When the defendant admitted that he had personally made no
investigation with reference to the truth of the statements he
made, he had no reasonable ground for believing the charge
made by him to be true. But probable cause for belief in
the truth of the matter charged is sufficient.
#2.
2
quasi offenses
FAIR AND TRUE REPORT
Elements
1. That it is a fair and true report of judicial, legislative or other
official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of
any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings,
or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise
of their functions.
2. It is made in good faith
3. It is without any comments or remarks
Notes:
1. Fair and true report. This means narrating only what had
taken place. In this case, even if what had been reported is
libelous, and even if some errors had been committed in the
process of the publication, the presumption of malice is
overcome by the privilege.
2. Notes on judicial proceedings:
a. True report on judicial proceedings is qualifiedly
privileged. Malice must be shown in order for it to
be actionable.
b. Allegations and averments in pleadings are
absolutely privileged but only in so far as they are relevant
or pertinent to the issues.
c. Parties, counsel, and witnesses are exempted from
liability in libel or slander for words otherwise
defamatory published in the courts of judicial
proceedings, provided that the same are pertinent or relevant
to the case.
d. An action for libel on a defamatory matter uttered in
the course of a judicial proceeding might be
instituted even if the defamatory matter had not yet
been stricken out of the record. An action for libel
accrues from the date of publication.
3. Legislative proceedings. These include proceedings of the
committees of the Congress of the PH. Records of these
proceedings may be published provided that they are not
confidential in nature and no remarks or comments are made.
4. Other official proceedings. These proceedings refer to the
official proceedings by other public officers in the exercise of
their functions.
5. Only matters not confidential of nature may be published.
6. Truth is a defense with respect to imputation made against
government employees with respect to facts related to the
discharge of their duties.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
#3.
FAIR COMMENTARIES ON MATTERS OF PUBLIC
INTEREST
1. A matter of public interest is a common property. Hence,
anybody may express an opinion on it.
2. DOCTRINE OF FAIR COMMENT. While in general,
every discreditable imputation publicly made is deemed false,
because every man is presumed innocent until his guilt is
judicially proved, and every false imputation is deemed
malicious, nevertheless, when discreditable imputation is
directed against a public person in his public capacity, it is
not necessarily actionable.
• In order that a discreditable imputation to a public
official may be actionable, it must either be a false
allegation of a fact or a comment based upon a
false supposition.
• Defamatory remarks and comments on the conduct
or acts of public officers which are related to the
discharge of their official duties will not constitute
libel if the defendant proves the truth of the
imputation.
3. Fair comments on qualifications of candidates. The
mental, moral, and physical fitness of candidates for public
office may be the object of comment and criticism. But if it
appears that it was actuated by actual or express malice, and is
defamatory in its nature, the comment or criticism constitutes
criminal libel.
4. Criticism or defamation. CRITICISM deals only with such
things as invite public attention or call for public comment.
DEFAMATION is criticism that follows a public officer into
his private life which has no connection with the performance
of his public duties, and falsely charges him with evil motives,
clearly designed to destroy his reputation or besmirch his
name.
5. A person libeled is justified to hit back with another libel.
Self-defense is a man’s inborn right. In physical assaults,
retaliation becomes unlawful after the attack has ceased. But
it is not the case when it is aimed at a person’s good name.
Once the aspersion is ceases, its sting clings and the one thus
defamed may avail himself of all necessary means to shake it
off. He may hit back with another libel which, if adequate, will
be justified.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
Rule: The defamatory statements made by the accused
must be fair answer to the libel made by the supposed
offended party and must be related to the imputation
made. The answer should not be unnecessarily libelous.
6. Statements made in self-defense or in mutual controversy are
often privileged.
Rule: To repel the attack, the defendant may make an
explanation of the imputation and it is only where, if by
explaining, he must of necessity have to sue scurrilous
and slanderous remarks, that he may legally be allowed
to do so without placing himself under criminal
prosecution.
ARTICLE 355
Libel means by writings or similar means.
A libel committed by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving,
radio, phonograph, painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic
exhibition, or any similar means, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods or a fine ranging from
200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in addition to the civil action which may
be brought by the offended party.
Libel may be committed by means of:
1. Writing
2. Printing
3. Lithography
4. Engraving
5. Radio
6. Phonograph
7. Painting
8. Theatrical exhibition
9. Cinematographic exhibition
10. Or any similar means
ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR 08-2008
Guidelines in the Observance of a Rule of Preference in the
Imposition of Penalties in Libel Cases
1. The circular does not remove imprisonment as an alternative
penalty for the crime of libel.
2. The judges concerned may, in the exercise of sound discretion
and taking into consideration the peculiar circumstances of
each case, determine whether the imposition of a fine alone
would best serve the interest of justice or whether the
3
quasi offenses
forbearing to impose imprisonment would depreciate the
seriousness of the offense.
3. Should only a fine be imposed and the accused be unable to
pay the fine, there is not legal obstacle to the application of
the provisions of RPC on subsidiary imprisonment.
Note: When threats and libel are committed on the same occasion and
contained in the same letter, the nature of such letter must be
considered.
• In the case of People v Yebra, the letter was more threatening
than libelous, intent to threaten being its principal aim and
object. The offender was found guilty of threats, the
statements derogatory to a person named did not constitute
and independent crime of libel.
ARTICLE 356
Threatening to publish and offer to present such publication for a compensation
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 2,000 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon any person who threatens another to publish a
libel concerning him or the parents, spouse, child, or other members of
the family of the latter or upon anyone who shall offer to prevent the
publication of such libel for a compensation or money consideration.
ACTS PUNISHED
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning him or the
parents, spouse, child, or other members of the family of the
latter
• This is also known as blackmail. BLACKMAIL is
any unlawful extortion of money by threats of
accusation or exposure.
• Depending on the nature of the action, blackmailing
may either be light threats or under this article.
2. Offering to prevent the publication of such libel for a
compensation or money consideration
ARTICLE 357
Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official proceedings.
The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to 2,000 pesos, or both,
shall be imposed upon any REPORTER, EDITOR or MANAGER
of a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall publish facts connected
with the private life of another and offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person, even though said publication be made in
connection with or under the pretext that it is necessary in the narration
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
of any judicial or administrative proceedings wherein such facts have
been mentioned.
Elements
1. The offender is a REPORTER, EDITOR or MANAGER
of a newspaper, daily or magazine
2. He publishes facts connected with the private life of another
3. Such facts are offensive to the honor, virtue, and reputation
of said person.
Note that the penalty is on the publishing reporter, editor or manager, and not the
one who wrote the statements.
Example: D uttered defamatory remarks calling a priest savage, a
carabao, that he had a concubine, and that he collected alms for himself,
not for the town. While the case was pending trial, the local weekly
edited by Diño published the complaint verbatim including the
defamatory expressions made by D.
• The matter contained in the complaint made by the priest
against D is libelous per se and affects the private life of the
priest. Diño is liable.
• Note that had the offended party been a person holding a
public office and the acts imputed had relation to the
discharge of his official duties, the situation would be different
in view of the fact that such communication would be
classified as privileged.
Notes:
1. Prohibition applies even if the facts are involved in
official proceedings. This means that the publication is
punished even of it is made in connection with or under the
pretext that it is necessary in the narration of any judicial or
administrative proceedings.
2. Connected with the private life. These are facts that are
intimately related to one’s family and home, such as conjugal
troubles and quarrels, adultery or divorce based on the
infidelity of the husband or the wife and attempts against the
honor and virtue of a woman. These do not at all interest or
please the intelligent and educated class of newspaper readers.
3. Source of news may not be revealed. Without prejudice to
his liability under the civil and criminal laws, the publisher,
editor, columnist or duly accredited reporter of any
newspaper, magazine or periodical cannot be compelled to
reveal the source of any news report or information appearing
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
in said publication which was related in confidence to such
publisher, editor, or reporter unless the court or a House
Committee of Congress finds that such revelation is
demanded by the security of the State.
ARTICLE 358
Slander
Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in its minimum period if it is of a serious
and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos.
Notes:
1. SLANDER. This is oral defamation. This is committed by
oral means instead of in writing. It may either be simple
slander or grave slander, when it is of a serious and insulting
nature.
2. Factors that determine the gravity of oral defamation.
a. Expressions used
b. Personal relations of the accused and the offended
party
c. Circumstances surrounding the case.
d. Social standing and the position of the offended
party
3. Grave slander example. Hurling offensive words imputing
unchastity to a respectable married lady with young daughters.
4. Simple slander example.
a. An accusation that the offended party has been living
successively and with several men uttered before
several persons, when intended to correct an
improper conduct of the offended party, made by a
kin of the accused.
b. Calling someone a gangster
c. Words uttered in the heat of anger, with some
provocation on the part of the offended party
5. The slander need not be heard by the offended party.
There is oral defamation even if other persons and not the
offended party heard the slanderous words, because a man’s
reputation is the estimate in which others hold him, not the
good opinion which he has of himself.
6. The word puta does not impute that the complainant is
a prostitute. It is but a mere expression in the dialect often
employed not to slander but rather to express anger or
displeasure.
4
quasi offenses
ARTICLE 359
Slander by deed
The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000
pesos shall be imposed upon any person who shall perform any ACT
not included and punished in this title, which shall cast DISHONOR,
DISCREDIT or CONTEMPT upon another person. If said act is
not of a serious nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not
exceeding 200 pesos.
Elements
1. Offender performs nay act no included in any other crime
against honor.
2. Such act is performed in the presence of another person or
persons
3. Such act casts dishonor, discredit, or contempt upon the
offended party.
Notes:
1. SLANDER BY DEED. This is a crime against honor which
is committed by performing any act which casts dishonor,
discredit, or contempt upon another person.
• It may either be simple or grave.
• There is no fixed standard in determining whether a
slander is serious or not. Hence, the courts have
sufficient discretion to determine the same, basing
the finding on the attendant circumstances and
matters relevant thereto.
2. Slander by deed refers to the performance of an act, not use
of words.
3. Example:
a. Slapping the face of another is slander by deed if the
intention of the accused is to cause shame and
humiliation.
b. Fighting the offended party with the intent to insult
him or bring him to the contempt of the public is
slander by deed.
c. Pointing a dirty finger constitutes simple slander by
deed.
d. Kissing a girl in public and touching her breast
without lewd designs committed by a rejected suitor
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW
to cast dishonor on the girl is not acts of
lasciviousness but slander by deed. The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of written
defamations as provided for in this chapter, shall be filed
4. Unjust vexation, slander by deed, and acts of simultaneously or separately with the court of first instance of the
lasciviousness distinguished province or city where the libelous article is printed and first published
Unjust Slander by Acts of or where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of the
Vexation deed lasciviousness commission of the offense: Provided, however, That where one of the
offended parties is a public officer whose office is in the City of
Common ground: irritation or annoyance Manila at the time of the commission of the offense, the action shall
be filed in the Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, or of the
No other In addition to In addition to city or province where the libelous article is printed and first published,
concurring irritation or irritation or and in case such public officer does not hold office in the City of
factor annoyance, annoyance, the Manila, the action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the
there is publicity circumstances in province or city where he held office at the time of the commission of
and dishonor or Article 335 (force the offense or where the libelous article is printed and first published
contempt or intimidation, and in case one of the offended parties is a private individual, the
deprivation of action shall be filed in the Court of First Instance of the province or
reason, etc.) are city where he actually resides at the time of the commission of the
offense or where the libelous matter is printed and first published:
present.
Provided, further, That the civil action shall be filed in the same
court where the criminal action is filed and vice versa: Provided,
5. When offended party’s complaint is not necessary. furthermore, That the court where the criminal action or civil action for
• General rule: Slander by deed may be prosecuted de damages is first filed, shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of other
officio. That is, without the complaint by the courts: And, provided, finally, That this amendment shall not apply to
offended party. cases of written defamations, the civil and/or criminal actions which
have been filed in court at the time of the effectivity of this law.
• Exception: Defamation imputing crimes which may
not be prosecuted de officio under Article 344
Preliminary investigation of criminal action for written defamations as
(adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape,
provided for in the chapter shall be conducted by the provincial or city
and acts of lasciviousness) must be prosecuted upon
fiscal of the province or city, or by the municipal court of the city or
complaint by the offended party.
capital of the province where such action may be instituted in
accordance with the provisions of this article.
Section Two
General provisions
No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of
a crime which cannot be prosecuted de oficio shall be brought except
ARTICLE 360
at the instance of and upon complaint expressly filed by the offended
Persons responsible
party. (As amended by R.A. 1289, approved June 15, 1955, R.A. 4363,
Any person who shall PUBLISH, EXHIBIT, or CAUSE THE
approved June 19, 1965).
PUBLICATION or EXHIBITION of any defamation in writing or
by similar means, shall be responsible for the same.
PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBEL
1. Person who publishes, exhibits, or causes the publication or
The AUTHOR or EDITOR of a book or pamphlet, or the EDITOR
exhibition of any defamation in writing or similar means.
or BUSINESS MANAGER of a daily newspaper, magazine or serial
2. Author or editor of a book or pamphlet.
publication, shall be responsible for the defamations contained therein
to the same extent as if he were the author thereof.
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 5
quasi offenses
3. Editor or business manager of a daily newspaper, magazine,
or serial publication.
4. The owner of the printing plant which publishes a libelous
article with his consent and all other persons who in any way
participate in or have connection with its publication. US v
Ortiz
Notes:
1. The person who publishes libelous letter written by the
offended party is liable.
A sent a love letter to B containing very intimate expressions
of sentiment which would be ridiculous to a 3 rd person. B
publishes said letter when they broke up. B is liable for libel.
the prime requisite of the crime of libel s not the composition
of the article, but the publishing thereof.
2. Liability of the editor is the same as that of the author,
3. Lack of participation in the preparation of libelous
articles does not shield the persons responsible for libel
from liability.
4. Municipal court of a municipality cannot conduct
preliminary investigation or criminal action for written
defamation.
• Preliminary investigation of criminal actions for
written defamations shall be conducted by the
provincial or city fiscal of the province or city or
capital of the province.
5. Civil and criminal actions must be filed in the same
court.
6. Offended party must file complaint for defamation
imputing a crime which cannot be prosecuted de oficio.
This applies to written and oral defamation. The crimes that
cannot be prosecuted de oficio are:
a. Adultery
b. Concubinage
c. Seduction
d. Abduction
e. Acts of lasciviousness
7. Libel imputing a vice or defect, not being an imputation
of a crime, is always prosecuted upon information signed
and filed by the fiscal. Only the imputation of a crime may
or may not be prosecuted de oficio. In vices or defects, there
is no such choice.
8. There is no remedy for damages for slander or libel in
case of absolutely privileged communication.
JO VALLES
ad majorem dei gloriam
VENUE OF CRIMINAL AND CIVIL ACTIONS FOR
DAMAGES IN WRITTEN DEFAMATIONS
General rule:
The criminal and civil action for damages in cases of written
defamations shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the court
of first instance of the province or city:
1. Where the libelous article is printed and first published or
2. Where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time
of the commission of the offense
Exceptions:
1. Where one of the offended parties is a public officer whose
office is in the City of Manila at the time of the commission
of the offense. the action shall be filed in
a. The Court of First Instance of the City of Manila, or
of
b. The city or province where the libelous article is
printed and first published
A libeled public officer must sue in the court of the locality where he holds
office in order that the prosecution of the action should interfere as little as
possible with the discharge of his official duties.
2. Where such public officer does not hold office in the City
of Manila, the action shall be filed in
a. The Court of First Instance of the province or city
where he held office at the time of the commission
of the offense or
b. Where the libelous article is printed and first
published
3. In case one of the offended parties is a private individual,
the action shall be filed in
a. The Court of First Instance of the province or city
where he actually resides at the time of the
commission of the offense or
b. Where the libelous matter is printed and first
published
ARTICLE 361
Proof of the truth
Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence.
CRIMINAL LAW
In every criminal prosecution for libel, the truth may be given in
evidence to the court and if it appears that the matter charged as libelous
is true, and, moreover, that it was published with good motives and for
justifiable ends, the defendants shall be acquitted.
Proof of the truth of an imputation of an act or omission not
constituting a crime shall not be admitted, unless the imputation
shall have been made against Government employees with respect to
facts related to the discharge of their official duties.
In such cases if the defendant proves the truth of the imputation made
by him, he shall be acquitted.
WHEN PROOF OF TRUTH IS ADMISSIBLE
1. When the act or omission imputed constitutes a crime,
regardless of whether the offended party is a private individual
or a public officer.
2. When the act or omission imputed does not constitute a
crime, and the offended party is a government employee,
provided that it is related to the discharge or his official duties.
Notes:
1. If the imputation involves the private life of a government
employee which is not related to the discharge of his official
duties, the offender cannot prove the truth thereof.
2. The proof of the truth of the accusation cannot be made to
rest upon mere hearsay, rumors or suspicion. It must rest
upon positive, direct evidence upon which a definite
finding may be made by the Court. But probable cause for
belief in the truth of the statement is sufficient.
3. Proof of truth not enough. Proof of good motives and
justifiable ends is necessary. Good motives and justifiable ends
constitute a defense insofar as they negate malice. There is no
libel if there is no malice.
• Good motives. Whether good motives exist is a
question to be determined by the court taking into
consideration not only the intention of the author of
the defamatory matter but all the other
circumstances of the case.
• Example: with good intention and justifiable
motive.
People v Chavez
A was a nurse who was treating a patient suffering
from gonorrhea and she believed that she was
6
quasi offenses ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

contaminated by her husband. She made the Incriminating innocent person 1. Intriguing against honor. This is committed by any person
following remarks, which was heard by other people: Any person who, by any act not constituting perjury, shall who shall make nay intrigue which has for its principal
This is the result of your foolishness, you contaminated your DIRECTLY incriminate or impute to an innocent person the purpose to blemish the honor or reputation of another person.
wife with venereal disease. commission of a crime, shall be punished by arresto menor. • This is any scheme or plot by means which consist
Held: The statement was done in private and only of some trickery.
as a precautionary measure to prevent further Elements • It is similar to slander by deed because the offender
contamination. Even if it was overheard, there was 1. Offender performs an act does not resort to written or spoken words.
no malice on the part of A. Further, this may be 2. Through such act he directly incriminates or imputes to an However, the offender uses some ingenious, crafty,
considered as a privileged communication innocent person the commission of a crime and secret plot, producing the same effect.
because as a registered nurse, she considered it her 3. Such act does not constitute perjury
duty to warn complainants of the dangers of the 2. Intriguing against honor vs slander
diseases from which they were suffering. Note: Intriguing against honor Slander
4. That the publication of the article was an honest mistake is not 1. This article is limited to planting evidence and the like, which
a complete defense but serves only to mitigate damages where do not in themselves constitute false prosecutions but tend Where the source or author Where the source of the
the article is libelous per se. directly to cause false prosecution. of information cannot be information can be
2. False accusation is defamation or perjury under the RPC, determined and the pinpointed and definitely
ARTICLE 362 depending upon the manner or form in which the act is defendant borrows the same determined, and the
Libelous remarks. committed.
and without subscribing to offender adopts the
Libelous remarks or comments connected with the matter privileged 3. There can be a complex crime of incriminating an innocent
the truth thereof, passes it to information as his own and
under the provisions of Article 354, if made with malice, shall not person through an unlawful arrest.
exempt the author thereof nor the editor or managing editor of a others, the defendant’s act is passes the same to another
• This is possible when the offender, after unlawfully
newspaper from criminal liability. one of intriguing against for the purpose of causing
arresting the offended party, plants evidence during
the investigation after the arrest. honor. dishonor to complainant’s
LIABILITY OF NEWSPAPER REPORTER FOR 4. Incriminating an innocent person vs perjury by making reputation, it is slander.
DISTORTING FACTS CONNECTED WITH OFFICIAL false accusation.
PROCEEDINGS Incriminating an innocent Perjury by making false
• The reporter of a newspaper publication, in publishing what person accusation
passes in a court of justice, must publish the whole case and Committed by performing an act The gravamen of the offense is
not merely state the conclusion which he himself draws from by which the offender directly the imputation itself, falsely
the evidence. incriminates or imputes to an made, before an officer
• The author or editor of publication who distorts, mutilates, innocent person the commission
or discolors the official proceedings reported by him, or add of a crime
comments thereon to cast aspersion on the character of the Limited to planting of evidence Giving of false statement under
parties concerned, is guilty of libel, notwithstanding the fact oath or the making of a false
that the defamatory matter is published in connection with affidavit, imputing to a person
privileged matter. Dorr v US the commission of the crime.
o Note: it is no longer a fair and true report covered by
the privilege. ARTICLE 364
Intriguing against honor.
Chapter Two The penalty of arresto menor or fine not exceeding 200 pesos shall be
imposed for any INTRIGUE which has for its principal purpose to
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS blemish the honor or reputation of a person.
ARTICLE 363 Notes:

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 7

Crimes against public interest ad majorem dei gloriam CRIMINAL LAW

Title Fourteen: QUASI-OFFENSES or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other
circumstances regarding persons, time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
cases in which the damage impending to be caused is not immediate
nor the danger clearly manifest.
ARTICLE 365
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in this article
Imprudence and negligence.
shall be imposed upon the offender who fails to lend on the spot to the
injured parties such help as may be in this hand to give. (As amended
Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which,
by R.A. 1790, approved June 21, 1957).
had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in
its medium period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony, the
penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be
imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto
menor in its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an
act which would otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods; if it would
have constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have only
resulted in damage to the property of another, the offender shall be
punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal to the value of said
damages to three times such value, but which shall in no case be less
than twenty-five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall be imposed
upon any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall cause
some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have constituted a light
felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall exercise their sound
discretion, without regard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or
lower than those provided in the first two paragraphs of this
article, in which case the court shall impose the penalty next
lower in degree than that which should be imposed in the
period which they may deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violation of
the Automobile Law, to death of a person shall be caused, in
which case the defendant shall be punished by prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without malice, doing
or falling to do an act from which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing of
failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment

JO VALLES Honor and Excellence. Honor before Excellence. 1