---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 114 - TREASON • Who may commit treason? FILIPINO CITIZEN • Where may he commit treason?

ANYWHERE • Are those who commit treason abroad criminally liable? YES • Why is it that a Filipino citizen may commit treason even if abroad? - Definition of treason; concept of allegiance • What allegiance is owed by a non-resident alien? • Why are penal laws territorial? • What is the territoriality principle?

• Does this violate the principle of territoriality? NO. See Par. 5, Art. 2 of the RPC (crimes committed against national security and the law of the nations; treason is a
crime against a national security, therefore it falls within the exceptions)

• Where may an alien commit treason? Only in the Philippines; he owes temporary allegiance to the govt. of the Phil. in return for protection he receives • What if he was once a Japanese and then he becomes a naturalized citizen, may he still be liable for treason? YES. There is no distinction made in Art. 114
 Supposing during time of war, a Chinese businessman, who has been residing in the Philippines for ten years, decides to visit China. While there, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? Supposing during time of war, a Chinese tourist visits the Philippines for three days. On his third day of stay, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? • How is treason committed? (1) By levying war against the government

• Should there be an actual military encounter with the govt. forces? Not necessarily • Can this be committed by just one person? NO; use of the word MEN in element #1 • Is it necessary that this assembly of men be armed? NO. There is no qualification in the law  Supposing the Phil. Govt. was at war with Japan. We were all unarmed and we were discussing ways and means of effectively delivering the govt. into the hands of
foreign power. Liable for treason? YES. Complied with elements of levying war (2) By adhering to the enemies and giving them aid • During the Japanese occupation, certain Filipinos were moving around, convincing the people that the principles of the govt. of Japan are better than that followed by the Phil. Treasonous? NO. there is only adherence in this case (adhering to the enemies and giving aid or comfort must concur)

 Suppose that during the Japanese occupation, you were a merchant engaged in the selling of weapons and you were having transactions with the Japanese.
Treasonous? YES. Adherence to the enemy may be implied by the nature of the act committed.

 Suppose you were engaged in a transportation business; Japanese hired your buses to transport their troops to another province. Liable? YES. It will directly
strengthen the enemy’s troops  Suppose you were a rice merchant supplying Japanese with rice. Liable? NO. Does not strengthen enemy; no adherence on your part  Supposing, during time of war, a young Filipina falls in love with a Japanese soldier. Is she liable for treason? What if she supplies names of guerrilla leaders to him?  Supposing a professor, during time of war, lectures about the advantages of having a government similar to the Japanese. Is he liable for treason?  Supposing a class, discuss and volunteer to do different means to help the Japanese (i.e. distribution of weapons, etc.) Are the members liable for treason? • Conviction of Treason (1) Confession of Guilt – plea of guilty Prosecution need not present evidence but may present it only to show the presence of AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE/S (2) Testimony of Two Witnessses with the same overt act • WHY? Because it carries with it penalty of death and it is committed in abnormal circumstance • Testimony of two witnesses to two different acts is not enough for conviction; testimony of two witnesses must be credible and believed by the court • Is it enough that there be two witnesses? –Depends: if testimony points to the same acts, it is enough that there are only two witnesses

• Is proof beyond reasonable doubt (PBRD) sufficient to convict the accused? NO. There is further requirement of two witnesses who should testify on the same overt
act (treason is the only felony in the entire RPC where PBRD is not sufficient) • Extrajudicial confession is not sufficient to convict a person of treason; confession must be made in open court • Prosecution of Treason

 Witness #1: saw personally the accused in the company of a Japanese major who went to the house of a guerrilla officer; saw the accused point at the guerrilla, and
the latter was tied and dragged. Witness #2: was walking in the farm locate across the brgy. hall; saw the jeep where the guerrilla officer was; saw him being dragged by the Japanese, after which they shot him.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Is the 2-witness rule complied with? NO.

 Suppose the prosecution presented three witnesses but the court gave credence only to one witness. Acquit or convict? Acquit for non-compliance with the 2witness rule. • • If the common crimes were committed and was in any way connected with the objectives of treason – liability is separate Accused was charged with treason and 10 acts of kidnapping with ransom: purpose of ransom was to finance their (treasonous) activities. Liability? Treason.


• How soon should the disclosure be made? Within a reasonable period which will depend on the judgement of the judge
• By any person? NO. refer to element #1 • Does this violate the principle of generality? Yes, it violates BUT this is an express exception by provision of the law

 Supposing, accused is prosecuted for MT; alleged in the info that being a

Filipino citizen, he owes permanent allegiance and having knowledge of persons who performed acts w/ the view of overthrowing the govt., he should have disclosed the same. Liable? NO. Knowledge was already about treason (in the first manner) and not mere conspiracy

 Supposing, accused is resident of a city; has knowledge of conspiracy; refused to disclose the matter to the mayor/fiscal because they are among the most corrupt;
disclose the matter directly to the AFP Chief of Staff. Liable for MT? NO. Even if the matter was not disclosed to the person/s specified in the law, there was no intent on the part of the accused not to disclose the info.  Supposing a witness sees a group of men, all unarmed, discussing means to commit treasonous acts against the government. He does not disclose what he sees to anyone. Liable? ARTICLE 117 - ESPIONAGE • Where may espionage in the first manner be committed (RPC)?  Suppose that the US donated armaments, etc. to the Phil. Govt. to be used for its war against Malaysia; arms were stored in a warehouse in Nueva Ecija; newspaper reporter without authority went inside the warehouse to take photos of the arms; was still 50 meters away from the warehouse when he was accosted. Liable? YES. Elements of first manner of committing the crime were present

 Supposing, a newspaper man who was accosted told the military officers that he wanted to take the photos of the modern warfare that he read in Remate (tabloid).
Liable? NO because what he intends to obtain is not anymore confidential; the matter has ceased to be confidential because of its previous publication

 Supposing, you climbed a tree to photograph confidential information. May you be held liable for espionage under the RPC? No. But you may be liable for
violation of CA 616.  May espionage be committed in the National Library? In the Benedictine Abbey?  Supposing you paid the janitor to obtain confidential information for you. Are you liable for espionage under the RPC? How about the janitor?

May espionage in the second manner be committed by a private person (RPC)? No.

 Supposing a high ranking military officer discloses confidential matters to a beauty contestant from another nation. Is he liable for espionage? Yes. The law does not distinguish foreign representative. ARTICLE 118 - INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVE FOR REPRISALS  Supposing protesters burn the US flag in front of the US embassy, are they liable? Does the act have a tendency to provoke war against US? • Does the raising of troops constitute inciting to war?

ARTICLE 119 - VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY ARTICLE 120 - CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY  Supposing Malaysia is at war with the Philippines. If a Filipina writes a love letter to a Malaysian sweetheart, is she liable for violation of Article 120? Without prohibition by the government? With prohibition by the government? What if the letter contains the drawing of a heart only? ARTICLE 121 - FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY • May this be committed by mere attempt to flee? YES ARTICLE 122 - PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS

• In what way is piracy under the RPC different from piracy under P.D. 532? Piracy under the RPC if committed by a stranger; Piracy under PD 532 if committed by
passenger or member of the crew • Which piracy falls under the law of the nations? • What constitutes high seas? Philippine waters?  May piracy be committed in the Pasig River? Waters under the Mendiola Bridge? Lake in Burnham Park? Floating restaurant?  Supposing you boarded a motor boat and a passenger ordered other passengers to give him their belongings. Is he liable for piracy? • What if persons from another boat commit the act of piracy. Which law will apply, RPC or P. D. 532?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ship from Manila to Cebu; while waiting for the departure of the ship, a person suddenly boarded the ship, pointed a knife at you, demanded that you give your
belongings after which, he got off. Crime committed? Piracy under RPC

 What if it was also a passenger of the ship who took your belongings? Piracy under PD 532  Floating casino in Manila Bay; while you were there, a person pointed a revolver at you and demanded that you give your winnings. Crime committed? –Common
robbery –floating casino is not within the definition of a vessel RA 6235 ANTI-HIJACKING LAW • Acts Punishable: (a) Aircraft of Phil. registry: (1) change in the course OR destination; (2) seize or usurp control thereof

 PAL from Manila to Davao: accused compelled the pilot to veer the plane a little to right for a couple of minutes. Violation? Yes –refers to a change in the course  Accused bribed the pilot to veer the plane in exchange for money. Violation? No - there is no compulsion (what is punished is the element of compulsion) •
• • Definition of “in flight”: from the moment external doors are closed following embarkation to the moment they are opened for disembarkation May a plane be considered in flight when the external doors have been closed but it is still on the ground because of engine problems? YES. Doors are already closed, passengers were already on board; but the pilot was still waiting for instructions from control tower; accused seized control of the plane. Violation? YES

 Suppose the doors have already been opened but the passengers have not come out; accused seized control of the plane. Violation? NO. Plane has seized to be in flight

 A group of skydivers on board a Phil. plane about to stage a skydiving exhibition in Luneta; at a latitude of about 15,000 ft., the door of the plane opened and the
skydivers jumped out; last person, instead of jumping, seized control of the plane. Violation? NO - legally speaking, the plane is no longer in flight, notwithstanding that it is actually flying (b) aircraft of foreign registry: (1) landing; (2) seize or usurp control thereof

Is it necessary that acts be done while the aircraft is in flight? NO, the law is silent

 Japan airlines, after it has landed, external doors were already opened, accused barged into the pilot’s cockpit and seized control of the plane. Liable? YES  Under the same facts, if plane if of Phi. Registry, liable? NO – no longer in flight (c) other acts: • Shipping, loading, carrying in any passenger aircraft operating as a public utility w/in the Philippine any explosive, flammable, corrosive, or poisonous substance or material (Sec.3)  A group of students chartered a PAL passenger plane for their exclusive use from Manila to Zamboanga; on board, they carried with them bottles of cyanide and several sacks of dynamite. Liable? YES

 Same facts but the plane was owned by one of the students. Liable? NO – plane is not w/in the contemplation of “public utility”

• May this be committed by ANY public officer? NO – only by those vested with authority • May this be committed by an officer who arrested and detained a person by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by the court? NO The moment there is a WOA, no
arbitrary detention can be committed • Public officer liable for arbitrary detention may be one who: has duty to make an arrest or detain; may recommend an arrest or detain; or may order an arrest or detain • A private individual may be also be liable for arbitrary detention if he acts either as an accessory, accomplice, principal by inducement, or principal by indispensable cooperation • Legal grounds for detention (1) committed the crime, (2)compulsory confined, (3) violent insanity • Instances when warrantless arrests are lawful: (1) has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense in his presence

• May a crime be committed in the presence of a public officer who is blind? Yes. Deaf? Yes. Both?
(2) personal knowledge of the facts that the person to be arrested actually committed the offense • May a person be arrested based on suspicion? Is suspicion equivalent to actual knowledge?  Suppose the accused stabbed X; there was a commotion after which the accused fled. He was holding a knife and he was already stained with blood. He was being chased by the people. A police officer came. Seeing what was happening, he arrested the accused. Liable? NO –there is personal knowledge of the facts that a crime has been committed and the person being arrested was the one who committed it

 Suppose a crime of robbery was committed. All the lights were on when it happened. The members of the household were able to give description of the robbers to
the police. Three days later, the officer saw one of the persons who fitted the description given so he arrested him. Valid? No. There is no probable cause to believe that the person committed the crime; he only has hearsay knowledge


May these be admissible in evidence? NO-not included in SW  Suppose court issued a SW for the seizure of equipment used in the production of shabu.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a woman was a victim of rape. Same as that prescribed in Art 124: 3 – 15 days. granting authority ARTICLE 128 .EXPULSION • May a Filipino be expelled from the Philippines? NO • Who can be expelled? ALIENS only • Who can order expulsion? Bureau of Immigration and Deportation to be approved by the Office of the President • Convict has already served the minimum term of his sentenceand ready to be released for parole. How about by virtue of ISLAW? Dangerous Drugs Act? Yes to both. Everything was done by the clerk. • Assuming detention is already illegal does this affect the validity of your arrest? Yes. Valid? NO – probable cause was not determined personally by the judge 4 . got all the documents. • Does illegal detention affect your crime? No. through which they can see high powered firearms. draft the order and bring it tot the judge. ordering the officers to seize high-powered firearms in the condo unit of the accused located in the 5 floor. when agents entered the compound. • May court order convict to change the residence by virtue of Probation Law? Yes. Is he liable? Yes. Valid? NO – place not particularly described th  Suppose the court issued a SW against the accused for violation of the internal revenue law. May NBI task force arrest and detain him? NO. together with her parents. Agents implemented the warrant.VIOLATION OF DOMICILE • Judicial order = search warrant • Search Warrant: an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Phils. What crime is committed by the police officer? Violation of Art. persons and things • Effect of SW that was not legally obtained: things seized would be inadmissible in evidence  Suppose NBI agents conducted a surveillance operations for 2 weeks.DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES • Distinguish from arbitrary detention • When does detention in delay become illegal? Upon expiration of the periods specified • Reason behind the law: to prevent any abuse that may be committed against the accused so that he can avail of any legal rights available to him. agents implemented the warrant. ordering the seizure of ALL documents contained inside the 2 cabinets in the office of the accused. raided the condo unit after the inquiry. judge was in a hurry so he instructed the clerk to receive the evidence the agents may present in support of their application. 15 days – 6 months. They seized such firearms. a task force was organized. Since there were media present. Even if you fail to deliver him as required there is already a case in court. the agents raided the lab. • May an alien be deported by the Bureau of Immigration without violating Art 127? Yes because the Bureau of Immigration has the authority to do so. Police officer made the arrest because he saw the killing. They only have hearsay knowledge (3) arrest of a prisoner who escaped ARTICLE 125 . He doesn’t form part of judicial authority • May this be committed if there is warrant of arrest? NO.  X killed his neighbor in the course of their town fiesta. 6 months or more ARTICLE 127 . ARTICLE 126 . blue gate. commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the court • Requisites: (1) probable cause. location of shabu lab is in a compound: white house. Within what hours should you be delivered? 36 hours  Supposing you were only delivered on the 7 th day.DELAYING RELEASe • Is there a period prescribed? Yes. they saw the warehouse door was open. They search and found him. after which they were convinced that there is a shabu lab in a certain compound. she proceeded to the NBI to report the crime. Laws. There is no warrant of arrest. The agents applied for the issuance of SW for violation of DDA and for illegal possession of firearms. Prosecutor only presented those material and relevant to the offense. agents saw that there were several units in said floor so they inquired. Is the SW issued by the court valid? NO-warrant was issued for two offenses  Warrant was issued for violation of DDA. condition in his parole fixes his residence even against his will. (2) for one offense (3) to be determined personally by the judge (4) particular description of place. • To whom should the delivery be made? Courts of Justice • Is delivery to fiscal sufficient? No. Order was brought to the judge who signed it. Armed with the SW. Valid? NO – place was not particularly described  Suppose the SW was issued for illegal possession of firearms. Is condition valid? YES  Supposing the Mayor of City of Manila. signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer. Detention became illegal. court by final judgment. Valid? NO – things seized were not particularly described therein  NBI agents applied for SW against the house said to be a shabu lab. in order to stop prostitution he arrested and sent all prostitutes to Basilan. There was a police officer. The TF learned rapist was in Bacolod. It was almost 5pm when thy arrived at the office of the judge. 125 • What does PO do if he cannot deliver him so he may not be liable? He should release him. There is authority of law.

Violation? NO  There was a sign that said “Do not enter at all times” but the door is slightly opened.SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED. he entered your house. INTERRUPTION.surreptitious entry: secretly entering the house  Police entered the house through the closed back door which he opened. any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances • What right is safeguarded? Right of the people to redress grievances 5 . Liable? NO. If the warrant turns out to be unlawfully issued. ARTICLE 131 . ARTICLE 129 . may the members of the raiding team be liable? Yes. What crime/s may he be liable for? Perjury and procurement of SW w/o just cause  Suppose he came to you and told you that unless you answer him. The crime is consummated by the mere act of obtaining the SW. police entered. In order to save your father. AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED • Is perjury necessary in maliciously obtaining a search warrant? • What if an illegal firearm was actually found based on a maliciously obtained search warrant for illegal possession of firearm? • Manner of Commission (1) maliciously obtaining  Suppose you have a persistent suitor whom you don’t like so you rejected him. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was conducted in the presence of two members of the raiding team who were also residents of the same locality. (3) by refusing to leave… . Is he liable for violation of domicile? No. (2) By hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings  Suppose an officer prevented you. Liable? YES . Is he liable for procuring SW w/o just cause? YES. which he immediately does. The warrant was issued. he did conduct any search. • How is violation of domicile committed? (1) by entering… -dwelling: a place that satisfies the requisites of domestic life Is it enough that there is no consent? NO-entry must be against the will of the owner  Police major who is your neighbour saw the door of your house slightly opened. somebody threw an explosive in the middle of the crowd. the holding of a peaceful meeting. ARTICLE 130 . Once inside.  Sign says enter at your own risk. (2) abuse in the service • Does the law require that for abuse to be committed. he will implement the warrant. through force or threat from joining the NPA. you catch him inside your house and order him to leave.locked door is implied prohibition  Sign says “no trespassing”. his attention was caught by the picture of a beautiful woman posted on your wall. The children are not valid witnesses.PROHIBITION. NPA is not a lawful org (3) By prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing. Violation? YES-there is express prohibition  Suppose the door was locked. w/o legal ground.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• May judge delegate such duty? NO. Police entered. which the police major opened and he entered the house. the SW must be lawfully obtained? The warrant enjoys the presumption of validity since it was issued by the court. the agents would only be liable for maliciously obtaining SW. or by dissolving the same • What constitutional right is safeguarded? Right to peaceful assembly • During a rally and while certain people were speaking. Liable? NO. you answered him. he did not refuse to leave the house after having been required to do so. sign says “Beware of dogs!” Police entered. May the police lawfully disperse the assembly? YES it has ceased to be peaceful. under the first manner – closed door constitutes prohibition • What consummates the crime? Refusal to leave the premises  Supposing a police officer. However. with the intention of searching the premises of your house. Liable? YES. While he was intently staring at the picture. it need not be implemented. He turned out to be an NBI officer and he ensued an application for SW against your father for keeping firearms in you house. entered through the slightly opened front door without your consent. before he began his search. AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETING • How committed? (1) by prohibiting or by interrupting. Officer left. Liable? No – what is contemplated is the joining of a lawful org. owner saw him and asked him to leave. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was witnessed by the twon children residing in the house who were both 8 years old.SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES  Supposing a raiding team conducted the search of a dwelling in the presence of two maids only. which is not true. either alone or together with others. (2) by searching… is it necessary that the entry be done against the will of the owner? NO – it is sufficient that the entry is without the consent of the owner. It is personal. There is no implied prohibition because the door was slightly opened. Liable? YES – express prohibition  Door was open. He is not liable because he did not commit any of the three acts under Article 128.

the common crime is absorbed in the crime of rebellion  Supposing an NPA commander had an encounter in Mindoro. because the persons induced would be principals by direct participation. communication networks. person who induced would be a principal by inducement 6 . What crimes are committed? Rebellion only.  Suppose the kidnappers distributed the ransom among themselves.INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP • Committed only by public officers or employees • Is it necessary that the act be committed inside a place of religious worship? NO. INSURRECTION.REBELLION OR INSURRECTION • Can it be committed by only one person? NO. OR COUP D’ ETAT ARTICLE 136 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ ETAT. ARTICLE 135 PENALTY FOR REBELLION. as to manner of commission: Rebellion – rising publicly and taking arms against the government Coup de etat – swift attack accompanied by violenece. ARTICLE 134 . installation. as to persons criminally liable: Rebellion – public persons and private persons Coup de etat – public persons. strategy. They ambushed the military. What crime is committed? If the common crime was committed in furtherance of the objectives of rebellion. Upon payment. as to purpose: Rebellion – Section 134 Coup de etat – Section 134-A 4. the Chinese was released and the ransom was given to the officers of the NPA for its finances.  Supposing common crimes are committed. Crime? Kidnapping ARTICLE 134 . because it was committed outside Philippine territory.mere adherence to the enemy by giving them aid or comfort is not punishable under rebellion  Members of the NPA kidnapped a Chinese merchant and demanded a ransom. because one element is missing. offender in this case was already a member of the NPA  Supposing. ARTICLE 133 . military officers met outside the Philippines and they agreed and decided to seize the power from the present administration. • Is it necessary that it be done in a church? No. He claimed that the Virgin Mary was only made of wood. INSURRECTION. thorugh speeches.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 132 . It is absorbed in rebellion. What is important is that what is interrupted is a ceremony. that the offender does not take arms against. an ordinary barangay leader who was fed up with the Arroyo administration.  Supposing accused placed the statute of the Virgin Mary in the altar and chopped it in pieces. public utilities or other facilities • May coup d’ etat be committed by one person? YES. Crime committed? Rebellion only. Crime committed? Rebellion. are they liable? NO. intimidation. upon arrival. or stealth 3. what crime was committed? Rebellion. a member of the NPA was going around recruiting members by inciting them.OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS • Whose point of view should be considered to determine the act as notoriously offensive? The worshippers. OR REBELLION • Conspiracy to commit Coup de etat  Supposing. military or police officers 2. or public officer or employee • Difference between rebellion and coup: 1. May they be prosecuted for murder? No. It is a crime of the masses • Manner of conviction: proof beyond reasonable doubt (2-witness rule is not necessary) • Is it necessary that they engage the government forces in actual combat? NO. persuaded and convinced people to join him in the fight against the government. they were arrested and prosecuted for committing conspiracy to commit coup de etat. threat. What crime is committed? Rebellion  Suppose an NPA asked you to encash some of their checks and to deliver them. police. Liable? NO . what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion  Suppose the audience before whom he spoke were finally induced and persuaded by him to join the movement and overthrow the government.  Supposing they raped the daughter of the Barangay Captain? Liable also for rape as it is not connected with any political purpose.  Supposing the NPA commander ambushed the governor for being corrupt. or is not in open hostility with the government. it cannot be prosecuted here because it was not among the exceptions provided for in Article of the RPC (Conspiracy to commit coup de etat is a crime against public order) ARTICLE 137 DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEES ARTICLE 138 INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION  Supposing. military camp.A COUP D’ETAT • Offender: military. May he be liable for violation of Article 133? Yes. target of the attack: Rebellion – government Coup de etat – authorities of the Philippines.

Cheats Unlimited. Congress was in session for 3 months.. a congressman committed the crime of homicide (penalty is reclusion temporal) and he was arrested while he was on his way to the session hall of Congress. armed themselves and proceeded to the precincts and prevented the elections officers. Separate power of Congress. association is unlawful. during the elctions.dangerous tendency rule nd purpose (3) writing. the purpose of which was to commit illegal logging. or circulating scurrilous libels against the government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof which tend to disturb the public peace  Supposing X incited others to commit sedition and they commit sedition. what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion ARTICLE 139 . to be illegal. the purpose of which is to devise ways and means of kidnapping. the purpose of which is to devise ways and means to cheat without being discovered. proclamations. writings.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using the same facts. are they liable for sedition? YES. are they liable? NO. etc. What crime may X be liable for? Sedition for principal by inducement because Sedition was committed. penalty for the crime he committed was 5 years. a military officer abducted a member of the Congress who was always taking an antagonistic position against them. several members in the barangay.INCITING TO SEDITION • How committed? (1) inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches. what crime was committed? Sedition. there was a meeting attended by several persons. by knowingly concealing such evil practices (one of the ways of committing inciting to sedition) ARTICLE 143 . etc. a group formed an association. under the 1st purpose  Using the same facts. from performing their duties. liable? NO.clear and present danger rule .CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION ARTICLE 142 .PENALTY FOR SEDITION ARTICLE 141 . emblems.ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES ARTICLE 144 .ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES • First form of illegal assembly  Supposing. a friend prevented you from attending the meeting of cheats. inspectors. was the arrest lawful? NO. a meeting.DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS • May an accused put double jeopardy as a defense? No. is this illegal assembly? NO. ten (10) persons who are armed purpose is to prevent the holding of a referendum through force. under the 2 ARTICLE 140 . by force. but the officers were prevented from performing their duties during a referendum. of the RPC (when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies) (2) By arresting or searching  Supposing. (2) uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace . is your friend liable under Article 131? NO. it is not an offense punishable under the RPC • Second form of illegal assembly • Is it necessary that they be armed? NO • Is it necessary that the members of the audience be incited? YES ARTICLE 147 . contrary to public morals  Supposing. etc. what is prohibited in Article 131 is preventing someone from attending a meeting of a lawful organization ARTICLE 148 .DIRECT ASSAULTS 7 . the Congressman was arrested on August 28 while he was at home. starting July 1. referendum is different from an election  Supposing. publishing. must be attended by armed persons  Supposing. there is an investigation in Basilan to find out how some members of the Abu Sayyaf were able to escape.SEDITION – HOW COMMITTED • When is public uprising deemed to be tumultuous? Article 163 – if it is caused by more than three (3) persons who are armed or are provided with means of violence  Supposing. 1st part. had a meeting. • May the crime of inciting to sedition be committed by mere silence? YES. there were 10 persons. refer to the definition of “session” ARTICLE 146 .VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY (1) By using force or intimidation . what crime was committed? May the military officer be held for kidnapping? Did the single act of the military officer give rise to two (2) felonies (kidnapping and violation of parliamentary immunity)? Crimes are COMPLEXED under Article 48. ARTICLE 145 . was the arrest lawful? YES  Supposing. all armed. are they liable? YES. not one of those who attended the meeting was armed.preventing a member from attending a meeting  Supposing.ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS  Supposing. if they were not convinced.

what crime was committed? Direct Assault. the other party waited for the lawyer outside where they inflicted harm on him. the lawyer cross-examined the witness of the other side and practically destroyed his testimony.  Supposing. Will X be liable? Yes. congressman. he made him a hero.TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER ARTICLE 154 ..RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH PERSON ARTICLE 152 . and he was attacked by reason of the performance of his official duties as a lawyer  Supposing a professor was in the middle of discussing lessons in class when his neighbor. what crime was committed? By reason of past performance of duties  Supposing. May the governor be liable for direct assault? YES.force or intimidation + objectives of rebellion or sedition + public uprising – (minus) public uprising = DIRECT ASSAULT in the first form (2) By attacking. But it is false. through a stone at the professor.PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY – WHO SHALL BE DEEMED AS SUCH • Persons in Authority directly vested with jurisdiction Examples: mayor.. the governor went to the office of the mayor where he inflicted where he inflicted fist blows upon the mayor. Position is immaterial. Absence of knowledge may constitute a defense of good faith ARTICLE 150 . not acquitted in IA. who had a long time personal grudge against him. liable for direct assault? Yes – the attack was done connected with performance of official duty May the offender be  May a person in authority be liable fro direct assault committed against subordinate? YES. May the offender be liable for direct assault? YES. In the film. The governor got mad and shot the traffic enforcer. intimidation. lawyers if in actual performance of professional duty or attacked because of such reason • Agent of person in authority not vested with jurisdiction duty is the protection of persons and property maintenance of public order Examples: policeman. ARTICLE 149 . ITS COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• How committed? (1) By employing force. if acquitted for reasons which are personal only to the accused. the governor assaulted the mayor.UNLAWFUL MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES • How Committed 1st Manner: Essence is publication of false news which causes damage to the interest of the state  Supposing X published that half of Mindanao under control of MILF. ITS COMMITTEES. The Reason for attack immaterial if done in the actual performance if duty  What if the killing was done while the professor was walking on his way home? No – there is no direct assault. supposing. . they met at a wedding and there. If acquitted because the act does not constitute direct assault it also means the person shall be acquitted for indirect assault. If acquitted because there is no guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  What if the neighbor was actually a former student and he killed the professor while on his way home because the latter failed him in class. Qualified assault – It is an aggravating circumstance when an offender s a public officer/employee  Supposing a provincial governor violated the traffic rules and regulations. a governor who recommended his niece to be a member of the staff of the mayor but the positions were already filled hence she was not accommodated. which hit him on the head and killed him. Prejudicial to the interest of the state 2nd Manner:  Supposing X made a film about the life of Abu Sabaya.DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY.. in a criminal case. teachers. May X be liable? Yes. it shall not mean acquittal in IA. justifying. what crime was committed by the governor?  Using the same facts. members of the military ARTICLE 153 . barangay tanod. extolling an act punished by law 3rd Manner:  Supposing X prematurely published a PIATCO Contract investigated by Blue Ribbon Committee? May X be liable? Yes – he has no official authority to publish the contract 8 .. A traffic enforcer stopped him and gave him a ticket. This includes being acquitted because of insanity or minority.INDIRECT ASSAULTS • Can only be committed in the occasion of direct assault • Does acquittal in DA also mean an acquittal in IA? It depends on the ground of acquittal. Praising. BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS. Chaplain). members of the board of directors. This would mean that there is a crime of DA however guilt of accused was not sufficiently proven • It is necessary that the offender has knowledge that the person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent? Yes. lawyers are considered persons in authority. rector. by employing force.public uprising + tumultuous + political purpose = SEDITION . administrators (dean. SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS ARTICLE 151 . judge.

If pointed at another. What crime may he be prosecuted for? No crime.SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN. what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing. the crime is either attempted homicide/murder if the wound is not mortal. the second offense committed by him was a violation of a special law. His mother gets sick in manila. he assisted in the escape at around 10pm. The accused went to Manila. The court pronounced judgment. while serving the same. accused was convicted. what crime was committed? Delivering Prisoners from Jail. is he liable under this article? NO.HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED 9 . and an officer assisted in the escape of such youthful offender. because he is already off-duty. the accused was convicted of homicide and was sentenced to a penalty of 10 years. the first offense need not be a felony ARTICLE 161 . he already served for 8 years.EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE  Supposing. AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER ARTICLE 168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND THE USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT  Supposing X used false bank note to pay for his the groceries. a youthful offender was committed inside a reformatory institution. AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS • What may be the subject of forgery? Does this include treasury or circular notes issued by a foreign bank be subject? How about those issued by the Philippines? ARTICLE 167 COUNTERFEITING. If there is intent to kill. he is not yet convicted by final judgment  Youthful offender who is incorrigible in a reformatory institution. 2 years after. is he a quasirecidivist? NO. IMPORTING.DELIVERY PRISONERS FROM JAIL  Supposing. ARTICLE 169 . the convict is free to accept or reject the offered conditions of the contract in the pardon ARTICLE 160 – QUASI-RECIDIVISM  Supposing the accused was convicted of attempted rape. and while pending. he appealed such judgment to the CA. ARTICLE 163 . he committed and was found guilty of illegal possession of shabu. He escaped in Bilibid. Will he be liable? Yes.ALARMS AND SCANDALS • Will the firing of a gun be punishable? Yes. FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE ARTICLE 162 . he attempted to take the life of his co-prisoner.EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS. his friend forged the President’s signature and gave the endorsement to the accused. the second crime must be a felony  Supposing. may he be liable for possession? • What is the presumption? Accused is the author of the forgery when he is found in possession of false treasury notes.COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS. which is kept by the customs and cannot be released because of failure to complete the payment of customs duties. he was found guilty of frustrated homicide. there is a prisoner against whom a judgment of conviction has been rendered. using the previous case. CONFLAGRATIONS. asked his friend from Malacanang to get an endorsement from the President. frustrated homicide/murder if the wound is mortal ARTICLE 156 . he was granted a conditional pardon. the one who escaped is a detention prisoner. sentenced to 10 years. while serving his sentence. if another person assists in the escape of such detention prisoner. WITHOUT CONNIVANCE ARTICLE 166 . what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing. etc. the judgment of conviction is not yet final  Supposed a youthful offender who is committed in a reformatory institution escapes. accused was already serving sentence for violation of a special law. he escaped. May he be liable? Yes. What is the remedy is available to him to be able to visit his sick mother during the service of his sentence? Executive clemency ARTICLE 158 . the conditional pardon is in the nature of a private contract between the President and the convict. was granted a conditional pardon thereafter and it was expressly provided that the convict should observe the terms and conditions of the conditional pardon for 7 years. the accused has a pending shipment. a jail officer whose duty is from 7am-7pm. and the prisoner is not anymore under his custody ARTICLE 157 . then he assisted in the escape of a prisoner at around 3pm.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 155 . It is presumed there is intention to utter. after 6 years. Can the accused be held liable under this Article? NO.  Supposing the accused is prohibited to enter manila. is he liable? YES  Supposing. OR OTHER CALAMITIES • Failure to return 48 hours within the proclamation = addition of 1/5 of the unexpired term to the sentence. he did not know that it is fake. May the President order his re-arrest even without waiting for conviction of the second crime? May he still be prosecuted separately for violation of conditional pardon?  Supposing. is the condition valid? YES. if he returned a deduction of 1/5 of the entire sentence shall take place • Accused must be a convict not a detention prisoner ARTICLE 159 . EARTHQUAKES.MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING FALSE COINS ARTICLE 164 . to be liable. the crime is discharge of firearm or grave threat. there must be actual uttering and intent ARTICLE 165 . IMPORTING.USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP  Supposing.OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE (VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON)  Supposing. shipment was then released. provided there is no intent to kill. is he liable? YES. there was no knowledge on his part that the signature of the President on the endorsement was forged • Is this an act of accessory? Yes but if accused is punished as principal of Article 162 he is not an accessory of Article 161.FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER.MUTILATION OF COINS • Is mere possession of counterfeited coins with knowledge make one liable? No. provided the gun is not pointed at any one in particular.

and a fire fighter.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing X was in the possession of a sweepstakes ticket. the officer changed the date of arrest to January 3. a student. 2001 but the arresting officer failed to deliver within 36 hours to proper authorities. May he be liable? Yes.  What if the owner acceded and A was able to inspect the book of accounts.FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS. The officer placed the date as January 5. what crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction ARTICLE 173 . Is the LCR liable? Yes. What crime is committed? Usurpation of Authority.USURPATION OF AUTHORITY • In usurpation of authority. If it is not legislative and falsified by a public officer who takes advantage of his position/office it falls under Art 171.  Supposing X wanted to apply for a position in a company. He introduced himself as an agent from BIR when in fact he was not.USING FALSE CERTIFICATES ARTICLE 176 . AND USE OF SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGE ARTICLE 174 . Liability? Is one’s status an essential part of his identity? ARTICLE 179 . To avoid being reprimanded. CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OR SERVICE. a doctor.  Supposing the Local Civil Registrar issued a birth certificate to show you were born earlier so X can run for mayor. and he used a false document. He claimed that he wanted to inspect the store’s book of accounts. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? YES.ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA  Supposing a PNP officer who was dismissed from service wore his uniform and went to a public function. to a medical certificate to excuse him from classes. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? NO. is it payable to bearer or order? It is payable to bearer ARTICLE 170 .FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER. who is liable? The mother. May he be liable for the commission of a crime? Yes he is liable under Article 175 using false certificates. May the girls be liable? Yes.FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 171 . During his suspension.  Supposing X used a falsified document in an administrative proceeding? What crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction  What if he was applying for a loan in a bank. X only had two years of work experience so he asked a former superior to issue a certificate stating that he has had 10 years of work experience.  Supposing A went to a Chinese Store. 2001. The raiding team confiscated an equipment used in the making of falsified Philippine money. Y later discovered that X is married.FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES. The first crime committed is his first liability. What is A’s criminal liability? Usurpation of official function  Supposing an MMDA traffic enforcer was suspended for 6 months. There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document since both have the same element – damage. Date is essential. He is no longer authorized to wear the uniform. he continued to wear his uniform and directed traffic in a major intersection. the entry falsified must be a fact not an opinion  Supposing a prisoner was arrested on January 2. She changed the grade of one examinee from 71 to 77. ARTICLE 180 .USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND CONCEALING TRUE NAME  Supposing X told Y he is single so that he can court the latter. 2002 – date of turnover.  Supposing P went to a whore house. Who may be liable under Article 174? The father. Date was not essential.  Supposing the Secretary of PRC is in charge with keeping the grades of board examinees. ARTICLE 177 . ARTICLE 172 . He introduce yourself as a PNP officer. Only the last number is different from the winning combination so he changed it and presented it as the winning ticket. • An ecclesiastical minister is liable only when the falsification affects civil status of persons and not ones religion • Under fourth manner commission. a nurse. May X be held liable? • How would you classify the lottery ticket. X was never ill. is it necessary to actually perform the duty? NO  Supposing the accused was in a party and he wanted to impress a girl. there must be intent to use.MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION  Supposing a raid in the house of E. AND THE LIKE  Supposing A asked his father.  What if the date of arrest was on January 2. 2001 as date of arrest. What crime may he be liable for? Usurpation of official function ARTICLE 178 . AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES. The father issued the certificate stating that X was recovering from fever and had to rest for three days when in fact. May he be liable? YES. thus making him liable under Article 125. May his superior be liable? Yes for issuing a false certificate of service ARTICLE 175 . May E be liable for possession? No. Determine which crime was first committed by the accused. He went to a room with many girls wearing different uniforms including those of a nun. CABLE.  What if it was X’s mother who issued mother the certificate. if it is legislative regardless of offender it is under Art 170. official or commercial documents? Yes. May she be liable under the sixth manner of commission? Yes.FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT 10 .FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THE USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS • May there be a crime of estafa through falsification of public. 2001 and the prisoner was delivered on January 3. which requires at least seven years of work experience. TELEGRAPH. EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER • Differentiate Article 170 from Article 171: Determine the nature of the document falsified.  Supposing X presented it to his professor.

Administration. 2. organizer. Assuming the application was sworn before an authorized officer. He executed a false affidavit. What crime is he liable for? Perjury • What is a material matter? It is the main fact which is the subject of the inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove that fact. She suspects he is married and has a wife in the province. His status is material matter  What if B indicated that he is 30 years old when in truth he is 45 years old. The heirs cannot agree extrajudicially. Trading. It is a special proceeding. May H be liable for perjury? Yes. What crime is he liable for? Perjury  Supposing an employee files an illegal dismissal proceeding. ARTICLE 182 . The judicial settlement is neither a criminal nor civil case  Supposing a guardianship proceeding is pending in court. -proximate cause of death is DD/CP/EC. In the course of the judicial settlement. or any fact or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative to the subject of inquiry. No  Supposing a woman was involved in case of immorality. material matter. broker  Max Penalty: -minors/mentally incapacitated persons used as couriers or messengers. X applied to take the bar before the SC. It is not necessary that the executed affidavit is required by law. Delivery. 11 . H gives it to W although she never asked him to submit such. Is B liable for perjury? Yes. Assertion must be deliberate or intentional  Supposing X needed to present driver’s license for his application. • Will a false statement of an opinion under oath make accused liable for perjury. In the course of investigation she falsely testified under oath that she is single when in fact she was already married. X testified falsely in his favor. H executes an affidavit under oath stating he is single but the truth is was already married for five years. Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1) Max Penalty: -DD is sold/administered to minor -proximate cause of death is DD 3. ARTICLE 181 . Importation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager. In order that this be approved. protector/coddler Sale. this right do not carry with it the right to testify falsely. or which legitimately affects the credit of any witness who testifies  Supposing G and B applied for a marriage license. -victim is minor/mentally incapacitated. Dispensation. -committed w/in 100m from school Maintenance of Den. Not material matter. age is not a material matter since in either case B is still capacitated to contract marriage. Status does not have a legal effect in immorality charge  Supposing H was courting his officemate. Is she liable for perjury? No. Distribution and Transportation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager. Is he liable for perjury? Yes. There must be a wilful and deliberate assertion of falsehood • Is good faith a defense? Yes. protector/coddler.FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION  Suppose a person died. Whether it is believed by the court or not is immaterial as it has the tendency to degrade the administration of justice and mislead justice. age is a material matter because he doe not possess legal capacity to contract marriage  Supposing after finishing law. financier.while he has the right to testify in his behalf. He falsely testified in court in his favor. W.FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES ARTICLE 183 . Is perjury committed? Yes. It is enough that it is authorized by law.OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------RA 9165 DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 • Difference between Dangerous Drugs (DD) and Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals (CP/EC) • Punishable Acts: 1. ARTICLE 184 . Is he liable for perjury? No. Is a guardianship proceeding a civil case? No. one of the heirs testified falsely. Testimony was not given credence. What the law punishes is the mere act of giving false testimony in a case. He said he was never convicted truth is he was previously convicted of theft. May he be prosecuted for false testimony in favorable to the defendant? Yes . Truth is license was confiscated for a traffic violation. imprudence? No.  What if B indicated that he is 21 years old when in truth he is only 17 years old. organizer.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing C falsely testified in a criminal case against his neighbor. He executed an affidavit of loss which stated that his license got lost when wallet was snatched. What crime may he be liable for? Perjury • May perjury be committed thru negligence. May he still be liable for Article 180? Yes. Is he liable? Yes. B stated in his application that he was single when truth was married but legally separated from his ex-wife.FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT  Supposing M was a defendant in a criminal case. financier.

Max Penalty: minor/mentally incapacitated is used to deliver Possession of Dangerous Drugs (DD) Possession of Equipment. presumption: possession shall be prima facie evidence that possessor has introduced into his body the DD and shall be presumed to have violated Section 15 Possession during Parties. etc. Social Gatherings. Apparatus or other Paraphernalia (DD and CP/EC)   8. Failure to Maintain or Keep Records of Transactions (DD and CP/EC)  Records of sales.employment of alien. 23.lab is concealed w/ legitimate business operations 6.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. (DD) Use of Dangerous Drugs (Section 15)     13. chemical engineer or practitioner . dispositions. Illegal Chemical Diversion (CP/EC) Manufacture/Delivery of Equipment.committed w/in 100m residential. Misappropriation. business. Instrument. provision of Section 11 shall apply Disqualified from Probation Law Cultivation and Culture of Plants classified as Dangerous Drugs or Sources thereof  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: same 14. Benefiting from Proceeds (DD) Receiving Financial or Material Contributions from Persons found Guilty of Trafficking Dangerous Drugs (DD) Planting Evidence Consenting or Knowingly Tolerating any Violation of DDA  applies to public officers Consenting or Tolerating Use of Vehicle or Equipment  as an instrument for commission of violation of DDA Violating Rules or Regulations Issued by DDB Issuance of False or Fraudulent Dangerous Drugs Test Result Violation of Confidentiality Rule  voluntary submission program Failure or Refusal to Appear as Witness for any Violation of DDA Delay or Bungling in the Prosecution of Drug Related Cases Fundamental Concepts  No Plea-bargaining Rule . confiscated. of DD/CP/EC 15. Instrument. in such a case. Escheat (legal proceeding for forfeiture of private property in favour of the State) Employment in and Visiting Den. Misapplication or Failure to Account (DD and CP/EC)  seized. 1st apprehension: 6 months rehabilitation 2nd apprehension: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years Not applicable if offender is also found to have in his possession such quantity of any drug. Social Gatherings. 11.lab is protected by booby traps . etc. 9. proceeds and property  become property of the State 18. Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC) Illegal Manufacture (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1) Presumption: presence of CP/EC or Lab Equipment is prima facie proof of manufacture  Max Penalty: . plants. 5. 16. etc. 21. equipment. or introduction to the human body of substance  10. 24. or surrendered DD. 22. Instrument. during Parties. 20. 19. etc.committed w/ help of minors . (DD)  intended for consuming. school or church premises . 7. 25. 26. Unnecessary Prescription (DD) Unlawful Prescription (DD) 17. public officer.for any person charged with the violation of DDA under any provision  Non applicability of the Probation Law . Meetings or in the proximate company of at least 2 Persons (DD) Possession of Equipment. 27. ingesting.for drug pushers and drug traffickers  Influence of Dangerous Drugs during commission of another crime 12 . 12.

13 (Possession of DD during Party). his commitment in Center shall be credited in full If he is prosecuted under Section 15. or made only to harass or prejudice the accused 2) failure or refusal to testify w/o just cause 3) violation of condition of immunity • Effects of Termination of Immunity -immunity shall cease and informant shall be prosecuted for the crime committed and cited for contempt Submission of Drug Dependent to Confinement/Treatment or Rehabilitation   refers only to use of DD under Section 15 Drug dependent may either submit voluntarily or compulsorily • Voluntary Submission application with the DDB by drug dependent. and 4) he poses no danger to himself.). or to the community.qualifying aggravating circumstance (changes the nature of the crime)  Public Officials found guilty of violation of DDA -Maximum Penalty is always imposed -no amount of ordinary mitigating circumstance will offset (lower) penalty Immunity from Criminal Prosecution and Punishment  • Requirements: does not refer to all provisions of the DDA 1) 2) Person violated Sections 7 (employment in den). if convicted. 16 (Cultivation or Culture). and is not a recidivist. one of the parties is found to be a drug dependent a) b) c) d) e) f) g) person is charged w/ offense punishable by imprisonment of less than 6 years and 1 day and is found by court to be a drug dependent Board files petition in RTC for confinement in Center Hearing is conducted by the court If RTC finds him a drug dependent. or any special law. 5 (Sale. and after-care and follow-up treatment (at least 18 months). 14 (Possession of Paraphernalia during parties).if either physician finds him dependent on drugs. he surrenders within one week from date of escape. and 19 (unlawful prescription) He voluntarily gives information about any of the following violations: Section 4 (Importation). 11 (Possession of DD). penalty is deemed served in center upon his release and upon certification by the Board and the center * Period of prescription of offense charged shall be suspended while 13 . 8 (Manufacture). court shall order his commitment 2) in the course of hearing a case. 3) he has no record of escape or if he has escaped. to his family. parents. 6 (Maintenance of Den). 10 (Manufacture of Equipment). etc.if physicians conclude that he is not a drug dependent.if court finds him a drug dependent. malicious. it shall issue an order for commitment If rehabilitated as certified. 15 (use of DD). court issues order for rehabilitation in a center: not less than 6 months but not more than 1 year e) Final discharge of drug dependent from the center discharge shall exempt him from criminal prosecution or liability under Section 15 Provided: 1) he complied with regulations of the center. spouse or any relative w/in 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity b) DDB files petition in court c) Court issues examination of drug dependent d) If positive. Board. RPC. DDB shall order his release . a)   * Drug dependent who is not rehabilitated after 2nd confinement and upon recommendation of the Board shall be charged under Section 15. court will consider all other evidence . he shall be given full credit for his stay in confinement * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under VSP shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose except to determine how many times he has voluntarily submitted himself for the program • Compulsory Submission 1) drug dependent who refuses to submit himself to VSP a) petition is filed by DDB in RTC b) RTC conducts a hearing c) Order by the court for examination of drug dependent by at least 2 physicians . 12 (Possession of Paraphernalia). or any act if committed by a syndicate He willingly testifies against persons who violated above provisions Information/testimony must comply with the ff conditions: a) it is necessary for conviction b) it is not yet in the possession of the State c) it can be substantially corroborated on its material points 3) 4) d) e) f) g) • Termination of Immunity informant has not yet been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude except when no other evidence is available informant shall strictly comply with condition imposed by the State Informant does not appear to be the most guilty No direct evidence available to state except testimony of informant 1) If information/testimony is false. he shall be returned to the court for discharge from the center Continuation of his prosecution.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. if found guilty. (2) he has never been charged or convicted for any offense under the DDA.

otherwise. the act was committed in the privacy of one’s room. DOJ. and any elected public official 7) 8) 9) Sworn certification of burning is issued by the Board Submission to the court of certificate After promulgation of judgment. because the 4 committed in a public place or within the public knowledge or view) ARTICLE 201 . minor shall be subjected to intervention programs • above 15 and under 18: find out if minor acted w/ or w/o discernment • reformed minor can deny that he was charged with a crime or convicted thereof (justified misrepresentation. while not criminally liable. and there is gambling going on.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------he is confined in rehab * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under CSP or those charged for violation of Section 15 shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose. Seized. prize of which is MB.IMMORAL DOCTRINES. full certification w/in next 24 hours 4) 5) Filing of criminal case in court Ocular inspection by court w/in 72 hours from filing 6) Within next 24 hours. or Surrendered DD. court is informed of termination of the case -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------PD 1602 – ANTI-GAMBLING LAW • May the inspector be criminally liable? NO • In any of the games specified. DOJ. NOT liable. if you can prove that you have NO knowledge of such gambling taking place. is it grave scandal? NO. civil society. for every purchase worth P100. is it necessary that there be bets involving money or other object? • Sports.  Supposing. you are liable. not liable for perjury or falsification) * The DOJ shall keep a confidential record of proceedings on suspension of sentence and shall not be used for any purpose other than to determine whether or not person accused is a first-time minor offender • Disposition of Confiscated. in a certain mall. is it lottery? • Do you get the full value of the money? YES • Is the prize merely incidental? YES ARTICLE 200 . partial certification may be issued. OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS • Who are liable? th element is missing (that the act complained of be 14 .GRAVE SCANDAL • How committed?  Supposing. burning or destroying of items -in presence of accused or his counsel. mere act of playing them. are you liable? It depends. you are the owner of a boat. etc. representative from the media. 1) Physical inventory and photograph -in presence of counsel of accused. and elected public official who shall sign a copy of the inventory 2) Items submitted w/in 24 hours to PDEA Forensic Laboratory for qualitative and quantitative examination 3) Certification of results w/in 24 hours -if time is not sufficient. punishable? NO • Conductor – person who manages or carries on the gambling game or scheme • Maintainer – person who sets up and furnishes the means with which to carry on the gambling game or scheme  Supposing. the representative sample with leave of court (approval) shall be turned over to the PDEA w/c shall destroy the same w/in 24 hours from receipt. or other special laws has not been previously committed to a center or care of a DOH accredited physician Board favorably recommends suspension of sentence for first-time minor offenders above 15 years of age but not over 18 years Republic Act 9344 supersedes the provisions of the DDA • 15 years and below: exempted from criminal liability. representative from the media. RPC. records of drug dependents who are not rehabilitated or who escaped and did not surrender shall be forwarded to the court who shall determine their use • Suspension of Sentence  Conditions: a) b) c)  has not been previously convicted of violation of DDA. you will be entitled to a ticket for a raffle.

or whether it is naturally calculated to excite impure imaginations. almost always seen in public places. • Is it necessary that money is actually received? No.  Under the same facts. raiders opened a cubicle and found a woman having sexual intercourse with a man. the woman was given jewellery. or subordinate official. and can provide for the support of her son. May the woman be considered a prostitute? Yes.the act was still done for profit  Supposing a squad conducted a raid in a house in Binondo known to be a prostitution house. is X still a vagrant? YES Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame. is she a prostitute? NO. is she a prostitute? YES    Supposing. The squad apprehended the woman. the definition of prostitutes – women who. is he a vagrant? YES  (3) (4) (5) Supposing. • MERE nudity in pictures or paintings is NOT obscenity ARTICLE 202 . public duties as an employee. X is an able-bodied man. agent. it was done with only one man but regularly. Is she liable? No – element of habituality was not established. or appointment by competent authority. it was done with a man for 6 months. • Are they appointed by the city government itself? NO – which means they do not fall under any of the 3 ways by which a person can be considered a public officer ARTICLE 204 KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT ARTICLE 205 JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE • Will any degree of negligence make the judge liable? No – the negligence must be inexcusable. who has the physical ability to work and who neglects to apply himself/herself to some lawful calling . the mother is employed. and asks for money. habitually indulge to sexual intercourse OR lascivious conduct A man cannot be a prostitute from the legal point of view. and whether or not such publication or act shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency • TEST OF OBSCENITY OF NUDE PICTURES – whether the motive of the picture. 15 . a woman engages in sexual intercourse at least two times a week.  Supposing the City Government of Manila entered into a contract with XYX Corp. by direct provision of the law. shall be found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose Prostitutes  •  May a woman who has been in the prostitution business for the last 20 years still remain a virgin? YES. not being included in the provisions of other articles of this Code. is she a prostitute? NO Supposing.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• TEST OF OBSCENITY – whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influence and into whose hands such a publication may fall. ARTICLE 206 UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER ARTICLE 207 MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE ARTICLE 208 PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES. ARTICLE 203 WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS • Any person who. instead he is liable as a principal by indispensible cooperation Supposing. what if there was proof that the woman has been engaged in sexual intercourse with different men for money or profit. may she be considered as a prostitute? Yes .“batugan” (2) Any person found loitering about public or semi-public buildings or places. The contract provided that the corp. of any rank or class. as indicated by it is pure or impure. would deploy its men to clean the premises of the building. Will the man be criminally liable? Yes – as principal by indispensable cooperation.VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES • Who are vagrants? (1) Any person having no apparent means of subsistence. Are these people deployed by XYX Corp. Will she be liable? Yes. to maintain the cleanliness of the city hall of Manila. ruffians or pimps. considered public officers? NO. there is no element of habituality Supposing. or shall perform in said government or any of its branches. and those who habitually associate with prostitutes Any person who. for money or profit. NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE • Manner of Commission: (1) maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against violators of the law • Who may commit? Public officer who has the duty to prosecute offender • May this be committed negligently? No. during those acts. a woman engages in sexual intercourse once a year.  Supposing for every sexual act. and does not ask her customers for money. shall take part in the performance of public functions in the government of the Philippines. or trampling or wandering about the country or the streets without visible means of support  Supposing. means of support is through his mother who is a laundrywoman. popular election. the man did not pay although he kept on promising to give her money. • Is their work a public function? Yes.

(3) By agreeing to refrain. there is insufficient evidence from X but the decision was still rendered in his favor. Liable? YES. or by refraining from doing something which it its his official duty to do. • What consummates the crime? Mere Agreement.  Supposing A was applying for a driver’s license and he was supposed to take a written exam. The chairman accepted. Is the LTO employee liable? No. promise. gift or present an act constituting a crime. He told the chief that he will give him a large amount of money if he will refrain from deploying his men at the pier. ARTICLE 209 .  What if the lawyer never came back? Is the stenographer still liable? YES  What if the lawyer came back and gave a check which was later dishonored for lack of funds. which does not constitute a crime. refraining from deploying his men is already a crime in itself (Article 208 dereliction of duty) • Who else may be liable for direct bribery? (a) private persons who conspire with the officers (b) accessories and accomplices (c) principal by indispensable cooperation * No principal by inducement – they fall under Article 212 corruption of public officials ARTICLE 211 . • When a public officer is prosecuted for either direct bribery or indirect bribery. X was able to get ahead in the line and his license was released. he agreed that the changed transcript must be ready within a week. because mere agreement is enough to constitute the crime of direct bribery  What if the stenographer actually changed the transcript and handed it to the lawyer but the latter had no enough cash and just said he’d be coming back. The latter immediately told A to proceed to the practical exam. there was an extensive cross-exam done by the opposing counsel. the transcript was already available but before it could be given to the lawyer. he did not give the give anymore. in consideration of any offer. etc.  Supposing a smuggler talked to the chief of police at the time the ship will be unloading his illegal goods. gave one of the employees of LTO P500 pesos to allow him to get ahead of the line. Is he liable? YES.A QUALIFIED BRIBERY ARTICLE 212 . He told the LTO employee that he would just return to pay him but he never did.CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS PD 749 . but after he got what he wanted.000. • What consummates the crime? Acceptance – mere agreement to accept the bribe does not constitute a crime  Supposing X. May the LTO employee still be liable for direct bribery? YES – the bribe was already accepted  What if X merely promised to give the LTO employee P500.BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR ARTICLE 210 . • What consummates the crime? MERE AGREEMENT to give a gift. he will give him two nights with a sexy dancer of his choice. in connection with the performance of official duties. the bribe-giver promised the officer a gift. Still liable? Yes. (2) By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act. Is the chief of police liable for direct bribery? YES – under the first manner of commission. the prosecution would lose the case. The chief agreed and did not deploy his men. in connection with the performance of his official duty. He did not want to wait so he dropped P1000 in the examiner’s drawer. Is the examiner liable? YES. ARTICLE 211 . to which the police agreed.  What if A passed the written exams but he had to wait for the results before taking the practical exam. May the stenographer be criminally liable? What crime/s? Yes.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) maliciously tolerating the commission of offenses  Supposing a smuggler. talked to a police officer and told him not to assign any men in the area where the shipment would be unloaded and where it would pass while being transported. the judge may be liable for unjust judgment under Article 204. who was frustrated by the long line in getting his driver’s license. the decision was rendered in favor of X but he was not able to produce the promised dancers. liable for direct bribery? YES  Suppose in one case. in consideration of a gift or promise. He placed money in the drawer of the examiner so the latter agreed to take the exam for A.  Supposing X approached a judge and told him that if he could render a decision favorable to him (X). The LTO employee accepted the amount but just the same. he was arrested by NBI agents.DIRECT BRIBERY • Manner of Commission (1) By agreeing to perform. May the judge be liable? IT DEPENDS – if during trial. the lawyer for the prosecution asked the stenographer to change certain portions of the transcript. The stenographer is liable for direct bribery and falsification. he did not allow X to get ahead of the others. Liable? YES. and he would give him P50. or by performing. knowing that an illegal shipment will be unloaded.GRANTING IMMUNITY TO GIVER OF BRIBE • Conditions for grant of immunity to a witness: (1) his testimony must refer to consummated violations (2) his testimony must be necessary for the conviction of the accused (3) his testimony must not yet be in the possession of the state 16 . the testimony of the witness for the prosecution came to a point that it was damaging the theory of his own case and unless corrected. It turns out that X does not have the money. and to do the act (between the bribe-giver and the officer) • Is it necessary that the officer actually receives the gift? NO • Is it necessary that the act constituting the crime to be committed be actually done by the officer? NO  Supposing. The employee agreed.INDIRECT BRIBERY  Supposing X is the owner of a taxi company and he gave a car to the newly appointed LTFRB chairman. May the police officer be liable? Yes. may he likewise be prosecuted for violation of RA 3019? YES.

Liable? YES. licenses.  The property custodian of DPWH for the construction of roads let the equipment and materials idle. Liable? YES. the car was forfeited.FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES • Manner of Commission: (1) by entering into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or making use of any other scheme to defraud the government. DPWH purchased 100 trucks of gravel.PROHIBITED INTEREST  Supposing a minor was hospitalized and his guardian had to sell some of the properties. DPWH paid the contractor the corresponding amount for the materials but in connivance with the officer. the residents got hold of the same. by way of payment or otherwise.  Supposing a contract was executed between DPWH and a private contractor. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act  Supposing heroin was confiscated. An application by a company where his wife is a majority stockholder was approved. As a consequence of which. Liable? YES. Is the caretaker liable for malversation? No – he only has qualified charge over the animals. things or objects of a nature different from that provided by law. witness may be prosecuted  What if he testified but the court disregarded his testimony and acquitted the officer.  Supposing the regional director of the DENR had to approve logging concessions.  What if the RTC judge purchased stocks in Cebu.  Supposing a van was ordered confiscated for having been used in the commission of a certain crime. In this case. Crime? Violation of Dangerous Drugs Act. Liable? YES. and 5000 bags of cement.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(4) his testimony may be corroborated on its material points (5) witness has not been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude  Supposing a witness testified against a public officer and availed of this immunity. and other imposts  Supposing an official asked a Chinese merchant to pay for P700 thousand delinquency taxes when in fact only P500 thousand is to be paid. licenses. and other imposts (4) ARTICLE 214 . is the witness still immune? No – the testimony must be necessary for conviction. in connivance with the officer. in the collection of taxes. the manufacturer distributed only medicine of inferior quality. Is he liable for malversation? YES – the car has become public property already. Legal effect? Immunity will not attach. the guardian sold a property to a company where he is a majority stockholder. for which he was dismissed. fees.  Supposing the car was used in the transporting of shabu. He was ordered to return the rifle but he refused and instead sold it.MALVERSATION • • • Who may commit? Public officers Any public officer? No. or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds  Supposing the DOH appropriated P100M for medicine to be distributed. licenses. as provided by law. 200 trucks of sand. ARTICLE 216 .  Supposing he testified but the testimony was false. fees. the contractor delivered only 10 trucks of gravel. What crime may he be liable for? Malversation – even though he has been dismissed. The latter sold the animals in the zoo. The PDEA chair sold the car. He committed irregularities.  Supposing a SWAT member was given a modern assault rifle to be used in the performance of his job.OTHER FRAUDS ARTICLE 215 . he is still considered an accountable officer. Liable? YES – the presumption applies 17 . Liable? YES – there is indirect benefit  What if there was a pre-nuptial agreement between them. Liable for violation of RA 3019? YES. Liable? YES – demanded a larger sum than that authorized by law  What if he asked for the payment of only P200 thousand. the custodian sold the car. directly or indirectly. for any sum of money collected by him officially. Is it enough that he has the physical charge of the fund or property to be held liable? No – he must be an accountable public officer  Supposing the Director of Manila Zoo has a zoo caretaker who works for him. purchased stocks in Ortigas. instead of the medicine specified. 10 days had lapsed but he still failed to account for the shortage. However. Fees. in the collection of taxes. and other imposts by collecting or receiving. ARTICLE 213 . With the approval of the court. he refused to continue testifying. What is the legal effect? Immunity will no longer attach. 10 trucks of sand. the making of contracts. (2) by demanding. Upon conviction of the accused. After doing so. May the witness be included in the information and be prosecuted? YES. Liable? No. PDEA agents sold the prohibited drug to other. whose jurisdiction is the national capital judicial region. directly or indirectly. and 1000 bags of cement. the Director of the Manila Zoo is the accountable officer. the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law in the collection of taxes. Still liable? YES – demanded payment different from that authorized by law (3) by failing voluntarily to issue a receipt. ARTICLE 217 . What crime may the property custodian be liable for? Malversation through negligence/abandonment  Supposing there was a demand made to an accountable public officer to pay within 10 days.PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS  Supposing an RTC judge. in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies. still liable? Not anymore.

which might have caused his death were it not for the timely medical assistance.ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICE ARTICLE 237 . it is necessary because without demand. thereafter.ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  What constitutes the crime of technical malversation? The fact that the officer applies the public funds or property to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance ARTICLE 221 .OFFICERS INCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING PROVISIONS ARTICLE 223 .FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  Supposing the AFP issued a check to a supplier but the disbursing officer refused to deliver the check. a personnel set it on fire. Is he liable for infidelity? No – forms are not documents  Supposing during trial. ARTICLE 227 . • In concealment and destruction.PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES AND POWERS ARTICLE 238 . is leaking. Is he liable? No.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if there has been a criminal case filed against the officer.REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE  Suppose there was no demand. What crime/s may the police officer be liable for? Maltreatment of prisoners and frustrated homicide. ARTICLE 224 . One day.CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO EVASION  Supposing there is a prisoner who requested if he could go home sine his house is just near the jail. It was kept as evidence. but the return mitigates the liability (criminal liability attaches the moment all the elements are present and cannot be extinguished by the return of the malversed money. The officer consented. CONCEALMENT.REMOVAL. The offenses are to be treated as separate crimes by virtue of the provision which states “in addition to any other liability for physical injuries or damage caused…” (2) by maltreating such prisoner t extort a confession or to obtain some information from the prisoner ARTICLE 236 . WHEN SAID ORDER WAS SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER ARTICLE 233 .PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS  Supposing an employee of the BIR disclosed your income to another employee. OR DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS • The removal should be for an illicit purpose  Supposing the building where the RTC is. One day.FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY ARTICLE 220 .OFFICER BREAKING SEAL ARTICLE 228 .EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE ARTICLE 225 . one of the policemen inflicted injuries and the detention prisoner suffered mortal wounds. lack of illicit purpose or illegal motive is not a valid defense  Supposing there are several blank application forms in the DPWH office.MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS • Who are the prisoners contemplated? Prisoners (by final judgment) and detention prisoners • May it be committed by any public officer? NO – only those who have direct charge of the prisoners or detention prisoners • Manner of Commission: (1) by overdoing himself in the correction and handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge either (a) by imposition of punishments no authorized by the regulations. Still liable? YES. The stenographer removes the papers/documents to save them.REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE ARTICLE 235 . which is not one of the grounds for extinguishment of criminal liability provided for under Article 89) ARTICLE 218 .ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION 18 . What crime may he be liable for? Infidelity of documents.FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS • Is demand necessary? No – as long as there is a law requiring the officer to render accounts ARTICLE 219 . he returned the amount he misappropriated. the clerk ran out of cash so he got P20 thousand from the exhibit. prosecution presented P100 thousand which were used in an entrapment operation. Is the officer liable? YES.OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 229 . The money bills partake the nature of a document which was used to prove the fact of the entrapment and bribery (not to be used for disbursing). the mere act of it is punishable. Liable? YES – under the first manner (failing to make payment by a public officer who is under obligation to make such payment from the government funds in his possession) ARTICLE 222 .DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR OFFICER. there can be no refusal ARTICLE 234 .ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER ARTICLE 226 . or (b) by inflicting such punishments in a cruel humiliating manner  Supposing a detention prisoner was being suspected of having been involved in kidnapping.OPEN DISOBEDIENCE ARTICLE 232 . may the officer to whom the assistance was expected be liable for refusal? NO – Demand must be made.REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER ARTICLE 230 . Is he liable? YES – a person’s income is his secret ARTICLE 231 .

May H be held liable for the injuries sustained by or even the death of the houseboy? YES. There was no order. the injuries W sustained were only less serious ones. • What does “immediately thereafter mean”? The discovery. H ran after him and kills him. liable? NO. Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? NO – killing should be committed after having one’s spouse in the act of sexual intercourse with another.  Supposing a female public officer made advances to a male prisoner. ARTICLE 246 . how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. who caught him having sexual intercourse with his wife. Crime committed? Parricide. • When should the killing or the infliction of injuries take place? In the act or immediately thereafter. ARTICLE 248 . P was already playing billiards at a nearby place. Is he liable? No. which states that any legal assistance given to the political leader will be appreciated. What crime may W be liable for? Parricide. While appeal was pending. Is he liable? No. Convinced that the man has had sexual intercourse his wife.USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS ARTICLE 240 . Article 247 is still a felony because it provides a penalty.  H saw W and her paramour both naked. After three years. loving is neither immoral nor indecent. Sexual intercourse outside of marriage is immoral. wearing only underwear. When they went home to the Philippines. no suggestion. Crime? Homicide or murder.USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 242 .MURDER • In the absence of qualified aggravating circumstance (QAC). W was a minor whose consent was obtained through force. Is warden liable? YES. 19 . May she be liable? Under the RPC. legitimate other ascendant or other descendant. which resulted in the latter’s pregnancy. the pursuit. Liable? NO – the proposal is neither indecent nor immoral (even if the judge is married) • The term “wife” in the third manner is misplaced. There is a presumption of validity of marriage.USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 241 . both single. Crime committed? Murder or homicide.DISOBEYING REQUEST FOR DISQUALIFICATION ARTICLE 243 . he remembered that he has a revolver in the neighbor’s house so he went there.” The public officer is already married. W killed H.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 239 .  Supposing the judgment has already become final when W killed H. were married in Hong Kong without a valid marriage license.”  Supposing a judge invites a woman interested with a pending case before him.  H and W.  Supposing a warden and a woman detainee. jump out of the window of H’s room. ARTICLE 244 . Is the Deputy Sec. mother or child. H shot P and the bullet also hit the houseboy who was peeping through a slightly opened window. Is H entitled to benefits? YES. May H avail of the benefits under Article 234? No. waited for an hour and returned. both were doing lascivious acts preparatory to the intercourse. fall in love and have a relationship. H then saw W and P in the act of intercourse. both Filipinos.  Supposing.  W filed a case for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to H.UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS ARTICLE 245 . The invitation is merely for them to talk.  Supposing a judge said that he will render a decision in favor of a woman with a pending case before her provided that she would be his sweetheart. The Deputy Sec. and the killing should all form part of a single act. H shot them both. H fired his gun at the two of them.  When H came home one night.DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES  Supposing H surprised W in the act of intercourse with another man. H shot them. under the same facts.PARRICIDE • Who may be the offended party? Legitimate or illegitimate father. H went to the kitchen to look for a knife but he couldn’t find any.ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY • Against who may it committed? Women only. Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? No. he invites her to be his “lover. at the time of their marriage.  Supposing H and W were married. as the case may be • Spouses include those with defective or flawed marriages. he saw a man. Judgment was rendered but H appealed the case. W was hit but according to the doctor.  H surprised W in the act with P. A woman in custody cannot have a “wife. talk to him in a motel.  H saw W naked with P. What crime did W commit? Parricide.ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY • What is the purpose of this provision? To prevent executive officers from influencing judicial authorities  Supposing the Deputy Executive Secretary has a connection with a strong political leader who has a pending case before a judge. natural. legitimate spouse  Supposing an illegitimate grandson killed his grandfather. When he got his gun. As such. as the case may be. The invitation is neither indecent nor immoral. H left home. The death of P is still the proximate result of the outrage of H. The third manner is in reference to the second manner of commission. prepares a letter addressed to the judge. she may not be liable but she may be held liable for violation of the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act. ARTICLE 247 . W killed H. H shot P dead. to the judge on what to do. there should be no interruption  Supposing H already has a suspicion of W’s infidelity so he told her that he was going to the province for a week when in fact. He did not see them in the act of sexual intercourse. and logical consequences of his act pursuant to Article 4 of the RPC. H is liable for the direct. Presumption of validity of marriage applies until it is terminated by final judicial declaration. W killed H. Liable? No. the escape. he was not.

ARTICLE 261 . homicide or murder. ARTICLE 253 . it still does not change the nature of the crime but only increases the penalty. how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. it was no longer aimed t A. Crime? Infanticide. under the third manner .DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who gave the fatal blow was identified. may the combatants still be liable? YES. what crime may he be liable for? Homicide. Intoxication is an alternative circumstance.ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCES OR BEVERAGES 20 .DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS  Supposing the accused aimed his gun at the house of his neighbor.UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION • May there be a crime of unintentional abortion through reckless imprudence? No. depending on the nature of the injuries inflicted. there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 263 .MUTILATION • As distinguished from physical injuries. there is merely an intent to deprive the offended party of the use of any part of his body. physical injuries.PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE. she suffered an abortion. what crime may he be liable for? Murder – influence of drugs in the commission of a crime is considered a QAC under Section 25 of the Dangerous Drugs Act. but at the time it was discharged . The violence exerted was not intended. there is an intention to deprive the offended party of the use of any part his body • Differentiate mutilation from attempted/frustrated parricide. the situation is no longer contemplated under Article 251. • What if the accused was under the influence of a prohibited drug. if there is no intention to kill. In SPI. only increases the penalty by period (3) QAC . MURDER OR HOMICIDE ARTICLE 251 . hit a pregnant woman. he is only liable for alarms and scandals.  Supposing a jeepney driver who was driving recklessly. in frustrated PMHI. no one was injured or harmed. ARTICLE 258 . • If a person was killed and the accused was under the influence of liquor.ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS • Any mitigating circumstance? YES.RESPONSIBILITY OF PARTICIPANTS IN A DUEL  Supposing in the course of the duel.PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who inflicted the physical injuries can be identified. if the purpose was to conceal dishonor. infanticide. Generic Aggravating Circumstance (1) QAC – cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance GAC – may be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance (2) QAC – changes the nature of the crime GAC – does not change the nature of the crime. The violence exerted against the pregnant woman must be intentional.ABORTION PRACTICED BY A PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES ARTICLE 260 . Crime? Infanticide ARTICLE 256 . ARTICLE 259 . may he still be liable for duel? YES.HOMICIDE ARTICLE 250 . the crime will remain SPL. and such QAC was actually proven. what crime is committed? Homicide or murder.CHALLENGING TO A DUEL ARTICLE 262 . while the injury inflicted may be mortal or sufficient to cause the death of a person. infanticide. in PMHI.of commission of duel: making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted. Crime committed? Illegal discharge.  Supposing C aimed his gun at A.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing only a generic aggravating circumstance (GAC) is present.SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES • Manner of commission: (1) by wounding (2) by beating (3) by assaulting (4) by administering injurious substance (Art. by  What if one of the combatants was seriously injured but survived. ARTICLE 252 . is he liable for discharge of firearms? No. 264) • Differentiate SPI from frustrated parricide.INFANTICIDE  Supposing a stranger killed a two-day old child with the use of poison. only the pregnant woman is entitled to avail of such mitigating circumstance. as the case may be.INTENTIONAL ABORTION ARTICLE 257 . Crime? At most. in mutilation. as a result of which. • Qualified Aggravating Circumstance v. The impact threw the woman several meters away. homicide or murder. ARTICLE 249 . what crime may he be liable for? Physical injuries.GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE ARTICLE 254 . In the mutilation. there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 264 .must be alleged in the information GAC – need not be alleged as long as it is proven during the trial • If a QAC is not alleged but the prosecution introduced a witness or presented evidence proving the existence of such QAC to which the defense counsel did not object.  Supposing a mother killed her two-day old child. ARTICLE 255 .

. • Define stalking. RA Anti-Hazing Law • What is hazing? How is it committed? • Who are the persons liable and what are their liabilities? • Which physical. guardian with ward. which has the effect of arousing a woman sexually. There were no attendant circumstances present. Is he liable? YES. the man would be liable since the woman’s resistance is unnecessary considering the crime had already been consummated.As an accomplice or accessory? YES. May the accused be held liable for rape? YES – regardless of the consent of the offended party. and CAT are not considered as hazing? Those approved by the NAPOLCOM and Secretary of National Defense. adopting father with his adopted daughter. she was simply reluctant.As principal by inducement? YES. threat or intimidation • Is it necessary for the crime to be consummated that there be full penetration? No – partial is sufficient • In the event that force was used. Is he liable? No. The woman was simply made to loosen her inhibitions (c) by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority • Is it necessary that there be force. After the effect kicks in. PMA. but when she became pregnant. • Fraudulent machinations include promise to marriage in order to secure a woman’s consent to sexual intercourse  Supposing through a promise of marriage. She was 11 years.  Supposing a tablet. he invites her to his place and has sexual intercourse with her. 21 . less serious and slight physical injuries). Is the man still liable? It depends. and psychological tests or training of the AFP. the charge of rape is always accompanied by violation of R. If there was already penetration before she woke up. When she woke up. 11months. A. May the offender be liable under the law? YES.”  Supposing that the victim was a prostitute who had sexual intercourse with the offender for the first time. Is the man liable? No. • What physical injuries are contemplated under this statute? Those enumerated under the RPC (serious. • Define Battered Woman Syndrome. . PNP. mental. (rape can be prosecuted de officio. They victim and offender did not have a “dating relationship. A agreed to have sexual intercourse with her boyfriend. and economic abuse. threat. what degree of resistance must be put up by the offended party? Same as if she was defending her life  Supposing the woman did not offer any resistance. was secretly dropped by a man into his date’s drink. The girl is 19 years old. or intimidation? No.As principal by direct participation? YES.  Supposing a man had sexual intercourse with the daughter of his common-law wife. Also applies to professor having sexual intercourse with student. ONLY if there is conspiracy .SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND MALTREATMENT RA 9262 . there is no rape. 7610  Supposing a girl worked as a prostitute who agreed to have sexual intercourse with the accused in exchange for a certain amount of money.LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES ARTICLE 266 . Does it have the same effect as a justifying circumstance? • Who are the women protected by the law?  Supposing the offender and the woman were only phone pals and had never met each other in person. if there was no penetration yet and the woman did not resist.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 265 . psychological. Crime committed? Rape. ARTICLE 266-A TO 266-D RAPE • How is rape classified? As a public crime. physical. w/c means authorities can initiate the filing of the complaint) • Manner of commission: (1) sexual act (carnal knowledge of a woman by a man) • Is it sufficient that a man has carnal knowledge of a woman? NO – it must be accompanied or attended by any of the circumstances enumerated • May a woman be criminally liable for rape under the first manner? . (d) when the offended party is under 12 years old or is demented • If victim is a minor.ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT • Define sexual. May the man be liable under this law? No. she saw a man on top of her and she just let him be. (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious  Supposing the offended party was asleep. • May the offender still be liable even if there is consent of the woman? YES. Abortion is not included.As principal by indispensable cooperation? YES. and 29 days old at the time of the commission of the offense. he disappeared. • Attendant circumstances: (a) through force. There is grave abuse of authority. There is sexual relationship between them. sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years old is always rape.

may offenders still be liable? YES – the law does not make distinction as to whether the injuries were inflicted intentionally or accidentally. there is one principal by direct participation and 2 principals by indispensable cooperation. or a public officer • Kidnapping for ransom . custody of the child from Monday-Friday is with W while it was with H during the weekends. On the same night. • Attendant circumstances: (a) if the detention lasts for more than three days  Supposing the offended party is detained for only one day but is a minor. What crime may X be liable for? Kidnapping for ransom.  Supposing he was allowed to go out but he chose to stay inside the building for security purposes.UNLAWFUL ARREST  Supposing A saw B in the act of committing theft so he arrested B. B agreed and A released her sister. A cannot pay so X kidnapped his mother and would only release her if A pays his debt. Liable? No. Who benefits from the pardon provided by the law? The principal by direct participation. What crime did A commit? Kidnapping for ransom  Is the crime of grave threats absorbed in kidnapping? YES.KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR • May the parents be criminally liable for this crime? YES. price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons. There is no official interpretation by the Supreme Court. A. Liable? YES but for the crime of arbitrary detention since the offender is a public officer.  What if there was already an order for the suspension of the police officer at the time he arrested his houseboy. this time for unlawful arrest. a female.  Supposing in a judicial proceeding. but she neglected his proposals.  Supposing a person was detained in a building.  Supposing A owes X P50. kidnapping was only incidental.What does ransom mean? Ransom is money. Detention? No. Is H liable? YES. What crime did X commit? Kidnapping for ransom . both must be attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in the first manner • May the offended party be male? YES.INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME  Supposing the accused assembled some minors in the province and told them about Manila. The mother took her children and did not allow DSWD to take them. the car was returned and the brother was released. they still had not returned. Liable? ARTICLE 271 . Notwithstanding the fact that the amount asked of is legally due to X? YES.  Supposing in a rape case. Liable? YES. the mother was deprived of the custody of her children which was granted to the DSWD. A kept him for 2-3 hours after which. 22 . The principal by direct participation marries the victim.  A borrowed a car from X but refused to return it so X kidnapped A’s brother. ARTICLE 267 . Detention? YES. 8353 is silent.  Supposing X suspected that his maid has been taking the jewellery of his mother so X took his maid to the police. The minors were mesmerized by his stories of the life in the city.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) sexual assault • How committed? By inserting one’s penis into another’s mouth or anal orifice or by inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person. One weekend. female friend. He was detained for two days. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4 (b) when the detention is committed by simulating public authority (c) when serious physical injuries are inflicted or threats to kill offended party are made circumstance  Supposing the infliction of physical injuries was only incidental. the condition for her release was for B to agree to become A’s girlfriend. Crime committed? Special complex crime of kidnapping with homicide ARTICLE 269 . H brought the child to the province. (d) when the victim is a minor. Arrest is not a valid warrantless arrest. Does the pardon extend to his co-accused? R. A was killed. That evening.the car was considered ransom. Is a liable? No .the arrest falls under valid warrantless arrests  Supposing a police officer has been suspecting that his houseboy has been stealing the jewellery of his wife so he took the houseboy into custody and brought him to the municipal hall for proper action. Still liable? YES. Crime committed? Murder – there was no indication of A’s intention to detain X. a payment that releases one from captivity  Supposing A was courting B. He took them with him to Manila.KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION • Is it necessary that there be physical deprivation of liberty for a person to be considered detained? No.  Supposing A kidnapped X and brought him to Cavite. There is only mere suspicion. he brought B to the proper authorities. he was free to roam around but offenders did not allow him to go out of the building’s premises. he saw three minors who wanted to go with him. Ransom was demanded but not forthcoming so X was killed. and after five days. A kidnapped B’s sister. if they are separated and one of them fails to return the child to the other’s custody  Supposing H and W were legally separated.000. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4 th circumstance th  Supposing the offended party is 45 years old and is a barangay tanod. when the accused was about to leave for Manila. ARTICLE 270 .  Supposing X was kidnapped and was brought to Laguna.

and other public house. the owner of the dwelling. ARTICLE 276 .“If you don’t allow me to cheat. May the police officer be liable? No – the police officer is justified. accused entered through the said door. ARTICLE 278 .EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR ARTICLE 274 .GRAVE COERCIONS  Supposing a police officer. ARTICLE 272 .EXPLOITATION OF MINORS ARTICLE 279 . Crime committed? Robbery – there was intent to gain (assuming there was violence in the seizure) 23 .BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR ARTICLE 285 . tavern. I will be forced to cheat. Liable? YES.  Supposing A boarded a taxi and the taxi brought you somewhere despite your efforts to stop the driver. The owner saw him and told him to leave but he did not. • If the threat was used as a means to commit another crime. ARTICLE 283 . • Possible defenses in trespass to dwelling: (1) purpose was to prevent harm on the accused. the threat is absorbed in such crime.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the accused persuaded the minors to go with him to Manila with the promise of giving them lucrative jobs. Is offender still liable? YES. the farmers did not go out of their house to harvest palay. Is X liable? No.QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING  Supposing the offender was a public officer.GRAVE THREATS  Supposing the threat was made and it was relayed to the person after three hours.  Several armed men surrounded the farm in a certain area. through violence. while the same is open ARTICLE 281 . Entry was not against the will of the owner. X did not give him any assistance. or by failing to take him to a safe place • Is it necessary that the minor be wounded? No. ARTICLE 287 . whom the offender has found abandoned to the authorities or to his family. The minors went with the accused.LIGHT THREATS  Supposing X made the following threat to Y: .“If you don’t lend me your book.” What crime may X be liable for? Grave threats . prevented X from joining the NPA. or third person (2) purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice (3) place is a café.  Supposing the back door was open.  What if he was unconscious because of starvation.ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR OTHER OFFENSES ARTICLE 280 . inn. I not pay my debt.ABANDONING A MINOR • The purpose of abandonment is to avoid the obligation of taking care of such minor ARTICLE 277 .OTHER LIGHT THREATS ARTICLE 286 . What crime may the armed men be liable for? Grave threats. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of domicile.SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION IN PAYMENT OF DEBT ARTICLE 275 .” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats ARTICLE 284 .ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM • Manner of commission: (1) by failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender finds in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying  Supposing the person X found did not have a wound but just fainted and lost consciousness. Because of their fear. may the parents also be liable for violation of RA 7610(Anti-Child Abuse Law)? YES.OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS ARTICLE 282 . is X liable if he did not render assistance? YES. (2) by failing to help or render assistance to another whom the offender has accidentally wounded or injured  Supposing X intentionally injured somebody in an isolated place and left him there. Liable? No.“If you don’t lend me your book. INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS • In indifference of parents.ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY. Liable? No. (3) by failing to deliver a child. I will take your book and sell it.” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats . under 7 years of age.SLAVERY ARTICLE 273 .LIGHT COERCIONS  Supposing the purpose of the seizure by offender was to sell the properties seized and not to apply to the debt. but the minor must be found in an unsafe place. Liable? No.

if charges were merely concocted.  Supposing there is a restaurant which was inspected by sanitary officers and thereafter a violation of cleanliness ordinance was discovered. Robbery with force upon things. What crime are the robbers liable for? Robbery with homicide. the vehicle was set on fire. Crime committed? Robbery. Crime committed? Robbery with arson. The offender destroys the door of the grocery and enters thru the connecting door and robbed the house. they were in turn. whether it was taken with or without force. Liable? YES. murder. If offender entered through the door the crime committed is robbery. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide. one robber was killed while two policemen were injured. Under Article 274.  Supposing that while fleeing. there is intimidation. the robbery was already consummated when the bus was set on fire.  Supposing a part of the house was set on fire by the accused in order to divert the attention of the household members while his co-accused robbed the house. • Manner of commission: 1) in an inhabited house. • ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS:  Supposing A. and C conspired to rob the house of X. etc.  Supposing a maid was hogtied and killed by robbers.  Under the same facts. The subject taken is large cattle. being present in the scene of the crime.  Supposing after a robbery was committed in a public bus. public building. robbers saw a person who witnessed the crime and killed him. • The concept of dependencies –  Supposing there is a house. • Distinguish robbery from direct bribery: In both. Unless. if there is actually no violation of cleanliness ordinance and threats of prosecution are based on concocted facts. Crime committed? Theft. Crime committed? Robbery with homicide. the crime committed is robbery. What crime are the sanitation officers liable for? Direct Bribery. they saw one of its residents and killed him in order there will be no opposition during the robbery. or edifice devoted to worship a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance)  Supposing offender entered through the window of a house and stole valuables. crime committed is always carnapping. it contemplates parricide. On their way to the house. suppose X is indebted to A but he cannot pay. The use of force upon things must be used as a means to gain entry to a building or house. • ROBBERY  Supposing a person was divested of his cell phone.  If during the robbery. Liability? A and B – robbery only. Is offender still liable? YES. A asked X to work as a janitor in his office as payment for his debt. B.000 in exchange for their silence.  Supposing you threaten another person to retrieve your personal property. Crime? Robbery with homicide.  Supposing during a robbery a shoot-out ensues between the robbers and the son of the owner of the house.  Supposing robbers escaped and policemen were able to catch up with them in another province. Is the crime committed a special complex crime of robbery with arson? No. The bank manager was shot dead by one of the robbers. During the shoot-out. Crime? Robbery with homicide. One of the robbers is killed. a policemen responded and was killed during the shoot-out. ARTICLE 288 & ARTICLE 289 • Articles 288 and 289 are now covered by the provisions of the Labor Code. The sanitation officers intimidated the Chinese owner with threats of legal cases and asked for P50. However. C took a woman out of the house and raped her. and C wanted to rob the wealthiest family in the barangay. Same is true with violation of Anti-cattle rustling law. Are the robbers liable? YES. Chinese owner gives them the said amount.  Supposing A stole a car with jewellery and money inside. It is not necessary that offender has had sufficient time to dispose of the object or property. 24 . Liable? No – he must have been made to work as a household servant or far laborer. Who is/are liable for the killing of the bank manager? All members of the band shall be equally liable as principals. the crime committed by the sanitary officers is robbery. not infanticide. Offender entered through the window and stole valuables. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking.  Supposing five robbers agreed to commit crime of robbery of Bank X only.  Supposing a robber accidentally pulled the trigger of his gun and killed another robber who was his son.  Supposing owners use the window for entering the house.  When the thing taken is a motor vehicle. they attempted to prevent the killing or assault of another person by their co-robber (except if there is an agreement to kill all those who get in their way. not parricide.  Supposing an offender has taken possession of the object but offended party fought back and was able to retrieve his stolen property. • Homicide is given a generic meaning. A and B were not present when C raped the woman so they were not in the position to prevent C from committing the rape. Are you liable for robbery? No. So long as a person is killed by reason or on occasion of the robbery.  Supposing a robber stepped on a two-day old child instantly killing the latter. violence.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Distinguish from services rendered under compulsion of debt under Article 274. • ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS:  Supposing a man slashes the bag of a passer-by and takes her cell phone and wallet. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide. As the robbers were fleeing. Crime? Robbery with homicide even if there is treachery. What crime is committed? Theft. If threat of prosecution was used to make a person part from his money and person actually committed a crime and was intimidated to part with his money – there is bribery. B. What crime is he liable for? Carnapping. adjacent to it is a grocery and there is a door connecting the two. and infanticide. C – robbery with rape. There is no intent to gain. divested of the cell phone they took from you. They then proceeded to the house and robbed it.)  Supposing A. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide and physical injuries. What is essential is the subject matter of the crime. Its return does not preclude the existence of robbery.

However. If offenders took valuables inside. After taking valuables. or taking of coconut from a coconut farm or plantation.  Supposing offender took the stolen car to a nearby street.  Supposing there is a warehouse. the crime committed is robbery with force upon things.ANTI-FENCING LAW • Can be prosecuted concurrently with theft or robbery under the RPC • Fence: any person who buys. window. The offender. Crime committed? Theft. or disposes of stolen items (subject of robbery and theft) and knows that such items were stolen. g) by removing or taking away such locked or sealed furniture.  Supposing the said jewellery box is not locked or sealed but merely closed. It turns out. receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery ARTICLE 310 . roof. Crime commited? Robbery. chest. floor c) through the use of picklocks or false keys d) by breaking door (internal). Offender entered and took a locked jewellery box. There is no use of fictitious name. f) by breaking door (internal). roof. Crime committed? Consummated robbery. • Purchasing unlicensed car parts may make the buyer liable for violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. the crime is robbery. A Meralco lineman is not a person in authority. If what he broke outside the inhabited house was a closed jewellery box. wall. floor  Supposing accused entered through the door of a house. mere possession is punishable.  Supposing the door of the master’s bedroom was not closed. conceals. or taking of fish from a fishpond or fishery. e) by removing or taking away such sealed or closed furniture. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking. Crime committed? Theft. The window was not broken to effect entrance  Supposing a carport is enclosed with a gate. sells. The offender broke the door and took the couple’s jewellery. Crime committed? Carnapping. 2) in an uninhabited house or public building a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance) b) breaking door (external). There is material possession of the car c) through the use of picklocks or false keys • Picklock: used solely for the commission of the crime.  Supposing a passer-by saw a locked jewellery box inside a parked car.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the offender. Accused entered through the slide opening and took 50 cavans of rice. Once inside. The seller is required to acquire license before selling such secondhand items. wall. “reaches” for valuables inside the house. destroyed the box and took the jewellery. What crime may A be liable for? Carnapping d) by simulating or pretending to be a public authority  Supposing a Meralco lineman asked permission to conduct electrical inspection inside your house. The box need not be broken. e) use of fictitious name  Supposing X pretended to be a long lost relative to gain your permission to sleep in your house for the night. Crime committed? Theft.  Supposing offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house with the intention to break it outside. offender breaks the window in order to escape. Crime committed? Carnapping. the son of the owner catches him with the box while he was on his way out. chest. Is he liable for robbery? No. he saw a motorcycle in the sala and took it. after breaking the window. wardrobe. He then destroyed the lock and took the valuables. Crime committed? Robbery. he takes your property. Upon entry. Crime committed? Robbery. receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery  Supposing the offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house and brought it outside and broke it open. chest. acquires. keeps. chest. He breaks the window of the car and takes the jewellery box home where he planned to force it open. • False key: includes a genuine key stolen from owner  Supposing A used a false key to open the door of their neighbor’s house. If the receptacle was sealed or closed. possesses. he takes your valuable items. Crime committed? Theft. What crime did he commit? Robbery. thinking it was locked. PD 1612 .QUALIFIED THEFT • When theft is committed by a domestic servant. 25 . Accused broke the gate and took the vehicle inside the carport. or act is committed with grave abuse of confidence. removed its stereo and fled leaving the car behind. window. when he opened the door. Crime committed? Theft. what crime did he commit? Theft. he was merely purporting himself to be Meralce lineman. wardrobe. Force upon things was not used as a means to enter the house. There is unlawful entry b) breaking door (external). locked or sealed furniture or receptacle  Supposing a husband and wife locked the door of the master’s bedroom when they left for work.  Supposing accused broke the window of a car and took valuables within his arm’s reach. Crime committed? Theft. sealed or closed furniture or receptacle  Supposing the offender breaks open a locked receptacle from an uninhabited house. Crime committed? Theft.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PD 532 . In estafa. F will give a better and newer model instead. G fails to return the bill and spends it for himself. What crime may the driver be liable for? Carnapping. S issues a receipt which states the serial number of the bill.  Is there JP? YES.  Supposing S has been keeping a 1. JP? YES. There is lawful transfer of possession based on the contract. with abuse of confidence. or by virtue of a provision of the law • Ownership of property: There is ownership when there is no more obligation to return exactly the same property given or lent to the accused. If F misappropriates the car. owner has better right than possessor. G never returns the P500. Act is solitary.  Supposing the student sold the book. 532 is punished as a co-principal.000 bill from S. or on any highway.  Is there MP? YES. Crime committed? Simple robbery only. based on the verbal agreement (there is a contract)  Does the student have a better right over the book than the professor? YES. G borrows the bill. ownership is transferred to him  Supposing a professor owns a criminal law book.D. Ownership? YES – student is no longer obliged to return the borrowed item.  Supposing on March 17. The student suggests that if he loses the book he will give the professor the latest edition of the book to take its place. Student has better right over it. The professor lends the book until March 17.  MP? YES. Ownership was already given since F was not obliged to return the same car to Y. A will give his neighbor a new bike instead. If it is committed through a solitary act.ESTAFA = Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation . (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing G borrows P500 from S. If G misappropriates the amount borrowed. There is ownership already.  Supposing P gives his car keys to his driver and instructs him to fill up his car with gas. May the student refuse to return it? YES. but A sells it instead. the professor changes his mind asks the student for the return of the book. what crime is he liable for? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing Y lends his car to F with the agreement to return it on the day after the wedding. 532.SWINDLING • Theft v.000 pesos instructing the student to have it denominated to two P500 bills. But A is civilly liable. Driver never returns and sells the car to his friend. what crime may A be liable for if he misappropriates the bike? No crime. the crime is simple robbery only. S give the student 1. The professor still has better right over the book and may ask for its return at any time. G will give S twice the amount plus interest instead. D. property is voluntarily lent or given to the offender. A is unable to return the bike because he sold it to another person. What crime did he commit? No crime. A Student approaches him and borrows the book knowing it contains personal notations by the professor. (MP + Mis) There is no JP since there is no agreement nor contract between them to give student better right over the book. What crime is committed? THEFT.  Supposing A borrows his neighbor’s bike for five days. ARTICLE 315 . S agrees. What crime may he be liable for? Theft.  Supposing after an hour. Student takes the book to Recto instead and sells it to a bookstore. (MP + JP + Mis)  If A was merely asked by his neighbor to bring the bike to a shop for repair.  Supposing offenders rode a bus and. Just to be sure that G returns the exact bill. What crime may A be liable for? Estafa.  Supposing the following day. take one of the bills and return the other to him. written or verbal. divested the other passengers of their valuables. the professor asks for the book. also called physical possession • Juridical Possession (JP): is present when possession arises from lawful transactions either by a contract of agreement.000 peso bill in his wallet for 25 years. The professor agrees. the professor asks for the book but student tells him that he could no longer return it because he sold it to another student.ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW • If a crime of robbery is committed on the streets. What crime? Estafa. subject to the condition that if in case it cannot be returned. (MP + Mis)  G borrows a P1. What crime is committed? Estafa. or bridge indiscriminately – it is highway robbery under P. • Offender benefiting from the proceeds of crime committed punishable under P.THEFT = Material Possession + Misappropriation . On the sixth day. May he do so? YES. what crime is he liable for? No crime. physical possession of the property. property is taken.  Supposing the professor lends his book to his student and asks about what will happen if the latter cannot return the book. expressed or implied. Subject of theft is a motor vehicle (MP + Mis)  What kind of possession does a bank teller have over the money deposited by the bank’s clients? Material possession only.  Is student bound to return the exact same book? No. what crime may A be liable for? Theft (MP + Mis)  If A was told to return the bike on the sixth day from the day it was borrowed but both he and the neighbor agreed that if it cannot be returned. If F does not return the car and sells it to another person. what crime may he be liable for? No crime. 26 .NO CRIME (only civil liability) = Ownership + Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation • Material Possession (MP): there is only actual. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing a professor asks his student to bring the book to his office in Makati. road. He is civilly liable only.  Supposing F approaches Y to borrow the latter’s car and to use it as a bridal vehicle for his cousin’s wedding. • In ordinary cases of theft. Y lends it to be returned on Monday. while it was travelling along EDSA. Only MP was given to the student. Estafa . Both agreed that if the car was not returned.

X is liable for estafa because there would be conversion in that case. who could not pay.there was no express prohibition for X to give the items to a sub-agent. Was the sale on credit within the scope of the authority of X? YES. There was no crime since the obligation does not arise until December 31. the officemate loses her job and could no longer pay the instalments agreed upon. B. if there is an express prohibition.  Supposing ABC Corp. is J liable for estafa? No. the company gives J a demand letter for the money giving him five days to turn it over. It does not extinguish criminal liability because there is no criminal liability to speak of. misappropriated certain properties of L. In the course of their stay. X sold the items on credit. J was fired and could no longer pay the balance. Istead of paying the taxes. May he be liable for estafa? No. was given the money to purchase high quality rice. If importer fails to pay the bank and to return the goods.  Supposing a company was bound to deliver a package to X but the package was delivered to M instead. If M misappropriates the contents of the package. The promissory note executed on December 23 is a valid novation of the initial obligation.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing bank teller takes the money deposited by a client.  Supposing a sales representative of an appliance company approached X as a prospective customer. However. redemption of the same. he made an agreement with the supplier of to provide for 50 sacks of rice at half the price. Therefore. Was there misappropriation? YES. 27 . joint owner. May the school be liable for estafa? No. J lost the entire amount. J failed to remit the amount. It was given for a specific purpose. The ownership of the goods remains with the bank who fully paid such goods. he shall receive 10% commission. is he liable for estafa? YES.  Under the same facts but A tells B that he is prohibited from giving it to a sub-agent. Novation is not one of the grounds stated therein. the depository is liable for estafa. At the end of the school year. After two months. after which. Crime committed? Frauds against the public treasury under Article 213. B acted beyond the authority given to him.  Supposing A owns a jewellery worth P100. Ownership is transferred to the school. After few days. • Estafa cannot be committed by a partner in a partnership. Even if the promissory note was a valid novation of his initial obligation. On the same day. The property was given to him in trust. Determine if there is a violation of the terms and conditions by the agent against the principal. he gave X a trial period of one week. May the company charge J with estafa? No.000 on December 1. M and X had the same name. May D be liable for estafa? YES.  Supposing one night. If there is. Two days later. Is B liable for estafa? YES.  Supposing D. What crime may the teller be liable for? Qualified Theft. collected P500. J defaults in payment. Not convinced. X gave the jewellery to a sub-agent who sold it to Z. The school refuses to return the amount deposited. There is no conversion. is he liable for estafa? YES. May the pawnshop be liable for estafa? YES. Moreover.  Supposing when the pieces of jewellery were given to X. acted within authority given to him by the owner. M takes possession of the property in trust for the true owner (based on the provision of the law). May B be liable for estafa? No. The agent in turn gives it to a sub-agent also for the jewellery to be sold. The grounds for the extinguishment of criminal liability are enumerated in Article 89 of the RPC.  Supposing the accused. ABC Corp has a policy that collections are to be remitted within 30 days from collection. • Conversion: disposing of property and acting as if one is the owner of a property. B acted in violation of prior agreement. if partner. J was holding the amount in trust and he already has the obligation to return it to its rightful owner. or co-owner misappropriates property which is already separated or given to a third person or entirely to the other partner. It turns out. Is X liable for estafa? No .  Supposing after December 31. J went to Manila and confessed to the president of ABC Corp that he had misappropriated the money. The president accepts the condition. Owner gave the jewellery to the agent for the latter to sell it. There is conversion committed by B  A tells B to sell the jewellery based on cash basis but B sells the jewellery on instalment basis to his officemate. D used the money to play in the casino and lost all of it. After three months. a partner to a business. he was merely instructed by Y to sell it within 30 days. Assuming it was December 10. • Novation of the contract or obligation: Is novation a ground to extinguish criminal liability? No. J signs a promissory note prepared by the company’s lawyer. if the product is not returned.  Supposing the administrator of the estate of deceased L. to return the same. J made no payment. a Cebu collecting agent. A gives it to B for the latter to sell it at a price less than 100K.  Supposing that on December 31. there is no estafa committed. explained the benefits of the appliance he was selling. They agree that if B succeeds. The importer is guilty of estafa by misappropriation. 2008 giving him until December 31 to remit the amount collected.  What if instead of selling it. There is a presumption of misappropriation when he failed to remit the amount collected. May J be charged of estafa? YES. it would be considered sold.  Supposing on December 23. J. • If a particular property is given to another through a contract of deposit and depository misappropriates it and cannot return the same.  Supposing a school asks for deposit in case of breakages. May L be liable for estafa? YES. conversion exists because the agent acted beyond authority given to him. acting in violation of a condition agreed or imposed upon. There is no obligation until December 31. The crime of theft is committed with abuse of confidence. the misappropriator may be held liable for estafa. B goes to C and asks him to sell the property on the same condition with a commission of 5%. The importer is bound to pay the bank the proceeds of the sale of the goods or to return the same to the bank. C does not sell the jewellery and keeps it for himself. Since there is no obligation.  Supposing an importer receives goods in trust. J played in the casino with his girlfriend and her family. novation is a change or amendment of terms or conditions agreed upon by the parties who are private individuals. J asked for forgiveness and suggested that he will repay the amount through salary deduction every month. by a co-owner or by a joint owner of a property. May B be liable for estafa? YES. B gives it to a sub-agent who misappropriates the jewellery. this does not bear any effect to his criminal liability. There is conversion. 2008. The money was misappropriated. J executes a promissory note to assuring payment of the amount through monthly instalments. the agent. and if not sold. upon the approval of the president. the student asks for the deposit arguing that no breakages occurred. The criminal liability of J has already attached since his obligation to pay arose on December 31. On January 5. X no longer returned the product because he had sold it to another. The school is not bound to return the exact money bills paid by the student. employs collection agents around the country who are obliged to collect amounts within their jurisdiction for the company. was tasked to pay taxes for the business. It is not within the power of private individuals to extinguish criminal liability.000. a public officer in charge of purchasing supplies.  Supposing A pawned his cell phone but the pawnshop did not return the item even after A’s The cell phone was given to them in trust. But could X be liable for estafa? No. is he liable for estafa? YES.

There must be evidence of receipt of the notice of dishonour or demand of payment. The check is postdated for the following week. is issuer already liable? No.)  Supposing A issues a check and at that time. • Will the dishonor by the bank of the check make the issuer liable? No. The check was dishonored for lack of funds.P. A indicated that the check is not intended for payment but merely to evidence an existing obligation.P.  Supposing before the check was encashed. If the check bounces. the crime may be committed by any person. it turned out that the account did not have sufficient funds. May E be liable for violation of B. issuer. 22? YES. may E be liable for estafa? YES. •2 nd Requisite – check is dishonoured by the bank for lack of funds. the intent to defraud is not needed while in estafa. concealed or destroyed. 22 if the check is dishonored by the bank? No. since it follows general principles of malum prohibitum. May E be liable for estafa? No.Even if check is issued as a guarantee for the obligation of another or only as collateral or security for the monetary obligation of another. 22? According to a decision of the Supreme Court – YES the issuer is still liable. presumption of knowledge of the insufficiency of funds on the part of the accused sets in. a worthless check is detrimental if placed in circulation • Manner of Commission (1) Making or drawing and issuing any check to apply on account or for value (Maker. In infidelity. A had sufficient funds and reason for the dishonor was the stop payment notice.P.P. A gave notice to the bank to stop payment because the payee did not comply with his obligation. May he be liable for violation of B. The check was issued simultaneously with the contracting of the debt.  Supposing B presented to the bank a check issued to him by A beyond 90 days from the date of issuance.P. E takes it back and issues a different check. If the check bounce.  Supposing one afternoon. he had P200.P.P. If the requisites concur. The later check was issued for payment of a pre-existing debt. the co-conspirators are also liable) •1 st Requisite – person issues. estafa . • The law requires banks and financial institutions to indicate on the face of the check or on its back.P. it does not punish a person for non-payment of contractual debt but for issuing a bum check. he issues a check in payment of the items bought.000 in the bank. He is still given five banking days to pay. there is already a prima facie evidence of violation of B.000. 22. • Upon receipt of the notice of dishonor. there is no violation of B. Before the presentation of the check. insufficiency of funds. the offender must be a public officer in charge with the custody of documents removed. V agrees and allows E to take the grocery items home. 22 gives the issuer the obligation to maintain in his account sufficient value to cover the amount of the check issued for a period of 90 days counted from the date appearing on the check (date of issuance. After such period.P. Issuance of a worthless check is not a crime. it was dishonored for lack of funds. When the later check was encashed. fails to pay the amount of the check within five banking days • All of the requisites must concur • Will the mere issuance of a bum check make a person liable for violation of B. • Is it necessary to have a testimony from a bank employee to back up the claim of presumption of knowledge? No.P. the issuer is still liable under B. there is only civil liability.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Postdating of the check should be prior to or simultaneous with the contracting of the obligation. provided that the account of the issuer had sufficient funds  Supposing at the time A issued a check for P100.In infidelity.000 from V. makes or draws check in payment of account or for value . Is A liable for violating B. the reason for dishonoring the same. 22 . 22? YES. 22? No. drawer. there should be a formal. On the back of the check. 22. A had more than enough funds to cover the value of the check. funds were coming in from payments to be made by his other clients. May he be liable for violation of B. When B encashed the check. 22  Supposing A issues a check to B. There is intent to defraud. (2) Failure to maintain sufficient funds to cover the value of the check in the event the check is presented for payment • B. • Is the mere evidence of notice sufficient? No. written demand of payment th Requisite – the maker. 28 .  Supposing A issued a check as evidence of a long time agreement with B.P. in estafa.ANTI-BOUNCING CHECKS LAW • Good faith and honest intention are not defenses in a prosecution for violation of B. or that account is closed • If the check is dishonored for any other reason. Failure to pay after such period will make the person liable. Before the 90-day period elapsed. it was enacted to protect the interest of people in checks as a substitute for money. having seen the notice of dishonor or demand of payment.  Supposing A did not have enough money to pay the debt and he knew of the insufficiency of the fund.P. 22? YES. 22? No. The check is not issued as payment of obligation or for value. May A be liable for violation of B. A sets up good faith as a defense and honest belief that his other clients would be paying him in the amount that would suffice payment of his obligation on time.  Supposing a client destroys the documents of a bank to conceal fact of the existence of a loan. may A be liable for violation of B. • Infidelity in the custody of papers v. Since E does not have enough cash at that time.P. or issuer. drawer are punished but endorser is not. The check would have been dishonored just the same for insufficiency of funds. May he be liable for violation of B. If it is issued in payment of a pre-existing debt. anticipating that in the following week. the act must be done with intent to defraud. 22? YES. A withdrew the amount sufficient to cover the value of the check. BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. E purchases grocery items worth P10. 22. What crime is he liable for? Estafa. •3 •4 rd Requisite – Payee or holder gives notice of dishonor and demands the value of the check • A verbal demand is not acceptable.

accused may be charged of violation of R. At the time of the taking. • CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY The brother-in-law charges A with violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. a high school teacher fell in love with a 17-year old female student and the student fell in love with him also. Supposing the woman is only 10 years old? YES. Sexual intercourse is punishable under any of the following circumstances: 1) maintaining a concubine or mistress in the conjugal home or dwelling 2) cohabitation in any other place (living together as husband and wife) 3) sexual intercourse with another woman under scandalous circumstances (open to public) ARTICLE 336 . with intent to kill. her neighbor. ARTICLE 338 . and checked-out at 10:00p. estafa. It applies only when crime committed is theft. checked-in to a motel room at 1:00 p.  Supposing a 19 year old woman refuses to file a case of acts of lasciviousness.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Penalty is a fine twice the amount of the value of the check but not exceeding P200. or guardians if offended party is incapacitated. it must be deliberate. The student becomes pregnant with her and the teacher’s child. ARTICLE 316 .m. Is A liable? YES. What crime may the teacher be charged with? Rape through grave abuse of authority and violation of R. This is o because unless the accused is a blatant violator of B. After a week.m. intentionally burned T to death what crime did X commit? Murder. A is not exempt from criminal liability under Article 332.000.can be initiated by the offended party only or by his parents. Is the evidence enough to warrant conviction for adultery? YES. A. 7610. the court adopts a liberal view against the accused. ARTICLE 332 . ARTICLE 333 . B leaves the cell phone on his table. 8353 and qualified seduction are present. A. and K.WHO ARE LIABLE FOR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF • It cannot be committed negligently.OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING  Supposing A runs out of cash so he pledges his cell phone to B for P5. A sees it lying around so he takes it.CONCUBINAGE • A single act of sexual intercourse between a married man and a woman not his wife is not punishable. May the court take jurisdiction of the case? No. A is liable for other forms of swindling under Article 316.SIMPLE SEDUCTION • The offended party may not be prostitute. he finds it in A’s possession. Their agreement was for A to pay back the amount within 30 days and for B to return the cell phone.CONSENTED ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS • Had there been sexual intercourse. O was already dead. accused may be charged of the higher crime (rape). What crime? Arson. ARTICLE 334 . sisters.P. ascendants or descendants. a married woman. ARTICLE 320 . estafa. • Private crimes . will the case prosper? YES.  Supposing N burned the body of O. B. SC issued a circular instructing lower courts to impose only the penalty of a fine.WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY • Is committed by a married woman having sexual intercourse with a man not her husband AND by the man knowing her to be married • Marriage contemplated may have defects but there must not be a judicial declaration of nullity or decree of annulment issued by the court • Is the presentation of an eyewitness necessary to prove the sexual intercourse? No.ARSON  Supposing X. 22. The victim is already legally capacitated. the offender would be liable for rape ARTICLE 337 . 7610. brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are living together  Supposing A’s brother-in-law loses his cell phone to a snatcher. grandparents. the court may take cognizance of the case. the man would be liable for qualified seduction or simple seduction ARTICLE 342 .PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY • Applies only when the crime of either theft.000 or imprisonment of one year or both.A.  Supposing. or malicious mischief. or malicious mischief is committed or mutually caused by: 1) spouses. Her father signs the complaint. Presentation of evidence of opportunity to have sexual intercourse between the accused is sufficient  Supposing the prosecution presented evidence that W. ARTICLE 327 . Assuming that A lives with his brother-in-law. has the lawful possession of the cell phone even if A is the owner.FORCIBLE ABDUCTION 29 .QUALIFIED SEDUCTION • Seduction: act of sexual intercourse • If both elements of R.ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS • Had there been sexual intercourse. woman has to be of good reputation • Committed by means of deceit . One week after. or relatives by affinity within the same line 2) widowed spouse with respect to the property of deceased spousebefore the same has been distributed 3) brothers. by virtue of the agreement.this includes a false promise of marriage. The taking is wrongful. if victim is below 18. ARTICLE 339 .

lewd design can only be proven by the actual physical acts of the offender ARTICLE 343 .PREMATURE MARRIAGE st marriage is dissolved • The offender will not incur criminal liability if there is a judicial decree of dissolution of first marriage or judicial declaration of presumption of death • Can be committed only by woman who contracts marriage within 301 days after the death of her husband or separation from the same. What crime may C be liable for? Slander by deed.---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Taking of a woman against her will with the presence of lewd designs or lascivious intent. there is presence of lewd design. 30 . or before giving birth if she is pregnant. she is taken with her consent • Also known in ordinary parlance as tanan ARTICLE 349 . There is no lewd design. the crime committed is kidnapping. This depends upon the circumstance of time.BIGAMY • Contracting a subsequent marriage before the 1 ARTICLE 351 . C confronted Z and grabbed her breasts. at the time of her husband’s death • The reason for the provision is to prevent doubtful paternity ARTICLE 359 . place. C only wanted to embarrass Z.SLANDER BY DEED • The difference of slander by deed from acts of lasciviousness is that in the latter. or manner of commission  Supposing C wanted to take revenge against his officemate Z for a prank she committed against him.CONSENTED ABDUCTION • Victim is a woman over 12 years old and under 18 and is a virgin. age of offended party is immaterial • If there is no lewd design. In the presence of their other co-workers.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.