Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006

)

1 of 86

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

ANSWERS TO 2BAR
of 86

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)

3 of 86

FORWARD
ofa 86
Crime
(2003).............................................................................................................................22
6
of
86
Penalties:
Fine
or
Imprisonment
vs.
Subsidiary
Imprisonment
EXAMINATION
QUESTIONS
MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCES................................................................................................22
GENERAL
PRINCIPLES...............................................................................................................10
(2005)...................................................................................33
7 of 86 Penalties: Pecuniary Penalties vs.
Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
4 of 86
Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
LawElements
Bar
Q&A5
(1994-2006)
Criminal Law BarCriminal
Examination
Q &Examination
A (1994-2006)
of 86
Qualifying;
of

41
Table of Contents

Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
Criminal
Law
Bar Examination
A (1994-2006)
Art
148;
Direct Q &Assault
vs.

Resistance
&
Disobedience
(2001)
Pecuniary
Liabilities
(2005)
............................................................................................33
Penalties;
General
Mitigating;
Principles;
Schools
of
Non-Intoxication
thought
in
Criminal
Law
(2000)
(1996)
............................................................................................44
Art
148;
Direct
Assault;
Teachers
&
Rape;
Anti-Rape
Law
of
1997
(2002)
Complex
Crimefor sale or commerce.
of GeneralThis
Estafa
(1997)
............................................................................................10
...................................................................................................................................22
Principles;
Mitigating;
Territoriality
Plea
of
Guilty
Professors
(2002)
.......................................................................................................45
Art 148;
Persons
in
This
work is
not intended
work
isRape;
freeware.
It(1994)
may
................................................................................................................................58
Consented
.......................................................................................................................33
Penalties;
Factors
toPrinciples;
Consider
.............................................................................................................................10
(1999)........................................................................................................................................22
General
Mitigating;
Plea
Mr.
Carlos Gabisi,
a..................................................................................................................................59
customs
and Mr.
Authority/Agents
Persons guard,
in Authority
(2000).....................................................................................45
Abduction
(2002)of
Rape;
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
8
of
86
Conspiracy
(1997)
(1991)
...............................................................................................................................33
Penalties;
Homicide
Territoriality;
of
Guilty;
Requisites
Jurisdiction
(1999).......................................................................................................................22
over
Vessel
(2000)
.........................................................................................10
Rico
Yto,
a
private
Individual,
went
to
the
Art
156;
of
Prisonersintended
from
Jail
(2002)
Bar Examination
Q&A
(1994-2006)
beCriminal
freelyLawcopied
andDelivery
distributed.
It is primarily
for all those
who
Effect;
Affidavit
of
Desistance
..........................................................................................................................................................10
w/
Modifying
Circumstance
(1995)
......................................................................................................34
Mitigating;
Plea
of
Voluntary
Surrender
Use
of
Aliases;
When
Allowed
(2006)
office
of Mr.
Diether
Ocuarto,
aExamination
customs
Criminal
Law Bar
Q & A Guilty;
(1994-2006)
9Artof
86 Evasion
...................................................................................................................45
157;
ofConspiracy;
Service
of
Theft;
Qualified
Theft
(2002)
(1993).......................................................................................................................59
Rape;
Male
Victim
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
FELONIES........................................................................................................................................10
Arson;
Destructive
Arson
Avoidance
of
Greater
Evil
(2004)....................................................................................................................11
Penalties;
Mitigating
Circumstances
w/out
Aggravating
Circumstance
(1997)
(1997).........................................................................................................22
Mitigating;
Voluntary
Surrender
...............................................................................................................................10
broker,
and
represented
themselves
as
Sentence
(1998)
.................................................................................................................46
Art.
134;
............................................................................................................................................73
Theft;
Qualified
(2002)
................................................................................................................................................59
Rape;
desire
to
have
a
deeper
understanding
of
the
issues
touched
by
the
Philippine
Plunder
under
RA
7080;
Prescriptive
Period
Criminal
Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006) Co-Conspirator
Conspiracy;
(1994).......................................................................................................................................64
(1998)
Arson;
.......................................................................34
Penalties;
Parricide
w/ Mitigating
(1996)..............................................................................................................................23
Mitigating;
Voluntary
agents
of Moonglow
Commercial
Trading,
an
10Circumstance
Rebellion
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
vs.
Q & Rapes;
A (1994-2006)
Coup
d'etat
(2004)
Theft
(2002)
............................................................................................................................................73
Theft;
Multiple
Forcible
Abduction
R.A.
No.
9160
Anti-Money
Laundering
Act
(2005)
(1993)............................................................................................................84
AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCES
.........................................................................................23
CRIMES
AGAINST
PUBLIC
INTEREST....................................................................................47
..................................................................................................................................11
Destructive
Conspiracy;
Common
Arson
GENERAL
PRINCIPLES
(1997).......................................................................................................34
Penalties;
Preventive
Surrender;
Elements
(1999)
..............................................................................................................23
Importer
of
children's
clothes
and
toys.
Mr.
........................................................................................................................46
Complex
Crime;
Direct
Assault
Qualified
Theft
(2006)
11
of
86
(2000)...............................................................................................................59
Rape;
Proper
Party
of
86
..............................................................................................................84
Ra
3019;
Preventive
Suspension
Bar
Examinations
and
its
trend.
It
is
specially
intended
for
law
students
from
Criminal Law
Bar Examination
Q & A (1994-2006)
Yes, the Motion
to Quash the Arson;
Information
CRIMES
AGAINST
PERSONAL
LIBERTY
AND
SECURITY
................................................60
Felonious
(2000).......................................................................................................................................64
Purpose
(1994)
...............................................................................................................11
New
Imprisonment
(1994)
.......................................................................................................................34
Gabisi
and
Mr.
Yto
engaged
Mr.
Ocuarto
to
Aggravating
Circumstances
with
murder
(2000)
............................................................................................................46
............................................................................................................................................73
Theft;
Stages
of
12
of
86
False
Notes;
Illegal
Possession
(1999)
(1993)...............................................................................................................................................59
Rape;
(1999)
...........................................................................................................................84
RA
3019;
Preventive
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
For
theLaw
physical
injuries Complex
ofSchools
F, A,Perpetua
B and
C. Arturo,
should
being
be granted.
one
ofThe
the Philippine
two
who devised
court
has
the
General
Principles;
of
Conspiracy;
Arson
(2004)..........................................................................................................................................64
Crime
with
Rape
BP
Penalties;
Reclusion
(RA)
No.
7959
(2005)
prepare
and
file
with
the
Bureau
of
Customs
(1996)...................................................................................................................................23
Aggravating
Execution
(1998)
....................................................................................................................................73
Theft;
.............................................................................................................................47
False
Testimony
Statutory
Rape;
Mental
Retardate
Victim
Suspension
(2000)...........................................................................................................................84
RA
3019;
the
provinces
who,
very
often,
are
recipients
of
deliberately
distorted
notes
Arbitrary
Detention;
Elements;
Grounds
should
b)
Suppose,
bein
held
liable
aftertherefore.
the (1996)
robbery,
Eventhe
if
it four
was
plan
A
no shall
jurisdiction
to
murder
incur
over
Joel,
full
the
thereby
criminal
crime
becomes
liability
committed
a
for
cothe
thought
Criminal
Law
22;
Memorandum
Check
(1996)...................................................................................................................11
Conspiracy;
Flight
to
ANSWER:
.........................................................................................................35
Penalties;
Reclusion
Perpetua
vs.
Life
the
necessary
Import
Entry
and
Circumstances;
Generis
vs. SUGGESTED
Qualifying
(1999)
Stages
of Internal
Execution
(2000)
(1994)...................................................................................................................................................47
(1996).......................................................................................................60
Public
Officer
(2003).........................................................................................................................................85
(2006)..................................................................................................................60
Grave
Coercion
only
took
turns
A
who
in
raping
actually
the
stabbed
three
daughters
and
caused
of
principal
crime
since
it
of
was
by
robbery
direct
committed
conspiracy.
with
homicide,
on
the
What
high
but
seas
is
B
or
shall
CRIMES
AGAINST
CHASTITY....................................................................................................74
1}
What
are
the
different
schools
of
thought
(1994)..................................................................................................................................65
BP
22;
Evade
Apprehension
(2003)..............................................................................................................12
Imprisonment
(1994)covering
...............................................................................................35
Penalties;
Reclusion
Revenue
Declaration
Moonglow's
.................................................................................................24
Aggravating
Circumstances;
Kinds
&
....................................................................................................................................74
Usurpation
of86
Real
Falsification;
Presumption
of
Falsification
Ra
6713;
Coverage
(2001)
(1998)....................................................................................................................................................60
Grave
of
from
other
unscrupulous
law
schools
and
students.
Share
toterritory
others
this
work
physical
Danilo
inside
injuries
the
latter's
to Law
G,
and
but
C
before
are
not
outside
incur
only
of Evade
Philippine
is
criminal
an overt
liability
act 13
and
and
both
because
on
will
board
a
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&house,
AB
(1994-2006)
or
theories
in
Criminal
and
describe
Conspiracy;
Memorandum
Flight
to needed
Apprehension
Checkhe
Perpetua
vs.
Life
Imprisonment
(2001)
...............................................................................................35
shipment.
Mr.
Gabisi
and
Mr.
Yto
submitted
Penalties
(1999)........................................................................................................24
Aggravating;
Cruelty;
Rights
(1996)......................................................................................................................................74
(1999)................................................................................................................47
Forgery
&
Falsification
Acts
of
Lasciviousness
vs.
Unjust
Vexation
(1994)
..............................................................................................................................................85
RA
7438-Economic
Coercion
vs.
Maltreatment
of
Prisoner
(1999)
nonetheless
they
left,
they
liable
killed
for
conspiring
the
whole
with
family
A
and
to
incur
desisted.
vessel
criminal
not
B's
registered
liability.
spontaneous
or
Arturo's
licensed
desistance,
liability
in
the
as
made
a
Criminal
Law Bar
Examination
Q
Acommercial
(1994-2006)
exculpatory.
Conspiracy
to&arob
and kill
each
briefly.
To (1994)
whatlist,
theory
does
ouris not
(2003)..............................................................................................................12
(1995)..................................................................................................................................65
Conspiracy;BP Implied
22;
Probation
Law:
Proper SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Period
(2005)
Mr.
Ocuarto
a2)
packing
Relationship
.........................................................................................................................24
(1999)
..........................................................................................................................................47
Grave
.............................................................................................................74
Adultery
Sabotage;
Illegal
Recruitment
(2004)
...................................................................................................85
..........................................................................................................61
Illegal
Detention
vs.participation
Grave
Coercion
and
you
will
be
richly
rewarded
by
God
heaven.
It
is
also
very
karma.
for
prevent
contributing
identification,
positive
what
acts
which
crime
led
did
to
the
the in conspirator
before
Philippines
all
acts
(US
arose
of
vs.
from
execution
Fowler,
his
1good
are
Phildestructive
performed,
614)
inRA
Yes.
A,
B.
C
and
D
are
liable
for
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
per
such
se
tetanus
punishable.
infection
the
victim
would
not
Revised
Penal
Code
belong?
Presumption
of
Knowledge
(2002)
Conspiracy
(1998).............................................................................................................................13
................................................................................................................................35
Probation
Law;
Barred
by is
invoice,
a(1996)
bill
of lading
and a Sworn
Aggravating;
Must
beImport
alleged
in Conspiracy
the
information
Scandal
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
.....................................................................................................................................................48
It
is the
registration
of
the
vessel
in 86
(2002)...............................................................................................................................................................74
7610

Child
Exploitation
(2006)
(1999).......................................................................................................................61
Kidnapping
(2002)
realization
four
commit?
of
Explain.
a
common
criminal
intent.
B
jointly
exculpatory.
devising
the
criminal
to
plan
rob
and
with
kill
Juan,
is
not
to
1
There
are
two
schools
of
thought
in
Criminal
arson
because
of
the
destruction
of
the
room
14
15
of
Criminal
Law
Bar
Q
&
have
died
with
it. which
.........................................................................................................................65
Estafa
& Trust
Receipt
Law
Conspiracy;
Implied
Conspiracy;
Effects
(2003)
Criminal
Law
Bar Examination
Examination
Q Manolo
&A
A (1994-2006)
(1994-2006)
Appeal
(1994)...........................................................................................................................35
Probation
Law;
Duty
Declaration
declared
the
(2000).......................................................................................................24
Aggravating;
Nighttime;
Band
(a)
Jose,
Domingo,
and
committed
Perjury
(1996)
accordance
with
the
laws
of
the
Philippines,
Concubinage
(1994)
.................................................................................................................................86
..........................................................................................................................................................61
Kidnapping
Law,
positioned
and
these
himself
are
(a)
as
the
a
CLASSICAL
lookout,
while
THEORY,
C
kill
per
Jose.
se
punishable.
And
it
was
pursuant
to
that
of
X
with
the
use
of
an
explosive,
the
hand
16
of
86
The
desistance
need
not
be
actuated
by
(1995)
...................................................................................................................................65
(1999)
.................................................................................................................13
Liability:
Destructive
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
& Athe
(1994-2006)
Barred
by
Appeal
(2001)...........................................................................................................................36
Although
A
died
of heart
attack,
the said
of
caused
the
strong
theCriminal
death
current
of
Cesar
or
because
isEstafa
not
he
a crime,
did
notno
shipment
as
children's
toys,
taxes
and
(1994)
................................................................................................................................24
Aggravating;
Robbery,
while
Fernando
committed
complex
................................................................................................................................................................48
Perjury
not
The
the
desistance
citizenship
need
ofkilled
her
not
owner,
be
actuated
which
.......................................................................................................................................................74
Concubinage
(2006)simply
..........................................................................................................................................................61
blocked
F's
escape.
D,
however,
although
conspiracy
that Juan
Joel.
The
which
means
that
the
basis
ofOFFICERS.......................................................................49
criminal
grenade.
Liability
for
an
impossible
crime
isby
Criminal
Liability:
Impossible
remorse
or
good
motive.
It
is
enough
that
CRIMES
COMMITTED
BY
PUBLIC
.................................................................................................................................................................66
Estafa
vs.
Arson
(2000)
.......................................................................................................................13
Criminal
Liability:
Probation
Law;
Maximum
Term
vs.
Total
Term
Under
attack
was
Article
generated
4,
Revised
by
B's
Penal
felonious
Code,
act
any
of
know
criminal
how
liability
to
swim,
may
he
arise
drowned,
therefrom.
the
Supreme
JP,
Aries
and
Randal
planned
to
kill
Elsa,
athat
duties
of
which
were
computed
at
Recidivism
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
(2001)........................................................................................................................................24
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
crime
of
Robbery
with
Rape,
Conspiracy
can
(1997)
................................................................................................................................................................48
makes
remorse
it
a
or
Philippine
good
motive.
ship.
The
It
is
vessel
enough
being
(2002)
.......................................................................................................................................................75
Unjust
Kidnapping
w/
Homicide
liabilities
part
of
the
islike
human
conspiracy,
free
will,
cannot
and
be
the
held
purpose
liable
of
the
conspiracy
here
is actual,
not
byof
inference
to
be imposed
only
if the
act
committed
We
would
to
seek
the
indulgence
ofvs.
the
some
Bar
Questions
Crimes
(2000)
ALTERNATIVE
CIRCUMSTANCES
...........................................................................................25
What
isLaw
an
impossible
crime?
(2%)
the
discontinuance
comes
from
the
person
17
18
86(1998)
Complex
Crime;
Homicide
w/reader
Assault-Authority
(1995)
BP
22
(1996)...................................................................................................................................................66
Felonious
Act
of
Scaring
CRIMES
AGAINST
THE
CIVIL
STATUS
OF
(1997)........................................................................................................36
Probation
Law;
Order
Denying
person
hitting
her
committing
with
his
fists.
amanner
Such
felony
felonious
shall
act
incur
Court
resident
affirmed
offor
Barangay
the conviction
Pula,
Laurel,
forofhomicide
Batangas.
of
P60,000.00.
Mr.
Ocuarto
filed
the
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Criminal
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
Aggravating;
Recidivism
Quasi-Recidivism
be
inferred
from
the
the
offenders
was
powdered
milk,
not
poison.
In
short,
thePERSONS........................................................75
Perjury
(2005)
registered
the
discontinuance
in
Panama,
comes
the
laws
from
Panama
the
person
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
& must
Aa(1996)..............................................................................................................13
(1994-2006)
Vexation
vs.
Act
of
Lasciviousness
Bribery
&
Corruption
of only.
Public
Official
(2001)
(2005)........................................................................................................................................62
Kidnapping;
because
he
left
the
scene
before
A
could
The
overt
act
was
done
pursuant
to
that
penalty
is
retribution
which
be
proportional
to
would
not
constitute
any
other
crime
under
Is
an
impossible
crime
really
crime?
who
has
begun
the
commission
of
the
crime
(NOTA
BENE:
R.A.
9344
is
outside
the
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act
of
.......................................................................................................53
Complex
Crime;
Parricide
w/
Criminal
Estafa
Liability:
vs.
Felonious
Act;
BP
Proximate
Cause
22
criminal
Probation;
was
the
immediate
liability
Not
Appealable
although
cause
of
the
(2002)
the
heart
wrongful
........................................................................................36
attack,
act
the
accused
because,
if
a
person
against
Probation
They
asked
the
assistance
of
Ella,
who
is
aforementioned
documents
with
the
Manila
........................................................................................................25
Aggravating;
Treachery
&
Unlawful
committed
the
robbery
but
the
rape
was
act
Also,
done
criminal
with
liability
criminal
isthe
generally
intent
byincurred
Jerry
and
in
registry
violation
list
of
of
aitvoters
special
islaw
wrong
is
not
per
punished.
sethe
because
Alternative
Circumstances;
Intoxication
................................................................................................................................................................49
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A (1994-2006)
govern
who
has
while
begun
is
the
in
the
commission
high
seas.
of
crime
(2006)...............................................................................................................75
.....................................................................................................................49
Direct
Bribery:
Infidelity
infacts
the
Effects;
Voluntary
Release
(2004)
..................................................................................................................62
Bigamy
the
enter
gravity
the
house
of
the
where
offense;
and
stabbing
(b)
the
occurred.
POSITIVIST
conspiracy
whereof
Arturo
is
co-conspirator.
the
Revised
Penal
Code.
Although
the
coverage
of
the
examination)
which
are
improperly
classified
under
a topic
and
for
some
topics
which
are
(2%)
but
before
all
acts
of
execution
are
Scaring
(2005)
Belle
saw
Gaston
stealing
the
prized
cock
of
unintentional
abortion
(1994)
.................................................................................................53
Criminal
(1996)...................................................................................................13
(2003)...................................................................................................................................................66
Criminal
Liability:
Impossible
Estafa
vs.
done
Law;
having
Period
be
materially
different
Covered
contributed
(2004)
from
.............................................................................................................................36
that
to
and
which
he
whom
familiar
aof
criminal
with
the
assault
place.
isof
directed
believes
International
Container
Port.
However,
before
Use
Aliases;
When
Entry
(1997)................................................................................................................25
committed
by
Fernando
at
a
place
"distant
Buddy,
crimes
mala
would
in
se
have
even
constituted
when
the
crime
a
is
crime
it
Actual
disenfranchises
injury
is
required.
a
voter
Yes,
his
both
right
are
to
liable
vote.
(2002)...................................................................................................................25
but
before
all
acts
execution
are
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
EXTINCTION
OF
CRIMINAL
LIABILITY....................................................................................38
Custody
of
Documents
(2005)
..............................................................................................49
Jurisdiction;
Kidnapping;
Illegal
Detention;
Minority
(2006)
(1994)................................................................................................................................................................75
Although
he
was
earlier
part
ofFELONIES................................................................25
the
There
being
aparallel
conspiracy,
the
actthe
ofthe
one
is
THEORY,
which
considers
man
as
abegan
social
being
involved
are
to
the
case
of
Intod
vs.
performed.
A
person
who
has
the
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
On
April
3,
1992,
atconsidered
about
10:00
in
PERSONS
CRIMINALLY
LIABLE
FOR
a
neighbor
and
reported
him
to
police.
Liabilities;
Money
Rape;
Homicide
Market
&
Theft
(1998
Placement
No)
Crimes
(2000)
......................................................................................................................14
Criminal
intended.
Probation
hastened
A's
In
this
death.
case,
Law;
Even
the
though
death
Right;
B
of
may
the
three
have
Barred
himself
to
be
by
in
danger
Appeal
of
death
or
great
(1995)
the
shipment
was
released,
a
spot
check
was
Allowed
(2006)
When
can
a
Filipino
citizen
residing
in
this
from
the
house"
where
the
robbery
was
against
only
attempted
persons
or
were
frustrated,
it
not
for
while
the
in
inherent
crimes
In
for
this
attempted
regard
it
estafa
is
thru
falsification
as
malum
of
in
se.
Criminal
Bar
Examination
Q & is
Anot
(1994-2006)
performed.
A
person
who
has
began
the
Impeachable
Public
Officers
(2006)
....................................................................................................................62
Kidnapping;
Proposal
to
Kidnap
Bigamy
and
conspiracy,
hisLaw
acts
he
are
did
attributable
not
personally
just
participate
to his
will
the
act
ofAppeals
all.
Arturo,
therefore,
should
be
1
An
impossible
crime
an
act
which
would
Court
of
(215
SCRA
52),
where
itwith
was
commission
of
a the
crime
but
desisted,
isthe
improperly
or
ignorantly
phrased,
for
authors
are
just
Bar
Reviewees
who
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
evening,
JP,
Aries
and
Randal,
all
armed
Thereafter,
Gaston,
while
driving
a
car
saw
Amnesty
vs.
PDbut
1160
(2006)
.......................................................................................................53
(1996).......................................................................................................................67
Criminal
Liability;
Estafa
Tumultous
vs.
Theft
(2005)
Affray
Liability;
Felonious
Act
of
Scaring
passengers
.................................................................................................................36
acted
without
was
intent
to
kill
direct,
his
wife,
natural
lack
of
and
bodily
harm
Probation
and
in
order
Law;
to
Right;
escape
Barred
jumps
by
conducted
by
Customs
Senior
Agent
James
Lucresia,
a
store
owner,
was
robbed
of
her
country
use
an
alias
legally?
Give
3
committed,
not
in
the
presence
of
the
other
inefficacy
mala
prohibita,
of
the
criminal
means
liability
employed.
is
generally
Criminal
Since
commercial
it
is
punished
documents,
under
a
a
complex
special
law
crime.
(Sec.
...
commission
of
a crime
but
desisted,
is
................................................................................................................50
Malversation
(1994)
Anti-Fencing
Law;
Fencing
(1996)
(1996)
.............................................................................................................................63
Kidnapping;
Serious
(1996)................................................................................................................................................................75
in
the
execution
of the
crime
by
acts
which
as
a
co-conspirator
but
the penalty
on
to
other
forces
of
society.
As such,
punishment
is
be
anintent
offense
against
person
or
property,
were
if liable
ruled
that
the
liability
ofCriminal
the
offender
was
for
absolved
from
criminal
liability
as
a reward
automatic
weapons,
went
tothe
Barangay
Pula.
Belle
crossing
the
street.
Incensed
that
Belle
...........................................................................................................................................38
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Amnesty;
Crimes
(1997).........................................................................................................................54
....................................................................................................................................................67
Liability;
Estafa;
(2001)..............................................................................................................14
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
logical
such
consequence
is
of
no
moment
of
Luis'
when
felonious
the
victim
act
into
the
water,
impelled
by
instinct
of
Appeal
(2003)
.................................................................................................................37
Suspension
of
Bandido,
who
discovered
that
the
contents
of
bracelet
in
her
home.
The
following
day,
at
In
the
same
breath,
E,
the
driver,
cannot
be
instances.
(2.5%)
conspirators.
Hence,
Fernando
alone
should
liability
incurred
is
only
incurred
when
the
by
crime
them
is
although
no
101
and
103,
Revised
Election
Code),
it
is
absolved
from
criminal
liability
as
a
reward
........................................................................................................................................................50
Malversation
....................................................................................................................................25
Anti-Fencing
Law;
Illegal
Detention
(1997)
.....................................................................................................................63
Bigamy
directly
the
solution,
tended
toward
as
he
is
the
not
same
entirely
end
to
(People
be
blamed;
him
may
be
that
of
an
accomplice
only
not
for
the
inherent
impossibility
of
its
an
impossible
crime,
no
hand
grenade
was
to
one,
who
having
set
foot
on
the
verge
of
have
prepared
this
work
while
reviewing
the
Bar
Exams
under
time
1Ella,
Pseudonym
for
literary
purposes.
being
the
guide,
directed
her
had
reported
him,
Gaston
decided
to
scare of
Complex
Covered
(2006).....................................................................................................................................38
Crime
vs. for
Compound
Crime
Tumultuous
Elements
(2005)
Affray
..................................................................................................................................................67
(2003).......................................................................................................................54
Act
of
Scaring
(2005)..............................................................................................................14
Criminal
CRIMES
AGAINST
PROPERTY..................................................................................................64
Malum
in
Se
vs.
Malum
which
dies.
However,
created
an
B
may
immediate
be
given
sense
the
mitigating
of
danger
self-preservation,
the
assailant
is
responsible
Sentence;
Also
in
crimes
Adults/Minors
mala
in
se,
mitigating
(2006)..................................................................................................................37
and
the
van
(shipment)
were
not
children's
toys
about
5
o'clock
in
the
afternoon,
a
neighbor,
also
held
liable
for
the
infliction
of
physical
answer
for
the
rape,
rendering
him
liable
for
crime
consummated.
resulted,
because
their
act
of
trying
to
considered
malum
prohibitum.
to
one,
who
having
set
foot
on
the
verge
Conspiracy;
Implied
Version
1973

2003
(1999)
........................................................................................................................................................50
Fencing
vs. etTheft
or
Robbery
(1995)......................................................................................................26
Trespass
to
Dwelling;
Private
Persons
(2004)................................................................................................................................................................75
vs.
Tomoro,
al
44
Phil.
38),
(People
vs.
Nierra,
96
SCRA
1;
People
us.
law
andthe
jurisprudence
not
be
the
yardstick
accomplishment
or
on
account
of
the
employment
used
in
said
case,
which
constitutes
a
more
crime,
heeds
the
call
of
his
conscience
and
Use
of
aliases
in
cinema
and
television
companions
ALTERNATIVE
to
ANSWER:
the
room
in
the
house
of
Elsa.
her
by
trying
to
make
it
appear
that
he
(2004).....................................................................................................................27
Extinction;
Anti-Carnapping
Criminal
&should
Civil
Act;
Liabilities;
Carnapping
Effects;
Death
of
w/
accused
Homicide
pending
Complex
appeal
Crime
(1998)
(2004)
vs.
Death
under
Exceptional
Mala
in
Se
vs.
Mala
Circumstances
Liability;
Estafa;
2.
No,
answer
Felonious
would
Falsification
not
be
the
same
of
as
Immediate
Commercial
Cause
Document
(2003)
Conspiracy;
Prohibitum
(2005)
Flight
to
Evade
in
circumstance
the
minds
of
of
said
having
passengers
acted
without
who
tried
to
Distinguish
for
the
malum
homicide
in
in
se
case
from
death
malum
results
prohibitum.
by
Suspension
aggravating
as
declared
in
circumstances
the
shipping
documents
are
appreciated
of
but
22-year
Sentence;
old
Jun-Jun,
who
had
an
unsavory
Minors
injuries
upon
F
because
there
is
no Act;
showing
CRIMES
AGAINST
HONOR.........................................................................................................76
Criminal
Liability:
Felonious
Act
ofwas
Edited
and
Arranged
the
special
complex
crime.
(People
vs.
poison
Jun
is
criminal.
crime,
heeds
the
call
of
his
conscience
and
Conspiracy
(1998)
What
is
the
doctrine
of
implied
conspiracy?
Malversation
(1999)
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
Anti-Fencing
Law;
Fencing;
Elements
(2006)....................................................................................................................63
Tresspass
to
Dwelling;
Bigamy;
Prescriptive
Period
in
the
imposition
of
sanction,
instead
the
Medrano,
114
SCRA
335)
because
he
was
not
of
inadequate
or
ineffectual
means
(Art.
4,
par.
2,
serious
crime
though
different
from
what
was
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act;
returns
to
the
path
of
righteousness.
Arturo
is
not
liable
because
he
was
not
able
b)
The
crime
would
be
Robbery
with
entertainment.
constraints
and
within
their
limited
knowledge
of
the
law.
We
would
like
to
Whereupon,
SUGGESTED
JP,
ANSWER:
Aries
and
Randal
fired
their
about
to
run
her
over.
He
revved
the
engine
Special
........................................................38
........................................................................................................79
Complex
Crime
vs.
Delito
Extinction;
Continuado
Criminal
(2005)
............................................................................28
&
Anti-Graft
Civil
Liabilities;
&
Corrupt
Effects;
Practices
Death
RA
(2001).................................................................................................................54
above.
Jerry
and
Buddy
would
be
liable
Prohibita
(1999)
Death
under
Exceptional
..................................................................................................14
(2000).........................................................................................................67
Criminal
Estafa;
Liability;
Falsification
Felonious
Act;
Distinguish
Apprehension
"
mala
(2003)
in
se"
from
"
mala
A
and
B,
both
store
janitors,
planned
to
kill
avoid
intention
or
escape
to
commit
from
so
it
grave
by
jumping
a
wrong
out
as
of
that
the
(2%)
drowning.
in
imposing
the
penalties,
while
in
crimes
(2003)............................................................................................................................37
1,000
units
of
video
cassette
recorders
with
reputation,
Luis
Cruz
was
came
deeply
to
her
hurt
store
Suspension
when
to
his
buy
offer
bottles
of
that
he
had
knowledge
of
the
plan
to
kill
F.
Scaring
(1996)
Canturia
et.
al,
G.R.
108490,
22
June
1995}
Alexander,
an
escaped
convict,
ran
amuck
on
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
returns
to
the
path
of
righteousness.
[3%]
........................................................................................................................................................50
Malversation
(1995).....................................................................................................................26
Criminal
Liability;
Rule
of
Absorption
(1994)
..............................................................................................................64
Unjust
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act;
by:
(1995)...................................................................................................................................76
Simulation
of
Birth
able
to
actually
participate
in
the
shooting
of
underlying
reasons
would
be
inquired
into.
Extinction;
Criminal
&
Civil
Liabilities;
Liability;
Felonious
Act;
RPC)
intended,
Proximate
Cause
(1999)
During
the
robbery
in
a
dwelling
house,
one
Libel
It prohibita,
is
not
necessary
to3,
prove
motive
when
In
crimes
malum
in
se,
an
act
is
by
nature
to
participate
in
the
killing
of
Joel.
Homicide
...
(implied:
there
is
still
In
athletics
and
sports
activities
(RA.
6085).
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
guns
at
her
room.
Fortunately,
Elsa
was
not
of
his
car
and
drove
towards
her
but
he
Complex
Offended
3019
(1997)
Party
................................................................................................................79
Crime;
(2000)......................................................................38
Aberratio
ictus
vs.
error
Pardon
Anti-Hazing
in
vs.
personae
Amnesty
law

RA
Circumstances
instead
for
less
(2005).................................................................................................................54
serious
physical
injuries
for
Homicide;
Proximate
Commercial
Documents
Cause
(1994)...................................................................................................15
(1997)
.......................................................................................................68
Criminal
Estafa;
prohibita"(3%)
their
employer
C
at
midnight
and
take
the
train.
committed
(People
(Art.
vs.
13,
Arpa,
par.
27
SCRA
Revised
1O37;
Penal
U.S.
vs.
mala
taxes
and
duties
such
computed
circumstances
at
P600,000.00.
are
not
A
of
love
beer.
was
Lucresia
rejected
noticed
by
his
girlfriend
her
bracelet
Marivella
wound
Sentence;
Youthful
Offender
(1995)
............................................................................................................38
Janette
Laggui-Icao
and
The
doctrine
of
implied
conspiracy
holds
two
board
a
Superlines
Bus
bound
for
Manila
19
(2001)
Accessories
&........................................................................................................................................................50
Fence
(1998)...................................................................................................................26
Vexation
vs
Acts
Lasciviousness
Proximate
Cause
(2004)
&
On
Child
his
way
Trafficking
home
(2002)
from
office,
.....................................................................................................................76
ZZ
rode
inof
aIttypographical
We
follow
the
classical
school
of
thought
although
Joel,
Effects;
having
been
Death
apprehended
of
accused
before
pending
(1994)
No,
an
impossible
crime
is
not
really
a
crime.
isUnder
Bhey
eloped
with
Scott.
Whereupon,
Bhey's
of
the
culprits
happened
to
fire
his
gun
the
offender
is
positively
identified
or
the
(2002)....................................................................................................................................................................76
In
"mala
inof
se",
the
acts
constituting
the
wrong,
evil
or
bad,
and
so
generally
Conspiracy
itself
is
not
punishable
unless
conspiracy)
the
witness
protection
program
a
Conspiracy;
Avoidance
of
around
as
she
attended
a
prayer
meeting
seek
the
reader’s
indulgence
for
ain
lot
errors
in
this
work.
applied
the
brakes.
Since
the
road
was
(1994)...............................................................................................28
(2006)..............................................................................................................................................39
8049
causing
(2002)....................................................................................................................................80
the
hospitalization
and
medical
Complex
Crime;
Aberratio
Pardon;
CHILD
Ictus,
Fraustrated;
Physical
Injuries
(1994)
Liability;
Swindling
(1998)..................................................................................................................................................68
Felonious
Proximate
Cause
Valdez,
41
Phil.
497}
money
kept
in
the
cash
register.
A
andhe
B
Code).
appreciated
unless
the
special
law
has
hold
order
and
warrant
of
seizure
and
around
one
afternoon
the
right
when
arm
he
of
visited
Jun-Jun.
her.
As
When
soon
as
or
more
persons
participating
theAct;
from
Bicol
and
killed
ten
(10)
persons.
Art
136;
Conspiracy
to
Commit
Alex
Andrew
P.
Icao
Malversation
(2006)
Criminal
Liability;
Non-Exemption
as
Accessory
of
86
(2004)
(1994)..............................................................................................................64
jeepney.
Subsequently,
XX
boarded
the
same
reaching
the
place
where
the
crime
was
some
provisions
of
eminently
positivist
in
appeal
(2004)
only
so-called
because
the
act
gives
rise
to
father,
Robin,
and
brother,
Rustom,
went
to
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
Exempting
Circumstances;
upward
in
the
ceiling
without
meaning
to
kill
Conspiracy;
Flight
to
Evade
criminal
act
did
not
give
rise
to
variant
Libel
crimes
are
inherently
evil,
bad
or
wrong,
and
condemned.
The
moral
trait
of
the
offender
is
expressly
provided
by
law
and
this
is
not
person
may
adopt
a
different
identity
(RA.
Greater
Evil
(2004)
BB
and
CC,
both
armed
with
knives,
that
evening
in
another
barangay
in
Laurel.
slippery
at
that
time,
the
vehicle
skidded
Effect;
Civil
Interdiction
(2004)
Error
ABUSE;
attendance
In
Personae
for
10
&
days
Praeter
to
Intentionem
Jun.
RA
Their
act
(1999)
of
.................................................................28
7610
Complex
.................................................................................................................55
Robbery
Infanticide
(1996)
(1997)...................................................................................................15
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act;
together
drew
the
sketch
of
the
store,
where
adopted
detention
the
were
scheme
then
issued
or
scale
by
of
the
penalties
District
the
left
her
latter
house,
left,
he
Lucresia
walked
as
went
if
he
to
was
a
nearby
commission
of
a
crime
collectively
Terrified
by the
incident,
Carol
and
Benjamin
Rebellion
(1994)
........................................................................................................................................................51
Malversation
......................................................................................................26
Liability;
Principal
by
Direct
jeepney.
Upon
reaching
a by
secluded
spot
in
tendencies,
like
punishment
of
impossible
crime,
committed.
JP,
etCriminal
al,the
were
charged
and
convicted
of
(Silliman
University
College
of
Law)
criminal
liability.
But
actually,
no
felony
is
Scott's
house.
Upon
reaching
the
house,
anyone.
Minority
The
(1998)
owner
of
the
house
who
was
Apprehension
(2003)
John,
an
eight-year
old
boy,
fond
of(2000)
A
and
crimes.
degrees
B,
both
than
store
that
janitors,
prescribed
planned
for
the
to
crime
kill
(2003)....................................................................................................................................................................76
hence
involves
the
moral
of
involved;
thus,
good
faith
or
of
criminal
true
in
case
of
Murder.
Aislack
co-conspirator
6981).
attacked
FT.
The
victim's
son,
ST,
upon
and
hit
Belle
causing
her
death.
Was
gaston
Crime;
.............................................................................................................................39
mixing
with
Aberratio
the
food
eaten
Ictus;
Jun
the
Attempted
matter
Murder
with
Pardon;
Homicide
Effect;
......................................................................................................................................80
Child
Abuse;
RA
7610
(2006)............................................................................................................................................................55
..............................................................................................................................................................68
Robbery
Proximate
Cause
(1999)...................................................................................................15
Criminal
they
knew
C
would
be
sleeping,
and
planned
under
the
Revised
Penal
Code.
Maryjane
Collector
of
had
Customs.
two
suitors
Further
-as
Felipe
investigation
and
Cesar.
police
sleepwalking
station
so
and
much
sought
so
that
the
atraits
teenage
help
ofthe
a
responsible
and
liable
co-conspirators
who
are
passengers
of
the
bus,
jumped
out
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
vs.
Estafa
(1999)
.........................................................................................................................................51
Participation;
Co-Principal
by
Indispensable
Cooperation
(2000).....................................27
Criminal
Motive
vs.
QC,
XX
pulled
out
a
grenade
from
his
bag
Juvenile
circumstances,
are
incorporated
in
our
attempted
murder
by
the
Regional
Trial
committed.
The
accused
is
to
be
punished
for
his
Rustom
inquired
from
Scott
about
his
sister's
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
hiding
thereat
was
hit
and
killed
as
a
result.
watching
the
television
program
"Zeo
their
committed
employer
C
shall
at
midnight
be
and
imposed
take
the
in
Libel
offender;
while
in
"mala
prohibita",
the
acts
Mala
Prohibita;
Actual
Injury
Intent
on
the
part
of
the
offender
is
a
defense,
must
perform
an
overt
act
pursuant
to
the
When
he
has
been
baptized
or
customarily
seeing
the
attack,
drew
his
gun
but
was
criminally
liable?
What
is
the
liability
of
............................................................................28
Reinstatement
which
required
such
medical
...............................................................................................................................39
attendance,
Complex
Crime;
Doctrine
of
Aberratio
Ictus;
Not
Murder
(2006)...........................................................................................................................................80
& (1994)
Sec.
25,
R.A.
No.
9165
Dangerous
(2005)
Liability;
under
RPC
(2000)
.............................................................................................................................................68
Felonious
Act;Yes,
Proximate
Cause
the
sequence
of
their
attack.
Shortly
before
She
showed
did
not
that
openly
Moonglow
show
is
her
non-existent.
preference
but
policeman
snatcher
was
on
able
duty,
to
grab
Pat.
his
Willie
cell
phone
Reyes.
and
He
although
absent
any
agreement
to
that
of
the
window
and
while
lying
unconscious
Gaston
istheorized
liable
forthat
Belle's
death
because
Malversation;
Properties;
Custodia
Legis
(2001)
Liability;
Principal
by
Inducement
(2002)
The
defense
the
killing
was a
Intent
(2004)
Conspiracy;
Common
Felonious
Distinguish
clearly
but
briefly
between
intent
and
announced
a......................................................................................29
hold-up.
He
told
ZZ
Code.
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Qno
&to
A (1994-2006)
Court
at Tanauan,
21
of
86
Batangas.
20
of
86
criminal
tendency
or
propensity
although
whereabouts,
while
Robin
shouted
and
Rangers."
One
evening
while
he
was
money
accordance
kept
in
with
the
cash
Article
68.
paragraph
Awere
and
B
1,
(2005)....................................................................................................................................................................77
constituting
the
crimes
are
not
inherently
Required
(2000)
unless
the
crime
the
result
ofAt
criminal
conspiracy.
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Qintent,
&register.
A
(1994-2006)
known
by
such
alias.
prevented
from
shooting
the
attackers
by
Gaston?
Why?
(4%)
committed
with
criminal
renders
them
Applicable
Prescription
Drug
(1996)
Act:
of
Crimes;
Plea-Bargaining
Complex
Bigamy
Crimes;
Coup
(1995)
(2005)
d’etat
...........................................................................................................................55
Murder
(1999)
(2001)...................................................................................................15
Robbery
under
Criminal
RPC
Liability;
Felonious
(2001)
Act;
midnight,
A
and
Bischased
were
ready
to
carry
out
PENALTIES
.....................................................................................................................................27
on
Consequently,
two
occasions,
Mr.
accepted
Gabisi
and
Cesar's
Mr.
Yto
invitation
A
went
flee
hadwithout
with
a grudge
Lucresia
being
against
to
the
F.no
Deciding
house
by
Luis.
of
to
Jun-Jun
the
kill
F,
to
A
effect,
when
they
act
in
concert,
after
hitting
the
pavement
of
the
road,
were
even
though
Gaston
has
intent
to
kill
Belle
................................................................................................................52
Malversation;
Technical
..............................................................................................................27
mere
accident
Criminal
and
was
Liability;
not
perpetrated
Principal;
in
Purpose
(1994)
and
motive
in
the
commission
of
an
offense.
surrender
his
watch,
wallet
and
cellphone.
Updated
At
about
by:
9:30
in
the
evening,
while
Dino
and
crime
was
committed.
threatened
to
kill
Scott.
The
latter
then
went
engrossed
watching
his
favorite
television
together
Rev.
drew
Penal
the
Code.
sketch
of
the
The
store,
sentence,
where
Slander
(1988)
bad,
evil
or
wrong
but
prohibited
and
made
negligence.
Correspondingly,
modifying
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q(2003).................................................................................................29
&Pops.
A
(1994-2006)
When
authorized
by
a
competent
court
(CA.
AA,
who
grappled
with
him
for
possession
of
A
may,
however,
invoke
the
benefit
of
the
CRIMES
AGAINST
PERSONS
....................................................................................................53
liable
for
the
resulting
injury.
&
..............................................................................................................................40
....................................................................................................................80
rebellion
&
sedition
Dangerous
Prescription
Drugs
of
Complex
Crimes;
Act
................................................................................................................................................................55
Murder;
Proximate
.............................................................................................................................................68
Cause
(2004)...................................................................................................16
Robbery
Criminal
vs.
the
plan.
When
A
was
about
to
lift
C's
to
charged
concerts
with
by
and
Regine
convicted
and
violation
Felipe
was
of
a
and
confront
next
his
LRT
friends,
station,
the
latter.
B,
he
C,
boarded
and
Pat.
D,
Reyes
armed
one
of
introduced
the
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
demonstrating
unity
of
criminal
intent
and
a
ran
over
and
crushed
to
death
by
a
fast
rather
just
to
scare
Belle.
scare"
does
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
On142,
appeal
toa
the
Court
of"To
Appeals,
all
thenot
Malversation
(1996)
.....................................................................................................................52
Public
Inducement
&
Participation
(1994)
............................................................................................27
connection
with,
or
for
purposes
of,
the
Fearing
for
his
life,
ZZ
jumped
out
of the
Raffy
were
walking
along
Padre
Faura
Street,
Criminal
Liability;
Impossible
Crimes;
downstairs
but
Rustom
held
his
(Scott's)
show,
Petra,
maid
changed
the
channel
to
they
however,
knew
C
would
should
be
sleeping,
automatically
and
planned
be
...............................................................................................................................................................77
Slander
punishable
only
for
public
good.
And
because
circumstances
are
considered
in
punishing
the
Justifying;
SD;
Defense
of
Honor;
No.
as
amended
by
RA.
6085).
the
Qualifying;
gun.
FT
died
Elements
from
knife
of
a
wounds.
AA,
BB
mitigating
circumstance
of
having
acted
in
Crimes;
Commencement
(1998)............................................................................................................................................80
(2000)
Determination
.................................................................................................................40
the
Dangerous
Crime
Definition
&
Elements
(1999)
Liability;
Highway
Robbery
(2000)...............................................................................................................................69
Impossible
Crime
(2004)
mosquito
net
to
thrust
his
dagger,
a
police
working
Section
3(e)
student
of
R.A.
and
3019
could
which
only
ask
makes
Mary
it to
While
themselves
himself
If
coaches
Iof
were
they
as
the
bound
were
a
with
ponente,
policeman
for
standing
knives
Baclaran.
I will
and
and
in
set
line
proceeded
tried
While
aside
awaiting
toseated,
the
get
to
hold
the
common
purpose
or
objective.
The
existence
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act
ofhit
moving
Desert
Fox
bus
tailing
the
Superlines
Intent
is
the
purpose
for
using
a
particular
MISCELLANEOUS.........................................................................................................................78
indicate
intent
to
kill.
However,
under
Art.
4
accused
ascribed
to
the
trial
court
the
sole
Officers;
definition
robbery.
In
crimes
Will
mala
you
prohibitum,
sustain
the
an
defense?
act
is
Why?
not
by
Destructive
Arson
(1994)
vehicle.
But
as
he
fell,
his
head
the
Manila.
Johnny
hit
them
with
a
rock
injuring
Kidnapping
(2000)
waist.
Meanwhile
Olive,
the
elder
sister
of
Carla,
4
years
old,
was
kidnapped
by
Enrique,
enable
her
to
watch
"Home
Along
the
Riles."
the
suspended
sequence
of
in
their
accordance
attack.
Shortly
with
Section
before
(1996)
...............................................................................................................................................................77
the
moral
trait
of
the
offender
is
Involved
in
offender.
When
properly
indicated
in
a
Certificate
of
Requisites
(1998)
General
Principles;
One
night,
Una,
a
young
married
woman,
and
Crime
CC
(2003)
were
charged
with
murder.
Can
Alexander
be
held
liable
for
the
death
of
When
would
qualifying
circumstances
be
immediate
vindication
of
grave
offense
to
Prescription
of
Crimes;
Commencement
(2004)
(1999)..........................................................................................................29
Drugs
Act
(2006)............................................................................................................................................81
Complex
Crimes;
Nature
&
...............................................................................................................................56
Robbery
w/
force
upon
Murder;
Evident
(2000)
........................................................................................................................16
Criminal
Liability;
Impossible
car
with
sirens
blaring
passed
by.
Scared,
B
After
see
unlawful
movie
drinking
among
which
one
others,
was
(1)
for
case
public
ofresult;
Felipe
San
officers
Miguel
felt
to
their
house
of
judgment
he
Jun-Jun
happened
vaccination
of finding
F,
convicting
who
taking
to
resisted
read
atathings
the
taxicab
the
a
school
newspaper
accused
and
for
clinic,
ran
the
ofaway.
left
purpose.
Pomping
on Pat.
the
of
a aconspiracy
shall
bedeclined.
inferred
or
deduced
Scaring
(2001)
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Bus.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
means
to
achieve
the
desired
while
of
the
Revised
Penal
Code,
provides
in
part
error
of
them
guilty
of
attempted
CIVIL
(1999).......................................................................................................................................52
LIABILITY
.............................................................................................................................41
Public
(4%)
nature
wrong,
evil
or
bad.
Yet,
itwas
isOfficers;
punished
.................................................................................................................................................27
pavement,
causing
his
instant
death
.4%
Is
XX
Dino
at
the
back.
Raffy
approached
Dino,
but
Scott,
carrying
her
two-month
old
child,
In
his
defense,
AA
invoked
the
justifying
the
tricycle
driver
paid
by
her
parents
to
This
enraged
John
who
got
his
father's
midnight,
5(a)
of
A
and
Rep.
B
Act
were
No.
ready
8369
to
carry
otherwise
out
Slander
by
Deed
vs.
Maltreatment
"mala
in
se".
Modifying
circumstances,
the
ReTake
BarOps
2007
Candidacy
(Omnibus
Election
Code).
Corpus
Delicti
(2001)
Territoriality
(1994)
was
sound
asleep
in
her
bedroom
when
she
Abe,
married
to
Liza,
contracted
another
deemed,
if
at
all,
elements
of
a
crime?
Carol
and
Benjamin
although
he
a
descendant,
his
daughter,
under
par.
5,
.................................................................................................................40
Prescription
of
Crimes;
Penalty
Dangerous
Involved
(1999)
Drugs
...........................................................................................................30
Act
(6425);
Marked
Complex
Money
Premeditation
................................................................................................................................69
(1996)...............................................................................................................................56
Robbery
w/
Homicide
Crimes
(1994)
......................................................................................................................16
Criminal
ran
out
of
the
store
and
fled,
while
A
went
on
beer
insulted
cause
Osang,
and
any
and
a
undue
taking
married
made
Injury
plans
two
woman
to
plates
to
any
get
party,
in
even
of
her
"pulutan",
with
early
repeatedly
About
Reyes
attempted
seat
Vicente
and
20
chased
hacked
meters
noticed
pulled
murder
him
Anacleto
from
the
that
and
and
ponytail
the
their
instead
with
headlines
fired
destination,
of
a
find
bolo
two
Katreena,
them
were
but
warning
the
the
Yes,
XX
is
liable
for
ZZ's
death
because
his
No,
I
will
not
sustain
the
defense.
The
act
from
their
criminal
participation
in
pursuing
motive
is
the
moving
power
which
impels
a
that
criminal
liability
shall
be
incurred
by
any
murder. If
you
were
the
ponente,
how
will
1
Also
if
found
criminally
liable,
the
ordinary
Infidelity
in
Custody
of
Prisoners
(1996)
.....................................................................................................52
because
there
isof
a participation
law
prohibiting
them
for
liable
for
ZZ's
death?
Explain
briefly.
(5%)
suddenly,
Bobby,
Steve,
Danny
and
Nonoy
approached
Rustom
and
Scott
to
pacify
circumstance
bring
and
fetch
of
avoidance
her
to
and
of
greater
from
evil
school.
or
revolver,
and
without
warning,
shot
Petra
at
the
known
plan.
as
When
the
"Family
Asteamer
was
Courts
about
Act
to
of
lift
1997";
C's
(1994
SUGGESTED
).........................................................................................................................77
ANSWER:
Slander
vs.
Criminal
offender's
extent
inCoverage
the
crime,
Conspiracy;
Implied
Conspiracy;
......................................................................................................................................................78
Corpus
Delicti;
felt
acrime
man
on
top
of
her.
Thinking
it
was
her
marriage
with
Connie
inon
Singapore.
completely
unaware
that
the
two
jumped
out
Article
of
the
Revised
Penal
Code,
as
Crimes;
Concubinage
Ordinary
Complex
(2001)......................................................................................................................40
Crime
vs.his
Special
Complex
Crime
(2003)
Exempting
Murder;
(2000)..........................................................................................................81
Homicide;
Circumstances;
Infanticide;
Dangerous
Drugs
Act
Parricide
(6425);
Liability;
R.A.
No.
7659
(2005)
Impossible
....................................................................................................................69
Crimes;
Kidnapping
Robbery
(2000)
to
stab
C13
to
death,
put
the
money
in
the
bag,
Civil
liability;
Effect
ofof
Acquittal
Binoy,
Yes,
While
Cesar
including
twenties,
Rustom
the
by
a
scaring
the
Filipino
was
crew
isGovernment.
sleeping
criminally
of
him
seaman,
aa
off
somehow.
liable
aresult.
In
stabbed
banig
prepared
the
for
discharge
on
the
One
to
the
to
death
death
day,
floor
of
group
shots
guilty
about
latter
11
in
years,
of
alighted
was
the
the
impossible
sinking
able
air.
2
months
and
to
Jun-Jun
parry
after
crime
the
and
it
continued
Super
instructing
with
under
13
days
his
Ferry
Art.
hand,
to
old
E,
while
4,
run
the
par.
and
on
acts
of
pulling
out
grenade
and
announcing
being
felonious
and
the
proximate
cause
of
the
and
thus
the
act
ofIntending
one
shall
be
person
towrote
act
for
a
definite
Intent
is
an
person
SUGGESTED
committing
ANSWER:
a
felony
although
the
you
decide
the
appeal?
Updated
mitigating
circumstance
by;
of
not
to
Public
Officers;
Infidelity
in
Custody
of
Prisoners
(1997)
public
good,
and
thus
good
faith
or
lack
of
surrounded
the
duo.
Then
Bobby
stabbed
A
qualifying
circumstance
would
be
deemed
them.
Olive
attempted
to
remove
Rustom's
injury,
contending
that
by
preventing
ST
Enrique
a
ransom
note
demanding
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
the
back
of
her
head
causing
her
mosquito
net
to
thrust
his
dagger,
a
police
Justifying;
Defense
of
Conversation
(2004)
.........................................................................................................................77
and
the
degree
FELONIES
of
accomplishment
of
the
Effects
(2003)
State
the
concept
of
"implied
conspiracy"
66
of
86
Definition
&
Elements
(2000)
.....................................................................................................................78
husband
Tito,
who
came
home
a
day
early
Thereafter,
Abe
and
Connie
returned
to
the
of
the
bus?
Explain.
amended.
.....................................................................30
Prescription
of
Crimes;
Continuing
Offense
False
vs.
Delito
Testimony
Continuado
(1994)
(2000).....................................................................................................................19
(1999)..................................................................................................................56
Plea
Bargaining
(1998)
........................................................................................................81
Murder;
Dangerous
Exempting
Reckles
....................................................................................................17
w/
Homicide
(1996)............................................................................................................................................70
Mala
in
Se
vs.
Mala
Prohibita
(1997)
and
ran
outside
to
look
for
B.
The
latter
was
(2000)...............................................................................................................................41
Civil
liability;
Effect
Sio
There
of
raise
he
official
the
their
entered
My,
anchor
child
was
functions
a
nipa
Singaporean
an
Cesar's
because
at
hut
expressed
the
through
beside
room
Pasig
his
felonious
seaman,
in
River,
manifest
conspiracy
the
their
seashore
A,
boarding
act
aboard
evidently
partiality,
between
was
when
M/V
the
classmate
Jose,
driver,
There
when
2,
its
causing
RPC,
way
Domingo,
was
he
to
in
to
upon
wait,
in
relation
Cebu.
was
an
Grade
him
expressed
traveled
Manolo,
about
He
to
a
5
went
two-inch
Art.
at
7
and
the
on
59,
conspiracy
over
meters
foot
Sampaloc
Fernando,
RPC.
wound
the
to
the
Liability
away,
list
on
between
house
of
armed
his
Pat,
for
a
hold-up,
coupled
with
a demand
for an
the
death,
the
offender
is liable
deemed
thegrave
actdolo
ofa all.
No,victim's
John
is not
criminally
liable
for
killing
ingredient
of
or
malice
and
thus
wrongful
act
done
be
different
from
that
commit
so
wrong
as
that
committed,
.....................................................................................................53
criminal
intent
in
doing
the
prohibited
act
is
Dino.
Steve,
Danny,
Nonoy
and
Johnny
kept
Yes,
Alexander
can
be
held
liable
for
the
an
element
of
a
crime
when
hand
from
Scott's
waist.
But
Rustom
pulled
from
P500,000.00
shooting
BB
from
and
CC,
Carla's
he
merely
parents
avoided
in
instantaneous
death.
Is
John
criminally
car
with
sirens
blaring
passed
by.
Scared,
B
Stranger
(2002)
A
chanced
upon
three
men
who
were
crime
are
taken
into
account
in
imposing
the
and
give
its
legal
effects.
4%
Entrapment
vs.
Instigation
(1995)
from
his
business
Una
let
him
have
sex
Philippines
and
lived
as
husband
and
wife
inisw/ Elementary
Circumstances;
...............................................................................................................30
.................................................................................................................41
Drugs
Act;
Consummation
Prescription
Death
ofmoving
of
Penalty
Crimes;
Minority
Simple
(2004)
Sale
Imprudence
(2001).................................................................................................................................56
................................................................................................................................17
Robbery
nowhere
in
sight.
Mala
Unknown
in
Se
to
him,
vs.
Homicide
Mala
B
had
"Princess
A
proximate
impatient
of
house
evident
she
and
Acquittal
was
B
and
bad
to
of
with
awakened
cause
placed
kill
faith
the
C
(2000)...............................................................................................................................41
the
and
Pacific",
of
or
atrip,
progress
such
rubber
gross
take
by
death.
the
an
inexcusable
the
snake
of
overseas
latter's
work,
act
It
which
was
of
began
money.
a
vessel
man
with
of
A
Reyes
1
impossible
1
missing
right
and
F. bolos,
Bpalm.
B
positioned
shot
"Motive
Motive
to
passengers
at
kill
crime
School.
Vicente
him
about
is
C"he
in
the
and
isarises
himself
Irritated,
the
was
one
who
moving
take
right
not
o'clock
not
were
at
the
only
a
able
Katreena
power
leg.
distance
latter's
presumed
power
inwhen
to
Jun-Jun
the
which
hack
which
money.
turned
the
Civil
as was
the
watch,
wallet
cellphone
of
ZZ
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
therefore
although
it
may
not
be
intended
or
Petra
because
isthe
only
8
years
old
when
element
of
deliberate
felonies;
while
motive
which
he
intended.
In
other
words,
the
rule
is
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
under
Article
13,
paragraph
3,
Rev.
Penal
Code;
not
a
defense.
it
changes
the
nature
of
the
crime,
bringing
about
on
hitting
Dino
and
Raffy
with
rocks.
As
a
death
of
Carol
and
Benjamin
because
of
Olive's
hand
causing
her
to
fall
over
her
a
SUGGESTED
greater
evil.
ANSWER:
Will
AA's
defense
prosper?
exchange
for
Carla's
freedom.
Enrique
sent
liable?
[2%]
ran
out
of
the
store
and
fled,
while
A
went
on
Conspiracy
attacking
B
with
fist
blows.
C,
one
of
the
men,
penalty:
these
are
not
so
in
"mala
prohibita"
.....................................................................................................................................78
Entrapment
with
her.
After
the
act,
the
man
said,
"Imoney
hope
the
hometown
of
Abe
in
Calamba,
Laguna.
1) EXAMINATION
From
the
ANSWERS
BAR
QUESTIONS
IN
(1998)........................................................................................................................19
......................................................................................................................................................30
Slander
(1996).........................................................................................................82
(1997)...................................................................................................................41
Dangerous
Exempting;
Drugs
Death
Act;
Minority;
Criminal
Penalty;
11
Murder;
Treachery
Prohibita
(1998)............................................................................................................................................70
(1999)
................................................................................................................................17
already
left
the
place.
What
Robbery
Mala
was
w/
in
the
which
The
Rustom's
to
Liability;
appeared
negligence.
mounting
use
planned
was
abusive
act
to
sailing
her.
In
be
killing
of
their
language
real
pulling
Thinking
in
motion
and
in
the
Cesar's
Olive's
South
taking
against
that
backpack.
hand
China
of
the
itTO
the
which
men.
Sea.
Subsidiary;
The
B,
her
around
morning,
Buddy
group's
The
hit
impels
impossibility
impels
dead
Anacleto
The
and
planned
conduct
and
always
and
a
one
lookout.
he
person
robbed
further
came
fell
swung
to
is
of
killing
resented
action
down
legal,
wife
across
to
C
abecause
at
and
house
do
and
A
for
Pomping
but
an
aroused
D
the
his
ataking
stood
act
at
likewise
he
three
definite
name
a
crawled
for
desolate
with
the
guard
of
policemen
aEmployers
of
when
definite
result;
the
ire
a
his
ball
towards
outside
of
Jun.
money
place
itvs.
her
is
felonious,
and
such
felonious
act
was
the
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&for
Acrime
(1994-2006)
different
from
what
he
intended.
The
he
committed
the
killing.
Aclassmate,
minor
below
Mala
Motive
in
Se
vs.
vs.
Mala
is
not
an
element
of
a
but
only
that
when
a
person,
by
a
felonious
act,
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
and
JUSTIFYING
SPECIAL
PENAL
&
EXEMPTING
LAWS...............................................................................................................79
CIRCUMSTANCES
...................................................................19
An
"IMPLIED
CONSPIRACY"
is
one
which
is
a
more
serious
crime
and
a
heavier
penalty;
result.
Dino
died,
Bobby,
Steve,
Danny,
felonious
act
of
running
was
the
proximate
Grave
SUGGESTED
Scandal
ANSWER:
baby.
The
baby
then
died
moments
later.
Is
Reason
the
ransom
briefly.
note
(5%)
by
mail.
However,
before
(1997)
to
stab
C
to
death,
put
the
money
in
the
bag,
was
about
to
stab
B
with
a
knife.
Not
knowing
where
criminal
liability
arises
only
when
the
Instigation
you
enjoyed
(2003)
it
as
.....................................................................................................................................78
much
as
I
did."
Not
Can
Abe
be
prosecuted
for
bigamy?
yrs
Qualified
Intent
SUGGESTED
Old;
to
Rape;
ANSWER:
Absence
Posses
Requisites
of
(2002)......................................................................................................82
Discernment
(2004)..............................................................................................................31
(2000)
........................................................................................19
Dangerous
(1995)................................................................................................................................................57
participation
and
corresponding
Murder;
criminal
Se
Homicide
(2003)............................................................................................................................................71
vs.
Mala
Prohibita
(2001)
vessel,
appears
That
caused
one
No,
Juan
Because
reconsideration,
husband,
of
AA's
and
B
the
the
although
ran
Cesar
defense
Arturo
members
to
Gardo,who
latter
out
had
be
the
of
to
devised
Panamanian
will
a
fall
the
accused
intimately
weak
the
on
not
had
store
her
a
crew,
heart,
prosper
plan
alleged
returned
baby.
and
registered,
related
he
to
fled
Had
suffered
because
that
murder
upon
from
It
the
as
is
pen.
That
where
One
the
appears
a
result;
factual
whereas
grandfather
arrived
husband
fence,
house.
The
day.
B
Danilo,
while
or
ran
and
top
intent
Buddy
B.
physical
to
Before
intending
Incensed
out
threatened
of
who
"intent"
his
the
be
is
planned
of
had
wife,
the
A
impossibility,
ball
the
could
intimately
is
with
purpose
raised
to
and
pen
the
to
store
to
enter
anger
shoot
pass
three
purpose
kill
hit
him
to
and
the
Jun
the
as
Vicente
from
almost
daughters
use
through
related
right
by
in
fled
for
house,
a
mixing
the
using
eye
upon
if
an
D
as
(1998).......................................................................................................................42
Civil
Liability;
When
proximate
cause
of
ZZ's
jumping
out
of
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
offender
shall
be
prosecuted
for
the
nine
(9)
years
old
is
absolutely
exempt
from
Prohibita
Intent
(1996)
(2001)
considered
when
the
identity
of
the
offender
CRIMINAL
LAW
by
the
UP
LAW
Briefly
COMPLEX
1
state
Distinguish
what
and
essentially
intent
PHILIPPINE
from
distinguishes
motive
inofhe
a
generates
in
the
mind
ofaggressor
another
abecause
sense
The
ordinary
mitigating
circumstance
of
sufficient
1)
Abe
may
be
prosecuted
for
bigamy
only
inferred
ornot
deduced
from
the
manner
it
isNo,
essential
to
the
crime
involved,
otherwise
Nonoy
and
Johnny
were
charged
with
cause
of
the
victim's
death.
The
rule
is that
(1996)
Rustom
criminally
liable
for
the
death
of
the
the
ransom
note
was
received
by
Carla's
and
ran
outside
to
look
B.
The
latter
was
that
Bliving.
was
actually
the
he
acts
are
consummated.
69
of
86
recognizing
the
voice,
it
dawned
upon
Lina
Motive;
Proof
thereof;
Not
Essential;
Justifying
Habitual
Use
Drugs
of
vs.
Delinquency
Exempting
Illegal
Act;
&
Circumstances
Firearms
Recidivism
Plea-Bargaining
(2001)
(2004)
Robbery
w/
Homicide;
Special
liability
Complex
of
each,
if
any?
Crime
Reasons.
8%
(1995)
................................................................................................................................17
Mala
in
Se
vs.
Mala
owned
component
hearing
not
remonstrated
No,
Crimes
obviously
Joel.
A,
a
decision
fishing
heart
B,
been
Osang"s
the
In
C
in
a
attack
the
was
prosecutor
mala
by
narrow
for
and
the
there
crimes,
said
claim
sirens
erroneous
sea,
saying
Lucio
upon
D,
in
was
alley
act
all
Osang
of
opening
se
hence
of
is
a
of
that
defense
armed
Sy,
near
conspiracy
not
the
Rustom,
because
are
continued
they
a
correct
Joel's
police
a
his
special
with
of
felonious
could
rich
backpack
honor
which
the
house,
among
car,
armalites,
in
her
crime
work
complex
Filipino
filing
should
is
is
sleep
Juan
acts
BB,
not
a
Yes,
of
hearing
were
poison
left
component
opening
a
case
particular
childhood
did
beyond
particular
Pomping
the
not
Vicente
at
in
scene
bar.
drop
the
his
underneath.
his
means
after
which
While
control,
means
crimes,
may
Elsa's
sirens
lunch.
his
without
he
bolo.
be
to
bled
the
absence
was
to
Not
of
B
hence
charged
effect
four
bring
could
Vicente
the
When
profusely.
the
orphaned.
knowing
knowledge
were
such
a
police
from
about
not
of
special
Pat.
was
homicide
results.
in
help
where
the
Realizing
a
He
the
Reyes
car,
desired
house
but
complex
of
was
he
is
the
for
was
not
is
Mandatory;
Criminal
Liability
(2005).....................................................................................................42
jeepney,
resulting
in
the
latter's
death.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
composite
crime
of
robbery
with
homicide,
criminal
liability
although
not
from
civil
is
in
doubt.
crime
Criminal
mala
Law.
prohibita
from
a
crime
mala
in
imminent
danger,
prompting
the
latter
to
provocation
on
the
part
of
the
offended
party
since
the
bigamous
marriage
was
contracted
the
participants
in
the
commission
of
crime
some
other
crime
ishideout
committed;
and
homicide.
IsOF
there
conspiracy
inact,
thisgenerates
case?
when
a person,
by
a felonious
child?
CRIMES
parents,
AGAINST
Enrique's
NATIONAL
was
discovered
SECURITY
by
AND
THE
LAW
NATIONS.......................42
ASSOCIATION
OF1the
LAW
SCHOOLS
nowhere
in
sight.
Unknown
to
him,
Bin
had
had
earlier
challenged
the
three
men
to
a
1
When
there
is
an
eyewitness
or
positive
that
man
was
not
Tito,
her
husband.
Conviction
(2006)
Motive
is
essential
in
the
determination
of
Yes,
there
is
conspiracy
among
the
offenders,
.................................................................................................................20
........................................................................................................................31
..............................................................................................................................57
(2004)...................................................................................................................82
Justifying;
Indeterminate
Highway
Defense
Robbery
Sentence
of
Parricide
Honor;
(2001)
Law
........................................................................................................71
Robbery
Minority
of
w/
the
Intimidation
accused
as
an
vs.
Theft
Prohibita
(2003)
................................................................................................................................17
Mala
businessman.
crime
spontaneous
undoubtedly
best
OZ
case
committed
CC
will
proceeded
and
was
but
not
and
be
hide
allowed
seeing
and
not
ifthe
they
for
sustained
AA,
of
consummated
behind
YO
to
by
the
were
such
"impossible
robbery
the
felonious
the
desistance
were
dolo
When
snake.
man,
the
not
that
house
because
or
both
big
insulted.
the
culpa
Cesar
M/V
(at
who
with
but
of
lamppost
but
crime
least
principle
courting
X.
was
the
was
"Princess
as
died
Y,
homicide.
flight
Aaggression
defined
slight
only
atook
actually
without
neighbor
toand
that
their
at
to
B's
commit
of
an
evade
shoot
when
their
The
cothe
on
of
what
spontaneous
process
can
others.
crime
about
result.
a
Motive
shocked
accordingly
inflict
physical
death
get
Gaston
she
physical
5Motive
A
is
poison,
of
meters
had
and
stealthily
of
not
ransacking
impossibility
Anacleto,
is
charged
robbery
caused.
his
desistance
an
is
liable
injuries
he
not
essential
away,
mind
approached
entered
an
for
by
Katreena
Danilo's
unless
went
with
on
element
he
which
Belle's
the
but
element
A.
fired
the
police
blank
Moments
the
homicide.
flight
renders
house,
death
another
immediately
house
of
another
tetanus
for
at
a
of
to
crime
the
aand
the
after
felony
few
evade
shot
The
B
Damages;
Homicide;
Temperate
Damages
(2006)
Stated
otherwise,
the
death
of
ZZ
was
the
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
whether
the
killing
was
intentional
or
liability.
(Art.
12,
par.
2,
RPC).
se.
May
(2%)
crime
be
committed
without
criminal
escape
from
or
avoid
such
danger
and
in
the
immediately
preceded
the
act.
or
solemnized
inwas
Singapore,
hence
such
carried
out
its
execution.
Where
the
it
is
specifically
alleged
in
the
Information
and
in
the
mind
of
another
a
sense
of
imminent
the
police.
Carla
rescued
while
Enrique
already
left
the
place.
What
was
the
fight,
A
shot
C
as
the
latter
was
about
to
stab
identification
of
the
accused.
Furious,
Una
took
out
Tito's
gun
and
shot
the
Exempting;
Minority;
11
yrs
commission
of
crime
and
the
liabilities
In
crimes
mala
prohibita,
the
acts
are
not
as
manifested
by
their
concerted
actions
Requisites
(1994)
(1999)..............................................................................................................................................................57
.................................................................................................................................................82
(2002).................................................................................................................20
Illegal
Indeterminate
Justifying;
Fishing
-by
Prohibita;
(2002)
...........................................................................................................................71
Actual
Injury
Required
Robbery
w/
(2000)
Rape
Pacific"
conspiracy
apprehension.
coercion)
attitude
Yes.
employee,
OZ
In
kidnapping"
Revised
there
Joel
X,
regaining
attempted
neighbor,
her
who
the
honor
A
when
incurred
is
can
problem
happened
as
Penal
reached
a.................................................................................................................................31
there
consciousness.
had
Julio,
be
stage,
conspiracy,
the
a
being
SUE.
display
held
against
Code.
It
ceased
latter
was
criminal
to
would
given,
expressed,
and
aa
to
criminally
Because
no
have
Philippine
of
Lack
be
passes
that
when
cause
insubordination
the
be
Enrique.
the
passing
The
of
sexual
in
different
liability
act
criminal
she
liable
not
fact
of
impossibility
for
police
through
Port
ofOlive
just
their
stabbed
the
by,
intercourse
one
for
Impossible
if
at
intent
implied,
for
pointed
the
to
on
Band,
is
bitter
Cebu
then
fall
the
his
an
of
is &Inexempting
infection
helped
apprehension.
Fernando,
classmate,
because
stabbed
conspiracy
at
but
crime
a)
and
minutes,
Yes.
prosecutor's
started
No,
crimes
Jun-Jun
No,
intent
need
the
intended
Pomping.
Katreena
Ahitting
mala
F.
defense
which
by
after
not
noticing
circumstance
is
hitting
FJerry
being
his
may
an
ran
office
be
in
It
which
developed
A
acts
Inherently
element
to
to
When
would
is
proved
with
of
se,
expressed,
him
that
whom
not
the
for
Pat.
invoke
ofhe
the
his
revving
attempted
at
criminally
investigated,
street
one
be
Reyes
under
ran
of
for
fists,
he
the
acts
twenty
incapable
intentional
different
of
purpose
amuck
disclosed
not
but
the
right
Danilo's
the
A
are
is
Article
suddenly
just
not
liable
five
was
homicide.
engine
by
lower
and,
justifying
if
she
of
tenable.
implied,
days
12.
his
B
nature
then
hip.
of
.............................................................................................................42
direct,
natural
and
logical
consequence
accidental,
as
long
as
the
killing
was
on
Piracythe
in
the
High
Seas
Qualified
Piracy
(2006)
Justifying
vs.
Exempting
intent?
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
process,
sustains
injuries
or
dies,
the
person
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
violation
is
not
one
of
those
where
the
offenders
acted
in
concert
in
the
commission
proven
during
the
trial.
danger,
prompting
the
latter
to escape
from
was
arrested
and
incarcerated.
Considering
participation
and
corresponding
criminal
B.
ALTERNATIVE
May
A
invoke
ANSWER:
the
defense
of
aaccused
stranger
as
Criminal
Liability;
Felonious
Act;
When
the
accused
admitted
or
confessed
to
the
man.
Charged
with
homicide
Una
denies
Old;
Absence
of
Discernment
of
the
perpetrators.
What
are
the
instances
against
nature
wrong,
the
victims,
evil
or
demonstrating
bad.
They
are
punished
Defense
Sentence
Parricide
PD
704
(1996)
of
Stranger
Law
.........................................................................................................................................82
(1999)
(2002)
.................................................................................................................................32
..............................................................................................................................20
Illegal
....................................................................................................................18
(1999)
.................................................................................................................................................71
Malum
in
Se
vs.
Robbery
Malum
City,
A
tried
When
over
rising
death
rivalry,
impossible
accomplishing
crimes
a
act
way
to
investigation
Government
No,
with
aggressor.
and
valid
The
Una's
of
to
her
her.
the
in
to
Felipe
of
four
B
all,
work.
are
circumstance
OZ
a
B,
baby.
defense,
are
stop
After
Captain
rage,
claim
culprits
shall
crime
Article
limited
In
intruded
decided
did
resulted
Arturo
bound
In
the
Julio
A
moved
that
not
defense
govern.
short,
of
4
from
of
the
crime
except
only
of
will
satisfied
suffer
murder.
as
she
the
affects
into
in
to
the
room
towards
Rustom's
co-conspirators
come
pinpointing
continuing
to
acted
of
The
get
vessel
Cesar's
Revised
any
of
when
acts
murder,
that
the
Criminal
himself,
act
from
rid
undue
rights
in
B
actor,
turned
which
felonious
X
wielding
room
defense
the
of
Penal
occupied.
the
Felipe
with
a
ST,
injury.
liability
he
YO
not
crime
under
other
when
after
over
said
the
the
by
a
as
the
of
wrong,
paragraph
later,
freely
B
tried
daughters
evil
his
blocked
A
The
Pat.
crimes.
accomplishment.
although
conviction,
using
circumstance
Twenty-five
complained
A
The
could
and
alone
car
plan.
presumption
Reyes
was
admitted
to
his
defense
and
B
evil
be
Motive,
by
should
stop
Because
are
she
brought
balisong,
3,
was
held
C,
driving
while
brought
Rev.
of
days
or
is
bound
forcing
of
trying
severe
A
to
liable
be
if
civilly
of
defense
is
intent
Penal
attending
To
later,
the
bad,
from
about
he
held
towards
started
that
convict
having
as
Jun-Jun
to
for
him
himself
school
liable.
chest
Code,
liable
while
is
get
such
continuing
co-conspirators
by
parricide
and
of
to
an
stabbing
Belle
an
away,
a
stranger
pains.
flee
the
Being
principal
essential
to
harbored
the
minor
for
crime,
where
acted
efficient
so
the
towards
is
the
preliminary
because
ran
B,
a
felonious,
acted
generally
at
with
always
she
minor
death
hospital,
since
that
in
after
the
after
of
the
he
of
XX's
felonious
act
which
created
an
occasion
of
the
robbery.
.............................................................................................................42
Circumstances
(2004)
Distinguish
clearly
but
briefly:
Between
Criminal
Law
Bar Examination
Qthat
& Anot
(1994-2006)
committing
the
felonious
act
is
responsible
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Revised
Penal
Code,
under
Art.
2 acts
thereof,
of
the
crime,
meaning
their
are
or
avoid
such
danger
and
in
the
process,
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
that
the
ransom
note
was
received
by
liability
of
each,
if
any?
Reasons.
8%
a
justifying
circumstance
his
favor?
Why?
Proximate
Cause
(2001)
CRIMES
commission
AGAINST
of
the
crime.
THE
FUNDAMENTAL
LAW
OF
THE
STATE........................................43
culpability
on
the
ground
of
defense
of
(2000)
where
proof
motive
is
not
essential
or
only
because
there
is
a
law
prohibiting
them
common
felonious
purpose
of
assaulting
the
Justifying;
Indeterminate
Art
Possession
134;
Rebellion;
Fulfillment
Politically
Firearms
Sentence
Motivated;
of

Committed
Duty;
RA
Law
by
Requisites
NPA
8294
Members
(1998)
(2000)
(1999)
(1999)..............................................................................................................................................................57
Prohibitum
w/
(2005)
........................................................................................................................18
Rape;
Conspiracy
Motive
(2004)
vs.
the
they
commission
without
act
big
Code
poisoning
shall
against
performed
results
Justifying
victim's
end
The
a)
A,
When
honor,
"Salamat
paragraph
IsThe
brother
act;
knife
is
culprit
the
of
four
be
provides
assailant
the
have
A
is
circumstance
persons,
the
from
arrived
contention
and
incurred
son,
cause
Osang"
not
culprits
circumstance
of
him.
and
1,
would
latter's
alley
of
B,
planned
threatening
Art.
tenable
criminal
in
appears
he
the
with
OZ
of
home,
was
part
Binoy
11
as
be
was
by
and
the
peppered
consent
crime;
of
poured
the
he
of
adue
affects
that
any
both
evil
charged
because
and
he
crime
the
simultaneously
turned
negligence.
intention
to
affects
to
to
to
found
criminal
person
caused.
he
RPC,
accused
and
astab
be
the
agreed
the
against
the
substance
did
with
to
took
the
a
employment
It
B
act,
the
B.
of
not.
leave.
performing
room
is
raping
Any
liability
legitimate
At
Philippine
correct?
having
unlawful
required
liberty
not
On
act,
on
persons
the
So
shoot
with
the
Only
into
his
the
the
not
a (US
condemned.
shall
supervening
she
his
commission
her
resentment
and
another
they
without
but
precede
attempted
less
element
passengers
was
investigation
realizing
G.
1.
fulfillment
act
Jerry
The
and
was
such
be
than
not
because
have
of
exempt
object
finally
discernment,
responsible
and
direction.
the
of
hitting
involved
that
felonious
fifteen
The
murder
of
felonies
towards
who
cause.
of
Buddy
intent.
planned
was
A
a
of
caught
the
from
moral
was
duty
his
of
(15)
the
then
Immediately
in
in
would
act
crime;
Vicente's
are
wife
by
for
Jun,
indeed
conspiracy
progress,
criminal
profuse
the
years
requires
and
up
scampered
trait
was
dolo.
and
liable
the
with
Jerry
with
fight
make
this
he
the
injury
of
old
in
agreed
felonious
fist
for
liability,
did
her
gave
is
the
serious
as
Anacleto
and
proximate
bleeding,
although
after
Art.
of
the
blows
to
a
away,
in
not.
A.
offender
he
Buddy
condition,
4,
a
so-called
A
B,
on
unless
thicket
par.
had
act
So
shot
and
C,
was
with
over
the
of
a
he
2
C
immediate
sense
of
danger
in
the
mind
of
ZZ
vs.
Valdez,
41
Phil,
1497;
People
vs.
Apra,
27
justifying
and
exempting
circumstances
in
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
for
such injuries
or
death.
(USperson
vs. Valdez, 41is
may
beIsparents,
applied
The
coordinated
or extraterritorially.
synchronized
inprosecutor
ageneral
way
sustains
injuries
or
dies,
the
Carla's
the
investigating
Criminal
Liability;
Impossible
(2%)
honor.
her
claim
tenable?
[5%]
required
to
justify
conviction
of
an
accused?
victims.
for
public
The
good,
existence
and
thus
of
the
good
conspiracy
faith
or
can
lack
2
................................................................................................................20
.................................................................................................................................32
......................................................................43
Parricide;
...............................................................................................................83
In
crimes
mala
prohibita.
Multiple
Art
134-A:
Coup
Parricide;
d’
Illegal
Justifying;
etat
&
Possession
Rape;
Indeterminate
SD;
Defense
Frustrated
of
Firearms
of
Sentence
Homicide
Honor;
(2005)
&
Intent
authorities.
sequence
act
with
Felipe's
person
instant
shall
YO's
an
of
or
other
Yes,
the
...............................................................................................................................71
defense
Joel
bullets.
Homicide
Explain.
night
daughter.
No,
aggression
then
inter
property.
ineffectual
actor;
The
act
of
A
the
an
from
coffee
actor;
be
did
out
hand,
cannot
alia
A
performing
when
act
which
claim
act
incurred
(1996)
(3%)
Unsatisfied,
letter's
Osang
of
in
for
with
Upon
of
behind.
on
is
may
thinking
An
pursuing
relatives;
crimes
As
while
that
Cesar's
A
felonious
b)
their
that
means
her
validly
would
his
was
information
kidnapping
seeing
backpack
realize
Assuming
by
be
...................................................................................................................................................18
honor
he
a
friends,
there
attack
only
exempting
mala
any
On
malum
felonious
it
death.
A
intended
which
be
the
invoke
was
hence,
A,
and
that
even
person
the
a
had
prohibita
an
B
where
few
commission
that
be
even
took
hence
arsenic.
is
ran
for
In
in
the
OZ
already
appointed
offense
a
defense
act
his
threw
feet
se
only
justified
the
homicide
(1)
committing
away.
crime
thought
circumstance
man
the
he
before
and
defense,
is
a
from
attempted
are
"to
placed
crime
It
unlawful
coconut
ceased.
a
was
against
malum
A
against
turned
of
play
those
hand
B,
took
as
they
day,
was
was
but
his
not
the
a
a
the
involved;
it
causing
Pomping's
therewith
act
somewhat
poison,
cause
stabbed
sequence
strengthened
eventually
Yes,
Motive
practically
nine
Yes,
In
three
when
rushed
trouble,
and
"impossible
After
inter
was
legal
of
Luis
D
a
(9)
proved
of
Jun-Jun
the
crime
A
was
is
alia,
which
a
to
thus,
years
F,
immediately
them
the
in
is
implications:
two-inch
relevant
inflicting
eye.
the
distant
of
latter
A
useless
died.
to
liable
pursuing
crime"
vehicle
also
may
that
their
by
that
Buddy
kill
good
hospital
was
of
Jumping
After
Robbery;
Pat
the
age,
was
for
F
stabbed
she
be
from
to
wound
physical
as
only.
shot
because,
attack
the
faith
to
the
Reyes
their
fact
placed
prove
committed
brought
all
the
acted
about
she
because
skid
out
the
incident,
In
in
Since
circumstances
that
on
injury
or
deaths
G
is
commission
Homicide;
crimes
of
house.
even
a
injuries
was
the
and
with
on
who
generally
to
Anacleto's
case
with
lack
the
Katreena
her
B,
Jun's
stab
of
right
hit
subsequently
without
was
C,
before
because
train
or
she
intent
to
symptoms
when
of
Fernando,
mala
Belle,
on
and
food.
the
B.
criminal
visiting
Arson
leg
offense
her,
and
of
only
There
right
in
D
to
they
and
the
he
se,
is
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
who
tried
to
avoid
such
danger
by
jumping
SCRA
1037.)
A
qualifying
circumstance
is
deemed
an
criminal
law.
Phil,
1497;
People
vs.
Apra,
27
SCRA
1037.)
Violation
of
Trespass
to felonious
Dwelling
(2002)
rule
on(2004)
territoriality
of "Impossible
criminal
governs
indicative
that
theyDomicile
are
pursuinglaw
avs.
common
committing
the
act
is prohibited
responsible
merely
filed
a
case
of
Crime
to
Crime
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Give
at
least
3
instances.
(5%)
of
criminal
intent
in
doing
the
act
be
inferred
or
deduced
from
the
manner
the
Requisites
Law
.............................................................................................................44
(1997)....................................................................................................................57
Ammunitions
(2002)
(1998)
.................................................................................................................................32
(2000)
..........................................................................................................21
........................................................................................................83
Art
134-A;
Coup
Justifying;
PD
d’etat
Indeterminate
46
&
RA
Defense
(2002)
Rape
6713
Motive
filed
committed
crime
Yes,
a
criminally
the
felony
out
persons
poison.
personal
considered
prohibitum
3
affects
(1995).....................................................................................................................................72
defense
Arturo
grenade
Felipe
or
shell
What
his
daughter's
Defense
her
aggression,
practical
frustrated
gun
The
actor
rubber
latter,
Felipe
that
against
husband.
which
isclaimed
although
In
was
which
act
and
the
The
of
acted
or
security
direct
that
liable
apparently
the
joke
snake.
is
the
honor
is
criminal
is
at
apprehended
shot
his
and
actor,
wrong
law
Binoy
property,
stage
liable
done
being
that
the
crime.
substance
without
totally
both
on
assault,
Enraged,
the
for
father
imputes
(2)
B,
as
in
Felipe
and
Cesar"
of
in
within
for
not
the
same
he
wrongful
killing
only
liability
having
used
included
reasonable
the
believing
Therefore,
he
did
the
not
destroyed
direct,
voluntariness;
were
against
the
when
was
violation
Regional
legal
does
because
criminal
by
time.
not
Osang
him.
death
by
and
against
was
of
act.
act
already
B
in
vs.
the
it
know
natural
A,
bounds,
not
himself
as
Charged
self-defense,
In
the
white
B
done
of
the
necessity
not
if
In
B
victim,
a
grabbed
authorities
charged
X's
Trial
liability
persons
any?
Cesar
People
they
since
designed,
about
bank
justifying
principle
unlawful
for
and
be
to
room.
sugar
hence
Court
Explain.
with
who
be
the
are
for
the
to
v.
is
of
or
a isIntent
discernment.
a
palm
executed
felonious.
crime
before
2.
However,
resulting
F.
committed
reacted
charged
was
Crimes
there
A
which
exempt
criminal
good
landing
being
hospital.
did
kill,
was
committed
Suppose
Thereafter,
shall
tetanus
not
they
committing
on
may
already
is
prevented
bringing
no
which
Intent
faith
the
know
mala
doubt
with
on
from
intent
incur
with
in
a
Despite
tried
A
Jun
still
indication
infection
statement
the
that,
the
person
part
be
She
acrawling,
did
criminal
of
be
A
prohibita
or
homicide.
as
to
ballpen
both
crime.
road
if
full
the
back
latter's
exiled
the
a
because
of
regarded
such
not
the
to
poison
is
efforts
felony
lack
committing
the
unavoidable
criminal
the
however
stabbing
on
below.
the
die
consummation
that
he
admitting
Therefore,
liability.
is
from
which
there
death.
the
offender
identity
are
Jun
a
of
daughter
because,
to
During
when
of
and
culpable
A
as
Robbery;
two-inch
alleviate
All
the
his
and
those
criminal
was
she
liability
of
the
Stated
civilly
the
The
he
asevere
house
G
of
her
B
the
or
is
thus
felonious
the
must
proximate
no
induced
started
by
unknown
to
three
the
a
where
exception
necessary
felony,
designed,
wound
A's
of
(1999)
trial,
principle
defense,
need
the
A,
liable;
for
and,
intent/
be
the
they
the
Pat
for
by
of
the
jeepney
(People
v.
Arpa,
27
SCRA
Criminal
Liability:
Felonious
Act;
element
of
a
crime
when
it
iskilled
specifically
General
Principles;
Territoriality;
.........................................................................................................43
the
situation.
criminal
objective,
they
shall
be deemed
to
for
such
injuries
or
death.
Commit
Kidnapping"
against
Enrique.
Is
the
i.
When,
in
his
presence,
offenders
not
a
defense.
acted
in
commonly
attacking
Dino
Sentence
..........................................................................................................................................44
(1995)...................................................................................................................................................................58
&
Indirect
Honor;
Bribery
Law
Elements
(2005)
(2006)
(2000)
.................................................................................................................................32
.......................................................................................................................83
..................................................................................................................21
Art
134-A;
Coup
PD
of
planned,
but
committing
persuade,
logical
in
different
substitute
inherent
the
property,
1
prohibited
Sunico,
Yes,
person
b)
circumstance,
aggression
before
However,
Cesar's
No,
not
coins
(3%)
homicide,
rape
must
balisong
great
law
No,
considered
Although
Cebu
punishable,
offender
he
Felipe
means
the
was
have
from
A
shall
consequence
Distinguish
that
in
reaching
weak
et
and
contention
from
is
impossibility
from
and
authority
Enrique
unknown
is
considering
A
already
City.
aL.
been
not
by
inside
employed
a
be
when
immediate
not
by
claimed
although
known
there
heart
felony.
that
commenced
BB
no
as
(CA
the
given
exempt
may
liable
done
He
the
statute.
not
criminal
and
their
could
there
between
is
which
consummated;
or
wall
and
50
to
of
thereof
the
And
a
the
he
moved
a
alley.
agent
the
no
because
that
to
as
of
CC.
crime,
OG
crime;
from
that
locked
peril,
and
not
accused
is
acted
benefit
crime
he
prevent
any
its
four
accused
ST's
5880)
they
and,
a
to
crimes
They
Equal.
of
intended.
although
he
When
have
accomplishment
criminal
stabbed
threw
conspiracy,
act
there
to
commit,
culprits,
a
cabinet
in
the
resulted,
only
act
are
generally,
person
of
be
done
it
or
defense
or
quash
incurred
that
moreover,
mala
act
constitute
the
Juan
to
is
himself
not
was
intended
repel
repel
Nothing
no
liability
In
Julio
defend
of
by
X
using
the
would
in
in
only
U.S.
shot
held
criminal
was
the
an
of
se
it.
no
an
to
and
unless
2
cause
culpability.
act
planned,
house,
allergy
to
otherwise,
together
in
using
Reyes
stabbing
acts
offender
crime
offense
is
wherein
negligence
passengers
revenge,
inflicted
In
pains,
cannot
perpetrate
Pat,
consequence
1
where
both
law
incurs
concept:
penalized
Reyes
of
in
the
If
of
raped
she
to
that
Buddy
Distinguish
be
will
found
raised
the
class
Intent
by
or
with
the
at
and
robbery
powdered
criminal
the
crime
Due
held
died
resentment
Murder,
when
is
to
the
be
Vicente.
latter's
when
died
prosecution
her
at
B
a
commenced
criminally
shoot
of
and
Crimes
death
are
treated
is
to
passengers
defense,
criminally
and
of
the
later
first.
the
substituted
the
the
is
with
liability
heart
there
Jerry,
not
"motive"
death
a
milk,
C,
time,
Anacleto
him
of
due
the
act
crime
defense,
injury.
Thereafter,
of
mala
inherently
returned
as
homicide,
Belle
attack.
the
liable,
or
their
is
while
further.
committed
proved
Jun
an
performance
because
and
therefor.
although
result
to
a
and
against
poison
from
any
incident
Pomping
in
was
by
had
conspiracy,
died
injuries
commit,
only
in
the
It
se
such
to
negligence
by
that
crimes
Clearly,
bad,
the
to
of
turned
the
"intent".
but
other
the
without
minority
to
E,
are
the
was
persons.
be
gives
way
criminal
direct,
the
four
stop
the
at
lost
B
evil,
of
would
those
mala
the
shall
out
act
Pat.
evil
the
his
or
of
...................................................................................................................................................18
(1997).....................................................................................................................................................72
Motive
vs.
Intent
Theft
CRIMES
AGAINST
PUBLIC
ORDER
.........................................................................................43
1037).
Proximate
Cause
(1996)
stated
by
law
as
included
in
the
definition
of
Jurisdiction
over
Vessel
(2000)
be acting correct?
in conspiracy
and their criminal
prosecutor
Why?
(3%)
person
to
be
arrested
has
committed,
and
Raffy
with
rocks,
thereby
demonstrating
Justifying;
Indeterminate
d’etat;
Rape;
46
(1994)..................................................................................................................................................................83
New
Firearms
SD;
Absence
Law
Sentence
Defense
(1998)..............................................................................................................44
of
of
Law;
Force
Property;
Exceptions
&
Requisites
Intimidation
(1996)
(1999)
information
act
also
mitigating
him
friends
different
into
vs.
happened
or
to
"impossible
crimes
violations
that
crime
authority
under
civil
Justifying
What
Joel
not
frightening
nevertheless
their
Is
criminal
his
B
unlawful
death.
The
A
play
already
suppress
Valdez
daughter's
Since
because
of
father's
exempted
inside
on
legal
while
as
the
unlawful
liability
common
be
the
AA
will
was
Art.
one
mala
a
planned,
but
water,
When
nor
account
from
practical
aggression.
the
was
effects
vs.
did
be
committing
the
41
not
circumstance
omission
to
the
in
ran
of
332
another
is
the
civil
his
prohibita.
life,
for
crime"
Exempting
considered
is
convicted
act
fact
Phil.
aggression
was
the
YO
attacked
what
consummated
honor.
from
disappeared
mere
act
room
key.
away,
incurred;
tried
because
actor
criminal
he
liability.
of
is
lack
cannot
after
rivals
act
joke
497.
to
of
not
an
he
is
was
criminal
of
Forthwith,
to
and
or
There
Is
stop
is
not
a
rules
of
of
"implied
for
intended
hence,
on
a
the
in
for
where
he
felony
B
A
in
regarded
Circumstances
that
conspirators;
unaware
crime,
commit
all,
propensity
Whereas,
failure
be
must
said
the
a
while
jurisdiction.
correct?
Cesar.
nobody
courting
an
a
because
drank
homicide,
crime.
beneath
is
liability
employment
of
already
regarded
he
is
lawful
actual
offense
the
is
Article
no
there
conspiracy"
be
correct,
there
A
in
(Art.
did
convenience
no
Is
of
only
the
that
kidnapping.
victim
defense
What
was
If
broke
continuing
exempting
Felipe
less
not
defense,
performance
under
not,
the
because
4,
of
governs
election
was
is
applies
b)
coffee.
as
Arturo
If
Osang
as
hit
(1998)
RA.
par.
no
he
who
their
can
an
the
you
no
Article
an
to
or
of
negligence.
of
such
right
wrongful
also
carted
Distinguish,
hospitalized
actually
natural
waiting
act
Pomping's
exoneration,
wrongful
wrong
rise
not
independent
was
or
prohibita,
hospital.
motive
following
where
that
driver,
Jun
Reyes
duty
When
the
imprudence,
of
was
to
wound,
committed
eye.
she
be
accused
incur
(People
away
one
variant
is
but
cannot
acted
and
the
taxicab
powdered
not
in
consequence
motive
had
act
Is
a)
the
day.
good
vexatious
prohibited
is
Luis
logical
shooting
acts
for
in
no
the
poisoned
criminal
Is
was
of
vs.
that
been
the
Correspondingly,
beyond
as
crimes
Can
act
be
their
Katreena
tetanus
10
and
the
and
faith
with
liable
belongings
Oanis,
relevant
a
or
the
also
act
he
days
milk.
consequence
privileged
suffering
Vicente
actor's
of
motored
also
omissions
respective
discernment.
act
or
proximate
and
acted
C,
by
only
for
of
is
the
held
et.al.,
liability
B
infection
lack
for
1,
different
criminally
of
in
all,
law
to
the
his
there
What
call
because
will
repeatedly
be
a
ingesting
liable
of
prove
of
in
from
74
already
away.
malum
death
mitigating
for
act
Danilo
eventually
which
criminal
the
of
penalized
Phil.
concepts
is
cause
because
crime
of
could
public
for
a
from
duty
the
a
is
The
liable?
Gaston's
fulfillment
G
modifying
lingering
of
the
257)
case?
the
of
it.
is
and
governs
justified
died.
need
the
of
pulling
or
what
an
intent
which
good,
.
their
said
his
It
and
are
he
F
is
(2004)
(1998)
...................................................................................................................................................19
...................................................................................................................................................................72
Motive;
a
crime,
like treachery
inEXEMPTING
the
of
liability
shall
be collective,
notcrime
individual.
Criminal Law is
Baractually
Examination
Q & A (1994-2006)
JUSTIFYING
&
committing,
or
is
attempting
a
unity
of
criminal
design
to
inflict
harm
on
were
them.
expressed
intend
wrongful,
Maryjane.
1,
surface,
was
What
inadequate
subjectively,
Criminal
There
Mala
May
designed
inspectors
3019
of
a)
only
circumstance,
Distinguish
1.
.......................................................................................................21
...............................................................................................................32
Art
(1995)...................................................................................................................58
PD
evil
not
Conspiracy;
are:
Only
conspirators;
injured
liable
did
punished
Exempting
coconut
332
in
A
aggression
speak
Justifying;
claimed
when
an
RFC;
his
claim
criminal;
commission
participation,
instrument
may
greater
inasmuch
A
of
threatened
a)
an
to
those
arrested
Exempting
is
the
for
duty
criminal
the
In
of
to
the
is
In
Not
theft,
in
during
People
act
a
is
and
be
defense
shell
the
commit
special
by
to
fact,
criminally
where
considering
Liability;
Liability:
Judge,
This
aggressor
Liability;
the
Revised
and
conspiracy.
(Art.
all
who
be
to
between
wrong,
thus
Se
or
evil,
secure
the
drowned.
death
Defense
and
swindling
Defense
136;
those
defend
malum
as
the
outside
ineffectual
he
vs,
of
case
earlier.
A
liability
poll
participated
148,
benefit
by
of
civil
Revised
vs.
to
the
law
Circumstances;
the
and
will
it
so
of
c)
shall
Pugay,
no
Incident.
but
the
Penal
of
clerks
is,
a
allow
is
is
who
Felonious
Mere
grave
liable
Destructive
honor.
justifying
Revised
punishing
unlawful
was
crime;
more
against
you
that
Impossible
Cesar
in
B
parallel
Mala
in
May
liability
accused
not
impossible
Both
of
crime
did
or
Discuss
Coa
of
not
Justifying
se
were
of
are
Penal
the
Code
BB
et
acquiescence
to
injured
means
their
malicious
they
grant
a
all
for
and
orderly
A
OZ
criminal
Are
Should
or
al,
Honor;
by
wrong
are
include
present
any
and
render
eyes
Conspiracy
Honor;
be
Penal
and
wrongs
will
to
and
already
aggression
will
for
Robbery
Code
GR
acts
incur,
criminal
were
be,
with
Act;
A,
home
is
held
the
liable
the
CC
(Art.
or
be
no
being
B,
of
mitigating
his
exempting
No.
regulation
as
at
Code).
crime
the
mala
mischief.
a
generally
under
case
at
disabled
achieve
part
one
C
defense
criminal
the
considered
motion?
the
though
if
that
knife,
voter's
in
4,
for
in
and
the
to
acts
claim
a
any?
with
law,
par.
the
of
same
of
the
brother
the
criminally
no
D
of
circumstances
circumstance.
develop
Why?
he
expressed
family.
legal
Would
crimes,
felonious
survived.
them.
her
of
passengers'
public
to
desisted.
element
burden
prohibitum
or
three
as
under
charged
inherently
heart
death
would-be
brought
not
When
b)
Conspiracy;
Criminal
Mala
Justifying;
Motive
to
intended
determine
a
malice
The
ponytail.
Justifying;
implications,
duty.
(3%)
enough
passengers
ailment.
your
of
In
is
par
a)
attendant
if
is
from
welfare
of
with
it
G
act.
any,
Who
What
about
fact,
in
B's
upon
killers
Indeterminate
is
conspiracy.
b)
not
3,
bad,
attempted
since
Is
answer
or
(Art.
Liability;
Liability:
jumping
not
are
In
the
Discuss
the
A
(People
Article
spontaneous
homicide
Se
if
the
did
are
necessary
What
that
A
Commit
crime
other
Fulfillment
the
discretionary
Complex
an
SD;
were
evil,
the
4,
a
victim's
considered
the
vs.
or
proper
and
Rape;
circumstances
who
Jerry
between
liable
defense
defense;
vs.
act
to
par.
prosecution
crime,
the
11
former
out
Defense
cause
interest
words,
the
did
or
v.
the
unaware
B
or
Felonious
Impossible
Both
jumped
is
and
for
1,
Arpa,
of
for
crime
Mala
wrong
Anti-Rape
were
of
frustrated
punishable
right
Jose,
attendant
first
accused
Crime
Revised
Sentence
the
the
the
desistance,
crimes
if
Buddy
the
tenable?
be
are
was
it
of
the
in
penalty
any,
of
27
question
palm,
Domingo,
is
already
to
of
death
out
and
that
Revised
established?
train;
punishing
death
that
to
liable
injury
completely
which
enough
SCRA
be
Duty;
Act;
Rebellion
Property;
prove
could
commit?
of
Penal
mala
felony
Law
what
acted
imputed
by
and
they
whoever
of
lower
hence
the
Explain.
of
for
Law;
was
of
in
may
be
made
Penal
B
G
in
46
that
of
that
the
are
be
se
in
Proof
Theft
thereof;
Not
Essential;
Conviction
(2006)
(2001)
murder.
But
if134;
the
aggression
that
was
begun
by
theis no
to
commit
an
offense,
ALTERNATIVE
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
ANSWER:
CIRCUMSTANCES
their
victims.
Why?
store
composite
which
"plans
People
74324,
Proximate
criminally
jumped
Explain
2,
objectively,
Crimes
kidnapping.
Prohibita
time,
of
name
prohibita.
In
force
Here,
incurred
circumstances.
Circumstances:
Requisites
Exceptions
(1994)................................................................................................................44
1997
(1997)..................................................................................................................................................................84
a
their
Conspirator
liability
scene
in
or
Arson
liable
defense
amount
the
Coverage
presence
Requisites
circumstance
to
longer
Elements
be
by
lawful
the
crimes
RFC).
B?
speak
approval
the
sustained?
There
co
of
liable
co-conspirator.
facts
criminal
Explain.
upon
(2002)
to
malum
for
the
(5%)
in
was
affairs
of
to
person
exists.
(2000)
vs.
Nov.
of
briefly.
into
to
carry
act.
(1994)
prosper?
the
although
the
of.
of
any
get
as
committed
of
crime
being
crime,
As
liable
Arturo,
Pugay,
committed
a
(2003)
crime
(1997)
(2000)
(2000)
things.....
(2003)
the
of
no
Cause
his
(2002)
the
18,
crime.
................................................................................................................................58
a
prohibitum?
of
even
crime?
(1998)
objective
or
out
(2%)
making
Why?
the
rule,
crime
(5%)
[3%]
case?
friends.
society.
no
committed
a
for
river
1988).
circumstances?
without
of
if
Why?
their
wrong
et
.......................................................................................................21
there
commission
...............................................................................................................33
with
crime
(1997)
Because
the
robbery
any.
attempted
(5%)
al.
Explain.
through
was
but
Explain.
(Art.
a
criminal
of
death
Cesar".
(5%}
defense.
is
[5%]
done
any
nor
because
committed.
stabbing
no
13,
is
with
the
act
criminal,
(3%)
criminal
reckless
robbery.
of
but
(3%)
par.
plan.
B?
act
(3%)
homicide.
ofno
FT.
criminal
3,
which
criminal.
liability.
RPC).
imprudence.
there
offender.
by
without
circumstances
Code).
composite
Manolo
and
the
[3%]
1037).
and
store
accidental.
(3%)
their
violates
to
before
(Intod
the
special
moving
Code,
Anacleto?
almost
held
unaware
they
victim.
fulfillment
Explain.
beat
with
Immediate
Crimes
Prohibita
Requisites
Intent
the
same?
considered
crimes
accused
prohibition
the
least
deaths.
guilty
mixed
to
Fernando
offender.
vs.
as
all
and
universally
law.
Rape
physical
carry
train?
the
(3%)
amended.
of
(1999)
acts
CA,
two
crime
(1998)
Explain.
[2%]
of
mala
of?
said
with
prohibition
acted
(2003)
a
out
215
(1996)
and
(2)
(2000)
State
of
Cause
8%
are:
was
duty.
commit?
of
prohibits.
killing.
injuries
the
execution
their
SCRA
effects
with
condemned.
robbery
voluntarily
your
food
(2003)
criminal
are
discernment.
52).
of
Explain.
reasons.
of
thereof.
4%
F?
penalized.
with
are
Junviolated.
performed,
plan.
homicide.
(2%)
(5%)
is
......................................................................................................19
...................................................................................................................................................................73
Art.
False
A
BP
legal
22;
Testimony
separation
Rebellion
Memorandum
is
vs.
a
separation
Coup
of
the

IN

CRIMINAL LAW
ARRANGED BY TOPIC

(1994 – 2006)

The Authors
July 26, 2005

Dondee

July 3, 2007

July 3, 2007

75 of 86
Criminal Law Bar Examination Q & A (1994-2006)
76 development.
of 86
CriminalRule
Law Bar
Examination
A (1994-2006)
with
110
of theQ &
Revised
Rules on
tions prejudicial to the child's
77
of parents
86 for of
Criminal Law
Barsuch
Examination
Q & A (1994-2006)
Criminal
Family
Code,
Procedure.
as in Article
27 which is a
they
The reaction
are not of
really
the victim,
the biological
screaming
Criminal
Lawchild
Bar Examination
Q &the
A (1994-2006)
marriage
of
Internal
in Revenue,
articulo mortis.
A, theIf the
speaker,
second
in the
land
said
help
grabber
upon
constitutes
theshe
occurrence
imputed
crime
to
of him
theof
touching
the
simulation

Concubinage
78and
ofwas
86
course
marriage
of was
his lecture,
valid even
lamented
without the
a marriage
fact that
commission
of
indicates
certain
birth. crimes,
that
of she
crimes.
likeperceived
rape, seduction
her dignity
(2002)
A is
married.
He has
paramour
with
C,
the debased
unwed
is criminally
liable
license,
a
great
then
majority
CBP
would
of athose
be liable
serving
for
bigamy.
inwhom
said
being
adultery.
It hasmother
or
noviolated.
definite
concept as
a for
79
of 86
Slander
he has sexual
relations
on a more
or lessCriminal
"child
trafficking",
a &violation
ofvs.
Article
IV,
agencies
were utterly
dishonest
and corrupt.
crime.
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
A the
(1994-2006)
Entrapment
Crimes
Against
Civil
Status
Otherwise,
CBP
is
not
liable
for
bigamy
but
(1996)
regular
basis. morning,
They meet
least group
once of
aCriminal
Pia,
a7
bold
actress
living
on
top
floor
of
a
Sec.
Rep.
Act
7610.
The
law
The
following
theatwhole
Law
Bar of
Examination
Q &the
ANo.
(1994-2006)
Highways
andExample
in
discharge
of
his
Instigation
(1995)
Distinguished
entrapment
from
of Entrapment:
Miscellaneous
ofagent
Persons
for
Illegal
in Art.
350
theattended
Revised
week
in Marriage
hotels,
andfor
other
placesCriminal
plush
condominium
in
City
sunbathed
punishes
inter alia
the
act
of
buying
and
employees
in the motels
two
bureaus
who
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
A,
an
anti-narcotic
of the
Government
official
administrative
functions,
did then
Instigation.
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&Makati
A (1994-2006)
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
Penal
Code,
designated
as
where
they specifically
can
be alone.
Is Afiled
guilty
of any
naked
at
its
penthouse
every
Sunday
Inand
INSTIGATION,
the instigator
practically
selling
of
aa
child.
the seminar,
as complainants,
a criminal
acted
as
poseur
buyer
of
shabu
and
there
willfully
and
unlawfully
work
for
Corpus
Delicti
Criminal
Lawcouple
Bar Examination
Q
A (1994-2006)
Bigamy
The
Awas
andunaware
B,& the
unwed
mother
C,
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
"Marriage
contracted
provisions
crime?
Why?
(3%) A against
morning.
induces
the
She
prospective
accused
that
the
into
business
complaint
against
for uttering
whatof the
negotiated
with
B, in
aapproval
suspected
drug
pusher
and
facilitate
the
of
B's
claim
for
(2001)
At
a
birthday
party
Bogo,
Cebu,
A
got
A
is
guilty
of
the
crime
of
concubinage
by
(1994)
and
Issa
and
the
Bobby,
doctor
who
being
were
all
first
involved
cousins,
in
were
the
Criminal
Law
Bar
Examination
Q
&
A
(1994-2006)
laws."
executives
holding
office
adjoining
tallA
commission
of the
offense
himself
group claimed to be defamatory statements
who
unaware
that
A
isatand
athe
officer.
theispayment
of
the
price
ofpolice
his
land
which
intoxicated
and
started
quarrelling
with
B
having sexual intercourse under scandalous
married in
1975.
Into1993,
Bobby
was
told
simulation
of birth
ofIn
the
newborn
child,
buildings
becomes
reported
co-principal.
office
ENTRAPMENT,
every
Sunday
ways
of the lecturer. In court, A filed a motion to
then
money
to
B who handed
theissued
government
had
expropriated,
and
and
At
themarked
height
of
their
arguments,
Aacts
circumstances,
with a woman who is not his
violate
thatC.
his
marriage
Rep.
Act
to
No.
Issa
was
7610.
incestous
Their
Bigamy;
Prescriptive
morning
and,
with
the
use
of
powerful
and
means
are
resorted
for
the
purpose
ofA
quash the
information, reciting fully the
a
sachet
of
shabu
toto
B.
Thereupon,
after
the
claim
was
approved,
the
accused
left
and
took
a
bolo
from
his
house,
after
wife.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
under the
law
then
in
force
and
therefore
constitute
child
trafficking
whichshe
are
Period
(1995)
Joe
andfacts,
Marcy
were
married
in that
Batanes
in
binoculars,
trapping
and
kept
capturing
on
gazing
the
at
lawbreaker
her
while
while
above
on
the
ground
no
crime
signaled
his
anti-narcotic
team
to
close-in
gaveheBreturned
only P1,000.00
of and
the approved
which
to theIVparty
Having
sexual
relations
on
moreand
or
I would
grant
motion
toaMarcy
quash
on less
the
penalized
void ab
initio.
under
HeArticle
married
of
Caring.
said law.
1955.
After
two the
years,
Joe
left
sunbathed.
Eventually,
her
sunbathing
executing
his
were
committed.
Ifhotels,
you
were
the judge,
how
and
arrest
B. criminal
Thisand
is plan.
aBobby
case
of
entrapment
claim
ofwith
P5,000
willfully
and
unlawfully
threatened
to
stab
everybody.
B
got
scared
regular
basis
in
motels
and
other
Charged
bigamy,
raised
the
ground
that
the
facts
charged
do
not
settled
in Mindanao
where
he later
met and
Instigation
(1995)
Suspecting
that
Juan
was a
Crimes
Against
Honor
became
the
talk
of
the
town.
1)
What
would
you
resolve
the
motion?
8%
because
the
criminal
mind
is
in
BA crime,
already
appropriated
for
himself
the
balance
of
and
ran
towards
the
seashore,
with
chasing
places
may
be
considered
a
scandalous
defense
that
his
first
marriage
is
void
ab
constitute
an
offense,
since
there
is
no
married Linda on 12 June 1960. The second
drug
pusher,
SPO2
Mercado,
leader
of
the
Example
of
Instigation:
if
any,
did
Pia
commit?
Explain,
2)
What
when
A
transacted
with
him.
P4,000,
thus
causing
undue
injury
to
B
and
him,
Band
ran therefore,
upANSWER:
agave
steep
incline
along
the
circumstance
conscience,
initio
there
no
previous
SUGGESTED
definite
oroffends
persons
dishonored.
The
marriageperson
was that
registered
in public
the
civil
registry
of A
Libel
Narcom
Juan
aofis
Pl00-bill
andshore
Because
the
members
an
anti-narcotic
has
filed
a motion
to
quash
the
information,
crime,
if team,
any,
did
the
business
executives
the
Government."
and
was
cornered
on
top
of
a
cliff.
Out
of
1)
Pia
did
not
commit
a
crime,
The
felony
giving
rise
to
criticism
and
general
protest
marriage
to
speak
of.
Will
you
sustain
crime
of
libel
or
slander,
is
a
crime
against
Davao City three days after its celebration.
asked
(2002)
him
tothat
buy
some
marijuana
cigarettes.
A.
A are
was
nominated
of an
a
team
already
known
toSecretary
drug
pushers.
A,
contending
it does
not charge
commit?
Explain.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
fear,
B
jumped
from
the
cliff
into
the
sea,
A
closest
to
making
Pia
criminally
liable
is
such
acts
being
imprudent
and
wanton
and
Bobby's
defense?
honor
such
that
the
person
or
persons
On
10
October
1975
Marcy
who
remained
in
Desirous
of
pleasing
SPO2
Mercado,
Juan
Department
in
the
Executive
Branch
of
the
the
team
leader,
approached
and
persuaded
offense.
Is
he
correct?
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
I will
not
sustain
Bobby's
defense,
Bobby
returned
to the
scene
of their
confrontation
Grave
Scandal,
but
then
act
is thereafter
not
to be
setting
a badmust
example
(People vs.ofSantos,
dishonored
be identifiable
even
by No.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Batanes
marriage
Joe
to 86
went
shopping
mall
while
the
government.
Hisbuyer
nomination
was
B to inside
act
asthe
a
of such
shabu
and
transact
A is notdiscovered
guilty ofthe
any
crime because
a
remarried
in
1993,
or
after
the
Family
Code
and
seeing
that
nobody
was
there,
went
considered
as
highly
scandalous
and
SCRA
705
[1978]).
Yes,
the
contention
of
A
is
correct.
The
innuendoes:
otherwise
the
crime
against
Linda. Onman
1 March
officer
at thethe
corner
ofpusher.
the mall.
After
submitted
to
Commission
on
witheffect
C,waited
the
suspected
drug
For
the
married
does1976
not Marcy
incur filed
the acrime of
onfailed
August
3,
1988,
and
therefore
home
to
sleep.
The
next
day,
B's
wife
offensive
against
decency
and
good
customs.
The crime
of committed.
bigamy
prescribed
in fifteen
information
to
allege
that
the
undue
honor
is not
Moreover,
A was not took
C.
After
C
handed
the
sachet
of
shabu
to
B
complaint
for
bigamy
against
Joe.
fifteen
minutes,
Juan
returned
with
ten
sticks
Appointments
for
confirmation.
While
the
purpose,
A
gave
B
marked
money
to
be
used
concubinage by merely having a paramour,
his
capacity
to
marry
instation
1993
shall
be
reported
toplace,
the
police
that
her
In
the
first
it
was
not
done
in
a
public
years
computed
from imputation,
the day the crime
is
injury
to
B
and
the
government
was
caused
making
a malicious
but merely
and
the
latter
handed
the
marked
money
to
of
marijuana
cigarettes
which
he
gave
to
Commission
was from
considering
the
nomination,
in buyingby
shabu
unless under scandalous circumstances, or
Code.
In
Art.
40 of
the
husband
hadsaid
not
yet
come
Aor
search
place
and
public
knowledge
discovered
the offended
party,delivering
the
by
the
accused's
manifest
partiality,
evident
stating an byopinion;
he was
a governed
C,group
theMercado
team
closed-in
andhome.
placed
Bview.
and
C
SPO2
who
thereupon
placed
Juan
a
ofwithin
concerned
citizens
caused
to be
he keeps her in the conjugal dwelling as a
Family
Code,
it
is
mandated
that
the
absolute
was
conducted
by
the
residents
of
the
As
a
matter
of
fact
it
was
discovered
byisthe
authorities
or
their
agents.
Joe
raised
the
bad
faith,
or
gross
Inexcusable
negligence,
lecture with no malice at all during a seminar published
under
arrest.
Under
the
facts,
B
not
under
arrest
and
charged
him
with
violation
in
the
newspapers
a
full-page
mistress, or cohabits with her in any other
of
a but
previous
marriage
maybe
barangay
after
almost
two
days,
Boffense
or
his
executives
accidentally
and
they
have
to
use
defense of prescription
the crime, absent
more in nullity
which
are
necessary
elements
ofselling
theinvoked
workshop.
Malice beingofinherently
criminally
liable
for
his
participation
inThey
the
of
The
Dangerous
Drugs
Law
by
statement
objecting
to
A's
appointment
place. His weekly meetings with his
Libel
for
purposes
of
remarriage
on
the
basis
solely
body
could
not
be
located
and
his
binoculars
to
have
public
and
full
view
of
Pia
than fifteen
years having
elapsed fromisthe not alleged
charged,
ie.,
violation
of
Section
3(e)
of
the
the
utterance,
the statement
transaction
because
he
was
acting
only
marijuana
cigarettes.
Is
Juan
guilty
of
any
that
A
was
a
drug
dependent,
that
he
paramour
does aired
not on
per
se constitute
(2005)
In
an interview
television,
Cindee
2)aThe
executives
did
not
commit
of
finalbusiness
judgment
declaring
such
previous
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
disappearance
continued
for
the
next
few
sunbathing
in
the
nude.
celebration
of
the
bigamous
marriage
up
to
Anti-Graft
and
Corrupt
Practices
Act.
The
actionable
as
defamatory.
Unjust
Vexation
vs.
Act
of
under
instigation
by
the
law
enforcers.
offense
punishable
under
The
Dangerous
had
several
mistresses,
and
that
he
was
scandalous
circumstance.
uttered
statementsHe
against
Erika, marriage
any crime.
Their
acts
could
notof
be
of of
Juan
cannot
be
charged
of
any
offense
void.
short,
there
is
need
days.
Based
onIn
the
testimony
Caacts
and
other
the
filingdefamatory
of Marcy's
contended
accused
is Discuss
employed
in
the
Office
of
the
Lasciviousness
(2006)
Eduardo
Quintos,
a complaint.
widowerbusinesswoman.
for the
past 10 corrupt,
Special
Penal
Drugs
Act?
fully.
having
accepted
bribes
orLaws
favors
a
successful
and
reputable
lasciviousness
[as
there
was
no
overt
lustful
punishable
under
The
Dangerous
Drugs
Act.
a
judicial
declaration
of
such
nullity
guests,
who
had
seen
A
and
B
on
top
of
the
that
the
registration
of
his
second
marriage
in
District
Engineer
of
the
DPWH
which
has
years,
felt that
retirement
at the
age of from
parties
transacting
business
his
What
crime
or his
crimes
did
Cindee
commit?
act), Aor
slander,
as
the
eventual
talk
ofin
thehe
Although
Juan
a suspected
drug
pusher,
before
Bobby
may
validly
remarry
cliff,
was
arrested
and
charged
with
the
civil
registry
of
Davao
City
was
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
nothing
to
dois
with
the
determination
and
Bigamy
70
gave
him
the
opportunity
to
engage
in
his
Anti-Carnapping
Act;
Carnapping
w/
previous
office,
and
therefore
he
was
unfit
for
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Explain.
(3%)notice to the whole world of the
town,
resulting
from
her
sunbathing,
is
cannot
be
charged
on
the
basis
athat
mere
(Dorothy
Terre
Terre,
211 of
SCRA
6).not
Murder.
In
hisvs.
defense,
he
claimed
since
The
defense
of
AJordan
is
not
tenable.
"Corpus
constructive
fixing
ofmarried
the
price
of
the
land
expropriated,
(1996)
Ramona
inplied
July,
1995,
only
to
favorite
— voyeurism.
not using
his Joselito
Cindee pastime
committed
libel Iffor
uttering
Homicide
(1998)
Samuel,
a
tricycle
driver,
his
usual
the
position
to
which
he
had
been
nominated.
directly
imputed
to
theto
business
executives,
suspicion.
By
providing
the
money
with
B's
body
has
not
been
found,
there
was
delicti"
the
body
of
the
celebration thereof
thus binding
upon
and
fordoes
which
expropriated
land
later
on
that
Ramona
was
previously
high-powered
binoculars
to peep
at
his learn
defamatory
remarks
tending
to Marcy.
cause
route
using
asuch
Honda
motorcycle
with
a tonothe
As
a besides
result
of
the refer
publication,
the
nomination
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and
topic
is
not
intended
which
to
buy
marijuana
cigarettes,
SPO2
evidence
of
"corpus
delicti'
and
therefore,
he
purported
victim
which
had
not
been
Has
the
crime
of
bigamy
charged
against
Joe
Government
is
legally
obligated
to
pay.
There
married
David,
from
whom
Ramona
had
neighbor's
and
domestic
activities,
dishonor
orhomes
discredit
to
Erika.
Libel
canofhis
be
sidecar.
One
evening,
Raul
on
thefound.
No.
The prescriptive
period
for the
crime
was
Slander
notto
confirmed
by
Deed
by
vs.
therode
Commission
on
defame
or
put
Piabody
toinduced
ridicule.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
Mercado
practically
and
prodded
should
be
acquitted.
Is
the
defense
of
A
Even
without
the
of
the
purported
already
prescribed?
Discuss
fully,
is
no separated
allegation
in
the
information
that the
more
than
tenand
years.
second is
choice
to follow
sweet
young
committed
in was
television
programs
or been
sidecar,
poked
afor
knife
Samuel
bigamy
computed
from
the time
the crime
Maltreatment
(1994
) ofcitizens
Appointments.
The
official
sued
the
Distinguish
slander
byatdeed
from
I
will
acquit
the
concerned
and
the
Juan
to
commit
the
offense
illegal
tenable
or
not?
State
theoffender
reason(s)
forbe
youran
victim
being
found,
the
can
land
was
overpriced
or
that
the
payment
of
that
his
marriage
tothe
Ramona
was
girls.discovered
One day,
he
a teenage
girlthe
up to Believing
SUGGESTED
broadcasts,
though
was
notparty,
specifically
instructed
him
to
goand
near
the
bridge.
Upon
was
by trailed
theitoffended
concerned
citizens
the
newspapers
for
maltreatment.
newspapers
involved,
from
crimethe
of
libel,
possession
ofANSWER:
marijuana.
Set
against
answer.
(5%)
convicted
when
the
facts
and
circumstances
the
amount
was
disadvantageous
to
the
SLANDER
BY
DEED
is
a
crime
committed
absolute
nullity,
Joselito
contracted
a
the LRT station
at EDSA-Buendia.
While
mentioned
in their
the article
since
was not
reaching
the
bridge,
Raul
alighted
from
the
Entrapment
vs.
authorities
or
agents.
The it
principle
ofyet
libel
and
damages
on
account
of
his
nonbecause
obviously
they
made
the
facts
instigation
is a valid
defense
available
of
a crime,
the
body
of
the
crime
or
"corpus
Government.
It
appears
that
the(2003)
charge
was
when
a person
publicly
subjects
another
to
marriage
with
Anabelle.
Can
ascending
stairs,
stayed applies
one
step subsequent
in
existencethe
then,
but he
isordinarily
included
as "any
motorcycle
and
suddenly
stabbed
Samuel
Instigation
Distinguish
fully
between
entrapment
and
constructive
notice
which
confirmation.
How
will
you
decide
the
case?
denunciation
out
of
a
moral
or
social
duty
to
Juan.
In
other
words,
the
non-recovery
of
the
body
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
delicti"
is established.
solely
based
on
thehe
accused
having
followed
an
act
intended
calculated
to cast
be
prosecuted
for
bigamy?
Explain.
behind
her
andDefamatory
indisputes
a moment
ofnot
bravado,
similar
statements
aired Joselito
several
times
until
was
Raul
fled
to
land means."
or
property
should
be
instigation
incan
Criminal
Law,
Exemplify
each.
(3%)
and
thus
there
isor
absence
ofthe
malice.
of
the
victim
is
not
aprosecuted
bar
todead.
prosecution
Yes,
Joselito
be
for
bigamy
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
up
the
payment
for
B's
land
which
the
dishonor,
discredit
or
contempt
upon
the
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
placed
his
hand
on of
her
leftradio,
hip
gently Since
on
television
is similar
to
theatrical
from
the
scene
taking
the
motorcycle
with
4%
applied
to the
crime
bigamy,
as and
marriage
A
was
a
candidate
for
a
very
important
of
Ahis
for
Murder,
but
the
fact
of death
and and
for
subsequent
marriage
with
Anabelle
Raul
committed
the
composite
crime
of
In
ENTRAPMENT
Government
has
already
appropriated,
latter.
Absent
the
intent
to
cast
dishonor,
massaged
it.
screamed
and filed
shouted
for public
exhibition
orShe
cinematographic
exhibition,
him.
What
crime
orDepartment
crimes
did
Raul
commit?
is
not property.
Thus
when Marcy
a
position
of
a
Secretary,
his
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
identity
of
the
victim
must
be
established
even
though
his
marriage
with
Ramona
was
Carnapping
with
homicide
under
Sec.
14
of
Slander
1 the
the criminal
originates
that
accused
eventually
withheld
for
discredit,
contempt,
or design
insult ANSWERS:
to
the
offended
ALTERNATIVE
help.
Eduardo
wasof
arrested
and
charged
which
arefor among
the
modes
for
the
|5%]
complaint
bigamy
on
7 March
1976,
it with
moral,
mental
and
physical
fitness
forfrom
the
The
designation
the
crime
as
acts
of
beyond
reasonable
doubt.
an
absolute
nullity.
Rep.
Act
No.
6539,
as
amended,
considering
(1988)
For
some
time,
bad
had
existed
and
inin
the
mind
ofsaid
the land,
himself
from
the
of
the
the
1.
Yes,
Ais
isalready
correct
filing
abecomes
motion
toa quash
party,
the
crime
isprice
only
MALTREATMENT
acts
of lasciviousness.
Isblood
theThere
designation
commission
of is
libel.
(Arts.
353
and
355,
was
well
within
the
reglamentary
period
as
itof public
trust
in
such
position
public
Corpus
Delicti;
Definition
& the
lasciviousness
not
correct.
is noRPC)
lewd
Despite
the
nullity
of
the
first
marriage,
that
the
killing
"in
the
course
or of
"on
between
the
two
families
of
Maria
Razon
and
lawbreaker
even
before
entrapment;
amount
of
P4,000
for
his
services.
the
information
because
Section
3(e)
under
Art,
266.
par.
3,
where,
by
deed,
an
the
crime
correct?
(5%)
was
barely
a few months
fromwhen
the time
of
concern
as
thehave
interest
ofcase
the of
public
is No
at
(2000)
a)should
Define
"corpus
delicti".
(2%)
design
exhibited
by Eduardo
he placed
Joselito
filed
a
occasion
ofElements
a carnapping
(People
vs.b) Deand
la
Judge
Gadioma
who
were
neighbors.
First,
Simulation
of
Birth
&
Child
the
law
enforcers
resort
to
ways
and
violation
of
Section
3(e)
of
the
Anti-Graft
Republic
Act
3019
applies
only
to
officers
offender
ill-treats
another
without
causing
discovery
on
10
October
1975.
(Sermonia
vs.
stake.
It
is
pursuant
to
such
concern
that
the
What
are
the
elements
of
"corpus
his
hand
on
the
left
hip
of
the
victim
and
dissolution
of
such
marriage
under
Art.
40,
Slander
vs.
Criminal
Cruz,
et
al.
183
SCRA
763)
.
A
motorcycle
is
there
was
a
boundary
dispute
between
them
Trafficking
(2002)
A
childless
couple,
A
and
B,
wanted
to
have
a
means
the
purpose
of
capturing
the of
Corrupt
Actfor
At ANSWER:
most,
thebereft
accused
employees
ofappears.
government
corporations
injury.
CA,
233massaging
SCRA 155) it. The act does not clearly denunciation
SUGGESTED
was
made;
hence,
delicti"?
(3%)
gently
Family
Code,
before
contracting
a second
Conversation
(2004)
Distinguish
clearly
but
briefly
between
oral
included
in
the
definition
of
a
"motor
vehicle"
which
wascould
still call
pending
in court.
Maria's
child they
their own.
C, an unwed
lawbreaker
in
flagrante
delictoand
should
beDelicti
merely
charged
administratively
charged
with
theliterally
grant
ofmeans
licenses
ormade
permits
B. If defamatory
imputations
are
not
Corpus
"the
body
or
show
analso
exclusively
sexual
motivation.
The malice.
marriage
with
Anabelle.
defamation
and
criminal
conversation.
in
said
Rep.
Act,
also
known
thebut
'Antimother
filed
an administrative
complaint
mother,
sold
her newborn
baby
to them.
2.
A
is not
correct.
In
the
case
ofas
Meforda
vs.
this
circumstance
is
no
bar
to
prosecution
or
other
concessions,
and
not
to
DPWH,
by
publication
in
the
newspapers
by
substance
of
the
crime"
or
the
fact
that
a
Bigamy
crime
he the
committed
iswhich
only
unjust
vexation
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Carnapping
Act
of
1972'.
There
is
no
against
judge
was
however
Thereafter,
A and
B caused
their
names
to
Sandiganbayan.
151
SCRA
399,
which
and
conviction
of
the
lawbreaker.
which
is
not
a
government
corporation.
broadcast
over
the
radio,
do
they
constitute
crime
has
been
committed,
but
does
not
(2004)
CBP
is
legally
married
to
OEM.
Without
Oral
defamation,
known
as
SLANDER,
a
for
causing
annoyance,
irritation
PDis
46
apparent
for
killing
of
the
tricycle
dismissed.
Razons
also felt
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
be stated
inThe
the birth
certificate
ofintimidated
the child or involves
a motive
substantially
identical
information
libel?
Why?
(2%)
include
the
identity
ofthe
the
person
who
obtaining
a
marriage
license,
CBP
contracted
malicious
imputation
of
any
act,
omission,
disturbance
to
the
victim
(Art.
287,
Revised
(1994)
driver
but it.
for(People
Raul
to be
able
toOGtake
the
Yes,
libel
may
committed
by
by
theparents.
position
and was
alleged
influence
of their
as
his
This
done
in connivance
as
the because
Information
quoted
inbe
question,
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
committed
Pascual
44
2789).
ALTERNATIVE
ANSWER:
a second
marriage
tovs.
RST.
Isthe
CBP
liable
forthe
condition
or The
circumstance
against
a person,
Penal
Code),
not
acts
oftolasciviousness
(Art.
In
INSTIGATIONmotorcycle.
fact
that
the
tricycle
driver
radio
broadcast
Article
355
of
the
Revised
neighbor.
Fanning
fire
the
situation
was
with
doctor
who
assisted
in Acts
the
delivery
Supreme
Court
held
that
the
Information
was
The the
crime
should
be
Other
of Child
RA
3019;
Preventive
Elements
of
corpus
delicti:
SUGGESTED
The
crime
committed
by (5%)
Raultois cause
carnapping,
bigamy?
Reason
briefly.
done
orally
inANSWER:
public,
tending
336,
Revised
Code).
1 actual
the
idea
design
to
bring
about
was
killed
brings
about
the
penalty
of
Penal
Code
punishes
libel
committed
by
the
of
Gadiomas
of throwing
of
C. practice
What
arePenal
thethe
criminal
if par.
any, b
valid.
While
itSection
is
trueand
that
the
information
The
commission
by
someone
of
the
Abuse
under
Section
10 ofliabilities,
RA. 7610,
Whether
CBP
could
be
held
liable
for
bigamy
Suspension
(2000)
punished
by
14
of
Rep.
Act
No.
6539.
dishonor,
discredit,
contempt,
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
the
commission
of
the
crime
originated
reclusion
perpetua
to
death.
means,
among
others,
of
radio
broadcast,
garbage
andA animal
into
the
of the
couple
and
B,refers
C excrement
and the
doctor?
quoted
In
the
question,
to
allege
particular
crime
charged.
It is
a
compound
that
to child
abuse
or not,
depends
on
whether
the
second crime
The
killing
of Samuel
isfailed
not
separate
TheSection
couple A3and
B, and
the doctor
shall
be
embarassment
or broadcast
ridicule
toa
the
Thisis
and
developed
inorthings:
the
mind
of latter.
the
inasmuch
as
the
made
bylaw
radio
Razon's
premises.
In an
explosion
of anger,
evident
bad
faith,
gross
inexcusable
fact
made
up
of
two
committed
by
any
act,
deeds
or
words
which
marriage
is
invalid
valid
even
without
a
but
only
an
aggravating
circumstance.
SUGGESTED
ANSWER:
liable for the
crime of simulation of birth,
is
a
crime
against
honor
penalized
in
Art.
358
enforcers;
public
andlicense.
may
be
defamatory.
Maria
called
Judge the
Gadioma
"land
grabber",
1
The
existence
ofAlthough
a certain
act
or
resultrule,
negligence
or
manifest
partiality,
said
debases,
degrades
or
demeans
the
intrinsic
marriage
as
a
general
Maria
committed
crime
of
slander
or
penalized under Article 347 of the Revised
of
the
Revised
Penal
Code.
Libel
the
enforcers
induce,
lure,
or and
incite
a "shameless",
and "hypocrite."
What
crime
forming
the law
basis
the criminal
charge;
Information
Isof
nevertheless
adequate
because
Anti-Graft
& without
Corrupt
Practices
worth
and
dignity
of
a The
child
as
human
marriages
solemnized
license
are
CRIMINAL
CONVERSATION.
The
term
is
used
slight
defamation
only
because
she
was
Penal Code,
as amended.
act
ofamaking
(2003)
During
a
seminar
workshop
attended
person
who
is
not
minded
to
commit
a
was
committed
by
Maria,
if
any?
Explain
The
existence
of
a
criminal
agency
as
the
cause
of
it
averred
RA
the
3019
three
(1997)
(3)
elements
for
the
A making
isand
charged
the
defined by
in
being.
Inin influence
relation
thereto,
10
null
void
ob with
initio,
therecrime
are
marriages
in
a polite
reference
to the
sexual
under
the
of
anger.ofSection
When
it appear
the
birth certificate
a childMaria
government
employees
from
Bureau
of
crime
and
would
not
otherwise
commit
it,
briefly.
the
act
or
result
violation
of
Section
3(c)
of
RA.
3012
when
it
Section
3(e)
of
the
Anti-Graft
and
Corrupt
provides
criminal
liability
for
other
acts
of
exempted
from
license
requirement
under
intercourse
as
in
called
Judge
Gadioma
a
hypocrite
and
that the persons named therein are the
Customs
and
the
Bureau
into(1)
committing
the
crime;
The stated
identity
of2,
the
offender
not
necessary
that
the
accused
is aand
public
officer
Practices
Act
in
an
Information
that reads:
child
abuse,
or exploitation, or for
Chapter
Title
1
of
theis
parents
of thecruelty
child when
2oftime
this
circumstance
absolves
the
element
corpus
delicti
Thatatfrom
01 to
January
1995,
the
City of
the
of 30
the
commission
ofin
the
crime,
other condi
accused
from
liability
(People
v. of
and
within
thebeing
jurisdiction
of
this
Honorable
Court,
Pasig
being
employed
incriminal
the
Office
of
the
District
the
accused,
then
employed
in
the
Office
154. [1990]).
Dante Marcos,
185
SCRAthe
DPWH;
(2) that
accused
caused
District
the Engineer,
Engineer,
Department
of Public
Works
and