You are on page 1of 53

Criminal Law Jurisprudence

Notes for Lecture By Atty. Modesto Ticman, Jr


JURISTS REVIEW CENTER
August 16, 2015

Notes
This is not a complete transcript of the lecture
The slides are limited to brief annotations, which the
author humbly found remarkable and especially
enlightening.
Made these slides to combat sleepiness and be
productive, so forgive some typographical and
grammatical lapses

Prepared by:
Lawrence Villamar
Special thanks to Panky Obbania

Foreplay
No answer in the bar requires It depends.
If question goes like this, What kind did the accused
commit? Could be phrased in a leading answer, Did
the accused commit direct assault? Answer always in
the negative. Supply the missing element.
Does the offender have criminal liability? Always, yes.
As a negative answer requires scanning the provisions
of the RPC?

Rape
Since Oct. 2007, rape declassified fromcrime against
chastity to crime against persons. Legal implication: (1)
now, public crime (any person may institute the
charge); and, (2) pardon of private party dos not
extinguish the right to institute criminal action (what
remains is marriage of the offender to the victimL.
Can now be committed against a man. Rape through
sexual assault.
Statutory rape, carnal knowledge with victim age 12
years old and below.

Insertion of Finger
Insertion of finger to the sexual organ of woman
constitutes rape by sexual assault (formerly acts of
lasciviousness)
SC: Insertion of tongue to vagina is rape by sexual
assault.

Mala Inse vs Mala Prohibita


See Estrada vs Sandiganbayan (2004)
Above case renders traditional distinction less defined
(see racio decidendi)
MIND: Lack of intent to perpetuate the crime

Technical Malversation
Illegal use of public funds (this time, for another public
purpose for which the fund was not originally intended)
SC: Malum prohibitum (though punished under RPC)
By reason of public policy and convenience

Mistake of Fact
Has not been asked in the bar for 41 years, but there is
a recent decision of the SC (reviewing a case from
Sandiganbayan! Research!)
Three element: (1) belief in truthfulness of the fact; (2)
otherwise lawful act; (3) due diligence

Criminal Liability
Impossible crime punishable to supress criminal
tendency of the crime (most recent case than Inton
(firing upon house where intended victim is not
located): Jacinto vs People)
Ex: Check payable for cash but was not honored
presented for payment by housemaid not intended to
be recipient thereof.
REMEMBER: Must not be a crime punishable in RPC

Criminal Liability
SC: Treachery may be appreciated in slight physical
injury
Treachery is an inherent circusmtance in Rape,can not
be appreciated (deprived of reason, inelligence, or
otherwise unconscious)

Stages of Execution
People vs Almazen
REMINDER: May depend on wound (mortal or otherwise)
RAPE no frustrated stage, no middle ground as mere
touching of the sexual organ (Carnal knowledge (Black:
Mere bodily connection) is not equal to sexual
intercourse (deeper daw!))
People vs Kampuhan
THEFT SC (in Valenzuela): Crime of theft has only two
stage: attempted and consummated. Permanence of
possession is not required. Mere disturbance of
proprietary right.

Attempted Rape
Intent to lie (insert his penis), otherwise acts o
lasciviousness.
But if accidentally inserted, see Art 4(1) (Remember: if
act is unlawful)

Defense of Property Rights


Requisites
SC (People vs Apolinar overturned in Navartes):
Unlawful aggression may exists in defense of property
rights even if not coupled with aggression against the
person defending that property right.
But mind, reasonable necessity of means used.

State of Necessity
Ty vs People (see codal provision)

Minority
15 years of age or below absolute
More than 15 years of age but below 18 with or
without discernment if yes, full responsibility (but see
procedural aspects such as suspension)
SC: 15 years of age = birth anniversary or before

Duress
Offender no oppourtunity to escape or to depend
himself
People vs Lising: Here, one of the accomplices, claimed
to be under duress but was given a gun he could have
used to escape or defend himself from any agression
from the other members.
People vs Shao: (performing sexual act twice at gun
point)
Passion Or Obfuscation: may not be appreciated
simulataneously, but appreciated at the same time if
arising from different acts (see People vs Genosa)

Confession (Mitigating
Circumstance)
Requisites: People vs Dawanon that the confession was
to the crime he was charged.
Example: Pleading guilty to ho micide oin a charge of
murder.confession not appreciated as mitigating
Reverse trial; confession happened before prosecution
presents evidence

Surrender
People vs Karaya: Provided an information is yet to be
filed in court OR before an arrest warrant is issued
Devera vs Devera: Element in Karaya not
indispensible.

Cattle Rustling
People vs Canta: Stolen carabao returned to
policeman, owner informed but subsequently filed
qualified theft (remember this involves large cattle).
Mitigating: Voluntary Surrender (take note this is a
violation of a special penal law (presidential decree) but
mitigating is appreciated).
Recent case: Confession and voluntary surrender
appreciated separately (reference Canta, where only v.s.
was appreciated)

Special Aggravating Circumstance


Definition: special condition
Can not be offset by mitigating (People vs Palaganas)
People vs Tapan: In contempt/insult to public
authorities (In the case, shooting was committed in
front of teacher (a PIA under the law). But SC said,
teacher only PIA if he is a victim of direct assault).

Treachery
Robbery with homicide: Treachery appreciated in
homicide,but not robbery. (People vs Ancheta)
Treachery to be appreciated: must have deliberately
adopted the means of attack (not reasonably expected)

Ignominy
May only be appreciated in crimes of chastity
Appreciated in rape though now crime against person

Disguise
People vs Feliciano: Ski masks used upon entering, but
afterwards it was removed. Still appreciated, as it shos
intent to conceal identity.

Intoxication
Not habitual, not intentional = mitigating
Otherwise, it is mitigating
But under the influence of drugs, always aggravating

Relationship
In robbery with homicide, relationship is always
mitigating in crimes against property (remember in
rimes against property, relationship is absolutory)

Principal By Inducement
May be committed by words of command (so
efficacious as to be equivalent to physical or moral
coercion. Note the other requisites.)
Bahala na kayo. Ambiguous and capable of two
interpretation, that favorable to the accused should b
adopted (NOTE: must be direct)

Accomplice
Keyword: community of design

Accessory
No accessory to light felonies The law does not deal
with trifles.

Subsidiary Imprisonment
From P8 to highest minimum wage

Death of the Accused


PEOPLE vs Bayotas criminal liability extinguised, but
not civil liability
If before conviction, civil and criminal liability.

Prescription
Art. 90
BP 22 reckoning period from lapse of grace period (5
banking days from notice of dishonor). NOTE: See Vaca
(J. Mendoza)
Prescription of Penalty Art. 92. Convict must have
started serving his service (entry to penal institution).

Exceptional Circumstance
People vs Abarca (Bar Reviewee) (Classic, asked in the
bar for 4times)
PERSONAL NOTE: What is remarkable in this case is the
significant interval of time between the discovery and
manifested outrage (clearly, the fiscal spotted this as he
was charged with murder due to evident premeditation).
In Abarca, SC expands definition of immediately
thereafter. Additionally, the collateral victims (see
reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide. Two
other victims were killed,otherthanthe paramour)
Not penalty but rather absolutory cause. Destierro is for
protection of offending party against retaliation

Exceptional Circumstance
Prefaratory act is included, with reasonable ground that
the are about to commit sexual intercourse or even
after the sexual intercourse (But for the former,please
see commentary of Reyes)

Qualifying Aggravating
Circumstance
Must be alleged in the information
Proof required: beyond reasonable doubt

Death in a Tumultuous Affray


People vs Ulmagara/People vs Sison
Rambol
If one can be identified, he is liable for death (no death
in tumultuous affray)

Kidnapping Etc
Kidnapping (Art 267) vs Arbitraty Detention
SC: If public officer unlawful arrest or in excess of
authority with primary purpoe of depriving liberty, may
be guilty of Art 267.
SC in People vs Enriquez (2013,Ransom): Demand for
ransom is not an essential Element in kidnapping.
Ransom is a qualifying,penalty to be imposed in
maximum period.
If without attendant circumstance in Art 267 and
without ransom, then slight illegal detention.
Art 269 Unlawful arrest Cedric Lee/Security Guard

Kidnapping
Kidnapping with intent to kill kidnapping with murder
(complex crime uner Art 48)
If without intent, but victim died: kidnapping or
hiomicide (in the process, not yet in custody). If in
custody, death is absorbed in kidnapping

Robbery With Homicide


Robbery vs theft see similarities/differences
Robbery with homicide homicide in generic sense (no
such thing as robbery with murder nor robbery with
infanticide nor robbry with parricide!)
If taking is an afterthought to homicide/murder,theft only as
the vicyim is dead and no need to use force. Two crimes,
and not complexed.
If robbery with homicide,plus rape rape only aggaravating
If robbery with rape rape only in generic sense, even if
multiple rape or attendant acts of lasciviousness

Rape
If a woman is rape and personal property is taken (such
as panty as souvenir), rape with unjust vexation (no
bodily harm, but annoy, vex). Not theft!

By A Band (Art 296)


Aggravating only, not a crime in itself so can not be
complexed. So no crime such as Robbery by a band
just mere robbery aggaravated by manner of commisser
by a band

Direct Assault
Gelig vs People: A teacher called the son of Mrs Gelig a
sissy. So Mrs Gelig attacked the teacher while the latter
was preparing lessons plan After class hours. Three
weeks later, the teacher suffered a miscarriage. Charge
was complex crime of direct assault with unintentional
abortion.
SC: Preparing lesson plan part of performance nof duties
as teacher. Guilty of direct assault only. Unintentional
abortion dropped as prosecution unable to prove that it
was a result of the attack.
Persons in Authority Art 152

Direct Assault
Slapping the traffic officer (not a persons in authority)
not direct assault

Libel
Vasquez vs Jajalandini
If truth is proven, then may be acquitted (NOTE: In
previous cases, the SC has saifd truth is not a defense,
but observe tha these cases are attendant with malice).

Slander by Deed
Told Panget mo! only (oral defamation/libel)
Joke time: Ang gwapo mo. You are hurt. Because, the
truth hurts.
Slapping slander by deed /slight physical injury w/
maltreatment
Moral pain (humiliation) slander by deed
Dirty finger SC: Slander by Deed (In Villanueva, there
was no physical contact).
JOKE: No anal defamation!
Praise underserved is slander in disguised.

Unjust Vexation
May not be productive of physical harm
But produce annoyance, vexation, disturbance
Peeping Tom/Voyeurism
Renato Valeros vs People: Valeros, a medical student in
UST, is the suitor of Malou Albano. One evening, around
11 pm awaken to find someone is pressing clothes on
her face soaked with chemicals to induce sleep. Valeros
charged and convicted by trial court of attempted rape,
coincurred by CA but reversed by SC. SC held that the
fact of the case did not point to intention of rape. Still
has clothes. Intention is unknown. But held liable of
unjust vexation.

Stalking
RA 9262 Vawc if victim is female (higher)
If man stalked by female, only stalking in RPC pebalized
with arresto mayor

Doctrine of Absorption
Common crimes absorbed in rebellion (Enrile case).

Estafa (Art 315)


If no damage yet, attempted estafa only.
Damage must be capable oft pecuniary estimation.
By abuse of confidence vs qualified theft (Artb310, with
grave abuse of confidence)
Merely phisical/material,estafa. If juridical, qualified
theft.

Qualified Theft
Motor vehicle qualified theft
If other type of motorized vehicle such as car Anti Car
Napping Law of 1972
Case: People vs Butinera

Arson
By means of fire qualifying aggaravating in crime of
murder (see People vs Mai)
Qualified arson if no intent to kill but someone died in
the arson
If burned the house to conceal person killed, two
crimes: arson and murder
IMPORTANT: If what was charged in the information is
wrong, then accussed is entitled to acquittal

Inundation
By drowning, need not be flood.
Example: Drum
Recent: Pemberton.