CRIMINAL LAW

FELONIES
ART 3- FELONIES, elements

1. There must be an act or omission, i.e there must be external

acts
◦ Act-bodily movement tending to produce some effect in the
external world; internal acts are beyond the sphere of penal
laws
◦ Omission-there is a law requiring a certain act to be performed
and the person required to do the act fails to perform it
ART 3- FELONIES, elements

2. The act or omission must be punishable by the

RPC (nullum….)
3. The act is performed or the omission is incurred by
means of dolo (malice) or culpa (fault)
CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES

According to Means by which they are committed

◦ Intentional Felonies- the act is performed or the omission
is incurred with deliberate intent or malice to do an injury
◦ Culpable Felonies- the act or omission is not malicious.
The injury caused by the offender to another person is
unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act
performed without malice
CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES

According to Nature
◦ Mala prohibita- crimes punishable by special penal laws
whereby criminal intent is not necessary, as a rule, it being
sufficient that the offender has the intent to perpetrate the
act prohibited by the special law. It is punishable because
the prohibited act is so injurious to the public welfare
thata it is the crime itself.
◦ Mala in se –acts or omissions which are inherently evil
INTENTIONAL FELONIES: REQUISITES OF
DOLO OR MALICE
1. Freedom – voluntariness on the part of the person to
commit the act or omission; when a person acts without
freedom, he is no longer a human being but a tool;
lack of freedom- offender is exempt from liability ( i.e
presence of irresistible force (Art. 12,5)or uncontrollable
fear(Art. 12,6)
INTENTIONAL FELONIES: REQUISITES OF
DOLO OR MALICE
2. Intelligence – the capacity to know and understand the
consequences of one’s act. Without this power necessary to
determine the morality of human acts, no crime can exist.
lack of intelligence-offender is exempt from liability (i.e
offender is an imbecile, insane, or 15 years of age or under
(Art. 12- 1,2,3)
INTENTIONAL FELONIES: REQUISITES OF
DOLO OR MALICE
3. Intent(Criminal) – (a)the purpose to use a particular means
to effect such result; (b)intent to commit an act with malice,
being purely a mental process, is presumed. Such presumption
arises from the proof of commission of an unlawful act
“The presumption of criminal intent does not arise from the
proof of the commission of an act which is not unlawful”(US
vs Catolico)
INTENTIONAL FELONIES: REQUISITES OF
DOLO OR MALICE
3. Intent(Criminal) – (c)a mental state, hence, its existence
is shown by overt acts.
Lack of intent- act is justified. Offender incurs NO criminal
liability (i.e. existence of a lawful or insuperable cause ,
commission by mere accident)
INTENTIONAL FELONIES: REQUISITES OF
DOLO OR MALICE
3. Intent(Criminal) – is necessary because
◦ ACTUS NON FACIT REUM NISI MENS SIT REA-”The
act itself does not make a man guilty unless his intentions
were so (US vs Catolico)
◦ ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS-
Än act done by me against my will is not my act”(US vs Ah
Chong)
General Intent and Specific Intent
General Intent
An intention to do a wrong
Presumed to exist from the
mere doing of a wrongful act
The burden of proving the
absence of intent is upon the
accused.
Specific Criminal Intent
An intention to commit a
definite act
Existence of the intent is nor
presumed because it is an
ingredient or element of a
crime
The burden of proving the
existence of the intent is upon
the prosecution; as such intent
is an element of the crime
CULPABLE FELONIES; REQUISTIES

◦ FREEDOM
◦ INTELLIGENCE
◦ NEGLIGENCE

The act or omission is voluntary but the intent or malice in

intentional felonies is replaced by imprudence, etc..
CULPABLE FELONIES; Negligence

Negligence indicates a deficiency of perception; failure to

pay proper attention and to use diligence in foreseeing the
injury or damage impending to be caused; usually involves
lack of foresight
Imprudence indicates a deficiency of action; failure to take
the necessary precaution to avoid injury to person or
damage to property; usually involves lack of skill
Reason for punishing acts of negligence

◦ A man must use his common sense and exercise due

reflection in all his acts; it is his duty to be cautious,
careful and prudent, if not from instinct, then through fear
of incurring punishment (US vs Maleza)
◦ Art 3, Culpa is a mode of committing a crime; Art 365
Culpa is the crime punished, denominated as reckless
imprudence….
INTENTIONAL FELONY CULPABLE FELONY
Act is malicious Not malicious
With deliberate intent Injury caused is
unintentional being
incident of another act
performed without malice
There is an intention to Wrongful acts result from
cause an injury imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight or lack of
skill
HONEST MISTAKE OF FACT

◦ It is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person

causing injury to another. Such person is not criminally liable
as he acted without criminal intent(Ignoratia facti excusat)
◦ An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption of
criminal intent which arises upon the commission of a
felonious act (PP vs Oanis)
◦ Honest mistake of fact is not applicable in culpable felonies
Mistake of fact as a defense; requisites

◦ That the act done would have been lawful had the facts
been as the accused believed them to be
◦ That the intention of the accused in performing the act
should be lawful
◦ That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on
the part of the accused
◦ Because of having no time or opportunity to make any further
inquiry, and being pressed by circumstances to act immediately,
the accused had no alternative but to take the facts as they
appeared to him and such facts justified his act of killing his
roommate (US vs Ah Chong)
◦ There was no mistake of fact when the accused police officer
shot Tecson, when they thought to be Balagtas (a notorious
criminal) who was sleeping in his bed, despite having ample
time and opportunity to ascertain his identity without hazard to
themselves (PP vs Oanis)
When honest mistake of fact not applicable

◦ When there is mistake in identity(error in personae); that

the accused made a mistake in killing one man instead of
another cannot relieve him from criminal responsibility, he
having acted maliciously and willfully (PP vs Gona)
◦ When there is negligence on the part of the accused
◦ When the accused committed a culpable felony (essence of
mistake of fact is lack of intent on the part of the accused)
Mala prohibita

◦ These are acts made evil because there is a law punishing it. The
basis of criminal liability is the offender’s voluntariness . Hence,
good faith or lack of criminal intent is not accepted as a defense,
unless this is an element of a crime. The act prohibited is not
inherently evil but made evil only by the prohibition of the statute.
◦ Gen Rule: As a rule, mere commission of crimes classified as mala
prohibita , even without criminal intent is punishable
Mala prohibita, exceptions

◦A. Accused was entitled to assume that his

employer had the requisite license to possess said
firearm and ammunition and to turn them over to
him while he was on duty as one of the regular
security guards of a duly licensed security
agency(Cuenca vs People)
◦ B. It was imperative that the persons collecting and
surrendering loose firearms should have temporary and
incidental possession thereof. The doctrine of the
immateriality of animus possidendi should be relaxed in
certain way. Otherwise, the avowed purpose of the
government’s policy cannot be realized
◦ C. Where the accused had a pending application for
permanent to possess a firearm, and whose possession was
not unknown to an agent of the law who advised the
former to keep it in the meantime, any doubt as to his
claim should be resolved in his favor
◦ D. Mere transient possession of unlicensed firearm
While in stealing a firearm the accused must necessarily come
into possession thereof, the crime of illegal possession of
firearms is not committed by mere transient possession of the
weapon. Thus, stealing a firearm with intent not to use but to
render the owner defenseless, may suffice for purposes of
establishing a case of theft, but would not justify a charge for
illegal possession of firearm, since intent to hold and eventually
use the weapon would be lacking
Mala in Se

Crimes mala in se are acts or omissions, which are

inherently evil
It implies something immoral in itself, regardless of the fact
that it (moral turpitude) is punishable by law or not
Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished

AS TO MALA IN SE MALA
PROHIBITA
NATURE Wrong from its Wrong because it
very nature is prohibited by
law
Use of good faith Good faith is a Good faith is not
as defense valid defense a defense
unless the crime
is the result of
culpa
Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished

AS TO MALA IN SE MALA
PROHIBITA
Intent as an Intent is an Criminal intent is
element element immaterial
Degree of Taken into The act gives
accomplishment account in rise to a crime
of the crime punishing the only when
offender consumated
 Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished

AS TO MALA IN SE MALA PROHIBITA

Mitigating and Rules on mitigating and Rules do not apply
aggravating aggravating unless provided for
circumstances circumstances apply by special law itself
Degree of Degree of participation Not taken into
participation for each offender in the account; all are
commission of a crime is punished to the
considered same extent
Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished

AS TO MALA IN SE MALA
PROHIBITA
Penalty Computed on the Penalty imposed
basis of degree on the offenders
of participation are the same
Laws violated RPC SPECIAL LAWS
Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished
AS TO MALA IN SE MALA
PROHIBITA
STAGES IN 3 STAGES- A, F, NO SUCH
EXECUTION C STAGES
PERSONS 3 PERSONS- P, ONLY THE
CRIMINALLY A, A PRINCIPAL IS
LIABLE LIABLE
Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita, Distinguished

AS TO MALA IN SE MALA
PROHIBITA
DIVISION OF MAY BE NO SUCH
PENALTIES DIVIDED INTO DIVISION OF
DEGREES AND PENALTIES
PERIODS
◦ A malum in se felony such as reckless imprudence resulting in
damage to property cannot absorb a malum prohibitum crime
such as violations of Water code, Pollution Control Law,
Mining Act, etc. What makes the former a felony is the
criminal intent or negligence; what makes the latter crimes are
the special laws enacting them (Loney vs PP)
◦ Laws that merely amend the provisions of RPC such as PD
533 which amended Art 308, 309 and 310, do not convert
their violations into mala prohibita (Taer vs CA)
Intent Motive
The purpose to use a The reason or moving
particular means power which impels one to
commit an act for a
definite result
An element of the crime Not an element of the
except in unintentional crime
felonies
Essential in intentional Essential only when the
felonies identity of the perpetrator
is in doubt
Motive, when relevant

◦ If the evidence is merely circumstantial

◦ Where the identification of the accused proceeds from an
unreliable source and the testimony is inconclusive and not
free from doubt
◦ In ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic theories
or versions of the killing
Motive, when relevant

◦ Where there are no eyewitnesses to the crime and where

suspicion is likely to fall upon the number of persons
◦ When there is doubt as to the identity of the assailant
◦ When the act is alleged to be committed in defense of a
stranger but it must not be induced by revenge, resentment
or other evil motive
Article 4, Criminal Liability

◦ Par. 1 – Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person

committing a felony although the wrongful act done be
different from that which he intended
◦ Reason: he who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused (PP vs Ural)
Article 4, Criminal Liability: requisites

◦ That an intentional felony has been committed ( not intentional

felony if not punishable by RPC or covered by any justifying
circumstances) (should not be punished by SPL because the
offender may not have the intent to do any injury to another;
wrongful act done could not be different as offender did not intent
to do any other injury)
◦ That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural
and logical consequence of the felony committed
Proximate cause

◦ It is that cause, which, in the natural and continuous

sequence, unbroken b any efficient intervening cause,
produces the injury and without which the result would not
have occurred (Vallacar Transit vs Catubig)
◦ If the result can be traced back to the original act, then the
doer of the original act can be held criminally liable.
Relation of cause and effect consists of

◦ The cause being the felonious act of the offender, and

◦ The effect being the resultant injuries and/or death of the
victim
Any person who creates in another person’s mind an
immediate sense of danger, which causes the latter to do
something resulting in the latter’s injuries, is liable for the
resulting injuries(PP vs Page)
Person is criminally liable although the wrongful act
done be different from that which was intended
◦ Error in personae- mistake in the identity of the victim
◦ Aberratio ictus – mistake in the blow
◦ Praeter intentionem- injurious result is greater than that
intended
Error in personae

◦ Illustration- xxxx

◦ Applying Art. 49 of the RPC, the penalty imposable is the

penalty for the lower offense but in its maximum period
Aberratio ictus

◦ Illustration
◦ Apply Article 48, penalty for the grave offense in its
maximum period is imposed
Praeter intentionem

◦ Illustration

Liable for the actual crime committed or injury inflicted

Apply Article 13 as a mitigating circumstance
Aberratio ictus Error in personae
The victim, as well as the The supposed victim may or
actual victim is both in the may not be in the scene of the
scene of the crime crime
The offender delivers the blow The offender delivers the blow
to his intended victim but not to his intended victim
because of the poor aim
landed on someone else
Generally gives rise to There is no complex crime
complex crime unless the
resulting consequence is not
a grave or less grave felony
When death is presumed to be the natural
consequence of physical injuries inflicted
◦ The victim, at the time the physical injuries were inflicted was
in normal health
◦ The death may be expected from the physical injuries inflicted
◦ The death ensued within a reasonable time
Note: The offended party is not obliged to submit to a surgical
operation or medical treatment to relieve the accused from
liability(US vs Marasigan)
Felony committed is not the proximate cause of
the resulting injury when:
◦ There is an active force between the felony committed and
the resulting injury; such active force is distinct from the
felony committed
◦ The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the
victim i.e fault or carelessness of the victim to increase the
criminal liability of the assailant
 Instances when there is a proximate cause and
when there is none
When there is an intervening disease
Instance Criminally Liable?
If disease is closely related to Yes
the wound
If disease is unrelated to the No
wound
If disease is combined force Yes. Mortal wound is a contributing factor
with wound to victim’s death. (mortal wound is
sufficient to cause death along with the
disease and was caused by actions
committed by the accused
 Instances when there is a proximate cause and
when there is none
When the death is caused by an infection of the wound due
to the unskilled medical treatment from the doctors
Instance Criminally Liable?
If the wound is moral Yes. Unskilled treatment and infection are
NOT efficient intervening causes
If the wound is slight No. Unskilled treatment and infection are
efficient intervening causes
Efficient intervening cause

◦ It is the cause which interrupted the natural flow of events

leading to one’s death. This may relieve the offender from
liability.
Not considered efficient intervening causes

◦ The weak or diseased physical condition of the victim

◦ The nervousness of temperament of the victim
◦ Causes which are inherent in the victim
◦ Neglect of the victim or third person
◦ Erroneous or unskilled medical or surgical treatment
(unless slight or not mortal wound)
“A supervening event can still be the subject of amendment
or of new charge without necessarily placing the accused in
double jeopardy. ‘” (PP vs Petilla)
Impossible crime

The impossibility of accomplishing criminal intent is not

merely a defense but an act penalized by itself
 Impossible crime: requisites
◦ The act performed would be an offense against persons or
property
◦ The act was done with evil intent
◦ Its accomplishment is inherently impossible or that the means
employed is either inadequate(insufficient) or ineffectual(means
do not produce the result expected)
◦ The act performed should not constitute a violation of another
provision of the RPC
Inherent impossibility of its accomplishment

◦ Legal impossibility – where the intended acts even if

completed would not amount to a crime(killing a dead
person)
◦ Physical or factual impossibility – when extraneous
circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his control
prevent the consumation of the intended crime (stealing a
wallet from an empty pocket)
Felonies against persons(Title 8 RPC II)
◦ Murder
◦ Homicide
◦ Parricide
◦ Infanticide
◦ Duel
◦ Rape
◦ Abortion
◦ Physical injuries
Felonies against property are (Title 10 RPC II)
◦ Brigandage
◦ Robbery
◦ Usurpation
◦ Culpable insolvency
◦ Theft
◦ Swindling and other deceits
◦ Chattel mortgage
◦ ‘arson and other crimes involving destruction
◦ Malicious mischief
Purpose of punishing impossible crime

◦ To suppress criminal propensity or criminal tendencies.

◦ Felony against persons or property should not be actually
committed, no impossible crime to speak of
◦ No attempted or frustrated impossible crime, always
consummated
◦ Penalty of arresto mayor or fine
Art 5 Duty of the court for acts that should be
repressed but not covered by law
◦ Court must render the proper decision by dismissing the case
and acquitting the accused
◦ The judge must make a report to the Chief Executive
through the Secretary of Justice , stating the reasons which
induce him to believe that the said act should be mad e the
subject of penal legislation
◦ No common law crimes in our jurisdiction
Excessive penalties, requisites
◦ The court after trial finds the accused guilty
◦ The penalty provided by law and which the court imposes for the crime
committed appears to be clearly excessive because accused acted with
lesser degree of malice and/or there is no injury or injury caused is of
lesser gravity
◦ Court should not suspend the execution of sentence
◦ Judge should submit a statement to the Chief Executive through the
Secretary of Justice recommending executive clemency
The duty of the court to apply the law, disregarding their feeling
of sympathy or pity for an accused. Dura lex sed lex.

Executive clemency- power of the President to pardon a person

convicted of a criminal offense OR to commute the related
sentence OR reduce it to a lesser sentence .
- Not applicable to offenses punishable by special law
Article 6 Consumated, Frustrated, Attempted
Felonies
Formal Crimes or Crimes of Effect
These are felonies which by a single act of the accused consummates
the offense as a matter of law.(i.e physical injuries, coercion, slander,
illegal exaction, acts of lasciviousness, attempted flight to enemy
country)
- No attempt at a formal crime because between the thought and the
deed, there is no chain of acts that can be severed in any link.
- There is a crime or no crime at all
Material Crimes
These are crimes which involve the three stages of execution.
1. Consumated Felony- when all the elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present.
2. Frustrated – performed all the acts of execution but felony is not produced by
reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
3. Attempted- offender commences the commission of the felony directly by
overt acts but does not perform all acts which should produce the felony due
to cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance
Consummated felony

◦ The offender does not have to do anything else to

consummate the offense . He has already reached the
objective stage of the offense that he no longer has control
of his acts having already performed all that is necessary to
accomplish his purpose.
Frustrated Felony

◦ The offender performs all the acts of execution

◦ All the acts performed would produce the felony as a
consequence( belief of the accused as to whether or not he had
performed all acts of execution is immaterial)
◦ But the felony is not produced
◦ By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
Crimes that do not admit of a frustrated stage

They are those which, by the definition of a frustrated felony, the

offender cannot possibly perform all the acts of execution to bring the
desired result without consummating the offense
◦ Rape since the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge, hence,
no matter how slight the penetration, the felony is consummated
◦ Indirect bribery because it is committed by accepting fits offered to
the public officer by reason of his office. If he does not accept, he
does not commit the crime. If he accepts, it is consummated.
Crimes that do not admit of a frustrated stage

◦ Direct bribery
◦ Corruption of public officers, because the offense requires the
concurrence of the will of both parties such as that when the offer is
accepted, the offense is consummated but when rejected, offense is
merely attempted.
◦ Adultery because the essence of the crime is sexual congress
Crimes that do not admit of a frustrated stage

◦ Physical injuries since it cannot be determined whether the injury

will be slight, less serious or serious unless and until consummated
◦ Theft, because the unlawful taking immediately consummates the
offense and disposition of the thing is not an element thereof
(Valenzuela vs PP)
Attempted Felony, elements

◦ The offender commences the commission of the felony

directly by overt acts;
◦ He does not perform all the acts of execution which should
produce the felony
◦ The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to a
cause or accident other than the offender ‘s own
spontaneous desistance
Attempted Felony, overt act

◦ It is some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to

commit a particular crime
◦ It is more than a mere planning or preparation, which if
carried to its complete termination following its natural
course, without being frustrated by external obstacles, nor
by voluntary desistance of the perpetrator will logically
ripen into a concrete offense
◦ Note: Overt act may not be a physical activity. There
are felonies where, because of their nature or the
manner of committing them, the over acts are not
performed with bodily movement or physical
activity.
(US vs Gloria)
Felonies deemed commenced by over acts when
the following are present:
◦ That there be external acts, and
◦ Such external acts have direct connection with the crime
intended to be committed
◦ To be an attempted crime, the purpose of the offender must
be thwarted by a foreign force or agency which intervenes
and compels him to stop prior to the moment when he has
performed all the acts which should produce the crime as a
consequence, which act it is his intention to perform (PP vs
Caballero)
Indeterminate Offense

◦ It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing

an act is not certain. Its nature in relation to its objective is
ambiguous. The accused may be convicted of a felony
defined by the acts performed by him up to the time of
desistance.
Indeterminate offense, illustration

The accused was caught opening with an iron bar a wall of a store of cheap
goods. He broke one board and was unfastening another when a patrolling
police caught him. He was charged with attempted robbery.

The crime committed is only attempted trespass to dwelling based on the

acts performed by him before being caught. There is something yet for him
to do to make him liable for the offense charged. The final objective
of the accused , once he succeeded in entering the store, may be to
robe, to cause physical injury to the inmates, or to commit any other
offense. In such case, there is no justification in finding the offender
guilty of attempted robbery by the use of force upon things(P vs
Lamahang)
Desistance

t is an absolutory case which negates criminal liability because the

law allows a person to desist from committing a crime.

Note: The desistance which exempts from criminal liability has

reference to the crime intended to be committed, and has no
reference to the crime actually committed by the offender before his
desistance.
◦ When the cause of non-performance of all the acts necessary for the
commission of the offense is other than the offender’s spontaneous
desistance , the felony is attempted (P vs Pareja)
Kinds of desistance

◦ Legal desistance- a desistance referred to in law which would

obviate criminal liability unless the overt or preparatory act already
committed in themselves constitute a felony other than what the
actor intended. It is made during the attempted stage.
◦ Factual Desistance – the actual desistance of the actor, the actor is
still liable for the attempt. It is one made after the attempted stage
of the crime.
2 stages in the development of the crime

◦ Internal acts such as mere thoughts or ideas in the mind of

a person; not punishable
◦ Externa acts cover preparatory acts which ordinarily not
punished except when considered by law as independent
crimes ( like possession of picklocks and similar tools) and
acts of execution which are punishable under the RPC
Attempted Stage

◦ It marks the commencement of the subjective phase.

◦ There is an attempt when the offender begins the
commission of a felony directly by overt acts
Subjective phase

◦ It is that portion of the acts constituting the crime, starting from the
point where the offender begins the commission of the crime to that
point where he has still control over his acts, including their natural
course
◦ If between those points, the offender is stopped by reason of any
cause outside of his own voluntary desistance, the subjective phase
has not been passed and it is an attempt
◦ If he is not so stopped but continues until he performs the last act, it
is frustrated.
Frustrated stage

◦ It is the end thereof and the start of the objective phase

Objective Phase

◦ It is the result of the acts of the execution, that is, the

accomplishment of the crime.
◦ If the subjective and objective phases are present, there is a
consummated felony.
◦ The spontaneous desistance of the accused is exculpatory only if
made during the attempted stage and provided, that the acts already
committed do not constitute any offense.
Factors in determining stage of execution of
felony
◦ Manner of committing the felony
◦ Elements constituting the felony; and
◦ Nature of the offense
MURDER/HOMICIDE/INFANTICIDE/
PARRICIDE
◦ With intent to kill but no mortal wound is inflicted-
ATTEMPTED
◦ With intent to kill, and mortal wound is inflicted but victim
does not die- FRUSTRATED
◦ The moment that victim dies, intent to kill is conclusively
presumed- CONSUMMATED.
RULES OF CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
AND STAGES OF EXECUTION
DEATH INTENT GRAVITY OF WOUND CRIME COMMITTED
RESULT TO KILL
S
Yes Presume Mortal MHIP
d
No Yes Mortal Frustrated MHIP
No Yes Non-mortal Attempted MHIP
No Yes Overt act only, no wound Attempted MHIP
No No Mortal wound Serious PI
No No Non-mortal wound Less Serious/Slight PI
Robbery and Theft
◦ Both crimes are committed by the taking of the personal property of
another and with the intent to gain
◦ The difference is that in robbery, there is the use of force or violence
◦ In theft, so long as there is possession of the property, no matter how
momentary it may be, the crime is consummated
◦ In robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons, the crime is
consummated the moment the offender gets hold of the thing taken and/or
in a position to dispose of it freely
Robbery and Theft
◦ In robbery by the use of force upon things, since the offender must
enter the building to commit the crime, he must be able to carry out
of the building the thing taken to consummate the crime
◦ In theft, it is deemed complete from the moment the offender gains
possession of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to dispose of
the same (P vs Ellasos)
RAPE

◦ The crime of Rape is consummated by mere penetration of the male

organ no matter how slight or superficial

The mere introduction of the penis into the labia majora of the victim’s
genitalia engenders the crime of rape. Hence, it is the touching or entry
of the penis into the labia majora or the labia minora of the pudendum
of the victim’s genitalia that consummates rape (P vs Orilla)
Attempted Rape, instances
◦ When the skirt of the victim has been lifted no matter what position
◦ When the accused mounted on the body of the victim
◦ When there is epidermal touching of the genital organs of the accused and the
victim

In AR, there is intent to have carnal knowledge or sexual intercourse. In acts of

lasciviousness, there is none
There is no crime of frustrated rape. The case of P vs Erina was an exception
since the victim was 3 years old..
Common crimes and their stages of execution:
ARSON
CONSUMMATED FRUSTRATED ATTEMPTED
Any part of the The tools used The tools to be
building burned, alone are on fire, or used for committing
even if only a small a furniture or thing the crime are I n the
portion. not attached to the building
building is on fire
(US vs Valdez)
Common crimes and their stages of execution:
ESTAFA
CONSUMMATED FRUSTRATED ATTEMPTED
Deceit and damage The money taken No money was
on the victim are has not been taken yet, only
present damaged or spent deceit is present
Comparison; when evil intent is not
accomplished
ATTEMPTED FRUSTRATED IMPOSSIBLE
Evil intent is possible of Evil intent is possible of Evil intent cannot be
accomplishment accomplishment accomplished
What prevented What prevented the Evil intent cannot be
accomplishment is the accomplishment are accomplished because
intervention of certain causes independent of it’s inherently
causes or accident in the will of the impossible of
which the offender had perpetrator accomplishment or the
no part means employed by
the offender is
inadequate or
ineffectual
Comparison, as to acts of execution
ATTEMPTED FRUSTRATED
Not all acts of execution had All acts of execution had been
been done done
Comparison, as to causes of non-
accomplishment
ATTEMPTED FRUSTRATED
The felony was not produced The reason for the frustration
by reason of some cause or is some cause independent of
accident other than the the will of the perpetrator
offender’s own spontaneous
desistance
Comparison, as to phase of the felony involved
ATTEMPTED FRUSTRATED
The offender is still in the The offender is already in the
subjective phase as he has objective phase because all
still control of his acts the acts of execution were
already there
Art 7 Light Felonies
◦ These are infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty of
arresto menor ( 1 to 30 days) or fine not exceeding forty thousand
pesos (P40,000) or both is provided
◦ Gen Rule: Punishable only when they have been consummated.
◦ Reason: they produce light, insignificant moral and material injuries that
public conscience is satisfied with providing a light penalty for their
consummation. If they are not consummated, the wrong done is so slight
that there is no need of providing a penalty at all
Exceptions: If committed against persons or property, punishable
even if attempted or frustrated, because such commission presupposes
moral depravity
◦ Xxx against person is actually unnecessary as the only light felony
against persons is slight pi which is always consummated
◦ Can apply to attempted or frustrated light felony against property
BUT only the principal and accomplices are criminally liable while
accessories are exempt
Light felonies under RPC (persons and
properties)
◦ Slight physical injuries
◦ Theft (value of the thing does not exceed P500)
◦ Alteration of boundary marks
◦ Malicious mischief (value of damage not more than P40,000)

Only principals and accomplices are held liable

Art 8 Conspiracy and Proposal to commit
felony
◦ Gen Rule: Mere conspiracy or proposal to commit a felony is not
punishable since they are only preparatory acts.
◦ Exception: punishable in cases where the law specially provides a
penalty therefor
◦ Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it
◦ Agreement may be oral or written, express or implied
Requisites of Conspiracy

◦ An agreement concerning the commission of a felony

◦ A decision to commit the felony, and
◦ Overt acts which, through different, separate and
independent of each other, indicate closeness,
coordination, or personal association so as to show a
concerted action common criminal design, community of
criminal purpose or joint criminal objective
◦ There must be participation with a criminal resolution because
simple knowledge thereof by a person may only make him liable as
an accomplice.
Mere conspiracy, punishable in the following
◦ Treason, Rebellion, Insurrection, Coup détat, Sedition
◦ Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade
SPL
◦ Selected acts under the Dangerous drugs act
◦ Espionage, Illegal association, Highway robbery
◦ Arson, terrorism under Human Security Act
Conspiracy as a felony and as a manner of
incurring criminal liability
AS A FELONY AS A MANNER OF INCURRING CRIMINAL
LIABILITY
Conspirators should not If the conspirators commit a felony, say,
actually commit treason, treason, they will be held liable for treason,
rebellion, etc.., it being and the conspiracy which they had before
sufficient that two or committing treason is only a manner of
more persons agree and incurring criminal liability, not treated as a
decide to commit it separate offense
Felony relates to a crime Conspiracy is not treated as a separate
actually committed offense but used to determine the liability of
the offenders
In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all
◦ Gen Rule: once conspiracy is established, each and every one of the
conspirators is made criminally liable for the crime committed by
anyone of them (PP vs Monroy)
◦ Exception: unless one or some of the conspirators committed some
other crime which is hot part of the intended crime (P vs Valdez)
Exception to the exception
◦ When another crime was committed in their presence and they did
not prevent its commission;
◦ When the other crime is the natural consequence of the crime
planned
◦ When the act constitutes a single indivisible offense
Doctrine of implied conspiracy

◦ Conspiracy may be inferred if it is proven that two or more persons

aimed their acts towards the accomplishment of the same unlawful
object, each doing a part so that their acts although apparently
independent were in fact connected and cooperative, thus indicating
a closeness of personal association and a concurrence of sentiment
◦ It is enough that at the time of the commission of the offense, the
offenders acted in concert, each doing his part to fulfill their
common design (P vs Hernandez)
Conspiracy…

◦ Mere knowledge , acquiescence to or agreement to cooperate, is not

enough to constitute one as party to conspiracy, absent any active
participation in the commission of the crime, with a view to the
furtherance of the common design and purpose-conspiracy
transcends companionship (P vs Patano)
In determining whether there is an implied
conspiracy, it must be based on
◦ Overt acts done before, during, or after the commission of the crime
or
◦ Words, remarks, or language used before, during or after the
commission of the crime, a) they must be distinct from each other,
independent, or separate; b) they must be closely associated,
closely related , closely linked and coordinated; c) they must be for
the common criminal design , joint criminal interest, unity of
criminal purpose, or concerted action, geared towards the
attainment of the felony (P vs Sandiganbayan, GR 158754)
◦ Note: In conspiracy, direct proof of a previous agreement to commit
a crime is not necessary. It may be deduced from the mode and
manner by which the offense was perpetrated or inferred from the
acts of the accused themselves when such point to a joint purpose
and design, concerted action, and community of interest (P vs Liad)
◦ IN the absence of conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and
intention immediately before the commission of the crime, or
community of criminal design, the criminal responsibility arising
from the acts directed against one and the same person is individual
and not collective (Tapalla vs CA)
Proposal to commit a felony
It is committed when the person who has decided to commit a felony
proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
Requisites of proposal:
◦ That the person has decided to commit a felony (decision), and
◦ That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons
RPC provides penalty for mere proposal in

◦ Treason
◦ Rebellion
◦ Insurrection
◦ Coup détat
(There is no crime of proposal to commit sedition)
There is no criminal proposal when

◦ The person who proposes is not determined to commit the felony

◦ There is no decided, concrete and formal proposal but a mere
suggestion
◦ It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed
It is not necessary that the person to whom the proposal is made
agrees to commit TRIC . What constitutes the felony is the making
of the proposal.
Article 9 Classification of Felonies
Grave Felonies- those which the law attaches the capital punishment or penalties which
in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Art. 25 of RPC such as:
◦ Reclusion perpetua
◦ Reclusion temporal (12 years 1 day to 20 years)
◦ Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
◦ Special or temporary special disqualification
◦ Prision mayor (6 years 1 day to 12 years) and
◦ Fines of more than P1,200, 000 pesos
Less grave felonies

Felonies which the law punishes with penalties which in their

maximum period are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of the
Code. These are
◦ Prision correccional (6 months 1 day to 6 years)
◦ Arresto mayor (one month 1 day to six months)
◦ Suspension
◦ Destierro, and
◦ Fines equal to or more than 40,000 but less than 1,200,000
Importance of classification
◦ To determine whether these felonies can be complexed or not
◦ To determine the prescription of the crime and the penalty
◦ To determine the duration of subsidiary penalty to be imposed where the subsidiary
penalty is based on severity of the penalty
◦ To determine the duration of the detention in case of failure to post the bond to
keep the peace
◦ To determine whether or not the person in authority or his agents have committed
delay in the delivery of detained persons to the judicial authority
◦ To determine the proper penalty for quasi-offenses
Art 10 Offenses not subject to the provisions of
RPC
Gen. Rule : RPC provisions are supplementary to special laws
Exceptions:
◦ Where the special law provides otherwise, and
◦ When the provisions of the RPC are impossible to apply, either by
express provision or by necessary implication
◦ Thus, when the special law adopts the penalties imposed in
the RPC, such as reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal,
the provisions of the RPC on imposition of penalties based
on stage of execution, degree of participation, and
attendance of mitigating and aggravating circumstances
may be applied by necessary implication.
 Suppletory application of the RPC
Only finds relevance when the provisions of the special laws are silent on a particular
matter.
1. Subsidiary penalty- applied when in violations of Revised Motor Vehicle law, BP 22
because they did not contain any provision on subsidiary imprisonment
2. Civil liability- Art 100 on civil liability was applied to a case for Violation o f Act
3992
3. Rules on service of sentence – Art 70 was applied in favor of the accused who was
found guilty of multiple violations of Dangerous Drugs Act
4. Definition of principals accomplices, accessories were used suppletorily to define
the words principal, accomplices and accessories under the migrant Workers and
Overseas Filipino Act
Circumstances affecting criminal liability

◦ Justifying circumstances-RPC Art 11; RA 9262 VAWC Sec 26

Battered woman syndrome
◦ Exempting circumstances- RPC Art 12
◦ Mitigating circumstances- RPC Art 13
◦ Aggravating circumstances RPC Art 14
◦ Alternative circumstances –RPC Art 15
Other circumstances found elsewhere in the
RPC
◦ Absolutory cause- the effect is to absolve the offender from criminal liability,
although not from civil liability
◦ Extenuating circumstances – the effect is to mitigate the criminal liability of
the offender and has the same effect as mitigating circumstances (like
concealment of dishonor in the crime of infanticide insofar as the mother and
maternal grandparents are concerned-penalty is lower by 2 degrees; the crime
of adultery committed by a married woman abandoned by her husband)
◦ Imputability – the quality oby which an act may be ascribed to a
person as its author or owner. It implies that the act committed has
been freely and consciously done and may therefore be put down to
the doer as his very own.
◦ Responsibility- the obligation of taking the penal and civil
consequences of the crime
◦ Guilt – an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be made to
answer for the consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.