Complex Crimes PDF
Complex Crimes PDF
Complex Crimes PDF
*Prepared by Jose Angelo A. David and Jansen F. Bernardo, 2013 San Beda Centralized Bar
Operations Special Notes for the 2013 Bar Examinations
Adviser: Justice Mario V. Lopez
Although perjury was used as a necessary means to maliciously obtain the search
warrant, these crimes will not be complexed under Article 48.
Instead, Article 128 provides that the offender shall suffer the penalty for violating
Article 129 in addition to the liability attaching to the offender for the commission of
any other offense.
2. Article 210 Direct bribery
The penalty for direct bribery (of the first type) shall be in addition to the penalty
corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if the same shall have been committed.
When the act constitutes a crime and the same was accomplished, the penalty shall
be for the bribery and for the crime committed (Boado, p. 554).
Note here that there are two crimes committed (1) bribery, and (2) the crime agreed
upon, if committed.
3. Article 235 Maltreatment of prisoners
The penalty for maltreatment of prisoners shall be in addition to his liability for the
physical injuries or damage caused.
When a prisoner is maltreated, the crimes are for maltreatment under Article 235 and
for the physical injuries suffered. The two crimes are not to be complexed (Boado, p.
614).
Note here that there are two crimes committed (1) maltreatment of prisoners, and
(2) physical injuries.
4. Article 275 to Article 278 in relation to Article 279 Abandonment of helpless
persons and exploitation of minors
The imposition of the penalties prescribed in Articles 275 to 287 shall not prevent the
imposition upon the same person of the penalty provided for any other felonies
defined and punished by the Revised Penal Code.
5. Article 312 Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property
The penalty for violating Article 312 shall be in addition to the penalty incurred for the
acts of violence executed by him.
The following discussion in People v. Hon. Alfeche, G.R. No. 102070, July 23, 1992,
is enlightening:
Article 312 may also be considered as defining and penalizing the single, special and
indivisible crime of occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property
by means of violence against or intimidation of persons. It is likewise not a complex
crime as defined under Article 48. However, while Article 294 (robbery) provides a
single penalty for each class of crime therein defined, Article 312 provides a single,
albeit two-tiered, penalty consisting of a principal penalty, which is that incurred for
the acts of violence, and an additional penalty of fine based on the value of the gain
obtained by the accused. This is clear from the clause "in addition to the penalty
incurred for the acts of violence executed by him." For want of a better term, the
additional penalty may be designated as an incremental penalty.
What Article 312 means then is that when the occupation of real property is
committed by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, the accused may
be prosecuted under an information for the violation thereof, and not for a separate
crime involving violence or intimidation. But, whenever, appropriate, he may be
sentenced to suffer the penalty for the acts of violence and to pay a fine based on the
value of the gain obtained.
Illustration:
Y owns a house and lot. In order to obtain possession thereof, X shot Y who was
sitting on his porch, leading to the latters death. X thereafter took possession of the
house and lot of Y.
Here, there is only one crime committed occupation of real property.
However, he shall be sentenced to suffer two penalties: (1) for the homicide
committed, and (2) to pay a fine based on the value of the gain obtained by him,
which shall be an amount equivalent to 50 to 100 per centum of such gain, but in no
case less than seventy-five (P75.000) pesos, provided, however, that if such value
cannot be ascertained, the fine shall be from 200 to 500 (P200.00 to P500.00) pesos.
6. Article 330 Damage and obstruction to means of communication
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or other accident, the
penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed, without prejudice to the criminal liability of
the offender for the other consequences of his criminal act.
7. Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, Violation of R.A. 3019 (Section 3)
The penalty for committing any of the acts in RA 3019 shall be in addition to acts or
omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law.
One may therefore be charged with violation of RA 3019 in addition to a felony under
the Revised Penal Code for the same delictual act, that is, either concurrently or
subsequent to being charged with a felony under the Revised Penal Code. There is
no double jeopardy if a person is charged simultaneously or successively for violation
of Section 3 of RA 3019 and the Revised Penal Code (Merencillo v. People, G.R.
Nos. 142369-70, April 13, 2007).
Hence, a person committing bribery (of the first kind) may be charged with (1) bribery,
(2) the crime agreed upon, if committed, and (3) violation of RA 3019.
Besides, Article 48 (on complex crime proper) will not apply because under Article 48,
the crimes committed must both be punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
8. Anti-Bouncing Checks Law, Violation of B.P. 22 (Section5)
Prosecution under this Act shall be without prejudice to any liability for violation of any
provision of the Revised Penal Code.
Thus, prosecution for estafa does not preclude that for B.P. 22 (Boado, p. 870).
Besides, Article 48 (on complex crime proper) will not apply because under Article 48,
the crimes committed must both be punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
9. Illegal Recruitment, Violation of R.A. 8042
An estafa case does not bar a prosecution for illegal recruitment, since they are
entirely different offenses and neither one necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in the other. A person who is convicted of illegal recruitment may, in
addition be convicted of estafa under Article 315 2(a) of the Revised Penal Code.
There is no problem of jeopardy because illegal recruitment is malum prohibitum, in
which the criminal intent is not necessary, whereas estafa is malum in se in which the
criminal intent of the accused is necessary. The claim of double jeopardy, therefore,
is patently without merit (People v. Billaber, G.R. Nos. 114967-68, January 26,
2004).
Besides, Article 48 (on complex crime proper) will not apply because under Article 48,
the crimes committed must both be punishable under the Revised Penal Code.
Complex
Crime
or
Delito
Complejo
Compound
Crime
or
Delito
Compuesto
When
an
offense is a
necessary
means
for
committing
the other.
When a single
act
constitutes,
(a) two or
more
grave
felonies,
(b)
two or more
less
grave
felonies,
(c)
one or more
grave and one
or more less
grave
felonies.
Composite
Continued Crimes
Crimes
or
or
Continuous
Special
Crime or Delito
Complex
Continuado
Crimes
CONCEPT
These
are The offender is
crimes which impelled by a single
in the eyes of criminal impulse but
the law are committed a series
treated
as of overt acts at
single
about the same
indivisible
time in about the
offenses
same place and all
although
in the
overt
acts
reality
are violate one and the
made up of same provision of
more than one law.
crime.
Characterized
by
the foreknowledge
rule wherein the
perpetrator
must
have an idea of the
outcome of his acts.
PENALTY
The penalty is Single penalty for
specified
in the
crime
the RPC.
committed
regardless of the
plurality of the acts.
Continuing Crimes
or
Transitory
Crimes