Garcia CRIM

GARCIA NOTES - CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] 1
Limitations to the Power of Congress to enact Penal Laws:

1. Penal law must be General in application otherwise it would
be violative of the Equal Protection Clause;
2. Must not partake the nature of an ex post facto law – ex
post facto law makes criminal an act done before the
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW passage of the law and which was innocent when done, and
punishes such an act;
3. Not a Bill of Attainder – A bill of attainder is a legislative act
which inflicts punishment without judicial trial;
4. Cannot impose cruel or excessive penalties or punishments
- e.g. congress cannot amend article 308-309 death, by
saying that henceforth that any who commit theft will be
given death. This is unusual punishment so it is prohibited.
Characteristics of Penal Laws

The following are the characteristics of penal laws;
1. Generality - Persons to whom criminal law shall apply;
CRIMINAL LAW – branch of division of law which defines crimes, 2. Territoriality - Place where penal law shall be applied;
treats of their nature and provides for their punishment. 3. Prospectivity - Time when it shall apply
CRIME – act committed or omitted in violation of the law. GENERALITY

 Penal laws shall be applied to all persons on being within the
2 injuries are committed; Philippine territory whether they are Filipino Citizens or
1. Injury committed against a person; foreigners regardless of any of their personal circumstances;
2. Injury committed against the state;  Applicable to all so long as within the Philippines;
 Applies to non-citizens since while they are within the
Injury committed against a person Philippines, they are given protection in the same way that the
Personal injury against the private offended party. Civil indemnity is government protects its own citizen;
awarded to the offended party on the heirs.  Article 14 of the Civil Code – penal laws shall be binding on all
those who live or sojourn in the Philippines whether citizen or
Injury committed against the state - Punishment is imprisonment. not;
Social injury against the state for the disturbance of peace.
Exceptions to the GENERALITY characteristic:
Note: for every crime committed, it is more of an offense against the 1. Generally Accepted Principles of International Law;
state rather than against the private offended party. 2. Laws of Preferential Application;
Example: Generally Accepted Principles of PIL;

A hit B. B sustained a fatal wound but he survived. Thereafter, B filed Heads of state, chief of state and other diplomatic heads such as
frustrated homicide. The fiscal found probable cause. In the ambassadors and public ministers enjoys blanket immunity from the
information filed by the fiscal, the title is People of the Philippines vs criminal jurisdiction of the country where they are assigned. Since
A. The trial continued and the judge found the accused guilty beyond they are immune, they cannot be arrested, prosecuted or punished.
reasonable doubt. The first penalty of the judge is imprisonment due (Diplomatic Immunity from Suit);
to social injury. Aside from this, B will pay a civil indemnity.
Laws of Preferential Application;
Definition of Terms Laws which exempt certain individuals from criminal prosecution
There are three kinds of Crime; such as members of Congress are immune from libel, slander and
1. Felony – Acts or omissions punished by the Revised Penal defamation for every speech made in the House of Congress during a
Code (RPC); regular or special session.
2. Offense – punished by a special law;
3. Acts/Infractions – punished by ordinances, local legislation; Example;
X, the head of state Japan, went to the Philippines for a working visit.
*Note that all three are under the umbrella term of Crime. X was summoned to Malacañang. However, the driver of X was not
feeling well so instead, X drove himself to Malacañang. X drove the
Q: Who has the power to enact Penal Laws? vehicle in a reckless manner. As a result, he hit and killed an innocent
A: As a general Rule the Legislative Department has the power to pedestrian.
enact Laws. However, in case of emergency, president may issue a
Penal Issuance Order provided that there is a law granting it to the Q: May X be prosecuted?
president. A: No. As a head of state, X enjoys blanket immunity from
prosecution.
Q: Is the power of Congress absolute?
A: No, there are limitations. *Consuls – not among those who enjoy the diplomatic immunity from
suit
Generally, consuls are subject to penal laws of the country where they 2.1 Basis of criminal liability is man’s social environment;
are assigned unless there is a treaty or an agreement between the  “All men are born good, they only become evil due to the
home country of the consul and the country where he is designated influence of the community.”
stating that the consul is immune from the criminal jurisdiction of the  Crimes are a social phenomenon;
host country.
2.2. Purpose of penalty is for purposes of rehabilitation;
Example;  Offender is a socially sick individual who need to be
A is an employee in ADB, a foreigner economist. A Filipino filed an oral corrected not to be punished;
defamation against the foreigner economist. The DFA issued a letter
and protocol to the court which states that ADB and PH has an 2.3. Determination of penalty is done on the case to case basis
agreement that the ADB economist is immune from suit. The SC held
that it was erroneous that there was a decision immediately to 2.4. Emphasis of the law is on the offender and not to the
dismiss the case without adducing any evidence, without informing offense;
the fiscal. SC ruled that diplomatic immunity is only applied in the  ...on the criminal not on the crime;
exercise of one’s function, but in this defamation case, it immunity  great regard to the human element of the crime;
will not lie. Evidence first must be gathered to determine if the act  takes into consideration why the offender committed the
was done in the exercise of one’s functions. (Liang v. People, G.R. No. crime;
125865. January 28, 2000)
CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHY POSITIVIST PHILOSOPHY
TERRITORIALITY Basis of criminal activity is Basis of criminal liability is
Penal laws shall be applicable only within the Philippine jurisdiction human free will; man’s social environment;
including its atmosphere, internal waters, etc; Purpose of penalty is Purpose of penalty is for
Retribution; purposes of rehabilitation;
General Rule Determination of penalty is Determination of penalty is
Crimes committed outside the Philippine jurisdiction cannot be under done mechanically; done on the case to case basis;
Philippine courts. Emphasis is on the crime and Emphasis of the law is on the
not on the criminal; offender and not to the
Exception; offense;
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code provides situations where the extra-
territorial jurisdiction of the Revised Penal Code may be applied. 4. MIXED/ECCLECTIC PHILOSOPHY
 Crimes which are heinous/obnoxious in nature-classical
PROSPECTIVITY  Crimes which are social/economic – positivist
Penal laws Penal laws shall only be applied from the time of
effectivity. It be given retroactive application unless; * The Revised Penal Code adheres to Classical philosophy;
1. If penal laws are favorable to the accused provided that the  Merely copied from Spanish...French espoused classical;
is not a habitual criminal; and
2. If the penal laws allow retroactivity; Although RPC is molded with classical philosophy, the amendments
are geared toward the positivist philosophy;
Philosophies under the Criminal Law System
1. Classical/ Juristic Philosophy; Example;
2. Positivist/ Realistic Philosophy;  Indeterminate Sentence Law – once served the minimum of his
3. Mixed/Eclectic; penalty, eligible for parole (rehabilitation);
 Probation Law – 6 years and below, probation report to
CLASSICAL/JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY probation officer;
3.1 Basis of criminal activity is human free will;  RA 9346 –abolished death penalty;
 Man is a moral creature which understands right from
wrong; THEORIES/RULES CONCERNING CRIMINAL LAW;
 When he commits a wrong, he voluntarily does the same, The following are the theories concerned with Criminal Law;
therefore, he shall be ready for the consequences of his acts 1. Utilitarian. Protective theory;
2. Doctrine of Pro Reo;
1.2 Purpose of penalty is Retribution; 3. Lenity Rule;
 Evolves from the maxim “an eye for an eye.” therefore, for 4. Equipoise Rule;
every crime committed, there is a corresponding penalty
based on the injury inflicted on the victim; Utilitarian/ Protective Theory;
Purpose of punishment is to protect the society from actual/potential
1.3. Determination of penalty is done mechanically; wrong doing;
 Done mechanically since the punishment is proportionate
to the severity sustained by the victim; Even in violation of special penal laws, wherein intent does not
matter, courts should see to it that punishment shall only be imposed
1.4. Emphasis is on the crime and not on the criminal; to actual/potential wrongdoers;
 …on the offense and not on the offender Magno v. CA (G.R. No. 96132)
POSITIVIST/REALISTIC PHILOSOPHY
Potential wrongdoer was not Magno rather it was Mrs. Teng. She There are no common law crimes in the Philippines since the
should not have deposited the check upon withdrawing the Philippines is a civil law country. Penal laws are enacted. They do not
machineries. She was the one who acted in bad faith. evolve through time;
Q: Should Magno should be convicted of violation of B.P. 22? --xXx--

A: NO. If Magno will be the one to be punished, then it will bring about
opportunism. Magno was acquitted on the ground of good faith. Article 1. Time when Act takes effect. — This Code shall take effect
on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-two.
Doctrine of Pro Reo
Penal laws should always be construed liberally in favor of the RPC took effect on January 1, 1932 passed into law on December 8,
accused and strictly against the state. 1930.
Lenity Rule --xXx--

Whenever a penal law or a provision of penal law is susceptible of 2
interpretations, the one lenient to the accused which will bring about Article 2.Application of its provisions. - Except as provided in
acquittal and the other one strictly against the accused which will the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of
bring about conviction, the lenient interpretation shall prevail. this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and
Maxim: In case of doubt, rule always for the accused; maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those
who:
Constitution: Unless proven guilty, deemed innocent. “Guilt must be 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;
proven.” 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the
Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Equipoise Rule Government of the Philippine Islands;
Whenever the evidence of the prosecution is equally balanced with 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into
the evidence of the defense, the scales of justice shall be titled these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the
towards the accused; presiding number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an
Reason: Presumption of innocence; offense in the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and
Prosecution has the burden of proving conviction beyond reasonable the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this
doubt. Conviction based on the strength of the evidence of the Code.
accused.
Art. 2 of the RPC has 2 scopes of application ;
Example; 1. Intraterritorial application – Intraterritorial application provides
Police officers received a tip from a credible source that a person that the RPC shall enforced within the Philippine archipelago,
wearing white shirt and blue shorts will arrive at bus terminal in including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone;
Cubao at 10pm carrying shabu. Acting thereon, the police officers 2. Extraterritorial application;
arrived at the bus station and waited. When a man wearing white
shirt and blue shorts came out of the bus, the police immediately Q: What does the phrase ‘Except as provided in the treaties and laws
frisked and searched the man. A white crystalline substance was of preferential application’ mean?
found in his possession which was identified as shabu by the crime A: This phrase means treaties entered with other countries, laws of
lab. During the trial, the defense presented two witnesses who were preferential palliation takes preference over the provision of the RPC.
passengers of the same bus with the accused, and seated beside him.  Therefore, if there is any conflict between any agreements entered
The witnesses said that they did not see the police officer frisked and into by the Philippines with another country, if it is in conflict with any
searched the accused. Furthermore, they did not see any drugs provisions of the RPC, the said agreement shall prevail over the
apprehended from the accused. How should the judge rule the case? provision of RPC.
The Judge should rule in favor of the accused. Under the equipoise *Remember the Larranaga case, based on the RPC, a person who is
rule, when the evidence of the prosecution and the defense is equally convicted of a crime shall serve his sentence in the New Bilibid prison,
balanced, justice should be tilted in favor of the accused. that is the national penitentiary. However, the Philippines entered
into an agreement with Spain. This agreement was ratified by the
Q: What if what has performed was a perverted/immoral act but Senate. As a result thereof, after Larranaga has been convicted of
there is no law which punishes the said act. Can the person be kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape and homicide,
prosecuted in court? considering that he has 2 citizenship – both Filipino and Spanish. He
A: No, “nullem crimen nulla poena sine lege” there is no crime when was brought to Spain, and there he is serving his sentence. Because
there is no law which punishes it. based on that agreement, Spanish citizens who are serving their
sentence in the Philippines can be brought to Spain and they are to
Q: Are there common law crimes in the Philippines? serve their sentence there. Larranaga took advantage because
A: NO. Common law crimes are principles, usages and use of action definitely, the facilities perhaps are better than prison facilities here.
which the community considers as condemnable even if there’s no
law that punishes it;
Example; that is the Intraterritorial application of the RPC because it is as the

Many heads of state arrived here for the 2017 Ms. Universe. Among crime is committed within the Philippine territory;
these was Pres. X, of X state. He found Ms Portugal very attractive and
invited her to a date in a hotel. Afterwards, Pres. X raped her. Jurisdictional Rules for Merchant Vessels
There are two jurisdictional rules for merchant vessels;
Q: Can Pres. X be prosecuted for rape? 1. French Rule;
A: YES. Immunity is NOT absolute, limited only to official functions. As 2. British Rule;
rape is outside of the functions of the head of state, Pres. X may be
prosecuted here. French Rule
The French Rule states that crimes committed on board while the
Example; foreign vessel is on the water of another country is within the
Pres. X was driving his car on his way to the pageant, and he hit a jurisdiction of the flag country. That is the country where the country
pedestrian, who died. is registered;
Q: May Pres. X be prosecuted? Exception;

A: No. This time he is performing official functions, thus he cannot be when the crime committed affects the public order, the peace and
prosecuted in Philippine courts. security of the host country, then the host country will have
jurisdiction over the said crime. Therefore, the French Rule recognizes
EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION: the jurisdiction of the country where the vessel is registered.
There are 5 instances where the Revised Penal Code shall take effect
outside the Philippine Territory; French Rule = flag country
1st: Those who should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or English Rule
airship. The English Rule states that when a crime is committed on board a
foreign merchant vessel while on the waters of another country it is
Q: When is it a Philippine ship or airship? the host country which will have jurisdiction over the said crime;
A: If it’s registered in the Philippines and under the Philippine laws.
Even if totally or wholly owned by a Filipino citizen, if it is not Exception;
registered in the Philippines it cannot be considered as a Philippine When the crime merely affects the internal management of the
ship/airship. It is only upon registration that this aircraft/vessel can fly vessel, then it is the flag country which will have jurisdiction. In effect,
the Philippine flag. Therefore, it is registration which is the operative the English Rule is territorial in nature.
act which makes it a Philippine ship/airship.
*Philippines adhere to the English Rule which is strictly territorial in
This is a situation where a crime is committed on board a Philippine nature.
vessel while it is outside Philippine territory but not in the territory of
another country. Example;
A foreign merchant vessel is on Manila Bay. A crime was committed
Q: If a Philippine vessel is on waters of the Philippines, and a crime on board, the Philippines will have jurisdiction over the said crime and
was committed on board. What country will have jurisdiction? criminal because we follow the English Rule.
A: Obviously, the Philippines.
2nd: Those who should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note
Q: What if that Philippine Vessel is on the high seas or international of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
waters and a crime was committed on board the said Philippine Government of the Philippine Islands.
Vessel. What country will have jurisdiction over the said crime?
A: Still the Philippines. Because of the extraterritorial application of 3rd: Those who should be liable for acts connected with the
the RPC. It is the situation referred to as the 1st circumstance under introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities
paragraph 2 of Art. 2. It is the situation where the Philippine ship is mentioned in the presiding number.
outside the Philippine territory but not in the territory of another
country. Example;
So X was in Japan. He counterfeited Philippine coins. He then
Q: What if the Philippine Vessel is on the waters on Malaysia and a introduced these coins in to the Philippine Islands. Although the crime
crime was committed on board. What country will have jurisdiction? has been committed in Japan, he can be held liable before Philippine
A: Malaysian courts will have the jurisdiction because of the courts. This is necessary in order to maintain and preserve the
territoriality characteristic of criminal law. financial circulation and financial stability of the Philippines.
Otherwise, no other country would be interested in prosecuting him
Exceptions; except the Philippines because it is only the Philippines will be
If the vessel is a Philippine war vessel or warship or it is a Philippine affected by the said counterfeiting of coins.
warplane. A Philippine warship or war aircraft is considered an
extension of the Philippine sovereignty. 4th: Those who while being public officers or employees should commit
Wherever they may be, when a crime is committed on board a an offense in the exercise of their functions.
Philippine war vessel or warplane, the Philippines will always have
jurisdiction and the reason is the 1st paragraph of Art. 2 of the RPC –
This refers to public officers or employees who are working in another the Philippine territory. Therefore, S should file the case before the
country, while they are working, they committed a crime. The crime Philippine courts because it is as if the crime was committed within
committed by this public officers or employees must be in connection the Philippine archipelago. The reason for this is the Intraterritorial
with the exercise of their functions. application of the RPC. But if the rape was committed at any other
place outside the Philippine Embassy, then PC should be prosecuted
If the crime they committed is not connected with the exercise of their before the courts of Japan because rape is in no way connected with
functions, then they should be prosecuted in the courts of the country the exercise of his functions and a consul does not enjoy diplomatic
where they are assigned; immunity.
Example; 5th: Those who should commit any of the crimes against national
OFW who lost his passport, he went to the Philippine Embassy in security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of
Japan applying for a new passport. He has been going there back and this Code.
forth that it has not it was not yet approved or it was not yet released.
On his way out, he saw the approving authority (AA). He talked to AA Crimes against National Security includes the following;
requesting and begging him that it be immediately approved and 1. Treason;
released. He was invited to a coffee shop, while having coffee, AA 2. Conspiracy/proposal to commit treason;
asked $500 from him and promised on that same afternoon, his 3. Misprision of treason;
passport would be released. So the poor OFW gave the $500. 4. Espionage;
5. enticing to war or giving motives for reprisals;
Q: Where may this AA be prosecuted? Before Philippine courts or
before the courts of Japan? If any of this crime is committed, even if it is done outside the
A: AA may be prosecuted before the Philippine courts. He did not Philippine archipelago the offender can be prosecuted before the
commit in effect a crime in approving the said passport because it his Philippine courts.
obligation to approve the said passport. However, he would not
perform his obligation without a bribe. He would not perform his Crime committed against the Law of Nations include the following;
function without the money given by the said OFW. So in effect, he 1. Piracy;
committed bribery in its 2nd form – he performs an act not 2. Qualified piracy;
constituting a crime in connection with the exercise of his function in 3. Mutiny; and
consideration of the bribe money. So here, he committed bribery, he 4. Qualified mutiny
can be prosecuted before Philippine courts. His act is in connection
with the exercise of his functions. Likewise, if the crime committed is against the Law of Nations the said
offender can also be prosecuted before the Philippine courts;
What if instead of the AA, here comes a Filipino filing clerk (FC) inside
the Philippine Embassy. The FC followed the OFW, the FC told him Example;
that he can facilitate the release of his passport if he will him $50. A, B, C, D, and E are in America. They decided to over throw the
Desperate, the OFW gave him the money. However, that afternoon, government of the Philippines. In preparation for their plan, they
the passport was still not released. He wanted to file a case against bought guns, ammos, and grenades. However, before they can
the FC. proceed with their plan, thy got caught.
Q: Where can he file a case? Before courts of Japan or Philippines? Q: Can A, B, C, D, and E be tried in the Philippines?
A: It should be filed before the courts of Japan because the act A: NO. Their crime is conspiracy to commit rebellion which is a crime
performed by FC has nothing to do with the exercise of his official against public order, Title Three of the Revised Penal Code, thus they
functions. In effect, what he has committed is estafa because he are outside the scope of extra-territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines
made this OFW believe that he has the authority to facilitate the under Article 2 of the RPC.
release of the said passport but he did not have such qualification. He
committed estafa under Art.315 (2)(a). Therefore, he should be Example;
prosecuted before the courts of Japan. Accused A, B, C, D, and E were in America. At that time, America is at
war with the Philippines. The accused decided to over throw the
Example; government of the Philippines. However, before they can overthrow
There is this Philippine consul (PC). The PC told his secretary to work the government, all the accused were caught.
overtime. So S followed PC. In the evening, PC gave coffee to S.
Unknown to S, there was something mixed in the coffee to make her Q: Can A, B, C, D, and E be tried in the Philippines?
unconscious. So after drinking the coffee, she became unconscious A: YES. All the accused committed conspiracy to commit treason
and she was raped by PC. S now wanted to file a case against PC. which is penalized under Title One, Book two of the Revised Penal
Code. Thus, it is within the scope of extra-territorial jurisdiction of the
Q: Where may she file the case? Philippines under Article 2 of the RPC.
A: The act of rape committed has nothing to do with the exercise of
PC’s functions. Therefore, it should be filed before the courts of --xXx--
Japan. However, it was committed inside the Philippine Embassy.
Article 3. Definitions. - Acts and omissions punishable by law are
The Philippine Embassy which is considered an extension of the felonies (delitos).
Philippine sovereignty, then it is as if the crime was committed within
GARCIA NOTES - CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018]
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but FAULT (CULPA)
also by means of fault (culpa). Fault (culpa) or culpable felony exist when the wrongful act results
There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill;
and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. Elements;
1. Criminal negligence;
Felonies 2. Freedom of action;
Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC. When the law 3. Intelligence;
says ‘by law’, it means the RPC.
Under Art. 365, a culpable felony is defined as one wherein the
Acts offender, although without malice or deliberate intent caused an
Acts refer to any body movement which has a direct connection to injury to another by the means of negligence or imprudence.
the felony intended to be committed. Therefore, even a culpable felony is a voluntary act;
It is an external act, an overt act in connection with the felony
intended to be committed. Internal acts or mere criminal thoughts Voluntariness
will never give rise to a crime; In so far as criminal law is concerned, voluntariness is actually the
concurrence of the 3 elements of intentional felony and the
Example; concurrence of the 3 elements of culpable felony;
A lust for his neighbor. Whenever the neighbor would pass by going
to work, A would always look at the neighbor. And for the whole day, In other words, in so far as voluntariness of intentional felony is
he would think of the neighbor with nothing but lust. No matter how concerned, it is the concurrence of criminal intent, freedom of action
criminal his thoughts are it will never give rise to a crime because it is and intelligence;
merely an internal unless he performs an external act or an overt act
related to acts of lasciviousness or attempted rape or rape. The law Therefore, without voluntariness, there can neither be an intentional
requires an act. felony nor a culpable felony;
Omission Freedom
Omission is the failure of a person to perform an act or to do a duty There is freedom of action when the offender performs the act on his
which is required by law. own free will, without force, duress, uncontrollable fear.
Example; So note if the offender performs the criminal act but he did the act
If a person found, any personal property on the street or on any place because there was this compulsion and irresistible fear or under the
and he failed to deliver the same to the owner or to the local impulse of an uncontrollable fear. There is no criminal liability. They
authorities. Under Art.308 he becomes liable for theft. Or if a person are exempting circumstances under Art. 12 of the RPC because there
was driving his vehicle, then he bumped and hit another person. And is no freedom of action, an element of voluntariness. There is neither
instead of helping that person, he increased his speed and left. It is a an intentional felony nor culpable felony because there is wanting of
hit-and-run situation. Such fact that he failed to lend help and freedom of action, an element of voluntariness.
assistance to that victim will aggravate his criminal liability under Art.
365. So here, for failing to perform an act which is required by law to Intelligence
be done. He commits a felony. So felonies are acts or omissions Intelligence is the mental capacity of a person to know wrong from
punishable by the RPC. right and to appreciate the consequences of one’s act.
Kinds of Felonies If the person acted without intelligence, there is no criminal liability.
2 kinds of felonies that are may be committed under Art. 3; So if the criminal act has been committed by an insane, an imbecile
1. Deceit (dolo); or a minor, the said offender is said to be exempted from criminal
2. Fault; liability.
DECEIT (DOLO) Under Art. 12, they are exempting circumstances, he is free of both
Deceit (Dolo) or intentional felony exist when the act is done with intentional and culpable felony because he acted without
deliberate intent; intelligence, an element of voluntariness.
Elements: INTENT
1. Criminal intent on the part of the offender; Intent is the use of a particular means to achieve the desired result;
2. Freedom of action in doing the act on the part of the
offender; * You cannot see intent. It is an internal state of the mind;
3. Intelligence of the offender;
Factors to Determine Intent
An intentional felony is a voluntary act because it is committed by In the case of Rivera v. People (G.R. No. 166326, January 25, 2006),
means of deliberate intent. Court declared that evidence to prove intent to kill in crimes against
persons may consist of the following;
1. The means used by the malefactors;
2. The nature, location, and number of wounds sustained by Therefore, it must be proven
The prosecution does not have
the victim; by the prosecution beyond
the burden to prove it;
3. The conduct of the malefactors before, during, or reasonable doubt;
immediately after the killing of the victim; and
4. The circumstances under which the crime was committed
and the motives of the accused; Example;
Intent to kill must be proven in frustrated/attempted homicide. A and
Example; B were fighting. A was losing and so A shot B. B was hit on the left
A was walking. Then here comes B with a lead pipe and hit the head arm. He was brought to the hospital. Thereafter, after B’s release
of A with it. B hit it hard and thereafter ran away. A went to the from the hospital, he filed a case against A for attempted homicide.
hospital, however, based on the medical certificate no injury Since the case filed is attempted homicide. The prosecution has the
whatsoever was sustained by the head of A. So there was no injury. burden of proving intent to kill on the part of A when he shot B and
Nevertheless, A filed a case for attempted homicide against B. hit him on the left arm. Otherwise, if the prosecution failed to prove
Therefore, intent to kill is incumbent to be proven by the prosecution intent to kill on the part of A. Then A can only be convicted of
because the case filed is attempted homicide. serious/less serious/slight physical injuries depending on the date
required for medical intervention or he should be acquitted of the
Q: Will B be held liable for attempted homicide? Was there intent to crime. Intent to kill must be proven.
kill?
A: There was NO intent to kill. Let us apply in this case the factors to But what if in the course of their fight, A was losing and so A took out
determine whether intent is present; his pistol and he shot B. B was shot on the heart, a fatal wound, a
mortal wound was sustained because it was a vital organ which was
Q: Was there motive? hit. A immediately bought B to the hospital. However, upon arrival,
A: NO. In the problem, there was no motive. he was pronounced dead. Therefore, the heirs of B filed a case for
homicide against A. A’s defense, I have no intention to kill B.
Q: What was the nature and number of weapon used? According to him, he only intended to threaten B because they were
A: B used a lead pipe. fighting.
Q: What is the nature, number and location of wound inflicted on Q: Will A’s defense stand in court?
the victim? A: NO. A’s defense that he has not intent to kill B will not lie. The
A: The victim did not sustain any wound despite the fact that it was reason is since the victim died, intent to kill becomes a General
hit with a lead pipe. Criminal Intent which is presumed by law. Prosecution need not prove
intent to kill in homicide, parricide, murder, infanticide because the
Q: What was the manner of committing the crime? victim died. It is only in the attempted and frustrated stages of the
A: After hitting A once, B ran away. If he had intended to kill the HPMI wherein intent to kill is considered an element.
victim, he would have hit A several times.
Q: Why is it only in the consummated stage of Homicide, Patricide,
Q: What were the act, deeds and words made by the offender Murder, Infacnticide that intent to kill is presumed?
before, during or after the commission of the crime? A: Because the best evidence to prove intent to kill is that the victim
A: He just saw the victim, hit the victim thereafter ran away. All of died. So it is presumed by law.
these would show there was no intent to kill on the part of said
offender. Q: Is there a defense to negate criminal intent?
A: YES. The accused may plead mistake of fact
Therefore, B should not be convicted of attempted homicide.
MOTIVE
Example; Motive is the moving power which impels a person to do an act to
The use of a lethal weapon would show intent to kill on the part of achieve the desired result
the offender although death did not arise. Taking the personal
property of another without the consent of the owner would show General Rule: Motive is not material in determining the criminal
intent to gain on the part of the offender. liability of the offender is identified, admits to the commission to the
crime, if the prosecution has direct evidence or eyewitness to the
Kinds of Intent commission of the crime, if crime committed is a culpable felony,
There are 2 kinds of intent: crime committed is not a special penal law.
1. General Criminal Intent (GCI);
2. Specific Criminal Intent (SCI); Exceptions;
Motive becomes material in determining the criminal liability of the
GENERAL CRIMINAL INTENT SPECIFIC CRIMINAL INTENT offender;
Specific Criminal Intent is just 1. When the act of the offender would result to variant crimes (to
General Criminal Intent is
like an element, an ingredient know what crime should be charged);
conclusively presumed by law
of the commission of the 2. When the identity of the offender is doubtful;
by the mere doing of an act;
crime; 3. When the prosecution only has circumstantial evidence to prove
the commission of the crime;
Example; immediately after the

City mayor (CM) was jogging near the seashore. Here comes X who commission of the crime;
went to CM and him. CM was not in the performance of his official
duty when he was shot. Therefore, the act of X in killing and shooting MISTAKE OF FACT
CM may result to variant crimes depending on the motive, depending Mistake of Fact is the misapprehension of facts on the person who
on the reason of X of killing. If the reason is a personal caused injury to another.
grudge/vendetta, murder is committed. But if the reason is because
of CM’s past performance of his duty, then the crime committed is If a person acted under mistake of fact, he is absolved of criminal
direct assault with homicide. liability because he acted without criminal intent. That is, had the
facts been as he believed them to be, his act done would have been
Example; lawful and justifiable.
There are so many suspects, A, B, C, D and E. There’s doubt as to who
among the committed the crime. Then motive will become material Elements of Mistake of Fact
in determining the criminal liability of the offender. Before one may be absolved of criminal liability for having acted
under mistake of fact, the following are elements:
Example; 1. That the act done would have been lawful and justifiable
Who was the last person seen together with the victim before he was had the facts been what the accused believed them to be -
killed? Why was he with the victim at that time? What could be the Had it been as he believed, the act performed would’ve
motive behind the kill? All of these must be taken into consideration amounted to a justifying or exempting circumstance;
because there was no eyewitness, no direct evidence in the 2. That the intention of the accused in doing the act must be
commission of the crime. lawful - The must be ignited by a noble or lawful or
justifiable intent
*Motive alone, however strong, will never bring about conviction. But 3. That the mistake must be without fault, negligence, careless
motive and circumstantial evidence, or motive and supporting on the part of the offender - The offender cannot be
evidence is necessary for conviction. negligent in ascertaining the true facts of the case and at
the same time invoke mistake of fact;
People v. Mapalo (G.R. No.172608, February 6, 2007)
SC convicted him only of ill treatment of another by deed, a form of Q: Can a mistake of fact be used as a defense against culpable
slight physical injury. Ill treatment of another by deed is the felony?
circumstance wherein a person was hit or there was injury caused to A: NO. One of the elements of Mistake of Fact is that the intent must
the person but there was no intent. be lawful. Since intent is not an element in culpable felonies, then
mistake of fact cannot be used as a efense.
Q: How do you prove Motive?
A: Motive is proved by the testimony of the witnesses as to the acts US v. Ah Chong (G.R. No. L-5272 March 19, 1910.)
or statements made by the accused before or immediately after the Ah Chong was acquitted because he acted under mistake of fact.
commission of the crime. [M’Garcia: BUT that was because the case was decided a long time
ago. If the case is decided now, I doubt if there will be an acquittal.
Example; Let’s go by the elements: 2nd and 3rd elements are present.
Before the killing of A, a witness saw B threatening to kill A. Therefore,
B would have the motive because of his acts prior to the commission However, the 1st element is wanting - that the act done would have
of the crime. Or right after the killing of A, a witness saw B running been lawful and justifiable had the facts been as the accused believed
away from the scene of the crime laughing saying “finally, I have my them to be - the victim was only trying to enter.
revenge” there is the motive.
Q: Will that act already constitute unlawful aggression?
So here motive is established by the acts or statements made by the A: NO. There is no unlawful aggression because there was no
accused prior to or after the commission of the crime but NOT imminent or immediate danger on the life and property of the said
DURING because in motive, there is no direct evidence. The witness offender. 1st element is wanting.]
did not see how the crime was committed.
Example;
INTENT MOTIVE The police officers A, B and C were dining in a restaurant when they
It is the moving power which noticed a group of men who are so noisy. And so A looked at them
impels a person to do a specific and noticed that one of them, X had a gun tucked on his waist. So A
Use of a particular means to
act to achieve the desired went on the back of X and told him “I can see that you have a gun
achieve a desired result;
result, therefore, it is the tucked on your waist. Do you have a license? I’m a police officer.” X
reason behind intent; said “Yes sir, I have a license.” And A said “Show me your license.” So
A material element in Immaterial to determine the X stood up and he tried to get his wallet from his pocket in order to
determining the criminal criminal liability of the show his license as requested by A. As he was picking his wallet, he
liability of the accused; offender; was turning around to look at A. The moment he faced A, A shot him.
Established/proven by the Established by the X died. Prosecuted for homicide, A said he acted under mistake of
overt act of the offender or by acts/statements made by the facts. He thought, what X was picking was his gun and that he would
the means employed; accused prior to or be shot by X. Therefore, in self-defense he shot X first.
Q: Will his defense of mistake of facts lie in his favor? Example;

A: NO. The 1st element is wanting. Granting for argument that what X Killing another, taking the thing of another;
was picking was the gun, it will not constitute unlawful aggression
because the gun was not yet pointed at A. it will not yet bring an MALA IN SE MALA PROHIBITA
immediate danger on the life of A. Also, the 3rd element is wanting. A Inherently evil, wrong per se; Not inherently evil
was negligent, there was fault or carelessness on his part in or wrong;
ascertaining the true facts of the case. He was asking for the license Criminal liability is based on the Criminal liability is based on the
and X said he has one. Definitely, what would be shown to him would intent or morality of the mere doing of the prohibited
be the license not the gun. offender; act;
Good faith or lack of criminal Good faith or lack of criminal
Yapyucu v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 120744-46, June 25, 2012) intent is a valid defense; intent is not a valid defense;
Yapyucu were members of the Police stationed in Pampanga. They Modifying circumstances such Modifying circumstances such
received a tip that NPA were spotted near their vicinity. Thus, as mitigating and aggravating as mitigating and aggravating
Yapyucu and his men convened in a nearby road to wait for the are considered by the court in are NOT considered by the
alleged vehicle of the NPA. Upon seeing a Tamaraw Jeep reportedly the imposition of penalty; court in the imposition of
containing NPA soldiers, Yapyucu and his men immediately open shot penalty UNLESS otherwise
the jeep. As a result, Licup, one of the passengers of the jeep, died, provided by Special Penal Law;
and another one, Villanueva, was injured. Upon closer inspection of Degree of participation of the Degree of participation by the
the jeep, it was later found out that the passengers were not offender (principal, accomplice, offender is NOT considered. All
members of the NPA, and that they were not armed. An information or accessory) is considered in perpetrators of the act are
for homicide was filed against Yapyuco. Yapyucu on the other hand, the imposition of the penalty; equally punished UNLESS
pleaded mistake of facts. He argued that had the passengers been otherwise provided by the
members of the NPA, he would have been justified in firing at them. Special Penal Law;
Stage (attempted, frustrated, The only stage considered is the
Q: Is the contention Yapyucu justified? or consummated) is taken into consummated stage. No
A: NO. The 1st element of Mistake of fact is that the act done would consideration in the imposition attempted or frustrated stage
have been lawful had they been what the offender believed them to of the penalty; UNLESS otherwise provided by
be. In this case, even if the passengers were members of the NPA, the the Special Penal Law;
accused was not justified in firing at them absent of any reason to
believe that their lives were in danger. Also, the 3 rd element of **Not all acts punishable by special penal laws are mala prohibita!!
Mistake of fact is that the mistake must be without fault, negligence, There are some special penal laws which punish acts mala in se, e.g.
or carelessness of the offender. In this case, the accused could have plunder is a special penal law yet the SC said plunder is malum in se.
been more prudent in the exercise of his functions. He could have
criminal intent matters.
stopped the jeep to ascertain the passengers. Likewise, even if the
jeep did not stop, they could have pursued the jeep seeing as they
Garcia v. CA (G.R. No. 157171 March 14, 2006)
have an available car and the jeep was moving in a slow speed due to
Garcia was the head of the board of canvassers. The number of votes
the potholes in the road.
of Sen. Pimentel was decreased. In decreasing the number of votes,
the said votes were not added to any candidate. So it did not favor
The Supreme Court convicted the accused of homicide and denied any candidate. So according to him, he acted in good faith, no criminal
their defense of mistake of fact.
intent. But according to the other side, it is a special penal law,
therefore they should be held criminally liable.
Q: Can a crime be committed without criminal intent?
A: YES. There are 2 instances wherein intent is not an essential
Q: Should Garcia’s defense of good faith be appreciated in violation
element of a crime; of the Omnibus Election Code (Special Law)?
1. Culpable Felony A: YES. The act of decreasing or increasing a candidate’s vote although
2. When the crime is in violation of special penal laws (Acts punished by special penal law is a malum in se. it is inherently evil or
Mala prohibita) wrong.
ACTS MALA PROHIBITA
What about in this case, it is a malum in se. And Garcia and company
Acts mala prohibita are acts which are only wrong because there is a said, they acted in good faith, they were already so tired, because of
law that prohibits and penalizes it; the counting. So how come they were still convicted?
They are not inherently wrong; According to the SC: They should exercise extraordinary diligence in
the counting of the votes. Hence, they are still held criminally liable.
Example; The defense of good faith would not lie in their favor as board of
Illegal possession of unlicensed firearms; canvassers.
ACTS MALA IN SE Q: Can an act mala in se absorb an act mala prohibita? And vice
Acts mala in se are acts which are inherently evil or wrong per se, even versa?
if there’s not law, it is evil;
A: NO. In the case of Loney v. People the Supreme Court held that Proximate Cause - Proximate cause is the cause that sets in to motion
intent is a material element in acts mala prohibita, on the other hand all other causes and which unbroken by efficient intervening cause
intent is immaterial in acts mala prohibita. produces the felony without which the felony would have not been
committed.
Lonely v. People (G.R. No. 152644, February 10, 2006)
Lonely and company, the head of marcopper company were charged For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause doctrine, it
4 cases – violation of the water code of the Philippines, violation of is necessary that the felonious act and the resulting felony must not
the Philippine mining act, violation of national pollution control be broken by any efficient intervening cause.
degree – all three are acts mala prohibita and one act malum in se –
that is violation of Art.365 reckless imprudence resulting to damage No efficient or supervening intervening cause must have broken the
to property. Their contention was that the 3 other information causal connection between the felonious act of the offender and the
involving violation of special penal law should already be quashed resulting felony.
because they are absorb by Art. 365. Anyway, the incident resulted
from the same act of polluting. Elements;
In the case of Garcia v. People (G.R. No. 171951, August 28, 2009),
Q: Should reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property The Supreme Court enumerated the following elements of proximate
under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code absorb the violation of cause:
special penal laws? 1. The intended act is a felonious act;
A: NO. Acts mala in se cannot absorb acts mala prohibita. What makes 2. The resulting act is a felony;
an act malum in se is the presence of intent, deceit or dolo or fault or 3. The resulting act is the direct, natural and logical
culpa. On the other hand, what makes an act malum prohibitum is the consequence of the felonious act of the offender;
fact that it’s in violation of a special penal law. Therefore, one cannot
absorb the other. So they have to be prosecuted on all 4 cases. Therefore, for one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause
Example; doctrine, it is necessary that the offender is performing a felonious
X killed B with the use of motor vehicle. X hit and bumped B. X was act and since he is performing a felonious act, he becomes liable for
charged with murder. So the information charges an intentional all the resulting crime although different from that which he
felony of murder. Trial on merits ensued, after the prosecution intended. Provided that the resulting felony is the direct, natural and
presented evidence, the defense presented evidence. The defense logical consequence of his felonious act. Otherwise stated, his
was able to show, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the reason felonious act must be the proximate cause of the resulting felony.
for the said act of killing B was because X lost control of his brake.
Therefore, according to them, there was only imprudence and so X For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause doctrine, it
should only be held liable for reckless imprudence resulting in is not necessary that the offender should have even touch the body
homicide. The judge believed the defense. So in an information for an of the victim. It suffices that the felonious act performed by the
intentional felony of murder, the said court convicted X only of offender has generated in the mind of the victim, fear for his life. By
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, a culpable felony. reason of that fear for his life the victim performed acts, made risk
that injured himself. The accused will become criminally liable.
Q: Is the judge correct? Can the judge convict a person of a culpable
felony in an information that charges him of intentional felony? Example;
A: Yes. The reason is that a culpable felony is necessarily included in B and G were boyfriend and girlfriend respectively. During their
an intentional felony because a culpable felony is of lesser offense relationship, B promised G that he would marry her. One day, B told
than that of intentional felony. G that she should wait for him outside the church at 7pm that night
so they could get married. However, instead of showing up, B sent G
*A malum prohibitum is not necessarily included in malum in se. a letter saying that he couldn’t marry her because B already has a wife
Therefore, one cannot absorb the other. and children. G was so heartbroken. She couldn’t live with the pain so
she ended her life and committed suicide.
--xXx--
Q: Is B liable for the death of G through the Proximate Cause
Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be Doctrine?
incurred: A: No. The first element of Proximate Cause is absent. Under the
By any person committing a felony (delito) although the Family Code, breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong.
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. Thus, although the death of G is considered a felony, the intention of
By any person performing an act which would be an B is not a felonious act.
offense against persons or property, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the Example;
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. B and G were boyfriend and girlfriend respectively. B promised G that
he will marry her. However, B changed his mind. G was so
Proximate Cause Doctrine heartbroken, she went to the top floor of the nearest building. At the
Proximate Cause Doctrine states that criminal liability shall be top, G jumped over the ledge and committed suicide. G died. On her
incurred by any person committing a felony (delito) although the way down, G landed over a pedestrian. The pedestrian was squashed
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. by G resulting to the death of the pedestrian.
Q: Is G liable for the death of the pedestrian by virtue of the Q: Is X criminally liable for the death of the boy?
proximate cause? A: YES. First element, the intended act is a felonious act. He was not
A: NO. Under the Revised Penal Code, committing suicide is not committing a felonious act. He was just acting his right when he said
considered a felony. he will call the police considering that the boys were taking his
mangoes, they were committing theft. Therefore, he was just acting
EFFICIENT INTERVENING CAUSE (EIC) within his right. Since X was not committing a felonious act, he cannot
Efficient Intervening Force is an active force which is a distinct act be held criminally liable for the resulting felony.
absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the offender.
* So if you are given a problem, the first thing you should do is to
In order that an act is considered an Efficient Intervening Cause, it is determine if the person is committing a felonious act. If not, a person
necessary that it is totally foreign from the felonious act that is cannot be held liable for the resulting felony. If he is, then he is liable
performed by the offender; for the resulting felony.
Proximate Cause is not always the immediate cause. At times it may Example;
be a remote cause; In the same case, X told the boys, if you will not come down I have
here my shotgun, I will shoot each one of you and he fired shots in
Example; the air. The boys were so afraid and hurriedly went down, one of them
A was driving his car along SLEX followed by B, by C, by D, by E. When jumped, fell and suffered serious physical injuries because of his
A reached the tollgate, he stopped to pay the toll, so B stopped as broken legs.
well as C and D. E however was very sleepy, he did not put to stop so
he hit D, D hit C, C hit B, B hit A. Because of the impact the car of A Q: Is X criminally liable for the injuries sustained by the boy?
sustained serious damage. A: NO. Because this time he was committing a felonious act. He was
threatening to shoot the children. It is a felonious act amounting to
Q: What is the proximate cause of the damage sustained by the car grave threats. Therefore, this time he is criminally liable for the
of A? resulting felony although different from that which he intended.
A: The Proximate Cause was E because it was the car of E which sets
into motion all other cars to bump each other. It was not the * For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause Doctrine,
immediate cause because the immediate cause was the car of B it is necessary that there is no efficient intervening cause that has
because it is the car of B which hit the car of A. So a PC is not always broken the chain between the felonious act and the resulting felony.
the immediate cause, at times it may be the remote cause.
Example;
Example; A and B, they are boyfriend and girlfriend respectively. The A
A bus was going to Quezon, suddenly 4 men boarded a bus, 2 man promised to marry B that night. B waited in vain, however, A did not
seated at front seats and the other 2 seated at back. While they were arrive. Instead B received a text message saying that A would not be
traversing a zigzag portion on the road, the 4 men stood up and able to come, and could not marry B because A is already a married
announced a hold up. One passenger was so afraid of the robber as man with 5 children. So B became so sad. Frustrated, she began crying
he had a previous experience of robbers. He was so afraid that he terribly and went out of the house, walked on the streets, not on her
opened a window and he jumped out of a window, he fell on a cliff own rightful self. She fell on a canal and she died.
and he died.
Q: Is A the boyfriend, liable for the death of B?
Q: Are the robbers liable for the death of the passenger? A: NO. It is a settled rule that breach of promise to marry is not a
A: Yes. The robbers in announcing a holdup are committing a felonious act. Since B was not committing a felony, therefore, he
felonious act. cannot be liable for the death of A.
The resulting act was a felony, the resulting felony was the direct, Example;
natural and logical consequence of the felonious act of the offenders. In the same problem, when the girl learned that the man could not
Were it not for the robbers announcing a hold up, there would be no marry her. She went on the top most portion of the building, decided
fear on the mind of the passenger. But because of the announcement, to commit suicide to take her own life. She jumped. However, as she
there was fear on the mind of passenger and by reason of that fear, was falling, she fell on a child. The girl survived but the child was
he made risk that caused his death. The robbers are liable for robbery pinned down and died.
with homicide because they are liable for the death of the passenger.
Q: Is A, the boyfriend, liable for the death of the child?
Example; A: NO. Again, breach of promise to is not a felony. Since A was not
X was having a siesta on the terrace of their house on a rocking chair. performing a felonious act, he is not liable for any resulting felony.
Suddenly he was awakened by the noise of the children. He found out
that it was coming from the backyard of their house, saw 4 boys Q: is B, the girlfriend, liable for the death of the baby?
harvesting his mango tree. So he told the boys to come down the tree, A: NO. Committing suicide is not a felony either the RPC or any special
otherwise, he will be calling the police and let them be arrested. The Penal law in PH jurisdiction. It is not a felonious act. However, in
boys hurriedly went down the tree. One boy from the top most performing said lawful act, she did not do so with due care. Since she
portion of the tree jumped down and his head hit a big stone. He did not do so with due care, she becomes liable for a CULPABLE
suffered hemorrhage, thereafter he died. FELONY. So here there is a simple negligence on the part of the said
woman, therefore, the said woman may be held liable for simple precisely he needed medical intervention, he needed treatment of
negligence resulting to homicide for the death of the said child. the doctor because he sustained a stab wound from A. Therefore,
there is a connection between the felonious act and the medical
People vs. Villacorta (G.R. No. 186412, August 28, 2009) treatment. It there for cannot be considered as an EIC. The doctors
January 23, 2002, there was a stabbing incident. Cruz was stabbed by negligence would only make him liable administratively but not
Villacorta on the left side of his body with a sharpened bamboo stick. criminally.
He was brought to the Tondo Medical Center. He was released on the
very same day as out patient because his wound was not fatal. Example;
February 14, 2002 he was brought to San Lazaro Hospital. He was A and B were friends. After farming while they were having a drinking
already suffering from tetanus infection. A day after February 15 he spree, they had a political discussion, A was pro Pnoy and B was pro
died. The cause of his death was tetanus infection. Villacorta was GMA. Their agreement heated, B stood up and broke a bottle of beer,
prosecuted for the crime of homicide for the death of Cruz. The lower stabbed A. A was wounded. They parted ways. A was on his way home
court convicted him. when suddenly it rained. After it rained there was lightning and A was
hit by lightning. A died. The heirs of A filed a case of homicide against
Q: Is the accused liable for homicide? B.
A: NO. Supreme Court: Citing Urbano case, he cannot be convicted of
the crime of homicide. Based on the expert testimony of the doctor, Q: Is B criminally liable for the death of A?
the incubation period of the tetanus virus is within 14 days. In the A: NO. Under the proximate cause doctrine, B is not criminally liable
case, it took the victim 22 days before he died. Therefore the stab for the death of A because there was an EIC that is the lightning. The
wound was without tetanus virus. Cruz may have performed acts lightning was an active force which is a distinct act or fact absolutely
which brought about the tetanus virus. The stabbing was only a foreign from the felonious act of the offender which was the stabbing
remote cause and the tetanus infection was the proximate infection of the victim. Therefore he cannot be held liable for the death of A
which brought about the death of the victim. but only physical injuries sustained by the victim.
So Villacorta was only convicted of slight physical injuries because 3 SITUATIONS WHEREIN A PERSON BECOMES CRIMINALLY LIABLE
they were not able to prove intent to kill. First, no evidence of motif. FOR THE RESULTING FELONY ALTHOUGH DIFFERENT FROM THAT
Second nature and number of weapon used. A sharpened bamboo WHICH HE INTENDED:
stick, not even a little weapon made of metal. Third, the nature, 1. Abberatio Ictus (Mistake in the blow)
number and location of wound. It was only on the left side of the 2. Error in Personae (Mistake in the identity);
body. Fourth, manner of committing the crime. After one stabbing, 3. Praeter intentionem;
there was no more. So from homicide, he was only convicted of slight
physical injury punished by the lowest penalty arresto menor, 1- ABERRATIO ICTUS
30days or fine of not more than P200. Aberratio Ictus is a situation wherein the offender directed a blow at
his intended victim but because of poor aim, the blow landed on
Urbano vs. IAC (G.R. NO. 72964, September 7, 2011) another victim.
Javier was hacked by Urbano on his right palm. Javier suffered an
incised wound and brought to the hospital. There was settlement. Example;
Thereafter he was released. However, after 22 days he was brought X and Y had a fist fight. X lost. However, X vowed to Y that he will have
to the hospital, he was already suffering from tetanus poisoning. The his revenge. One day, X saw Y riding in a tricycle. In that instance, X
next day he died. pulled out his gun and with intent to kill, shot Y. However, due to poor
aim, X hit the tricycle driver instead. The tricycle driver died.
Q: Is the accused liable for homicide?
A: NO. SC: same reasoning by the SC. The act committed by Javier Q: What crime may X be convicted in so far as Y is concerned?
after he was released from the hospital, the fishing, going to the farm A: In so far as Y is concerned, X is liable for attempted murder because
was considered as the proximate cause that brought about the he intended to kill Y. He already performed an overt act when he fired
tetanus virus on his incised wound. Therefore he was not convicted the gun with intent to kill against B. There was treachery because the
of the crime of homicide but only physical injuries. victim was totally defenseless. However, because of poor aim, it was
the tricycle driver who died.
Example;
A and B were fighting. A stabbed B. B sustained a less serious physical Q: What crime may X be convicted in so far as the tricycle driver is
injuries. B was brought to the hospital, it was not a serious wound, concer?
however, because of the negligence or careless treatment of the In so far as the tricycle driver is concerned, X is liable for murder. In
doctor, this not serious wound became a very serious wound which the case of People v. Flora (G.R. No. 125909, June 23, 2000), the
later on caused the death of B. The relatives of B filed a case of Supreme Court held that treachery is appreciated in Aberratio Ictus.
homicide against A. The Flora doctrine was likewise adopted by the court in People v.
Adrian (G.R. No. 205228, July 15, 2015).
Q: Is A liable of homicide for the death of B? Or would you consider
the careless treatment of the doctor as an EIC? Q: Therefore, of what crime will you charge and convict X?
A: A is liable for the death of B. The negligence or careless treatment A: There are two crimes committed. Against Y attempted murder,
of the doctor cannot be considered as an EIC. The negligent treatment against the tricycle driver is murder. But since this 2 crimes were
of the doctor was an active force but it is not a distinct act or fact brought about by a single act, it will give rise to a complex crime under
absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the offender. Because Art. 48. Under Art. 48 when a single act constitutes two or more grave
or less grave felonies, we have compound crime or a complex crime. ERROR IN PERSONAE
Thus, the crime committed by X is Murder with attempted murder Error in Personae is a situation wherein the victim actually received
because it results from the single act of the crime. the bullet but he was mistaken to be the intended victim. The
intended victim was not at the scene of the crime.
Q: In the same case as mentioned above, the tricycle driver survived
but sustained a mortal wound. What crime may be charged to X? Effects
A: As to Y, X is liable for attempted murder. As to the tricycle driver, The effect of error in personae depends on the variance between the
X is liable for serious Physical injuries only because there is no intent intended crime and the actual crime committed;
to kill on his part.
Mitigating - If there is variance between the penalty of the intended
Q: What if when the tricycle driver was hit by the bullet, he only crime and the penalty of the actual crime committed, the lesser
sustained a slight physical injury which is a light felony, are you penalty between the two shall apply;
going to complex?
A: NO. This time you cannot complex because under Art. 48, you can If there is no variance between the penalty of the intended crime and
only complex grave and less grave felonies. You cannot complex a the crime actually committed, then it will not affect the criminal
light felony. Therefore, there would be 2 cases filed separately. liability of the offender;
Attempted murder in so far as B is concerned. Slight physical injury in
so far as C is concerned. So 2 informations, 2 cases must be filed in Example;
the court. A and B were fighting. A punched B so hard, he fell on the ground, his
face facing the ground. A left the scene of the crime. At that precise
People v. Flora (G.R. No. 125909, June 23, 2000). moment when A left, here comes the father of B who saw his poor
Hermogenes Flora and his brother Edwin Flora were in a party. In that son boxed by A so he came to the rescue of his son and went near
party, they saw Ireneo Gallarte, the uncle of their enemy Villanueva. him. To retaliate, B took out his balisong and stabbed the person next
As a revenge against Villanueva, the brothers shot Gallarte, but to him thinking that it was still his opponent A but in truth it was
because of poor aim, they hit Flor Espinas and killed Emerita Roma. already his father. Let's say the father died.
However, the brothers succeeded in killing Gallarte.
Q: What was the intended crime committed by B?
Q: What is the liability of the brothers to the deceased Gallarte and A: B intended to commit homicide because he intended to kill A, the
Roma? person who boxed him.
A: As to Gallarte and Roma, the Supreme Court held that the brothers
were guilty of murder because the killing was qualified by treachery. Q: What crime did B actually commit?
Treachery is present when the deceased was not given a chance to A: B actually committedparricide because he killed his own father.
defend themselves. Since neither Gallarte and Roma were given a
chance to defend themselves, both accused were guilty of murder. Q: Of what crime will you prosecute B?
A: B should be prosecuted for Parricide because that is the crime he
Q: What is the liability of the brothers to the Espinas? actually committed.
A: As to Flor Espinas, the brothers were guilty of attempted murder.
Let's say that he is now charged of parricide. Trial on the merits
People v. Adriano (G.R. 205228, July 15, 2015) proceeded. The Judge found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
Police Officers Garabiles and Santos were on patrolling the streets of parricide.
Pampanga when they saw a Toyota Corolla overtook them. The
Corolla reached alongside a SUV. The Corolla cut the lane of the SUV Q: What penalty as a Judge would you impose on him?
leading the latter to swerve and fall into a canal. 4 men alighted the A: The judge should impose the penalty for homicide. The penalty for
Corolla and thereafter peppered the SUV with gunshots resulting to parricide under Art. 246 is reclusion perpetua to death whereas the
the death of the driver. A stray bullet hit a bystander identified as penalty for homicide under Art. 249 is reclusion temporal. Although
Bulanan. Further investigation showed that the accused Cabiedes was he committed parricide. You have to impose upon him the penalty
one of those men who participated in the killing of the driver of the which is lesser and that is reclusion temporal but in its maximum
SUV. period.
Q: What is the liability of the accused to the driver of the SUV? Under Art. 49, in case of Error in Personae or Mistake in the Identity,
A: As to the driver of the SUV, the accused is guilty of murder because when there is a variance between the intended crime and the actual
the killing was coupled by treachery. The accused ambushed the SUV crime committed, you have to compare the 2. Whichever has a lesser
giving the driver no chance to defend himself. penalty, that penalty has to be imposed.
Q: What is the liability of the accused to Bulanan? In the case the intended felony is homicide but the actual felony is
A: As to Bulanan, the accused is likewise guilty of murder. The Court parricide. Compare the penalty of the 2, although B should be
held that treachery is appreciated in aberration ictus applying the convicted of the crime of parricide, the penalty will be that of the
Flora doctrine. crime with a lesser penalty. That is reclusion temporal for homicide.
Example;
In the same problem, instead of the father coming to the rescue of B,
it was the friend of B who came to his rescue. So when A left, the
friend of B arrived and was the one stabbed by B and died. Therefore, A: YES. because no one could have foreseen that the mere act of
B killed his own best friend. The crime committed is homicide. elbowing the W, death would result. There was a notable disparity
between the means employed, the act of elbowing the W, and the
Q: What was B’s intended crime? resulting felony which is death or parricide. Therefore, he should be
A: B intended to commit homicide. given the benefit of mitigating circumstance.
Q: What crime did B actually commit? Garcia vs. People (G.R. No. 171951)
A: B actually committed homicide because he killed his own best Accused Garcia was having a karaoke with his friends late at night
friend. when deceased Chy requested the accused to quiet down. Thereafter,
accused vowed to kill Chy one day. On one instance, the accused saw
Q: What crime would you charge him of? the deceased in a sari-sari store. Suddenly, the accused hit the victim
A: B should be charged of Homicide because that was his actual crime. in the nape with a bottle of beer and thereafter mauled him. The
deceased was able to escape and called his wife to call for police.
Q: After trial on the merits what penalty will you impose? When his wife returned, the Chy was already lying in the floor lifeless.
A: The penalty to be imposed against B is the penalty for homicide Autopsy report concludes that Chy died from a heart attack brought
because there is no variance between the intended felony and the about by emotional stress. The accused was charged with the crime
felony actually committed. In this case, Error in Personae will not of homicide.
mitigate the liability of the offender. Art. 49 will not apply.
Q: Should the accused be convicted for the crime of homicide?
PRATER INTENTIONEM A: YES. His act of mauling him was the proximate cause of his heart
Praeter intentionem occurs when the consequence went beyond the attack. However, he was given the benefit of Praeter intentionem.
intention or when the injurious result is greater than that intended. Who would have anticipated that the mere act of mauling or boxing
him, death would result. Therefore, there was Praeter intentionem.
Praeter Intetionem is a situation wherein the offender directed the
blow at his actual victim, the victim received the blow. However, the People vs. Noel Sales (G.R. No. 177218).
injurious result is far greater than what is intended by the victim. The accused Noel Sales beat his sons because they went out of the
house for two days without permission. The accused tied one of his
Effect sons to a coconut tree and thereafter hit him with a thick piece of
Praeter Interionem it is always a mitigating circumstance because of wood. Thereafter, the son experienced a difficulty in breathing, and
Art. 13 of the Revised Penal Code; his eyes were moving up and down. The son collapsed, and died.
Autopsy report suggest that the son died. According to the accused,
The offender has no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that he cannot be held liable for parricide. He claimed that he has no
committed. intention to kill the child, he only intended to discipline his children.
However, since the victim died, death is considered a general criminal
Elements; intent which is presumed by law. Therefore, he should be held liable
1. That the offender committed a Felony; of parricide.
2. There must be a notable or notorious disparity between the
means employed by the offender and the result of the Q: Does the Proximate Cause Doctrine Apply?
felony; A: Yes. The father in beating the son with a thick piece of wood while
the child was tied on a coconut tree was already a felonious act.
For Praeter intentionem to be considered as a mitigating Therefore the father should be liable for the resulting felony although
circumstance, the prime element or requisite is that there must be a different from that which he intended.
notable disparity between the means employed by the offender and
the resulting felony. Q: Should the father be given the benefit of Praeter intentionem?
A: No. According to the SC, there was no notable disparity between
* Out of the means employed by the offender, no one could have the act of the father hitting the said son with a thick piece of wood
anticipated or foreseen that injurious result. while being tied on a coconut tree and the resulting felony which is
death. Considering the age of the child, such act of the father would
Example; produce and indeed produce the death of the child. Therefore it
H arrived home and asked W what was their dinner and the W cannot b said that there is no intention to commit so grave a wrong
answered that she has not yet cooked because she was watching as that committed.
teleserye. Since the H was so tired, he got mad and elbowed the W.
The W fell on floor and her head hit the edge of the table and so she IMPOSSIBLE CRIME DOCTRINE
suffered hemorrhage. Thereafter, she died. H said he had no intention Impossible Crime is committed by any person performing an act which
of killing his W, he only elbowed her. However, since death is the would be an offense against persons or property, were it not for the
result, it is a general criminal intent which is presumed by law. inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
Q: What crime should H be prosecuted?
A: H should be prosecuted for the crime of Parricide It is not really a crime in the legal sense of the word because a crime
requires a substantive change in the outside world. Here the act dis
Q: Should H be given the benefit of Praeter intentionem? not ripen into a crime. It was not accomplished into a crime because
of its inherent impossibility.
The offender is being punished because of his criminality and KINDS OF INHERENTLY IMPOSSIBILITY
dangerousness. So although objectively, no crime is committed, still According to jurisprudence, there are two kinds of inherent
the offender shall be punished that is why he is convicted only of impossibility;
Impossible Crime. 1. Legal Impossibility;
2. Physical Impossibility;
The penalty of IC is only arresto mayor or a fine of P200-P500
depending on the criminality or dangerousness of the offender. Legal Impossibility
There is legal impossibility when all the intended acts even if
Elements; committed would not have amounted to a crime.
For a person to be liable of Impossible Crime, the following requisites
must concur; Example;
1. That the act done would have been an offense against X saw his enemy Y lying on a bench. He went to Y and stabbed Y 10
persons or property; times not knowing that Y had already long been dead for 2 hours due
2. That the act was done with evil intent; to a heart attack. Even if X performed all the acts amounting to
3. That the act was not accomplished because of its inherent murder, still murder would not arise which is a crime against persons
impossibility or the employment of inadequate or because the victim is already deceased. He is no longer a person in
ineffectual means; the eyes of criminal law. Therefore there is Impossible Cime and what
4. That the act done should not constitute any other violation we have is legal impossibility.
of the Revised Penal Code;
Physical Impossibility
CRIMES AGAINST PERSON OR PROPERTY Physical or Factual Impossibility exist when an extraneous
Under the Revised Penal Code, crimes against person includes the circumstance unknown to the offender prevented the consignation of
following; the crime. Here, there are circumstances unknown to the offender,
1. Parricide; the inadequate control of the offender which prevented the
2. Murder; consignation of the crime.
3. Homicide;
4. Abortion; Example;
5. Infanticide; A person placed his hands inside the pocket of the polo of another,
6. Duel; intended to get the wallet of the said person but the pocket was
7. Physical injuries; empty. It is an IC. Extraneous Circumstances unknown to the offender
8. Rape; prevented the consignation of the crime. Unknown to him the wallet
was not inside his pocket. S it is an IC because it would have amounted
Under the Revised Penal Code, crimes against property include; to theft, a crime against property.
1. Robbery;
2. Brigandage; MUST NOT CONSTITUTE ANY OTHER VIOLATION OF THE REVISED
3. Theft; PENAL CODE
4. Usurpation or occupation of real property; It is necessary that the act done must not be a violation of any crime
5. Estafa or swindling; under the RPC otherwise that person would be held liable of that
6. Malicious mischief; crime and not of an Impossible crime.
7. Arson.
Intod vs. CA (G.R. No. 103119 October 21, 1992)
*Only crimes against persons and property would an IC Intod, accompanied by other men, wanted to kill Palampangan. Thus,
the accused peppered Palampangan’s room with bullets. However,
Example; the intended victim was not there. Only the son-in-law and children
H and W were lawfully married. During the subsistence of their were present but they were not hit. Intod and his company were
marriage, H caught W having sexual intercourse with another man. As charged with the crime of attempted murder up to the CA.
a result, H filed a complaint of adultery against W. As a defense, W
argued that she cannot be held liable for adultery because she was Q: Should Intod be convicted for attempted murder?
born a man and merely changed her sexual organ. A: NO. The Supreme Court held that an impossible crime was
committed. It was unknown to the offenders that the intended victim
Q: Is W liable for an impossible crime of adultery? was not at the scene of the crime. It could have amounted to a crime
A: NO. For a person to be held liable for impossible crime, the act against persons which is murder. But it was inherently impossible
committed would have been a crime against person or property were because the victim was not there.
it not for the inherent impossibility of the crime or the inadequate
and ineffective means employed. In this case, adultery is a crime This decision of the SC were criticized because under the 4th element,
against chastity. Thus, the first requisite of an impossible crime is the act must not constitute any other violation of the RPC. When this
absent. accused peppered the house of Palampangan with bullets, they did
peppered the house with bullets. So they said, they should be liable
INTENT with malicious mischief because damage was done to the house and
It is necessary that the offender in doing the act must be incited by an not IC. SC retained its decision that it is an IC and this case of Intod vs.
evil intent. CA was cited in the case of Jacinto vs. People.
Jacinto vs. People (G.R. No. 162540. July 13, 2009) of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous
A check which was supposed to be remitted was not remitted by the desistance.
offender to Megafoam. Instead the check was depositedto her own
account. Since the check was not remitted, Megafoam filed a case of 2 Phases in the Commission of the crime
qualified theft against the employee. She was convicted before the There are always 2 phases in the commission of the crime;
lower court up to the CA. 1. Subjective phase;
2. Objective phase;
Q: Should the accused be convicted of theft if the check she stole was
dishonored due to lack of funds? Subjective Phase
A: NO. The Supreme Court held that the crime committed was an The subjective phase is the portion in the commission of the act
Impossible Crime citing the case of Intod vs. CA. The act amounted to wherein the offender commences the commission of the crime after
qualified theft. However, unknown to the said offender the check was the time that he still has control over his acts.
not funded. Therefore, she was not able to get the face value of the
said check. Hence, physical circumstances unknown to the offender He may or may not proceed in the commission of the crime. He still
prevented the consummation of the crime. We have physical or has control over his acts
factual impossibility.
Objective Phase
Q: What about the fact that the check was taken and was not From the moment the offender loses control over his acts, it is already
remitted to Megafoam? in the objective phase of the commission of the crime.
A: According to the Supreme Court, theft has been defined under Art.
308 as the taking of a property with intent to gain the personal Stages in the Development of the Crime
property of another. Therefore it is necessary that the property taken The following are the stages in the development of a crime;
must have value because the taking must be with intent to gain. The 1. Internal Acts;
mere taking of a check without value would not amount to theft 2. External Act;
because the check without value is a worthless check. Hence, the SC
said that the crime committed is only an IC. Internal Acts
Internal acts are not punishable. Mere criminal thoughts will never
--xXx-- give rise to criminal liability. There must be an external act.
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which External Act
should be repressed but which are not covered by the law, and in External Act are acts which includes preparatory acts and acts of
cases of excessive penalties. — Whenever a court has knowledge of execution. As a rule, preparatory Acts are not yet punishable because
any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not they are not yet connected to a particular felony.
punishable by law, it shall render the proper decision, and shall
report to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, Example;
the reasons which induce the court to believe that said act should Conspiracy to commit a crime, proposal to commit a crime -> merely
be made the subject of legislation. preparatory acts. Hence, as a rule they are not punishable
In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief
Executive, through the Department of Justice, such statement as ACTS OF EXECUTION
may be deemed proper, without suspending the execution of the Acts of Execution is the actual act of committing the crime. We have
sentence, when a strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code 3 stages;
would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking 1. Attempted;
into consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused by the 2. Frustrated; and
offense. 3. Consummated;
There are no common law crimes in the Philippines. ATTEMPTED STAGE

There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission
--xXx-- of a felony directly or over acts, and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance.
— Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and
attempted, are punishable. The offender is still in the subjective phase, the offender has still
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary control over his acts, he may proceed in the commission of the crime
for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is or he may desist.
frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution
which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, The moment he desist on his own spontaneous desistance then he
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of will no longer be held criminally liable.
the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the Elements;
commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does not perform The following are the elements of attempted felony;
all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason 1. The offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt act;
2. That he does not perform all acts of execution that would Baleros vs. People (G.R. No. 138033, February 22, 2006)
have produced the felony; The woman was awakened by a man pressing a cloth soaked with
3. That his act was not stopped by his own spontaneous chemical on her face. The man was on top of her, she struggled, she
desistance; was able to kick the man, the man jumped out of the window. She
4. That he was not able to perform all acts of execution by called on the guard and then everyone came up to her. The case filed
reason of some cause or accident other than his own against the man was attempted rape. The man was convicted up to
spontaneous desistance; the CA of attempted rape.
Overt Act Q: Was there attempted rape?

Overt Act refers to any external act which if allowed to continue will A: NO. The Supreme Court held that the overt act of pressing a cloth
naturally and logically ripen into a crime. soaked with chemical on the face of a woman is not an overt act
directly connected to rape. The obvious intent was to make the
What the law requires is that the overt act must be directly connected woman unconscious but once the woman is made unconscious, the
to the intended felony. The offender commences the commission of man may rape, may touch the private parts of the woman, or he may
the crime directly by overt act. injure the woman, or may rob the property of the woman. Therefore
he cannot be held liable for attempted rape.
Directly By Overt Acts
Directly by Overt Acts means that the Overt Acts performed by the When the overt act of a person is ambiguous in so far as the intended
offender must be directly connected to the intended felony. felony is committed, what we have is an attempt to commit an
indeterminate offense which is a juridical standpoint insofar as the
The attempted felony that is punished by law is one which is directly RPC is concerned
connected to the overt act performed by the offender although he has
admitted the crime. Indeterminate Offense
In indeterminate offense, the overt act of a person in relation to the
Example; intended felony is ambiguous. It is necessary that the overt act must
X won the lottery. X put the lottery money in a safe in his house. Y be necessarily connected to the felony. Only then he will be punished
wanted to steal the lottery money in X’s house. On that night, Y went of the said attempted felony.
to the house of X. In order to enter the house, Y removed the jalousies
of the window of X’s house. When Y was about to enter the house of Rivera vs. People (G.R. No. 166326, January 25, 2006)
X, a barangay tanod saw Y. Thereafter, Y was apprehended by the The victim was mauled, hit with hollow blocks, Rivera brothers were
barangay tanod before he could enter X’s house. Y was charged with able to pin him down on the ground. Suddenly there was the siren of
attempted robbery. the police, so the Rivera brothers fled. The medical certificate showed
that the victim only suffered superficial injuries, only slight physical
Q: Should X be convicted of attempted robbery? injuries, yet they were charged of attempted murder.
A: NO. The act of Y in removing the jalousie window of X is not directly
connected to the act of robbery. The act of removing the jalousies of Q: What is the criminal liability of the Rivera brother, if any?
the window will not necessarily ripen in to the crime of robbery A: The Rivera Brothers are liable for attempted murder. The first
because once inside, Y may rape, may kill, may rob, etc. element was present, they boxed the victim, they mauled him, their
intention was to kill him. Second, they were not able to perform all
Q: What is the liability of X, if any? acts of execution because of the arrival of the police. Therefore, the
A: X is liable only for attempted trespass to dwelling. Removing the non-consummation of the crime was because of a cause or accident
jalousie of the window is an overt act directly connected to trespass other than the accused's own spontaneous desistance.
to dwelling. It will necessarily ripen into the crime of trespass to
dwelling. However, because the barangay tanod apprehended Y Q: Why attempted murder? Why not slight physical injuries?
before he could enter the house of X, he did not perform all the acts A: Because there was intent to kill.
of execution by reason or some accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance. Determining Intent to Kill
The following are the factors to determine whether or not there is
Poeple vs. Lamahag (G.R. No. L-43530, August 3, 1935) intent to kill;
A person intending to rob a store made an opening on the wall of the 1. Evidence of motive;
store sufficient for his body to enter. His intention was to rob. Before 2. The nature and number of weapons used by the offender;
he could enter he was already apprehended. 3. The nature, number and location of the wounds inflicted on
the victim;
Q: Can he be liable of attempted robbery? 4. Manner of committing the crime;
A: NO. Because his OA of making an opening on the wall of the store 5. Acts and statements made by the offender before, during
is not an overt act directly connected to robbery. It is only an overt and after the commission of the crime;
act directly connected to trespassing. Hence, he can only be held
liable for attempted trespassing. Example;
X and Y were fighting. In the course of the fight, X pulled out a gun.
Although his intention was to commit robbery, once inside he may Upon seeing this, Y ran away from X. With intent to kill, X aimed the
rob, he may rape, he may kill, he may injure the owner of the store. gun towards Y and pulled the trigger. At the last minute, Y evaded the
Therefore, it is not an act directly connected to robbery. bullet.
Q: Is X liable for any crime? Example;

A: YES. The crime committed was attempted homicide or murder as X and Y are enemies. In one instance, X saw Y walking in the streets.
the case may be. Even if the victim was not hit, since the act of X took out his gun from his house with the purpose of killing Y. X
discharging the firearm was with intent to kill the victim, it was aimed the gun at Y. At that very moment, Y’s son ran towards Y. Upon
already in the attempted stage. Such act of firing the fire arm was seeing the son, X did not shoot Y.
already an OA directly connected to the act of homicide or murder as
the case may be. Q: What crime did X commit, if any?
A: Nothing. Although X commenced the commission of killing Y
Example; through overt acts, X did not perform all the acts of execution which
In the same problem, X aimed the gun towards Y and pulled the should produce the felony. Upon seeing the son of Y ran towards him,
trigger. Y was hit in the right shoulder. Y safely got away. Upon he voluntary and spontaneously desisted.
medical examination, the doctor said that Y’s wound will heal within
5 days. Attempted Felony v. Impossible Crime
ATTEMPTED FELONY IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Q: What crime was committed by X against Y? In attempted felony, the crime In impossible crime, the felony
A: X is liable for attempted homicide or murder as the case may be. may be accomplished; cannot be accomplishment;
The wound sustained was not fatal or not mortal. It requires another It is inherently impossible, or
It is not accomplished by
act for the crime to be consummated. No one would die by a non- the means employed is
spontaneous desistance;
mortal or non-fatal wound. inadequate or ineffective;
Example; Example;
A shot B with intent to kill. B was hit on a vital organ. So he sustained X and Y are enemies. In one instance, X saw Y outside his house.
a fatal, mortal wound. However, he survived due to immediate Angered, X took his gun out of his house. X took aim at Y and pulled
medical intervention. the trigger of the gun. However, the gun did not fire the shot. X pulled
the trigger again, yet no bullet came out. Upon inspection, X found
Q: What crime was committed by A against B? out that the gun was not loaded with bullets.
A: It is already frustrated homicide or murder as the case may be.
Q: What crime did X commit, if any?
People v. Labiaga (G.R. No. 02867, July 15, 2013) A: X is liable for an impossible crime. Had the gun been loaded with
Accused Labiaga was in the house of Gregorio Conde when suddenly bullets, X would have committed the crime of murder. However,
he shot Gregorio in the forearm. Gregorio shouted for help. One of because the gun had no bullets, it is inherently impossible to commit
his daughters, Judy Conde, came to his rescue. However, the accused the crime of murder in any circumstance.
shot Judy to the stomach. Accused was charged with murder and
frustrated murder. FRUSTRATED STAGE
There is frustrated felony when the offender performs all the acts of
Q: Whether or not the accused is guilty of frustrated murder against execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but
Gregorio Conde? which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
A: NO. Gregorio Conde failed to present prove that the wound he independent of the will of the perpetrator.
sustained was fatal. If the wound sustained by the victim is a not fatal
or not mortal, the crime is only in the attempted stage. The reason is Elements:
that it is only when the wound sustained is mortal or fatal that it can In the case of People v. Badriago (G.R. No. 183566, May 8, 2009) the
be said that the said offender has already performed all the acts of Supreme Court gave the elements of frustrated homicide;
execution which would produce the felony. However, the felony was 1. The offender performs all the acts of executions;
not produced by reason of a cause independent of his will that is the 2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a
immediate medical intervention. consequence;
3. Felony is not produced;
Example; 4. By reason of cause or accident other than the will of the
X and Y are enemies. In one instance, X saw Y outside his house. perpetrator;
Angered, X took his father’s gun. The gun was not used for a long time.
Thereafter, X took aim and, with intent to kill, pulled the trigger of the Example;
gun. However, the gun did not fire the shot. X pulled the trigger four A wanted to kill his own father to get his inheritance immediately and
times, yet no bullet came out. The gun was jammed. wanted to be rich. Went to drug store and bought poison. Before
going home, he went to the house of his friend and told his friend
Q: What is the liability of X, if any? "tonight I will be rich, I will be poisoning my father, I will be a
A: X is liable for homicide. The overt act of pointing the gun to Y is millionaire." After telling that to his friend, A ran to his house. Upon
directly connected to the crime of homicide. However, the gun reaching his house, he took the poison out of the plastic. Meanwhile,
jammed. X was prevented from performing all the acts of execution the friend went to the police and told plan of A to kill the father. The
by some reason or accident other than his own spontaneous friend and the police went to the house of A and the father. Upon
desistance. reaching the house, they saw A in the act of taking out the said poison
from the plastic bag. A was arrested.
Q: Is A liable of attempted parricide? A: The son is liable of physical injuries depending on the required
A: NO. He is not yet liable of attempted parricide. The act of buying medical intervention. 1-9 days slight physical injuries. 10-30 days less
poison, taking out of the plastic are only preparatory act. It is not yet serious physical injuries, more than 30 days serious physical injuries.
an overt act directly connected to parricide. He may use the poison
not really to kill the father, he may use it to kill insects or pests. NO FRSUTRATED THEFT
Therefore, he cannot be liable of attempted parricide. In the case of People vs. Valenzuela (G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
the Supreme Court held that there is no such thing as frustrated theft.
Example; Under Art. 308, theft is committed when the person takes the
A mixed the poison to the juice of the father and then he gave it to personal property of another with intent to gain without violence,
his father. The father was about to drink the juice with poison. force or intimidation upon persons or things without the consent of
However, since the father was clumsy, the glass fell from the hands the owner.
of the father.
Theft can admit only either an attempted and consummated stage
Q: Is A liable of attempted parricide? because the moment the offender gains possession of the personal
A: YES. He already liable. The moment he poured the poison in the property of another, unlawful taking is already committed.
juice of the father and he gave it to the father for him to drink, he
already performed an overt act directly connected to parricide. Even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the property and the
However, parricide was not consummated and he was not able to moment the unlawful taking is complete, theft is already
perform all the acts of execution by reason of an accident. It was consummated. Hence, there can be no instance of frustrated theft.
purely accidental because the father was clumsy and the glass slipped
from his hands. Example;
A woman went to Rustans and bought perfume. While she was sitting
Example; and the saleslady was taking the perfume in the counter, she saw a
In the same problem, after mixing the poison in the juice, he gave it new line of lipsticks on a glass shelf. She went there but it was locked.
to his father. The father was about to drink the juice with a poison Saw the key on the table and opened it, took one and slipped in inside
when A took pity on his father and had a change of heart. He her bag, closed the glass, placed the key back on the table. The
immediately grabbed the juice and threw it on the garden. saleslady arrived and gave her the perfume. She was about to leave
Rustans when suddenly this certain device detected and made a
Q: Is A liable of attempted parricide? sound, so the unpaid lipstick was discovered.
A: NO. He is not liable of attempted parricide. The act of mixing of the
poison with the juice is an overt act directly connected to parricide, Q: What crime was committed by the woman?
however, he was not able to perform all acts of execution by reason A: The woman committed consummated Theft. Even if she has not
of his own spontaneous desistance. Therefore, he is absolved of yet left Rustans, the moment she took the lipstick from the glass shelf,
criminal liability. Because for one to be liable in the attempted stage, taking is already complete, theft is already consummated.
the reason for the non-consummation of the crime must not be his
own spontaneous desistance. In the same problem, woman took a lipstick and slipped it inside her
bag. Suddenly she has a change of heart. She took the lipstick from
Example; her back and placed it back on the glass shelf and the closed the glass
In the same problem, A mixed the poison with a juice and gave it to and locked it.
his father. The father drank the juice and was poisoned. Suddenly, he
was already showing signs of being poisoned, he was chilling. Upon Q: Did the woman commit any crime?
seeing his father in that condition, A immediately administered an A: YES. She is already liable of consummated theft. The moment she
antidote to his father, after that he immediately rushed his father to took the lipstick from the glass shelf and placed it inside her bag,
the hospital. The father survived. The doctor said, were it not for the taking is already complete, therefore, theft is already consummated.
antidote given by the son, the father would have died. Her change of heart would not amount to desistance. Too late.
Desistance will only lie in the attempted stage but never in the
Q: Is the son liable of attempted parricide? consummated nor in the frustrated stage.
A: NO. The moment the father drank the juice, all the acts for the
performance of the crime has already been done. The offender has Q: What is the effect of returning back the lipstick?
already performed all acts of execution necessary to consummate the A: There will only be NO civil liability. She will not be made to pay the
crime. However, the crime was not consummated. lipstick because she returned it but nevertheless, she is already liable
for consummated theft because unlawful taking is already
Q: Is the son liable of frustrated parricide? committed.
A: NO. In frustrated parricide although the offender has already
performed all the acts of execution, the reason for the non- Example;
consummation of the crime must be a cause independent of his will. In the same case, the woman opened the glass shelf. She was about
The reason for the non-consummation of the crime is the own will of to take the lipstick when suddenly there was this hand placed on top
the son. Therefore, the son is not liable of frustrated homicide. of her hand before she could even get the lipstick. Unknown to her,
her acts were being seen on a CCTV camera and the head of the
Q: What is the liability of the son? administrative office immediately went to her upon seeing that she
was about to take the lipstick.
Q: Is the woman liable of any crime? Intent to have carnal

There is no intent to have
A: Yes. She is already liable of attempted theft. A note was posted on knowledge with the girl is
carnal knowledge of the girl;
the glass shelf saying, do not open, ask for assistance. The moment evident;
she opened it with use of the key, it shows her intent to gain. It is on
the attempted stage because she has not yet taken possession of the MATERIAL CRIMES
personal property of another. Material crimes are crimes which admits stages of attempted,
frustrated, and consummated.
NO FRUSTRATED RAPE
In the case of People v. Pareja (G.R. No. 188979, September 5, 2012) FORMAL CRIMES
the Supreme Court held that rape is consummated by the slightest Formal crimes are crimes which does not admit any stages. It only
penile penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female punishes a consummated stage.
organ. Without any showing of such penetration, there can be no
consummated rape; at most, it can only be attempted rape or acts of The following are considered formal crimes;
lasciviousness.” 1. Physical injuries;
2. Slander;
Example; 3. Adultery;
A woman was raped. She filed a case of rape against the man. In her
open court testimony, she said she was not sure if the penetration --xXx--
was complete. Likewise in the medical certificate it shows that her
hymen was not lacerated, it was intact. Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. — Light felonies
are punishable only when they have been consummated, with the
Q: Can the said man be liable of consummated rape? exception of those committed against person or property.
A: YES. According to the Supreme Court, rape does not admit of any
frustrated stage. Rape is consummated the moment the penis has The following are light felonies;
touched the lips or the labia of the pudendum of a woman's genitalia. 1. Slight Physical Injuries; (Art. 266)
It is not necessary that there is full or complete penetration nor a 2. Theft; (Art. 309, Par. 7 and 8)
hymenal laceration. The hymen may remain intact yet rape can be 3. Alteration of boundary marks; (Art. 313)
committed because what is required is the penis must touch lips or 4. Malicious Mischief; (Art. 328, par. 3, Art. 329, par. 3)
the labia. 5. Intriguing against honor;
People vs. Lizada (G.R. No. 143468-71, January 24, 2003) As a rule, light felonies are punishable only when they are on their
The man was still in his shorts. His penis has not yet even touch the consummated stage. Unless the crime is committed against person or
genitalia of the girl. He only touched the private parts of the girl. property
Q: How come the conviction was for attempted rape and not mere Q: Why are attempted and frustrated felonies not punishable?
acts of lasciviousness? A: Light felonies produces such light, such insignificant, moral and
A: The Supreme Court convicted the accused of attempted rape material injuries. If they are not consummated, the wrong done is so
taking into consideration the 3 other consummated rape that has slight that there is no need of providing a penalty at all.
been done by the stepfather on the daughter. Considering that in
these 3 former acts rape had been consummated, the obvious intent Q: What is the reason for the exception?
of the stepfather is to rape the girl. It just so happen that he saw the A: The commission of felonies against persons or property
son peeping and so he went out of the room. That is the reason given. presupposes in the offender moral depravity.
* If that is the reason given without the said facts that there has been --xXx--
consummated rape for the past 3 acts, it should only be acts of
lasciviousness or at least attempted rape if there in an intent to lie. In Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. —
the case, the stepfather was still in his shorts, the penis has not yet Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the
touched even the outer portion of a woman's genitalia. Absent the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor.
facts that there were 3 former consummated rape, it should only be A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
acts of lasciviousness. Because to amount to at least attempted stage, agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to
it is necessary that the penis must touch at least the outer portion to commit it.
show intent to lie. The man was still in his shorts, how can you know There is proposal when the person who has decided to
that there was intent to lie. It is only a different ruling because there commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or
were 3 previous consummated rape and the SC considered all these persons.
saying that the obvious intent of the stepfather was also to rape the
daughter. Conspiracy v. Proposal.
CONPIRACY PROPOSAL
Acts of Lasciviousness v. Attempted Rape A bilateral act – there must be
Unilateral act – only one
at least two persons who
ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS ATTEMPTED RAPE person who decide to commit
agreed to the commission of
a felony is sufficient;
the crime;
Likewise, the penis only
The penis only touched the
touched the outer portion of
outer portion of the vagina;
the vagina;
General Rule – not punishable as an act; Direct or Express Conspiracy

Exception – unless the law especially provides for their penalty; There is direct or express conspiracy when the offenders or
conspirators met, planned, agreed, decided to commit a crime. There
CONSPIRACY AS A CRIME is a preconceived plan prior to the commission of the crime.
If conspiracy or proposal to commit a crime are provided in penalties
by law, it is not necessary that there be an overt act committed. The For one to be criminally liable of direct or express conspiracy, the
mere act of conspiring or proposing will already give rise to a crime. following elements must be present;
1. There is a prior agreement or preconceived plan;
The following are conspiracies as a crime; 2. Presence at the time of the commission of the crime;
1. Conspiracy to commit treason;
2. Conspiracy to commit rebellion; Even if he is part of the agreement if at the time of the commission of
3. Conspiracy to commit sedition; the crime he failed to appear, such failure on his part to appear at the
4. Conspiracy to commit terrorism; (Special Penal Laws) scene of the crime would be construed by law as a desistance.
Therefore, even if he part of the agreement he will not be liable as a
It is not necessary that there be overt acts. They are punishable acts conspirator.
by themselves.
Example;
Example; A, B and C decided to kill X on a particular date and time. On the said
A, B, C, D, and E come to an agreement to take up arms and overthrow date and time, A and B arrived and killed X. However, C failed to
the government and stir public uprising. They already bought guns appear.
and other pieces of equipment. However, before they could execute
their plan, they were apprehended. Q: Is C liable for the death of X?
A: NO. Although C was part of the agreement, he cannot be held
Q: Are A, B, C, D, and E criminally liable? criminally liable as a conspirator for the crime of murder because he
A: YES. They were liable for the crime of conspiracy to commit failed to appear at the scene of the crime. His failure to appear is
rebellion. Even though they were not able to execute their plan, construed by law as a desistance on his part.
conspiring to overthrow the government is already a felony which
makes them criminally liable. Example;
In the same problem but all were present. A and B were about to kill
Example; X but C performed acts preventing A and B from committing the
A, B, C, D, and E come to an agreement to kidnap X and thereafter crime.
exchange him for ransom. However, before they could execute their
plan, all of them were arrested. Q: Is C criminally liable as a conspirator for the crime of murder?
A: NO. Since C performed acts trying to prevent A and B from
Q: Did A, B, C, D, and E incur criminal liability? committing the crime, he cannot be held criminally liable as a
A: NO. There is no crime of conspiracy to commit kidnapping for conspirator for the crime of murder in the said case.
ransom. A, B, C, D, and E di not incur criminal liability.
General Rule;
OVERT ACT IN FURTHERANCE OF THE CONSPIRACY Conspirators are liable only for the crime agreed upon. They are not
1. Active participation in the crime itself; liable for any crime which is not agreed upon.
2. Lending moral assistance to his co-conspirators by being
present at the commission of the crime; Exceptions;
3. Exerting moral ascendancy on the other co-conspirators; 1. When the other crime was committed in the presence of
the other conspirators and they did not perform acts to
CONSPIRACY AS A MEANS OF COMMITTING A CRIME prevent its commission;
If conspiracy is only a means of committing a crime it is not yet a 2. When the other crime committed was the natural
punishable act. The mere act of conspiring will make the offenders co- consequence of the crime agreed upon; and
conspirators but they are not yet punishable, they are not yet 3. When the resulting crime is a composite crime or a special
criminally liable. complex crime or a single indivisible complex crime;
Elements Example;
In the case of People v. Castillo (G.R. No. 132895, March 10, 2004) A, B and C decided to kill X. Went to the place where X will be passing
conspiracy is established by the presence of two factors; at night time. When they saw X, A B and C surrounded X and they all
1. Singularity of intent; stabbed X. When X was lying on the ground, A and B left. C remained
2. Unity in the execution of the unlawful objective; and took the valuables of X.
2 kinds of Conspiracy as a means of committing a crime Q: What is or are the criminal liabilities of A, B and C?
1. Direct or express conspiracy; A: A, B and C are all liable for the crime of murder as conspirators
2. Implied or Inferred Conspiracy; because it is the crime agreed upon. However, only C will be liable for
the crime of theft. A and B cannot be held liable for the crime of theft
because theft was not a crime agreed upon by all of them.
Also, theft was committed in the absence of A and B. There was no In People vs. Garchitorena (G.R. No. 131357, August 28, 2009), the
opportunity for A and B to stop C in theft. Therefore, only C will be Supreme Court held that direct proof is not necessary for one to
held liable for theft. become a conspirator because conspiracy can be proven from the
acts done or performed prior, during or subsequent to the
Example; commission of the crime.
In the same problem, C took the valuables of X in the presence of A
and B. While he was taking them, A said what about the cellphone, B Example;
what about the ring, here take it also. A, B and C alighted in the house of X, they were all armed with
armalites. They all went in front of the door. A knocked at the door.
Q: What is or are the criminal liabilities of A, B and C? When X opened the door, B fired at X. X fell on the floor. C kicked his
A: Although theft was not a crime agreed upon, all of them will be body inside and closed the door. All of them left still armed.
held liable of the crime of theft because although theft was not
agreed upon, it was committed in the presence of A and B and they Q: Are they all conspirators for the murder of X?
did not perform acts to prevent C from committing theft. A: YES. It is evident here that there is a pre conceived plan prior to the
commission of the crime. Although the only participation of A was to
Example; knock at the door and the only participation of C was to close the
A, B and C decided to injure X to teach him a lesson. When X arrived, door, it was obvious, there was a pre conceived plan. All of the,
they surrounded him, boxed, punched, hit X. While X was lying on the arrived at the same time armed with armalites. They went in front of
ground, seriously wounded, A inflicted a fatal wound by kicking the the door, one knocked, one fired, one closed the door, left together
neck of X. X died. still armed. All of these showed that there was a pre conceived plan
to kill X. As such they are all liable as conspirators regardless of the
Q: Who is liable for the death of X? quantity and quality of their participation.
A:All of them are criminally liable for the death of X. They all agreed
to injure X. That was their agreement. The death of X however was Implied or Inferred Conspiracy
the natural consequence of their agreement to injure X. Therefore, Implied or inferred conspiracy is deduced from the mode and manner
even if it is not their intended act, since it is the natural consequence of committing the crime, there is no pre-conceived plan but the
of the crime, they are all criminally liable for the death of X. offenders acted simultaneously in a synchronized and coordinated
manner, their acts complimenting one another towards a common
Example; criminal objective or design. T
A, B and C decided to rob the house of X. They went inside the house
of X. They have already taken the valuables. On their way out It may happen that the conspirators do not know each other. Since
however, C pushed a chair. The chair fell on floor and created a noise. the offenders acted in a synchronized and coordinated manner, a
The owner of the house was awakened and began shouting upon conspiracy was established instantly, impulsively, at the spur of the
seeing A, B and C. C shot the owner of the house. The owner died. moment.
Q: What is or are the criminal liabilities of A, B and C? Example;

A: The crime agreed upon was robbery. However, by reason or on the X was trying to stab Y. Y evaded all the blows. Z saw that X was having
occasion of robbery, homicide was committed. Therefore, the a hard time stabbing Y. Z was an enemy of Y. So Z went at the back of
resulting felony is a special complex crime. Y and held both hands of Y at the back and told X to stab Y which X
did.
Under Art. 294 it is robbery with homicide. Since the resulting felony
is a special complex crime, which cannot be separated from each Q: Was there conspiracy between Z and X?
other, all of them can be held criminally liable of the special complex A: YES. An implied conspiracy was established, instantly, impulsively,
crime of robbery with homicide. at the spur of the moment. There was no pre conceived plan but the
act of Z of holding the hands of Y is a direct and positive overt act
People vs. Carandang, Milan and Chua (G.R. No. 175926, July 6, 2011) showing that he has the same criminal design as That of X which is to
All of them were charged of 2 counts of murder and 1 count of kill Y.
frustrated murder. The only participation of Milan was to close the
door. It was only Carandang who shot the 3 police officers. Chua In case of implied conspiracy, for one to be considered as a
instructed Milan to finish the 3rd police officer and Milan followed conspirator, it is necessary that the offender have an active
him. participation in the commission of the crime.
Q: Is there conspiracy among the accused? Mere presence at the scene of the crime, mere approval, mere
A: YES. The Supreme Court held that although the participation of acquiescence, mere knowledge of the commission of the crime will
Milan was only to close the door, Chua was only to order Milan to not make one a conspirator absent any active participation. Because
shoot the 3rd police officer, such act of Chua showed that he the basis is on the acts performed by the offender. Unlike a
exercised moral ascendancy over Milan. Therefore, since what is preconceived plan there was a prior agreement, therefore mere
present here is a prior agreement to kill the police officers, mere presence or exercise of moral ascendancy will make one a
exercise of moral ascendancy will already make one a conspirator. It conspirator. In implied the conspiracy is established based on the acts
is not necessary that they actually participate in the execution of the performed. Therefore, if you do not perform an act, if you are merely
crime. Thus, all of them are held criminally liable. present then you cannot be held a conspirator.
Example; 2 KINDS OF MULTIPLE CONSPIRACY

X was trying to stab Y. When Z saw that X was stabbing Y he shouted There are two kinds of multiple conspiracy;
"sige tirahin mo pa, sa kaliwa sa kanan..." X kept on stabbing Y. 1. Wheel or Circle Conspiracy;
2. Chain Conspiracy;
Q: Was there conspiracy between Z and X?
A: NO. Absent any active participation, mere approval, mere Wheel or Circle Conspiracy
acquiescence, mere knowledge of the commission of the crime will Wheel or Circle Conspiracy exist when a single person or group of
not make one a conspirator in case of implied or inferred conspiracy. persons known as a hub, deals individually with another person or
group of persons known as the spokes.
PENALTY BETWEEN CONSPIRATORS
When conspiracy is established whether direct or express, implied or Chain Conspiracy
inferred, the act of one is the act of all. Therefore, all the perpetrators Chain Conspiracy usually involving the distribution of narcotics or
in the crime will have one and the same penalty. The same penalty other contraband, in which there is successive communication and
will be imposed regardless of the quantity and quality of the cooperation in much the same way as with legitimate business
participation. The moment conspiracy is established, it is immaterial operations between manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler
to determine who inflicted because all of them will have the same and retailer, and then retailer and consumer.
penalty.
In Fernan vs. People (G.R. No. 145927, August 24, 2007) The Supreme
If however, conspiracy is not established, the penalty will be Court held that what is present is a wheel or circle conspiracy. 4
individual in nature depending on the act that they performed. persons headed by the chief accountant acted as the hub. They
enticed all other 36 employees of the DPWH to be one with them in
Example; committing fraud against the government. They falsified LAA's and
X and Y were fighting. X punched Y so hard, he fell down. Thereafter, would negotiate it at a certain percentage, then one of them would
X pulled out a knife with intent to kill Y. However, instead of stabing compute the general voucher, funds then will be issued as if materials
Y, X stabbed the ground instead. Afterwards, X left. Not long after, X’s will be delivered for the construction. Fernan and Torevillas were civil
brother came out of nowhere and stabbed Y to death. engineers of the DPWH, they signed tally sheets, saying that there
were deliveries when in fact these were ghost deliveries. No actual
Q: Was there conspiracy between X and his brothers? deliveries of the materials.
A: NO. In the problem, there was no prior agreement between X and
his brothers. Furthermore, X already left when his brothers appeared CONSPIRACY IN SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
and repeatedly stabbed Y. Conspiracy may be appreciated in Special Penal Laws if the law
specifically provides therein.
Q: What is the criminal liability of X and his brothers?
A: X is guilty of physical injuries because he had no intent to kill Y. Morillo v. People (G.R. No. 189833, February 5, 2014)
However, X’s brothers being conspirators of each other, are equally Mayor Mitra was traversing a road in his starex when he encountered
guilty for themurder of Y. a check point. He was allowed to pass without undergoing a
checkpoint. Mayor Mitra was followed by an ambulance driven by
People vs. Bokingco (G.R. No. 187356, August 10, 2011) Morilla. Morilla was flagged down in the checkpoint and upon
Bokingco killed Pasyon inside the apartment. At the time that he was inspection, bags of shabu were found in his possession. Morilla said
killing, Reynante was inside the main house, he was asking the wife he is with Mayor Mitra. The police officers then pursued the vehicle
to open the vault of the pawnshop. After killing the husband, of Mayor Mitra and upon inspection, bags of shabu were found in the
Bokingco called Reynante and said "tara na, patay na siya!" They fled starex.
at the same time. They were both charged for the crime of murder.
Convicted both of murder in the CA. Q: Was there a conspiracy between Mayor Mitra and Morilla?
A: YES. The Supreme Court held that the accused Mitra and Morilla
Q: Was there conspiracy between Bokingco and Reynante? committed the crime of transportation of illegal substance through
A: NO. The Supreme Court held that there was no conspiracy between conspiracy. Morilla himself admitted that he was with Mayor Mitra.
Bokingco and Reynante in killing the husband. While one is killing the This admission was enough to establish conspiracy between them.
victim the other was trying to commit another crime. They did not act
in a synchronized and coordinated manner. There was no evidence Go Tan v. Tan (G.R. No. 168852, September 30, 2008)
that there was a pre conceived plan because one was committing Sharica and Steven were lawfully married. However, during their
another crime different from the other. marriage, Sharica filed a temporary protection order against Steven
and her in-laws. She argued that Steven and her in-laws were acting
They are one in escaping but not in the commission of the crime. Since in conspiracy in causing her physical and psychological abuse in
conspiracy was not established, the most that is established is that violation of R.A. 9262 known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and
they planned to commit 2 crimes simultaneously at the same time. Children Act. The in-laws argued that they are not proper party to the
But the charge was only murder, there was no charge for robbery. case because R.A. 9262 is filed only against the husband, boyfriend,
Therefore, Bokingco was convicted, Reynante was acquitted of the or intimate partner of the woman.
crime of murder. So absent any evidence of conspiracy, the liability is
individual. Q: Whether or not R.A. 9262 may be filed against the in-laws?
A: YES. R.A. 9262 allows suppletory application of the Revised Penal --xXx--
Code. Hence. The i-laws may likewise be charged of violation of R.A.
9262 if they acted in conspiracy with the husband or the man. Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not
incur any criminal liability:
--xXx-- 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights,
provided that the following circumstances concur;
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies. First. Unlawful aggression.
— Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, prevent or repel it.
in accordance with Art. 25 of this Code. Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
person defending himself.
Less Grave Felonies 2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or
which in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with adopted brothers or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same
the above-mentioned Article degrees and those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree,
provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next
Light Felonies preceding circumstance are present, and the further requisite, in
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which case the revocation was given by the person attacked, that the one
a penalty of arrest menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; making defense had no part therein.
is provided. 3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a
stranger, provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in
3 kinds of felonies according to severity the first circumstance of this Article are present and that the person
1. Grave felonies; defending be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil
2. Less grave felonies; motive.
3. Light felonies; 4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does
not act which causes damage to another, provided that the
--xXx-- following requisites are present;
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done
— Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under to avoid it;
special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. This Code Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful
shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should means of preventing it.
specially provide the contrary. 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty
or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.
Example; 6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order
What if a person convicted of a violation of a SPL? A issued a check to issued by a superior for some lawful purpose.
B for payment of an obligation. B deposited but the check bounced.
Notice of dishonor was sent. After the trial on the merits, A was found CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT THE LIABILITY OF THE OFFENDER
guilty of the violation of BP 22 beyond reasonable doubt. Fine and The following circumstances affects the criminal liability of the
payment of the value of the check. The court said in case of non offender;
payment of the fine, the said convict shall suffer subsidiary 1. Justifying circumstances; (Art. 11)
imprisonment. 2. Exempting circumstances; (Art. 12)
3. Mitigating Circumstances; (Art. 13)
Q: Can a person who violated a SPL and was imposed with fine be 4. Aggravating Circumstances; (Art. 14)
made to suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of non payment of
fine? JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES
A: YES. There is no provision in B.P. 22 prohibiting the application of Justifying circumstances are those where the acts of the actor are in
the Revised Penal Code, then the RPC shall apply suppletorily or accordance with the law, thus he incurs no criminal liability. Since
supplementarily to the provisions of Special Penal Law unless the there is no crime, there is no criminal and civil liability.
Special Penal Law provides otherwise.
Effect of Invoking Justifying Circumstance
Example of "unless" The moment the offender or the accused invokes any of the acts
Sec. 98 of RA 9165. It is expressly provided that the provisions of the amounting to justifying circumstance, he is in effect admitting the
RPC shall not apply to the violations RA 9165 or the 2002 commission of the crime. But he wanted to evade criminal liability by
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act. The law uses the word shall. invoking justifying circumstances.
Exception; Example;
If the offender is a minor. In that case if the minor is penalized with A killed B. A case of homicide was filed against A. A pleaded not guilty
life imprisonment to death, it will be considered as reclusion perpetua during the arraignment. During the pre-trial, the counsel of A invoked
to death and the nomenclature of the penalties in the RPC will now self-defense. The moment the counsel said that their defense is self-
be applied defense, a kind of justifying circumstance, the procedure in trial
would be inverted.
Inverted Trial Imminent unlawful aggression means an attack that is impending or

As a rule it is the prosecution that must first present evidence, it is at the point of happening; it must not consist in a mere threatening
only after the prosecution has presented evidence that the defense attitude, nor must it be merely imaginary, but must be offensive and
would present evidence. positively strong
If however the defense invoke any of the justifying circumstances, the Test for unlawful aggression
trial will be inverted. It is the defense that must first present evidence. In the same case of People v. Dulin, the Supreme Court held that that
Because he in effect admits the commission of the crime. He only the test for unlawful aggression under the circumstance is whether
wanted to avoid liability by saying that his act was justifying. the aggression from the victim put in real peril the life or personal
safety of the person defending himself. The peril must not be an
Burden to Prove Justifying Circumstance imaginary threat.
Therefore the burden of evidence is upon the defense to prove all the
elements, all the requisites of the justifying circumstance that he is Example;
invoking. X was walking along the street. Suddenly, Y went up to him. Y pointed
a gun towards X. Y commanded X to give him his wallet, watch, and
If the defense failed to prove the evidence or requisites of justifying cellphone otherwise he will stab him. X gave his cellphone and his
circumstance that he is invoking, that will amount to conviction wallet. When X was about to give his watch, he suddenly grabbed the
because he already admitted to the commission of the crime. gun from Y. Now with the possession of the gun, X ordered Y to give
him back his cellphone and wallet. Instead of giving X back his
SELF-DEFENSE belongings, Y ran away. Thereafter, X fired a shot against Y, hitting Y
Self-defense is not limited to one’s life. The following is the scope of in his knee. Unable to run, X approached Y and thereafter took his
self-defense; belongings. X left. Thereafter, X was charged with physical injury. X
1. Defense of life; argued self-defense.
2. Defense of honor or chastity;
3. Defense of property provided that it is coupled with an Q: Is X liable for physical injury
attack on the person entrusted with the said property; A: NO. Although X already gained possession of the gun, the unlawful
aggression did not cease. The unlawful aggression continued because
Elements of Self-defense Y still had the property of X. Had X not shot Y in the knee, Y would
The following are the elements of self-defense; have gotten away with the property of X.
1. Unlawful Aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or REASONABLE NECESSITY OF THE MEANS EMPLOYED TO PREVENT OR
repel it; REPEL IT.
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person When you say reasonable necessity, what the law requires is rational
defending himself; equality or rational equivalence as determined by the emergency.
Rational is the means employed. Rationally necessary to prevent or
UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION repel it.
Unlawful Aggression is an attack with physical force or with a weapon
as to cause injury or danger to life or personal safety. Unlawful Reasonable necessity does not necessarily mean that when the
aggression must come from the victim. aggressor makes use of a bolo, the person defending must also make
use of a bolo.
Unlawful aggression I the primordial requisite which must at all times
be present. When unlawful aggression is absent, there is no self- Factors of Reasonable Necessity
defense whether complete or incomplete. Factors to be considered in order to be said that the means employed
is rationally necessary are the following;
Elements of unlawful aggression 1. Nature and the number of the weapon used by the
In the case of People v. Dulin (G.R. No. 171284, June 29, 2015), the aggressor;
Supreme Court provided the elements of unlawful aggression; 2. Physical condition, size, weight and other personal
1. There must be physical or material attack or assault; circumstances of the aggressor versus that of the person
2. The attack or assault must be actual or at least imminent; defending himself;
3. The attack or assault must be unlawful; 3. Place and location of the assault;
Kinds of Unlawful Aggression All of these would determine if the means employed of the person
In the case of People v. Fontanilla (G.R. No. 177743, January 25, 2012), defending himself is reasonably necessary to prevent or repel the
the Supreme Court held that there are two kinds of unlawful aggression.
aggression;
1. Actual or Material Unlawful Aggression; LACK OF SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION
2. Imminent Unlawful Aggression; There must be lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself.
Actual or material unlawful Aggression means an attack with physical
force or with a weapon, an offensive act that positively determines Provocation
the intent of the aggressor to cause the injury. Provocation refers to any immoral act or conduct, unjustified act or
conduct which stirs a person to do wrong.
Sufficient Provocation A: NO. There was no self-defense. The unlawful aggression already
Sufficient Provocation refers to an act which is adequate to stir a ceased to exist because the sexual congress was already finished.
person to do the wrongful act and when it is proportionate to the There was no more honor to protect.
gravity of the act.
Q: If you were the judge, would you convict or acquit the accused?
No Sufficient Provocation A: YES, I would convict the accused for the crime of homicide, but I
The following circumstances show that there is no sufficient will give the said victim the mitigating circumstances of immediate
provocation on the part of the person defending himself; vindication of a grave offense and sudden impulse of passion and
1. When no provocation at all was given; obfuscation. This to lower the imposable penalty.
2. When although provocation was given, it was not sufficient;
3. When although the provocation was sufficient, it did come Example;
from the person defending himself; and A tried to stab B. B evaded the blow. In the course of said struggle, B
4. Although provocation came from the person defending gained possession of the bolo or gun and fired at A. A died.
himself, it is not immediate or imminent to the aggression;
Q: Was there self-defense?
Example; A: NO. Even if the unlawful aggression was started by A, the moment
A saw his enemy B. B was fast approaching to A with a gun on his B gained possession of the bolo or gun, the unlawful aggression has
hand. Upon seeing that B was about 10 feet away, A immediately already ceased to exist. There was no more danger on the life of B. so
pulled out his balisong and he spin B who was hit on the neck and when B fired, it was not an act of retaliation which is justifying
died. circumstance.
Q: Was there unlawful aggression? Example;

A: NO. There was no unlawful aggression. The mere act of holding a A woman was on her way home. Suddenly a man appeared, boxed
gun will not constitute imminent and immediate danger on the life of her, dragged her on a portion of a vacant lot, boxed her again, pinned
the person unless the said gun is aimed at the said person. Same with her down, undressed her. When the man stood up to undressed
bolo or any weapon. If it is just being held by a person, it will not yet himself, the woman took the moment to get the balisong in her bag.
produce any imminent or immediate danger. When the man placed himself on top of the woman, the woman
stabbed the man. The man died. Prosecuted for homicide. The
For a bolo to produce imminent and immediate danger, it must be woman invoked self-defense particularly defense of one’s honor and
held in a hacking position. Only then that it will produce unlawful chastity.
aggression.
Q: Is there self-defense?
In the example, B was only walking with a gun on his hand and it was A: YES. There was unlawful aggression since the man boxed the
not yet pointed or aimed to the offender. Therefore, there was no woman, dragged her, undressed her, pinned her down. This is
unlawful aggression. Therefore, A should be convicted of homicide. unlawful aggression sufficient to mean that she would be raped. 2nd,
Self-defense would not lie in his favor. it is reasonably necessary for the woman to make use of the balisong
because although the said man has no arms, you must take into
People v. Regalario (G.R. No. 174483, March 31, 2009) consideration of the personal circumstances of the woman versus
The offended party or the victim, Roland shot allegedly the barangay that of the man, the physical circumstances. Likewise, you must take
official Ramon. Ramon hit the back of the head of Roland with an ice into consideration the place and the occasion. It was 3 o'clock in the
pick and continued hitting him so he would not gain balance. When morning, nobody could give help to the woman. The only means she
the accused hit the victim whatever inceptive unlawful aggression has could do to help herself and prevent the act of rape would be to stab
been started by the victim, it has already ceased to exist. Therefore, the man. Lastly, there was lack sufficient provocation because the
the accused has no more right to wound or kill the victim. woman was merely walking on her way home. Absolutely there was
no sufficient provocation coming from the woman. Therefore, the
The Supreme Court held that the moment the inceptive unlawful woman was justified in killing the man. She acted in self-defense.
aggression cease to exist, the person defending himself must not kill
or wound the aggressor. Retaliation is not a justifying circumstance. Example;
When the father went home, his son was crying. When he was asked
Example; by his father why he was crying, he said he was slapped by the
W and H are husband and wife. One early morning, the husband left neighbor. When he was asked why he was slapped, the son did not
the house to go fishing. N, the neighbor, upon seeing that the answer. The father decided to inquire from the neighbor why he
husband left, snuck into the house of H and W. N proceeded to the slapped his son. Such inquiry angered the neighbor. The neighbor
bedroom and found W still sleeping. N proceeded to have carnal who was at that time was gardening tried to hit the father with a rake
knowledge of W. Thinking that it was the husband, W allowed N to that he was using for gardening. The first blow and the second blow
finish. When N finished, he dressedhimself up and he told the W, were evaded. The neighbor tried to hit again the father for the third
"salamat! ". Upon hearing the voice, the W realized that he is not the time, the father saw a pointed stick on the ground, took it and
husband. W immediately jumped out of the bed, took the bolo and stabbed the neighbor. The neighbor suffered a fatal wound, brought
hacked N. N died. W was prosecuted for homicide. She invoked self- to the hospital and survived. The father was prosecuted for frustrated
defense, particularly defense of honor and chastity. homicide. He invoked self-defense.
Q: Was there self-defense?

Q: may the father invoke self-defense in order to be exempt from the brothers and sisters, or relative by affinity within the same degree.
criminal liability frustrated homicide? Although C is the first cousin of W and thus related to H by affinity, C
A: YES. There was unlawful aggression because the neighbor tried to is not of the same degree mentioned by the provision. C is neither the
hit him with a rake 3 times. There was an image of danger from his ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or
life. 2nd, the means was reasonable and necessary because tThe sister of W. Thus, the defense of relative is untenable.
father went to the house of the neighbor without any arms and at the
time he was attacked, he just saw a pointed stick. That is the only Q: Are there other defenses which H can use?
means that he could avail at the moment to protect himself. Lastly, A: YES. Although, C is not of the same degree as that mentioned by
there was lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the father. The law, H can still argue defense of a stranger since C in this case is a
act of the father inquiring from the neighbor why he slapped his son stranger.
was an act within his right. It cannot be considered as sufficient
provocation. It is the right of the father to know why his son was hurt DEFENSE OF A STRANGER
or injured by the neighbor. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger,
provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first
Toledo vs. People (G.R. No. 158057, September 24, 2004) circumstance of this Article are present and that the person defending
The Supreme Court held that there is no such thing as accidental self- be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
defense. You cannot invoke self-defense and accident at the same
time. Because in self-defense it is direct and positive overt act in the Elements
name of self-preservation. The offender killed the victim so as to The following are the elements of defense of a stranger;
preserve his own life. It is direct and positive. It cannot be done out 1. Unlawful aggression;
of accident imminence. Therefore, it is inconsistent with accident. 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel the attack;
Stand Ground When in the Right 3. The person defending be not induced by revenge,
The reason behind self-defense stand ground when in the right. Stand resentment, or motive;
ground in the right means that where the said accused is where he
should be and his assailant is fast approaching, the law does not The 3rd element requires that the said offender must be disinterested
require him to retreat because the moment he retreats he runs the and not induced by any other motive, otherwise, defense of a
risk of being stabbed at the back. stranger will not lie.
DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE Example;

Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, What if one night, A and B were on board a jeepney. Said jeepney was
ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers flagged down by X. Upon reaching a dark portion of the street, X
or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those pulled a balisong and declared a hold-up. X poked A with his balisong
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and said “give me your cellphone”. A did not want to give her
and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance cellphone to X. X was about to stab A when B, upon seeing that the
are present, and the further requisite, in case the revocation was latter was about to stab B, immediately kicked X out of the jeepney.
given by the person attacked, that the one making defense had no X, who fell from the jeepney suffered physical injuries. B was
part therein. prosecuted for serious physical injuries. B invoked defense of a
stranger.
Elements
The following are the elements of defense of a relative; Q: Is B be criminally liable for serious physical injuries?
1. Unlawful aggression; A: NO. The elements of defense of a stranger is present. 1st, there was
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or unlawful aggression because X was about to stab A because A did not
repel it; want to give her Cellphone. 2nd, there was reasonable necessity of the
3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, means employed because B was unarmed. All that he did was he
the one making the defense had no part therein; kicked X out of the jeepney. It was necessary for him to do said act in
order for him to prevent the aggression. Lastly, in the problem, there
Even if the relative, who was defended by the offender, was the one was no showing that B knows X, so it cannot be said that B is induced
provoked the offended party, the offender should took no part in the by any motive.
provocation in said situation so as to justify the defense of a relative.
STATE OF NECESSITY
Example; As a rule, it is noted that justifying circumstances are exempt from
H and W are husband and wife. C is the first cousin of W. In one criminal as well as civil liability. However, this paragraph of Article 11
instance, H saw C arguing with D. During that argument, D was about is an exception when it comes to civil liability. Although he is not
to stab C. Thereafter, H immediately grabbed a stone and approached criminally liable, he is civilly liable;
D. H hit D with a stone. D sustained a fatal wound however he
survived. H was charged with frustrated homicide. H argues defense Civil liability is born not only by the accused, but all those people who
of relative. benefitted in this state of emergence. Under Art. 101 of the RPC, “In
cases falling within subdivision 4 of Art 11, the persons for whose
Q: is H’s argument of defense of relative tenable? benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in
A: NO. The law says that a person may defend the person or rights of proportion to the benefit which they may have received.
his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, or adopted
Elements It is important to note that the injury is the necessary consequence of

The following are the elements of state of necessity; the lawful exercise of duty.
1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED BY A SUPERIOR FOR SOME
3. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of LAWFUL PURPOSE.
preventing it; Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for
some lawful purpose.
Example;
A pregnant woman met an accident. She was immediately brought to Elements
the hospital. Because of the said dire situation, the doctor who was in The following are the elements;
charge of the pregnant woman has to make a decision, that is to save 1. An order has been issued by a superior;
only one life, either the life of the woman or the baby that she is 2. Such order must be for some lawful purpose;
carrying. The doctor chose to save the life of the woman. Because of 3. Means used by the subordinate to carry out said order is
that, the fetus died. Prosecuted for abortion, the doctor invoked the lawful;
doctrine of state of necessity.
Example;
Q: Is the doctor liable for abortion? What if a warrant of arrest was issued by the court against X. The chief
A: NO. The elements of state of necessity are all present. The evil of police handed the warrant to a group of police and instructed them
sought to be avoided actually exist because the life of the baby and to arrest X, and if X would refuse to be arrested, they can immobilize
the mother is in danger. 2nd, The injury (death of the pregnant X. So the group headed by Police Officer Y received an information
woman) is greater than that of the death of the fetus. Lastly, there that X lived in a certain province. Police Officer Y, together with his
was no other less practical or harmful means of preventing it. The group went to said province and was able to verify that X actually lived
situation was an emergency. The woman had no relatives with her so there. Police Officer Y thereafter went to the location of X. Police
the doctor has to decide immediately—either to save the life of the Officer Y, upon seeing X who was at that time was cultivating the soil,
mother or the fetus. Therefore the doctor should be absolved from immediately fired at X. Thereafter, X dies. Prosecuted for murder,
criminal liability. Police Officer Y invoked two justifying circumstances: lawful duty and
acted in obedience to a lawful order.
Example;
What if on a taxi a family was on board. Said taxi was traversing ESDA Q: Can police officer Y invoke the justifying circumstance of lawful
during night time. Suddenly, without any warning, a truck appeared exercise of duty?
in front of him. If he would go forward, he would be hitting the buses. A: NO. Although the accused acted in the performance of his duty by
If he swerved to the right, he would be hitting bystanders. If he obeying the orders of his officer to arrest X by the chief of police by
swerved to the left, he would hit a store. So the taxi driver chose to virtue of the warrant of arrest issued by the court, the injury
swerve to the left, hit the store thereby causing damage. Prosecuted committed was not the necessary consequence of the due
for reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property, the taxi performance of such right because at that time, X was just cultivating
driver invoked the 4th justifying circumstances. his soil.
Q: Is the taxi criminally liable for reckless imprudence resulting to Q: Can the accused use the defense of obedience to a lawful order?
damage to property? A: NO. Although there was a lawful order by his superior to was arrest
A: NO. The elements are all present. 1st, the evil sought to be avoided and immobilize X if he refuses to be arrested and the purpose was
actually exist because there was a collision. 2nd, the injury feared lawful, the means employed by Police Officer Y, where his order was
(death) was greater than that done. Lastly, there was no other arrest and in case of resistance is to immobilize X was not performed.
practical and less harmful means of preventing it. Aside from these 3 X was merely cultivating his soil and was not resisting arrest at that
requisites stated by the law, it should be added that the necessity time.
must not be due to the negligence or violation of the law by the actor.
In this case, there was a warning to the taxi driver not to enter the Example;
street, yet he proceeded. It is through his negligence that caused the X was convicted by final judgment for the crime of homicide. When
state of necessity, therefore he is criminally and civilly liable. X was about to be transferred to a maximum security prison, he
suddenly escaped. Police officer Y was ordered by the jail warden to
FULFILMENT OF A DUTY OR IN A LAWFUL EXERCISE OF A RIGHT OR retrieve X. Y thereafter pursued X. Knowing that he was being
OFFICE pursued, X went to a market and grabbed a 5 year old child as
Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful hostage. X pointed a knife towards the neck of the child, and he told
exercise of a right or office. Y not to pursue him, otherwise he will kill the child. However the child
cried. The crying child started to annoy X to the point that he was
Elements: about to kill the child. However, sensing that X was about to stab the
The following are the elements of fulfillment of a duty or in a lawful child. X fired a shot towards X. X suffered a mortal wound and
exercise of office; thereafter died. Y was charged with homicide.
1. Accused acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful
exercise of a right or office; Q: What defenses can Y utilize?
2. Injury caused or offense committed be the necessary A: Y can make us of the justifying circumstance of performance of
consequence of the due performance of duty or the lawful fulfillment of a duty or in a lawful exercise of office. As a police officer,
exercise of such right or office; Y acted in the performance of his duty in pursing X, an escaped
convict. Likewise, the injury caused to X was the necessary On the other hand, the battered woman also tries to convince herself
consequence of the fulfillment of Y’s duties, otherwise X will kill the that the battery will never happen again; that her partner will change
child. Y can also use the justifying circumstance of defense of for the better; and that this good, gentle and caring man is the real
stranger. person whom she loves.
BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME No Criminal Liability and Civil Liability

Battered Woman Syndrome refers to a scientifically defined pattern Battered Woman Syndrome is akin to akin to justifying. It is even
of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in better that self-defense because in self-defense, you have to prove
battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse. that the elements are present. However, in battered woman
syndrome, what should be proven is that the wife is suffering from
Battered Woman battered woman syndrome. It is through the expert testimony of the
Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (R.A. psychiatrist who will prove that the wife is suffering from battered
9262) defines battered woman as a battered woman has been woman syndrome. If this is proven, she is absolved from criminal and
defined as a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful civil liability.
physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to --xXx--
do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights.
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal
Battered women include wives or women in any form of intimate liability. — the following are exempt from criminal liability:
relationship with men. Furthermore, in order to be classified as a 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has
battered woman, the couple must go through the battering cycle at acted during a lucid interval.
least twice. When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an
act which the law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order
Cycle of violence his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established for
In the case of People v. Genosa (G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004) persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to leave
the Supreme Court held that the battered woman syndrome is without first obtaining the permission of the same court.
characterized by the so-called cycle of violence, which has three 2. A person under nine years of age.
phases; 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen,
1. The tension-building phase; unless he has acted with discernment, in which case, such minor
2. The acute battering incident; and shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art.
3. The tranquil, loving (or, at least, nonviolent) phase; 80 of this Code.
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally
Tension Building Phase irresponsible, the court, in conformably with the provisions of this
During the tension-building phase, minor battering occurs -- it could and the preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and
be verbal or slight physical abuse or another form of hostile behavior. custody of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and
The woman usually tries to pacify the batterer through a show of kind, education otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of some
nurturing behavior; or by simply staying out of his way. institution or person mentioned in said Article 80.
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with
All the woman wants is to prevent the escalation of the violence due care, causes an injury by mere accident without fault or
exhibited by the batterer. This wish, however, proves to be double- intention of causing it.
edged, because her placatory and passive behavior legitimizes his 5. Any person who act under the compulsion of
belief that he has the right to abuse her in the first place. irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an
Acute Battering Incident uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
The acute battering incident is said to be characterized by brutality, 7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by
destructiveness and, sometimes, death. At this stage, the woman has law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.
a sense of detachment from the attack and the terrible pain, although
she may later clearly remember every detail. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE
Exempting Circumstance are those grounds for exemption from
Her apparent passivity in the face of acute violence may be punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime any of
rationalized thus: the batterer is almost always much stronger the conditions which makes the act voluntary or negligent.
physically, and she knows from her past painful experience that it is
futile to fight back. Acute battering incidents are often very savage INSANITY AND IMBECILITY
and out of control, such that innocent bystanders or intervenors are In this paragraph there are two exempting circumstances;
likely to get hurt. 1. Imbecility;
2. Insanity;
Tranquil or Loving Phase
During this tranquil period, the couple experience profound relief. On Just like exempting circumstance, imbecility and insanity are both
the one hand, the batterer may show a tender and nurturing behavior admission and avoidance. In effect, invoking insanity and imbecility is
towards his partner. He knows that he has been viciously cruel and tantamount to admitting the crime. But in order to avoid criminal
tries to make up for it, begging for her forgiveness and promising liability, he invokes that he is either insane or imbecile
never to beat her again.
Imbecile Criminal Liability

An imbecile is one who is already advanced in age but only have a R.A. 9344, if a child committed a felony when he is 15 or below, he is
thinking of a child between 2 and 7. There is no intelligence, an exempted from criminal liability. If he is over 15 but below 18, but he
element of voluntariness. did not act with discernment, he is exempted from criminal liability. If
he is over 15 but below 18 and he acted with discernment, he is not
Imbecility is exempting under any circumstance. exempted from criminal liability and he will be prosecuted just like
any other criminal.
Insanity
Insanity refers to the mental aberrational background or disease of So, if the offender is 16, therefore he is over 15 but below 18, and he
the mind and must completely impair the intelligence of the accused. committed a crime and acted with discernment. During the trial, it
was established and proven that he is guilty beyond reasonable
Insanity is not exempting under any circumstance. If it can be shown doubt. There is already a pronouncement of a judgment of civil
that he committed the crime in lucid interval, he is liable. liability.
Presumption of Sanity Suspension of Sentence

In your civil code, it is presumed that the person is sane. Therefore the Under Sec. 38 of R.A. 9344, once the child who is under 18 years of
burden of evidence is on the defense. Therefore, all the accused has age at the time of the commission of the crime was found guilty of
to do is to prove that he was insane when he committed the crime. the offense charged the court shall determine and ascertain any civil
liability which may have resulted from the offense committed.
Example; However, instead of pronouncing the judgment of conviction, the
A killed B and stabbed him many times. A was prosecuted for murder. court shall place the child in conflict with the law under suspended
The defense tried to prove that was he was insane. To prove insanity, sentence, without need of application. Provided however, that the
the defense presented the father of A, who testified that his son suspension of the sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is
would go out of their home naked and thereafter return. Second, his already 18 years of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of
son was in and out of the mental institution. Third, his son would steal his guilt. Therefore, as long as he is 18 years and below at the time of
the jewelries of his mother and would sell it at an extreme low price. the commission of the crime, even if he is above 18 at the
These were the evidence presented by the defense. promulgation of the judgment, he can still benefit from the
suspended sentence.
Q: Can the son be acquitted because of insanity?
A: NO. The father’s testimony, instead of proving that A was insane, Under Section 40 of R.A. 9344, if a child is under suspended sentence,
established otherwise. First, an insane person would not know where the court shall decide to discharge or to extend the sentence for a
his house is. Second, A was in and out of the mental institution. Third, specific period of time or until the child attains the maximum age of
an insane person would not know that a thing has a value (considering 21. Although there is automatic suspension, it is tempered by Section
the evidence that the son sold the jewelries of the mother at a low 40. Therefore, the maximum limit is 21 years old.
price)
People v. Sarcia (G.R. No. 169641, September 10, 2009)
Example; The accused was convicted of statutory rape. In this case, the SC ruled
A killed B. A stated that a week prior to the killing, he could not sleep that the law should be given a retroactive application. Section 36 of
and there was a voice that kept nagging him, “Kill B, kill B.” And so he the act provided that persons who have been convicted and are
killed B, so he followed the voice. He pleaded guilty but his defense serving sentence at the time of the effectivity of the act and who were
was insanity. below 18 at the time of the commission of the offense for which they
were convicted and are serving sentence shall be given a retroactive
Q: Will A be acquitted due to insanity? application of the act.
A: NO. In the case of People v. Antonio (G.R. No. 14426, November 27,
2002) the Supreme Court held that mere mental disturbance, mere The SC also ruled that although the crime committed is a heinous
craziness is not the insanity contemplated by the law. It is the insanity crime, the accused can still be given a suspension of the sentence.
which would deprive the offender the capacity to distinguish right Section 38 does not distinguish the nature of the crime, be it heinous,
from wrong and the consequences of his act. capital, or light offense, the child is entitled to suspension of
sentence.
In the case of People v. Gimena (G.R. No. L-3387, February 6, 1931),
an old case, sleep walking or somnambulism is also considered as akin However, the SC ruled that considering the age of Sarcia (already 31),
to insanity. He did not know what he was doing at that time when he he cannot be given anymore the benefit of suspension. Although he
killed the victim. Therefore, there is no criminal liability. committed the crime when he was 17 years old, the maximum age is
21.
MINORITY
The second and third circumstance was already amended by R.A. The only benefit that was available to him was that he shall serve his
9344 or the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006. This refers to a sentence in an agricultural camp and other training facilities.
child in conflict of the law. A child in conflict with the law is a child
who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as, having committed an People v. Mantalaba (G.R. No. 186227, July20, 2011)
offense under Philippine laws. The same case was applied in People vs Mantalaba. They have the
very same issues. The case is about the sale of illegal drugs involving
minors. In this case, the SC remanded the CA. The CA should have
suspended the sentence because at that time the law was enacted A: NO. Although the police officer is performing a lawful act in
and was on appeal to the CA, the accused was 20 years of age, hence pacifying the two men are fighting on the street, he did not perform
he is entitled to the automatic suspension of his sentence. it with due care. Considering that it was a community, he knew that a
stray bullet would have landed on any person. He should not have
ACT OF DISCERNMENT fired shots. The police officer is liable for reckless imprudence
In the case of Madali v. People (G.R. No. 180380, August 4, 2009), resulting to homicide, a culpable felony.
there is an act of discernment when the minor knows the
consequences and circumstances of his act. Discernment is that IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
mental capacity of a minor to fully appreciate the consequences of his Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.
unlawful act. Such capacity may be known and should be determined
by taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances. Elements;
1. There must be Compulsion is by means of physical force;
In this case, the accused who was 16 years old at the time of the 2. Physical force must be irresistible;
commission of the crime, warned the witness not to reveal their 3. Physical force must come from a third person;
hideous act, otherwise, he (accused) and his co-accused would kill
him. Therefore, he knew that killing the victim was a condemnable act In irresistible force, the offender must be reduced as a mere
and should be kept in secrecy. He fully appreciated the consequences instrument, that he is not acting in his will. Therefore, if he is acting
for his unlawful act. against his will, voluntariness is absent.
ACCIDENT UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

In the case of People v. Del Cruz (G.R. No. 187683, February 11, 2010) Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of
An accident is an occurrence that happens outside the sway of our an equal or greater injury.
will, and although it comes about through some act of our will, it lies
beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. Elements;
1. Existence of an uncontrollable fear;
Elements; 2. Fear must be real and imminent;
1. A person is performing a lawful act; 3. Fear of an injury is greater than or equal to that committed;
2. With due care;
3. He causes injury to another by mere accident; It is necessary by the means employed by the third person, it would
4. Without fault or intention causing it; cause a person to suffer uncontrollable fear. Again, he is reduced as a
mere instrument such that he acted against his will. It is necessary
Note that although exempting, as a rule, there is no criminal liability that such fear must be of imminence that an ordinary man cannot
but there is civil liability. However, paragraph 4 (accident) is an stand. When there is an existence of uncontrollable force or fear
exception. There are no criminal liability and civil liability. Accident is there is lack of freedom of action—an element of voluntariness.
akin to justifying circumstance because the offender was performing Therefore, the person totally has no free will.
a lawful act with due care.
Even if there was force employed but the person has a choice to do
Example; the act or not, this exempting provision will not lie.
A is a prisoner. He was about to be investigated and was escorted to
the investigation room. Before reaching the investigating room, A Example;
grabbed the service pistol of the officer who was accompanying him A farmer and his carabao was on his way home. On his way home, he
to the investigating room. The police tried to get back his pistol, and heard gun shots, so he went to the place where he heard the gun
in the course of the fight, the pistol was fired accidentally and A was shots. He hid behind a tree and saw two men shooting X. X way
hit. Thereafter, A died. The police officer was prosecuted for already lying on the ground. The farmer was so shocked and afraid
homicide. that he tried to leave the place. However, when he was about to
leave, he stepped on the dried leaves and caused a noise. The two
Q: Is the officer liable for homicide? men saw him. One of the men pointed the gun at the farmer and told
A: YES. The police was performing a lawful act in trying to get back his him to come near them. Afraid for his life, the farmer obeyed. The
property, and that is his pistol. He caused an injury by accident. He men, pointing the gun at the farmer told him to bury X lying on the
was performing an act with due care because there’s no other way to ground. The farmer said, “No, I don’t want to.” “If you will not bury X,
get back the pistol. He causes an injury through accident because we will shoot you”, said one of the men. The farmer was so afraid and
there was no intention on his part to kill A. so he dug the ground and buried X.
Example; Q: Is the farmer criminally liable together with the two men?
A police officer saw two men fighting on a street. They were hitting A: YES. There was an uncontrollable fear when the farmer saw that
each other. The police tried to pacify the two men, but they won’t the two men shot X. If the two men can shoot X, they can also shoot
stop. So what the police officer did was that he fired shots to pacify him. Therefore, there was an uncontrollable fear and it was real and
the men. However, one of the stray bullets landed on the child. imminent. The farmer’s fear is of an injury is greater than or equal to
Unfortunately the child died. The police officer was prosecuted for that committed because his life is more important. Therefore all the
homicide. As a defense, the police officer invoked accident elements are present, he is not liable
Q: Is the police officer liable for homicide?

Example; Example;
I the same problem, the farmer was told that If he will not bury X, they For example, there is a war in which the Philippines is involved. A, B,
will shoot and kill his carabao. The farmer was so afraid. His carabao and C conspired to commit treason against the government. A, one of
was his only means of living. And so, he buried X. the conspirators went to the priest and confided to the priest that
there was conspiracy between B and C to commit treason against the
Q: Is the farmer criminally liable together with the two men? government. Despite knowledge on the conspiracy to commit
A: YES. There was an uncontrollable fear and it is real and imminent treason, the priest did not immediately divulge it to the police. Under
because the farmer saw that the two men shot X. If the two men can Art 116, the priest is criminally liable for misprision of treason, for not
shoot X, they can also shoot the carabao. However, the third element divulging the conspiracy to commit treason. However, the priest
is wanting. The death of the carabao is not equal to or greater than failed to perform such act due to a lawful cause. Under your rules on
the life of the human. evidence, a confession made to a priest is considered as a privileged
communication. Therefore the priest does not incur any criminal
Example; liability.
In the same problem, the two men told the farmer that if the farmer
will not bury X, they will go to his house, rape his wife, thereafter kill EXEMPTING V. JUSTIFYING
her and his children and burn his house. His family is the most EXEMPTING JUSTIFYING
important people in his life. Therefore, he was constrained to bury X. The act is legal; The act is criminal;
There is no crime, hence there There is a crime, hence there is
Q: Is the farmer criminally liable? is no criminal; a criminal;
A: NO. Although there is an existence of an uncontrollable fear Since there is a crime, there is
because, his wife would be raped, his children would be killed and his Since there is no crime, there is criminal liability, although he is
house would be burned, the 2nd element is not present. The fear is no criminal and civil liabilities; exempted therefrom, and
not present. It is in the future, speculative. Imagine, the two men there are civil liabilities.
would still have to go to the house of the farmer and look for his wife The emphasis of the law is on The emphasis of the law is on
and children. By that time, the farmer had already gone to his house the act; i.e. self-defense. the actor;
and warned his family. He could also have reported the killing of X. So Cannot be invoked in Quasi-
his fear is not real imminent. Imaginative not present. Can be invoked in quasi-
offenses, i.e. reckless
offenses;
imprudence;
Ty v. People (G.R. No. 149275, September 27, 2004)
In the case of Vicky Ty, she was accused of issuing bouncing checks. --xXx--
Vicky Ty’s defense was that she feared that her ailing mother who was
confined in the hospital would commit suicide because of the Article 13.Mitigating circumstances. - The following are
hospital’s ill treatment. So she was compelled to issue unfunded mitigating circumstances;
checks for her mother to be discharged. In this case, yes there is an 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the
uncontrollable fear. However, her fear was not real and imminent. It requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in
is mere imaginative, speculative. It is not now, or not present. the respective cases are not attendant.
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over
Q: How about state of necessity? seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded
A: NO. The threat of the mother does not actually exist because the against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80.
threat is in the future. Therefore state of necessity is not present. The 3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a
Supreme Court ruled that she was not in state of necessity. Because wrong as that committed.
she has several jewelries. She could have sold the jewelries to pay for 4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the
the hospital expenses offended party immediately preceded the act.
5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication
LAWFUL AND INSUPERABLE CASUE of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his
Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
prevented by some lawful insuperable cause. 6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as
naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation.
Elements; 7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to
1. An act is required by law to be done; a person in authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily
2. A person fails to perform such act; confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the
3. Failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or evidence for the prosecution;
insuperable cause; 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise
suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his means of
No Civil Liability action, defense, or communications with his fellow beings.
Note that it is one of the instances in exempting circumstances that 9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise
the actor is exempt from both criminal and civil liability. It is akin to a of the will-power of the offender without however depriving him of
justifying circumstance because what prevented the offender from the consciousness of his acts.
performing a lawful act is a lawful cause. 10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature
and analogous to those above mentioned.
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE

Mitigating Circumstances are those circumstances which if present or Incomplete Justifying or exempting circumstances are those
attendant in the commission of a felony would reduce the imposable mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites
penalty because it shows lesser perversity or criminality of the necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the
offender. respective cases are not attendant.
Mitigating circumstances need not be alleged in the information in Privilege Mitigating or Ordinary Mitigating
order to be appreciated by the court provided that such circumstance The following are the rules to determine whether an incomplete
is shown and proven during the trial. justifying or incomplete exempting circumstance should be treated as
privilege or ordinary mitigating;
There is a lesser criminality on the part of the offender because the 1. If majority of the elements necessary to justify the act or to
offender acted with the diminution of any of the elements of exempt from liability are present, then it’s treated as
voluntariness. privilege mitigating circumstance;
2. If less than the majority is present, then it is an ordinary
There is a diminution on the following; mitigating circumstance which can be offset by a generic
1. Criminal intent; aggravating circumstance;
2. Freedom of action; or 3. If the elements necessary to justify the act or to exempt
3. Intelligence. from criminal liability is only 2, the presence of 1 element is
already a privilege mitigating circumstance .
Kinds of mitigating Circumstance
There are 2 kinds of mitigating circumstance; Incomplete Self-Defense
1. Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance; In case of incomplete self-defense, incomplete defense of a relative,
2. Privilege Mitigating Circumstance; incomplete defense of a stranger, there must always be unlawful
aggression in order for the mc to mitigate.
Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance
An Ordinary Mitigating Circumstance is one which may be offset by a It is only ordinary mitigating if only the element of unlawful
generic aggravating circumstance aggravating circumstance. If an aggression is present, the incomplete self-defense should be treated
ordinary mitigating circumstance is not offset by a generic ac it would as an Ordinary.
reduce the imposable penalty to its minimum period.
It is privilege mitigating circumstance if aside from unlawful
Privilege Mitigating Circumstance aggression, another element but not all is present, it is to be treated
A Privilege Mitigating Circumstance is one which cannot be offset by as a privilege mitigating circumstance .
any ac and the effect of privilege mitigating circumstance is to reduce
the imposable penalty not only to its period but by one or more Example;
degrees A was running in a subdivision with a bolo, he was hacking all those
he passed by. So the residents called for police assistance. The police
*If in the computation of penalties there’re aggravating arrived headed by police officer X. They called on A to put down his
circumstances, mitigating circumstances, if there is a privilege weapon but A instead of laying down his weapon, advanced towards
mitigating circumstance, that presence of privilege mitigating the police with the bolo in his hands in a hacking position in the act of
circumstance takes preference over all other things. Before you can hacking the police officers. So X immediately fired at A. He hit the
even the appropriate penalty, you still have to first consider the hands and legs of A. non-fatal wounds. A slam on the ground face
presence of the privilege mitigating circumstance. That is how facing the ground. At that particular moment, X went to A, got his
important that is why it’s privileged. bolo and then fired shot at the head of A and A died. X was prosecuted
for murder, police officer invoked 2 justifying circumstance. We have
Ordinary Mitigating v. Privilege Mitigating self-defense and fulfillment of duty.
ORDINARY MITIGATING PRIVILEGE MITIGATING
Can be offset by generic Cannot be offset by any kind of Q: Is there self-defense or at least incomplete self-defense?
aggravating circumstance; aggravating circumstance; A: NO. There’s no self-defense because at the time X shot the head of
Lowers the penalty to the A, A was already lying on the ground. Whatever inceptive unlawful
minimum period except when aggression he has commenced, it has ceased to exist from the time
there are two ordinary Lowers the penalty by one or the fatal blow was inflicted on him. Therefore, there was no unlawful
mitigating circumstance in two degrees; aggression. Since unlawful aggression is the element that is wanting.
which case the penalty is There’s no self-defense, neither is there incomplete self-defense.
lowered by one degree only;
Not considered in the Q: Is there fulfillment of duty?
determination of the proper A: NO. There are only 2 elements in fulfillment of duty, 1stelement -
penalty when the penalty Always considered regardless that the accused acted in the due performance of his duty or in lawful
prescribed by law for the single of the penalty imposed’ exercise of his proper office. It is present right because the police
crime is a single indivisible officer went there because the residents asked for police assistance.
penalty; They went there to maintain peace and order. The 1st element is
present. The 2nd element – that the injury caused is an unavoidable
consequence of the due performance of a duty. The 2nd element is
absent. The act of X in shooting the head of A is not a necessary Example;

consequence of the due performance of his duty. Therefore, based A and B were fighting, A boxed B, B boxed A, A retaliated and boxed
on the rule that if there are only 2 elements necessary to justify the B again. When A boxed B, B’s head hit a cemented wall and so he
act and the presence of 1 is already considered as the majority and it suffered cerebral hemorrhage and thereafter caused his death.
is considered as a privilege mitigating circumstance . Therefore, in this
case, there is an incomplete fulfillment of duty which is a privilege Q: Is A criminally liable for the death of B?
mitigating circumstance which may lower the imposable penalty by A: YES. When A boxed B, he was committing a felonious act. Therefore
degrees not only by period. he is criminally liable for the resulting felony although it be different
from which he intended.
MINORITY/SENILITY
That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years. Q: But can he be given the benefit of praeter intentionem that he
In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance has no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed?
with the provisions of Art. 80. A: YES. There was a notable disparity between the means employed
by the offender and the resulting felony. Who could have anticipated
There are 2 mitigating circumstance here; that by the mere act of boxing death would result. Therefore, he
1. Minority; should be given the benefit of prater intentionem.
2. Seniority;
Example;
Minority In the same problem A and B were fighting by means of fist, the
Remember that if minority is not exempting, it is always and always a suddenly, A who was losing pulled out a balisong or a fan knife and
privilege mitigating circumstance. Never an ordinary mitigating stabbed B on the neck, a fatal wound. B died. A was prosecuted for
circumstance homicide. He said he had no intention to commit a wrong so grave as
that committed, no intention to kill B.
So if the offender is over 15 but below 18, and he acted with
discernment, it is not exempting but it is a privilege mitigating Q: Can A benefit from praeter intentionem that he has no intention
circumstance . to commit so grave a wrong as that committed?
A: No, because there was no notable disparity in the between means
Senility employed – stabbing on the neck using a balisong or fan knife
Senility (a person over age70) is generally an ordinary mitigating resulting to death. In fact, the act of the victim of stabbing would
circumstance. produce, and did produce the death of the victim. Therefore, praeter
intentionem would not lie in favor of the accused.
[Prosecutor Garcia: In your book there are instances wherein seniority
shall be considered as a privilege mitigating circumstance , when the SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT
crime committed by the person over 70 year old is punishable by That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party
death, death shall not be imposed on him. Or when he has already immediately preceded the act.
been convicted it shall be computed to reclusion perpetua. These
provisions of the RPC are no longer applicable at the moment. At the There must be a sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the
moment because we have RA 9346 which prohibits the imposition of offended party and it must immediately precede the commission of
death penalty on whoever be the offender. Then senility, at the the crime.
moment is only an omc. I am emphasizing ‘at the moment’ because
at the moment the reign of P.Noy ends, the new president may bring The following are the elements of sufficient provocation;
back death penalty. Then there will now be again a circumstance 1. The provocation must be sufficient;
where seniority will be a privilege mitigating circumstance . But at the 2. It must be immediate to the commission of the crime;
moment, we have no death penalty that may be imposed.] 3. it must originate from the offended party;
PRAETER INTENTIONEM Provocation

That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as Provocation is any unjust or immoral act or conduct on the part of the
that committed. offended party which is capable of inciting, exciting or inflating(?)
another.
We have already studied this in Art. 4. This is praeter intentionem.
Q: When is provocation is sufficient?
Elements; A: For provocation to be sufficient, there must be 2 elements;
1. The offender committed a felony;
2. There must be a notable or notorious disparity between the 1. It must be adequate to stir a person to commit a wrongful
means employed by offender and the result felony. act;
2. It must be proportionate to the gravity of the crime;
So for praeter intentionem, for this mitigating circumstance to lie, it is
necessary that there must be a notable or notorious disparity Immediate
between the means employed and the resulting felony. That is, out of The 2nd element requires that the provocation must be immediate to
the means employed by the offender, no one could have anticipated the commission of the crime.
that the resulting felony would come.
The word immediate here does not allow a lapse of time. There must 1. That there be a grave offense to the one committing the
be no lapse of time between the provocation and the commission of felony, his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
the crime. natural, or adopted brothers or sister, or relatives by affinity
within the same degree;
Example; 2. It requires that the said act or grave offense must be the
There was this long line of evacuees, victims of Pablo who are to be proximate cause of the commission of the crime.
given reliefs. A was 5th on the line, suddenly, X inserted himself in
front of A. This angered A, A told X to place himself at the end of the It is necessary that the commission of the crime was in immediate
line but X didn’t want because he was so hungry. This angered A, and vindication of the grave offense done to the one committing the
so A pulled out his bolo and hacked X at the back. A was prosecuted felony.
for homicide.
Q: Is it necessary that the grave offense need be a punishable act?
Q: Is the mitigating circumstance of sufficient provocation on the A: NO. It suffices that it be any act unjust act, immoral act which cause
part of the offended party justified? the offender sleepless nights and move him to vindicate himself.
A: NO. Although the act of X in inserting himself to the line is an act
adequate to stir a person to commit a wrongful act, the 2nd element Immediate
is absent – it is not proportionate to the gravity of the act. The act of The 2nd element requires that the commission of crime was in
killing is not proportionate to the act of X of placing himself in front immediate vindication of the grave offense. This time the word
of A in a long line. Therefore, sufficient provocation as a mc is not immediate allows a lapse of time.
present so as to reduce the imposable penalty.
According to the Supreme Court, very funny reasoning, there was an
Urbano v. People (G.R. No. 182750, January 20, 2009) erroneous Spanish translation. Our RPC was copied from the Spanish
The victim has always been calling and teasing on the accused Codigo Penal, in there, the word used there was proximate. Yet when
Urbano. So there was a confrontation because whenever the victim it was translated in the RPC, the word used was immediate. Supreme
was drunk, he would defame Urbano. So there was a verbal Court said wrong translation. It is sufficient that the said grave offense
confrontation and ensued into a fight. In the said fight, Urbano was must be the proximate cause of the commission of the crime.
losing because he was just a small man. However, he was able to land
one lucky punch on the face of the victim (parangsiPacquiao). Because Immediate allows an interval of time between the commission of the
of the said lucky punch, the said victim was about to fall unconscious offense and its vindication as long as the offender is still suffering
on the ground. However, the other employees were able to prevent from the mental agony brought about by the offense.
him from falling on the ground. Nevertheless, he became unconscious
and later on regained consciousness. In and out of the hospital, later PASSION OR OBFUSCATION
on he died. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have
produced passion or obfuscation.
Q: Is Urbano criminally liable for the death of the victim?
A: YES. Under Art. 4, because he was committing a felonious act. In the case of People v. Lobino (G.R. No. 123071, October 28, 1999),
Therefore he is criminally liable for the resulting felony although the Supreme Court held that there is passion and obfuscation when
different from that which he intend. the crime was committed due to an uncontrollable burst of passion
provoked by prior unjust or improper acts, or due to a legitimate
But there are 2 mitigating circumstance considered by the court to stimulus so powerful as to overcome reason.
reduce the imposable penalty. 1st according to the court, there was
sufficient provocation. 2nd, that the offender has no intention to Paragraphs 4 and 5 are related to each other. They are collectively
commit so grave a wrong as that committed. Who could have known as sudden impulse of passion and obfuscation.
anticipated that out of one lucky punch, death would result. There
was a total disparity on the means employed by the offender and the Elements;
resulting felony. 1. There be an act both unlawful and sufficient to produce
passion and obfuscation;
Q: How about sufficient provocation, is it present? 2. The act that must produce passion and obfuscation must
A: YES. The provocation was on the part of the victim. He would not be far removed from the commission of the crime by
always call names and defame Urbano. Is it sufficient? Yes, because the considerable length of time during which the offender
what Urbano only did was to confront the victim verbally. That was might have recovered his normal equanimity;
his first act, later on only did it ensue to a fight.
* Passion and obfuscation on the part of the accused must arise from
IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE lawful sentiments because an unlawful act was committed against
That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave him.
offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse,
ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. Immediate
2nd element requires also the immediateness. It is necessary that it
Elements; must be done immediately because the law says the commission of
He following are the elements of immediate vindication of a criminal the act which produced the passion and obfuscation must not be far
offense. removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable length
of time.
Example; A: Yes. It is also present. The act of the neighbor trying to hack the
What if A attempted on the virtue of the wife of B, B learned about wife and his act of continuously hacking the wooden door and walls.
this from a neighbor. When B learned about this, 4 days after, he went
to A and hacked A to death. Q; Since both mitigating circumstance are present, should you
consider both in the computation of the penalty?
Q: Is the mitigating circumstance of sudden impulse of passion and A: NO. Since both mitigating circumstance arises from only one act,
obfuscation and immediate vindication of grave offense present? you should only consider mitigating circumstance.
A: NO. 4 days had already lapsed. According to the SC, 4 days is
already a long time for the said offender to have recovered from his VOLUNTARY SURRENDER AND VOLUNTARY PLEA OF GUILT
normal equanimity. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
More so in the case of People v. Ignas (G.R. No. 140514-15, September before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the
30, 2003), in this case, from the time of the discovery of the adultery prosecution;
of the wife, to the time of the killing, 2 weeks had already lapsed, the
SC said such 2 weeks is too long a time for such offender to have There are 2 mitigating circumstance here;
recovered already his normal equanimity. 1. Voluntary surrender;
2. Voluntary plea of guilt;
In the case of People v. Romera, the Supreme Court said par.4 -
sufficient provocation on the part of the offended party, par.5 - If both are present, you have to consider always 2 mitigating
immediate vindication of grave offense, par.6 – sudden impulse of circumstance. They have different elements and would always arise
passion and obfuscation are related to each other such that in the from different set of facts and circumstances. Therefore, they are
commission of the crime, all three present, or any 2 are present, if always separate and distinct from each other.
they are based on the same facts and circumstances they should be
appreciated only as 1 mitigating circumstance, not 2 or 3. Voluntary Surrender
The elements of Voluntary surrender are the following;
Q: Why is this important? 1. The offender had not actually arrested; T
A: It is important because in the computation of the penalties, if you 2. The offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a
consider them as 3, you will be wrong in the penalties. person in authority or his agent; S
3. Such surrender must be voluntary;
*So again note, if 4, 5 and 6 are all present or if any 2 is present and
they are all based on the same facts and circumstances, they should So it is necessary that the offender has not yet been arrested. It is
only be treated as 1 mc. necessary that he surrender to a person in authority or his agent. The
surrender must be voluntary.
Example;
Husband and wife were about to have dinner. Then someone was Q: When is surrender voluntary?
calling the name of the husband outside their house. The wife opened A: Surrender is said to be voluntary when it is done spontaneously
the door, upon opening, the neighbor who was calling the name tried and unconditionally either because he has this feeling of remorse and
to hack the wife. Good enough, the wife was able to reach and close wanted to admit his guilt or he wanted to save the government that
the door and the wife was not hacked. The neighbor however with a much needed time or effort which will be incurred in looking for him.
use of a bolo continuously hacked the wooden or the bamboo door
and walls of the house. And so, considering that his house was being Example;
damaged, the husband was forced to go outside to confront the A case was found against B in the fiscal’s office. A warrant of arrest
neighbor. He used the kitchen door. He called the neighbor and asked was requested, the fiscal found probable cause. The information filed
what was the reason why he was hacking. The neighbor instead of in court, the court agreed with the fiscal, a warrant of arrest was
answering tried to hack the husband. They struggled for the issued. B got a tip from the court employee that a warrant of arrest
possession of the bolo, and in the course the husband gained was now in possession of the police officers. And so B upon learning
possession of the bolo. Once in the possession of the bolo, the that there was already an issued warrant of arrest, immediately went
husband hacked the neighbor. The neighbor suffered a fatal wound to the police station and surrendered himself to the authorities. Then
but was brought to the hospital by the husband and so he survived. trial against him proceeded, and after trial on the merits, he was
Husband was prosecuted for frustrated homicide, the husband as a convicted. But the judge did not consider voluntary surrender in
defense invoked 2 mitigating circumstance – 1st, there was sudden reducing his imposable penalty.
impulse of passion and obfuscation, 2nd that there was sufficient
provocation on the part of the offended party immediately preceded Q: Is the judge correct?
the action. A: The judge is wrong because voluntary surrender is present as a
mitigating circumstance. Although there is already a warrant of arrest
Q: Is sufficient provocation present? issued. The police officers have not yet gone out looking for him.
A: YES. Both are present. There is sufficient provocation because of Therefore, any surrender would still be considered as voluntary
the act of the neighbor trying to hack the wife. And his act of surrender even if there is already a warrant of arrest against the said
continuously hacking the wooden door and walls of the house – that offender.
is sufficient provocation.
In the case of De Vera v. De Vera (G.R. No. 172832, April 7, 2009), the
Q: Is sudden impulse of passion and obfuscation present? Supreme Court held that mere filing of an information and/or the
issuance of a warrant of arrest will not automatically make the Q: If the offender voluntary confessed his guilt to a court which has
surrender involuntary. The accused may still be entitled to the no jurisdiction and later on pleaded guilty before the proper court,
mitigating circumstance in case he surrenders, depending on the will the voluntary plea of guilt still be appreciated?
actual facts surrounding the very fact of giving himself up. A: YES. Since the proceedings before the former court was void, the
voluntary plea of guilt may still be appreciated in the court with
Voluntary Plea of Guilt proper jurisdiction.
The elements of voluntary plea of guilt are the following;
1. That guilt tendered is confessed spontaneously and PHYSICAL DEFECT
unconditionally; That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some
2. That he confesses guilt in open court that is before the court physical defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or
tried his case; communications with his fellow beings.
3. The confession that was made before the presentation of
the evidence for the prosecution; For this mitigating circumstance to lie in favor of the accused, it is
necessary that there must be a connection, a relation between the
Example; physical defect and the crime committed. It is necessary that the said
A was charged with the crime of frustrated murder. During the plea physical defect must have restricted his use of action, defense or
bargaining, with the consent of the judge, the fiscal and the offended communication with his fellow being.
party, he said that he had plead guilty to attempted murder. And so
he pleaded guilty to attempted murder. The judge rendered Example;
judgment without considering voluntary plead of guilt so as to reduce A is a cripple, he has no legs, he always position himself near the
his penalty. Quiapo church. He was on board a skateboard. So he often stays
there, and his work was to snatch the handbags of any churchgoers.
Q: Is the judge correct? And so one time, he snatched the handbag of a churchgoer and
A: YES. For said plea of guilty to be considered voluntary, it must be thereafter, he sped away on board his skateboard. He was thereafter
done spontaneously. Spontaneously, it must be the original crime arrested.
charged.
Q: Will his physical defect of being crippled, a man with no legs, be
Example; mitigating?
A was charged as a principal in the crime of robbery. He pleaded guilty A: NO. His physical defect has no relation at all to the crime he has
with the consent of the judge, the fiscal and the offended party to the committed.
crime of robbery but merely as an accomplice. The judge rendered
judgment because of the plea of guilt. The judge did not consider the Example;
said plea of guilt as mitigating. A is a blind man, blind beggar, near the Quiapo church. One time he
was begging for alms, suddenly, he was scraped on his head with a
Q: Is the judge correct? wound, it was so strong that he fell on the ground wounded. Angry,
A: Yes, the judge is correct because when he pleaded guilt as an he stood up, took his cane and retaliated by hitting the person next
accomplice, his plea of guilt was not done unconditionally. to him, not knowing that it was not the person but an innocent
passerby. The innocent passerby suffered less physical injuries. So the
Example; blind beggar was prosecuted for less serious physical injuries.
A was prosecuted for the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide and multiple physical injuries. He was driving his vehicle, Q: Is the mitigating circumstance of physical defect present so as to
bumped a person and injured several others. During arraignment, he reduce the imposable penalty?
immediately pleaded guilty. The judge rendered judgment. In A: YES. His being blind restricted his means of action, defense or
rendering judgment, the judge did not consider the voluntary plea of communication with his fellow being. His intention was to hit the
guilt as mitigating. person who scraped him with the wound. But because of he could not
see, he hit an innocent passerby. There was a relation between the
Q: Is the judge correct? physical defect and the crime committed. Therefore, it will mitigate
A: YES. In Mariano v. People (G.R. No. 178145, July 7, 2014) the his criminal liability.
Supreme Court held that in the case of a culpable felony, in case of
quasi-offenses, under Art. 365 the judge may or may not consider ILLNESS
these mitigating circumstance in the imposition of penalty. If the Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-
judge consider it or if the judge did not consider it, that is the decision power of the offender without however depriving him of the
of the judge. Under Art. 365, the court is not mandated to consider consciousness of his acts.
the rules, the decision is based on the sound discretion whether or
not to consider the mitigating circumstance. So this is illness. It is necessary that the said illness must diminish the
exercise of the will-power of the offender. But it must not deprive him
Q: May the mitigating circumstance of voluntary plea of guilt be of his consciousness of his act because if it will deprive him of
appreciated in confessions before the media? consciousness of his act, then it is exempting not merely mitigating.
A: NO. Confessions before the media are considered extra-judicial
confessions. For voluntary plea of guilt be appreciated, the confession Example;
must be made before the court. A is a kleptomaniac, he has this urge to steal. Now, his urge is to steal
diamonds. So one time he was in a party, he was talking to a lady with
diamond earrings, diamond necklace, diamond watch, diamond 10. That the offender has been previously punished by an
bracelet. Then after the conversation, the lady went to the restroom. offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for
Upon looking at the mirror, she shouted, she was shocked, the two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty.
diamond earring, necklace, watch and bracelet were all gone. It was 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price,
already taken by the said accused. A was prosecuted for theft. reward, or promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire,
Q: Will his illness mitigate his criminal liability? poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage
A: Yes. It diminishes his exercise of his will-power without however thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other
depriving him of consciousness. He knew that he was committing artifice involving great waste and ruin.
theft, he knew that he was taking the personal property of another 13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation.
but he cannot control, he has a diminished self-control to prevent the 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
commission of the crime. It will only mitigate, reduce the imposable 15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be
penalty but it will not exempt from criminal liability. employed to weaken the defense.
16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCE There is treachery when the offender commits any of the
And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature and crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in
analogous to those above mentioned. the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which
Any other circumstance which is similar in nature from the 1st to the the offended party might make.
9th paragraph, then it is also considered as a mc. 17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about
which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
Example; 18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
A public officer who has malversed public funds, voluntarily, There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall,
voluntary returned the public funds, it is akin to voluntary surrender. roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
Or what if a person is already of 65 years of age, sickly, suffering from 19. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons
a disease it can be said to be akin or similar to seniority. It will mitigate under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized
his criminal liability. watercraft, airships, or other similar means. (As amended by RA
5438).
--xXx-- 20. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be
deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for
Article 14. Aggravating circumstances. - The following are its commissions.
aggravating circumstances:
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE
position. Aggravating Circumstance are those which, if attendant in the
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to commission of the crime, serve to increase the penalty without,
the public authorities. however, exceeding the maximum of the penalty provided by law for
3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the offense.
the respect due the offended party on account of his rank, age, or
sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if Kinds of aggravating Circumstances:
the latter has not given provocation. 1. Generic Aggravating;
4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or 2. Specific Aggravating;
obvious ungratefulness. 3. Inherent Aggravating;
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief 4. Qualifying Aggravating;
Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are 5. Special Aggravating;
engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place dedicated to
religious worship. In order for aggravating circumstance to be appreciated, all the
6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an aggravating circumstance must be alleged in the information and
uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever such circumstances may must be proven during the trial.
facilitate the commission of the offense.
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted Unlike justifying, exempting and mitigating circumstances, which are
together in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have not stated or alleged in the information, aggravating circumstances
been committed by a band. must be alleged in the information. Even if they are proven in trial but
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a they are not alleged in the information, they cannot be considered
conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or against the person. They must be both alleged and likewise proven
misfortune. during trial, so as not to deprive the accused of right to know the
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men nature of the accusation against him.
or persons who insure or afford impunity.
9. That the accused is a recidivist. Generic Aggravating Circumstance
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, Generic Aggravating Circumstance are those that applies generally to
shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another all crimes.
crime embraced in the same title of this Code.
Example: felony to murder and the others shall be considered as a generic

Nos. 1,2,3,4,5,6,9,10,14,18,19, and 20 of the Revised Penal Code; aggravating circumstance.
Nightime - it can be applied to crimes against persons, crimes against
property, crimes against chastity and applied to all other crimes; Example;
Recidivism. In case of qualifying aggravating circumstance, for example, A killed B
there was treachery, it was done in consideration of a price, reward
Specific Aggravating Circumstance or promise, there was also cruelty, so there are three qualifying
Specific Aggravating Circumstance are those that apply only to certain aggravating circumstances present. Only one of them will qualify the
or particular crimes. killing to murder. So if treachery is already proven, the crime
committed is already murder. Cruelty and the other circumstance of
Example: in consideration of a price, reward or promise shall only be considered
Treachery (Par.16 Art. 14) can only be considered or appreciated in as generic aggravating circumstances.
crimes against persons.
THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC
Inherent Aggravating Circumstance POSITION.
Inherent Aggravating Circumstance are those which of necessity This aggravating circumstance can be applied only if the offender is a
follow the commission of the crime because they are considered as public officer.
elements in the commission of the crime, therefore they are
considered inherent in the commission of the crime. Taking Advantage of Public Position
Taking advantage of public position means that the offender use the
If inherent aggravating circumstance are present in the commission prestige, influence or ascendency of his office in the commission of
of the crime, they are no longer considered so as to increase the the crime or to facilitate the commission of the crime.
penalty because they are considered as elements
Example;
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstance Police officer A was having a drinking spree with his friends outside
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstance are those which either change his house. In the course thereof, they were discussing about the
the nature of the crime to bring about a more serious for a higher alleged shoot out in Quezon. According to the police officer, since he
penalty or even without changing the nature of the crime it would was a police officer, it was a shoot out. But according to his friend it
impose a higher penalty. was a rub-out. They were arguing, exchanging views until the police
officer got mad. At that time, he had with him his pistol. He used his
Example: service pistol and shot his friend who thereafter died.
In Art. 248 of the RPC, the circumstances therein present would
qualify the killing of a person from homicide to murder. The presence Q: Is the said act of killing done by taking advantage of his public
of treachery, evident premeditation, cruelty in killing would make a position?
crime not of homicide but would be qualified to murder A: NO. The said offender, public officer, did not use or misuse his
public office. He did not use the influence, the ascendency or the
Special Aggravating Circumstance prestige of his office in order to commit the crime. Even not being a
In the case of People of the Philippines v. De Leon (G.R. No. 179943, public officer he could have killed his friend in the same situation . He
June 26, 2009) the Supreme Court defined Special Aggravating could even have used another weapon, not necessarily his service
Circumstances as circumstances which arise under special conditions pistol.
to increase the penalty for the offense to its maximum period, but the
same cannot increase the penalty to the next higher degree. Special Aggravating Circumstance
Under Art. 14, taking advantage of his public position is a generic
In the case of special aggravating circumstance, it CANNOT be offset aggravating circumstance. However, under Art. 62 (as amended by RA
by an ordinary mitigating circumstance. 7659), the fact the crime was committed by taking advantage of his
public position is a special aggravating circumstance because the
Example; maximum penalty prescribed by law shall be the one imposed.
The following are examples of Special Aggravating Circumstance;
1. Quasi-recidivism under Article 60 of the Revised Penal Example;
Code; Police officer X was assigned as a traffic enforcer. X was always
2. Complex Crimes under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code; demanding toll in the amount of fifty pesos from jeepney drivers
and otherwise he would not let them enter a certain street. One day,
3. When homicide or murder is committed with the use of an jeepney driver Y got mad at X for extorting toll on him because Y had
unlicensed firearm under P.D. 1866 as amended by R.A. no earning that day. He filed a case for robbery against X. the
8294; information alleged that in order to perpetrate the crime of robbery,
4. When in the omission of the crime, advantage was taken by X took advantage of his public position.
the offender of his public position under Article 62 of the
RPC; Q: How do we appreciate the aggravating circumstance of taking
advantage of public position in this case?
Effect of more than one Qualifying Circumstance A: taking advantage of public position should be appreciated as a
If there are more than one qualifying aggravating circumstance as for special aggravating circumstance. Article 62 of the RPC states that the
example, homicide qualified to murder, only one will qualify the maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offender took advantage of
his public position as a means to facilitate the commission of the disrespected the said person as a public authority if he has no
crime. knowledge that he is a public authority.
Example; That the presence of the public authority did not prevent the
W is a woman who drives a jeepney for a living. While she was driving offender from the commission of the crime.
her route, police officer X flagged her down and demanded for her to An offense may be said to have been committed in contempt of public
pay a toll in the amount of fifty pesos. However W refused to give authority when his presence, made known to the offender, has not
money to X. Thus, X arrested W and brought her to the police station. prevented the latte from committing the criminal act.
W was detained in the investigation room. Thereafter, X entered in
the investigation room. While there, X had carnal knowledge of W. an Example;
information for rape was filed with the aggravating circumstance of The barangay chairman was in a restaurant having dinner with his
taking advantage of public position. wife because it was there wedding anniversary. Suddenly here comes
A, B and C who are constituents of the barangay chairman. Upon
Q: How do we appreciate the aggravating circumstance of taking seeing the chairman, they greeted him and even congratulated him
advantage of public position in this case? and his wife upon learning that they were celebrating their wedding
A: Taking advantage of public position should be appreciated as a anniversary. They seated next to the table of the chairman and
qualifying circumstance in this case. Article 266-B (3) of the Revised ordered food. In the giving of the food, there was an argument
Penal Code states that Death penalty shall be imposed if the crime of between A and the waiter. The argument immediately became a
rape is committed when the victim is under the custody of the police heated one. A took the table knife and stab the waiter. The waiter
or the military or any law enforcement or penal institution. In this suffered serious physical injuries. Prosecuted for frustrated homicide.
case, the charge against X should qualified rape. Since death penalty
is suspended, X shall suffer the penalty of Reclusion perpetua. Q: In the prosecution for said crime, is the aggravating circumstance
of in contempt of or with insult to public authority present?
CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES. A: NO. The first element is absent. The first element is that the public
This is based on the greater perversity of the offender, as shown by officer or public authority is engaged in the exercise of his function.
his lack of respect for the public authorities. At the time of the commission of the crime, yes he was there but he
was in a private act. He was not engaged in the exercise of his
Elements: function, hence it cannot be said that the said offender insulted the
1. That the public officer or public authority is engaged in the said public authority.
exercise of his function;
2. That the public authority is not the person against whom the Example;
crime is committed; The public authority was the city mayor who was inside his office.
3. That the offender knows him to be a public authority; Suddenly he heard commotion on the ground floor. He looked out his
4. That the presence of the public authority did not prevent the window, he saw his two supporters having an argument. A and B were
offender from the commission of the crime. having an argument over a parking space. The mayor went down the
building and talked to both A and B. He told them to shake hands and
That the public officer or public authority is engaged in the exercise forget everything. Then he told A to just allow B to park his car anyway
of his function. there was another parking space available. This angered A because he
Public authority refers to Justice of the peace, persons in authority, or thought that the mayor was siding with B. A took out his balisong and
any person directly vested with jurisdiction whether an individual or stabbed the mayor.
some members of court or governmental commissioner. It is
necessary that he has the duty to govern and execute the laws. Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of in contempt of or with insult
to public authority present?
Example; A: YES. It is present but it is not an aggravating circumstance but an
Mayors, barangay chairman police officer is merely an agent of a element of the crime because the crime committed is direct assault.
person in authority. It is direct assault because the public authority at the time of the
attack was engaged in the performance of his functions. Since the
Agents of public authority are not included. Police officers are agents crime committed was against the public authority himself, the fact
of public authority. that it was committed in contempt of or with insult to the said public
authority is an ingredient of the crime.
That the public authority is not the person against whom the crime
is committed. Example;
If the offender is the person against whom the crime is committed, hat if in the same problem instead of stabbing the said mayor, A felt
such fact that the crime was committed in contempt of the public insulted with the mayor’s words that he is giving the parking space to
authority is an element because the crime committed would be direct B so this angered A. A stabbed B. B died.
assault. In direct assault, in contempt of or with insult to public
authority is an element, no longer an aggravating circumstance. Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of in contempt of or with insult
to public authority present?
That the offender knows him to be a public authority. A: YES. The mayor’s act of pacifying A and B was engaged in his official
There must be knowledge on the part of the offender that the said functions. He was not the person against whom the crime was
person is a public authority. Otherwise, it cannot be said that he committed. A was a supporter, therefore he knew mayor was a
person in authority. Yet, the presence of the mayor did not prevent A
from committing the crime against B. Hence, the second aggravating offended party was inside his dwelling at the time of the commission
circumstance is present. of the crime and he has not given any provocation.
DISRESPECT OF RANK, AGE OR SEX, OR DWELLING OF THE If the crime is committed inside the dwelling of the offended party, it
OFFENDED PARTY, IF THE LATTER HAS NOT GIVEN PROVOCATION. is as an aggravating circumstance because it shows the greater
perversity of the offender than when the crime is committed in any
There are four aggravating circumstances under this paragraph; other place.
1. Disregard of rank;
2. Disregard of age; The constitution itself provides that a man’s abode must be respected
3. Disregard of sex; and therefore when a crime is committed inside the house dwelling it
4. Crimes committed in dwelling of the offended party; shows the greater criminality on the part of the offender.
These four aggravating circumstances can be appreciated singly or Even if a crime is committed inside dwelling, it cannot be considered
collectively if present in the commission of the crime. There must be as aggravating if the following circumstances are present;
deliberate intent on the part of the offender to disrespect the 1. offended has given provocation;
offended party on account of the latter’s age, sex, or rank. 2. If the offender and the offended party are living in the same
dwelling;
Disregard of rank, disregard of age and disregard of sex can only be 3. Dwelling is inherent in the commission of the crime.
considered in crimes against persons and crimes against chastity. You
do not consider these in crimes against property; you do not consider Example;
these in crimes against public interest. They can only be considered X and Y are roommates in a rented apartment. One night, when X was
in crimes against persons and crimes against chastity. studying for his exam, Y arrived from work. Y was so tired, he went
directly straight to bed and turned off the lights. However, X turned
Disregard of rank on the lights and told Y that he was still studying. On the other hand,
Rank refers to a high social standing, a high position in the society. For Y turned off the lights because he can’t sleep with the lights. X turned
this to be considered as an aggravating circumstance, it is necessary off the lights, and Y turned it on again. An altercation ensued between
that the offender be of lower rank than that of the offended party. X and Y. Suddenly, X stabbed Y with a ballpen in the eye. Y was
blinded. X was charged with serious physical injury.
Example;
A student attacking a professor. There was a disregard of rank of the Q: May the aggravating circumstance of dwelling be appreciated in
said professor. An employee attacking his employer. There was a this case?
disregard of rank of the said employer. A: NO. One of the exceptions for dwelling to be appreciated is that
when the offender and the offended party are both living together in
Disregard of age the same dwelling. In this case, X and Y are roommates. They are living
Age here refers to both minority and senority. in the same dwelling together. Thus, the aggravating circumstance of
dwelling cannot be appreciated.
Example;
The offended party is 95 years old. A killed him by hitting his head for Example;
25 times with a lead pipe. Obviously, there was disregard of his age. X and Y were fighting in the streets. In the course of their fight, X lost.
Considering his age, whereas even one hit of the lead pipe could have Thereafter, X went home and left the gate and door open. Sometime
already killed the said old man but he was hit 25 times showing later, X saw Y walking in the street in front of his home. X told Y “kung
disregard of the age of the old man. matapang ka, pumasok ka dito”. Y entered the house of X. Without
any warning, Y stabbed X multiple times. Y was charged with the
Example; information of homicide.
A child is 4 years old. He was stabbed 25 times, thereafter his body
was placed inside a dram filled with water and then the dram was Q: Whether or not the aggravating circumstance of dwelling should
covered. There was disregard of age. The victim was a minor and be appreciated?
therefore any attack, just 1 stab, could have killed the minor. But he A: NO. In order for dwelling to be appreciated, there must be no
was stabbed 25 times; not only that, he was also submerged and the provocation on the part of the owner of the house who is also the
drum was covered, which shows disrespect of age. offended party. In this case, were it not for X taunting Y to come into
*If there was disrespect of age and there was also treachery, the his house if Y is brave, Y would not have had the opportunity to stab
aggravating circumstance to be considered is treachery because it X.
absorbs disrespect of age.
*Dwelling includes the dependencies, the staircase and the
Disrespect of sex enclosures therein.
Disrespect of sex refers to the female sex. This is inherent in the crime
of rape and in certain crimes involving chastity. *The dwelling need not be owned by the offended party. It suffices
that the offended party uses it for rest and comfort. E.g., a room being
Crimes committed in dwelling of the offended party rented by the lessee or a tenant; room where a person is living as a
Dwelling is considered as aggravating circumstance if the crime is bedspacer.
committed inside the dwelling of the offended party, that is, the
Example; ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS.

A who lives in a nipa hut was sitting at the staircase when B came and There are two aggravating circumstances;
forcibly drag her to another house, 1 kilometer away from A’s house, 1. Abuse of confidence;
where she was raped by B. 2. Obvious ungratefulness;
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of dwelling present? Abuse of Confidence

A: YES. The aggravating circumstance is present even if the crime was The circumstance exists only when the offended party has trusted the
committed in another place far from the dwelling, the aggression offender who later abuses such trust by committing the crime. The
started in the dwelling of the offended party. The aggression that abuse of confidence must be a means of facilitating the commission
started in the dwelling of the offended party when she was dragged of the crime, the culprit taking advantage of the offended party’s
from the said staircase, that aggression cannot be divided from the belief that the former would not abuse said confidence.
commission of said crim. So even if it grounds were consummated in
another place for as long as aggression started in the dwelling, still Elements of abuse of confidence;
dwelling is an aggravating circumstance. 1. That the offended party had trusted the offender;
2. That the offender abuse such trust by committing a crime
Example; against the offended party;
X woke up 6:00 in the morning. He got up from bed, and looked out 3. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of
the window wanting to get fresh morning air. Suddenly and without the crime
any warning, Y shot X. X died. The information charges Y with murder
qualified by treachery and with the aggravating circumstance of Example;
dwelling. H and W were husband and wife living here in Manila for 4 years.
Suddenly here comes X. X was their former neighbor in Batangas. He
Q: Should the aggravating circumstance of dwelling be appreciated? told H and W “I am looking for work here in Manila, can I live in your
A: YES. Dwelling is an aggravating circumstance. It is not necessary house while I am looking for work?” Since X was a good neighbor back
for dwelling to be aggravating that the perpetrator of the crime was then, H and W trusted X and allowed X to live inside their house. X
able to get in. It suffices that the offended party or the victim is inside now sleeps in the house of H and W while he was looking for work
his house. The assailant may device ways and means to commit the here in manila. One time H was out of the house. The house helpers
crime from the outside. and the drivers were also away. The only person left in the house was
X and W. While H was out, X went to the master’s bedroom and had
Q: Will the treachery absorb the aggravating circumstance of carnal knowledge of W against the latter’s will.
dwelling?
A: NO. Treachery does not absorb dwelling. In this case, murder was Q: Is the aggravating circumstance abuse of confidence present in
qualified by treachery, and dwelling will be treated as an ordinary this case?
aggravating circumstance. A: YES. X was there because A and B trusted him, yet he abused such
trust and confidence and instead facilitated the commission of the
Example; crime. Therefore this aggravating circumstance is present.
W is 95 years old; a woman of high standing in the society. She was a
former department secretary. She is living alone in her house. One Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of dwelling present in the case?
time here comes X. X wanted to rob the valuables inside the house of A: NO. The aggravating circumstance of dwelling in this case cannot
the said old woman. X entered the said house and he was able to get be considered because at the time of the incident, H and W allowed
the valuables from the vault of the house. He was about to leave the X to live with them even though it was only in a temporary basis.
house when accidentally pushed the chair. By reason thereof, the Ownership of the house is irrelevant in dwelling.
woman was awaken. The woman upon seeing X begun screaming. X
then fired at the woman 50 times. The woman died. Obvious Ungratefulness
Ungratefulness means the offender has no gratitude, does not even
Q: Are the aggravating circumstances of disregard of rank, disregard know how to say thank you.
of age, disregard of sex present?
A: NO. The crime committed is robbery with homicide, under article The elements of obvious ungratefulness are the following;
10 which is a crime against property. Disregard of rank, age and sex 1. That the offended party had trusted the offender;
are not applicable to any other crimes but only to crimes against 2. That the offender abuse such trust by committing a crime
person and crimes against chastity. Since the crime committed is a against the offended party;
crime against property, therefore, disregard of rank, age and sex 3. That the act be committed with obvious ungratefulness
cannot be considered against the accused.
Example;
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of dwelling present? A was selling kettles and other kitchen wares on the street under the
A: YES. The crime committed robbery with homicide is a form of heat of the sun. A goes from one house to another under the heat of
robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. Dwelling is the sun. He was so thirsty already so he knocked on the gate of the
only inherent in robbery with use of force upon things but dwelling is house of X. X opened the gate and A told X that he was so thirsty. X
not inherent in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation being a good person, allowed A to go inside their house and asked
of persons just like robbery with homicide. So in this case, only him to take a sit while he get him a glass of water. When he came
dwelling should be considered as an aggravating circumstance. back, he was not only holding a glass of water but also brought some
biscuits. However A suddenly, brought out his knife and stabbed X and employees had already left, so the farmers were there still having
thereafter robbed him. their rally. They set tents and prepared to sleep there. In the course
thereof, 2 farmers argued at each other. In the course of their
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance obvious ungratefulness present? argument one farmer jumped into the fence and went inside the DAR.
A: YES. Instead of showing gratitude for having been allowed to enter The second farmer followed him and when the second farmer was
the house and given a glass of water with biscuits, he instead took able to catch up with the first farmer, he killed the latter.
advantage of the goodness of the man and committed the crime of
killing and robbery. There was obvious ungratefulness on the part of Q: Is the aggravating circumstance that the crime was committed in
the offender. a place where the Public Authorities are engaged in the discharge of
their duties present?
THE PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, OR IN HIS PRESENCE, OR A: NO. Although DAR is a place where the Public Authorities are
WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF engaged in the discharge of their duties, at the time of the
THEIR DUTIES OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. commission of the crime, the officials and employees are not in the
If the crime is committed in any of these places it is considered as an actual performance of their duties. Under this aggravating
aggravating circumstance because it shows on the part of the circumstance, it is not only necessary that the said places are where
offender lack of respect on these places. public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, it is
also necessary that at the time of the commission of the crime, the
There are four aggravating circumstances in this case; public authorities are actually engaged in the performance of their
1. In the Palace of the chief executive; duties.
2. In the presence of the chief executive;
3. Public authorities engaged in the discharge of their duties; In a place dedicated to religious worship
4. Place dedicated to religious worship; Even if there is no religious ceremony on going, for as long as the said
crime is committed in said place dedicated to religious worship it is
In order however for these aggravating circumstances to be aggravating because of lack of respect on said place.
considered, it is necessary that the offender deliberately sought the
said place to commit the crime because otherwise it cannot be said Example;
that he disrespected the place. X was in a church praying to kill Y. X saw Y at the back of the church.
X went out of the church. X entered the church in the back door and
In the Palace of the Chief Executive suddenly, he stabbed Y. Y died. X was charged with homicide.
This aggravating circumstance may be committed regardless of
whether there is a public affair or official affair going on, if a crime is Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of place of religious worship
committed it is aggravating. present?
A: YES. In order for the aggravating circumstance of religious worship
Example: to be appreciated, the offender must especially sought the place to
A and B are chefs in Malacanang. They are outdoing each other in facilitate the commission of the crime. In this case, when X saw Y, he
trying to prepare the best meal for P-noy. One time, both of them went out of the church and entered in the back so that he could stab
were preparing lunch for the president. Suddenly they had an Y. X deliberately sought the place of religious worship to facilitate the
argument. In the course thereof, A stabbed B. B suffered a fatal commission of the crime.
wound but he survived. Prosecuted for frustrated homicide.
NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE, OR BY A BAND
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance that the crime was committed in There are three aggravating circumstances in this case;
the palace of the Chief Executive present? 1. Nighttime;
A: NO. Because he works there, he lives there. It cannot be said that 2. Uninhabited place;
he sought the said place in order to commit the crime. It cannot be 3. Band;
said that he went to said place in order to commit the crime or can it
be said that he disrespected the said place. Nighttime
Nighttime is from sunset to sunrise. In order for these aggravating
In the presence of the Chief Executive circumstances to be considered, it is necessary that the offender
Even if the Chief Executive is not engaged in his official duty, still it is deliberately sought the darkness of the night either to facilitate the
considered as aggravating because of the lack of respect to the chief commission of the crime or to insure or afford impunity.
executive.
Elelements;
Where the Public Authorities are engaged in the discharge of their The following are the elements of Nighttime;
duties 1. The darkness or silence of the night was especially sought
It is not only necessary that the said places are where public by the offender;
authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, it is also 2. That night time was taken advantage of by the offender to
necessary that at the time of the commission of the crime, the public facilitate the commission of the crime;
authorities are actually engaged in the performance of their duties. 3. The purpose is to insure his immunity from capture;
Example; Even if the offender sought nighttime, the moment the scene of the
Many farmers were having a rally outside the DAR. They started the crime has been illuminated by any light, rule out nighttime as an
rally around 6am, it is now 8pm, they were still there. The officials and aggravating circumstance.
Example; conspiracy has already been considered therefore by a band can no

In the commission of the crime, A decided to kill B, his enemy. A knew longer be considered by the court.
that B would pass by the place wherein there were no light posts. A
waited for B in the said place. Upon the moment B arrived A left his Q: Is the counsel’s contention correct?
post and was about to stab B when suddenly a tricycle passed by and A: NO. Even if the court already considered conspiracy, by a band may
the light coming from the tricycle illuminated the scene of the crime. still be considered by the court because conspiracy is a means of
Even if A deliberately sought nighttime, nighttime is not aggravating committing a crime. It means they have the same criminal liability. On
because a light illuminated the scene of the crime. Whenever any light the other hand, by a band is an aggravating circumstance. One does
has illuminated the scene of the crime, rule out nighttime as an not absorb the other, therefore, both maybe considered and
aggravating circumstance. Light coming from the tricycle, from any appreciated by the court.
vehicle, nearby house, light posts or even from the moon, for as long
as the scene of the crime has been illuminated, nighttime is not Example;
aggravating. A induced B, C, and D wanted to kill W. A, B, C, and D planned to
commit the crime at 11pm so that the community is fast asleep. At
An uninhabited place 11pm, B, C, and D entered the house of W. They directly proceeded
Means a place which is isolated from the others or located far from to his room. W’s room was fully lighted. Thereafter, B, C, and D
others. However this is not the requirement for it to be considered stabbed W. W died. A, B, C, and D was charged murder qualified by
aggravating. treachery with the aggravating circumstance of nighttime,
uninhabited place, and by a band.
Requisites;
1. That in the place where the crime was committed there was Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of nighttime present?
a remote possibility for the victim to receive some help; A: YES. Although the room of W was fully lighted, the accused
2. That the offender deliberately sought the uninhabited place deliberately sought the darkness and silence of the night in order to
in order to facilitate the commission of the crime; facilitate the commission of the crime.
Example; Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of by a band present?

A, B and C are fishermen. Around 3 am, they all went out fishing on A: NO. A band is present whenever more than three armed
their respective boats. They were sailing 5 meters away from each malefactors come together in the commission of the crime. All of the
other. Suddenly X sprung out of the water and he stabbed A. armed malefactors must be a principal by direct participation. In this
case A is a principal by inducement.
Q: In the prosecution for killing of A, is the aggravating circumstance
of uninhabited place present? Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of uninhabited place present?
A: YES. First, in the place where the crime was committed, there was A: NO. In order for an uninhabited place to be present, the offender
very little, remote possibility for A to receive some help. Because B deliberately sought a place isolated from the others or located far
and C must still swim before they could render help or assistance to from others so that there is a remote possibility that the victim may
A. Before they could have swum and reached A, A is already dead. receive help.
Therefore there was very litter or remote possibility for the victim to
be saved. The said accused X deliberately sought the place in order to ON THE OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION, SHIPWRECK,
facilitate in the commission of the crime because he suddenly EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC, OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE.
appeared from the water. Therefore the aggravating circumstance of It is considered as an aggravating circumstance because on occasion
uninhabited place is present. of these calamities, the offender took advantage of the said occasion
in order to commit the crime.
By a band
For the aggravating circumstance of by a band to be present, the law Example;
says where more than three armed malefactors shall have acted X and Y were fighting. X lost the fight. Suddenly, there was an
together in the commission of the offense, it shall be deemed to have earthquake and all the people panicked and went outside their house.
been committed by a band. Therefore, there must be at least 4 armed X went out of his house and saw Y also panicking. X saw this as an
men in the commission of the crime or they must have acted together opportunity to kill Y and get his revenge. X approached Y and stabbed
in the commission of the crime. him multiple times. X was charged with homicide committed on the
occasion of earthquake as an aggravating circumstance.
Example;
A, B, C, D and E all armed with knives, killed X. The information stated Q: How do we appreciate the aggravating circumstance that the
that A, B, C, D and E conspired with one another and as a band they crime was committed on the occasion of an earthquake?
committed the crime of murder against X. during the presentation of A: The aggravating circumstance that the crime was committed in the
evidence, conspiracy was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Likewise, occasion of an earthquake must be appreciated as a qualifying
band as an aggravating circumstance was proven beyond reasonable aggravating circumstance. Article 248 states that when a person kills
doubt. Thus the judge convicted A, B, C, D and E for the crime of another on the occasion of a calamity such as an earthquake, the
murder as conspirators. The judge also considered the aggravating person is liable for murder. In this case, since X killed Y on the occasion
circumstance of by a band. The counsel for the accused filed a motion of an earthquake, such aggravating circumstance shall qualify the
for the consideration, questioning the consideration of the crime into murder.
aggravating circumstance of by a band. According to the counsel,
Example; imprescriptible. There is no time limit between the first crime for
An earthquake occurred. All of the persons in the community which he has been convicted by final judgment and the second crime
panicked and went outside their house. Upon Seeing this, X saw an for which he is also convicted.
opportunity to commit theft and take the belongings of other person
who are out of their house. However, X was apprehended and Example;
charged for the crime of theft with the aggravating circumstance that X was a convicted murder. While serving his sentence, he was granted
the crime was committed on the occasion of an earthquake. an absolute pardon by President Duterte. X was released from prison.
After a few weeks, X was engaged in a fight and killed Y. X was
Q: How do we appreciate the aggravating circumstance of convicted with homicide with the aggravating circumstance of
earthquake in relation to the crime of theft? recidivism.
A: The aggravating circumstance of earthquake should be considered
as a qualifying circumstance. Article 310 of the RPC states that when Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of recidivism present in this case?
theft was committed on the occasion of an earthquake, the crime A: YES. The fact that X was granted with pardon does not erase the
committed is qualified theft. In this case, since X committed the crime effects of the prior conviction of murder.
of theft in the occasion of an earthquake, he is liable for qualified
theft. Example;
X was a military man. He was convicted of conspiracy to commit
AID OF ARMED MEN rebellion. While he was serving his sentence, an amnesty
Aid of armed men means that the armed men aided the offender in proclamation was executed by the president for all those who
the commission of the crime. The aid given by the armed men maybe conspired to commit rebellion. X applied for amnesty and was
a direct or indirect participation in the commission of the crime. granted. X was able to get out of prison. Sometime later, X joined
some military men and participated in their coup d’état. X, long with
The armed men who gives aid to the offender are merely accomplices the other military men, were apprehended and convicted.
because they may give material or moral aid to the offender.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of recidivism present in this case?
Armed men v. By a band A: NO. Amnesty erases the effects of the crime as if no crime
BY A BAND AID OF ARMED MEN happened and no crime was committed by the accused. It totally
There must be at least 4 armed There is no requisite as to the obliterates and erase the former conviction. In this case, since X was
malefactors; number of armed men; granted amnesty in the conspiracy to commit to commit rebellion,
The armed men may have recidivism was not present.
Must have acted together in
direct or indirect participation.
the actual commission of the REITERACION OR HABITUALITY
They are mere accomplices of
crime; (conspiracy)
the offender. The offender has been previously punished for an offense to which
the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes
RECIDIVISM to which it attaches a lighter penalty.
A recidivist is one whom at the time of his trial for one crime, shall
have previously been convicted by final judgment of another crime The following are the elements of reiteracion;
embraced in the same title of this Code. 1. That the accused is on trial for an offense;
2. That he previously served sentence for another crime to
The following are the elements of recidivism; which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for
1. The offender is on trial for an offense; two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty;
2. He was previously convicted by final judgment of another 3. That he is also convicted of the new offense.
crime;
3. Both the first and second offenses are embraced in the The first situation is that, he has already served out the sentence, he
same title of the code; has already been punished for a crime.
4. That the offender is convicted of the second offense
charged. Under the second element there are two situations;
1. If it is only one crime it is necessary that the said crime must
Example: carry a penalty equal to or greater than the second crime;
A has been convicted of the crime of attempted homicide. The judge 2. If there are two crimes for which he had been previously
found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt, therefore, he was punished, it is necessary that they carry a lighter penalties
convicted. The judgment became final and executory, therefore he than the new crime for which he is convicted.
was behind bars. He served out his sentence. Once out of prison cell,
he lived a good life. However, after 25 years, he engaged in a fight and There are four forms of habituality;
killed the other man. By reasonable doubt he was charged with and 1. Recidivism; (Article 14, par. 9)
convicted of the crime of murder. 2. Riteracion; (Article 14, par. 10)
3. Habitual Delinquency; (Article 62, no. 5)
Q: Can the judge consider recidivism as an aggravating circumstance 4. Quasi-recidivism; (Article 160)
in imposing the penalty for murder?
A: YES. Both homicide and murder are embraced in the same title of
the code. The fact that 25 years had lapsed from the time of the first
crime to the second crime is immaterial because recidivism is
Recidivism v. Reiteracion A: NO. Slight physical injuries which carries with it the penalty of
RECIDIVISM REITERACION arresto menor is lighter than malicious mischief which carries with it
Requires conviction by final the penalty of arresto mayor. Therefore the judge cannot consider
Requires service of sentence;
judgment; reiteracion as an aggravating circumstance. He was convicted of
May be felonies or offenses malicious mischief and placed behind bars.
Crimes must be felonies;
punishable by special law;
Offenses are under the same Offenses may or may not be in Example;
title of the RPC; the same title of the RPC; In the same problem, after service of sentence, A is now out of prison.
Once out of prison, he was still mad at B. Therefore he made sworn
Example: affidavits stating false statements against B. B filed a case of perjury
A has been convicted of the crime of homicide. Convicted by final against A. he is now on trial for the crime of perjury. The judge found
judgment, he was placed behind bars. He served out his sentence. him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Once out of prison, he committed forcible abduction. Homicide is
punished by reclusion temporal. Forcible abduction is now on trial. Q: Can the judge consider reiteracion as an aggravating
The penalty prescribed by law for forcible abduction is also reclusion circumstance?
temporal. The judge found him guilty for forcible abduction. A: YES. The first two crimes, the penalties of which were already
served out, carry lighter penalties than the third crime: slight physical
Q: Can the judge consider reiteracion as an aggravating injuries, arresto menor; malicious mischief arresto mayor. Therefore
circumstance in imposing the penalty for forcible abduction? reiteracion can be considered.
A: YES. The penalty for the crime of homicide where he has already
served out his sentence is equal to the penalty for forcible abduction, Example;
both reclusion temporal. Therefore, reiteracion or habituality can be X was convicted of homicide with the privilege mitigating
considered. circumstance of incomplete self-defense. The judge imposed upon
him the penalty of Prision coreccional (6 years). X applied for
Example; probation and it was granted. While under probation, X forcibly
B committed forcible abduction. He was convicted by final judgment. abducted his neighbor. As a result, an information for forcible
He served out his sentence. He is now out of prison. Once out of abduction was charged against X with the aggravating circumstance
prison, he committed falsification of public document. He is on trial of reiteracion.
for the said falsification of public document. The judge found him
guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Q: is the aggravating circumstance of reiteracion present in this
case?
Q: In imposing the penalty for falsification of public document, can A: NO. In order for reiteracion to be appreciated as an aggravating
judge consider reiteracion as an aggravating circumstance? circumstance, the offender must have previously served his sentence.
A: YES. The penalty for forcible abduction is reclusion temporal, which By applying probation, the accused admitted to the commission of
is higher than the penalty for falsification of public document the crime, however, he avoided serving sentence. The Supreme Court
committed by a private individual which is only prision correccional. held that probation is not the same as serving once sentence. In this
Therefore, reiteracion or habituality should be considered by the case, there was no reiteracion.
court in imposing the penalty for falsification of public document.
IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD, OR PROMISE.
Example; If the price, reward or promise, as a circumstance is present in the
B committed falsification of public document. Convicted, served out killing of a person, it is not considered as a generic aggravating person
the sentence. After service of sentence, he is out of prison, he but a qualifying aggravating circumstance. It is one of the qualifying
engaged in a fight and killed his opponent. His now on trial for circumstances under Art.248.
homicide. The judge found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
This aggravating circumstance should be considered both against the
Q: Can the judge consider reiteracion as an aggravating person who made the offer and the person who accepted the price,
circumstance? reward or promise. Therefore, it is to be considered both against the
A: NO. The crime for which he has served out his sentence carries a principal by inducement and the principal by direct participation.
penalty lighter than that of the second crime. The law requires that if
it is only one crime, it must carry a penalty equal to or greater than To be considered against the principal by inducement, it is necessary
the second crime he committed. that the price, reward or promise must be the prime reason for the
principal by direct participation committed the crime. That without
Example; the price, reward or promise, the principal by direct participation
A slapped B. B filed a case for slight physical injuries against A. He was would not have committed the crime.
convicted and served out his sentence for slight physical injuries
which is arresto menor. Once out of prison, he was still mad at B. He BY MEANS OF GREAT WASTE AND RUIN
deliberately caused damage to the property of B. B now filed a case That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison,
of malicious mischief against A. The judge found him guilty beyond explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto,
reasonable doubt for malicious mischief. derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice
involving great waste and ruin.
Q: Can the judge consider reiteracion as an aggravating The offender makes use of inundation, fire or explosion in order to
circumstance? commit the crime. It is a means to commit the crime. If these means
are used in killing a person, it is not a generic aggravating Fraud

circumstance, it is a qualifying aggravating circumstance under article Fraud or deceit is manifested by the use of insidious words or
248. It qualifies the killing to murder. machinations resorted to by the accused so that the offended party
will perform an act that will make the offender do the crime easily.
EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
Evident premeditation is the stubborn adherence to a decision to Example;
commit a crime. The offended party was about to sleep on the upper portion of the
house because the lower portion is a store. The offender called over
It implies a deliberate plans before or after the commission of the the owner, saying that he was going to buy something. The owner
crime. went down the house and opened the store. However, upon opening
the store, he was stabbed and robbery was committed. There was
The following are the requisites of evident premeditation; fraud as manifested by the insidious words or machinations, resorted
1. The time when the offender determined to commit the to by the offender.
crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his Disguise
determination; Disguise are ways and means resorted to by the accused to conceal
3. Sufficient lapse time between the determination and his identity.
execution, to allow him to reflect upon the consequences
of his acts; This include stockings, bonnet or anything that could be used so that
one could not be recognized.
Example;
A slapped B two times in front of the public. B felt so humiliated so he If despite disguise he is recognized, rule out disguise as an aggravating
told A “the next time I see you, I will kill you!” B went home and circumstance, it did not serve its purpose.
searched for his gun. He found the same and kept it under his pillow,
waiting for the time to kill A. A month has lapsed. B while walking saw ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH
A. upon seeing A, he immediately run to his house, went to his Abuse of superior strength is intentionally employing excessive force
bedroom and took the gun under his pillow. He raised back to A and out of proportion to the means of defense available to the offended
shot him. party.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation The requisites for abuse of superior strength are the following;
present? 1. That there be a notorious inequality of forces between the
A: YES. First, the time when the offender determined to commit the offender and the offended party in terms of their age, size
crime. That is the time when B told A “the next time I see you, I will and strength;
kill you!” Second, an overt act manifestly indicating that he has clung 2. That the offender took advantage of this inequality of forces
to his determination. He brought a gun. It is an overt act showing that to facilitate the commission of the crime.
he has clung to his determination. Third, a sufficient lapse time
between the determination and execution. A month has passed. That Inequality of forces
is sufficient for him to cool off, to reflect upon the consequences of Inequality of forces includes the following;
his acts. Therefore, evident premeditation was present in the 1. Offender uses weapon to tak advantage;
commission of the crime. 2. Numerical Superiority;
3. Difference in physical characteristics such as age strength
THAT THE CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE BE EMPLOYED. and size.
There are three aggravating circumstances;
1. Craft; The mere fact that there was numerical superiority does not
2. Fraud; automatically mean that there is abuse of superior strength. Under
3. Disguise the second element, evidence must show that the offender
deliberately took advantage of their strength to facilitate the
Craft commission of the crime.
Craft means intellectual trickery or cunning resorted to by the
accused TRERACHERY
There is treachery or alevosia when the offender commits any of the
Example; crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in
The accused knocked at the door. He knows that only the maid was the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
at home. He told the maid that he was a relative of the owners of the execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the
house who came from the province. He was allowed to enter the offended party might make.
house, thereafter he committed a crime of robbery. There was
cunning or intellectual trickery resorted to by the accused for he The following are the elements of treachery;
tricked the maid to consummate the crime of robbery. 1. That the offender deliberately adopted the particular
means, method or form of attack employed by him;
2. That at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a
position to defend himself.
The essence of treachery is the suddenness and unexpectedness of The Offender Adopted Particular Means
the act to unexpecting and unarmed victim who has not even the The offender must have deliberately adopted the particular means,
slightest provocation. The victim must be totally without defense. method or form of attack employed by him.
If the victim was able to put out any defense, no matter how minor, Example;
treachery is not present. A prisoner arrived at the police station. Upon removal of his
handcuffs, he immediately grab the pistol of the arresting officer.
Example; Thereafter he went out pointing the said gun. Upon seeing a woman
A was about to stab B but he was able to parry the blow, that is who was getting inside the PNP station, he shot the woman.
already a defense on his part. He was able to run away, that is already
considered as a defense. Treachery is no longer present. It is Q: The woman died. Is the aggravating circumstance of treachery
necessary that the offended party or the victim must be totally present?
without defense. A: NO. It is a mere chance encounter. The first element is wanting.
There is no showing the offender deliberately adopted the particular
Q: What if the attack is a frontal attack? means, method or form of attack employed by him in killing the
A: Even if it is a frontal attack, if it is so sudden, unexpected, such that woman.
the offended party would not be aware of it and was not able to put
up any defense, there is still treachery. People v. Vilbar (G.R. No. 186541, February 1, 2012)
Guilbert Patricia and his wife Maria Liza owns a sari-sari store. One
Example; night, when Guilbert arrived home from work, he saw the accused
A and B were walking towards each other. When near enough, B who was drunk, urinating in one of the table in their store. Guilbert
suddenly stabbed A. It was a frontal attack yet obviously there was reprimanded the accused, but the accused merely ignored Guilbert.
treachery. A was totally defenseless and B deliberately and Suddenly, the accused approached Guilbert, drew out a knife, and
consciously adopted the means in the commission of the crime. stabbed him repeatedly. The accused was charged with murder
qualified by treachery.
People v. Matibag (G.R. No. 206381, March 15, 2015)
Deceased Duhan was walking along the road when the accused Q: Was treachery present as an aggravating circumstance?
Matibag confronted him and asked “ano bang pinagsasabi mo?”, A: NO. The Supreme Court held that the prosecution in the instant
Duhan replied “wala”. Matibag thereafter hit Duahan and pulled out case merely showed that accused-appellant attacked Guilbert
a gun and shot him. Matibag was charged with the murder qualified suddenly and unexpectedly, but failed to prove that accused-
by treachery. appellant consciously adopted such mode of attack to facilitate the
perpetration of the killing without risk to himself.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of treachery present in this case?
A: YES. The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack. Treachery must be present at the commencement of the attack
A frontal attack does not necessarily rule out treachery. The qualifying For treachery to arise it is necessary that he must be present at the
circumstance may still be appreciated if the attack was so sudden and commencement of the attack in order to know whether the offended
so unexpected that the deceased had no time to prepare for his or party was totally defenseless.
her defense. In this case, Although the attack was frontal, the sudden
and unexpected manner by which it was made rendered it impossible People v. Bokingco (G.R. No. 187536, August 10, 2011)
for Duhan to defend himself, adding too that he was unarmed. The witness saw the deceased Pasion enter the room of Bokingco. The
witness peeped through the window of Bokingco who was seen
When Victim is a Minor hitting something in the floor. Bokingco was charged with murder
Whenever the offended party is a minor, there is always treachery qualified by treachery.
because the minor is always defenseless.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of treachery present?
Example; A: NO. For treachery to be appreciated, the prosecution must prove
Victim is 17 years of age, but a big, macho man, full of muscles. that at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to
defend himself, and that the offender consciously adopted the
Q: Is there treachery? particular means, method or form of attack employed by him.Nobody
A: The Supreme Court held that whenever the offended party is a witnessed the commencement and the manner of the attack. While
minor, there is always treachery. the witness Vitalicio managed to see Bokingco hitting something on
the floor, he failed to see the victim at that time.
Minority Appreciated in Treachery
Minority here does not refer to the statutory definition of minority, People v. Tabarnero (G.R. No. 68169, February 24, 2010)
that is, being below 18 years of age. Minority here is with reference The witness Emerito testified that he saw the deceased Ernesto bing
to the sense of helplessness of the victim. So it is necessary that the held by two persons whil accused Gary and Alberto Tabarnero were
victim is helpless. stabbing the deceased. The witness did not see how the attack
commenced but only that he was attacked by both the accused while
Example; his hands were held by another person.
If the victim is 17 years old with a masculine physique and was able
to put up a defense, there is no treachery. But if the victim is 6 years
old, then there is treachery.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of treachery present in this case? IGNOMINY

A: YES. The Supreme Court held that there was treachery. What the Ignominy is a moral circumstance which adds disgrace or humiliation
witness saw was that the hands of the victim were being held at the to the injury suffered by the victim.
back while he was being attacked. That is sufficient because there was
restraint on the person of the victim. Even the witness did not observe People v. Bumidang (G.R. No. 130630, December 4, 2000)
the commencement of the attack, since there was restraint on his Accused Bumidang went into the house of Melencio Imbat in the
person, he was totally defenseless, treachery is present according to middle night. Accused threatened to kill Melencio and her unmarried
the Supreme Court. daughter Gloria if the door was not opened. When Melencio opened
the door, the accused asked where the room of Gloria is. Melencio
Treachery absorbs Craft thereafter pointed to the room of Gloria. The accused went inside the
If craft was used to insure the commission of the crime without risk room of Gloria. The accused threatened to kill her with a spear if she
to the accused, it is absorbed as treachery. resisted. The accused removed the garments of Gloria, inspected her
genitals with a flashlight and proceeded to have carnal knowledge in
Example; front of Melencio.
A, B, C, and D wanted to kill X. Thus, they procured the uniform of
military en and knocked on the door of X. Upon seeing the military Q: Was there ignominy in this case?
uniform, X allowed A, B, C, and D to enter his house. Once inside, A, A: YES. The Supreme Court held that it was established that
B, C, and D, shot X. They were charged with murder qualified by BALIWANG used the flashlight and examined the genital of Gloria
treachery and with the aggravating circumstance of craft. before he ravished her. He committed his bestial deed in the presence
of Gloria's old father. These facts clearly show that BALIWANG
Q: Was craft absorbed by treachery in this case? deliberately wanted to further humiliate Gloria, thereby aggravating
A: NO. Although, the all the accused dressed up as military men, such and compounding her moral sufferings.
did not facilitate the commission of the crime. The uniform of military
men was merely used as a means to gain entry into the house of X. People v. Saylan (G.R. No. L-36941, June 29, 1984)
Accused Saylan raped Eutropia Agno five times. In one of those time,
Example; Saylan gained entry to the genitals of the Eutropia from behind in dog-
X wanted to kill Y. Thus, X took his gun and hid it in the pocket of his style position. Eutropia filed a complaint for rape against Saylan.
jacket so that it could be concealed. Thereafter, X approached Y and
started talking. While Y was talking, X shot Y with the gun concealed Q: Does the dog-style position adds ignominy to rape?
in his jacket. Y died. A: YES. The entry of the penis was from behind. Although this position
was not novel and in fact normal in case of two consenting partners,
Q: Was craft used to facilitate the commission of the crime? such act adds ignominy in rape cases.
A: YES. Since X hid the gun in his jacket to conceal it from the eyesight
of Y, such means facilitated the crime of murder through craft. People v. Fernandez (G.R. No. L-62116, March 22, 1990)
Rebecca Soriano is employed as a house helper. Rebecca had just
Treachery Absorbs Abuse Superior Strength taken a shower in the house of her master when suddenly, accused
When both abuse of superior strength and treachery is present, only went inside the house and raped her. She added that after the ape,
treachery will be appreciated because abuse of superior strength is the accused grab a handful of mud and smeared it on her vagina.
absorbed by treachery.
Q: Is there ignominy in this case?
Fantastico v. Malicse (G.R. No. 190912, January 12, 2015) A: YES. The act of "plastering" mud on the victim's vagina right after
Elpidio Malicse got into a heated argument with his sister Isabela she was raped, is adequately and properly described as "ignominy".
Iguiron. However, they were pacified by the Barangay Chairman.
Victim Malicse returned to the house of Isabela to apologize, UNLAWFUL ENTRY
however, accused Fantastico (the son-in law of Isabela) along with There is an unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not
Rolly Villanueva, suddenly attacked victim with a stick and lead pipe, intended for the purpose
respectively. Malicse almost died were it not for the intervention of
the barangay tanod. The accused was charged with attempted In correlation to this, paragraph 19 states that as a means to the
murder qualified by abuse of superior strength. commission of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of Abuse of superior strength Example;

present in this case? A was on vacation. B knew that A was on vacation. He saw that the
A: YES. The victim in this case was unarmed, while the accused was window on the third floor of the house was open. He got a ladder and
armed with a stick and a lead pipe. However, there was no treachery placed it in the window, climbed it and entered the house. Then he
in this case. From the facts proven by the prosecution, the incident took the valuables, got out through the window.
was spontaneous, thus, the second element of treachery is wanting.
The incident, which happened at the spur of the moment, negates the Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of unlawful entry present?
possibility that the petitioners consciously adopted means to execute A: NO. The reason is that, the fact that a crime was committed after
the crime committed. an unlawful entry is inherent in the commission of the crime because
the crime committed is robbery under Art.299, robbery with use of
force upon things. The essence of robbery, is in the act of unlawful
entry. The entry was done through a means not intended for anything
that is to a window. Thus, the fact that a crime was committed after Example;
an unlawful entry is not an aggravating circumstance. A person was found dead with several wounds all over his body. The
fact that there was 25-50 wounds cannot immediately mean that
Example; there was cruelty in the commission of the crime. It is necessary to
A was passing by the house of B. Suddenly he saw through the determine, whether first, he was still alive at the time the physical
window, two cellphones being charged. Interested on the cellphones, pain was inflicted; second, did the offender enjoy and delight in
he broke the window entered his hand and took the cellphones. seeing his victim suffer gradually by the infliction of the physical pain.
If there were defense wounds, cruelty cannot be appreciated.
Q: Is the aggravating circumstance that as a means to the
commission of the crime the window was broken present? Ignominy vs. Cruelty
A: YES. The crime committed is theft only and not robbery because IGNOMINY CRUELTY
the offender did not enter the house. In the case of People v. Jaranilla The victim suffered moral pain; The victim suffered physical
(G.R. No. L-28547 February 22, 1974) One essential requisite of pain or physical suffering;
robbery with force upon things is that the malefactor should enter the The victim may either be alive It is necessary that the victim is
building or dependency, where the object to be taken is found. If the or dead; alive;
culprit did not enter the building, there would be no robbery with
force upon things. The crime committed is only theft. In this case, the USE OF AN UNLICENSED FIREARM
offender only broke the window, entered his hand and took the Under section 1 of P.D. 1866 as amended by. R.A. 8294, If homicide
cellphones. Therefore the crime committed is theft. In theft, the fact or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, such
that a window was broken is not inherent it is an aggravating use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance. circumstance.
AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YEARS Special Aggravating Circumstance

If the crime committed makes use of minors under 15 years of age, it In the case of People v. Palaganas (G.R. No. 165483, September 12,
shows the greater perversity of the offender because he knows that 2006) The Supreme Court held that the passage of Republic Act. No.
minors cannot be arrested. Persons below 15 years of age cannot be 8294 on 6 June 1997, the use of an unlicensed firearm in murder or
prosecuted, it is among the exempting circumstances. Therefore, it homicide is now considered as a SPECIAL aggravating circumstance
shows greater perversity. and not a generic aggravating circumstance.
BY MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLE Thus, if the use of unlicensed firearm is inherent in the crime
If the crime is committed with the use of motor vehicle in killing a committed, it shall not constitute as another offense but will be
person, it is a qualifying aggravating circumstance under article 248. considered as a special aggravating circumstance.
If the motor vehicle is used in the commission of any other crime, it is
a mere generic aggravating circumstance. Example;
A killed B by means of an unlicensed firearm. B died and A was
Example; arrested. The firearm was recovered. Two cases were filed against A;
X was walking along the road. Suddenly two men riding in tandem in murder or homicide as the case maybe and illegal possession of
a motorcycle snatched the handbag of X. X was able to identify the unlicensed firearm under PD. 1866 as amended by RA 8294.
plate number of the motorcycle and reported the matter to the
police. The police made an investigation which resulted to the arrest Q: Are the charges correct?
of the two men. A: NO. Under section 1 of PD. 1866 as amended by RA 8294 if
homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed
Q: Is the use of motor vehicle an aggravating circumstance? firearm, such use of unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an
A: YES. The two men used the motor vehicle to snatch the handbag of aggravating circumstance. Therefore, there shall only be one charge
X. Thereafter, the two men utilized the motor vehicle to facilitate of murder or homicide as the case maybe. The use of the unlicensed
their escape. Thus, the aggravating circumstance of use of motor firearm shall be alleged in the information as an aggravating
vehicle is present because it facilitated the commission of the crime. circumstance.
CRUELTY Example;
Cruelty is the additional physical pain aside from the material injury A father and son had an argument. The son shot his father with an
which is not necessary to the commission of the crime. unlicensed firearm. The father died. Two cases were filed against the
son: parricide and illegal possession of unlicensed firearm. The fiscal
The following are the elements of cruelty; opined that under section 1 of PD. 1866 as amended by RA 8294 if
1. That at the time of the infliction of the physical pain, the homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed
offended party is still alive; firearm, such use of unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an
2. That the offender enjoys and delights in seeing his victim aggravating circumstance. It did not provide for parricide, therefore
suffer gradually by the infliction of the physical pain; two cases should be filed.
* The victim must be alive because a corpse cannot feel pain. Q: Is the fiscal correct?
A: NO. SC has already ruled, that the words homicide and murder in
the said law is used in its generic sense. Therefore it includes all kinds
of killing where the penalty prescribed by law is the same as murder
which is reclusion perpetua to death. The penalty prescribed by law is The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into
reclusion perpetua to death. consideration as a mitigating circumstances when the offender has
committed a felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is not
Example; habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit said felony but when
X wanted to carnap the vehicle of Y. In doing so, X approached Y and the intoxication is habitual or intentional, it shall be considered as
intimidated him with an unlicensed firearm. X told Y to surrender his an aggravating circumstance.
vehicle otherwise he will be killed. Y, being terrified for his life,
surrendered the keys to his vehicle. X drove away. Thereafter, Y ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCE
reported the incident to the police. An investigation ensued which Alternative circumstances are those circumstances which can either
lead to the arrest of X. X was charged with the information of be aggravating or mitigating, depending on their effect in commission
carnapping and use of an unlicensed firearm. of the crime.
Q: Is the charge correct? There are three alternative Circumstances in Article 15

A: Yes. The use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an 1. Relationship;
aggravating circumstance only if such use is inherent in the 2. Intoxication;
commission of the crime. In this case, since the use of an unlicensed 3. Degree of Instruction or Education
firearm was not inherent in the commission of the crime of robbery,
it shall be a separate offense. RELATIONSHIP
Relationship is considered as an alternative circumstance when the
Example; offender is related to the offended party as his spouse, ascendants,
X and Y had a fight. X stabbed Y with a knife. Thereafter, the police descendants, legitimate, illegitimate, natural, adopted brothers,
arrived to arrest X. Upon his arrest, X was body searched by the police sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degree.
and found in his possession an unlicensed firearm. X was charged with
homicide and illegal possession. Relationship as mitigating
Relationship is considered as mitigating in crimes against property.
Q: Is the charge correct?
A: YES. Use of an unlicensed firearm will only be appreciated as a Relationship as an Absolutory Cause
special aggravating circumstance if such was inherent in the In certain crimes against property, relationship of the offender with
commission of the crime. In this case, although the crime committed the offended party is exempting.
was homicide, the unlicensed firearm was not used as a means to
facilitate the commission of the crime. Hence the proper charge Example;
against X was the use of an unlicensed firearm and homicide. 1. Theft;
2. Estafa or swindling; and
DANGEROUS DRUGS 3. Malicious mischief;
A killed B. thereafter he chopped the body of B. because of the
manner employed by the accused in killing the victim, the police Under article 332 if the crime committed is theft, estafa or swindling,
suspected that he was under the influence of prohibited drugs. He and malicious mischief, relationship exempts the offender from
was brought to the PNP crime laboratory for forensic examination. criminal liability.
the results provided that he was under the influence of prohibited
drugs. Relationship in crimes against Persons
In crimes against persons, relationship is mitigating if the following
Q: What is the effect of the positive result of the said examination circumstances are present;
on the commission of the crime of the said accused? 1. The offender is of a higher degree than that of the offended
A: Under Section 25 of RA 9165, when a crime is committed by an party; and
offender under the influence of dangerous drugs, such state shall be 2. The crime committed is less physical injury, or slight
considered as a qualifying aggravating circumstance. Therefore, it will physical injury.
bring about a change in the nature of the crime to a more serious
crime with a higher penalty. Relationship is aggravating if the crime committed by the offender
who is of higher degree than that of the offended party is serious
--xXx-- physical injury
Art. 15. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances are Relationship is inherent in the crime of parricide.
those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating or
mitigating according to the nature and effects of the crime and the INTOXICATION
other conditions attending its commission. They are the There is intoxication when the offender has taken such amount of
relationship, intoxication and the degree of instruction and liquor of sufficient quantity as to affect his mental capacity to
education of the offender. determine the consequences of his act.
The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken
into consideration when the offended party in the spouse, Intoxication as mitigating
ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or Intoxication is considered as a mitigating circumstance if it is not
sister, or relative by affinity in the same degrees of the offender. habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit the felony
Intoxication as aggravating On other hand, entrapment is not an absolutory cause because

Intoxication is considered as an aggravating circumstance if it is entrapment refers to ways and means resorted to by the public
habitual and it is done subsequent to the commission of a crime. officer in order to trap and capture a criminal in flagrante delicto.
Here, the mens rea originated from the mind of the offender
Example;
X wanted to commit a crime. Since he had no courage, he deliberately In People vs Naelga (G.R. No. 171018, September 11, 2009) The
takes liquor as a stimulant for him to commit the crime. He was so Supreme Court differentiated instigaton and entrapment.
nervous he cannot commit the crime, so he takes liquor form him to
have the strength to commit the crime. INSTIGATION ENTAPMENT
The mens rea (evil intent) The mens rea (evil intent)
DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION originated from the mind of the originated from the mind of the
As a rule a low degree of education or instruction is considered as a public officer; offender;
mitigating circumstance. An absolutory cause by reason Not an absolutory cause;
of public policy;
Exception: if the crime committed is inherently evil or wrong. The public officer is liable as The public officer is not
principal by inducement; criminally liable;
Exemption;
Killing a person, molesting a woman, taking the personal property of --xXx--
another. Such is as wrong as to a learned man as it is to an ignorant
man. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE
As Aggravating Circumstance Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following are
A high degree of education is considered as an aggravating criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies:
circumstance if the offended makes use of his high degree of Principals.
education in facilitating the commission of the crime. Accomplices.
Accessories.
Example;
A lawyer committing estafa by falsifying a deed of absolute sale. The The following are criminally liable for light felonies:
lawyer makes use of his high degree of education in order to commit Principals
the crime. Accomplices
However, in a case where a lawyer kills another person in the course --xXx--
of an argument, his high degree of education has nothing to do with
the commission of the crime. Therefore in this case, it cannot be Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered principals:
considered as an aggravating circumstance. 1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;
2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
ABSOLUTORY CAUSES 3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by
Absolutory Causes are those circumstance which have the effect in another act without which it would not have been
Article 12. Absolutory causes exempts a person from criminal liability accomplished.
but not from civil liability.
Kinds
Examples; There are three kinds of Principals;
1. Mistake of fact; 1. Principal by direct participation;
2. Instigation; 2. Principal by inducement;
3. Accessories in Light felonies; 3. Principal by direct participation;
EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION

Extenuating circumstances are those which have the same effect as Principal by direct participation are those who take direct part in the
mitigating circumstance but not included in Article 13, to lower the execution of the act.
imposable penalty
The principal by direct participation must necessarily be present in
Example; the scene of the crime because he is the one who actually executed
A mother killed her own child less than 3 days old in order to conceal the crime. Without him, the crime will not be committed.
her dishonor. The penalty here will be lowered by 2 degrees, from
reclusion perpetua to death, the penalty will be prision mayor. PRINCIPAL BY INDUCEMENT
Principal by direct participation are those who directly force or induce
INSTIGATION other to commit it.
I mentioned Instigation, as an absolutory cause. In instigation, the
mens rea originated from the mind of the public officer who only The principal may or may not be present in the scene of the crime.
lured the offender to commit the crime.
Elements; Q: What are the liabilities of A, B, C, D, and E?

1. Inducement be made with the intention of procuring the A: All of them are liable as principals by direct participation, because
commission of the crime; all of them are authors of the criminal design.
2. The inducement is the determining cause of the
commission of the crime by the material executor; Example;
What if, A, B and C decided to rob the bank. On the agreed time and
Forms of inducement place, they were already about to go to the bank, but suddenly they
Inducement may come in different forms; realized they have no vehicle. So they flagged down a taxi. They
1. Giving of price, reward or promise; informed the taxi driver of their criminal design, to which the taxi
2. By employing force, command or ascendancy which is being driver agreed for his car to be used as a getaway vehicle. While on
followed by the principal by direct participation. their way to the bank, they realized that they needed a lookout. They
saw a balut vendor and asked him, “Can you be our lookout? The
PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION moment you see a police coming, shout baluuuuut!” The said vendor
Principal by indispensable cooperation are those who cooperate in agreed to the said criminal design. After robbing the bank, A B C and
the commission of the offense by another act without which it would the balut vendor boarded the taxi.
not have been accomplished.
Q: What is the criminal liability of each?
Elements; A: A, B, and C, are liable as principal by direct participation, while the
1. The accused participated in the criminal resolution; taxi driver and the balut vendor are liable as accomplices. They are
2. Performance by him of another act indispensable to the accomplices since A, B, and C already agreed on the criminal design
accomplishment of the crime; before they informed the two of the same and the latter concurred
by performing simultaneous acts or subsequent to the commission of
The principal by indispensable cooperation must be at the scene of the crime.
the crime because he must perform another act without the crime
would not have been. * So no matter how minor the participation is of an offender, if he is
an author of the criminal design, even if he only acted as a lookout,
--xXx-- still he is liable as a principal by direct participation
Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons Example;

who, not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the execution of the X wanted to kill Y. X knows that Y is living in a dorm. In order to
offense by previous or simultaneous acts. execute his plan, X contacted W who is also living in the same dorm
as Y. X told W of his plan to kill Y. X asked W to open the gate of the
The accomplice merely cooperate in the commission of the crime by dorm at exactly 1 am so that X could enter. At exactly 1am, W opened
previous of simultaneous acts. The participation is only minor in the door to the dorm allowing X to enter. Upon entering, X
character. It only provides material and moral aide in an efficacious immediately went to the room of Y. Thereafter, X stabbed Y. Y died.
manner but not in an indispensable manner.
Q: What is the liability of X?
If the act performed by the offender facilitated the commission of the A: X is liable as a principal by direct participation in the crime of
crime, but it is not indispensable in the commission of the crime, with homicide regarding the death of Y. X is the one who performed all the
or without said act nevertheless, the crime had been committed, the acts of execution by stabbing Y resulting to the death of the latter.
offender is merely an accomplice.
Q: What is the liability of W?
Requisites to be an accomplice; A: W is liable as an accomplice. Although W knew of the plan to kill X,
1. There must be a community of design; he did not participate the criminal resolution thereof. X merely
2. That he performs the acts previous or simultaneous to the informed W of the plan, and W merely concurred. Likewise, the acts
commission of the crime; and of W in opening the gate for X is not an indispensable act in order to
3. That the acts performed by the principal is related to the consummate the homicide of Y. X could have easily asked another
acts performed by the accomplice. person to open the gate of the dorm for him.
Community of design --xXx--

The accomplice had been informed of the criminal design of the
offender and having been informed, he concurs with the said criminal Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who, having
design. He’s not part of the conspiracy but he knows and concurs with knowledge of the commission of the crime, and without having
the design because he was informed of the same only after the participated therein, either as principals or accomplices, take part
principal had come up with agreement. subsequent to its commission in any of the following manners:
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to
Example; profit by the effects of the crime;
A, B, C, D, and E decided to rob a bank. Based on their agreement, A.B, 2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or
and C will be the ones to enter the bank. D will serve as lookout. E will the effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery;
serve as the driver of the vehicle. They committed the crime on the 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of
date agreed upon. the principals of the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse
of his public functions or whenever the author of the crime is guilty
of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the life of the of arson. W executed the acts of execution of arson in burning the
Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other; house of Y with the body of Y inside.
Knowledge of the Crime Example;

The accessory does not know the criminal design. What he knows is X and Y were fighting. Y kicked and punched X. X lost the fight and fell
the commission of the crime. Despite knowledge that the crime has down. W, who saw the fight, gave X a gun and ordered to shoot Y. S,
been committed, he take part subsequent to its commission. another bystander, also told X to shoot Y. X shot Y who died
immediately. X went home. Feeling guilty of the crime that he
BY PROFITING FROM THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME. committed, confessed to his father what he had done. X gave the gun
The accomplice profited themselves or assisted the offender to profit that he used to his father. The father hid the gun to prevent its
from the effects of the crime. discovery by the police.
Example; Q: What is the liability of X?

A, by means of deceit, was able to take the diamond ring of his friend. A: X is guilty of homicide as a principal by direct participation. X
So A swindled his friend by means of deceit. After taking the ring, she completed all the acts of execution for homicide by pulling the trigger
went to B. A told B “B, I have here a diamond ring, I swindled it from of the gun which immediately resulted to the death of Y.
my friend and I’m selling it to you for only 10k. B bought the said ring
and displayed it to his shop to have it sold. Later B was found in Q: What is the liability of W?
possession of the said ring. A: W is considered as a principal by indispensable cooperation in the
crime of homicide. W gave a gun to X which the latter used to shoot
Q: Is B liable as an accessory? and kill Y. Were it not for the gun which W gave, X would not have
A: YES. B assisted A, the principal of the crime of swindling, in profiting used said gun to kill Y therby committing homicide.
from the effects of the crime by buying the stolen diamond ring.
Furthermore, B slater sold the diamond ring for profit. Thus, B is Q: What is the liability of S?
considered as an accomplice. A: S is not criminally liable. Even though S also told X to shoot Y, he
did not provide the gun to complete the acts of the execution.
DESTROYING THE BODY OF THE CRIME TO PREVENT ITS DISCOVERY Likewise, absence of any finding of conspiracy, or that S participated
2nd act of an accomplice is by concealing or destroying the body of the in the criminal resolution of homicide, such words of encouragement
crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its does not make him criminally liable.
discovery.
Q: What is the liability of the father?
Body of the crime A: The father is liable as an accessory. By concealing the gun which X,
The body of the crime does not mean the corpse of a deceased person his son, used to commit the crime of homicide, he assisted by
in murder, or the item stolen in case of robbery or theft. It means that concealing the effects or the instrument of the crime of homicide in
a fact has been committed by someone. order to prevent its discovery. However, by virtue of Article 20, the
father is exempted from the criminal liability because X was his son.
Elements of body of the crime; However, he is liable for obstruction of justice because he assisted in
1. Proof of occurrence of a certain event; preventing the discovery of the crime of homicide.
2. Proof of person’s criminal liability;
ASSISTING THE ESCAPE OF THE PRINCIPAL
Example; The 3rd act of the accessory is by harboring, concealing, or assisting
X and Y were engaged in a fight. In the course of the said fight, X killed in the escape of the principals of the crime, provided that he either;
Y. Thereafter, X told his friend W to bring the body of Y to the house 1. Acts with abuse of his public functions; or
of Y and burn it to conceal and destroy the body of Y in exchange for 2. The author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide,
100k. Needing the money, W took the body of Y and brought it in the murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief
house Y. Thereafter, W burned down the house of Y. Thereafter, the Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty of some other
relatives of Y reported to the police that he has been missing for a offense;
long time. The police made an investigation which lead to the arrest
of X and W. * If the accessory who harbored and concealed or assisted in the
escape of the of the principal is a private individual, the law specifies
Q: What is the liability of X? the crime committed, which is PD 1829, otherwise known as
A: X is a principal by direct participation in the crime of homicide of Y, Obstruction of Justice.
because it was X who executed the acts of execution which lead to
the death of Y. Likewise, X, is a principal by inducement in the crime OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
of arson. Were it not for the consideration given by X to W, the latter Obstruction of Justice is committed by any person who willfully and
would not have burned the house of Y with the body of Y inside for lawfully obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the apprehension of
the purpose of concealing the crime of homicide. suspects and the investigation and prosecution of criminal cases.
Q: What is the liability of W? Example;

A: W is an accessory of the crime of homicide of Y. W assisted in the The principal committed swindling or estafa. X harbored the principal
concealing and destroying the corpse of Y by burning it in Y’s own despite knowing the latter committed estafa. X cannot be considered
house. However, W is a principal by direct participation in the crime
as an accessory because estafa or swindling is not among the crimes the incident to the police. Upon investigation, the police
mentioned in the second part of the 3rd act. apprehended X, the mother, and the jewelry store owner.
Q: What is the criminal liability of the friend? Q: What is the liability of X?

A: He is liable for obstruction of justice under P.D. 1829. A: X is liable as principal by direct participation in the crime of
qualified theft. X used his occupation as a house help as a means to
Example; facilitate the commission of the crime of theft.
What if A and B sisters. They had a housemaid, X. A and B were cruel
to X, for a minor mistake they would slap, boxed or injure her. One Q: What is the liability of the mother?
time, A went to work. When she arrived home, she saw the deceased The mother is liable as an accessory because she assisted X from
body of X. A and B placed the deceased body in a sack and placed it profiting from the effects of the crime. Despite having knowledge of
on the trunk of their car. However, someone witnessed their act who the commission of the crime, the mother deposited the money to a
immediately called the police, reporting that he saw 2 women putting bank in order to gain interest therefrom. Likewise by selling the
a sack in the truck wherein 2 feet were protruding from the said sack. jewelries to the jewelry store, the mother enriched herself from the
A and B were prosecuted and both convicted for murder. stolen jewelries.
Q: Are both A and B liable for murder? Q: What is the liability of the Jewelry store owner?
A: NO. The Supreme Court said that only B is liable, not for murder A: The Jewelry store owner is liable as a fence. The jewelry store
but only for homicide. When A arrived, the housemaid was already owner, knowing that the said jewels were sold to him at an extremely
dead. low price, should have known that the same were proceeds of the
crime of robbery or theft.
Q: Does A have no criminal liability?
A: A is considered as an accessory. Her act of trying to place the Q: If you were the fiscal, what case would you prefer to file against
deceased body inside the trunk of the car in order to prevent the the jewelry store owner? a fence or an accessory?
discovery of the crime her act constitutes that of an accessory. But A: You can only file either of the two. It’s better to file fencing.
she falls under Article 20 since she is related to the offender. Because it is easier to prove. While in accessory, he must first know
that the crime has been committed. In fencing, it is not necessary that
FENCING he knows.
Under P.D. 1612, a fence includes any person, firm, association
corporation or partnership or other organization who/which commits Section 5 of PD 1612 provided a prima facie presumption of fencing.
the act of fencing. The burden of evidence is shifted on the accused
“Fencing" is the act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself --xXx--
or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell
or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal
article, item, object or anything of value which he knows, or should liability. — The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be
be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses,
crime of robbery or theft. ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers
and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the
Elements single exception of accessories falling within the provisions of
In the case of Dimat v. People (G.R. No. 181184, January 25, 2012) The paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.
Supreme Court held the following as elements of fencing;
1. A robbery or theft has been committed; An accessory is exempted from criminal liability in the following
2. The accused, who took no part in the robbery or theft, buys, instances;
receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or 1. When the crime committed is a light felony;
disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any 2. When the said accessory is the spouses, ascendants,
article or object taken during that robbery or theft; descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and
3. The accused knows or should have known that the thing sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees;
derived from that crime; and
4. He intends by the deal he makes to gain for himself or for --xXx--
another.
Example;
X was a house helper. One night, when the master was not home, X
went to the room of his master and took the jewelries worth 500k and
cash worth 1M from the cabinet. X went to his mother and told her
that she stole the jewelries and cash from the master. The mother
deposited the cash to a bank. The mother sold the jewelries to a
jewelry store in a discounted amount of 100k. When the master came
home, he found the jewelries and cash missing. The master reported
Light penalties:
Arresto menor,
Public censure.
Penalties common to the three preceding classes:

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW Fine, and
Bond to keep the peace.
PART II
PENALTIES ACCESSORY PENALTIES
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be
voted for, the profession or calling.
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of
the offense,
Payment of costs.
PENALTIES --xXx--
Penalties refers to punishment, imposed by lawful authority upon a
person who has committed an intentional felony or a culpable felony CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
2 kinds of penalties; DEATH

1. Principal; and Under RA 9346, death penalty cannot be imposed.
2. Accessory
SEC. 2 of RA 9346: in lieu of death penalty it shall be reclusion
Principal penalties perpetua in case of violation of the RPC and life imprisonment in case
Principal penalties are penalties prescribed by law or precribed by the of violation of Special Penal Laws.
court.
SEC. 3. Person convicted of offenses punished with reclusion
Accessory penalties perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua,
Accessory penalties are those which are necessarily included in the by reason of this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No.
imposition of principal penalties. 4180, otherwise known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as
amended.
--xXx--
--xXx--
Art. 25. Penalties which may be imposed. — The penalties
which may be imposed according to this Code, and their different AFFLICTIVE PENALTIES
classes, are those included in the following:
RECLUSION PERPETUA AND LIFE IMPRISONMENT
SCALE Reclusion perpetua is imposed in case the offender violated the
provisions of the Revised Penal Code. On the other hand, life
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES imprisonment is imposed in case the offender violate the provisions
Capital punishment: of the special penal laws.
Death.
Reclusion perpetua v. Life Imprisonment
Afflictive penalties: The following are the distinctions reclusion perpetua and life
Reclusion perpetua, imprisonment;
Reclusion temporal,
Perpetual or temporary absolute RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT
disqualification, Penalty is imposed in case of Penalty is imposed in case of
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, violation of the Revised Penal violation of special penal laws;
Prision mayor. Code;
Carries a duration of 20 to 40 No fixe duration;
Correctional penalties: years;
Prision correccional, Carries with it an accessory Does not carry an accessory
Arresto mayor, penalty; penalty’
Suspension,
Destierro. Q: Is Reclusion perpetua a divisible penalty?
A: NO. In People v. Lucas (G.R. Nos. 108172-73, January 9, 1995)
had the Congress intended that Reclusion perpetua be a
divisible penalty, the application of two indivisible
penalties under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code will
be meaningless and there would be no statutory rules for
determining when either reclusion perpetua or death
should be the imposable penalty
CORRECTIONAL PENALTIES
Q: If reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty, then what is the
reason for fixing the duration of reclusion perpetua? PRISION CORRECCIONAL AND DESTIERRO
A: In the same case as mentioned above, the Supreme Court held Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the duration of the
that the duration of thirty (30) years for reclusion perpetua is penalties of prision correccional shall be from six (6) months and one
necessary to serve as the basis for determining the convict's eligibility (1) day to six (6) years.
for pardon or for the application of the three-fold rule in the service
of multiple penalties. DESTIERRO
Under Article 87 of the Revised Penal Code, any person sentenced to
RECLUSION TEMPORAL destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the duration of reclusion designated in the sentence, nor within the radius therein specified,
temporal is 12 years and 1 day to 20 years. which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers
from the place designated.
PRISION MAYOR
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the duration of Prision Destierro is a principal penalty and has a duration of six (6) months
mayor shall be from six (6) year and one day to twelve (12) years. and one (1) day to six(6) years under Article 27 of the Revised Penal
Code,
DISQUALIFICATION
Perpetual or Temporary Absolute Disqualification Perpetual or SUSPENSION
Temporary Special Disqualification may be either a principal penalty Suspension may either be a principal penalty or an accessory penalty.
or an accessory penalty.
Suspension as principal penalty
Principal Penalty Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the duration of the
As a principal penalty, the duration of temporary absolute or special penalties of destierro shall be from six (6) months and one (1) day to
disqualification shall be from six (6) year and one day to twelve (12) six(6) years.
years under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code.
Suspension as accessory penalty
Accessory Penalty Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, when the penalty of
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, when the penalty of destierro is imposed as an accessory penalty, its duration shall be that
temporary special or absolute disqualification is imposed as an of the principal penalty.
accessory penalty, its duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
ARRESTO MAYOR
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, The duration of the
penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one (1) month and one (1) day
to six (6) months.
The principal penalty which accompanies perpetual absolute --xXx--

disqualification are the following;
1. Death; (thirty years following the date of sentence) LIGHT PENALTIES
2. Reclusion perpetua;
3. Reclusion temporal; ARRESTO MENOR
The principal penalty which accompanies perpetual special --xXx--

disqualification of the right of suffrage are the following;
1. Prision mayor;
2. Prision correccional ;
Perpetual Absolute v. Temporary Absolute

PERPETUAL ABSOLUTE TENMPORARY ABSOLUTE
Effective during the lifetime of Disqualification lasts during the
the convict and even after the term of the sentence, and is
service of the sentence; removed after the service of
the sentence, except:
1. Deprivation of the
Public
office/employment;
2. Loss of all rights to
retirement pay or
pension for any office
formerly held.
Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the duration of
the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one (1) day to thirty (30)
days.
PUBLIC CENSURE
A principal and indivisible penalty that has no fixed duration.
--xXx--
PENALTIES COMMON TO THE THREE

CLASSESS
FINE
A pecuniary penalty which is imposed by the court in case of
the judgment of conviction. Instead of imprisonment, the
penalty imposed is fine.
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE

Under Article 35 of the Revised Penal Code, It shall be the duty of
any person sentenced to give bond to keep the peace, to
present two sufficient sureties who shall undertake that such
person will not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and
that in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount
determined by the court in the judgment, or otherwise to
deposit such amount in the office of the clerk of the court to
guarantee said undertaking.
Bond to keep the peace is a principal penalty.

Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and

Bond for Good Behavior forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be property of a
Bond to keep the peace is different from bond for good behavior. third person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are
not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
Under Article 284 of the Revised Penal Code, in cases of grave threats
and light threats, the person making the threats may also be required PAYMENT OF COST
to give bail not to molest the person threatened, or if he shall fail to Cost means the expenses of litigation.
give such bail, he shall be sentenced to destierro.
Cost Includes
Bond to keep the peace v. Bond for good behavior Under Article 7 of the Revised Penal Code, costs shall include fees and
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR indemnities in the course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be
May be applied to all cases; Applicable only to cases of fixed or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or
grave threats and light threats; regulations in force, or amounts not subject to schedule.
Failure to post a bond to keep If a person fails to post a bond
the peace results to for good behavior , he shall be Q: Who shall pay the cost?
imprisonment either for six (6) sentenced to destierro; A: If an accused is convicted of a crime, cost shall be adjudged against
months or thirty (30) days him. However, in case of acquittal, each party must bear his own lost.
depending on whether the --xXx--
felony committed is grave or
less grave on one hand, or a PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT
light felony on the other; Preventive Imprisonment is the detention of accused while the case
against him is on going trial either because;
1. The crime he committed is a non-bailable offense and
evidence of guilt is strong; or
2. The crime committed is a bailable offense but he does not
have the funds.
--xXx--
Q: Can the period of preventive imprisonment undergone by the
ACCESSORY PENALTIES accused be credited to his final sentence?
A: YES. As a general rule, Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code states
CIVIL INTERDICTION that offenders who have undergone preventive imprisonment shall
Under Article 34 of the Revised penal Code, Civil interdiction shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of deprivation
deprive the offender during the time of his sentence the following of liberty, with the full time during which they have undergone
rights; preventive imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily
1. Rights of parental authority; in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
2. Guardianship, either as to the person or property of any convicted prisoners, except in the following cases;
ward; 1. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously
3. Marital authority, twice or more times of any crime; and
4. The right to manage his property; and 2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their
5. The right to dispose of such property by any act or any sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily;
conveyance inter vivos.
Q: What is the effect if the detention prisoner does not abide by the
The offender sentenced to civil interdiction ma make a last will and same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners?
testament because the prohibition to dispose property extends only A: Under Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code, if the detention
to inter vivos and not to mortis causa. prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules
imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the service
Donation may also be made by the offender provided that it shall take of his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has
effect after death or mortis causa. undergone preventive imprisonment.
An accessory penalty Q: What is the effect if the accused has undergone imprisonment for
Civil Interdiction is always an accessory penalty in case of the a period equal to or more than the maximum imprisonment for the
following principal penalties; offense charged?
1. Death; A: Under Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code, whenever an accused
2. Reclusion perpetua; has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal to or
3. Reclusion temporal; more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense
charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet
FORFEITURE AND CONFISCATION terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to the
Under Article 45 of the Revised penal Code, every penalty imposed for continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the
the commission of a felony shall carry with it the forfeiture of the same is under review.
proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools with which it was
committed.
Preventive imprisonment for Destierro Q: Will the pardon of X in the crime of acts lasciviousness against Y
In case the maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced operate to dismiss the case already instituted?
is destierro, he shall be released after thirty (30) days of preventive A: NO. Although the crime committed by Y is a private crime under
imprisonment. Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code, the case will not be dismissed
because it was given after the institution of the criminal prosecution.
Q: Can the period of preventive imprisonment be deducted in case
of destierro? Q: What is the effect of pardon given by X?
A: YES. Because destierro also involves deprivation of liberty and has A: The pardon of X will only serve as to extinguish the civil liability of
a fixed duration of six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) years. Y in the complaint for acts of lasciviousness.
NOTE: If detention has already exceeded the possible maximum Regardless of whether private or public crimes, the pardon given by
imprisonment of the offense charged but his case is not yet the private complainant must be prior to the institution of the
terminated, file a case for Habeas Corpus for the immediate release criminal case.
of the accused.
Marital Rape
--xXx-- Although the general rule is that pardon must be given prior to the
institution of the criminal case, Article 266-C of the Revised Penal
PARDON Code, the subsequent valid marriage between the offended party
There are two kinds of pardon; shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.
1. Pardon by the offended party; (Article 23)
2. Pardon by the President; (Article 36) Under Article 266-C of the revised penal Code, in case it is the legal
husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife
Pardon by the offended party as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the
Under Article 23 of the Revised Penal Code, a pardon of the offended penalty: Provided, That the crime shall not be extinguished or the
party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
344 of this Code; but civil liability with regard to the interest of the
injured party is extinguished by his express waiver. Pardon by the President
Under Article 36 of the Revised Penal Code, a pardon shall not work
Example; the restoration of the right to hold public office, or the right of
X killed Y. The relatives of Y filed a complaint for homicide against X. suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the
thereafter, X asked forgiveness from the relatives of Y. The relatives pardon.
of Y accepted the apology of X and thereby granted him a pardon.
Just like amnesty and parol, the pardon by the president does not
Q: Will the pardon of the offended party extinguish the criminal extinguish civil liability because the same is personal to the victim.
liability of the offender in homicide?
A: NO. In the crime of homicide, pardon by the offended party will not 2 kinds of pardon by the president;
extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. Homicide is a public 1. Absolute pardon; (Article 89)
crime and it is essentially more of an offense against the state rather 2. Conditional Pardon; (Article 94)
than the offended party because it causes disturbance or public
disorder. In addition, Presidential Pardon does not automatically restore the
following rights, unless they are specifically stated by the terms of the
Private Crimes pardon;
Pardon by the offended party does will only operate to extinguish the 1. To hold public office;
criminal liability in private crimes as mentioned under under Article 2. To vote and be voted; and
344 of the Revised Penal Code; 3. To exercise his right of suffrage;
1. Adultery;
2. Concubinage; Pardon by the President v. Pardon by the Offended party
3. Seduction; PARDON BY THE PRESIDENT PARDON BY THE OFFENDED
4. Abduction; PARTY
5. Rape; and Extinguishes criminal liability; Does not extinguish criminal
6. Acts of lasciviousness; liability whether public or
private crime with the
Example; exception of Marital Rape
X filed a complaint for acts of lasciviousness against Y. during the trial, under Article 266-C;
Y asked for forgiveness from X. X accepted the apology of Y. Does not extinguish civil liability Extinguish civil liability as it is
Thereafter, X granted Y a pardon. of the offender; deemed as a waiver;
Pardon must be made before Pardon may only be made after
Pardon prior to Criminal proceedings the institution of the criminal conviction by final judgment
For pardon to extinguish the criminal liability of the offender, it must case; only in private crimes;
be given prior to the institution of the criminal action.
--xXx--
Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment. — In case Rate of Subsidiary Penalty
the property of the offender should not be sufficient for the Under Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code, if the convict has no
payment of all his pecuniary liabilities, the same shall be met in the property with which to meet the fine mentioned in paragraph 3 of
following order: Article 38 of the Revised Penal Code, he shall be subject to a
The reparation of the damage caused. subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for each amount
Indemnification of consequential damages equivalent to the highest minimum wage rate prevailing in the
The fine. Philippines at the time of the rendition of judgment of conviction by
The cost of the proceedings. the trial court subject to the following rules;
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or
PECUNIARY LIABILITIES PECUNIARY PENALITIES arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until
(ARTICLE 38) (ARTICLE 25) his fine referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied,
Imposed by the court in case of Imposed by the court in case of but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third
conviction but not as penalty; conviction as a penalty; of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue
for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall
--xXx-- be counted against the prisoner;
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the
Article 39. Subsidiary penalty. - If the convict has no subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the
property with which to meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave
of the nest preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony;
personal liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos, subject 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision
to the following rules: correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional upon the culprit;
or arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine 4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by
referred to in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the term of the fixed duration, the convict, during the period of time
sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more than one year, established in the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer
and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted against the the same deprivations as those of which the principal
prisoner. penalty consists;
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the 5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him,
shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall from the fine in case his financial circumstances should
not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony. improve. (As amended by RA 5465, April 21, 1969).
3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision
correccional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the Limitations of Subsidiary Penalty
culprit. Subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed on the following instances;
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by 1. If the judgment of the court did not impose fine as a
confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed penalty;
duration, the convict, during the period of time established in the 2. If the judgment of the court did not expressly state that in
preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations as case of nonpayment of fine, the convict shall suffer
those of which the principal penalty consists. subsidiary penalty;
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may 3. If the principal penalty that goes with fine exceeds prision
have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from correccional or higher than 6 years;
the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As 4. If the principal penalty that goes with fine does not have
amended by RA 5465, April 21, 1969). fixed duration;
5. If what the convict thinks to pay is not fine but damages and
SUBSIDIARY PENALTY cost;
Subsidiary Penalty is a substitute penalty for fine in case of insolvency
by the accused. Example;
X was convicted of reckless imprudence causing damage to property.
Q: If the accused is insolvent and cannot pay the fine, may he be Penalty imposed on him is fine and public censure. Lower portion of
imposed of a subsidiary penalty of imprisonment? the decision “in case of insolvency to pay the fine, he shall suffer
A: NO. Absent any express statement of subsidiary penalty by the subsidiary penalty”.
court, subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed even if the accused is
insolvent and cannot pay the fine. Q: Is the court correct?
A: NO. The principal penalty that goes with fine is public censure is
Q: Why must there be an express statement by the court imposing not to be executed in a penal institution and is an indivisible penalty.
subsidiary penalty?
A: Because it is only a substitute penalty. A subsidiary penalty is not a Example;
principal penalty nor an accessory penalty, but only a substitute Accused was convicted of prision mayor and fine. The decision of the
penalty for fine. court includes a statement that in case of insolvency to pay the fine,
he shall suffer subsidiary penalty.
Q: Is the court correct? Example; aberratio ictus

A: NO. Subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed if the principal penalty A aimed the gun at B. But because of poor aim, it shot C a pedestrian
is higher than the prision correccional. Since prision mayor is more walking. Treachery was attended. As to B, crime committed is
than 6 years, subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed. attempted murder. As to C, murder. Crime committed is attempted
murder.
Example;
X was convicted of a felony. The penalty imposed on him is fine alone. Example;
The judgment became final and executory. A writ of execution was A political rival placed a bomb on B’s car. A person died, several
issued by the court, however such writ was unsatisfied. The judge persons injured. A single act placing the bomb produces two or more
ordered for his arrest to suffer subsidiary penalty. less grave felonies. Crime is murder with multiple frustrated murder.
Q: Is the court correct? If two persons died, the charge is double murder. If three or more
A: NO. Failure to state that in case of insolvency to pay the fine, persons died, the crime is multiple murder. There is no complex crime
convict cannot be made to suffer subsidiary penalty. of triple murder.
Example; Example;
X was convicted of a fine with a subsidiary penalty. However, X was X wanted to kill Y. to kill Y, X placed a bomb under the car of Y. When
insolvent so he was imprisoned. When he was released he bought Y and wife and 3 children opened the car, the bomb exploded. As a
lottery tickets and won the lottery. X is now a multimillionaire. result, Y and his wife died. However, the children survived due to
Thereafter, the court issued a writ of execution against him. X argues medical treatment.
that his fine is now satisfied because he was subsidiarily imprisoned
in lieu thereof. Q: Is X liable for a complex crime?
A: YES. The single act of X in placing the bomb in the car of Y resulted
Q: Can the court issue a writ of execution against X despite serving to 5 grave felonies; the murder of Y and his wife, and the frustrated
the subsidiary penalty of imprisonment? murder of the children. The charge should be double murder with
A: YES. Even if X already served the prison term for subsidiary multiple frustrated murder.
imprisonment, the court may still hold him liable for the fine
unsatisfied. Q: In the same problem, what is the crime committed if all of them
died?
--xXx-- A: X will be liable for multiple murder because the single act of placing
a bomb resulting to 5 grave felonies. There should only be one charge
* Memorize the Rules in Articles 50 – 57. or one information filed in court.
* Exception to Articles 50 – 57 is Article 60.
Example;
--xXx-- X is armed with M-16 high powered rifle, machine gun. He went inside
the conference room. One pull of trigger, many bullets came out
Article 48. Penalty for complex crimes. - When a single act hitting 5 persons.
constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an
offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty Q: is X liable for the complex crime of multiple murder?
for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied A: NO. If the weapon used is a high powered machine gun, the factor
in its maximum period. to be considered is the number of bullets which came from the
machine gun and the number of people wounded or killed rather than
2 Kinds of Complex Crime the single act of pulling the trigger. Thus, X is liable for 5 counts of
There are 2 kinds of complex crime; murder.
1. Compound Crime;
2. Complex Crime Proper; COMPLEX CRIME PROPER
Complex crime proper is present when the offense is a necessary
In both kinds, only one (1) information is filed and the accused shall means commit the another offense.
suffer the penalty for the most serious crime in its maximum period.
Elements
COMPOUND CRIME The following are the elements of complex crime proper;
Compound Crime is present when the offender performs a single act 1. Two offenses committed;
which constitutes to two or more grave or less grave felonies. 2. Offenses necessary means to commit the other;
3. Both crimes are punished by the same statute
Basis
Basis of compound crime is the singularity of act of the offender. Example
The following are examples of complex crime proper;
Elements 1. Rape with forcible abduction - A was on the ladder of the
The elements of compound crime are the following; house, B a woman abducted her against her will and with
1. Offender performs single act; lewd design;
2. Resulted to two or more less grave felonies Basis: 2. Estafa thru falsification of public document. Person falsifies
Singularity of act a public document – Falsification used to defraud another;
Estafa through falsification of private document A: Crime committed is one charge of theft. X impelled by a single
There is no estafa by falsification of private document. In estafa and impulse committed overt acts leading to theft.
falsification of private document, there is only and the same damage
contemplated by both felonies. Thus, only charge can be made, either Santiago v. Garchtorena (G.R. No. 109266, December 2, 1993)
falsification or estafa, otherwise the prohibition against the twice Petitioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago was charged in the
recovery for damages will be violated. Sandiganbayan with the Anti-Graft & Corrupt Practices Act for
favoring 32 “unqualified” aliens with the benefits of the Alien
If estafa cannot be committed without falsification, the correct Legalization Program. Defender-Santiago moved for a bill of
charge is falsification. Estafa is merely a consequence. particulars, contending that unless she be provided with the names
and identities of the “aliens” she would not be able to adequately
If estafa can be committed without falsifying, the proper charge is prepare for trial. Initially, the public prosecutors stated that they
estafa. Falsification is merely an incident of estafa. would file only one amended complaint, but they later filed 32
amended informations, separately naming each of the aliens in each
On the other hand, in falsification of public document, damage is not of the informations. The Sandiganbayan admitted the 32 amended
an element of the offense. Thus, the charge of estafa thru falsification informations.
of public document may exist.
Q: Was it correct to admit the 32 amended informations?
SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME A: NO. For delito continuado to exist there should be a plurality of
Special complex crimes exist when, in reality, two or more crimes are acts performed during a period of time; unity of penal provision
committed but in the eyes of law only one. violated; and unity of criminal intent or purpose, which means that
two or more violations of the same penal provisions are united in one
It is the law which provides what crimes would be complexed and and same instant or resolution leading to the perpetration of the
what crimes go together; same criminal purpose or aim. In this case, the 32 Amended
1. Robbery with homicide; (Article 294) Informations aver that the offenses were committed on the same
2. Kidnapping with homicide; (Article 267 as amended by R.A. period of time, i.e., on or about October 17, 1988. The strong
7659) probability even exists that the approval of the application or the
3. Rape with homicide; (Article 266-B) legalization of the stay of the 32 aliens was done by a single stroke of
the pen, as when the approval was embodied in the same document.
Special Complex Crime v. Compound Crime
SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME COMPOUND CRIME CONTINUING CRIME OR TRANSITORY OFFENSE.
The law specifies the crimes Crimes are general; In Continuing crime, the offender may be prosecuted in any courts of
which are combined; the place where any of the crime has been committed. This is more
Law provides for the penalty; The penalty for the most on remedial law not in criminal law.
serious crime is imposed in the
maximum period; Example;
Light felonies are absorbed; Light felonies committed is a X in payment of his obligation, issued a postdated check to Y in
separate and distinct charge; Manila, on the maturity date, Y deposited the check to his depositary
bank in Quezon City. The check however was dishonored by the
DELITO CONTINUADO. drawee bank in Caloocan City. Notice of dishonor was sent. X failed to
Delicto continuado or continuous crime is present when the offender make good the check. A complaint was filed against X for violation of
is impelled by a single criminal impulse commits a series of overt acts B.P. 22.
in about the same time and about the same place violating one and
the same provision of law. Basis is singularity of impulse. Q: Where may Y file the case for violation of BP 22?
A: The complaint may be filed in any of the court where the elements
Basis of the crime occurred.
The basis is the singularity of impulse of the offender.
If the BP 22 case has already been filed in the MTC of Manila, the said
Elements case can no longer be filed before the MTC of Quezon City or Caloocan
In the case of Santiago v. Garchtorena (G.R. No. 109266, December 2, City.
1993) the Supreme Court established the elements of delito
continuado; --xXx--
1. Plurality of acts performed during a period of time;
2. Unity of penal provisions violated; Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general.
3. Unity of criminal purpose or aim; — The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall
be imposed upon the principals in the commission of such felony.
Example; Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is
A, B, C,D lives in one compound. All engaged in the business of selling general terms, it shall be understood as applicable to the
rooster. One night, 11:00 in the evening here comes X. While they consummated felony.
were sleeping, X took the rooster of A, then of B, then of C, then of D.
Q: How many crimes will you file against X?

Penalty Imposed shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the
Under Article 46, when the law prescribes a penalty for a felony, it penalty.
shall be understood to mean that such penalty shall be imposed upon
principals of a consummated felony. 2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any
aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that
--xXx-- it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
PENALTY IMPOSED UPON ACCESSORIES AND ACCOMPLICES 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise
(Articles 50-57) from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private
Articles 50-57 provides for penalties if the offender is a principal, relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause,
accomplice or accessory whether or not the felony is consummated, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the
frustrated, attempted. principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such
circumstances are attendant.
CONSUMMATED FRUSTRATED ATTEMPTED
Penalty The penalty A penalty lower 4. The circumstances which consist in the material
prescribed by lower by one by two degrees execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it,
law for the degree than than that shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons
offense; that prescribed by law only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution of the
prescribed for principal of a act or their cooperation therein.
PRINCIPALS by law for consummated
the principal felony; 5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects:
of a (Art. 51)
consummate (a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be sentenced
d felony; to the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he be
(Art. 50) found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision correccional in
A penalty lower The penalty A penalty lower its medium and maximum periods;
by one degree lower by one by one degree
than that degree than than that (b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced
prescribed by prescribed prescribed by law to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty
law for principal by law for for principals of and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and
ACCOMPLICES medium periods; and
of a the principal an attempted
consummated of a felony;
felony; frustrated (Art. 56) (c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall
(Art. 52) felony; be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he
(Art. 54) be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in its
A penalty lower The penalty The penalty lower maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period.
by two degrees lower by two by two degrees
than that degrees than than that Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of
prescribed by prescribed prescribed by law the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity
law for principal by law for for principals of herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years.
ACCESSORIES
of a the an attempted
consummated principals of felony; (Art. 57) PARAGRAPH 1.
felony; a frustrated The following aggravating circumstance shall not be taken into
(Art. 53) felony; account for the purpose of increasing penalty;
(Art. 55 1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute
a crime specially punishable by law; or
Exception 2. Aggravating circumstances which are included by the law in
Under Article 60, the provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57, defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor;
inclusive, of this Code shall not be applicable to cases in which the law 3. Aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a
expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission
attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. thereof (Par. 2);
--xXx-- Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime

especially punishable by law.
Article 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or
aggravating circumstances and of habitual delinquency. - Mitigating Example;
or aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency shall be 1. That the crime be committed by means of fire is not
taken into account for the purpose of diminishing or increasing the considered as aggravating in arson; (Art. 14, par. 2)
penalty in conformity with the following rules: 2. The crime be committed by means of derailment of a
1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves locomotive shall not be considered in damages and
constitute a crime specially punishable by law or which are included obstruction to means of communication; (Art. 330)
by the law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor
Aggravating circumstances which are included by the law in defining Example;

a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor; A, as principal by induction, B, and C agreed to kill D. B and C killed D
with treachery, which mode of committing the offense had not been
Example; previously agreed upon by them with A. A was not present when B
1. The crime be committed in the dwelling of the offended and C killed D with treachery.
party is not aggravating in robbery with force upon things;
(Art. 299) Q: How should the aggravating circumstance in this case be
2. Abuse of confidence is not qualified theft committed with appreciated?
grave abuse of confidence; (Art. 310) A: The aggravating circumstance of treachery should not be taken into
account against A, but against B and C only. But if A was present and
PARAGRAPH 2. had knowledge of the treachery with which the crime was committed
The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating by B and C, he is also liable for murder, qualified by treachery.
circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of
necessity accompany the commission thereof. In the means employed to accomplish it
A ordered B to kill C. B invited C to eat with him. B mixed poison with
Example; the food of C, who died after he had eaten the food. A did not know
Evident premeditation is inherent in robbery and theft; that B used poison to kill C.
PARAGRAPH 3. Q: Is the aggravating circumstance that the crime that the crime be
The following aggravating or mitigating circumstance shall serve to committed by means of poison applicable to A?
aggravate for mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices, and A: NO. The aggravating circumstance that the crime be committed by
accessories; means of poison is not applicable to A.
1. Those which arise from the moral attributes of the
offender; or ORGANIZED OR SYNDICATED CRIME GROUP.
2. From his private relations with the offended party; or An organized or syndicate crime group consists of two or more
3. From any other personal cause; persons collaborating, confederating and mutually helping another
for purposes of gain in the commission of the crime.
Those which arise from the moral attributes of the offender The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed
by any person who belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group.
Example;
A and B killed C. A acted with evident premeditation, and B with The information charges A, B, C, D as collaborating, confederating and
passion and obfuscation. mutually helping another for purposes of gain in the commission of
the crime. This is what the information alleges. Trial found this so. The
Q: How should the aggravating circumstance be appreciated? judge considered conspiracy and considered this special aggravating
A: Evident premeditation should affect and aggravate only the circumstance.
penalty for A, while passion and obfuscation will benefit B only
mitigate his liability. Q: Is the court correct?
A: NO. Before the special aggravating circumstance be considered the
From his private relations with the offended party. court, evidence must show was held to commit crimes involving gain.
A and C inflicted slight physical injuries on B. A is the son of B. C is the
father of B. HABITUAL DELINQUENCY
A person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, is within a period
Q: How does A and C’s relationship with B affect their criminal of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the
liability? crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa
A: The alternative circumstance of relationship, as aggravating shall or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or
be taken into account against A only, because he is a relative of a oftener.
lower degree than the offended party, B.
Elements;
From any other personal cause In the material execution of the act 1. The crime is specified should be serious physical injuries,
A and B committed a crime. A was under 16 years of age and B was a less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa;
recidivist. 2. There should be at least three convictions;
3. Each convictions must come within ten year from date of
PARAGRAPH 4
release or last conviction of the previous crime;
The following circumstance shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the
liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time
Effect
of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein;
Additional penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period being an
1. In the material execution of the act; or
aggravating circumstance.
2. In the means employed to accomplish it;
NUMBER OF CONVICTION PENALTY PRESCRIBED No prescriptive period on the Prescribes in ten years;
The penalty for the last crime commission of the offense;
of which he be found guilty. No additional penalty; Provides additional penalty;
Third Conviction; ADDITIONAL PENALTY; QUASI RECIDIVISM

prision correccional in its Under Article 160, a person is said to be a quasi-recidivist if after
medium and maximum having been convicted by a final judgment, he shall commit a felony
periods; before serving out his sentence or while service of sentence. The
The penalty provided for the maximum period shall be imposed.
last crime of which he be
found guilty. Again it is a special aggravating circumstance.
Fourth Conviction;
ADDITIONAL PENALTY; * The first crime may be any crime. The second crime must be a
Prision mayor in its minimum felony.
and medium periods;
The culprit shall be sentenced Example;
to the penalty provided for the A, while serving a final judgment, he was found in possession of illegal
last crime of which he be found drugs.
guilty.
Q: Is A a quasi-recidivist?
Fifth Conviction;
ADDITIONAL PENALTY; A: NO. The second crime is not a felony, it is a special law.
prision mayor in its maximum
period to reclusion temporal in Example;
its minimum period. If A was was serving sentence for possession of illegal drugs and then
inside a crime he killed a co-inmate.
Limitation Q: Is A a quasi-recidivist?
The penalty committed for the crime plus additional penalty should A: YES. Maximum period prescribed by law shall be imposed.
not exceed thirty years.
--xXx--
Recidivism and Habitual Delinquency
Recidivism and Habitual Delinquency may be simultaneously Article 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties.
considered because they have different effects on criminal liability of - In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty,
the offender. Recidivism effect is on the theft committed. It may be it shall be applied by the courts regardless of any mitigating or
offset by mitigating circumstances. Habitual delinquency will give him aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission
additional penalty. of the deed.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed
Example; of two indivisible penalties, the following rules shall be observed in
A was charged and convicted of robbery he served his sentence. the application thereof;
Within 10 years from date of release he committed theft. He served 1. When in the commission of the deed there is present
sentence and again released. Within 10 years he committed another only one aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be
theft. The judgment become final and executory. He served again and applied.
out of prison. Within 10 years against he committed another theft. He 2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating
is now in trial. circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser
penalty shall be applied;
Q: Can the judge impose both recidivism and habitual delinquency? 3. When the commission of the act is attended by some
A: YES. He is recidivist because at the time he served theft he was mitigating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance,
previously convicted of a final judgment of robbery embraced within the lesser penalty shall be applied;
the same title of the code. He is also habitual delinquent, because 4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances
within the ten years from the date of his last release he committed a attended the commission of the act, the court shall reasonably allow
theft the third time. them to offset one another in consideration of their number and
importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance
RECIDIVISM HABITUAL DELINQUENCY with the preceding rules, according to the result of such
Generic aggravating Cannot be offset by ordinary compensation;
circumstance - Can be offset; mitigating circumstance;
Requires at least two Requires at least three Outline of the rules.
conviction; convictions; 1. When the penalty is single indivisible, it shall be applied
Felony violated must be within The felony violated are serious regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances.
the same title of the code; physical injuries, less serious 2. When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties,
physical injuries, robbery, theft, the following rules shall be observed;
estafa, falsification;
GARCIA NOTES - CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018]
a. When there is only one aggravating circumstance. Since only one mitigating circumstance is left, the
circumstance, the greater penalty shall be lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall apply;
imposed;
b. When there is neither mitigating nor aggravating PRIVELEGE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE
circumstances, the lesser penalty shall be When there is a privileged mitigating circumstance, apply it first
imposed; before computing the penalties.
c. When there is a mitigating circumstance and no
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall Example;
be imposed. A was charged with the information of Rape. At the time of the
d. When both mitigating and aggravating commission of the offense, A was only 16 years old. After trial, he was
circumstances are present, the court shall allow sentenced to the indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua. In his
them to offset one another; motion for reconsideration, A argues that his penalty should be
lowered by one degree because he is a minor. The judge denied the
Example; motion on the ground that reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty
The penalty for Rape is reclusion perpetua. If the penalty is single and and cannot be offset by mitigating circumstance.
indivisible, it shall be imposed as is, without consideration of any
Aggravating or Mitigating circumstance Q: Is the judge correct?
A: NO. Minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance which lowers
Example; the penalty by one degree. Indivisible penalties shall be imposed as is
The penalty for the crime of murder is reclusion perpetua to death - regardless of mitigating or aggravating circumstance. However,
two indivisible penalties. privilege mitigating circumstance takes preference over prior to the
computation of penalties. In this case, since A was a minor at the time
Only one aggravating circumstance. of the commission of the offense, his penalty should be lowered by
If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstance of one degree to reclusion temporal.
trespass to dwelling, the greater penalty of death shall be applied;
--xXx--
Two or more aggravating circumstance and no mitigating
circumstance Article 64. Rules for the application of penalties which
If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstances of contain three periods. - In cases in which the penalties prescribed by
trespass to dwelling and recidivism, the greater penalty of death shall law contain three periods, whether it be a single divisible penalty or
be applied; composed of three different penalties, each one of which forms a
period in accordance with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77, the
No mitigating nor aggravating circumstance court shall observe for the application of the penalty the following
If there is no mitigating or aggravating circumstance in attendant, rules, according to whether there are or are not mitigating or
apply the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua; aggravating circumstances:
1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating
One mitigating and no aggravating circumstance circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its
If the murder was committed with the mitigating circumstance of medium period.
passion and obfuscation, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall 2. When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the
apply; commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum
period.
Two or more mitigating circumstance and no aggravating 3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the
circumstance commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum
If the murder was committed with the mitigating circumstances of period.
passion and obfuscation and sufficient provocation on the part of the 4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are
offended party, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall apply; present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against
the other according to their relative weight.
If there are two aggravating circumstance and one mitigating 5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and
circumstance no aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose
If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstances of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that
trespass to dwelling and recidivism, and the mitigating circumstance it may deem applicable, according to the number and nature of such
of passion and obfuscation, one mitigating circumstance will offset circumstances.
one aggravating circumstance. Since only one aggravating 6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the
circumstance is left, the greater penalty of death shall apply; aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater
penalty than that prescribed by law, in its maximum period.
If there are two mitigating circumstance and one aggravating 7. Within the limits of each period, the court shall determine
circumstance the extent of the penalty according to the number and nature of the
If the murder was committed with the mitigating circumstances of aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser
passion and obfuscation and sufficient provocation on the part of the extent of the evil produced by the crime.
offended party, and the aggravating circumstance of trespass to
dwelling, one mitigating circumstance will offset another aggravating
Degree of penalty previous rules. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
Degree of penalty is a penalty prescribed by law for every crime minimum period.
committed whether divisible or indivisible.
Four mitigating circumstance.
Period of penalty X committed homicide with passion and obfuscation when he was
A period of penalty refers to the subdivision of every said divisible suffering from an illness which would diminish the exercise of his will-
penalty into three portion, the first portion is minimum, second is power, and thereafter voluntary surrendered and there is a voluntary
medium, third is maximum plea of guilt. The penalty imposed upon him cannot be lowered by
two degrees. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its
Indivisible penalty minimum period.
Indivisible penalties are penalties without fixed duration, death,
reclusion perpetua, perpetual absolute disqualification, perpetual * In order that the penalty will be lowered by 1 degree, it is necessary
special disqualification, public censure, fine. that there absolutely is NO aggravating circumstance.
Divisible penalty Even if there are many Mitigating circumstances, as long as there is 1
Divisible Penalties are penalties with fixed duration and therefore can aggravating circumstance, you will cannot lower the penalty by
be divided into three period. the first portion is minimum, second is degrees, it is only by periods.
medium, third is maximum
Privilege Mitigating Circumstance
*Memorize the rules under Article 64. If present, Privilege Mitigating Circumstance must be applied first
prior to the application of penalties under the Rules of Articles 63 and
Example; 64.
X and Y had a fight. In the course of the fight, X killed Y. X was charged
and convicted of homicide. The penalty for homicide is Reclusion Example;
temporal. X committed the crime of homicide. The penalty for homicide is
reclusion temporal.
No aggravating and no mitigating.
Reclusion temporal shall be imposed in its medium period. One privilege mitigating circumstance.
X was a minor at the time he committed homicide. Minority is a
One mitigating and no aggravating. privilege mitigating circumstance which will lower the imposable
If there is voluntary surrender in the part of X, reclusion temporal shall penalty by one degree. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision mayor
be imposed in its minimum period. in its medium period.
One aggravating and no mitigating. Two privilege mitigating circumstances.

If X was a recidivist, reclusion temporal shall be imposed in its X was a minor at the time he committed the homicide. He argues
maximum period. incomplete self-defense. Minority and Incomplete self-defense are
both privilege mitigating circumstance which will lower the imposable
Both mitigating and aggravating are present. penalty by two degrees. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision
If the homicide was committed in the dwelling of Y and X acted on correccional in its medium period.
passion and obfuscation, the aggravating and mitigating circumstance
will offset one another and reclusion temporal shall be imposed in its Two privilege mitigating circumstance and one ordinary mitigating
medium period. circumstance.
X was a minor at the time he committed the homicide with
Two mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance. incomplete self-defense. He voluntarily surrendered to the persons in
The homicide was committed with passion and obfuscation and X authority. Minority and Incomplete self-defense are both privilege
voluntary surrendered. A penalty one degree lower than reclusion mitigating circumstance which will lower the imposable penalty by
temporal shall be imposed upon X. X shall suffer the penalty of prision two degrees. The remaining ordinary mitigating circumstance shall
mayor in its medium period. operate to make the penalty in its minimum period. Thus, X will suffer
the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period.
Two or more aggravating circumstance.
X committed the crime of homicide with trespass to dwelling and 2 privilege mitigating circumstance and 3 ordinary mitigating
disregard of the age of Y. regardless of the number of aggravating circumstance.
circumstance present, the court cannot impose a penalty higher than X was a minor who was suffering an illness which diminishes the
the maximum period prescribed by law. Thus, X will suffer the penalty exercise of his will-power at the time he committed the homicide with
of reclusion temporal in its maximum period. incomplete self-defense on his part. He voluntarily surrendered to the
persons in authority and thereafter voluntarily plead guilty. Minority
Three mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance. and Incomplete self-defense will lower the imposable penalty by two
If there is sufficient provocation on the part of Y, and voluntarily degrees. The two ordinary mitigating circumstances will operate to
surrendered and there voluntary plea of guilt, X shall suffer the lower the penalty imposed after the application of the two privilege
penalty lower by one degree than reclusion temporal. Thereafter, we mitigating circumstance. The remaining ordinary mitigating
apply the remaining mitigating circumstance in accordance with the circumstance shall operate to make the penalty in its minimum
period. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum Indeterminate Sentence Law, it is after 'any prisoner shall have served
period. the minimum penalty imposed on him, that the Board of
Indeterminate Sentence may consider whether such prisoner may be
--xXx-- granted parole. There being no 'minimum penalty imposable on those
convicted to reclusion perpetua, it follows that persons sentenced by
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW (R.A. 4103) final judgment to reclusion perpetua could not have availed of parole
Indeterminate Sentence Law modifies the imposition of penalty. It is under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
applied both to the Revised Penal Code and Special Penal Laws. It
provides for a minimum and max term, such that the moment the Q: is the indeterminate sentence law applicable if the penalty
offender serves the minimum of the sentence, he shall be eligible for imposed is destierro?
parole. If granted, he will serve the remainder of the sentence out of A: NO. Destierro does not involve imprisonment.
prison, but subject to the supervision of the parole officer
Effect of disqualification
OBJECTIVES If the offender is disqualified for the application of the indeterminate
The following are the objectives of the Indeterminate Sentence Law; sentence law, he shall be given a straight penalty. The offender must
1. Uplift and redeem valuable human material; serve the entire term of his sentence and he is not eligible for parole.
2. Avoid unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty;
Example;
These objectives are achieved when the moment the offender A final judgment was rendered against X. He was granted conditional
becomes eligible to apply for parole and he may be able to serve pardon by the Chief Executive. He violated the terms and conditions
sentence out of jail. of the said pardon. He was charged with evasion of service of
sentence. He was found guilty by the court.
PAROLE
Parole is the conditional release of the offender form the correctional Q: Can the court impose upon him an indeterminate sentence?
institution after serving minimum sentence after showing that he has A: NO. X is among those disqualified under the law. By violating the
reformed. Note it does not extinguish criminal and civil liability. condition of his pardon he cannot avail of an indeterminate sentence
law.
Requisites;
1. He must be placed in prison jail to serve an indeterminate Example;
sentence penalty which exceeds 1 year; X has been convicted of final judgment of serious physical injuries,
2. Served minimum term of sentence; thereafter he committed homicide and the judge found him guilty of
3. Board of pardons and parole found that his released is for homicide.
greater interest of society
Q: Can the judge impose upon him an indeterminate sentence?
DISQUALIFICATIONS UNDER THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW. A: YES. X is a recidivist. Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, only
The general rule is that everyone is entitled to the Indeterminate habitual delinquents are disqualified from availing indeterminate
Sentence law. However, this act shall not apply to the following sentence. A recidivist is qualified under the law from availing the
persons; Indeterminate Sentence Law.
1. Convicted crime punished by death or life imprisonment;
(Reclusion perpetua ias held by the Supreme Court in People Example;
v. Enriquez G.R. No.158797, July 29, 2005) X is a minor who was charged and convicted for kidnapping with
2. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to ransom, the penalty of which is reclusion perpetua to death. Since
commit treason, misprision of treason; minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance, we will lower the
3. Those convicted of rebellion, sedition, or espionage; imposable penalty by one degree.
4. Those convicted piracy;
5. Those who are habitual delinquents; (In People v. Jaranilla, Q: is X qualified under for indeterminate sentence?
G.R. No. 28547, Feb. 22, 1974, the Supreme Court ruled that A: YES. In applying the indeterminate sentence law, we should
Recidivist are entitled to an indeterminate sentence law) consider the imposable penalty rather than the penalty prescribed by
6. Those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded law. In this case, since the penalty of reclusion perpetua was lowered
sentence; (In People v. Perez, 44 OG 3884, a minor who to reclusion temporal, then X is qualified for indeterminate sentence.
escaped from confinement in the reformatory is entitled to
the benefits of the law because confinement is not Computation for Indeterminate Sentence Law
considered imprisonment). In order to arrive at an indeterminate sentence in the violation of the
7. Those who having been granted conditional pardon by the RPC, the following rules must be considered;
President shall have violated the terms thereof; 1. Get first the maximum term of sentence with all the
8. Those whose maximum period of imprisonment does not attendant circumstance in accordance with Article 64 of the
exceed one year; RPC;
2. Lower it the one degree. Do NOT consider anymore the
Reclusion perpetua cannot Avail Indeterminate Sentence Law attendant circumstance. The minimum term of sentence
In the concurring opinion of Justice Tinga in the case of (People v. depends upon the sound discretion of the court.
Tubongbanua, G.R. No. 171271, August 31, 2006) Parole is extended
only to those convicted of divisible penalties. Under Section 5 of the
VIOLATION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS Q: What if there is only one aggravating circumstance is present?
If the offense is punished by special laws, the court shall sentence the A: The maximum term will be reclusion temporal in its maximum
accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which period and the minimum term is Prision mayor in any of its period
shall not exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum according to the sound discretion of the court.
shall not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the same.
Q: What if both aggravating and mitigating circumstance are
Example; present?
X committed was charged and convicted of the anti-carnapping law. A: The maximum term shall be reclusion temporal in its medium
Section 14 of R.A. 6539 (Anti-Carnapping law) provides a penalty for period because under article 64 you should offset the circumstances.
17 years and 4 months to 30 years if a person committed carnapping The minimum term will be one degree lower than reclusion temporal
by means of violence against or intimidation of any person, or force which is Prision mayor in any of its period according to the sound
upon things. discretion of the court.
Q: Under the indeterminate sentence law, what is the duration of Q: What if there are 2 aggravating circumstance and 1 ordinary
the penalty for the violation of the anti-carnapping law? mitigating circumstance present?
A: Under the indeterminate sentence law, if a special law is violated, A: The maximum term shall be reclusion temporal in its maximum
the courts may sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence period applying the last aggravating circumstance after offsetting the
provided that it shall not be less than the minimum or more than the aggravating circumstance and mitigating circumstance. The minimum
maximum according to the sound discretion of the judge. Thus, term is Prision mayor in any of its period according to the sound
anywhere from 17 years and 4 months to 30 years may be imposed discretion of the court.
upon X.
Q: What if there are two mitigating circumstances and no
Argoncillo v. CA, G.R. No. 118816, July 10, 1998 aggravating circumstance present?
The crime committed is illegal fishing with the use of explosives. The A: The maximum term shall be prision mayor in its medium period.
penalty prescribed by law is 20 years to life imprisonment. The judge Since there are two ordinary mitigating circumstances, we lower the
imposed him the penalty of straight 30 years. imposable penalty by one degree. The minimum term is prision
correccional in any of its periods according to the sound discretion of
Q: Is the judge correct? the court.
A: NO. The Indeterminate sentence law states that a violation of
special penal law and the said special penal law does not use the Q: What if there are three mitigating circumstance with no
enumeration of penalties in the RPC, the maximum term of the aggravating circumstance present?
sentence shall not exceed the maximum penalty prescribed by law A: The maximum term shall be prision mayor in its minimum period.
and the minimum term of sentence shall not be less than the The two ordinary mitigating circumstances shall operate to lower the
minimum penalty prescribed by law. In this case, since the penalty imposable penalty by one degree, the remaining ordinary mitigating
prescribed by law is 20 years to life imprisonment, it means that the circumstance shall operate to make the penalty in its minimum
penalty to be imposed upon the convict must be an indeterminate period. The minimum term is prision correccional in any of its periods
sentence. SC said the penalty must be 20 years (minimum term) to 25 according to the sound discretion of the court.
years (maximum term)
Q: What if there are four mitigating circumstances and no
Article 64 and Indeterminate Sentence law aggravating circumstance?
The indeterminate sentence law did not repeal Article 34 of the A: The maximum term shall still be prision mayor in its minimum
Revised Penal Code. On the contrary, they are related. period. In case of ordinary mitigating circumstance, you can only
lower the penalty by one degree. You cannot lower the penalty by
Example; two degrees. The two ordinary mitigating circumstances shall operate
A abducted B with lewd design. His intention was rape. But before A to make the penalty in its minimum period. The minimum term is
raped B, A was arrested. A was charged with the crime of forcible prision correccional in any of its periods according to the sound
abduction punishable by reclusion temporal. discretion of the court.
Q: What is the penalty imposed if there is no mitigating or * In order that the penalty will be lowered by one degree, it is
aggravating circumstance? necessary that there is NO aggravating circumstance.
A: The maximum term will be reclusion temporal in medium period
since there are no mitigating or aggravating circumstance. The Even if there are many mitigating circumstances, for as long as there
minimum term is 1 degree lower in any of its periods according to the is one aggravating circumstance, you cannot lower the penalty by
sound discretion of the court. Thus, the imposable penalty is prsion degrees. Only by periods.
mayor in any of its period to reclusion temporal.
Example;
Q: What if there is only one ordinary mitigating circumstance is A was charged with the information of rape with mitigating
present? circumstance of passion and obfuscation, against B. thereafter, A
A: Maximum term will be reclusion temporal in minimum period and voluntarily surrendered. A convicted of rape and was punished with
the minimum term is Prision mayor in any of its period according to the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
the sound discretion of the court.
Q: since there are two mitigating circumstance, should the judge 3. To prevent further commission of crimes because the
lower his penalty by one degree? offender is placed under an individualized treatment;
A: NO. Reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty. Under Article 63 4. To decongest cases;
of the Revised Penal Code, if the penalty prescribe by law is a single 5. To save the Government from spending much-needed
invisible penalty you shall impose it as it is regardless of any funds when the offender will be placed behind bars
aggravating or mitigating circumstance.
The first three objectives are based on P.D. 968. The last two purposes
Q: What is the penalty of A if, in a addition to the 2 mitigating are jurisprudential.
circumstances above mentioned, A is a minor at the time of the
offense? Probation as a Privilege
A: privilege mitigating circumstance must first be applied prior to the Probation is not a right but a privilege. Thus, even if a convict is not
ordinary mitigating circumstance. Since minority is a privilege among those disqualified of probation, the judge can still deny the
mitigating circumstance which lowers the penalty by one degree, the application. This denial is not appealable. The grant or denial of
maximum term is prision mayor in its medium period and the application is dependent solely on the sound discretion of the judge.
minimum term prision correccional in any of its range according to the
sound discretion of the court. DISQUALIFICATIONS
The following are disqualified to avail probation;
*Only circumstance that can defeat an indivisible penalty is a privilege 1. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment is more than
mitigating circumstance. 6 years;
2. Those who have been convicted of subversion and crimes
Example; against national security;
X was charged with the crime of frustrated homicide. X voluntarily 3. Those who have previously been convicted by final
surrendered to the authorities. In the trial, the mitigating judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment of more
circumstance of immediate vindication to a grave offense was in than six (6) months and one (1) day and/or a fine of more
attendant. than one thousand pesos (P1,000.00);
4. Those who have already availed the benefit of probation;
Q: What should be the penalty imposed to X? 5. Those who have perfected an appeal from judgment of
A: Since the penalty for frustrated homicide is prision mayor and conviction;
there are two other ordinary mitigating circumstance present, the 6. Those convicted of an election offense under the Omnibus
maxium term of sentence is Prision correccional in its medium period Election Code;
while the mimimum term of sentence. Arresto mayor within the 7. Those convicted of drug trafficking or drug pushing;
range or. 8. Those who filed a malicious report that a person is
committing a violation of Anti-money laundering law and
Q: What is the penalty if, in addition to the facts above mentioned, was convicted because of such malicious filing
X is minor committing without discernment?
A: Since the penalty already imposed upon X is prision correccional, Example;
we lower it by one degree more because minority is a privilege X was charged and convicted for alarms and scandals. He was
mitigating circumstance. Thus, according to Article 64, the maximum sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor.
term is Arresto mayor in its medium period. Indeterminate sentence
law is not applicable if the penalty imposed upon the offender does Q: Can X avail probation?
not exceed one year. In this instance we cannot give him an A: If the felony was committed prior to the amendment of the
indeterminate sentence because the duration of arresto mayor is 1 probation law, X cannot avail probation. Under P.D. 968, a person
month to 6 months. who is convicted of a crime involving public disorder cannot avail
probation. The felony of Alarm and Scandal is a crime against public
If the maximum term of sentence does not exceed one year, a straight disorder. Thus X cannot avail probation. However, if the crime was
penalty shall be imposed upon him. convicted after the amendment, X may avail probation. Under R.A.
1070, crimes against public disorder is removed from the
--xXx-- disqualifications. Thus, X may avail probations
PROBATION LAW (P.D. 968 as Amended by R.A. 10707) Q: May probation be availed even if the penalty imposed upon the
Probation is a disposition by which a convict after conviction and offender is only a fine?
sentence is released subject to the conditions imposed by the court A: YES. Under Section 4 of P.D. 968 as Amended by R.A. 10707,
under the supervision of a probation officer. Probation may be granted whether the sentence imposes a term of
imprisonment or a fine only.
Objectives
The following are the objectives of probation law; APPEAL AND PROBATION
1. To promote the correction and rehabilitation of the Generally, under P.D 968, appeal and probation are mutually
offender because he is placed under a personalized exclusive remedies. This is because the reason behind appeal and the
treatment; reason behind probation are diametrically opposed.
2. To provide an opportunity for the reformation of penitent
offender; If a person appeals, it means that he is questioning the decision of the
court. He is insisting on his innocence. On the other hand, if a person
applies for probation, it means that he is accepting the judgment of A: A grant of probation is applied before the Trial Court which heard
the court. He, however, does not want to serve his sentence behind the case within the period of perfecting an appeal or within 15 days
bars. from promulgation of judgment.
Exceptions; CONDITIONS IMPOSED UPON OFFENDER UNDER PROBATION

1. However, Section 4 of R.A. 10707 which amended the There are two conditions imposed upon a person seeking probation;
probation law, states that when a judgment of conviction 1. Mandatory/ Ordinary;
imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed or 2. Discretionary/ Special;
reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the
imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall Mandatory
be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified The following are mandatory conditions imposed by the court to the
decision before such decision becomes final. The application probationer;
for probation based on the modified decision shall be filed 1. Appear before the probationary officer within 72 hours
in the trial court where the judgment of conviction from the receipt of the order;
imposing a non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in 2. Report once a month;
the trial court where such case has since been re-raffled.
Discretionary
This notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the benefit of Discretionary or special conditions are dependent upon the sound
probation should he seek a review of the modified decision discretion of the court. Usually involves engaging in a vocation, not
which already imposes a probationable penalty. drinking alcohol, not going to house of ill-reputes.
2. Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare act provides
that the court may, after it shall have convicted and The only limitation on the discretionary conditions is that they must
sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and upon not be so restrictive to the rights of the accused such that they will no
application at any time, place the child on probation in lieu longer be in consonance with his freedom.
of service of his/her sentence taking into account the best
interest of the child. For this purpose, Section 4 of Example;
Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the In the case of Baclayon v. Mutia (G.R. No. L-59298, April 30, 1984) the
"Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended accordingly. trial court prohibited the offender, who is a teacher by profession, to
teach as a condition during the period of probation. This is a
Colinares v. People (G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011) restrictive condition. It deprives the offender his means of livelihood.
Colinares hit Rufino twice in the head with a stone. Thereafter,
Colinares was charged and convicted for frustrated homicide in the PERIOD OF PROBATION:
regional trial court. He was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months of SENTENCE PERIOD OF PROBATION
prision correcional to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor. Colinares Imprisonment of not more
Will not exceed two years;
appealed to the Court of Appeals for the purpose of modifying his than 1 year;
conviction from frustrated homicide to attempted homicide thereby All other cases of
lowering the penalty so that he can avail probation. The Court of Will not exceed 6 years;
imprisonment;
Appeals affirmed the decision of the RTC. Thus, Colinares elevated the Not less than nor be more than
case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that Colinares is 2x than the total number of
only liable for attempted homicide because the prosecution failed to days of subsidiary
prove that the wound of Rufino is fatal. Thus the penalty imposed on Fine subsidiary imprisonment
imprisonment, taking into
him should be lowered to imprisonment of four months of arresto in case of insolvency;
account the highest minimum
mayor, as minimum, to two years and four months of prision wage rate at the time of the
correccional, as maximum. rendition of the judgment.
Q: Can Colinares avail probation after the perfection of appeal to EFFECT OF PROBATION
modify his conviction? Probation will suspend the execution of the sentence. However, it will
A: YES. Colinares did not appeal from a judgment that would have not extinguish civil liability.
allowed him to apply for probation. He did not have a choice between
appeal and probation. He was not in a position to say, "By taking this Under Section 16 of P.D. 968 as amended by R.A. 10707, the final
appeal, I choose not to apply for probation." The stiff penalty that the discharge of the probationer shall operate to restore to him all civil
trial court imposed on him denied him that choice. Besides, in rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction and to totally
appealing his case, Colinares raised the issue of correctness of the extinguish his criminal liability as to the offense for which probation
penalty imposed on him. He claimed that the evidence at best was granted.
warranted his conviction only for attempted, not frustrated,
homicide, which crime called for a probationable penalty. In a way, Moreno v. COMELEC (G.R. No. 168550, August 10, 2006)
therefore, Colinares sought from the beginning to bring down the Moreno ran for the public office of punong barangay. However, a
penalty to the level where the law would allow him to apply for petition for disqualification was filed against him because he was
probation. convicted by final judgment of the crime of Arbitrary Detention and
was sentenced to suffer imprisonment of Four (4) Months and One
Q: When and where do you apply for probation? (1) Day to Two (2) Years and Four (4) Months. Moreno argues that the
disqualification under the Local Government Code is for those ho
have served sentence for more than 1 year. Since Moreno applied and Factors to consider in imposing fines;
was granted of probation, he did not serve his sentence because 1. Aggravating and mitigating circumstance;
probation suspends the service of the offender. 2. Wealth and means of the offender
Q: Can a person who was convicted by final judgment but was Scale of Penalty in case of Fine
granted probation run for public office? Article 26 of the Revised Penal determines whether a fine is afflictive,
A: YES. The phrase service of sentence, understood in its general and correctional, or light penalty.
common sense, means the confinement of a convicted person in a SCALE OF PENALTY AMOUNT OF FINE
penal facility for the period adjudged by the court. During the period Afflictive Penalty; Exceeds P6,000.00
of probation, the probationer does not serve the penalty imposed Correctional Penalty From P200.00 to P6,000.00
upon him by the court but is merely required to comply with all the Light Penalty; Less than P200.00
conditions prescribed in the probation order. Furthermore, he
accessory penalties of suspension from public office, from the right to --xXx--
follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special
disqualification from the right of suffrage, attendant to the penalty of Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its or more degrees. — Whenever it may be necessary to increase or
minimum period imposed upon Moreno were similarly suspended reduce the penalty of fine by one or more degrees, it shall be
upon the grant of probation. increased or reduced, respectively, for each degree, by one-fourth
of the maximum amount prescribed by law, without however,
Example; changing the minimum.
Lindsay Lohan, after conviction, applied for probation and was
granted the same. Thereafter, she filed an appeal questioning the civil If a fine is imposed to an accomplice or an accessory, the fine shall be
indemnity imposed upon her. The judge denied the appeal on the reduced or increased, respectively for e each degree, by one fourth of
ground that Lindsay already applied for probation. Therefore, the the maximum amount prescribed by law.
appeal cannot be granted.
Example;
Q: Is the judge correct? If A prevented the meetings of congress by means of fraud, the
A: NO. The only effect of probation is to suspend the execution of the penalty imposed upon him is P200 – P2000. If he is merely an
sentence. It has nothing to do with the civil aspect of the case. Insofar accomplice, the fine will be lowered by one degree and a decrease of
as the civil aspect is concerned, the convict can still appeal it. ¼ of the maximum amount prescribed by law. Since ¼ of P2,000.00 is
P500.00, the penalty imposed upon the accomplice is P200.00 to
Example; P,500.00.
D, under the probation for two years, was imposed the condition that
he could not change his residence. For two years, he complied with Example;
this condition. After the lapse of two years, D now changed his A, B, and C, was charged and convicted of an impossible crime. A as
residence. The probation officer learned about this and filed for a the principal, B as the accomplice, and C as the accessory. The court
Motion to Revoke the probation. D contended that the period of imposed upon them a fine of P200.00 to P500.00 as prescribed by law.
probation (2 years) has already been completed, so he is already
allowed to change residence. The trial court granted the revocation. Q: How much would A, B, and C, pay?
A: A, as the principal, is liable for a fine ranging from P200.00 –
Q: Is the trial court correct? P500.00. To get the liability of B as an accomplice we take ¼ of the
A: YES. The expiration of the period of probation does not ipso facto maximum amount of fine and deduct it therefrom. So the maximum
mean the termination of probation. Probation is only terminated amount of fine is P500.00 ¼ of P500.00 is 125. Deduct P125.00 from
upon the issuance of the court of a final discharge of probation. This P500.00. This will now be P375.00 Thus, B, as an accomplice, is liable
happens when after the lapse of the period of probation, the for P200-P375. Let us say the offender is a mere accessory, deduct ¼
probation officer will file a Motion before the court with a or P125.00 from the maximum fine. The sum is P250.00. Thus, C as
recommendation stating that the convict has complied with the the accomplice is liable for P200.00 - P250.00
conditions imposed and therefore, he should be discharged. The
court will then issue a final discharge of probation. Only then will --xXx--
probation be terminated.
Article 70. Successive service of sentence. - When the
--xXx-- culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall serve them
simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit
Art. 66. Imposition of fines. — In imposing fines the courts otherwise, the following rules shall be observed:
may fix any amount within the limits established by law; in fixing In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their
the amount in each case attention shall be given, not only to the respective severity shall be followed so that they may be executed
mitigating and aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to successively or as nearly as may be possible, should a pardon have
the wealth or means of the culprit. been granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or should
they have been served out.
FINE
Fine is a pecuniary penalty imposed by court in case of judgment of
conviction.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next Order of Severity.
preceding paragraph the respective severity of the penalties shall be In the imposition of penalties, the convict shall first serve the most
determined in accordance with the following scale: severe penalty imposed upon him in accordance with the scale
provided for in Article 70.
1. Death,
THREE-FOLD RULE
2. Reclusion perpetua, The three-fold rule provides that when multiple successive penalties
are imposed upon the offender, the maximum duration of the
3. Reclusion temporal, convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of
time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon
4. Prision mayor, him. However, such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty
years.
5. Prision correccional,
Example;
6. Arresto mayor, X raped her daughter 5 times. He was charged and convicted of 5
counts of rape. The penalty for 1 count of rape is reclusion perpetua.
7. Arresto menor,
Q: What penalty shall the court impose on him?
8. Destierro, A: 5 counts of reclusion perpetua.
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification, Q: Since reclusion perpetua is 20-40 years, does that mean X will
serve 200 years in prison?
10 Temporal absolute disqualification. A: NO. Under the three-fold rule the when the offender is serving
multiple successive sentences, the maximum duration of the
11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be offender’s sentence shall not exceed three folds of the length of the
voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling, and most severe penalty, provided that such penalty will not be more than
40 years. In this case, since the penalty imposed upon X is 5 reclusion
12. Public censure. perpetua, his service of sentence will not be more than three-folds of
the length of reclusion perpetua which is the most severe penalty
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, imposed upon him. However, since three counts of reclusion perpetua
the maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more is 120 years which exceeds the maximum penalty of 40 years, X will
than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe serve the maximum sentence of 40 years.
of the penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty to which he
may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum total of those imposed Example;
equals the same maximum period. X was charged and convicted of 5 counts of rape punishable by
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years. reclusion perpetua and a civil liability of P50,000.00. The judge,
In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of applying the three-fold rule, sentenced X of 40 years of imprisonment
perpetual penalties (pena perpetua) shall be computed at thirty and a civil liability of P50,000.00.
years. (As amended).
Q: Is the judge correct?
SIMULTANEOUS SERVICE OF SENTENCE A: NO. The three-fold rule is not for the judge to impose. The 40 years
Under Article 70, as a rule, when the convict has to serve two or more imprisonment in accordance to three-fold rule refers to service of
penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the sentence, NOT to the imposition of penalties.
penalties will so permit.
Q: If the judge will not impose the three-fold rule? Who will impose
Penalties that allow simultaneous service of sentence; it?
1. Improvement and fine; A: The three-fold rule is for the Director of Prisons to apply and
2. Imprisonment and suspension; compute, and not for the judge to impose.
3. Imprisonment and public censure;
Q: What penalties cannot be served at the same time? Q: How should the judge impose 5 counts of rape?
A: All forms of imprisonment. A: The judge shall impose upon him a penalty of reclusion perpetua
for each count of rape, the penalty prescribed by law for the crime of
SUCCESSIVE SERVICE OF SENTENCE rape. Likewise, the judge shall impose upon the convict the civil
All forms of imprisonment cannot be served simultaneously. liability of P50,000.00 for each count of rape.
Example; Q: does the three-fold rule also apply to civil liabilities of the
X was convicted of two counts of homicide. A penalty of reclusion offender?
temporal was imposed upon him for each count of homicide. A: NO. Each count of rape is a violation of the person of the victim
Reclusion temporal has a duration of 12-20 years. X will satisfy the therefore, civil indemnity is separate and distinct from the criminal
first 12-20 years of imprisonment. Thereafter, he shall serve another offense of rape. The civil indemnity shall be the number of times the
12-20 years of reclusion temporal for the second count of homicide. victim was raped.
In answering questions regarding penalties, you need not state the SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES
equivalent duration. It suffices that you state the designation, i.e. Subsidiary penalties are deemed imposed.
prision mayor, prision correcional, etc.
SUBSIDIARY IMPRISONMENT
--xXx-- Unlike subsidiary penalties, the subsidiary imprisonment must be
expressly stated in the decision.
Article 71. Graduated scales. - In the case in which the law
prescribed a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than --xXx--
another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be
observed in graduating such penalty. Art. 74. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain
The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the cases. — In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty higher than
graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty. another given penalty, without specially designating the name of
The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall the former, if such higher penalty should be that of death, the same
observe the following graduated scales: penalty and the accessory penalties of Article 40, shall be considered
as the next higher penalty.
SCALE NO. 1
If the decision or law says higher than Reclusion perpetua or 2 degrees
1. Death, than Reclusion temporal, then the penalty imposed is Reclusion
2. Reclusion perpetua, perpetua or Reclusion temporal as the case may be.
3. Reclusion temporal,
4. Prision mayor, Death must be designated by name. However, for the other penalties,
5. Prision correccional, this does not apply.
6. Arresto mayor,
7. Destierro, Example;
8. Arresto menor, The penalty for crime X is 2 degrees lower than RP. The penalty
9. Public censure, imposed is prision mayor.
10. Fine.
--xXx--
SCALE NO. 2
Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification, or more degrees. — Whenever it may be necessary to increase or
2. Temporal absolute disqualification reduce the penalty of fine by one or more degrees, it shall be
3. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be increased or reduced, respectively, for each degree, by one-fourth
voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling, of the maximum amount prescribed by law, without however,
4. Public censure, changing the minimum.
5. Fine.
The same rules shall be observed with regard of fines that
Q: What is the importance of 1 day in the duration of the period (6 do not consist of a fixed amount, but are made proportional.
yrs and 1 DAY -12 years)?
A: The 1 day separates the different degrees of the penalty. It also --xXx--
separates a divisible penalty from an indivisible penalty. It also
determines whether subsidiary imprisonment may be imposed on the Art. 76. Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. —
offender. The legal period of duration of divisible penalties shall be considered
as divided into three parts, forming three periods, the minimum, the
--xXx-- medium, and the maximum in the manner shown in the following
table:
Art. 72. Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities. —
The civil liabilities of a person found guilty of two or more offenses --xXx--
shall be satisfied by following the chronological order of the dates Art. 77. When the penalty is a complex one composed of
of the judgments rendered against him, beginning with the first in three distinct penalties. — In cases in which the law prescribes a
order of time. penalty composed of three distinct penalties, each one shall form a
period; the lightest of them shall be the minimum the next the
The penalties shall be satisfied according to the scale of Art 70 medium, and the most severe the maximum period.
--xXx-- Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the
forms specially provided for in this Code, the periods shall be
Art. 73. Presumption in regard to the imposition of distributed, applying by analogy the prescribed rules.
accessory penalties. — Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty
which, by provision of law, carries with it other penalties, according --xXx--
to the provisions of Articles 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of this Code, it must
be understood that the accessory penalties are also imposed upon
the convict.
EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES

--xXx--
Art. 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. — No
penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment. Art. 86. Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than mayor, prision correccional and arresto mayor. — The penalties of
that prescribed by law, nor with any other circumstances or reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision
incidents than those expressly authorized thereby. correccional and arresto mayor, shall be executed and served in the
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special places and penal establishments provided by the Administrative
regulations prescribed for the government of the institutions in Code in force or which may be provided by law in the future.
which the penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard
to the character of the work to be performed, the time of its --xXx--
performance, and other incidents connected therewith, the
relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons, the Art. 87. Destierro. — Any person sentenced to destierro
relief which they may receive, and their diet. shall not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the
The regulations shall make provision for the separation of sentence, nor within the radius therein specified, which shall be not
the sexes in different institutions, or at least into different more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place
departments and also for the correction and reform of the convicts. designated.
--xXx-- DESTIERRO
Destierro is considered as a principal correctional and divisible
Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and service of the penalty. Therefore, jurisdiction over crimes punishable with destierro
penalties in case of insanity. — When a convict shall become insane lies with the Metropolitan Trial Court.
or an imbecile after final sentence has been pronounced, the
execution of said sentence shall be suspended only with regard to Destierro shall be imposed in the following cases;
the personal penalty, the provisions of the second paragraph of 1. Death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted
circumstance number 1 of article 12 being observed in the under exceptional circumstance;
corresponding cases. 2. Person fails to give bond for good behavior in grave and
If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his light threats;
sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed 3. Concubine’s penalty for the crime of concubinage;
in accordance with the provisions of this Code. 4. When after reducing the penalty by one or more degree,
The respective provisions of this section shall also be destierro is the proper penalty
observed if the insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is
serving his sentence. Execution of Destierro
1. Convict shall not be permitted to enter the place designated
INSANITY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL OR AFTER THE CONVICTION OF THE in the sentence nor within the radius specified, which shall
ACCUSED BY FINAL JUDGMENT not be more than 250 and not less than 25 km from the
There will be a suspension of sentence. The accused cannot be made place designated;
to suffer the sentence. 2. If the convict enters the prohibited area, he commits
evasion of sentence
The moment he regains his sanity he is required to serve his sentence.
Provided, that the period of penalty has not yet prescribed. --xXx--
--xXx-- Art. 88. Arresto menor. — The penalty of arresto menor

shall be served in the municipal jail, or in the house of the defendant
Art 80 (as amended by PD 603: Child and Youth Welfare Code) himself under the surveillance of an officer of the law, when the
Note: refer to R.A. 9344 (Minority) court so provides in its decision, taking into consideration the health
of the offender and other reasons which may seem satisfactory to
--xXx-- it.
Art. 81. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. --xXx--
Art. 82. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance to
the culprit.
Art. 83. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence.
Art. 84. Place of execution and persons who may witness the same.
Art. 85. Provisions relative to the corpse of the person executed and
its burial.
As of writing, the death penalty is suspended by virtue of R.A. 9346.
Under RA 9346, the prohibition pertains only to the imposition of

death penalty. But for heinous crimes, the penalty shall still be death.
Only that it cannot be imposed.
1. Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction

extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability
based solely thereon;
2. 2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives
notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also
be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict.
Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these other
sources of obligation from which the civil liability may arise
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW as a result of the same act or omission:
a. Law;
PART II
b. Contracts;
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL c. Quasi-contracts;
d. (delict);
LIABILITY e. Quasi-delicts;
3. Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2

above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but
only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to
Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure
as amended. This separate civil action may be enforced
either against the executor/administrator or the estate of
Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. —
the accused, depending on the source of obligation upon
Criminal liability is totally extinguished;
which the same is based as explained above.
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties
4. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture
and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only
of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription,
when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment;
in cases where during the prosecution of the criminal action
2. By service of the sentence;
and prior to its extinction, the private-offended party
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty
instituted together therewith the civil action. In such case,
and all its effects;
the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed
4. By absolute pardon;
interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case,
5. By prescription of the crime;
conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil
6. By prescription of the penalty;
Code, that should thereby avoid any apprehension on a
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in
possible privation of right by prescription. (Citations
Art 344 of this Code;
omitted.)
MODES OF EXTINGUISHING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Article 89 is incomplete. The following are the modes ofextinguishing
Service of sentence means satisfaction of the penalty imposed. If it is
criminal liability;
imprisonment, it means that he has served his sentence behind bars.
1. Death;
If it is fine, it means that he has paid the amount.
2. Service of Sentence;
3. Amnesty; AMNESTY
4. Absolute pardon; Amnesty is an act of grace from the power entrusted with the
5. Prescription of crime;
execution of the law which does not only exempt the offender from
6. Prescription of penalty;
the service of penalty for the crime committed, but also obliterates
7. Valid marriage of the offended with the offender;
the effects of the crime. It does not only suspend the execution of the
8. Express repeal of the penal law; (Decriminalization of the
sentence. It also obliterates the effects of the crime.
act)
9. Probation under PD. 986 as amended by R.A. 10707;
ABSOLUTE PARDON
Absolute Pardon is an act of grace received from the power entrusted
DEATH
with the execution of the law which exempts the offender from the
Death is the permanent cessation of life.
penalty prescribed by law for the crime committed.
Q: When does death extinguish criminal liability?
PARDON AMNEST
A: Death extinguishes criminal liability at any stage of the
Merely suspends the execution Obliterates all effects of crime
proceedings, be it before or after conviction. This is because the
of sentence, erases the penalty as if no crime was committed;
moment the offender dies, there is no one to serve the personal
to be imposed;
penalty.
Granted only after conviction Granted at any stage of
Extinguishment of Civil liability through Death by final judgment; proceedings, before during or
after final judgment;
In People v. Amistoso (G.R. No. 201447, August 28, 2013) the Supreme
Court laid down rules in case the accused dies prior to final judgment; Private act of President. As Public act of President. Granted
such, the person pardoned with the concurrence of
must plead and prove it before Congress. Courts take judicial PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME
the courts. No judicial notice of notice of it; Prescription of Crime is the loss or forfeiture of the right of State to
Pardon; prosecute an act prohibited by law. The moment that a crime has
May be given to all kinds of Generally granted to a class or already prescribed, the court has to dismiss the case even if the
offenders; group of persons who have accused has not moved for its dismissal. The courts lose their
committed political offenses; jurisdiction to try the case.
VALID MARRIAGE Period of Prescription of Crimes

A valid marriage between the offender and the offended party PENALTY OF CRIMES PRESCRIPTION PERIOD
extinguishes criminal liability only in relation to private crimes; i.e. Death, Reclusion perpetua, 20 years;
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and one public crime reclusion temporal;
which is rape. Other afflictive penalties; 15 years;
Correctional penalties; 10 years;
* Under Art 266, the valid marriage of the offended with the offender Arresto mayor; 5 years;
extinguishes criminal liability as well as the penalty. Libel and other similar offenses; 1 year
Oral defamation and slander by 6 months;
Example; deed
Jack raped Rose. Rose filed a case of rape against Jack. Trial on the Light felonies; 2 month.
merits ensued. During trial, Jack and Rose would often see each other
and because of this, they fell in love with each other. Later on, they COMPUTATION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD
got married. This valid marriage will extinguish the criminal liability of The running of the prescriptive period shall be from the time of the
Jack. commission of the crime, if known. If not known, from discovery by
offended party, authorities and agents.
Q: IS the criminal liability extinguished if the marriage took place
after the offender was convicted by final judgment? Example;
A: YES. Even if there is already a final and executory judgment, such X and Y had a quarrel. In the course thereof, X killed Y. Thereafter, X
as when the offender is already behind bars, a valid marriage between buried the body of Y in his backyard. Unknown to X, neighbor A
the offender and the offended will still extinguish criminal liability and witnesses A burry the body in his backyard. After 25 years from the
the penalty imposed. commission of the crime, the neighbor became old and sickly. He then
told the police what he witnessed 25 years ago. The police then went
--xXx-- to the backyard, dug the ground and saw the bones of Y.
Art. 90. Prescription of crime. — Crimes punishable by Q: Can the State still prosecute H for parricide?
death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in A: YES. The crime has not yet prescribed. The authorities and their
twenty years. agents only came to know the crime 25 years from its commission.
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall This is the only time when the prescriptive period for the crime shall
prescribe in fifteen years. commence to run. Also, the neighbor who knew the commission of
Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe the crime is not the person required by law to discover the crime in
in ten years; with the exception of those punishable by arresto order to start the running of the prescriptive period. Therefore, the
mayor, which shall prescribe in five years. State can still file the case of parricide.
The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe
in one year. Example;
The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall Niki and Mariah were friends. Niki, before going to Mindanao, left the
prescribe in six months. titles of her properties to Mariah for safekeeping. Mariah became
Light offenses prescribe in two months. interested in one of the properties. While Niki was in Mindanao,
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the Mariah falsified a Deed of Absolute Sale forging the signature of Niki,
highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the making it appear that Niki sold the property to her. Mariah then
rules contained in the first, second and third paragraphs of this registered the Deed before the Registry of Deeds. The title was
article. (As amended by RA 4661, approved June 19, 1966.) thereafter transferred to the name of Mariah. 20 years thereafter,
Niki came back to Manila and acquired the titles she left to Mariah.
Art. 91. Computation of prescription of offenses. — The Niki noticed that one title was missing. She eventually discovered that
period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the property covered by such missing title was already transferred to
the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or the name of Mariah.
their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint
or information, and shall commence to run again when such Q: Can Niki file case of falsification of public document punishable
proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or by Prision mayor, against Mariah?
acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable A: NO. The crime has already prescribed. If a document or transaction
to him. involves real properties (sale, lease, attachment), the moment the
The term of prescription shall not run when the offender document is registered before the Registry of Deeds, such registration
is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. constitutes constructive notice. As such, the law presumes that the
whole world, including Niki, knows about the registration. The period
of prescription commences to run from that time. Since 20 years have purposes of preliminary investigation. It remains suspended until the
already lapsed in this case, the crime has already prescribed. This accused is convicted or acquitted or the case is terminated without
concerns only criminal liability. But Niki can still file a civil case for the fault of accused.
damages or any civil action to recover the property.
The term shall not run when the offender is absent from the
VIOLATION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS Philippine Archipelago.
In the case of People v. Pangilinan (G.R. No. 152662, June 13, 2012),
the Supreme Court said whether it is a violation of a special penal law Situations which do not follow Art. 91;
like the BP 22 or a violation of the RPC, the filing of a complaint before 1. In continuing crimes-prescriptive period will start to run
the office of the public prosecutor suspends or interrupts the running only at the termination of the intended result;
of the prescriptive period. It remains suspended until the case has 2. In crimes against false testimony, prescriptive period is
been decided the accused being acquitted or convicted or the case reckoned from the day final judgment is rendered in the
has been dismissed for any reason not imputable to him. proceeding where such false testimony is utilized not when
the false testimony is made;
Here the checks were issued, and the notice of dishonor was received 3. In Election offenses;
by the maker in 1995. The cases were filed before the prosecutors in a. if discovery of the offense is incidental to judicial
1997, and they filed the information in the MTC in 2000. The MTC and proceedings, prescription begins when such
RTC ruled that the crime did not prescribe. The CA held that the crime proceedings terminate; or
had prescribed, and that the filing of the complaint before the b. From the date of the commission of the offense.
prosecutors did not suspend the running of the prescriptive period.
--xXx--
The CA cited the case of Zaldivia v. Reyes and ruled that the violation
of BP 22 has already prescribed because according to the CA, in case Art. 92. When and how penalties prescribe. — The penalties
of violation of special penal laws, the running of the prescriptive imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows;
period is only interrupted upon the filing of the case before the 1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years;
appropriate court because the Supreme Court interpreted the word 2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years;
“proceedings” as judicial proceedings in Zaldivia v. Reyes. 3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the exception of
the penalty of arresto mayor, which prescribes in five
The SC said that the interpretation of the CA is erroneous. SC said it is years;
now settled in jurisprudence that whether it is a violation of a special 4. Light penalties, in one year.
penal law or a violation of the RPC, the filing of the complaint with the
public prosecutor interrupts the running of the prescriptive period. Art. 93. Computation of the prescription of penalties. — The
period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the
Violation of Municipal Ordinance date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence, and
In Zaldivia v. Reyes (G.R. No. 102342, July 3, 1992), what is involved is it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be
a violation of a municipal ordinance. It is only in case of violation of captured, should go to some foreign country with which this
municipal ordinance wherein the running of the prescriptive period is Government has no extradition treaty, or should commit another
interrupted upon the filing of the complaint before the proper court. crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.
The filing of the information in 1997 suspended the prescriptive
period and the same remains suspended; thus the crime has not yet PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY
prescribed Prescription of penalty is the loss of the right of the State to execute
the sentence.
Example;
Gerald and Kim were spouses. Gerald, as a medical representative, Prescription Period
was assigned in Visayas leaving his wife, Kim, in Manila. 20 years PENALTY PRESCRIPTION PERIOD
thereafter, Kim while watching TV saw Gerald presenting another Death, Reclusion perpetua; 20 years;
woman, Maja, as his wife. Furious, Kim went to Visayas and therein Afflictive penalties; 15 years;
discovered that there was a registered marriage certificate between Correctional penalties; 10 years;
Gerald and Maja, the woman she saw on TV. Arresto mayor; 5 years;
Light penalties; 1 year
Q: Can Kim file a case of bigamy?
A: YES. The crime has not yet prescribed. The rule on constructive COMMENCEMENT PERIOD
notice by registration is applicable only if the transaction involves real The running of the period shall commence from the time the convict
properties. Registration as to other documents or transactions with evaded the service of his sentence. It is necessary therefore that the
the Office of the Civil Registry does not constitute constructive notice convict is serving his sentence and while serving, he escaped. It is
to the whole world. Since the wife herein discovered the bigamous from the time of escape that the prescriptive period runs.
marriage only 20 years thereafter, this shall be the starting point for
the running of the prescriptive period of the crime. Example;
Garcia was convicted of homicide. The judgment became final and
PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD SUSPENDED executory. He was brought to serve sentence in Muntinlupa. While
The Prescriptive period shall be suspended upon filing of complaint or serving sentence, he escaped. Police failed to capture and find him. It
info before the fiscal’s office or before the court/public prosecutor for
was only after 20 years that Garcia was located and brought behind 3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn
bars. Garcia’s counsel filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus contending while he is serving his sentence.
that the penalty prescribed and therefore, Garcia could not be
imprisoned. MODES FOR PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
The following are the modes for extinguishing criminal liability;
Q: Is the counsel correct? 1. Conditional Pardon;
A: YES. The penalty has prescribed. Homicide prescribes in 15 years. 2. Commutation of sentence;
Here, Garcia was captured 20 years from escape. 3. Good conduct of allowance;
4. Special Time Allowance for Loyalty;
Example; 5. Parole under the Indeterminate Sentence Law;
Cuenca was charged with homicide. Being a bailable offense, Cuenca 6. Implied repeal or amendment of penal law lowering the
posted bail. During the arraignment and pre trial, Cuenca appeared penalty;
before the court. However, during the trial proper, he did not appear.
Trial in absentia ensued. Judgment was for conviction. Warrant of CONDITIONAL PARDON
arrest was issued against Cuenca. It was only 20 years thereafter that Conditional Pardon is an act of grace received from a power entrusted
the police were able to arrest Cuenca and bring him behind bars. with the authority to execute the law, but the pardon herein is subject
Cuenca’s counsel filed a petition for habeas corpus contending that to strict conditions.
the penalty has prescribed.
Because of this strict conditions, there must be acceptance on the
Q: Is the counsel correct? part of the offender. The moment he accepts, it becomes incumbent
A: NO. The penalty has not prescribed. In fact, prescription has not upon him to comply with the strict terms and conditions of the
even commenced to run. For the period to run, it is necessary that the pardon.
offender is serving sentence and while serving sentence, he escaped.
The running of prescriptive period only starts from the escape of Failure to comply with any of the strict conditions, the State can file a
offender. In this case, the offender has not even served his sentence. criminal case under Art 159- evasion of service of sentence. In
addition, the Chief Executive can order the immediate incarceration
SUSPENSION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD OF PENALTY of the offender under the Administrative Code.
The following are the grounds when the prescriptive period of penalty
is suspended; COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE
1. When offender surrenders; In commutation of sentence, a new sentence imposed shall be in lieu
2. When offender went to a country which has no extradition of the original sentence.
treaty with the Philippines;
3. When convict commits a crime before the expiration of Example;
period of prescription; Death penalty commuted to Reclusion perpetua.
4. When the offender is captured;
--xXx--
Prescription of Crimes v. Prescription of Penalty ART. 97. Allowance for good conduct. – The good conduct
PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY of any offender qualified for credit for preventive imprisonment
Loss or forfeiture of the right Loss or forfeiture of the right pursuant to Article 29 of this Code, or of any convicted prisoner in
of the State to prosecute; of the State to enforce final any penal institution, rehabilitation or detention center or any other
judgment; local jail shall entitle him to the following deductions from the
Starts counting upon the Starts counting upon the period of his sentence;
discovery of the commission of escape or evasion of service of 1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he shall be
the crime. sentence. allowed a deduction of twenty days for each month of good
Mere absence from the Absence from the Philippines behavior during detention;
Philippines interrupts the interrupts the period only 2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his
running of the prescription; when the convict goes to a imprisonment, he shall be allowed a reduction of twenty-three days
foreign country without an for each month of good behavior during detention;
extradition treaty with the 3. During the following years until the tenth year,
Philippines; inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of
Commission of another crime Commission of another crime twenty-five days for each month of good behavior during detention;
before the expiration of the before the expiration of the 4. During the eleventh and successive years of his
prescriptive period does not period interrupts the imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of thirty days for
interrupt prescription. prescription. each month of good behavior during detention; and
5. At any time during the period of imprisonment, he shall
--xXx-- be allowed another deduction of fifteen days, in addition to
numbers one to four hereof, for each month of study, teaching or
Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. — Criminal liability is mentoring service time rendered. (As amended by R.A. 10592)
extinguished partially;
1. By conditional pardon; An appeal by the accused shall not deprive him of
2. By commutation of the sentence; and entitlement to the above allowances for good conduct.
GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCE

Good conduct allowance is awarded to the offender if he has been
behaving properly in prison. The Director of Prisons shall compute the
good conduct allowance in favor of the offender so that he will be
immediately released.
PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT DEDUCTION CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

First two years; 20 days for each month of good
behavior during detention; PART III
Third to fifth year, inclusive, of 23 days for each month of good
his imprisonment; behavior during detention;
CIVIL LIABILITY
Sixth until the tenth year, 25 days for each month
inclusive, of his imprisonment; of good behavior during
detention;
Eleventh and successive years 30 days for each month
of his Imprisonment; of good behavior during
detention;
At any time during the another deduction of 15 days,
period of imprisonment; in addition to numbers one to Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. — Every
four hereof for each month of person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
service time rendered for;
1. Study; CIVIL LIABILITY
2. Teaching; or As a general rule, every person criminally liable is also civilly liable. For
3. Mentoring; every criminal action filed in court, the civil action for the recovery of
civil liability is deemed impliedly instituted.
--xXx--
Reason
ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A deduction The commission of a crime, 2 injuries are inflicted;
of one fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any 1. Social injury against the State for the disturbance of social
prisoner who, having evaded his preventive imprisonment or the order; and
service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in 2. Personal Injury against the offended party and his heirs;
Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48
hours following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the The social injury against the state will be answered by reparation. The
passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said personal injury will be answered by the civil indemnity.
article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his sentence shall
be granted in case said prisoner chose to stay in the place of his Exceptions to Implied Institution of Civil Action
confinement notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or The following are the exemption to the general that a civil action is
catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code. (As amended by impliedly instituted in a criminal case;
R.A. 10592) 1. When offended party waives the civil action;
2. When the offended party reserves the right to file a
Example; separate civil action, which must be made prior to the
During the time Bin Laden was serving his sentence behind bars, an presentation of evidence of the prosecution;
8.9 magnitude earthquake suddenly occurred prompting Bin Laden to 3. When the offended party files the civil action prior to the
escape. He then went to the house of his mother. While Bin Laden criminal action
was watching TV in the house of his mother, he saw the President
announcing that the earthquake subsided. Within 48 hours from ACQUITTAL; EFFECT ON CIVIL LIABILITY:
announcement, Bin Laden surrendered. Because of this surrender, In the following cases, acquittal in a criminal action bars recovery in a
Bin Laden is entitled to the special allowance for loyalty for being so civil action;
loyal to the government. 1. If the judgment of acquittal states that the alleged criminal
acts of the offender were not committed by him;
If Bin Laden remained in prison despite the 8.9 magnitude 2. If the judgment of acquittal states that the accused is not
earthquake, he is entitled to a deduction of 2/5 from the period of his guilty of criminal or civil damages;
sentence.
In the following cases, the acquittal of the accused in a criminal case
However, if Bin Laden did not return, there will be an additional 1/5 is not a bar to recover civil liability;
to the term of his sentence. If Bin Laden merely remained in prison, 1. When judgment of acquittal is based on reasonable doubt -
there will be neither deduction nor addition to his sentence. This is because civil actions require mere preponderance of
evidence;
--xXx-- 2. When judgment of acquittal states that the liability of
accused is not criminal but civil in nature - This usually
happens when the case is estafa and there is a contract
between the accused and complainant, upon which the
accused failed to comply with the terms of the contract. is the one who acted under the compulsion of irresistible force or
There is breach of contract; uncontrollable fear.
3. When the judgment of acquittal states that the civil liability
does not arise from the crime but from other sources of --xXx--
obligations;
Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers,
--xXx-- tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. — In default of
the persons criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any
Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. — other persons or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes
The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, committed in their establishments, in all cases where a violation of
2, 3, 5 and 6 of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation
Code does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be shall have been committed by them or their employees.
enforced subject to the following rules: Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the goods taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests
civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and lodging therein, or for the payment of the value thereof, provided
by a person under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper
fifteen years of age, who has acted without discernment, shall himself, or the person representing him, of the deposit of such
devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed the
or control, unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have
their part. given them with respect to the care and vigilance over such goods.
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or
minor under his authority, legal guardianship or control, or if such intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper's
person be insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond employees.
with their own property, excepting property exempt from
execution, in accordance with the civil law. Art. 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. — The
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, subsidiary liability established in the next preceding article shall also
the persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be apply to employers, teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in
civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they may have any kind of industry for felonies committed by their servants, pupils,
received. workmen, apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the duties.
proportionate amount for which each one shall be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY
determined, even approximately, or when the liability also attaches Parents, teacher, employers, and proprietors shall be subsidiarily
to the Government, or to the majority of the inhabitants of the liable for the crimes committed by their children, students,
town, and, in all events, whenever the damages have been caused employees, servants.
with the consent of the authorities or their agents, indemnification
shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or Subsidiary Liability of employers
regulations. Employers may be held subsidiarily liable for the acts of their
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article employees provided the following requisites are present;
12, the persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily 1. Employer must be engaged in some kind of industry;
liable and secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing 2. Employer and employee relationship;
the act shall be liable, saving always to the latter that part of their 3. Employee committed a crime in the exercise of his duties as
property exempt from execution. employee;
4. There must be conviction of the crime and the employee
INSANE, IMBECILE, MINOR was found insolvent to pay civil indemnity;
In case the offender is insane, imbecile or minor, the civil liability
arising from their acts shall be shouldered by the persons who have The moment the employee was found insolvent, the liability of the
custody of the insane, imbecile or minor. employer now becomes absolute. A motion for the issuance of a
subsidiary writ of execution must then be filed by the complainant
Secondary liability falls on the property of the insane, imbecile or
minor, except those properties which are prohibited from being Example;
attached. Paris Hilton, a guest in a hotel, told the representative of the hotel
that she carries valuables. The representative of the hotel told Paris
STATE OF NECESSITY about the rules regarding the care and vigilance of the valuables.
All persons who have been benefitted during the state of necessity However, during nighttime, a robbery occurred inside the hotel.
shall bear the civil liability. If there are many persons benefitted, the Among those taken were the valuables of Paris. The offender was
liability shall be divided by the court proportionately. arrested, convicted and civil liability was imposed upon him.
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE OR UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR Q: In case of insolvency of the offender, does the proprietor of the
Borne by the person who enforced the threats to the offender. hotel or establishment have subsidiary civil liability?
Secondary liability falls upon the principal by direct participation, who
A: YES. The guest complied with the rules and regulations as to the Q: Is the proprietor of the establishment liable?
care and vigilance of the goods. He also informed the representative A: YES. There was a violation of the ordinance. Any crimes committed
of the hotel of the presence of his valuables. in the establishment will make the proprietor subsidiarily liable for
civil liability only, not for criminal liability.
Example;
Same situation as above. The guard of the hotel tried to fight the Example;
robbers. One of the robbers shot the guard. Prosecuted for robbery Vin Diesel was a driver of XYZ Corporation engaged in the business of
with homicide and was convicted. distributing goods to supermarkets. Vin Diesel was driving recklessly
as he was headed to one supermarket. In the course thereof, Vin
Q: In case of insolvency, is the proprietor of the hotel subsidiarily Diesel hit a car. The car was damaged. Because of this, a crime for
liable? reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property was filed
A: NO. The crime committed is robbery with homicide, which is a against Vin Diesel. Court found him guilty. The penalties imposed
crime under robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons. were fine and payment of damage caused. When the judgment
If the crime committed is robbery with violence against or became final and executory, a writ of execution was issued but was
intimidation of persons, the proprietor is not liable, except if the returned unsatisfied due to the insolvency of Vin Diesel.
offender is the employee of the hotel or establishment.
Q: Is there need to file a separate civil action?
A: NO. There is no need to file a separate civil action. In the very same
Solidum v. People (G.r. No. 192123, March 10, 2014) action for reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property, the
Gerald Gercayo was born with an imperforated anus. Two days after moment the employee is found to be insolvent, the liability of the
his birth, Gerald underwent colostomy, a surgical procedure to bring employer becomes absolute. However, even if it is absolute, it is not
one end of the large intestine out through the abdominal wall, automatic. The complainant has to file a Motion for the Issuance of a
enabling him to excrete through a colostomy bag attached to the side Subsidiary Writ of Execution. This is not an ex parte motion, but a
of his body. When Gerald was three years old, he was admitted at the litigated one. Thus, the other party (XYZ COrpo) must be informed for
Ospital ng Maynila for a pull-through operation. Dr. Leandro due process.
Resurreccion headed the surgical team along with the
anesthesiologists which includes petitioner Dr. Fernando Solidum. --xXx--
During the operation, Gerald experienced bradycardia, and went into
a coma. His coma lasted for two weeks,9 but he regained Art. 104. What is included in civil liability. — The civil liability
consciousness only after a month. He could no longer see, hear or established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code includes;
move. Thus, the mother lodged a complaint for reckless imprudence 1. Restitution;
resulting in serious physical injuries against the attending physicians 2. Reparation of the damage caused;
and Ospital ng Maynila. 3. Indemnification for consequential damages.
Q: Is Dr. Solidum civilly or criminally liable? Art. 105. Restitution. — How made. — The restitution of
A: NO. The Prosecution presented no witnesses with special medical the thing itself must be made whenever possible, with allowance for
qualifications in anesthesia to provide guidance to the trial court on any deterioration, or diminution of value as determined by the
what standard of care was applicable. It would consequently be truly court.
difficult, if not impossible, to determine whether the first three The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found
elements of a negligence and malpractice action were attendant. in the possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful
means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person, who
Q: Is Ospital ng Maynila subsidiarily liable? may be liable to him.
A: NO. For one, Ospital ng Maynila was not at all a party in the This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing
proceedings. Hence, its fundamental right to be heard was not has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under the
respected from the outset. Second, granting for the sake of argument requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
that Ospital ng Maynila was impleaded, still it cannot be subsidiarily
liable because the requisites for the subsidiary liability of the RESTITUTION
employers are not present. First, there is no employer-employee Restitution is the return of the very thing taken.
relationship because based on the evidence, Dr. Solidum is a
consultant and not an employee of OM. Second, OM is not engaged Exception
in some kind of industry, it is a charitable institution that caters Exception: if the innocent purchaser acquired the said property in a
hospital services to poor patients; there is no profit. Also, Dr. Solidum public sale. Then, it can no longer be taken away from him.
was not criminally liable. Lastly, granting that Dr. Solidum was held
liable for civil liability, there was no proof that Dr. Solidum was Q: What is the remedy of the offended party if the thing can no
insolvent such that OM will be subsidiarily liable. longer be returned?
A: The remedy of the offended party is reparation.
Example;
A municipal ordinance provides that Establishment XYZ should only --xXx--
be open during weekdays. However, this establishment violated the
ordinance as it opened on a Sunday. A crime was committed during Art. 106. Reparation. — How made. — The court shall
the Sunday it opened. determine the amount of damage, taking into consideration the
price of the thing, whenever possible, and its special sentimental shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their
value to the injured party, and reparation shall be made accordingly. respective shares.
Reparation Example;
In case of inability to return the property stolen, the culprit must pay X, Y and Z were charged in the case of robbery. They were all charged
the value of the property stolen. The court shall determine the value as principals. But the judge ruled that X is a principal, Y is an
of the thing taken including its sentimental value. accomplice and Z is a mere accessory. The judge divided the civil
liability proportionately. Their liabilities among themselves are in
--xXx-- solidum.
Art. 107. Indemnification — What is included. — Q: Against whom can the private complainant recover said civil
Indemnification for consequential damages shall include not only liability?
those caused the injured party, but also those suffered by his family A: The private complainant can recover the entire civil liability from
or by a third person by reason of the crime. X, the principal but X now has a right of action against Y and Z insofar
as their respective civil liabilities are concerned. If X cannot pay, the
INDEMNIFICATION private complainant can go against Y. Y can now go against X and Z
Indemnification includes moral damages, civil indemnity, exemplary because their liabilities are in solidum but subsidiary insofar as the
damages. private complainant is concerned
Moral Damages --xXx--

Moral damages in case of rape or murder need not be proved. It
suffices that the crime has been committed. The law presumes that Art. 111. Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. —
the victim suffered moral indemnity because of the crime committed. Any person who has participated gratuitously in the proceeds of a
felony shall be bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent
Exemplary Damages to the extent of such participation.
Exemplary damages can only be granted if there are aggravating
circumstances in the commission of the crime. Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability. — Civil liability
established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code shall be
--xXx-- extinguished in the same manner as obligations, in accordance with
the provisions of the Civil Law.
Article 108. Obligation to make restoration, reparation for
damages, or indemnification for consequential damages and actions EXTINGUISHMENT OF CIVIL LIABILITY:
to demand the same; Upon whom it devolves. - The obligation to Civil Liability shall be extinguished by the following acts;
make restoration or reparation for damages and indemnification for 1. By pardon of the offended party;
consequential damages devolves upon the heirs of the person liable. 2. Other modes for extinguishing civil liability under Civil Code;
(payment, Condonation, etc)
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification
likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured. Civil liability is personal and cannot be extinguished by pardon,
amnesty, probation, commutation of sentence, etc. Civil liability can
Article 109. Share of each person civilly liable. - If there are only be extinguished in the same manner as in Civil Law, by the
two or more persons civilly liable for a felony, the courts shall extinguishment of obligations, i.e., payment, loss of the thing,
determine the amount for which each must respond. remuneration, compensation, etc.
If there were 2 accused convicted, insofar as the civil liability is --xXx--

concerned, it is the court which shall determine the civil liability of the
2 accused Art. 113. Obligation to satisfy civil liability. — Except in
case of extinction of his civil liability as provided in the next
--xXx-- preceding article the offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy
the civil liability resulting from the crime committed by him,
Art. 110. Several and subsidiary liability of principals, notwithstanding the fact that he has served his sentence consisting
accomplices and accessories of a felony — Preference in payment. of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not been required to
— Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article, the serve the same by reason of amnesty, pardon, commutation of
principals, accomplices, and accessories, each within their sentence or any other reason.
respective class, shall be liable severally (in solidum) among
themselves for their quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the other --END--
persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the
property of the principals; next, against that of the accomplices,
and, lastly, against that of the accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability
has been enforced, the person by whom payment has been made

Garcia CRIM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garcia CRIM

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garcia CRIM

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GARCIA NOTES - CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] 1

Limitations to the Power of Congress to enact Penal Laws:

Characteristics of Penal Laws

CRIME – act committed or omitted in violation of the law. GENERALITY

Example: Generally Accepted Principles of PIL;

Q: Should Magno should be convicted of violation of B.P. 22? --xXx--

Lenity Rule --xXx--

Example; that is the Intraterritorial application of the RPC because it is as the

Q: May Pres. X be prosecuted? Exception;

Example; immediately after the

Q: Will his defense of mistake of facts lie in his favor? Example;

There are no common law crimes in the Philippines. ATTEMPTED STAGE

Overt Act Q: Was there attempted rape?

Q: Is X liable for any crime? Example;

Q: Is the woman liable of any crime? Intent to have carnal

General Rule – not punishable as an act; Direct or Express Conspiracy

Q: What is or are the criminal liabilities of A, B and C? Example;

Example; 2 KINDS OF MULTIPLE CONSPIRACY

Inverted Trial Imminent unlawful aggression means an attack that is impending or

Q: Was there unlawful aggression? Example;

Q: Was there self-defense?

DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE Example;

Elements It is important to note that the injury is the necessary consequence of

BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME No Criminal Liability and Civil Liability

Imbecile Criminal Liability

Presumption of Sanity Suspension of Sentence

ACCIDENT UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

Q: Is the police officer liable for homicide?

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE

absent. The act of X in shooting the head of A is not a necessary Example;

PRAETER INTENTIONEM Provocation

Example: felony to murder and the others shall be considered as a generic

Example; ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS.

Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of dwelling present? Abuse of Confidence

Example; conspiracy has already been considered therefore by a band can no

Example; Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of by a band present?

are used in killing a person, it is not a generic aggravating Fraud

Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of treachery present in this case? IGNOMINY

Q: Is the aggravating circumstance of Abuse of superior strength Example;

AID OF PERSONS UNDER 15 YEARS Special Aggravating Circumstance

Q: Is the charge correct? There are three alternative Circumstances in Article 15

Intoxication as aggravating On other hand, entrapment is not an absolutory cause because

EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION

Elements; Q: What are the liabilities of A, B, C, D, and E?

Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons Example;

Community of design --xXx--

Knowledge of the Crime Example;

Example; Q: What is the liability of X?

Q: What is the liability of W? Example;

Q: What is the criminal liability of the friend? Q: What is the liability of X?

Penalties common to the three preceding classes:

2 kinds of penalties; DEATH

The principal penalty which accompanies perpetual absolute --xXx--

The principal penalty which accompanies perpetual special --xXx--

Perpetual Absolute v. Temporary Absolute

PENALTIES COMMON TO THE THREE

BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE

Bond to keep the peace is a principal penalty.

Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and