Jose Maria College

College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

REVISED PENAL CODE

ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED
BOOK I (ARTICLES 1 TO 113)

I. CRIMINAL LAW; Fundamental Principles

 Definition of Criminal Law
“Criminal Law – that branch of public substantive law which defines crimes, treats of their nature,
and provides for their punishment.” [Reyes, citing 12 Cyc. 129]
o RPC, Article 3 & 21

 Sources of Criminal Law in the Philippines

 Development of Criminal Law in the Philippines

 CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS
a. State Authority to Punish Crime
o 1987 Constitution, Art. II, Sec 5
o 1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec 1

b. Limitations on the Power

1. Must be General in application.
2. Must not partake of the nature of an Ex Post Facto law.
3. Must not partake of the nature of a Bill of Attainder.
 Case: - People vs. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382
4. Must not impose cruel and unusual punishment or excessive fines.

o 1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 1, 14(1), 14(2), 18(1), 18(2), 19(1), 19(2), 20, 22
o 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115
o Civil Code, Article 2
o Cases:
- Tanada vs Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985)
- Pesigan vs Angeles,129 SCRA 174 (1994)

 Different Theories Underlying the Criminal Law System

1. Classical or Juristic Theory
2. Positivist or Realistic Theory
3. Eclectic or Mixed Theory
4. Utilitarian or Protective Theory

 Scope of Application and Characteristics of the Philippine Criminal Law

1. GENERALITY of Criminal Law
o 1987 Constitution, Art. VI, Sec 1
o Civil Code, Article 14
o Exceptions to the General Application of Criminal Law

2. TERRITORIALITY of Criminal Law

o The Archipelagic Rule

1
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

o 1987 Constitution, Art. 1

o Exceptions, EXTRATERRITORIALITY

3. PROSPECTIVITY/ IRRETROSPECTIVITY of Criminal Law

o RPC, Article 21 & 22
o Civil Code, Article 4
o Exception where a penal law may be given retroactive application
 Exception to the exception
 Case: - Gumabon vs. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA 420 (1971)
o Effects of Repeal/ Amendment of Penal Law
 With Reenactment
 Without Reenactment

 CONSTRUCTION OF PENAL LAWS

 1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 14(2)
 Pro Reo Doctrine
 Equipoise Rule
 Spanish Text of the RPC prevails over its English translation
 Cases:
- People v. Manaba (58 Phil 665. 668)
- Pascual vs Board of Medical Examiners, 28 SCRA 344 (1969)

 BASIC MAXIMS IN CRIMINAL LAW

a) NULLUM CRIMEN, NULLA POENA SINE LEGE
“There is no crime if there is no penal law punishing it”.
b) ACTUS NON FACIT REUM, NISI MENS SIT REA
“The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal.”
c) ACTUS ME INVITO FACTUS NON EST MEUS ACTUS
“An act done by me against my will is not my act.”
d) EL QUE ES CAUSA DE LA CAUSA ES CAUSA DEL MAL CAUSADO
“He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused.”

II. CODAL PROVISIONS OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE

Article 1 – Time when Act takes effect. – This Code shall take effect on the 1st of January 1932.
Article 2 – Application of Its Provisions
 Principle of Extraterritoriality

 English Rule v. French Rule

 Cases:
- People vs. Wong Cheng, (46 Phil 729)
- U.S. vs. Look Chaw, (18 Phil 573)
- U.S. vs. Ah Sing, (36 Phil 978)

Article 3 – FELONIES
A. Felonies vs. Offense vs. Crime vs. Misdemeanor
B. Kinds of Felonies

2
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

1. INTENTIONAL FELONIES (DOLO)

 Elements
 Presumption of Criminal Intent
 Distinctions between INTENT and MOTIVE
 How motive is proved
 WHEN MOTIVE BECOMES MATERIAL IN DETERMINING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
 Cases:
- Barrioquinto v. Fernandez (1949)
- People vs. Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988)
- People vs. Temblor, 161 SCRA 623 (1988)
- People vs Delos Santos GR No. 135919, May 9, 2003

 Mistake of Fact (Ignorantia Facti Excusat)

 Cases:
- People vs. Oanis, et.al. (74 Phil 257)
- U.S. vs. Ah Chong (15 Phil 499)

2. CULPABLE FELONIES (CULPA)

 Elements
 Culpa distinguished from Dolo
o RPC, Article 3 & 365
o Cases: --People vs. Buan, 22 SCRA 1383 (1968)

C. Crimes Defined and Penalized by Special Laws

 MALA IN SE vs. MALA PROHIBITA
 Case: -- Padilla vs. Dizon, 158 SCRA 127 (1988)

Article 4- CRIMINAL LIABILITY

A. DOCTRINE OF PROXIMATE CAUSE
B. PROXIMATE CAUSE VS. REMOTE CAUSE
 Cases:
- People v. Villacorta, G.R. No. 186412, September 7, 2011
- Rodolfo Belbis Jr. y Competente and Alberto Brucales v. People, G.R. No. 181052,
November 14, 2012
- U.S. vs. Valdez (41 Phil 497)
- People vs. Almonte (56 Phil 54)
- People vs. Toleng et.al. (G.R. No. L-33535, January 17, 1975)
- People vs. Ortega, Jr. (276 SCRA 166)
- Urbano vs. IAC (157 SCRA 10 [1988])
- People vs. Abarca (153 SCRA 735 [1987])
- Bataclan vs. Medina (102 Phil. 181)
- People vs. Ulep (G.R. No. L-36858, June 20, 1988)
- People vs. Bindoy (56 Phil 15)

3
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

C. CAUSES THAT PRODUCE A DIFFERENT RESULT

1. Error in personae -- Mistake in person
2. Aberratio ictus – Mistake in blow
3. Praeter intentionem – No intent to commit so grave a wrong as that committed

 Additional Cases:
- People vs. Gona, (54 Phil 605)
- People vs. Mabug-at, (51 Phil 967)
- People vs. Cagoco, (58 Phil 524)

D. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

 Requisites

 MODIFIED CONCEPT OF IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

 Cases:

- Intod et.al. vs. C.A. (G.R. No. 103119, October 21, 1992)
- People vs. Domasian (March 1, 1993)
- Jacinto vs. People (July 13, 2009)

Article 5. Duty of the Court

Article 6. STAGES OF EXECUTION

(1) Attempted Stage
(2) Frustrated Stage
(3) Consummated Stage
 What is the distinction between ATTEMPTED and FRUSTRATED felony?
 What are FORMAL CRIMES?
 Cases:
- People vs. Trinidad, 169 SCRA 51 (1989)
- People vs Velasco, 73 SCRA 574 (1976)
- People vs. Pancho (November 27, 2003)
- People vs. Lamahang (91 Phil 703)
- Valenzuela vs. People (525 SCRA 306, June 21, 2007)
- People vs. Eriña (50 Phil 998)
- People vs. Orita (G.R. No. 86164, April 3, 1990)
- People vs. Campuhan (2000)
- People v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 188602, February 4, 2010

Article 7. When Light Felonies Punishable

Article 8. CONSPIRACY – Levels of Conspiracy

 RPC, Articles 8, 115, 136, 141
 Requisites
 2 KINDS OF CONSPIRACY

4
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

1) Conspiracy as a Crime
2) Conspiracy as a basis of Incurring Criminal Liability
 2 WAYS IN COMMITTING CONSPIRACY
1) Express Conspiracy
2) Implied Conspiracy
 What are the legal effects of implied conspiracy? (2003 Bar Question)
 What is overlapping conspiracy?
 2 Structures of Multiple Conspiracies
 Distinctions between CONSPIRACY and PROPOSAL to commit a felony?
 Cases:
- Fernan Jr. et.al. vs. People (August 24, 2007)
- People vs. Valdez, 159 SCRA 153 (1988)
- People vs. Nacional, 248 SCRA 122 (1995)
- People v. Agacer et al., G.R. No. 177751, December 14, 2011
- People of the Philippines v. Halil Gambao, et al, G.R. No. 172707, October 1, 2013
- People of the Philippines v. Javier Morilla y Avellano, G.R. No. 189833, February 5, 2014
- Ricardo L. Atienza and Alfredo A. Castro v. People, G.R. No. 188694, February 12, 2014

Article 9. GRAVE, LESS GRAVE AND LIGHT FELONIES

Article 10. Offenses Not Subject to the Provisions of the Code

 Case: -- Go-Tan vs. Tan (September 30, 2008)

 What are the circumstances affecting criminal liability?

 What are the other two circumstances found in the RPC affecting criminal liability?
o Absolutory cause
o Extenuating circumstances

Article 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

 PAR. 1-3: SELF DEFENSE; DEFENSE OF RELATIVES AND STRANGERS; DEFENSE OF

PROPERTY; DEFENSE OF REPUTATION
 Requisites
 DOCTRINE OF RATIONAL EQUIVALENCE
 Cases:
- Dela Cruz vs. People (November 19, 2014)
- People vs. Abrazaldo (February 7, 2003, 397 SCRA 137)
- People vs. Apolinar (CA 38, OG 2870)
- People vs. Narvaez (G.R. Nos. L-33466-67, April 20, 1983)
- People vs Abagon, 161 SCRA 255 (1988)
- People v. Chua Hiong (1954)
- People v. Eulogio Ignacio, G.R. No. 134568. February 10, 2000
- Rodolfo Guevarra and Joey Guevarra v. People,, G.R. No. 170462, February 5, 2014

 PAR. 4: STATE OF NECESSITY (AVOIDANCE OF GREATER EVIL)

 Cases:

5
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

- People vs Ricohermoso, 56 SCRA 431 (1974)

- Ty vs. People (September 27, 2004)

 PAR. 5: FULFILLMENT OF DUTY OR LAWFUL EXERCISE OF RIGHT/ OFFICE

 DOCTRINE OF “SELF-HELP”
 Cases:
- People v. Delima (1922)
- People vs Oanis, 74 Phil. 257 (1943)
- People v. Ulep (2000)
- Mamagun v. People (2007)

 PAR. 6: OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED FOR SOME LAWFUL PURPOSE

 Cases:
- People vs Beronilla, 96 SCRA 566 (1955)
- Tabuena vs. Sandiganbayan, 268 SCRA 332 (1997)

 BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME

(See R.A. No. 9262 “Anti Violence Against Women and Children Law” or VAWC)
 Definition of BWS
 Who can avail of BWS as a defense?
 Case: -People vs. Marivic Genosa (G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004)

Article 12. EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

 PAR. 1: INSANITY AND IMBECILITY
 Presumption
 TWO TESTS OF INSANITY:
 (1) The test of COGNITION, or whether the accused acted with complete deprivation of
intelligence in committing the said crime;
 (2) The test of VOLITION, or whether the accused acted in total deprivation of freedom of
will. [Case: People vs. Rafanan, 1991]
 Cases:
- People vs Puno, 105 SCRA 151 (1981)
- People v. Dungo, 199 SCRA 860
- People vs Pambid, G.R. No. 124453. March 15, 2000
- People vs. Domingo , 580 SCRA 436 (March 2, 2009)
- People v. Bulagao, G.R. No. 184757, October 5, 2011

 PAR. 2 & 3: MINORITY (SUPERSEDED BY RA 9344)

 See R.A. 9344 (Juvenile justice and Welfare Law), as amended by R.A. 10630
 See AM No. 02-1-18-SC (November 24, 2009)
 See R.A. 10630 (An Act Strengthening the Juvenile system)
 See Implementing the Rules and Regulations of R.A. 10630

 Child in Conflict with the Law, Definition

6
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 MINIMUM AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY AND TREATMENT OF CHILD BELOW AGE OF

RESPONSIBILITY
 Determination of Age [Sec. 7, RA 9344]
 Exemption from criminal liability
 Discernment, definition
 INTENT vs DISCERNMENT
 What is automatic suspension of sentence as provided for in Sec. 38 of R.A. 9344?
 Cases:
- People vs Doquena, 68 Phil, 580 (1939)
- People vs. Alcabao (CA, 44 OG 5006)
- Llave vs. Peolple (April 26, 2006)
- Jose vs. People (January 13, 2005)
- U.S. vs. Maralit (January 25, 1917)
- People vs. Cortezano & Cortezano (G.R. no. 123140, September 23, 2003)
- People vs. Capistrano (G.R. No. L-4549, October 22, 1952)
- Valcesar Estioca vs. People (G.R. No. 173876, June 27, 2008)
- Robert Sierra vs. People (G.R. No. 182941, July 3, 2009)
- Raymund Madali vs. People (G.R. No. 180380, August 4, 2009)
- Joemar Ortega vs. People (August 20, 2008)
- Remiendo vs. People (October 9, 2009)
- People vs. Hermie Jacinto (March 16, 2011)
- People v. Mantalaba, G.R. No. 186227, July 20, 2011 reiterating People v. Sarcia

 PAR. 4: ACCIDENT WITHOUT FAULT OR INTENTION OF CAUSING IT

(DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA)
 Elements
 Cases:
- People vs. Bandian (G.R. No. 45186, September 30, 1936)
- U.S. Tanedo (15 Phil 196)
- People vs. Fallorina (G.R. No. 137347, March 4, 2004)
- People vs. Ayaya (52 phil 453)
- People vs. Genita, Jr. (G.R. No. 126171, March 11, 2004)
- Amployo vs. People (G.R. No. 157718, April 26, 2005)
- People vs. Castillo (G.R. No. 172695, June 29, 2007)
- People vs. Abrazaldo (February 7, 2003)
- People vs. Latosa (June 23, 2010)
- People v. Lanuza y Bagaoisan, G.R. No. 188562, August 17, 2011).

 PAR. 5- 6: COMPULSION OF IRRESISTIBLE FORCE/ UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR

 Elements
 IRRESISTIBLE FORCE vs. UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
 Cases:
- People vs. Moreno (77 Phil 549)
- People vs Loreno 130 SCRA 311 (1984)
- People vs Fronda 222 SCRA 71 (1993)

7
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

- People v. Saldana, G.R. No. 148518, Apr. 15, 2004

 PAR. 7: PREVENTED BY SOME LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE

Article 13. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
o ORDINARY vs. PRIVILEGED MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE

 PAR. 1: INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING OR EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

 Incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives, defense of stranger:
In these 3 classes of defense, UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION must always be present. It is an
indispensable requisite.
 Cases:
- People v. Oanis (1943)

 PAR. 2: UNDER 18 OR OVER 70 YEARS OF AGE

 PAR. 3: NO INTENTION TO COMMIT SO GRAVE A WRONG (PRAETER INTENTIONEM)

 WHEN NOT APPLICABLE
 Cases:
- People vs. Jaurigue, (G.R. No. 384, February 21, 1946)
- People vs Ural, 56 SCRA 138 (1974)
- People vs Regato. 127 SCRA 287 (1984)
- People v. Calleto (2002)
- People v. Sales, G.R. No. 177218, October 3, 2011

 PAR. 4: SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT

 Elements
 How is sufficient threat or provocation as a mitigating circumstance distinguished from threat or
provocation as an element of self- defense?
 Cases:
- People vs. Pagal, 76 SCRA 570 (1977)
- People v. CA, G.R No. 103613, Feb. 23, 2001

 PAR. 5: IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE

 Elements
 Provocation vs. Vindication
 Cases:
- U.S. vs. Ampar (G.R. No. 12883, November 26, 1917)
- People vs. Ignas (G.R. No. 140514-15, September 30, 2003)
- People vs. Benito (December 17, 1976)
- People vs. David (60 Phil 93)
- U.S. vs. Hicks (14 Phil 217)
- Sanico vs. CA (46 OG 98)
- U.S. vs. Dela Cruz (G.R. No. 7094, March 29, 1912)
- People vs. Rabao (G.R. No. 46530, April 10, 1912)
- People vs Parana, 64 Phil. 331 (1937)
- People vs Diokno, 63 Phil 601 (1936)

8
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

9
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 PAR. 6: PASSION OR OBFUSCATION (ARREBATO Y OBCECACION)

 Elements
 PASSION OR OBFUSCATION NOT APPLICABLE WHEN:
(1) The act committed in a spirit of LAWLESSNESS.
(2) The act is committed in a spirit of REVENGE.
 PASSION/OBFUSCATION vs. IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
 PASSION/OBFUSCATION vs PROVOCATION
 Cases:
- US v. De la Cruz (1912)
- People v. Guhiting, 88 Phil. 672
- People vs. Muit. 117 SCRA 696 (1982)
- People vs Aquino, GR No. 128887, January 20, 2000

 PAR. 7: VOLUNTARY SURRENDER & CONFESSION OF GUILT

 Requisites
 Effect of Arrest; Exceptions
 When is surrender considered voluntary?
 Is plea of guilty applicable to all crimes?
 PLEA TO A LESSER OFFENSE
 Cases:
- People vs. Amaguin. 229 SCRA 166 (1994)
- People vs Dulos, 237 SCRA 141 (1994)
- People vs. Dawaton (G.R. No. 146247, September 17, 2002)
- People vs. Viernes (G.R. 136733-35, December 13, 2001)
- People vs. Abolidor et.al. (G.R> No. 147231, February 18, 2004)
- People vs. Crisostomo, 160 SCRA 47 (1988)
- People vs. Jose et. al., 37 SCRA 141 (1971)

 PAR. 8: PHYSICAL DEFECTS

 Requisites

 PAR. 9: ILLNESS
 Elements
 Case: -- People v. Javier (1999)

 PAR. 10: ANALOGOUS MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

Article 14. AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES

o KINDS of Aggravating Circumstances:
1) GENERIC
2) SPECIFIC
3) QUALIFYING
4) INHERENT
5) SPECIAL
o What are the distinctions between Generic aggravating and Qualifying circumstances?

10
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 PAR. 1. THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN BY THE OFFENDER OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION

 Requisites
 Cases:
- People vs. Gapasin, 231 SCRA 728 (1994)
- People vs Villa, GR No. 129899, April 27, 2000

 PAR. 2. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONTEMPT OF OR WITH INSULT TO THE PUBLIC
AUTHORITIES
 Requisites
 Who is a Person in authority?
 Is it necessary that the offender has knowledge that the public authority is present?
 Cases: -- People vs. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981)

 PAR. 3. WITH INSULT OR LACK OR REGARD DUE TO OFFENDED PARTY BY REASON OF

RANK, AGE, OR SEX, DWELLING
 Rank of the offended party- Designation or title used to fix the relative position of the offended party
in reference to others. There must be a difference in the social condition of the offender and the
offended party.
 Age of the offended party- May refer to old age or tender age of the victim.
 Sex of the offended party- This refers to the female sex, not to the male sex.
 Dwelling (Morada)- Building or structure, exclusively used for rest and comfort.
 Cases:
- People vs. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981)
- People vs Daniel, 86 SCRA 511(1978)
- People v. Taño (2000)

 PAR. 4. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS

UNGRATEFULNESS
O ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE (ABUSO DE CONFIANZA)
 Requisites
O OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
 Requisites
 Cases:
- People vs. Caliso (G.R. No. 37271, July 1, 1933)
- People vs. Lora (G.R. No. L-49430, March 30, 1982)
- People vs Mandolado, 123 SCRA 128 (1983)
- People v. Arrojado (2001)

 PAR. 5. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE PALACE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OR IN
HIS PRESENCE, OR WHERE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES ARE ENGAGED IN THE DISCHARGE OF
THEIR DUTIES, OR IN A PLACE DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
O Requisites
O Distinctions between par. 5 and par. 2?
O Case: -- People v. Jauringe, et al., 76 Phil. 174

11
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 PAR. 6. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN THE NIGHT TIME, OR IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE
(DESPOBLADO), OR BY A BAND
 Requisites
 Cases:
- People vs. Laguardia et.al. (G.R. No. L-63423, February 27, 1987)
- People vs Marra, 236 SCRA 565 (1994)
- People vs Desalisa, 299 SCRA 35 (1994)
- People v. Librando (2000)

 SEE Article 62, RPC (ORGANIZED/SYNDICATED CRIME GROUP)

 SEE (a) PD 1866, as amended by R.A. No. 8294
(b) Section 29 of R.A. No. 10591 [USE OF UNLICENSED FIREARM AND EXPLOSIVES]

 PAR. 7. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED ON THE OCCASION OF A CONFLAGRATION,

SHIPWRECK, EARTHQUAKE, EPIDEMIC OR OTHER CALAMITY OR MISFORTUNE

 PAR. 8. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID OF ARMED MEN, OR PERSONS WHO
INSURE OR AFFORD IMPUNITY
 Requisites
 Distinctions of Par. 6: By a Band and Par. 8: With Aid of Armed Men

 PAR. 9. THAT THE ACCUSED IS A RECIDIVIST (REINCIDENCIA)

 RPC, Articles 160
 Requisites

 PAR. 10. REITERACION OR HABITUALITY

 RPC, Articles 62(5) & 160
 Requisites
 Par. 9: Recidivism vs. Par. 10: Reiteracion

 PAR. 11. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED IN CONSIDERATION OF A PRICE, REWARD, OR

PROMISE
 Requisites
 Case: --- U.S. v. Gamao, G.R. No. L-6942 August 30, 1912

 PAR. 12. INUNDATION, FIRE, POISON

 PAR. 13. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH EVIDENT PREMEDITATION

 Requisites
 What is the essence of premeditation?
 What is the rule in appreciating evident premeditation in error in personae and aberratio ictus?
o GR: Evident premeditation is not appreciated in error in personae and aberratio ictus.
o XPNs:
1. When there is no particular intended victim or particular person to kill.
2. Where the victim belonged to the same class or family designated by the accused.
 Does conspiracy presuppose premeditation?
 Cases:

12
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

- People vs. Zeta (March 27, 2008)

- People v. Biso (2003)
- People vs. Lug-aw, 229 SCRA 308 (1994)
- People vs Ilao-a, 233 SCRA 231 (1994)
- People of the Philippines vs. Jonel Falabrica Serenas, et al, G.R. No. 188124, June 29, 2010
- People of the Philippines vs. Albert Sanchez y Galera, G.R. No. 188610, June 29, 2010
- People of the Philippines v. Allan Gabrino, G.R. No. 189981, March 9, 2011

 PAR. 14. THAT CRAFT, FRAUD OR DISGUISE BE EMPLOYED

 Requisites
 Cases:
- People vs. Marquez, 117 SCRA 165 (1982)
- People vs. Empacis, 222 SCRA 59 (1994)
- People v. Labuguen (2000)

 PAR. 15. THAT ADVANTAGE BE TAKEN OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH, OR MEANS BE EMPLOYED

TO WEAKEN THE DEFENSE
 Requisites
 How is abuse of superiority determined?
 Cases:
- People vs. Cabato, 160 SCRA 98 (1988)
- People vs. Ruelan, 231 SCRA 650 (1994)
- People vs Padilla. 233 SCRA 46 (1994)
- People v. Sansaet (2002)
- People of the Philippines vs. Hemiano De Jesus and Rodelo Morales, G.R. No. 186528,
January 26, 2011
- People of the Philippines v. Conrado Laog y Ramin, G.R. No. 178321, October 5, 2011
- People v. Salcedo, G.R. No. 178272, March 14, 2011

 PAR. 16. THAT THE ACT BE COMMITTED WITH TREACHERY (ALEVOSIA)

 Requisites
 What is the essence of treachery?
 What are the rules regarding treachery?
 Does a frontal attack negate the presence of treachery?
 What are those instances that may be absorbed by treachery?
 Cases:
- People vs. Crisostomo 160 SCRA 47 (1988)
- People vs. Verchez, 233 SCRA 174 (1994)
- People vs Jose, GR No. 130666, January 31, 2000
- People v. Pelis, G.R. No. 189328, February 21, 2011
- People of the Philippines v. Orlito Villacorta, G.R. No. 186412, September 7, 2011
- People v Yanson, G.R. No. 179195, October 3, 2011
- People of the Philippines v. Florencio Agacer, et al, G.R. No. 177751, sDecember 14, 2011
- People of the Philippines v. Wilfredo Gunda Alias “Fred”, G.R. No. 195525, February 5, 2014

 PAR. 17. IGNOMINY

13
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 Requisites
 Is there ignominy when a man is killed in the presence of his wife?
 Cases:
- People v. Torrefiel (1947)
- People vs. Jose, et. al, 37 SCRA 450 (1971)
- People v. Bumidang (2000)
- People v. Cachola (2004)

 PAR. 18. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED AFTER AN UNLAWFUL ENTRY.

 Requisites
 Cases: -- People vs. Baello, 224 SCRA 218 (1993)

 PAR. 19. THAT AS A MEANS TO THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME, A WALL, ROOF, FLOOR,
DOOR OR WINDOW BE BROKEN
 Requisites
 Distinctions between BREAKING WALL and UNLAWFUL ENTRY

 PAR. 20. THAT THE CRIME BE COMMITTED WITH THE AID OF PERSONS UNDER FIFTEEN
YEARS OF AGE OR BY MEANS OF MOTOR VEHICLES, ETC.

 PAR. 21. CRUELTY

 Requisites
 Ignominy vs. Cruelty
 Cases:
- People vs. Ilao-a, 233 SCRA 231 (1994)
- People v. Catian (2002)
- People v. Guerrero (2002)

Article 15. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES

 RELATIONSHIP
 When is relationship taken into consideration?
 Cases:
- People v. Atop (1998)
- People v. Marcos (2001)

 INTOXICATION

 R.A. No. 10586 – An Act Penalizing Persons Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol,
Dangerous Drugs and Similar Substances
 Cases:
- People vs. Renejane, 158 SCRA 258 (1998)
- People vs. Camano, 115 SCRA 688 (1982)

 DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION

 ABSOLUTORY CAUSES

14
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

(1) Instigation
 Distinguish fully between entrapment and instigation in criminal law. (2003 Bar Question)
 Case: -- People v. Pacis (2002)
(2) Pardon
- General rule: Pardon does not extinguish criminal action [Article 23, RPC]
- Exception: Pardon by marriage between the accused and the offended party in cases of
SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION, RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS [Art. 344]
(3) Other Absolutory Causes
(4) Acts not covered by law and in case of excessive punishment

Article 16. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE

Article 17. PRINCIPALS

o What are the different classifications of criminal responsibility?
1. Individual criminal responsibility
2. Quasi - collective criminal responsibility
3. Collective criminal responsibility
o KINDS OF PRINCIPALS
 By Direct Participation
 By Inducement/ Induction
 By Indispensable Cooperation
o What are the distinctions between principal by inducement from the offender who made proposal to
commit a felony?
o Cases:
- People vs. Inovera, et.al. (65 OG 3168)
- Viño vs. People (G.R. No. 84163, October 19, 1989)
- People vs Nunag, 173 SCRA 274 (1989)
- People vs Dela Cerna, 21 SCRA 569 (1967)
- People vs Dela Cruz, 97 SCRA 385 (1980)
- People vs Montealegre, 161 SCRA 700 (1988)
- People vs Quillosa, GR No. 115867, February 17, 2000
- People of the Philippines vs. Khaddafy Janjalani, et al, G.R. No. 188314, January 10, 2011

Article 18. ACCOMPLICES

 Distinguish between an accomplice and a conspirator. (2007 Bar Question)
 Cases:
- People vs. Mandolado, 123 SCRA 133 (1983)
- People vs Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632 (1991)

Article 19. ACCESSORIES

 Cases:
- People vs. Inovera, et.al. (65 OG 3168)
- Viño vs. People (G.R. No. 84163, October 19, 1989)
- People vs. Ortega Jr. et.al. (G.R. No. 116736, July 24, 1997)
- People vs Talingdan, 84 SCRA 19 (1978)

 INSTANCES WHEN ONE BECOMES AN ACCESSORY

15
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 SEE PD No. 1612 (ANTI-FENCING LAW)

 Cases:
- Dizon-Pamintuan vs. People (July 11, 1994)
- Tan vs. People (August 26, 1999)
 SEE PD No. 532 (ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW OF 1974)
 SEE PD No. 1829 (OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE)

Article 20. ACCESSORIES EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY

o Who are the accessories exempt from criminal liability?
 GR: An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when the principal is his:
o Spouse, Ascendant, Descendant, Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother, sister or relative
by affinity within the same degree.
 XPN: Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even if the principal is related to him, if such
accessory:
1. Profited by the effects of the crime; or
2. Assisted the offender to profit from the effects of the crime.

Article 21. PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED

o What are the penalties that may be imposed?

Article 22. RETROACTIVE EFFECT OF PENAL LAWS

 GR: Criminal laws must have a prospective effect.
 XPN: It may be given a retroactive effect when favorable to the accused, although at the
time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict
is serving the same.
 XPN to the XPN: The person guilty of a felony must not be a habitual criminal.
 Is the principle of retroactivity applicable to special laws?
 When is it not applicable?
 Case: -- People v. Bon, G.R. 166401, Oct. 30, 2006

Article 23. EFFECT OF PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY

o Does pardon by the offended party extinguish criminal action?
o Case: -- People v. Santiago, 51 Phil. 68

Article 24. MEASURES OF PREVENTION OR SAFETY WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED PENALTIES
- See Family Code, Articles 228-229
- What are the purposes for the imposition of penalty under the RPC?

Article 25. CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES

o What are the general classifications of penalties?
a) PRINCIPAL PENALITIES
i. ACCORDING TO THEIR GRAVITY
 Capital
 Afflictive
 Correctional
 Light
 Penalties common to afflictive, correctional and light penalties

16
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

b) ACCESSORY PENALTIES
c) SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES
o What are the penalties that can either be principal or accessory?
o What are the principal penalties according to their DIVISIBILITY?
1. Indivisible
2. Divisible - can be divided into 3 periods (Minimum, Medium, Maximum)

Article 26. FINE

 How are fines imposed?
 When is a fine considered as afflictive, correctional or light penalty?
 Can a penalty be imposed in the alternative?
 E and M are convicted of a penal law that imposes a penalty of fine or imprisonment or both fine
and imprisonment. The judge sentenced them to pay the fine, jointly and severally, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency. (2005 Bar Question)

Article 27. DURATION AND EFFECT OF PENALTIES

 What is the duration of each of different penalties?
 What are the distinctions between RECLUSION PERPETUA and LIFE IMPRISONMENT?
 What is the nature of destierro?

Article 28. COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES

 What are the rules for the computation of penalties?
 What are examples of temporary penalties?
1. Temporary absolute disqualification.
2. Temporary special disqualification.
3. Suspension.
 What are accessory penalties that are inherently attached to principal penalties?
 What is the distinction between PERPETUAL absolute disqualification and TEMPORARY absolute
disqualification?
 Cases: -- People vs Formigones, 87 Phil 658 (1950)

Article 29. PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT

o When is there preventive imprisonment?
o How much of the time spent by offenders during a preventive imprisonment can be credited for the
service of their sentence?
o Who are the offenders not entitled to the full time or four-fifths of the time of preventive imprisonment?
o What if the period of the preventive imprisonment is equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment of the offense charged?

 SEE R.A. No. 10592 – An act Amending Articles 29, 94, 97, 98 and 99 of the RPC
 SEE Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 10592

17
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 30-33. EFFECTS OF PENALTIES

o What are the effects produced by the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for
public office, profession or calling?
o What are the effects produced by the penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the
exercise of suffrage?
o What are the effects produced by the penalties of suspension from public office, profession or calling or
the right of suffrage?
o Case: -- O.P. v. Cataquiz, G.R. No. 183445, September 14, 2011 reiterating Pagano v. Nazarro , Jr

Article 34. CIVIL INTERDICTION

 What is civil interdiction?

Article 35. EFFECTS OF BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE

 What is the distinction between a BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE, a BAIL BOND, and a BOND FOR
GOOD BEHAVIOR?

Article 36. PARDON; ITS EFFECTS

 What is pardon?
 ABSOLUTE vs CONDITIONAL PARDON
 What are the effects of pardon by the President?
 LIMITATIONS UPON THE EXERCISE OF PARDONING POWER
 Pardon by the Chief Executive vs. Pardon by the offended party
 What is amnesty?
 Enumerate the differences between pardon and amnesty. (2006 Bar Question)
 Case: -- Monsanto v Factoran (1989)

Article 37. COSTS

Article 38. PECUNIARY LIABILITIES
1. Reparation of damage caused
2. Indemnification of the consequential damages
3. Fine
4. Costs of proceedings
 When does this article apply?
 Can the court disregard the order of payment?
 Distinguish pecuniary penalties from pecuniary liabilities. (2005 Bar Question)

Article 39. SUBSIDIARY PENALTY

o What is subsidiary penalty?
o When is subsidiary penalty imposed?

 SEE R.A. No. 10159 – An Act Amending Article 39 of the RPC

Article 40-44. ACCESSORY PENALTIES, PRINCIPAL PENALTIES

o Is subsidiary imprisonment an accessory penalty?
o What are the rules as to subsidiary imprisonment?
o When is subsidiary penalty not imposed?
o Is subsidiary imprisonment applicable to violations of special laws?

18
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 45. CONFISCATION AND FORFEITURE OF THE PROCEEDS OR INSTRUMENTS OF THE CRIME
Article 46. PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED UPON PRINCIPALS IN GENERAL

Article 47. DEATH PENALTY

 R.A. No. 9346 – An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty

o What is the effect of R.A. 9346?
o What penalty would be imposed in lieu of the death penalty?
 R.A. No. 7659 – Heinous Crimes Law

Article 48. COMPLEX CRIMES

o What is plurality of crimes? Kinds of plurality of crimes?
o Distinguish between an ordinary complex crime and a special complex crime as to their concepts and
as to the imposition of penalties. (2003 Bar Question)
o When is there no complex crime?

O KINDS OF COMPLEX CRIMES

 COMPOUND CRIME (DELITO COMPUESTO)
 Cases:
- People vs. Castromero (G.R. No. 118992, October 9, 1997)
- People vs. Comadre (G.R. No. 153559, June 8, 2004)
- People vs. Melecio Robinos (G.R. No. 138453, May 29, 2002)
- People vs. Balotol (84 Phil 289)
- People vs. Macagcaling (October 33, 1994, G.R. Nos. 109,131-33)
- People vs. Antonio Sanchez, et.al. (August 27, 1999, G.R. No. 131116)
- Lontok vs. Gregorio (89 SCRA 632)
- Monteverde v. People (2002)
- People v. Villaflores, G.R. No. 184926, April 11, 2012.

 COMPLEX CRIME PROPER (DELITO COMPLEJO)

 Cases:
- People vs. Erlindo Talo (October 25, 2000, G.R. No. 125542)
- People vs. Jimmy Sabredo (May 11, 2000)
- Intestate Estate of Manolita Gonzales vs. People (February11, 2010)

 SPECIAL COMPLEX/ COMPOSITE CRIMES

 CONTINUED CRIME (DELITO CONTINUADO)

 Cases:
- People vs. Tumlos (GR No. 46248, April 13, 1999)
- People vs. Jaranilla (GR No. L-28547)
- Santiago vs. Garchitorena (GR No. 109266, December 2, 1993)
- Ilagan vs. Court of Appeals (December 29, 1994)
- Santiago Paera vs. People (May 30, 2011)

19
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

 DOCTRINE OF ABSORPTION
 Cases:
- People vs. Hernandez (GR Nos. 6025-26, July 18, 1956)
- Enrile vs. Salazar (GR No. 92163, June 5, 1990)
- Enrile vs. Armin (G.R. 93335, 189 SCRA 573)

 TRANSITORY CRIMES
 Section 15, Rule 110 of the Rules in Criminal Procedure
o Cases: -- People vs. Cecilia Yabut (April 29, 1977, GR No. L- 42487)

Article 49. PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED UPON PRINCIPALS WHEN THE CRIME INTENDED IS DIFFERENT
FROM THAT INTENDED

Article 50-57. PENALTIES

o What are the penalties imposed on principals, accomplices, accessories, in accordance to the stages of
committing a felony?

Article 58. ADDITIONAL PENALTY FOR CERTAIN ACCESSORIES

Article 59. PENALTY FOR AN IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

Articles 60-65. RULES FOR GRADUATION OF PENALTIES

o Differentiate period from degree
o What are the rules for the application of indivisible penalties?
o What are the rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods?
o When is the graduated scale followed?
 Case: -People vs. Mantalaba (July 10, 2011)

Article 66. IMPOSITION OF FINES

Article 67. PENALTY WHEN NOT ALL REQUISITES OF EXEMPTION OF ARTICLE 12 (4TH
CIRCUMSTANCES) IS NOT PRESENT

Article 68. PRIVILEGED MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES

 Cases:
- People vs. Quitorio (January 28, 1998)
- People vs. Sarcia (September 10, 2009)
- Atizado vs. People (October 13, 2010)
- People vs. Jacinto (MArch 16, 2011)
- People vs. Asia Musa (October 24, 2012)

Article 69. PENALTY WHEN THE CRIME COMMITTED IS NOT WHOLLY EXCUSABLE
 SEE THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW (Act 4103, as Amended by Act No. 4225)
o What are the rules in imposing a penalty under the indeterminate sentence law?
o When does indeterminate sentence apply?
o Who are disqualified from availing the benefits of the indeterminate sentence law?
o When is a prisoner qualified for release on parole?
o What are the sanctions for the violation of the conditions of parole?

20
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 70. SUCCESSIVE SERVICE OF SENTENCE

 THREE-FOLD RULE
 Cases:
- People vs Escares (GR No. L-11128-33, December 23, 1957)
- Mejorada vs. Sandiganbayan (GR No. L-51065-72, June 30 1987)

Article 71. GRADUATED SCALES

 Cases:
- People vs. Alfredo Bon (GR No. 166401, October 30, 2006)
- People vs. Sarcia (September 10, 2009)
- People vs. Jacinto (March 16, 2011)

Article 72. PREFERENCE IN THE PAYMENT OF CIVIL LIABILITIES

Article 73. PRESUMPTION IN REGARD TO THE IMPOSITION OF ACCESSORY OF PENALTIES
Article 74. PENALTY TO HIGHER THAN RECLUSION PERPETUA
Article 75. INCREASING OR REDUCING THE PENALTY OF FINE BY ONE OR MORE DEGREES
Article 76. LEGAL PERIOD OF DURATION OF POSSIBLE PENALTIES
Article 77. COMPLEX PENALTY

Article 78. WHEN AND HOW A PENALTY IS TO BE EXECUTED

o When is a penalty executed?
o When does a judgment become final?

Article 79. SUSPENSION OF THE EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF THE PENALTIES IN CASE OF INSANITY

Article 80. SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE OF MINORS

 SEE PD 603, as Amended (CHILD AND YOUTH WELFARE CODE)

 SEE R.A. 6344 (JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE LAW)
 SEE AM No. 02-1-18-SC (November 24, 2009)
 Cases:
- Rennie Declarador vs. Hon. SAlvador S Gubaton (G.R No. 159208, August 18, 2006)
- Padua vs. People (July 23, 2008)
- People vs. Richard Sarcia (September 10, 2009)
- Robert Reminedo vs. People (October 9, 2009)
- People vs. Hermie Jacinto (March 16, 2011)
- People vs. Urban Salcedo, et.a. (June 22, 2011)

Article 81 to 85. DEATH PENALTY

 R.A. No. 9346 - An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty

Article 86. RECLUSION PERPETUA, RECLUSION TEMPORAL, PRISION MAYOR, PRISION

CORRECCIONAL AND ARRESTO MAYOR
Article 87. DESTIERRO
Article 88. ARRESTO MENOR

21
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 89. MODES OF EXTINGUISHING CRIMINAL LIABILITY

a) Total Extinction
b) Partial Extinction
 Cases:
- People vs. Bayotas GR No. 152007, September 2, 1994, 236 SCRA 239
- Monsanto vs Factoran, 170 SCRA 190 (1989)
- People of the Philippines v. Florencio Agacer, et al, G.R. No. 177751, January 7, 2013
- People v. Anastacio Amistoso y Broca, G.R. No. 201447, August 28, 2013

Article 90. PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES

 When shall crimes prescribe?
 Case: -- Isabelita Reodica vs. CA (July 8, 1998)

Article 91. COMPUTATION OF PRESCRIPTION OF OFFENSES

 How is prescription of offenses determined?
 What are the situations which do not follow Art. 91?
 Cases:
- Cabral vs. Puno (GR No. L-41692, April 30, 1976)
- People vs. Reyes (GR No. 74266, July 27, 1989)
- Sermonia vs. CA (GR No. 109454, June 14, 1994)
- People vs. Maneja (GR No. 47684, June 10, 1941)

 SEE ACT NO. 3326, as Amended [PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES, PRESCRIPTION OF VIOLATIONS

OF SPECIAL LAWS]
 General rule: Prescription of the crime begins on the day the crime was committed; Exceptions
 PRESCRIPTIVE PERIODS UNDER SPECIAL LAWS AND MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES
 Cases:
- Zaldivia vs. Reyes, Jr. (GR No. 102342, July 3, 1992)
- PCGG vs. Desierto (July 9, 2007)
- Panaguiton, Jr. v. DOJ, G.R. No. 167571, Nov. 25, 2008

Article 93. COMPUTATION OF PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES

 Elements
 When shall penalties prescribe?
 What are the rules in prescription of penalties?
 Cases:
- Jovendo del Castillo vs. Rosario Torrecampo, et.al. (December 18, 2002)
- Benjamin Pangan vs. Hon. Lourdes Gatbalite (January 21, 2007)
- People v. Puntillas, G.R. No. 45269
- Tanega v. Masakayan, G.R. No. 141718, 2005

Article 94. PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

 See R.A. No. 10592

 Implementing Rules and Regulation of R.A. No. 10592

22
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 95. OBLIGATION INCURRED BY PERSON GRANTED CONDITIONAL PARDON

o What is the nature of conditional pardon?
o What is the obligation incurred by a person granted with conditional pardon?
o Cases: -Torres vs. Gonzales (152 SCRA 272)

 SEE Section 64 (i) of the Revised Administrative Code

o Cases: -Tesoro vs. Director of Prisons (May 23, 1939)

Article 96. COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE

 What is nature of commutation of sentence?
 What is effect of commutation of sentence?

Article 97- 99. GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCES

 What is the nature of good conduct allowances?
 Who shall grant time allowance?
 What is special time allowance for loyalty of prisoner?

 What is PAROLE?
 What is the difference between CONDITIONAL PARDON and PAROLE?

 See R.A. No. 10592 and the Implementing Rules and Regulations of R.A. No. 10592
 See PD 968, AS AMENDED (‘PROBATION LAW’)
 What is Probation?
 Who can apply for probation? Who are disqualified to avail the benefits of the probation law?
 What is the period of probation?
 When can probation be terminated? Effects of termination?
 Cases:
- Francisco v. CA (GR No. 108747, April 6, 1995)
- Soriano vs. CA (GR No. 123936, March 4, 1999)
- Colinares v. People, G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011

Article 100. EVERY PERSON CRIMINALLY LIABLE IS ALSO CIVILLY LIABLE

- Cases: -- Jose Garcia vs. CA (January 27, 1997)

Article 101. RULES REGARDING CIVIL LIABILITY IN CERTAIN CASES

Article 102. SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY OF INNKEEPERS, TAVERN KEEPERS AND PROPRIETORS OF
ESTABLISHMENTS.

Article 103. SUBSIDIARY CIVIL LIABILITY OF OTHER PERSONS

 Cases:
- Carpio vs Doroja, 180 SCRA 1 (1989)
- Pangonorom vs. People (GR No. 143380, April 11, 2005)
- Yonoha vs. CA (March 1996)
- Phil. Rabbit Bus Lines vs. Heirs of Mangawag e. Al. (May 16, 2005)
- LG Foods Corp vs. Hon. Agraviador (September 26 2006)

23
 Jose Maria College
College of Law
CRIMINAL LAW 1
COURSE OUTLINE and CASE LIST
Professor: Atty. Dimpna D. Bermejo-Dulay, MSChem PhD

Article 104-107. WHAT CIVIL LIABILITY INCLUDES

 Cases:
- Apportionment of Civil Liability
People vs. Montesclaros (June 16, 2009)

Article 108-111. PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE

Article 112. EXTINCTION OF CIVIL LIABILITY

Article 113. OBLIGATION TO SATISFY CIVIL LIABILITY

References:
- The Revised Penal Code Book One - by Luis B. Reyes
- The Revised Penal Code Book One - Revised Edition by Benjamin R. Caraig
- Notes and Cases on Special Penal Laws by Leonor D. Boado
- www.lawphil.net
- www.sc. judiciary.gov.ph
- www.chanrobles.com
- Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA)

24