CRIMINAL LAW BOOK 1

Q. What is the law that creates our Penal Code? And when does
the law took effect?
A. Act 3815 or Revised Penal Code which took effect on January
1, 1932.
Q. Criminal law (Define)
A. Criminal Law is that branch of Municipal law which defines
crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their
punishment.
Q. What is a crime?
A. Crimes is the commission or omission by a person having
capacity, of any act which is either prohibited or compelled by
law and the commission or omission is punishable by the
proceedings brought in the name of the government whose
laws has been violated.
Q. What do you call If the crime is punished by
the Revised Penal Code?
A. It is called a FELONY.
Q. What do you the crime is punished by a
special law?
A. It is called an OFFENSE.
Q. What do you call if a crime is punished by an
ordinance?
A. It is called an INFRACTION.
Q. What do you call If the crime is punished by
the Revised Penal Code?
A. It is called a FELONY.
Q. What do you the crime is punished by a
special law?
A. It is called an OFFENSE.
Q. What do you call if a crime is punished by an
ordinance?
A. It is called an INFRACTION
Q. What are the different Theories justifying the
imposition of punishment, viz: prevention, public
self-defense, deterrence, exemplarity, reformation
and retribution.
A. CLASSICAL THEORY:
1. The basis of penalty is human free will and the purpose
of the penalty is retribution.
2. That man is essentially a moral creature with the
absolute free will to choose between good and evil,
thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result
of the felonious act than upon the man, the criminal
himself.
3. It has endeavoured to establish a mechanical and
proportion between crime and penalty.
4. There is a scant regard to the human element.
B. Positivist theory
1) That man is subdued occasionally by a strange
and morbid phenomenon which constrains him
to do wrong, in spite of contrary volition.
2) That crime is essentially a social and natural
phenomenon and such, it cannot be treated and
checked by the application of abstract principle
of law and jurisprudence nor by the imposition
of a punishment, fixed and determined a priori;
but rather through the enforcement of
individual measures in each particular case after
a thorough, personal and individual
investigation conducted by a competent body of
psychiatrist and social scientist.
Q.WHAT ARE LIMITATIONS UPON THE POWER
OF THE LEGISLATURE TO ENACT PENAL LAWS?
Answer:
a) It cannot enact an ex post facto law nor a bill
of attainder.
Q. What is a bill of attainder?
Bill of attainder a legislative act that inflicts
punishment without trial, its essence being
the substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial
determination of guilt
 Q. WHAT IS AN EX POST FACTO LAW UNDER
ART III, SEC. 22, 1987 CONSTITUTION?
A. Ex post facto law is one which:
1. Makes criminal an act done BEFORE the passage of the law
and which was innocent when done, and punishes such an
act.
2. Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when
committed;
3. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment
than the law annexed to the crime when committed;
4. Alters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction
upon less or different testimony than the law required at the
time of the commission of the offense;
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and
remedies only, in effect imposes penalty
or deprivation of a right for something
which when done was lawful; and
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime
some lawful protection to which he has
become entitled, such as the protection
of a former conviction or acquittal, or a
proclamation of amnesty.
 B) A penal law must be of general
application.
Equal protection
• Article III, Section 1, 1987 Constitution:
“No person shall deprive life, liberty or
property without due process of law nor
shall any person be denied equal
protection of the law”.
C) It cannot provide for a cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment nor can it impose excessive fines.
• Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in
the Philippines (R.A.9346)
• Repealed the law imposing lethal injection
(R.A.8177) and the law imposing the death penalty
(R.A.7659) (Sec. 1).This Act also imposes the
punishment of reclusion perpetua for offenses under
any act using the nomenclature of the RPC
(Sec. 2 (a)) and the punishment of life imprisonment
for offenses under any act which does not use the
nomenclature of the RPC (Sec. 2(b))
Q. What is Doctrine of Pro Reo?
A. Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied and the law
admits of two interpretations – one lenient to the offender and
one strict to the offender – that interpretation which is lenient or
favorable to the offender will be adopted.
Q. What is the Utilitarian Theory or Protective Theory in
Criminal law?
A. The primary purpose of the punishment under criminal law is
the protection of society from actual and potential
wrongdoers. The courts, therefore, in exacting retribution for
the wronged society, should direct the punishment to
potential or actual wrongdoers, since criminal law is directed
against acts and omissions which the society does not
approve. Consistent with this theory, the mala prohibita
principle which punishes an offense regardless of malice or
criminal intent, should not be utilized to apply the full
harshness of the special law
 Q. WHAT ARE THE CHARACTERISTICS
OF PENAL LAWS?
Ans.
1. GENERALITY-that the law is binding upon all persons who
reside or sojourn in the Philippines, irrespective of age,
sex, color, creed, or personal circumstances.

2. TERRITORIALITY-Undertakes to punish crimes committed

within Philippine territory. That the law is applicable to all
crimes committed in interior waters and maritime zone.

3. IRRETROSPECTIVITY OR PROSPECTIVITY-That the law

does not have any retroactive effects, except if it favors
the offender unless he’s habitual delinquent or the law
otherwise provides.
 Q. WHAT ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE
GENERAL APPLICATIONS OF PENAL LAWS?
Ans.
1. Public International laws- Head of State, person with
diplomatic status, and public vessel of a friendly foreign
power. Note: Consuls is not entitled to the privilege and
immunities of an ambassadors and ministers.
2. Treaty Stipulations-Art. XIII of the former Military Bases
Agreement, Visiting Forces Agreement.
Example Of VFA provision “ US military authorities shall
have the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over US
personnel subject to the military laws of the US in relation
to : (1) offense solely against the property or security of
the US or offenses solely against the property or person of
US personnel AND ; (2) done in offense arising out of any
act or omission done in the performance of official duty.
 Q. WHAT ARE SOME LAWS ON
PREFERENTIAL APPLICATIONS?
3) Preferential Applications.
(a) Members of Congress are not liable for libel or
slander for any speech in Congress or in any
committee thereof. (Sec. 11, Art. VI, 1987
Constitution)
(b) Any ambassador or public minister of any foreign
State, authorized and received as such by the
President, or any domestic or domestic servant of
any such ambassador or minister are exempt from
arrest and imprisonment and whose properties are
exempt from distraint, seizure and attachment. (R.A.
No. 75)
 Q. WHAT ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE
TERRITORIAL APPLICATIONS OF PENAL LAWS-
ART. 2
Refer to Art. 2 of the RPC refers to the extent of the territory for
purposes of criminal law.
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the
Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding
number;
21. What is the reason behind the application of Par. 2 and 3 in the
exception to Territoriality?
A. The introduction of forged or counterfeited obligations and securities into
the Philippines is as dangerous as the forging or counterfeiting of the
same, to the ECONOMICAL INTEREST of the country.
1. What is the extent of our territory?
A. The national territory consists of its territorial, fluvial and
aerial domain, as well as its maritime zone.
2. What is the extent of the Philippine maritime zone?
A. Maritime zone is 3 geographical miles from the shore lines,
starting from the low water marks.
1) Under the Convention on the law of the sea (UNCLOS)
includes archipelagic territorial water and EXCLUSIVE
ECONOMIC ZONE (EZZ). The territorial sea extends 12
nautical miles, and the EEZ is 200 nautical miles outward
from the shore of our country (Archipelagic Doctrine).
3. Which country has jurisdiction over crimes committed by
Philippine vessel already in another country or territory?
A. When the Philippine vessel is on a territory of a foreign
country, and a crime was committed on said vessel or
aircraft. The crime is now subject to the laws of the
foreign country.
4. What is a Philippine vessel?
A. A Philippine vessel or aircraft must be understood as that
which is registered in the Philippine Bureau of Customs.
4. Which country has jurisdiction over crime committed in a Philippine
vessel while in International waters?
A. The Philippines, applying the English Rule.
5. A crime committed ten miles from the shores of the Philippines on board
of a vessel belonging to a Filipino, but the same is not registered in the
Philippines or licensed in the Philippine? Do we have jurisdiction over
the offense?
A. No, par. 1 of Art. 2 is not applicable.
6. Which court has jurisdiction over crimes committed in the Philippine
vessel?
A. Crimes committed under Art. 2 is cognizable by RTC courts in which the
charge is filed.
-Continuing offense on board of a foreign vessel is triable in our jurisdiction.
Ex. Norwegian merchant vessel sailing from Formosa to the Philippines, by
failing to provide stalls for animals in transit in violations of Act. No.55, is
triable in the Philippines.
-If the act is not punishable in the foreign country where the vessel comes
from but such act is punishable under our laws, our courts will have
jurisdiction.
• The legal application of the rule is that the crime committed the
crime on board of a foreign vessel IN TRANSIT in Philippine waters
must affect a breach of public order to be triable by our courts.
Hence, the rule does not apply to a case of mere possession of opium
on board a foreign vessel in transit in Philippine water as such does
not involved a breach of public order unless the opium is landed in
the Philippines.
• But if the foreign vessel is not in transit and the Philippine port is the
destination, any crime committed on board said vessel, like
possession of opium is triable in our courts.
7. What if the vessel is not registered in any country and a crime
happens inside the vessel while in International water?
Ans. Under international law rule, a vessel which is not registered in
accordance with the laws of any country is considered a pirate vessel
and piracy is a crime against humanity in general, such that
wherever the pirates may go, they can be prosecuted.
8. What is a Warship rule?
Ans. Warship Rule – A warship of another country, even though docked in
the Philippines, is considered an extension of the territory of its
respective country. This also applies to embassies.
9. What is the French rule and the English Rule in
Extraterritorial applications. What do we use
between the two?
A. French Rule or Nationality Rule-the Philippines has
no jurisdiction, unless the crime affects the peace
and security of the country.
• English Rule or Territoriality Rule- the country has
jurisdiction over such offenses unless the same
affect or refers only to the internal management of
the vessel. We apply this rule.
A. The Philippines adheres to the ENGLISH
RULE However, these rules are NOT applicable if
the vessel is on the high seas when the crime was
committed. In these cases, the laws of the
nationality of the ship will always apply.
Two situations where the foreign country may NOT apply its
criminal law even if a crime was committed on board a
vessel within its territorial waters and these are:
(1) When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a foreign
country, because war vessels are part of the sovereignty of
the country to whose naval force they belong;
(2) When the foreign country in whose territorial waters the
crime was committed adopts the French Rule, which applies
only to merchant vessels, except when the crime committed
affects the national security or public order of such foreign
country.
Example:
Mere possession of opium in a vessel in transit is not triable
by our courts, except if the drug is landed on our soil or
smoked aboard the vessel in Manila Bay- Prosecution will lie
because this is an open defiance of our laws and breach of
the public order.
4. While being public officers or employees, should
commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions;
Par. 4 contemplates the appropriate felonies under
Title Seven of Book Two which may be committed
by the Philippine public officer abroad in the
exercise if his official function and, therefore in his
official capacity. committed pertains to the exercise
of the public official’s functions: The crimes which
may be committed are:.
1. Direct bribery (A.210)
2. Qualified Bribery (A. 211-A)
3. Indirect bribery (A.211)
4. Corruption (A.212)
5. Frauds against the public treasury(A.213)
6. Possession of prohibited interest (A.216)
7.Malversation of public funds or property(A. 217)
8. Failure to render accounts (A.218) Illegal use of
public funds or property(A.220)
9. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property
(A.221)
10. Falsification by a public officer or employee
committed with abuse of his official position (A.171)
• This exceptions does not apply to the public officer
of the Philippine government who enjoys diplomatic
immunity because in such case the principles of
public international law will govern.
Those having to do with the discharge of their duties in a
foreign country. The functions contemplated are those,
which are, under the law:
1. to be performed by the public officer;
2.in the foreign service of the Phil. government;
3. in a foreign country.
As a general rule, the Revised Penal Code governs only when
the crime committed pertains to the exercise of the public
official’s functions, those having to do with the discharge of
their duties in a foreign country. The functions contemplated
are those, which are, under the law, to be performed by the
public officer in the Foreign Service of the Philippine
government in a foreign country.
Exception: The Revised Penal Code governs if the crime was
committed within the Philippine Embassy or within the
embassy grounds in a foreign country. This is because
embassy grounds are considered an extension of sovereignty.
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the
law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.
Par.5 applies to crime against national security and the laws of nations.
Crimes against national security:
1. Treason (A.114)
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (A.115)
3. Misprision of treason (A.116)
4. Espionage (A.117)Crimes against the law of nations:
5. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals (A.118)
6. Violation of neutrality (A.119)
7. Correspondence with hostile country(A.120)
8. Flight to enemy‘s country (A.121)
9. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine
waters (A.122)
*The reason for the exception regarding crimes against national
security and the laws of nations is to safeguard the existence of the
state
Terrorism is now classified as a crime against
national security and the law of nations. (See
R.A.9372, otherwise known as Human
Security Act of 2007).
• Paragraph 5 of Article 2, use the phrase “as
defined in Title One of Book Two of this
Code.”
• This is a very important part of the
exception, because Title I of Book 2 (crimes
against national security) does not include
rebellion.
 Q. WHAT ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE
PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS OF THE RPC?
Rules to be observed:
General Rule: A penal law does not have RETROACTIVE EFFECT;
EXC:
a) If penal law is favourable to the accused, it maybe given a
retroactive application.
b) A penal law CANNOT BE GIVEN A RETROACTIVE EFFECT IF
THE ACCUSED IS A HABITUAL DELINQUENT OR THE LAW
EXPRESSLY PROVIDES.
c) If a penal law is expressly repealed by another law, the crime
is obliterated, and if there is a pending criminal action at the
time of the repeal, the same is to be dismissed.
d) When Penal laws is EXPRESSLY inapplicable to pending
actions or existing cause of action.
 Q. WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF
FELONY?
Ans:
1. Act or omission;
2. Punishable by the RPC; and
3. Either by means of deceit or fault
• Act is any bodily movement tending to produce
some effect in the external world. Must be the
one which is defined by the CODE as constituting
a felony; or at least an act OVERT ACT of the
felony, that is the external act which has a direct
connection with the felony intended to be
committed.
1. What type of acts punished by our penal laws?
A. Only external act is punished. A criminal thought or a
mere intention no matter how immoral or improper it
may be, will never constitute a felony.
2. What do we mean by Omission?
A. Omission is meant inaction, the failure to perform a
positive duty which one is bound to do. There must
be a law requiring the doing or performance of an act.
Ex. Art. 275, par1, Abandonment of person in danger/
of failure to render assistance; Art. 213, par.
2(b).Illegal exaction- for failure to issue receipt as
provided by law; Art. 116, Misprision of treason.
3. What type of Omission is punishable?
A. The omission must be one that is punishable by law,
based on the maxim “ there is no crime if there is no
law punishing it”.
4. What is the reason for punishing a
negligent act or omission?
A. Reason for punishing act of negligence-
A man must use common sense, and
exercise due reflection in all his acts; it
is his duty to be cautious, careful and
prudent, if not from instinct, then
through fear of incurring punishment.
 Q. WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF
DECEIT/DOLO?
ANS.
1. FREEDOM- determination to do or not to do an
act.
• When a person acts without freedom, he is no
longer a human being but a tool. ( a knife that
wounds, torch that sets fire) Ex. Art 12, par.5.
Compulsion of irresistible force; Art. 12, par 6. A
person who act under the impulse of
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury,
in both cases the offender is exempt from
criminal liability.
• Intent presuppose the exercise of freedom and
the use of intelligence.
2. INTELLIGENCE
1. What is Intelligence?
A. Intelligence is the moral capacity to determine what is right
from what is wrong and to realize the consequence of one’s
act.
• Without this power, necessary to determine the morality of
human act, no crime can exist.
2. How does the law determined intelligence for purposes of
incurring criminal liability?
A. Capacity to know and understand the consequences of one’s
act.
-This power is necessary to determine the morality of human
acts, the lack of which leads to non-existence of a crime.
-If there is lack of intelligence, the offender is exempt from
liability. (i.e., offender is an imbecile, insane or under 15
years of age)
3. INTENT
1. What is Intent?
ANS. A determination to do a certain thing, an aim, a purpose of the
mind.
2. How is intent determine for purpose of incurring criminal liability?
A. the existence of intent is shown by the OVERT ACTS of the offender
and it is presumed from the commission of an unlawful act.
3. What is OVER ACT?
Ans. Is some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to commit a
particular crime, Overt act is presumed.
The presumption DOES NOT apply if the act is not criminal.
(a) The purpose to use a particular means to effect a result.
(b) The intent to commit an act with malice, being purely a mental state,
is presumed (but only if the act committed is unlawful).Such
presumption arises from the proof of commission of an unlawful act.
(c) However, in some crimes, intent cannot be presumed being an
integral element thereof; so it has to be proven.
(d) Example: In frustrated homicide, specific intent to kill is not presumed
but must be proven; otherwise it is merely physical injuries.
 WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF
FAULT/CULPA?
1. Freedom;
2. Intelligence;
3. Negligence or Imprudence.
Notes:
1) IMPRUDENCE arise from the deficiency of
action in avoiding the injury by reason of lack of
skill.
2) NEGLIGENCE is the failure to foresee the
impending injury due to insufficient perception,
hence, it is based on lack of foresight.
3) Negligence must be voluntary.
 WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF
FAULT/CULPA?
(1)He must have FREEDOM while doing/omitting to do an act.
(2)He must have INTELLIGENCE while doing the act/omitting to
do an act.
(3)He is IMPRUDENT, NEGLIGENT, or LACKSFORESIGHT or SKILL
while doing the act/omitting to do an act.
The concept of criminal negligence is the inexcusable lack of
precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to
perform an act.
A. If the danger impending from that situation is clearly
manifest, you have a case of reckless imprudence.
B. But if the danger that would result from such imprudence is
not clear, not manifest nor immediate you have only a case of
simple negligence.
 Q. What are culpable felonies?
• Felonies committed by means of culpa, to the
mind of the offender is not criminal. However,
his act is wrongful, because the injury or
damage cause to the injured party result from
his negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight
and lack of skill. Ex. Discharging a gun in a
public place is recklessness.
Q. What are culpa/omission found
in the RPC?
Omission-It is inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty
which a person is bound to do. There must be a law
requiring the doing or performing of an act.
Omissions punishable in the RPC:
1. Art. 116: Misprision of treason.
2. Art. 137: Disloyalty of public officers or employees.
3. Art. 208: Negligence and tolerance in prosecution of offenses.
4. Art. 223: Conniving with or consenting to evasion.
5. Art. 275: Abandonment of person in danger and
6. Art. 275 Abandonment of one‘s own victim.
7. Art. 276: Abandoning a minor.
 Q. What is negligence and
imprudence
• NEGLIGENCE - Indicates deficiency of
perception, failure to pay proper attention,
and to use diligence in foreseeing the injury
or damage impending to be caused. Usually
involves lack of foresight.
• IMPRUDENCE - Indicates deficiency of action,
failure to take the necessary precaution to
avoid injury to person or damage to
property. Usually involves lack of skill.
Q. WHEN IS MOTIVE IMPORTANT?
ANS.
1. When the identity of the assailant is in question
2. To determine the voluntariness of the criminal act.
3. To determine from which side the unlawful aggression commence in
self-defense.
4. Where the accused contends that he acted in defense of a stranger.
5. To determine the specific nature of the crime.
6. When the evidence is circumstantial or inconclusive or there is doubt
whether the crime has been committed.
7. On the question as to whether criminal negligence is a felony or only a
mode of its commission.
-Motive is established by the testimony of witnesses on the acts or
statements of the accused before or immediately after the commission of
the offense. Such words or deed may indicate motive.
 Q. WHAT ARE THE CLASSES OF
CRIMES?
1. Intentional felonies;
2. Culpable felonies;
3. Those defined and penalized by special law including
crimes by municipal and city ordinance.
• -intent to commit crime is not necessary, only intent to
perpetrate act.
• Mala in se-so serious in effect in society as to earn
unanimous condemnation of its members. Requires
criminal intent. Felonies covered by the RPC.
• Mala prohibita-violation of mere rules of convention
designed to secure a more orderly regulation of society.
Mere commission of the prohibited act, regardless of the
intent is sufficient. Refers to act punished by special laws
 Q. WHO ARE PERSON WHO WILL
INCUR CRIMINAL LIABILITY?
ANS. ANY person committing an intentional felony
though wrongful act done is different from that
intended.
Coverage:
1. Error in personae-mistake in Identity of the victim
2. Aberatio ictus-mistake in blow
3. Praeter intentionem-result exceeded the intention.
Requisites:
1. Intentional felony committed;
2. Wrong done is the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed except if the
act committed is with negligence.
 Q. WHAT IS PROXIMATE CAUSE?
A. A cause which is the natural and continuous sequence
unbroken by efficient intervening cause produces
injury and without which the result would not have
occurred.
Notes:
1) He who causes the cause is the cause of the evil
cause, and one is liable for all the direct, logical and
natural consequence of unlawful act, even if the
consequence is not intended.
2) This does not apply to felony by culpa.
3) One who fired in self-defense with due care, but
instead hit a bystander killing the latter, the accused is
not liable because the act committed is lawful.
 Q. What are examples of
Proximate cause?
1. A victim who was threatened by the accused
with a knife, jumped into the water and drown.
2. A victim who removed the drainage in the
wound which resulted in the development of
petronitis which in turn cause his death.
3. The victim refused to submit to surgical
operation
4. The resulting injury is aggravated by infection.
 Q. WHAT IS MISTAKE OF FACT?
ANS. Misapprehension of fact on the part of person who
caused the injury to another.
Q. WHAT ARE THE Requisite of Mistake of Fact as a defense?
ANS.
1. That the act done would have been lawful had the facts
been as the accused believed them to be;
2. The intention of accused in doing the act should be lawful;
3. That mistake must be without fault or carelessness on
part of accused.
- While ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance
therewith, ignorance or mistake of fact relieves the accused
from criminal liability.
 NOTES ON MISTAKE OF FACT
1) Defendant swore to a civil service form that he was
never accused for any violations of laws before any
court. When he testified in court for perjury he
claimed that he answer no to the question because
he relied to the provincial fiscals opinion that unjust
vexation does not involved moral turpitude and is
not necessary to mention it in the form.
2) Accused believed that she was already of age when
she contracted marriage.
Q. When is mistake of fact exempting?
A. Be exempting, mistake of fact must be
committed in good faith or under honest
belief.
Q. Can mistake of fact applies even if there is
negligence?
A. NO, mistake of fact is not exempting and the
actor is liable for committing a felony by
means of culpa.
Q. Can mistake of fact applies to mistake in
identity?
A. NO, because in the Mistake in Identity there is
criminal intent.
EXAMPLE: The mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused. Ex:
Accused, police officer instructed to arrest a
escape convict. When he went to the suspects
house, he saw a man sleeping at his back, he
immediately shoot and killed the person, who
turn out be an innocent man. Accused is guilty
of murder. (Pp vs. Oanis).
- In mistake of fact, the intention of the
accused in performing the act should be
lawful. Thus, in eror in personae or mistake
in identity, mistake of fact does not apply.
 CRIMES UNDER SPECIAL LAWS
Notes:
1) The third class of crimes are punished by special laws, which include
crimes punished by municipal and city ordinance (anti-smoking, anti-
loitering).
2) Dolo is not required in crimes punished by special laws. It is enough that
the offender has the intent to perpetrate the act.
3) Intent to commit the crime.- wherein there must be a criminal intent,
whereas in intent to perpetrate the act it is enough that the prohibited act
is done freely consciously.
4) The rule is that in acts MALA IN SE, there must be criminal intent; but in
those MALA PROHIBITA, it is sufficient if the prohibited act was s
Intentionally done . Ex. The Election Code prohibits and punishes the
carrying of firearm inside the polling place, and that the person did the
prohibited act freely and consciously, he had the intent to perpetrate the
act.
5) Good faith and absence of criminal intent is not a valid defense in crimes
punished by special laws.
 IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
Q. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF PUNISHING IMPOSSIBLE CRIME?
ANS. PURPOSE OF PUNISHING IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES – is to suppress criminal
propensity or criminal tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not
committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a criminal.
Q. A fires at B, who was lying on the bed, Not knowing that B was dead
hours before the crime. Is A criminally liable?
ANS. Yes because there is Criminal intent.
Q. What if A knew that B is dead when he shot him. Is he criminally liable?
A. No, because A knew that B was already dead. There was no evil intent on
the part of A, because he knew that he could not cause any injury to B.
Q. A, with intent to gain, took a watch from the pocket of B. When A had
the watch in his possession, he found out that it was the watch he had
lost a week before.
A. YES, because the taking is with criminal intent.
 Q. WHAT ARE DUTY OF COURTS?
ANS.
1) If charge is not punishable but court deems it
proper to repress, DISMISS charge and
suggest it made subject of penal legislation
to President through Secretary of Justice;
2) In case of excessive penalty: impose penalty
provided by law and recommend grant of
Executive Clemency form the President
through Secretary of Justice.
 Q. WHAT ARE THE STAGES OF
EXECUTION OF A FELONY?
1. Consummated-all the elements necessary for
execution and accomplishment are present.
2. Frustrated-offender performs all the acts of
execution which would produce felony as a
consequence but which do not produce it by reason
of causes independent of will of perpetrator.
3. Attempted-offender commences commission of a
felony directly by overt act, and does not perform
all the acts of execution which should produce the
felony by reason of some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.
 Q. WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF
AN ATTEMPTED FELONY?
ANS; Elements:
1. The offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt act;
2. He DOES NOT PERFORM ALL THE ACTS OF EXECUTION
which should produce a felony as a consequence;
3. The offender’s act is not stopped by his own spontaneous
desistance;
4. The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to
the cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance.
*Attempted and Frustrated Felonies – The difference
between the attempted stage and the frustrated stage
lies in: whether the offender has performed all the ACTS
OF EXECUTION FOR THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF A
FELONY
Q. WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF A
FRUSTRATED FELONY?
Ans:
Elements:
1. The offender PERFORMS ALL THE ACTS OF
EXECUTION;
2. All the acts performed would produce the
felony as a consequence;
3. But the felony is not produced;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of
the perpetrator.
OVERT ACT VS. PREPARATORY ACT
Is some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to commit a
particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which
if carried to its complete termination following its natural course,
without being frustrated by external act obstacles nor by voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen
into a concrete offense.
Ex. If A bought a poison from a drugstore, in preparation for the killing
of B by means of poison, such act is only a PREPARATORY ACT. It is
not an overt act, because it has no direct connection with the
crime of murder which A intended to commit. But if A mixed the
poison with the food of B, the latter put into his mouth, the act of A
is more than mere planning or preparation for the crime of murder.
• Drawing or trying a draw a pistol is not an overt act of homicide.
• The external act mush have a direct connection with the crime
intended to be committed by the offender.
 Q. HOW DOES A CRIME DEVELOPS?
ANS: (1) INTERNAL ACTS:
(A) Intent, ideas and plans; generally not punishable. The intention and act must
concur. Illustration: Ernie plans to kill Bert
(2) EXTERNAL ACTS:
(A) Preparatory Acts
1. Acts tending toward the crime.
2. Not punished except when considered by law as independent crimes (i.e.
Art. 304 – possession of picklocks)
3. Proposal and conspiracy to commit a felony are NOT punishable except
when the law provides for their punishment in certain felonies.
4. These acts do not yet constitute even the first stage of the acts of
execution.
5. Intent not yet disclosed.
. Illustration: Ernie goes to the kitchen to get a knife.
(B) Acts of Execution
(a) Usually overt acts with a logical relation to a particular concrete offense.
(b) Punishable under the RPC.
(c) Illustration: Ernie stabs Bert
 Q. WHAT IS AN INDETERMINATE
OFFENSE?
ANS: One where the purpose of offender in
performing an act is not certain. Its nature in
relation not its objective is ambiguous.
Ex. A who enter a hole in the house of B when
apprehended is not liable of attempted
robbery because it does not show the final
objective of the offender at the time of his
apprehension. He maybe there to rob or to
cause harm or injury or commit other offense.
 Q. WHAT IS A SUBJECTIVE PHASE AND OBJECTIVE
PHASE OF A FELONY?
Ans.
(1) SUBJECTIVE PHASE is that portion of the acts
constituting the crime, starting from the point
where the offender begins the commission of the
crime to the point where he has still control over
his acts, including their acts natural cause
• If between those TWO POINTS, the offender is
stopped by reason of any cause outside of his
own voluntary desistance, the subjective phase
has not been passed and it is merely an attempt.
• The end of the subjective phase and the
beginning of the objective phase.
• If he has not passed the subjective phase:
ATTEMPTED
2. OBJECTIVE PHASE – the result of the acts of
execution, that is, the accomplishment of the crime.
(3) If the subjective and objective phases have been
passed there is a consummated felony
• Passed but not produce: frustrated
• Objective phase- accomplish the crime.
SP + OP=consummated
Light felonies when punished:
• Only when consummated, except:
1. Against person; and
2. Against property
3. Only principal and accomplice are punished.
NOTES:
1) Crimes consist of internal and external acts. Internal
acts are not punished. External act refers to
preparatory act and acts of execution.
2) Preparatory acts are not punishable unless these acts
in themselves as independent crimes. Ex. Art. 315 –
possession of picklock which is considered a
preparatory to an intended robbery. So proposal and
conspiracy being preparatory act are not punishable
unless the law make it punishable.
3) Does not perform all the acts of execution-if the
offender has perform all the act of execution-nothing
is left to be done- the stage of execution is that of
frustrated felony, if the felony is NOT produce; or
consummated, if the felony is produced.
4) If anything yet remained for him to do, he would be
guilty of attempted crime.
5) Arson: The weight of the authority is that the crime of
arson cannot be committed in the frustrated stage. The
reason is because we can hardly determine whether the
offender has performed all the acts of execution that would
result in arson, as a consequence, unless a part of the
premises has started to burn. On the other hand, the
moment a particle or a molecule of the premises has
blackened, in law, arson is consummated. This is because
consummated arson does not require that the whole of the
premises be burned. It is enough that any part of the
premises, no matter how small, has begun to burn.
6) When the victim is mortally wounded by the accused who
stabbed him in the abdomen but did not die due timely
medical attendance, the homicide is frustrated.
7) When there is no intent to kill but the discharge was
firearm directed at the victim who was not hit at all, the
crime is illegal discharge of firearm. If the there is intent to
kill but the bullet jammed attempted homicide is
committed. When it is not directed to at a person as for
example firing the revolver in the air the crime is alarm and
scandal.
8) If the victim dies as a direct consequence of the
wound inflicted, the crime is consummated, even
though there maybe no intent to kill.
9) If intent to kill is not evident as when the accused
after wounding the victim withdrew, the crime is
serious physical injuries and not attempted
homicide.
10) Felonies without attempted stage are: treason
(Art.114); attempted flight to enemy country
(Art.121); false testimony and perjury (Art. 180-
183); failure to render account before leaving the
country (Art.219); abuse of chastity (Art. 245);
physical injuries (Art. 263 to 266); acts of
lasciviousness (Art. 337, 339); corruption of minor
(Art.340); slander (Art.358); various offense of
illegal possession of prohibited articles (art.168,
176,304)-these are called FORMAL CRIMES.
11) In theft-what is determinative of the consummation of
this felony is whether or not the accused was in position or
had the capacity to freely dispose of the property even if
possession thereof is more or less momentary.
12) In bribery, refusal of the subject to accept the bribe, the
crime is only attempted, because there is no crime of
frustrated bribery.
13) In rape, the mere penile penetration into the labia majora
of the female genital organ is sufficient to consummate the
crime. If there is intent to lie with the victim as when the
accused threw her on the ground and place himself on top
of her and raising her skirt but he did not succeed because
of the resistance of the victim, the rape is attempted.
Under the present state of the law, therefore ,rape is either
attempted or consummated.
14) There can also be attempted adultery, coercion and
falsification. And attempted and frustrated abortion.
15) The spontaneous desistance of the accused is exculpatory
only (a) if made during the ATTEMPTED STAGE, and (b)
provided the act already committed do not constitute any
other offense.
 Q. WHAT ARE INSTANCES WHERE THE STAGES
OF A FELONY DOES NOT APPLY ?
ANS:
1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless the
otherwise is provided for.
2. Formal crimes (e.g., slander, adultery, etc.)
3. Impossible Crimes
4. Crimes consummated by mere
attempt. Examples: attempt to flee to an enemy
country, treason, corruption of minors.
5. Felonies by omission
6. Crimes committed by mere
agreement. Examples: betting in sports (endings in
basketball), corruption of public officers.
 Q. WHAT IS A CONSPIRACY?
When two or more persons come to an agreement
concerning commission of felony and decide to
commit it.
• Conspiracy and Proposals is not a crime EXCEPT when
the law specifically provides a penalty therefor.
1. Conspiracy punished:
- (a) Treason (Art. 115) (b) Rebellion (Art. 136) (c)
Insurrection (Art. 136) (d) Coup d’état, (Art. 136) (e)
Sedition (Art. 141) (f) Monopolies and combinations
in restraint of trade, espionage (Art. 186) (g) Illegal
association (Art. 147) (h) Highway Robbery (P.D. 532)
(i) Espionage (Sec. 3, C.A. 616) (j) Selected acts under
the Dangerous Drugs Acts (k) Arson (l) Terrorism (R.A.
9372).
Q. When the conspiracy relates to a crime actually committed, is IT A
FELONY?
ANS. NO. but only a manner of incurring criminal liability, that is , when
there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.
Q. What if the conspiracy relates to any of the crime of treason,
rebellion, and sedition, but any of them is actually committed, is
conspiracy a separate offense?
ANS. NO, it is only a manner of incurring criminal liability. And the
CONSPIRACY IS ABSORBED.
Q. How do we determined conspiracy in a criminal act?
ANS. Indication of conspiracy is when the defendant by their
acts aimed at the same object, one performing another part
so to complete it, with the view to the attainment of the
same object, and their acts, though apparently independent,
were in fact concerted and cooperative, indicating closeness
of personal association, concerted action and concurrence of
sentiments.
Q. WHAT DO WE MEAN BY DOCTRINE OF
IMPLIED CONSPIRACY?
ANS. Conspiracy need not be direct but
may be inferred from the conduct of the
parties, their joint purpose, community
of interest and in the mode and manner
of commission of the offense. [People v.
Pangilinan (2003)];
General rule: When the conspiracy is established, all who
participated therein, irrespective of the quantity or
quality of his participation is liable equally, whether
conspiracy is pre-planned or instantaneous.
Exception: Unless one or some of the conspirators
committed some other crime which is not part of the
conspiracy.
Exception to the Exception: When the act constitutes a
“single indivisible offense.
• To establish conspiracy, evidence of actual cooperation rather
than mere cognizance or approval of an illegal act is required.
• Conspiracy is never presumed; it must be shown to exist as
clearly and convincingly as the commission of the crime itself.
• Conspiracy must be established by positive and conclusive
evidence, not by conjectures or speculations. [People v.
Laurio (1991)]
Q. State the concept of "implied conspiracy" and give its legal effects.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
• An "IMPLIED CONSPIRACY" is one which is only inferred or deduced from
the manner the participants in the commission of crime carried out its
execution. Where the offenders acted in concert in the commission of the
crime, meaning that their acts are coordinated or synchronized in a way
indicative that they are pursuing a common criminal objective, they shall
be deemed to be acting in conspiracy and their criminal liability shall be
collective, not individual.
The legal effects of an "implied conspiracy" are:
a) Not all those who are present at the scene of the crime will be
considered conspirators;
b) Only those who participated by criminal acts in the commission of the
crime will be considered as coconspirators; and
c) Mere acquiescence to or approval of the commission of the crime,
without any act of criminal participation, shall not render one criminally
liable as co-conspirator.
•
 Q. WHAT IS A PROPOSAL?
Proposal-when the person has decided to commit felony
proposes its execution to some other person/s.
Proposal punished
(a) Treason (Art. 115) (b) Coup d’ etat (Art. 136) (c) Rebellion
(Art. 136) (d) Inducement not to answer summons,
appear or be sworn in Congress, etc. (Art. 150) Accepted
proposal=conspiracy
(b) There is no criminal proposal when:
(1) The person who proposes is not determined to
commit the felony;
(2) There is no decided, concrete and formal proposal;
(3) It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed.
Note: It is not necessary that the person to whom the
proposal is made agrees to commit treason or rebellion.
Q. WHAT ARE THE CLASSIFICATION OF
FELONIES?
ANS:
1. Grave-law attaches capital punishment or
penalty or any of their periods are afflictive.
2. Less grave-law punishes with penalty in
maximum period is correctional.
3. Light- Law provides penalty of arresto menor or
fine not more than P200 or both.
Offense not subject of the RPC:
1. Offenses punished by special laws: not subject to
provision of RPC.
2. RPC supplementary to special laws, unless
otherwise provided.
 Q. WHAT ARE THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES
WHICH AFFECTS CRIMINAL LIABILITY?
ANS:
1. Mitigating circumstances-act of person is in accordance with law.
And is deemed not have transgressed the law and is free from
both civil and criminal liability.
2. Exempting circumstance- (non-imputability) exemption from
punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the crime
any of the condition which make the act voluntary or negligent.
3. Mitigating circumstances-those which, if present in the
commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from
criminal liability but only serve to reduce the penalty.
4. Aggravating circumstances- those which, if attendant in the
commission of crime, served to increase the penalty but without
exceeding maximum penalty provided by law.
5. Alternative circumstances-aggravating or mitigating according to
the nature and effect of the crime and other conditions attending
its commission.
Justifying Exempting Mitigating Aggravating Alternative
No wrong There is a THERE IS A THERE IS A THERE IS A
wrong FELONY FELONY FELONY
No criminal No criminal Decreased Increased Increased
liability liability criminal criminal or
liability liability decreased
liability
No civil With civil With civil With civil With civil
liability liability liability liability liability
EXC. State Except:
of necessity accident;
insuperable
cause
Q. Distinguish clearly but briefly: Between
justifying and exempting circumstances in
criminal law.
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
• Justifying circumstance affects the act, not the
actor; while exempting circumstance affects
the actor, not the act.
• In justifying circumstance, no criminal and,
generally, no civil liability is incurred; while in
exempting circumstance, civil liability is
generally incurred although there is no
criminal liability.
 Art 11. Justifying Circumstances

• No civil liability except under par.4

1. Self Defense- of his person or rights
Elements:
a) Unlawful aggression (indispensable requirement);
b) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it; and
c) Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
person defending himself.
- BURDEN OF PROOF-It is incumbent upon the accused,
in order to avoid criminal liability to prove the
justifying circumstances claimed to him to the
satisfaction of the court.
 1. Unlawful Agression
Q. WHAT IS Unlawful Aggression?
ANS. IS a peril to one’s life, limb or right which is either
actual or imminent.
Q. What type Peril to ones life are covered by self-
defense?
ANS.
1. Actual-that the danger is actually present, that is,
actually in existence.
Ex. blow with a deadly weapon aimed at his vital
parts of his body.
2. Imminent-That the DANGER IS ON THE POINT OF
HAPPENING. It is not required that the attack
already begins, for it may be too late. Ex. Victim
rocking the boat, fearing that the boat might
capsized, accused defended himself and the
passenger by hitting the victim with an oar, the
deceased fell to the water and died of drowning or
picking up a knife or adopting a threatening
attitude is not unlawful aggression). Neither there
is no unlawful aggression in a concerted or pre-
arranged fight as the combatants are also mutual
aggressors, UNLESS one of the parties attacks the
other ahead of the appointed time or before
reaching the agreed place, the former is the
unlawful aggressor.
 Unlawful Aggression in Defense of
other Rights
Q. Is an Attempt to rape a woman constitute self-defense?
Ans. Yes as a defense of one’s right to chastity/honor.
Q. Is there such a thing as Defense of property in self-defense?
Ans. Defense of property can only be invoked as a justifying
circumstances only WHEN COUPLED WITH AN ATTACKED ON
THE PERSON of the one entrusted with said property. (b)
Defense of Property- People vs. Apolinar. This can only be
invoked as justifying circumstance if (1) Life and limb of the
person making the defense is also the subject of unlawful
aggression (2) Life cannot be equal to property
Q. Is Defense of Home constitute as a self-defense?
Ans. Violent entry to another’s house at nighttime, by a person
who s armed with a bolo, and is forcing his way into the
house only shows that he is ready and looking for trouble,
and the manner of his entry constitutes Unlawful Aggression.
 2. Reasonable necessity of
defending oneself
Q. How do we determined reasonableness of the act in defending
oneself?
Ans. Whether or not the means employed is reasonable, will depend
upon the nature and quality of the weapon used by the aggressor, his
physical condition, character, size and other circumstances, and those
of the person defending himself, and also the place and occasion of the
assault.
Q. What is the test to determine reasonableness of the attack?
Ans. The test is whether they are commensurate, as they appear to the
one making the defense.
Q. Is perfect equality between the weapon used required between the
aggressor and the person defending himself?
Ans. Perfect equality between the weapon used by the one defending
himself and that of the aggressor is NOT REQUIRED, because the
person assaulted does not have sufficient tranquility of mind to think,
to calculate and choose which weapon to use.
Reasonable necessity of means employed
to prevent or repel it; Test of
reasonableness depends upon:
• (a) nature and quality of the weapon used
by the aggressor
• (b) aggressor’s physical condition,
character, size, and other circumstances
• (c) and those of the person defending
himself
• (d) the place and occasion of the assault.
 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the
part of the person defending
• Lack of provocation which must be sufficient, unlawful and made
exclusively by the accused immediately preceding the offense. This
concept is applied whether provocation is used as an element of this
justifying or mitigating circumstances in itself.
Q. Lack of sufficient provocation, when present?
Ans.
1. No provocation;
2. Provocation not sufficient;
3. Provocation not given by person defending himself.
4. Provocation not proximate and immediate to aggression.
Q. What is Battered Woman Syndrome under the ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST
WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004 (RA 9262)?
Ans. Battered Woman Syndrome- refers to a scientifically defined pattern of
psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women living in
battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse.
 2. Defense of Relatives
Relatives that can be defended:
1. Spouse;
2. Ascendant;
3. Descendant;
4. Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters;
5. Relative by affinity within the same degrees; or
6. Relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.
Elements:
a) Unlawful aggression;
b) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or prevent
it.
c) In case the provocation was given by relatives, one making the
defense had no part therein.
 3. Defense of Stranger
Elements:
a) Unlawful aggression;
b) Reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or prevent it.
c) Person defending is not induced by revenge, resentment or other evil
motive.
Q. Can an enemy invoked this provision?
Ans. Even an enemy may invoke defense of stranger as long as he is induces by
a motive that is generous and not evil.
Q. What is the rational behind this provision?
Ans. The right of a person to take the life in his own defense or in defense of
another who bears a close relationship is universally recognized.
Q. Who are strangers?
Ans. Any person not included in the enumeration of relatives mentioned in Par.
2 of this art. Is considered stranger for the purpose par. 3.
 4. Avoidance of greater evil or injury
Elements:
a) Evil sought to be avoided actually exist;
b) Injury feared to be greater than that to avoid
it; and
c) There is no other practical and less harmful
means of preventing it.
-Civil liability to be borne by person/s in
proportion to benefit received.
5.Fulfilment of duty or lawful exercise
of right of office.
Elements:
1. Accused acted in performance of duty or in
lawful exercise of office; and
2. Injury caused or offense committed is
necessary consequence of due performance
of duty or lawful exercise of such right or
office.
-Doctrine of Self-Help under Art. 429 of the NCC,
applied in Criminal Law.
Q. Is the Killing by a policeman of an escaping
prisoner is presumed to be committed in the
performance of his duty.
Ans. Yes, But only absolute necessity would
authorize the police officer to fire at the
prisoner.
Q. Shooting a thief who refused to be arrested is
the act justified?
Ans. No, the act is not justified.
1) The lawful exercises of a right exist if the owner
or possessor of a thing employs reasonable
force to repel or prevent an actual or threatened
unlawful physical invasion of his property.
 6. Obedience to an order issued for
some lawful purpose.
Elements:
a) Order issued by superior;
b) For some lawful purpose; and
c) Means used to carry out the order is lawful.

Q. When the order is not for lawful purpose. Is the

subordinate who obeyed the same criminally liable?
Ans. Yes
Q. Is there an instance where a subordinate is not liable
even if the order is not lawful?
A subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order
of his superior, if he is NOT AWARE of the illegality of
the order and he is not negligent.
 Art. 12.Exempting Circumstances
• There is a crime but no criminal liability; with civil liability except
par.4 and 7.
1. Imbecile or insane person, except when the latter acted during
lucid interval.
Q. What is the test of insanity and imbecibility?
Ans. The test of imbecibility or insanity is complete deprivation of
intelligence in the commission of the act, that is the accused
acted without the least discernment, there must be complete
deprivation of intelligence or that there be a total deprivation of
the freedom of the free will.
Q. What is the presumption of law insanity?
Ans. Presumption is in favour of sanity. The law presumes that every
man to be sane. If the accused interposes the defense of mental
insanity, the burden of establishing such fact rest upon him
because the presumption is always in favor of sanity.
2. Person 9 years and below
• there is an absolute presumption of irresponsibility
Basis: based on complete absense of intelligence.
3. Person over 9 and under 18, unless acted with
discernment.
• -offender is presumed to have acted without
discernment.
Q. How is Discernment maybe shown?
Ans:
1. Manner in committing the crime; or
2. Conduct of offender after commission of crime
3. Degrees of responsibility:
a. Absolute responsibility-15 and under
b. Conditional responsibility-more than 15 but less than 18
c. Full responsibility-18 or over to 70
Q. What are the Legal effects of various ages of
offenders?
(1) 15 and below - Exempting
(2) Above 15 but under 18 years of age, also an
exempting circumstance, unless he acted with
discernment (Art. 12, par. 3 as amended by RA
9344).
(3) Minor delinquent under 18 years of age, the
sentence may be suspended. (Art. 192, PD No. 603
as amended by PD 1179)
(4) 18 years or over, full criminal responsibility.
(5) 70 years or over – mitigating, no imposition of death
penalty; if already imposed. Execution of death
penalty is suspended and commuted.
 4. Accident
Accident - something that happens outside the sway of our will and,
although coming about through some act of our will, lies beyond
the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. Under Article
12, paragraph 4, the offender is exempt not only from criminal but
also from civil liability.
Elements:
1. Performance a lawful act;
2. With due care;
3. Causes injury to another by mere accident;
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.
Q. What is the basis of accident as exempting circumstances?
Ans. Based on the latin maxim Damnum Absque Injuria-damage
without injury
-refer to Art.67 when all the requisites of exemption of Art.12(4)
are present. Do not apply Art.12 (1).
Q. Accident- any happening beyond the control of persons,
consequences of which are not foreseeable. What If the
happening is foreseeable?
Ans. Then the offender who foresee the incident is criminally
liable for fault or culpa.
• Accident presupposes lack of intention to commit the
wrong done.
Q. Example of accident:
1. An accidental shooting due to legitimate self-defense is
exempting.
2. The blow-up of a tire, there beinidentcg no proof of
excessive speed, is also accidental.
Q. If the accused fired on the ground in order to make the
combatant stop in their fist fight and as a result, the
bullet ricochet, hitting a bystander, Is the offender liable?
Ans. Yes, because such is not an accident but negligence as
when he wilfully discharge his gun he did not take the
necessary precaution demanded by the circumstances.
 5. Irresistible Force
Elements:
1. Compulsion is by means of physical force;
2. Physical force is irresistible; and
3. Physical force comes from a third person
-never consist in passion and obfuscation, must
come from external source.
Q.What is the basis of this exemption?
Ans. Is based on the complete absence of
freedom, and element of voluntariness.
 6. Uncontrollable fear
Elements:
1. Threat which causes fear is of an evil greater or at
least equal to that which is required to commit; and
2. Promises an evil of such gravity and imminence
ordinary man would have succumbed to it.
The requisites must concur:
a. Existence of uncontrollable fear
b. The fear must be real and imminent;
c. The fear of an injury is greater than or at least equal
to that committed.
Q. What type of fear is required to produced an exempting
circumstances?
Ans. The fear must be INSUPERABLE and he who acts under
insuperable fear is completely deprived of freedom.
• The threat producing the insuperable fear must be grave,
actual, serious and such kind that the majority of men
would have succumbed to such moral compulsion.
• The compulsion must be as to leave no opportunity for the
accused to escape.
Q. One who is compelled under fear of death to join the
rebels. Is he liable for rebellion?
Ans. No, because he acted under the impulse of
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
Q. Is threat of future injury the same as uncontrollable fear?
Ans. No. The compulsion must be of such a character as to
leave no opportunity to the accused for escape or self-
defense in equal combat.Speculative, fanciful and remote
fear is not uncontrollable fear.
 7. Insuperable or lawful cause
Elements:
1. An act is required by law to be done
2. Person fails to perform such act
3. Failure to perform due to lawful or insuperable cause.
Notes:
1) Applies to felonies committed by omission
2) The law imposes a duty on the part of the offender to
perform an act. If he fails to do so, he violates the law.
But if the failure is due to a lawful or insuperable
cause, he is criminally exempt.
3) Exempt the accused from criminal liability, because he
acts without intent.
4) The failure of a policeman to deliver the prisoner lawfully arrested
to the judicial authorities within the prescribe period because it
was not possible to do so with practicable dispatch as the prisoner
was arrested in a distant place would constitute a non-performance
of duty due to insuperable cause.
8. Absolutory causes- are those where the act committed is a crime
but for reason of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty
imposed.
person committed a crime but no penalty by reason of public policy
• Instigation-public officer or private detective induces an innocent
person to commit a crime and would arrest him upon or after the
commission of the crime by him;
• Entrapment-a person has planned or s about to commit a crime
and ways and means are resorted to by a public officer to trap and
catch the criminal; not a defense.
• Basis: Lack of intent.
• People v. Bandian (1936):A woman cannot be held liable for
infanticide when she left her newborn child in the bushes without
being aware that she had given birth at all. Severe dizziness and
extreme debility made it physically impossible for Bandian to take
home the child plus the assertion that she didn’t know that she had
given birth. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Examples of absolutory causes:
1. Essential elements of crime charged do not
proved and/or elements proved do not
constitute a crime.
2. Spontaneous desistance in attempted stage and
no other crime was committed;
3. Attempted or frustrated light felony and not
against person or property;
4. Accessory is relative of principal;
5. Legal grounds for arbitrary detention;
6. Legal grounds for trespass;
 Art. 13. Mitigating Circumstances
• Are those which, if present in the commission of the crime, do
not entirely free the actors from criminal liability but serve to
reduce the penalty.
Q. What are the two Classes of mitigaing circumstances?
1.Ordinary-can be offset by generic aggravating circumstances.
2. Privilege- has the capacity to go down by degree/s.
Q. What are Privilege mitigating circumstances found in the
RPC?
a) More than 9 but less than 18: penalty always lower by at least 1 or 2
degrees than that prescribe by law;
b) Incomplete justifying or exempting; lower by degree than that
prescribe by law but majority of the conditions must be present.
c) Two or more mitigating and no aggravating: lower by one degree
Ordinary Privilege
Can be offset by any Cannot be offset by
aggravating aggravating
circumstance circumstance
If not offset by The effect of imposing
aggravating upon the offender the
circumstance, penalty lower by one or
produces the effect of two degrees than that
applying the penalty provided by law for the
provided by law for crime.
the crime in its min
period in case of
divisible penalty
 1. Incomplete justifying or Exempting
Circumstances
• self-defense, defense of relative and stranger, it is
essential that unlawful aggression be present,
otherwise there can be no such defense, whether
complete or incomplete.
• unlawful aggression must always be present and
of the requisites is absent, Art.13, par. 1 applies.
• in case of accident: governed by Art. 67, RPC.
Q. What is the effect of the presence of the
circumstances?
Ans. The effect is the same as that of a privilege
mitigating as the penalty is one degree lower that
provided for in intentional felony.
2. Offender is over 70 year of age.
a. more than 9 but less than 18 who acted with
discernment-lower by two degrees always.
b. 10 or over but less than 18-lower by one degree at
least
Basis: Diminution of intelligence
3. No intent to commit a wrong as that committed.
• - there must be a notable and evident disproportion of
the means employed to execute the criminal act.
• What is important is the intention when committed
and not the intention as planned.
Notes:
• This is the effect of praeter intentionem. The injury
should befell upon the same person, not another.
 Q.What are the Legal effects of
various ages of offenders?
(1) 15 and below – Exempting
(2) Above 15 but under 18 years of age, also an
exempting circumstance, unless he acted with
discernment (Art. 12, par. 3 as amended by RA 9344).
(3) Minor delinquent under 18 years of age, the
sentence may be suspended. (Art. 192, PD No. 603 as
amended by PD 1179)
(4) 18 years or over, full criminal responsibility.
(5) 70 years or over – mitigating, no imposition of death
penalty; if already imposed. Execution of death
penalty is suspended and commuted.
Basis: Diminution of intelligence
 4. Sufficient provocation or threat
immediately preceded the act.
Elements:
1. Elements:
(1) That the provocation must be sufficient
(2) That it must originate from the offended party
(3) That the provocation must be immediate to the act, i.e.,
to the commission of the crime by the person who is
provoked
Q. What is provocation?
Provocation - Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
offended part capable of exciting, inciting, or irritating
anyone. Provocation in order to be mitigating must be
SUFFICIENT and IMMEDIATELY preceding the act.
 5. Vindication of a Grave Offense
Elements:
1. Grave offense done to the one committing the
felony, his spouse, ascendant, descendant,
legitimate natural or adopted brother or sisters, or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees; and
2. Felony committed in vindication of such grave
offense.
3. The vindication need not be done by the person
upon whom the grave offense was committed
• Lapse of time is allowed. The word “immediate” used in the
English text is not the correct translation.
 Provocation Vindication
1. Against the accused 1.against the accused
or relatives
2. Cause need not be 2.cause must be grave
grave offense
3. immediate 3.need not be
immediate
 6. Passion and Obfuscation
Elements:
1. Accused acted upon an impulse;
2. Impulse so powerful it naturally produced
passion and obfuscation in offender
3. Act both unlawful and sufficient to produce such
condition of mind; and
4. Act that produced obfuscation is not far
removed from the commission of the crime by a
considerable length of time during which the
perpetrator might recover his normal
equanimity. (immediate)
Q. When does this feeling must have arisen?
Ans. the feeling must have risen from lawful sentiments.
Q. Can this provision be invoked if done in response to
exercise of right or fulfilment of duty.
Ans. No
Q. How does one prove passion and obfuscation?
Ans. Fact must be proved to show causes sufficient to
produce loss of self-control and to overcome reason.
Q. Is it necessary that to established the existence of an
unlawful act, sufficient to produce such condition of the
mind , and it must not be far removed from the
commission of the crime by the considerable period of
time, during which the perpetrator might recover his
normal equanimity?
Ans. Yes
 7. Voluntary Surrender/ Confession of
Guilt
Elements-Surrender:
1. Offender not actually arrested;
2. Surrender to person in authority;
3. Surrender voluntary.
Q. When is Surrender mitigating?
A. must be spontaneous, as when to acknowledge guilt; or
B. To save the government trouble and expense of search
Q. When is Plea of Guilty Mitigating?
1. Offender spontaneously confess his guilt;
2. Made in open court
3. Of competent jurisdiction; and
4. Made prior to the presentation of evidence by
prosecution.
7. Offender is Deaf and Dumb and Blind
Q. What is the physical defect contemplated in this
mitigating circumstance?
Ans. The physical defect must affect the means of action,
defense or communication of the offender with his
fellow beings. The nature of the offense is, therefore, to
be considered as to whether such physical defect is
mitigating.
Q. What is the extent of the physical defect to be
mitigating?
Ans. Physical defect referred to in this paragraph is such as
being armless, cripple, or a stutterer, whereby his means
to act, defend himself or communicate with his fellow
beings are limited. The physical defect that a person may
have must have a relation to the commission of the
crime.
Notes:
• Ex. Acute neurosis that made he offender ill-tempered and
easily angered. A mother who killed her child after the
delivery as she was suffering under the influence of a
puerperal fever.
9. Illness that diminish the willpower of the offender
• Elements:
(1) That the illness of the offender must diminish the exercise
of his will-power
(2) That such illness should not deprive the offender of
consciousness of his acts.
When the offender completely lost the exercise of will-power,
it may be an exempting circumstance. It is said that this
paragraph refers only to diseases of pathological state that
trouble the conscience or will.
• A mother who, under the influence of a puerperal fever,
killed her child the day following her delivery.
Par. 10. Analogous Mitigating Circumstances
• Any other circumstance of similar nature and analogous to the nine
mitigating circumstances enumerated in art. 513 may be mitigating.
(1) The act of the offender of leading the law enforcers to the place where
he buried the instrument of the crime has been considered as
equivalent to voluntary surrender.
(2) Stealing by a person who is driven to do so out of extreme poverty is
considered as analogous to incomplete state of necessity.
(3) Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to over 70 years of age
mentioned in par. 2. (People v. Reantillo).
(4) Voluntary restitution of stolen goods similar to voluntary surrender
(People v. Luntao).
(5) Impulse of jealous feelings, similar to passion and obfuscation.
(People v. Libria).
(6) Extreme poverty and necessity, similar to incomplete justification
based on state of necessity. (People v. Macbul).
(7) Testifying for the prosecution, without previous discharge, analogous
to a plea of guilty. (People v. Narvasca).
Art. 14. Aggravating Circumstances
Kinds:
1. Generic-generally applies to all like recidivism
2. Specific-applies to a particular felony like
cruelty in crimes against person;
3. Qualifying-changes the nature of the felony,
as treachery in murder, or
4. Inherent-part of the felony committed, as
unlawful entry with force upon things.
1. Taking Advantage of Official Position
Q. How determined?
The offender is a public officer who availed of the
influence or reputation inherent in his position for
the purpose of committing crime.
• The public officer must use his influence, prestige or
ascendancy which his office gives him as the means
by which he realizes his purpose. Did the accused
abused his office in order to commit the crime?
• Not appreciated when it is inherent element of
crime-Malversation.
 2. Contempt or Insult to Public
Authorities
Elements:
1. Public authority is engage in the exercise of his
function;
2. He is not the person against whom the crime is
committed;
3. Offender knows him to be public authority; and
4. His presence has not prevented the offender from
committing crime
• Public authority sometimes called person in authority
is a public officer who is directly vested with
jurisdiction, that is a public officer who has the power
and execute laws.
 3. Disregard of Rank, Age, or Sex and
Dwelling of Offended Party
• Present when the act be committed:
a. with insult or disregard of respect
due the offended party on account
of his (1) rank, (2) age, (3) sex; or
(4). in the dwelling of the offended
party, if latter has not given
provocation.
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by
the personal circumstances of the offended party and
the place of the commission of the crime.
1. Rank of the offended party
(1) Designation or title used to fix the relative position
of the offended party in reference to others.
(2) There must be a difference in the social condition of
the offender and the offended party.
2. Age of the offended party
May refer to old age or tender age of the victim.
3. Sex of the offended party
This refers to the FEMALE SEX, not to the male sex.
The aggravating circumstance is NOT to be considered
in the following cases:
(a) When the offender acted with PASSION AND
OBFUSCATION. (People v. Ibanez)
(b) When there exists a relationship between the
offended party and the offender. (People v. Valencia)
(c) When the condition of being a woman is
indispensable in the commission of the crime. Thus,
in rape, abduction, or seduction, sex is not
aggravating. (People v. Lopez)
4. Dwelling (Morada)
(1) Building or structure, exclusively used for rest and comfort.Thus, in the
case of People v. Magnaye, a “combination of a house and a store”, or a
market stall where the victim slept is not a dwelling.
(2) This is considered an AC because in certain cases, there is an abuse of
confidence which the offended party reposed in the offender by opening
the door to him.
(3) Dwelling need not be owned by the offended party.
(4) It is enough that he used the place for his peace of mind, rest, comfort
and privacy.
(5) Dwelling should not be understood in the concept of a domicile: A
person has more than one dwelling. So, if a man has so many wives and
he gave them places of their own, each one is his own dwelling. If he is
killed there, dwelling will be aggravating, provided that he also stays
there once in a while.
(6) If a crime of adultery was committed. Dwelling was considered
aggravating on the part of the paramour. However, if the paramour was
also residing in the same dwelling, it will not be aggravating.
4. Abuse of Confidence of Obvious
Ungratefulness
Elements:
1. Trust
2. Abuse such trust; and
3. Abuse facilitated commission
Notes:
1) Betrayal of trust.ex. accused raped a girl who
was entrusted to his care by the parent, there is
betrayal of confidence reposed upon him by the
parents.
2) Theft or robbery committed by the visitors in
the house of the offended party is aggravated by
obvious ungratefulness.
Par. 4 provides two aggravating circumstances. If present in the
same case, they must be independently appreciated.
(a) Abuse of confidence (Abuso de confianza)

(1)That the offended party had trusted the offender.

(2) That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime
against the offended party.
(3)That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the
crime.
(a) The confidence between the offender and the offended
party must be immediate and personal.
(b) It is inherent in malversation (Art. 217), qualified theft
(Art. 310), estafa by conversion or misappropriation (Art. 315)
and qualified seduction. (Art. 337).
(b) Obvious ungratefulness
(1) That the offended party had trusted the offender;
(2) That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the
offended party;
(3) That the act be committed with obvious ungratefulness.
(a) The ungratefulness must be obvious:
(1) manifest and
(2) clear.
(b) In a case where the offender is a servant, the offended party is one of
the members of the family. The servant poisoned the child. It was held
that abuse of confidence is aggravating. This is only true, however, if the
servant was still in the service of the family when he did the killing. If he
was driven by the master out of the house for some time and he came
back to poison the child, abuse of confidence will no longer be
aggravating. The reason is because that confidence has already been
terminated when the offender was driven out of the house.
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the means and ways
employed.
5. Crime committed in:
a) Palace of the Chief Executive
b) In his Presence;
c) Where public authorities are engage
in discharge of duties; and
d) Place dedicated to religious
worship.
If it is the Malacañang Palace or a church it is aggravating
regardless of whether State or official or religious functions
are being held.
(a) The President need not be in the palace.
(b) His presence alone in any place where the crime is
committed is enough to constitute the AC.
(c) It also applies even if he is not engaged in the discharge of
his duties in the place where the crime was committed.
(d) Cemeteries are not places dedicated for religious worship.
Note: Offender must have the intention to commit a
crime when he entered the place. (People v. Jaurigue)
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the
place of the commission of the crime, which must be
respected.
 6. Nightime, Uninhabited Place,
Band
Notes:
1) These circumstances maybe appreciated if:
Especially sought to insure commission of crime,
or offender took advantage thereof with
impunity.
1) Nightime –from sunset to sunrise
2) Commission must begin and end’s at night
3) Uninhabited place-consider possibility for the
victim to received help
4) Band- more than 3 armed malefactors acting
together in commission of the crime to avoid
risk or capture.
(a) Nighttime (Nocturnidad)
The commission of the crime must begin and be accomplished in the
nighttime (after sunset and before sunrise).
(1) the offender purposely took advantage of nighttime; or
(2) it facilitated the commission of the offense.
(a) Nighttime by and of itself is not an aggravating circumstance.
(b) The offense must be actually committed in the darkness of the
night.
(c) When the place is illuminated by light, nighttime is not
aggravating.
(d) Nighttime may be absorbed by treachery depending on
circumstances.
(e) Nighttime need not be specifically sought for when:
(1) the offender purposely took advantage of nighttime; or
(2) it facilitated the commission of the offense.
(b) Uninhabited place (Desplobado)
It is determined NOT by the distance of the nearest
house to the scene of the crime but whether or not in
the place of the commission of the offense, there was a
reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some
help.
(a) Solitude must be sought to better attain the criminal
purpose. (People v. Aguinaldo)
(b) The offenders must choose the place as an aid either
(1) to an easy and uninterrupted accomplishment of
their criminal designs, or
(2) to insure concealment of the offense, that he
might thereby be better secured against detection
and punishment. (U.S. v. Vitug).
(c) Band (Cuadrilla)
Band - Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall
have acted together in the commission of an offense, it
shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. There
should
(1) Be at least be four persons
(2) At least 4 of them should be armed
(3) and are principals by direct participation.
(a) This aggravating circumstance is absorbed in the
circumstance of abuse of superior strength.
(b) This is inherent in brigandage.
(c) The armed men must have acted together in the
commission of the crime.
Basis: On the time and place of the commission of the crime
and means and ways employed.
7. Calamity
Committed on occasion of:
• a. conflagration
• b. shipwreck
• c. earthquake
• d. epidemic
• e. other calamities or misfortune
8. Aid of Armed Men, etc.
• Armed men took part in commission of crime directly
or indirectly; and
• Accused availed of their aid or relied on them when
crime was committed.
-aid of armed men is absorbed in band if there are at
least 4 armed armed men, otherwise, they are to be
separated.
 9. Accused is a Recidivist
Elements:
1. Offender is on trial for an offense
2. He was previously convicted by final judgment of
another
3. Both the 1st and 2nd offense are embraced in the same
title of RPC
4. Offender is convicted of the new offense
• Considered no matter how many years passed between
the 1st and 2nd felonies.
• Amnesty extinguish the penalty and its effects, pardon
does not
• If both offenses were committed on the same date, they
shall be considered only one, hence they cannot be
separately counted in order to constitute recidivism.
Q. Distinguish between recidivism and quasi-recidivism. [2%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
IN RECIDIVISM
-1 The convictions of the offender are for crimes embraced in
the same Title of the Revised Penal Code; and
2 This circumstance is generic aggravating and therefore can be
effect by an ordinary mitigating circumstance.
WHEREAS IN QUASI-RECIDIVISM
1. The convictions are not for crimes embraced in the
same Title of the Revised Penal Code, provided that it is a
felony that was committed by the offender before serving
sentence by final judgment for another crime or while
serving sentence for another crime; and
2. This circumstance is a special aggravating circumstance which
cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance.
 10. Reiteracion or Habituality
Elements:
1. Accused is on trial for an offense;
2. He has not previously served sentenced for
another offense to which the law attaches an
equal or greater penalty, or for two or more
crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty
than that for the new offense; and
3. that he is convicted of the new offense.
Requisites:
(1) That the accused is on trial for an offense;
(2) That he previously served sentence for another offense to
which the law attaches:
(a) an equal or
(b) greater penalty, or
(c) for 2 or more crimes to which it attaches lighter
penalty than that for the new offense; and
(3) That he is convicted of the new offense. In Reiteracion or
Habituality, it is essential that the offender be previously
punished; that is, he has served sentence.
Par. 10 speaks of
(a) penalty attached to the offense,
(b) not the penalty actually imposed
Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his
inclination to crimes.
 11. In consideration of Price,
Reward or Promise
Notes:
1) Must be for the purpose of inducing another to
perform the act.
2) Not considered if given after the crime was
committed without previous promise.
3) In this aggravating circumstances need not consist of
or refer to material things of or that the same were
actually delivered, it being sufficient that the offer
made by the principal by inducement be accepted by
the principal by inducement be accepted by the
principal by the direct participation before the
commission of the offense.
4) This aggravates the liability of both the offeror and
the offeree.
12.Crime Committed by Means of Inundation,
Fire, Explosion; Poison; Straddling of the
Vessel or intentional damage thereto;
Derailment of Locomotive; Use of any other
Artifice involving Great waste and Ruin.
• Considered generic only with another
aggravating circumstances already qualifies
crime as in murder with evident
premeditation as qualifying
 13. Evident Premeditation
Elements:
The prosecution must prove:
1. Time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
2. Act manifesting that the culprit has clung to his determination;
3. Sufficient lapse of time between the determination and
execution to allow him to reflect upon the consequence of his
act.
Notes:
1) Premeditation must be based upon external act and must be
evident which is indicative of deliberate planning.
2) Where the existence of a criminal conspiracy has been
established, it is disputably presumed that the conspirators were
acting with evident premeditation.
3) Is necessary absorbed in the aggravating circumstances of price,
reward or promise but only in so far as the inducer is concerned
since he obviously reflected thereon in planning the crime.
4) Inherent in crime of robbery, theft, estafa or analogous offense
 14. Craft/Fraud and Disguish
Notes:
1) Craft-cunnning or intellectual machinery. May be absorbed in
treachery.
2) Fraud-deceit; manifested by insidious words or machinations.
3) Disguise-conceal identity; not aggravating if it did not facilitate
commission.
4) The test of disguise is whether the device or contrivance resorted
to by the offender was intended to or did make identification
more difficult, such as use of mask.
5) DISGUISE
(a) Resorting to any device to conceal identity.
(b) The test of disguise is (1) whether the device or contrivance resorted
to by the offender (2) was intended to or did make identification
more difficult, such as the use of a mask, false hair or beard.
(c) But if in spite of the use of handkerchief to cover their faces, the
culprits were recognized by the victim, disguise is not considered
aggravating.
Basis: Means employed in the commission of the crime.
 15. Superior Strength or Means to
Weaken Defense
Notes:
1) Excessive force out proportion to weaken the defense
2) Notorious inequality of forces
3) Deliberate intent to take advantage of superior
strength
4) Absorb band
5) If victim is totally deprived of means of
defense=treachery
6) Superiority in numbers does not necessarily means
superiority in strength; the accused must have
cooperated and intended to use or secure advantage
for the superiority in strength.
 16. Treachery
Elements:
1. Accused employed means, method or forms
of execution which tend to insure his safety
from any offensive or retaliatory act on part
of offended party; no opportunity was given
to latter to do so; and
2. Means, method or manner of execution was
deliberately or consciously shown.
17. Ignominy
• Adds disgrace and obloquy
• Must be deliberate
Ex. Victim is made to knell before his servant before he
was shot by the accused; victim made dig his grave and
forced to lie on it, then he was interrogated and
stabbed, after which he was buried. Rape committed
front of the husband who is hogtied.
18. Unlawful entry
• When the entrance to building is made by way not
intended for purpose.
• Made for the purpose of committing a crime.
• It must be for the purpose of entry and not escape.
• Alleged in information to qualify theft to robbery
• Cannot considered in trespass to dwelling.
19. As a Means to Commit a Crime, a Wall, Roof, Floor, Doors
or Window be Broken
• This is inherent in robbery with force upon things.
• The breaking is for the purpose of entering the same to
commit a crime, not in order to leave the place.
20. Aid of Minor or By Means of Motor Vehicle
• Minor less than 15 years old
• By means of motor vehicle, motorized watercraft or similar
means
• Vehicle be purposely used to facilitate crime, without
which crime cannot be committed or used to insure
success of commission; not appreciated when used as a
means to escape.
• Motor vehicle must have been for the purpose of ensuring
the success of their criminal enterprise. It must be shown
that without it the offense charge could not have been
committed.
 21. Cruelty
• Deliberate intention to prolong physical sufferings
of victim.
Ignominy –moral suffering
Cruelty- physical suffering
• Rape is aggravating in robbery with homicide.
• Cruelty is not inherent in crime against persons.
• If the victim was already dead when the acts of
mutilation were being performed on him, this
would also qualify the killing to murder due to
the outraging of his corpse.
Art. 15. Alternative Circumstances
Kinds:
1) Relationship
2) Intoxication
3) Degree of instruction and education with
homicide
 1. Relationship
Notes:
1) Inherent in crimes of parricide, adultery and
concubinage.
2) Mitigating in crimes against property, such as trespass,
robbery and arson
3) Always aggravating in crimes against person if the crimes
committed is grave felony,ex. Serious physal injury,
homicide and murder. But is mitigating if crime is
classified as light or less serious. Ex. Slight physical injury.
Considered when the victim is:
1. spouse;
2. Ascendant (also step-parent; adopting parents)
3. descendant
4. legitimate, adopted or natural brothers and sisters; or
5. relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender.
 2. Intoxication
1) Mitigating-not habitual; or not subsequent of plan to
commit the felony. The habit should be proved . It must
prove that: A. That he has taken such quantity of alcohol as
to blur his reason and deprive him of certain degree of
control. B. That such intoxication is not habitual or
subsequent to the plan.
- Intoxication to be mitigating must be proved to the satisfaction
of the court and in the absence of proof to the contrary it is
presumed to be not habitual but accidental.
1) Aggravating-habitual; or intentional had embolden accused.
Ex. One who plotted to kill the victim, had drunk wine in order to
embolden him in carrying out his evil plan.
 3. Education/Degree of instruction
Notes:
1) Mitigating-generally, if low degree or lack of education.
The court consider not only illiteracy but lack of
intelligence of the offender.
2) Aggravating-if high degree and offender avails himself of
his learning in committing the crime.
3) Not mitigating (low degree of education) when:
1. crimes against property
2. crimes against chastity
3. murder or assault on person on authority
• Does not only refer literacy but more to the level of
intelligence of the accused.
• Must be proved positively and directly and cannot be
based on mere deduction or inference
 Persons Criminally Liable
Only natural persons can be offenders
Grave and Less grave felonies: Light Felonies:
1. principal 1. Principal
2. accomplice 2. Accomplice
3. accessory
1. Principals
Kinds (those who):
A. Take direct part in the commission of crime;
B. Directly by force or induce others to commit it; or
C. Cooperate in commission of offense by another
without which it would not have been accomplished.
A. PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION.
-To establish conspiracy, proof of the previous agreement is not essential or
that the attack be joint and simultaneous. It is necessary that the
assailant be animated by one and the same purpose or acted in concert
pursuant to the same criminal objective.
- Mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval of the act without
cooperation or agreement is not enough to constitute one party to the
conspiracy. Ex. Appellant was present wHGen other co-accused met in
his house to plan the bank robbery and that he told them that he could
not join the latter because of the foot injury will not make him a co-
conspirator.
- However, if the conspirator agreed to kill a particular person, and a
conspirator killed another person, the others will not be liable, for such
killing is not what was conspired upon.
- One who stood guard outside the house for the purpose of keeping other
persons away while other companions were inside the house killing the
victim is guilty as principal by direct participation, because as a guard he
knew the plan and being present, aided in the commission.
B. PRINCIPALS BY INDUCTION LIABLE ONLY when the
principal by direct participation commits the crime, but
if he is forced by another by threat then there is no
conspiracy; only the inducer is liable.
The inducement must precede the act induced and it is so
influential in producing the criminal act that without it
the act would not have been performed.
One who planned the commission of the crime is
principal by inducement.
Elements of Inducement:
1. Made directly with the intention of procuring
commission of crime; and
2. Is the determining cause of commission of crime by
material executor
3. If money is given after, without prior promise, it
cannot be regarded as inducement
Requisites for Person Giving Command to be Held Liable
As Principals:
1. Has intention to procure commission of the crime;
2. Has ascendancy or influence over person who acted;
3. Words used so direct, efficacious and powerful
amounting to moral coercion;
4. Words of command were uttered prior to the
commission of the crime;
5. Material executor of crime has no personal reason to
commit the crime.
C. Principal by Indispensable Cooperation
Requisites:
1. Participation in criminal resolution-anterior
conspiracy or immediately before the commission of
crime; and
2. Without which the crime could not have committed
 2. Accomplice
Notes:
1) The cooperation that the law punishes is the
assistance knowingly or intentionally rendered,
which cannot exist without previous cognizance
of the criminal act intended to be executed.
2) Person who, not being principal, cooperates in
the execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts.
3) A relation must exist between act of principal
and that committed by accomplice.
 3. Accesories
Notes:
They are neither principals nor accomplice but:
1. have knowledge of the commission of the crime;
2. take part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manner:
A. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit
from effects of the crime.
B. By concealing or destroying corpus delicti or the effects or
instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery.
C. By harbouring, concealing or assisting an escape of
principal if he acts with abuse of public function or when
author of crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder or
attempt on the life of Chief executive or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime.
 Anti-Fencing Law of 1979
• Fencing-with the intent to gain knows or
should have know that the property derived
from proceeds of robbery or theft.
• Penalty depends on the value of the property
involved.
• Prima facie evidence of fencing-mere
possession of goods subject of robbery or
theft.
 Accessories exempt from Criminal
Liability
Those with respect to their:
1. spouse
2. ascendant
3. descendant
4.legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and
sisters
5. relative by affinity within the same degree
PROVIDED
• They do not profit or assist the offender to profit
from the effects of the crime.
Effects of Pardon of Offended Party
1. Public crime-only civil liability is extinguish,
criminal action is not extinguish.
2. Private crimes-barred if:
a) Made before institution of action;
b) Adultery/Concubinage-both offender must be
pardoned; or
c) Rape-must be express pardon
d) Marriage-totally extinguish crime.
e) Deduction of Preventive Imprisonment:
General Rule: applies to all
 Complex Crime
Kinds:
1. Compound-Single act
2. 2. Complex Crime- necessary means
Requisites for Compound Crimes:
1. That a single act is performed by the offender.
2. When a single act results in:
a) 2 or more grave felonies;
b) 1 or more grave and 1 or more less grave; or
c) 2 or more less grave felonies
 Plurality of crimes consist in the sucessive execution by
the
same individual of different acts upon any of which no
conviction has yet been declared.
1. Real or material-there are different crimes in law as
well as in the conscience of the offender. Eg. A
stab B with a knife. Then A also stabbed C. There
are two crimes committed. Note: there are two acts
performed
2. Formal and ideal type:
a. Art. 48
b. When the law fixes a single penalty for two or
more offense committed- Special Complex Crime.
3. Compound crime.
• Felony and crime punished by special law: no complex
crime , 2 independent crimes are committed.
• Several light felonies resulting from single act: not complex
• Ex. A single act of throwing a hand grenade at a person,
killing him and injuring others-murder with multiple
frustrated murder; or one shot and the same bullet killed A
and hit and killed B.
• Several shots from Thompson sub-machine gun causing
several deaths, although used by a single act of pressing
the trigger, are considered several acts.
Complex Crime Proper
Elements:
1. That at least two offense are committed;
2. That one or more of the offenses must be necessary to
commit the other;
3. That both or all the offenses must be punished under the
same statute.
 Penalty To Be Imposed Upon
Person Under 18 Years Of Age
1.More than 15 but less than 18 who acted with
discernment-discretionary penalty but always
lower by 2 degrees at least (Pri. Mitigating).
Applies only when:
a. application for suspension of sentence is
disapproved; or
b. while in the reformatory institution, the
minor becomes incorrigible and is returned to
court for imposition of the proper penalty.
 Penalties Time included in Time included in Time included in Time included in
the penalty in its its minimum its medium its maximum
entirety period period

Reclusion temporal From 12 years and From 12 years and From 14 years, 8 From 17 years, 4
1 day to 20 years. 1 day to 14 years months and 1 day months and 1 day
and 8 months. to 17 years and 4 to 20 years.
months.

Prision mayor, From 6 years and 1 From 6 years and 1 From 8 years and 1 From 10 years and
absolute day to 12 years. day to 8 years. day to 10 years. 1 day to 12 years.
disqualification and
special temporary
disqualification
Prision From 6 months and From 6 months and From 2 years, 4 From 4 years, 2
correccional,suspen 1 day to 6 years. 1 day to 2 years months and 1 day months and 1 day
sion anddestierro and 4 months. to 4 years and 2 to 6 years.
months.

Arresto mayor From 1 month and From 1 to 2 From 2 months and From 4 months and
1 day to months. months. 1 day to 4 months. 1 day to 6 months.

Arresto menor From 1 to 30 days. From 1 to 10 days. From 11 to 20 days. From 21 to 30 days.
 What are Extinction Of Criminal
Liability?
Criminal Liability is Totally extinguished:
1. death of the convict, as to personal penalties; and as to
pecuniary penalties, when the death occurs before
final judgement;
2. service of sentence;
3. amnesty
4.absolute pardon
5. prescription of the crime
6. prescription of the penalty; or
7. marriage of the offended
• Criminal liability not extinguish by death of victim
• Amnesty completely extinguish penalty and all its
effects; except for civil liability, which persists.
 Prescription of the Crime
1. Death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion
temporal-20 years
2. Other afflictive penalties-15 years
3. Correctional penalty-10 years except arresto
mayor-5 years
4. Libel or other similar offenses-1 year
5. Oral defamation and slander by deed-6 months
6. Light offenses-2 months

When penalty is fixed by law is compound one,

highest penalty shall be made basis of application
of rules contained in 1st, 2nd and 3rd par.
What are Partial Extinction of Criminal
Liability?
1. conditional pardon;
2. commutation of sentence;
3. good conduct allowance;
• The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal
institution shall=entitle him to following
deductions from the period of his sentence:
a) First 2 years-5 days/month of good behaviour
b) 3rd to 5th-8 days/month
c) Following years until 10th -10 days/month
d) 11th and successive years-15 days/month
4. Parole
 What is a Special time Allowance for
Loyalty?
Partial Extinction of Criminal Liability
A deduction of 1/5 of the period of his sentence shall be granted to
any prisoner who, having evaded service of his sentence under the
following circumstances:
a) On occasion of disorder;
b) Conflagration;
c) Earthquake
d) Explosion
e) Mutiny in which he has not participated
f) Gives himself up to authorities within 48 hours following issuance
of proclamation announcing the passing away of calamity or
catastrophe mentioned.
g) If he fails to give himself up upon cessation of catastrophe or
calamity, 1/5 of unexpired portion of his sentence shall be added
but not to exceed 6 months.
 What is Prescription of
Offense/Crime?
Start: from day crime was discovered by offended party, authorities
/agent;
Interrupted: filing of complaint information
Re-start: when proceedings are terminated without accused being
convicted or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason
not imputable to him.
1) Period will not run if offender is abroad
2) Discovery of crime, not discovery of offender, that start running of
period.
3) Filing of complaint/information in municipal court for preliminary
investigation interrupts the running of the prospective period
4) To interrupt period, it must be proper complaint/information
corresponding to the offense.
5) If dismissal is final, accused cannot be prosecuted anymore, even
if stil within prescriptive period, on ground of double jeopardy.
6) If proceedings are interrupted because of accused’s own acts, it
does not run.
 Computation of Prescription of
Offense
1. Death, Reclusion Perpetua-20 years
2. Other afflictive penalties-15 years
3. Correctional penalties-10 years
4. Arresto mayor-5years
5. Light-1 year
• Penalty must have been imposed by final judgement,
therefore, prescription will not run pending appeal.
• Prescription of crime-consider penalty prescribe by law
• Prescription of penalty-consider penalty imposed
Fine of P200
• Crime prescribe in 2 years (light)
• Penalty prescribe in 10 years (correctional)
 Computation of Prescription of
Penalties
• Start: when culprit evades service of sentence
• Stop: if defendant-surrender, is captured, goes
to a foreign country which we have no
extradition treaty, commit another crime
before the expiration of the period of
prescription, acceptance of conditional
pardon.
• Evades sentence means actual escape.
 Civil Liability
Civil liability of Persons Guilty of Felony
• Every person criminally liable for a felony is also
civilly liable.
• If no damage, no civil liability even if there is
criminal liability.
Civil liability may exist, although criminal liability
may not , in the following cases:
1. acquitted on reasonable doubt;
2. acquitted from cause of non-imputability;
3. acquittal in criminal action for negligence;
4. there is only civil responsibility adjudge; or
5. independent civil actions.
Reservation must be made to institute the following
separate civil actions:
1. when civil action is base on an obligation not
arising from the act omission complained of as a
felony;
2. cases referred to Art.31, 32 and 33 of NCC,
whether or not the defendant act or omission
constitute criminal offender;
3. defamation, fraud, physical injuries;
4. civil action against member of city or municipal
police for refusing or failing ro render aid or
protection to person in case of danger to life or
property; and
5. quasi-delict.
 Prejudicial Question
1. Another exception to the rule that the
criminal action is decided first and the civil
action is suspended.
2. Acquittal in criminal case is not evidence of
innocence in subsequent civil action based
upon the alleged criminal act.
3. Rules regarding Civil Liability in Certain Cases;
Rules regarding Civil Liability in Certain
Cases
• Exemption from criminal liability established in Art.12, par. 1,2,3,5,6
and Art.11, par. 4 does not include civil liability.
1. Art.12, par.1,2,3
-persons with legal authority or control are liable, unless they show
that they had no fault or negligence.
-if no one was in charge, or person is insolvent, offender is personally
liable.
• Art.11,Par.4
Person benefitted is civilly liable, in proportion to benefit he received.
Courts determine proportion to the benefit he received.
Courts determine proportionate amount.
• Art. 12. Par.5 and 6
Primarily liable-person using violence or causing fear
Secondarily liable (of if there are no person primarily liable) those
doing the act.
Civil Liability; Subsidiary; Employers (1998)
Q. Guy, while driving a passenger jeepney owned and operat-ed by Max, bumped
Demy, a pedestrian crossing the street. Demy sustained injuries which required
medical attendance for three months. Guy was charged with reckless imprudence
resulting to physical injuries. Convicted by the Metropolitan Trial Court. Guy was
sentenced to suffer a straight penalty of three months of arresto mayor and
ordered to indemnify Demy in the sum of P5,000 and to pay P1,000 as attorney's
fees. Upon finality of the decision, a writ of execution was served upon Guy, but
was returned unsatisfied due to his insolvency. Demy moved for a subsidiary writ
of execution against Max. The latter opposed the motion on-the ground that the
decision made no mention of his subsidiary liability and that he was not
impleaded in the case. How will you resolve the motion? [5%]
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The motion is to be granted. Max as an employer of Guy and engaged in an industry
(transportation business) where said employee is utilized, is subsidiarily civilly
liable under Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code. Even though the decision made
no mention of his subsidiary liability, the law violated (Revised Penal Code) itself
mandates for such liability and Max is deemed to know it because ignorance of the
law is never excused. And since his liability is not primary but only subsidiary in
case his employee cannot pay; he need not be impleaded in the in the criminal
case. It suffices that he was duly notified of the motion for issuance of a subsidiary
writ of execution and thus given the opportunity to be heard.