GENERAL PRINCIPLES
NULLUM CRIMEN NULLA POENA SINE LEGE- “There is no crime when there is no law punishing the
same.”
While anti-Social acts should be penalized, there must a clear definition of the offense sought to be
punished including the penalty that may be imposed.
Example: Love Bug (May 2000)
POWER TO CRIMINALIZE
Criminalization of a wrong is Legislative in character.
Power of congress to criminalize and punish a wrongful act must be prospective in application.
PROHIBITION AGAINST EX-POST FACTO LAW. Congress may not pass a law criminalizing a wrongful act
committed in the past.
THEORIES of criminal law
CLASSICAL THEORy (Characteristics)(1) The basis of criminal liability is human free will and the purpose of penalty is retribution;
(2) that man is essentially a moral creature with an absolutely free will to choose between good and
evil, thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of the felonious act that upon the man, the
criminal himself;
(3) It has endeavored to establish a mechanical and direct proportion between crime and penalty;
(4) There is scant regard to the human element.
THEORIES OF CRIMINAL LAW
POSITIVIST THEORY (CHARACTERISTICS)
(1) That man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon which constrain him to
do wrong;
(2) That crime is essentially a social and natural phenomenon, and as such, it cannot be treated and
checked by the abstract principles of law and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of punishment,
fixed and determined a priori.
TREATIES
FORMALLY CONCLUDED AND RATIFIED AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO OR MORE COUNTRIES.
EXAMPLES:
~CEDAW
~RP-US VISITING FORCES AGREEMENT (VFA)
~ENHANCE DEFENSE COOPERATION AGREEMENT
PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
The following are not subject to the operation of our criminal laws:
Sovereigns and other heads of state;
Charges d’ Affaires;
Ambassadors;
Ministers plenipotentiary
PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
GENERAL RULE: DIPLOMATIC REPRESENTATIVES POSSESS IMMUNITY FROM CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
OF THE COUNTRY OF THEIR SOJOURN.
BASIS: PAR IN PAREM, NON HABET IMPERIUM
ALL STATES ARE SOVEREIGN EQUALS AND CANNOT ASSERT JURISDICTION OVER ONE ANOTHER.
WHAT ABOUT CONSULS OR VICE CONSULS?
NO. THEY MERELY REPRESENT THE STATE’S COMMERCIAL OR BUSINESS INTEREST.
2) TERRITORIAL- Criminal laws undertake to punish crimes committed within the Philippine territory.
NATIONAL TERRITORY
Article 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution
EXTRATERRITORIALITYApplication of the RPC outside the Philippines (rpc Art.2)
Art. 2. Application of its provisions. – Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential
application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago,
including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction,
against those who:
Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;
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;
Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding number;
While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions;
or
Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One
of Book Two of this Code.
3) PROSPECTIVITYGENERAL RULE: Criminal law cannot penalize an act that was not punishable at the time of its
commission.
Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the time of their commission.
EXCEPTION: When Favorable to the accused;
EXCEPTIONS TO THE EXCEPTION:
1. NEW LAW WAS EXPRESSLY MADE INAPPLICABLE
2. ACCUSED IS A HABITUAL CRIMINAL;
CONSTRUCTION: Strictly Construed against the government and liberally in favor of the accused
DOCTRINE OF PRO REO- whenever a penal law is to be applied and the law admits two different
interpretations- one lenient to the offender and the other one is strict, the former shall be applied.
BASIS: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved. (CONST. art.111, sec.14, Par.2)
Felonies
Art 3. Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies.
Acts – an overt or external act
Omission – failure to perform a duty required by law. Example of an omission: failure to render
assistance to anyone who is in danger of dying or is in an uninhabited place or is wounded –
abandonment.
What requisites must concur before a felony may be committed?
There must be:
(1) an act or omission;
(2) punishable by the Revised Penal Code; and
(3) the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa.
CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
As to Manner of Commission:
Intentional Felonies
Culpable Felonies
2.
As to Nature:
1. Mala In Se
2. Mala Prohibita
3.
As to Gravity:
1.Grave Felonies
2. Less Grave Felonies
3. Light Felonies
How felonies are committed?
FIRST: by means of deceit (dolo) – There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent.
Requisites:
freedom
intelligence
Intent
Examples: murder, treason, and robbery
In criminal law, intent is categorized into two:
(1)
(2)
General criminal intent; and
Specific criminal intent.
General criminal intent is presumed from the mere doing of a wrong act. This does not require
proof. The burden is upon the wrong doer to prove that he acted without such criminal intent.
Specific criminal intent is not presumed because it is an ingredient or element of a crime, like intent
to kill in the crimes of attempted or frustrated homicide/parricide/murder. The prosecution has the
burden of proving the same.
Distinction between intent and discernment
Intent is the determination to do a certain thing, an aim or purpose of the mind. It is the design to
resolve or determination by which a person acts.
On the other hand, discernment is the mental capacity to tell right from wrong. It relates to the moral
significance that a person ascribes to his act and relates to the intelligence as an element of dolo,
distinct from intent.
Distinction between intent and motive
Intent is demonstrated by the use of a particular means to bring about a desired result – it is not a
state of mind or a reason for committing a crime.
On the other hand, motive implies motion. It is the moving power which impels one to do an
act. When there is motive in the commission of a crime, it always comes before the intent. But a
crime may be committed without motive.
If the crime is intentional, it cannot be committed without intent. Intent is manifested by the
instrument used by the offender. The specific criminal intent becomes material if the crime is to be
distinguished from the attempted or frustrated stage.
2. by means of fault (culpa) – There is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Requisites:
Freedom
Intelligence
Imprudence, negligence, lack of skill or foresight
Lack of intent
Imprudence – Indicates deficiency in action and failure to take necessary precaution to avoid injury to
person or damage to property; it usually involves lack of skill.
Negligence – failure in advertence or lack of due diligence in foreseeing the injury or damage
impending to be caused; it usually involved lack of foresight.
The concept of criminal negligence is the inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person
performing or failing to perform an act. If the danger impending from that situation is clearly
manifest, you have a case of reckless imprudence. 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.
MISTAKE OF FACT
is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another. He is not
criminally liable as he acted without criminal intent (Ignorantia Facti Excusat)
Requisites:
that the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be;
intention of the accused is lawful;
mistake must be without fault of carelessness.
NOTE: Mistake of fact would be relevant only when the felony would have been intentional or
through dolo, but not when the felony is a result of culpa. When the felony is a product of culpa, do
not discuss mistake of fact.
MALA IN SE AND MALA PROHIBITA
Violations of the Revised Penal Code are referred to as malum in se, which literally means, that the
act is inherently evil or bad or per se wrongful. On the other hand, violations of special laws are
generally referred to as malum prohibitum.
Note, however, that not all violations of special laws are mala prohibita. While intentional felonies
are always mala in se, it does not follow that prohibited acts done in violation of special laws are
always mala prohibita.
Even if the crime is punished under a special law, if the act punished is one which is inherently wrong,
the same is malum in se, and, therefore, good faith and the lack of criminal intent is a valid defense;
unless it is the product of criminal negligence or culpa.
Distinction between crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code and crimes punished under
Special Laws
1.
As to moral trait of the offender
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the moral trait of the offender is
considered. This is why liability would only arise when there is dolo or culpa in the commission of the
punishable act.
In crimes punished under special laws, the moral trait of the offender is not considered; it is
enough that the prohibited act was voluntarily done.
2.
As to use of good faith as defense
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, good faith or lack of criminal intent is a
valid defense; unless the crime is the result of culpa
In crimes punished under special laws, good faith is not a defense
3.
As to degree of accomplishment of the crime
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the degree of accomplishment of the
crime is taken into account in punishing the offender; thus, there are attempted, frustrated, and
consummated stages in the commission of the crime.
In crimes punished under special laws, the act gives rise to a crime only when it is
consummated; there are no attempted or frustrated stages, unless the special law expressly
penalize the mere attempt or
frustration of the crime.
4.
As to mitigating and aggravating circumstances
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, mitigating and aggravating circumstances
are taken into account in imposing the penalty since the moral trait of the offender is considered.
In crimes punished under special laws, mitigating and aggravating circumstances are not
taken into account in imposing the penalty.
5.
As to degree of participation
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, when there is more than one offender, the degree
of participation of each in the commission of the crime is taken into account in imposing the penalty;
thus, offenders are classified as principal, accomplice and accessory.
In crimes punished under special laws, the degree of participation of the offenders is not
considered. All who perpetrated the prohibited act are penalized to the same extent. There is no
principal or accomplice or accessory to consider.
STAGES OF EXECUTION
Article 4. Criminal liability. - Criminal liability shall be incurred:
By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended. (EL QUE ES CAUSA DELA CAUSA ES CAUSA DEL MAL CAUSADO)
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the employment of
inadequate or ineffectual means.
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended.
Proximate cause has been defined as that which, in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by
any efficient intervening cause, produces injury, and without which the result would not have
occurred.
ERROR IN PERSONAE- Mistake in identity.
ABERRATIO ICTUS- Mistake in the blow.
PRAETER INTENTIONEM- Injurious result is greater than that intended
2 .Impossible Crimes
-LEGAL IMPOSSIBILITY- where the intended acts even if completed would not amount to a crime.
-PHYSICAL/ FACTUAL IMPOSSIBILITY- When extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or
beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime.
Art. 6. Consummated felonies, as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts,
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.
Development of a crime
Internal acts – intent and plans; usually not punishable
External acts
i. Preparatory Acts – acts tending toward the crime
ii. Acts of Execution – acts directly connected the crime
Stages of a Crime does not apply in:
Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless the otherwise is
Formal crimes (e.g., slander, adultery, etc.)
Impossible Crimes
Crimes consummated by mere attempt.
Examples: attempt to flee to an enemy country, treason,
5. Felonies by omission
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement.
Examples:
betting in sports (endings in basketball),
provided for.
corruption of minors.
corruption of public officers.
ATTEMPTED STAGE
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
ELEMENTS:
The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts;
He does not perform all acts of execution which should produce the felony;
The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to a cause or accident other than the offender’s
own spontaneous desistance.
OVERT ACT- it is some physical activity or deed, indicating intention to commit a particular crime.
Desistance
Desistance on the part of the offender negates criminal liability in the attempted stage. Desistance is
true only in the attempted stage of the felony. If under the definition of the felony, the act done is
already in the frustrated stage, no amount of desistance will negate criminal liability.
The spontaneous desistance of the offender negates only the attempted stage but not necessarily all
criminal liability. Even though there was desistance on the part of the offender, if the desistance was
made when acts done by him already resulted to a felony, that offender will still be criminally liable
for the felony brought about his act
Applications:
A put poison in B’s food. B threw away his food. A is liable – attempted murder.
A stole B’s car, but he returned it. A is liable – (consummated) theft.
A aimed his gun at B. C held A’s hand and prevented him from shooting B – attempted murder.
A inflicted a mortal wound on B. B managed to survive – frustrated murder.
A intended to kill B by shooting him. A missed – attempted murder.
A doused B’s house with kerosene. But before he could light the match, he was caught – attempted
arson.
A cause a blaze, but did not burn the house of B – frustrated arson.
B’s house was set on fire by A – (consummated) arson.
A tried to rape B. B managed to escape. There was no penetration – attempted rape.
A got hold of B’s painting. A was caught before he could leave B’s house – frustrated robbery.
FRUSTRATED STAGE
ELEMENTS:
The Offender performs all acts of execution;
All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence;
But the Felony is not produced;
By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
CRIMES WHICH DO NOT ADMIT OF A FRUSTRATED STAGE
They are those which, by definition of a frustrated stage felony, the offender cannot possibly perform
all the acts of execution to bring the desired result without consummating the offense.
EXAMPLES:
THEFT- because the unlawful taking immediately consummates the offense and the disposition of the
thing is not an element thereof.
PHYSICAL INJURY- since it cannot be determined whether the injury will be slight, less serious, or
serious until consummated.
RAPE- since the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge, hence, no matter how slight the
penetration, the felony is consummated
CONSUMMATED STAGE
When ALL elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present
NOTE: The Offender does not have to do anything else to consummate the offense. He already has
reached the objective phase and that he no longer has the control of his acts having already
performed all that is necessary to accomplish his purpose.
NOTES ON 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.
NOTES ON RAPE:
Jurisprudence dictates that the labia majora must be entered for rape to be consummated, and not
merely for the penis to stroke the surface of the female organ. xxxx Thus, a grazing of the surface of
the female organ or touching the mons pubisof the pudendum is not sufficient to constitute
consummated rape. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ, i.e.,
touching of either labia of the pudendum by the penis, there can be no consummated rape; at most,
it can only be attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness.
NO FRUSTRATED RAPE
In People v. Orita, the Court clarified that the ruling in People v. Eriñia whereby the offender was
declared guilty of frustrated rape because of lack of conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital
organ of the offended party, was a stray decision for not having been reiterated in subsequent cases
As the evolving case law on rape stands, therefore, rape in its frustrated stage is a physical
impossibility, considering that the requisites of a frustrated felony under Article 6 of the Revised Penal
Code are that:
the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony; and
(2) that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator’s will. Obviously, the
offender attains his purpose from the moment he has carnal knowledge of his victim, because from
that moment all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished, leaving nothing more
to be done by him