TABLE OF CONTENTS
CRIMINAL LAW I .......................................... 1
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES ................................ 2
A. Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita......................2
B. Applicability and Effectivity of the RPC 3
C. Interpretation of Penal Laws .................. 7
D. Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws .......... 7
II. FELONIES ....................................................... 9
A. Criminal Liabilities and Felonies ..................9
1. Classification of Felonies (Grave, Less
Grave, and Light Felonies) .......................... 9
2. Abberatio Ictus, Error in Personae, and
Praeter Intentionem ................................... 10
3. Impossible Crimes.................................. 11
4. Stages of Execution................................ 12
5. Continuing Crimes ................................. 15
6. Complex Crimes and Composite Crimes
[Art. 48] ....................................................... 16
B. Circumstances Affecting Criminal Liability
............................................................................17
1. Justifying Circumstances ........................ 17
2. Exempting Circumstances [Art. 12]...... 22
3. Mitigating Circumstances [Art. 13] ....... 27
4. Aggravating Circumstances [Art. 14] .... 33
6. Absolutory Causes.................................. 54
C. Persons Liable and Degree of Participation
............................................................................56
1. Principals, Accomplices, and Accessories
...................................................................... 56
D. Penalties .......................................................70
1. Imposable Penalties................................ 70
2. Classification ........................................... 70
3. Duration and Effects ............................. 70
4. Application and Graduation of Penalties
...................................................................... 75
5. Accessory Penalties ................................ 79
6. Subsidiary Imprisonment....................... 81
E. Execution and Service of Penalties ............82
1. Three-Fold Place .................................... 83
2. Probation Law [P.D. 968, As Amended by
R.A. 10707] ................................................. 84
3. Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act (R.A.
9344, As Amended) .................................... 88
F. Extinction of Criminal Liabilities (As
Amended by R.A. No. 10592) .........................95
1. Total Extinction ..................................... 95
2. Partial Extinction.................................... 99
G. Civil Liabilities Arising from Criminal Cases
..........................................................................101
CRIMINAL LAW 2 ...................................... 107
A.
CRIMES
AGAINST
NATIONAL
SECURITY AND THE LAW OF NATIONS
[ARTS. 114-123] ................................................. 108
1. Chapter I: Crimes against National Security
..........................................................................108
a. Article 114 - Treason ........................ 108
b. Article 115 – Conspiracy and Proposal to
Commit Treason ....................................... 110
c. Article 116 – Misprision of Treason ... 110
d. Article 117 – Espionage ....................... 111
Espionage vs. Treason ............................. 111
SECTION 2. Provoking War and Disloyalty
in Case of War .......................................... 112
e. Article 118 – Inciting to War or Giving
Motives for Reprisals................................ 112
f. Article 119 - Violation of Neutrality.... 112
g. Article 120 – Correspondence with
Hostile Country ........................................ 112
h. Article 121 – Flight to Enemy’s Country
.................................................................... 112
i. Article 122 – Piracy in General and Mutiny
on the High Seas or in Philippine Waters
.................................................................... 113
j. Article 123 – Qualified Piracy............... 114
B. CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL
LAW OF THE STATE [ARTS. 124 - 133] ..... 115
1. Chapter I: Arbitrary Detention or Expulsion,
Violation
of
Dwelling,
Prohibition,
Interruption, and Dissolution of Peaceful
Meetings and Crimes Against Religious
Worship .......................................................... 115
SECTION 1 – Arbitrary Detention or
Expulsion .................................................. 115
a. Article 124 - Arbitrary Detention ........ 115
b. Article 125 - Delay in the Delivery of
Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial
Authorities................................................. 115
c. Article 126 - Delaying Release ............. 116
d. Article 127 – Expulsion ....................... 116
e. Article 128 – Violation of Domicile.... 117
f. Article 129 - Search Warrants Maliciously
Obtained and Abuse in the Service of those
Legally Obtained ....................................... 118
g. Article 130 - Searching Domicile Without
Witnesses ................................................... 119
Crimes under Section Two - Violation of
Domicile, Distinguished................................ 119
SECTION 3 – Prohibition, Interruption and
Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings ........... 119
h. Article 131 - Prohibition, Interruption and
Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings ........... 119
SECTION 4 - Crimes Against Religious
Worship ..................................................... 120
i. Article 132 - Interruption of Religious
Worship ..................................................... 120
j. Article 133 - Offending the Religious
Feelings ...................................................... 120
C. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
[ARTS. 134 - 160] ............................................... 121
1. Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup d’etat, Sedition,
and Disloyalty................................................. 121
a. Article 134 - Rebellion or Insurrection121
b. Article 134-A - Coup d’État ................ 122
c. Art 135 - Penalty for Rebellion,
Insurrection or Coup d’état ..................... 122
d. Article 136 - Conspiracy and Proposal to
Commit Coup d’état, Rebellion or
Insurrection............................................... 123
e. Article 137 - Disloyalty of Public Officers
or Employees ............................................ 123
f. Article 138 - Inciting to Rebellion or
Insurrection............................................... 123
g. Article 139 – Sedition........................... 124
h. Art. 140 - Penalty for sedition ............. 125
i. Article 141 - Conspiracy to Commit
Sedition...................................................... 125
j. Article 142 - Inciting to Sedition.......... 125
2. Chapter II: Crimes against Popular
Representation ................................................126
SECTION 1. Crimes against Legislative
Bodies and Similar Bodies ....................... 126
a. Article 143 - Acts Tending to Prevent the
Meeting of the Assembly and Similar Bodies
.................................................................... 126
b. Article 144 - Disturbance of Proceedings
.................................................................... 126
SECTION 2. Violation of Parliamentary
Immunity ................................................... 127
c. Article 145 - Violation of Parliamentary
Immunity ................................................... 127
3. Chapter III: Illegal Assemblies and
Associations ....................................................128
a. Article 146 - Illegal Assemblies ........... 128
b. Article 147 - Illegal Associations......... 128
4. Chapter IV: Assault upon, and Resistance and
Disobedience to Persons in Authority and Their
Agents..............................................................129
a. Article 148 - Direct Assaults ................ 129
b. Article 149 - Indirect Assaults ............. 130
c. Article 150 - Disobedience to summons
issued by the National Assembly, its
Committees or Subcommittees, or divisions
.................................................................... 130
d. Article 151 - Resistance and Disobedience
to a Person in Authority or the Agents of
Such Person .............................................. 130
e. Article 152 - Persons in authority and
agents of persons in authority ................. 131
5. Chapter V: Public Disorders .....................131
a. Article 153 - Tumults and Other
Disturbances of Public Order Acts
Punishable: [SIODB] ............................... 131
b. Article 154 - Unlawful Use of Means of
Publication and Unlawful Utterances ..... 132
c. Article 155 - Alarms and Scandals ...... 132
d. Article 156 - Delivering Prisoners from Jail
.................................................................... 132
6. Chapter VI: Evasion of Service of Sentence
..........................................................................133
Evasion of Service of Sentence vs. Evasion
of Service of Sentence on the Occasion of
Calamities vs. Other Cases of Evasion ... 133
a. Article 157 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence .................................................... 134
b. Article 158 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence on the Occasion of Disorders,
Conflagrations, Earthquakes, or Other
Calamities .................................................. 134
c. Article 159 - Other Cases of Evasion of
Service of Sentence................................... 134
7. Chapter VII: Commission of Another Crime
During Service of Penalty Imposed for Another
Previous Offense ........................................... 135
a. Article 160 - Commission of another crime
during service of penalty imposed for
another previous offense - Penalty ......... 135
D. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST
[ARTS. 161 - 187] ............................................... 137
1. Chapter I: Forgeries................................... 137
SECTION 1. Forging The Seal of The
Government of The Philippine Islands, the
Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive
.................................................................... 137
1. Acts of Counterfeiting ......................... 137
a. Article 161 – Counterfeiting the Great Seal
of the Government of the Philippine Islands,
Forging the Signature or Stamp of the Chief
Executive ................................................... 137
b. Article 162 – Using Forged Signature or
Counterfeit Seal or Stamp ........................ 137
SECTION 2. Counterfeiting Coins ........ 137
c. Article 163 – Making and Importing and
Uttering False Coins ................................. 137
d. Article 164 – Mutilation of Coins ....... 137
e. Article 165 – Selling of False or Mutilated
Coin, without Connivance ....................... 138
SECTION 3. Forging Treasury or Bank
Notes, Obligations and Securities; Importing
and Uttering False or Forged Notes,
Obligations and Securities........................ 139
f. Article 166 – Forging Treasury or Bank
Notes or Other Documents Payable to
Bearer; Importing and Uttering Such False
or Forged Notes and Documents ........... 139
g. Article 167 – Counterfeiting, Importing,
and Uttering Instruments Not Payable to
Bearer ......................................................... 139
2. Acts of Forgery ..................................... 139
h. Article 168 – Illegal Possession and Use of
False Treasury or Bank Notes and Other
Instruments of Credit ............................... 139
i. Article 169 – How Forgery is Committed
.................................................................... 140
Section 4. Falsification of Legislative, Public,
Commercial, and Private Documents and
Wireless, Telegraph and Telephone Messages
......................................................................... 140
3. Acts of Falsification.............................. 140
j. Article 170 – Falsification of Legislative
Documents ................................................ 140
k. Article 171 – Falsification by Public
Officer, Employee or Notary or
Ecclesiastical Minister .............................. 140
l. Article 172 – Falsification by Private
Individual and Use of Falsified Documents
.................................................................... 142
m. Article 173 – Falsification of Wireless,
Cable, Telegraph and Telephone Messages,
and Use of Said Falsified Messages......... 145
SECTION 5. Falsification of Medical
Certificates, Certificates of Merit Or Service
and The Like ............................................. 145
n. Article 174 – False Medical Certificates,
False Certificates of Merits of Service, Etc.
.................................................................... 145
o. Article 175 – Using False Certificates. 145
SECTION 6. Manufacturing, Importing
And Possession of Instruments or
Implements Intended for the Commission
of Falsification .......................................... 146
p. Article 176 – Manufacturing and
Possession of Instruments or Implements
for Falsification ......................................... 146
2. Chapter II: Other Falsities .........................146
SECTION 1. Usurpation of Authority,
Rank, Title, and Improper Use of Names,
Uniforms and Insignia ............................. 146
a. Article 177 – Usurpation of Authority or
Official Functions..................................... 146
b. Article 178 – Using Fictitious and
Concealing True Name ............................ 146
c. Article 179 – Illegal Use of Uniforms and
Insignia ...................................................... 147
SECTION 2. False Testimony ................ 147
d. Article 180 – False Testimony Against a
Defendant ................................................. 147
e. Article 181 – False Testimony Favorable
to the Defendant ...................................... 148
f. Article 182 – False Testimony in Civil
Cases .......................................................... 148
g. Article 183 – False Testimony in Other
Cases and Perjury in Solemn Affirmation
.................................................................... 148
h. Article 184 – Offering False Testimony in
Evidence.................................................... 149
3. Chapter III: Frauds ....................................149
SECTION 1. Machinations, Monopolies
and Combinations .................................... 149
a. Article 185 – Machinations in Public
Auctions .................................................... 149
b. [REPEALED] Article 186 – Monopolies
and Combinations in Restraint of Trade 149
SECTION 2. Frauds in Commerce and
Industry ..................................................... 149
c. Article 187 – Importation and Disposition
of Falsely Marked Articles or Merchandise
Made of Gold, Silver, or other Precious
Metals or their Alloys ............................... 149
[REPEALED] d. Article 188 – Substituting
and Altering Trade-marks and Trade-names
.................................................................... 150
[REPEALED] e. Article 189 – Unfair
Competition and Fraudulent Registration of
Trade-mark or Trade-name. .................... 150
[REPEALED] - CRIMES RELATIVE TO
OPIUM AND OTHER PROHIBITED DRUGS
.............................................................................. 150
F. CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS
[ARTS. 194 - 202] ............................................... 151
1. Chapter I: Gambling and Betting ............. 151
a. PD. 1602 (Anti-Gambling Law) as amended
by RA 9287 [Anti-Illegal Numbers Games Law]
......................................................................... 151
f. Article 199 – Illegal Cockfighting
[amended by PD 449]............................... 151
b. RA 9287: INCREASING THE PENALTY
FOR ILLEGAL NUMBERS GAMES ....... 152
Illegal Numbers Game ............................. 152
c. Article 196 – Importation, Sale and
Possession of Lottery Tickets and
Advertisements ......................................... 153
d. Article 197 – Betting in Sports Contests
(Repealed by PD 483) .............................. 153
PD 483 - PENALIZING BETTING,
GAME FIXING OR POINT-SHAVING
AND MACHINATIONS IN SPORT
CONTESTS.............................................. 153
e. Article 198 – Illegal Betting On Horse
Races [Repealed by Act. 309, as amended by
RA 983]...................................................... 153
f. Article 199 – Illegal Cockfighting
[amended by PD 449]............................... 154
2. Chapter II: Offenses Against Decency and
Good Customs............................................... 155
a. Article 200 – Grave Scandal ................ 155
b. Article 201 – Immoral Doctrines,
Obscene Publications and Exhibitions and
Indecent Shows (as amended by PD 960 and
969) ............................................................ 155
c. Article 202 – Vagrants and Prostitutes (as
amended by RA 10158) ............................ 156
G. CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC
OFFICERS [ARTS. 203 - 245] ......................... 158
1. Chapter I: Preliminary Provisions ............ 158
a. Article 203 – Who Are Public Officers
.................................................................... 158
2. Chapter II: Malfeasance and Misfeasance in
Office .............................................................. 158
SECTION 1. Dereliction of Duty .......... 158
a. Article 204 – Knowingly Rendering Unjust
Judgment; and ........................................... 158
b. Article 205 – Judgment Rendered
Through Negligence ................................. 158
c. Article 206 – Unjust Interlocutory Order
.................................................................... 159
d. Article 207 – Malicious Delay in the
Administration of Justice ......................... 159
Elements [JP-DeM]: ................................. 159
e. Article 208 – Prosecution of Offenses;
Negligence and Tolerance ....................... 160
f. Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by an
Attorney or a Solicitor – Revelation of
Secrets........................................................ 160
SECTION 2. Bribery ............................... 162
g. Article 210 – Direct Bribery ................ 162
h. Article 211 – Indirect Bribery ............. 164
i. Article 211-A – Qualified Bribery ........ 164
j. Article 212 – Corruption of Public
Officials ..................................................... 165
3. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal Exactions and
Transactions ....................................................166
a. Article 213 – Fraud Against the Public
Treasury and Similar Offenses ................ 166
b. Article 214 – Other Frauds ................. 168
c. Art. 215 – Prohibited Transactions..... 168
d. Article 216 – Possession of Prohibited
Interest by a Public Officer ..................... 168
4. Chapter IV: Malversation of Public Funds or
Property ...........................................................168
a. Article 217 – Malversation of Public Funds
or Property - Presumption of Malversation
.................................................................... 168
b. Article 218 – Failure of Accountable
Officer to Render Accounts .................... 170
c. Article 219 – Failure of a Responsible
Public Officer to Render Accounts Before
Leaving the Country................................. 171
d. Article 220 – Illegal Use of Public Funds
or Property ................................................ 171
e. Article 221 - Failure to Make Delivery of
Public Funds or Property......................... 171
f. Article 222 – Officers Included in the
Preceding Provisions ................................ 172
5. Chapter V: Infidelity of Public Officers ....... 172
SECTION 1. Infidelity in the Custody Of
Prisoners.................................................... 172
a. Article 223 – Conniving With or
Consenting to Evasion............................. 172
b. Article 224 – Evasion through Negligence
.................................................................... 173
c. Article 225 – Escape of Prisoner under the
Custody of a Person Not a Public Officer
.................................................................... 173
SECTION 2. Infidelity in the Custody Of
Documents................................................ 173
d. Article 226 – Removal, Concealment, or
Destruction of Documents...................... 173
e. Article 227 – Officer Breaking Seal .... 174
f. Article 228 – Opening of Closed
Documents................................................ 174
g. Article 229 – Revelation of Secrets by an
Officer ....................................................... 175
h. Article 230 – Public Officers Revealing
Secrets of Private Individuals .................. 175
6. Chapter VI: Other Offenses or Irregularities by
Public Officers .................................................... 176
SECTION 1. Disobedience, Refusal of
Assistance, and Maltreatment Of Prisoners
.................................................................... 176
a. Article 231 – Open Disobedience ....... 176
b. Article 232 – Disobedience to the Order
of Superior Officer When Said Order Was
Suspended by Inferior Officer................. 176
c. Article 233 – Refusal of Assistance ..... 176
d. Article 234 – Refusal to Discharge
Elective Office .......................................... 176
e. Article 235 – Maltreatment of Prisoners
.................................................................... 176
SECTION 2. Anticipation, Prolongation,
and Abandonment of the Duties and Powers
of Public Office ........................................ 178
f. Article 236 – Anticipation of Duties of a
Public Officer............................................ 178
g. Article 237 – Prolonging Performance of
Duties and Powers.................................... 178
h. Article 238 – Abandonment of Office or
Position...................................................... 178
SECTION 3. Usurpation of Powers and
Unlawful Appointments........................... 179
i. Article 239 – Usurpation of Legislative
Powers ....................................................... 179
j. Article 240 – Usurpation of Executive
Functions................................................... 179
k. Article 241 – Usurpation of Judicial
Functions................................................... 179
l. Article 242 – Disobeying Request for
Disqualification ......................................... 179
m. Article 243 – Orders or Request by
Executive Officer to Any Judicial Authority
.................................................................... 180
n. Article 244 – Unlawful Appointments 180
o. Article 245 – Abuses Against Chastity 180
H. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS [ARTS. 246 266-D].................................................................. 182
1. Chapter I: Destruction of Life.................. 182
SECTION 1. Parricide, Murder, Homicide
.................................................................... 182
a. Article 246 – Parricide .......................... 182
b. Article 247 – Death or Physical Injuries
Under Exceptional Circumstances .......... 182
c. Article 248 – Murder ............................ 183
d. Article 249 – Homicide........................ 184
e. Article 250 - Penalty for Frustrated
Parricide, Murder or Homicide ............... 184
f. Article 251 - Death Caused in Tumultuous
Affray ......................................................... 185
g. Article 252 - Physical Injuries Caused in
Tumultuous Affray ................................... 185
h. Article 253 - Giving Assistance to Suicide
.................................................................... 185
i. Article 254 - Discharge of Firearms..... 186
If Offended Party is Hit and Wounded .. 186
SECTION 2. Infanticide and Abortion . 186
j. Article 255 – Infanticide ....................... 187
k. Article 256 - Intentional Abortion ...... 187
l. Article 257 - Unintentional Abortion .. 188
m. Article 258 - Abortion Practiced by the
Woman Herself or by Parents ................. 188
n. Article 259 - Abortion by a Physician or
Midwife and Dispensing of Abortives.... 189
SECTION 3. Duel ................................... 189
o. Article 260 - Responsibility of Participants
in a Duel .................................................... 189
p. Article 261 - Challenging to a Duel .... 190
2. Chapter II: Physical Injuries ......................190
a. Article 262 – Mutilation ....................... 190
b. Article 263 - Serious Physical Injuries 190
c. Article 264 - Administering Injurious
Substances or Beverages .......................... 192
d. Article 265 - Less Serious Physical Injuries
.................................................................... 192
e. Article 266 - Slight Physical Injuries and
Maltreatment ............................................. 192
3. Chapter III : Rape ......................................193
a. Article 266 - A – Rape (as amended by RA
8353) .......................................................... 193
b. Article 266 - B – Qualified Rape......... 197
c. Art. 266 - C - Effect of Pardon ........... 198
d. Art. 266 - D - Presumptions ............... 198
I. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONAL LIBERTY
AND SECURITY [ARTS. 267 - 292] .............. 199
1. Chapter I: Crimes Against Liberty ............199
SECTION 1. Illegal Detention ............... 199
a. Article 267 - Kidnapping and Serious
Illegal Detention ....................................... 199
b. Article 268 - Slight Illegal Detention .. 200
c. Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest .............. 201
SECTION 2. Kidnapping of Minors ..... 201
d. Article 270 - Kidnapping and Failure to
Return a Minor ......................................... 201
e. Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to Abandon
His Home .................................................. 202
SECTION 3. Slavery and Servitude ....... 202
f. Article 272 – Slavery ............................. 202
g. Article 273 - Exploitation of Child Labor
.................................................................... 202
h. Article 274 - Services Rendered Under
Compulsion in Payment of Debt ............ 203
2. Chapter II: Crimes Against Security .........204
SECTION 1. Abandonment of Helpless
Persons and Exploitation of Minors....... 204
a. Article 275 - Abandonment of Persons in
Danger and Abandonment of Own Victim
.................................................................... 204
b. Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor...... 204
c. Article 277 - Abandonment of Minor by
Person
Entrusted
With
Custody;
Indifference of Parents ............................ 204
d. Article 278 - Exploitation of Minors .. 205
Summary of Ages of Minors .........................207
e. Article 279 – Additional Penalties for
Other Offenses ......................................... 208
SECTION 2. Trespass to Dwelling ........ 208
f. Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to
Dwelling .................................................... 208
g. Article 281 - Other Forms of Trespass
.................................................................... 209
SECTION 3. Threats and Coercion ....... 209
h. Article 282 - Grave Threats ................. 209
Third Type of Grave Threats .................. 210
i. Article 283 - Light Threats.................... 210
j. Article 284 - Bond for Good Behavior 211
k. Article 285 – Other Light Threats ...... 211
l. Article 286 - Grave Coercions .............. 211
m. Article 287 - Light Coercions ............. 212
n. Article 288 - Other Similar Coercions 213
o. Article 289 - Formation, Maintenance, and
Prohibition of Combination of Capital or
Labor through Violence or Threats (repealed
by Labor Code) place labor code provision
which repealed .......................................... 213
3. Chapter III: Discovery and Revelation of
Secrets ............................................................. 214
a. Article 290 - Discovering Secrets through
Seizure of Correspondence...................... 214
b. Article 291 - Revealing Secrets with Abuse
of Office .................................................... 214
c. Article 292 - Revelation of Industrial
Secrets ........................................................ 215
J. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY [ARTS. 293 332] ...................................................................... 216
1. Chapter I: Robbery in General ................. 216
a. Article 293 – Who Are Guilty of Robbery
.................................................................... 216
SECTION 1. Robbery with Violence
Against or Intimidation of Persons......... 217
b. Article 294 – Robbery with Violence or
Intimidation of Persons ........................... 217
c. Art. 295 – Robbery with Physical Injuries
Committed in an Uninhabited Place and by
a Band or With the Use of a Firearm on a
Street, Road or Alley ................................ 221
d. Art. 296 – Definition of a Band and
Penalty Incurred by the Members thereof
.................................................................... 221
e. Article 297 – Attempted and Frustrated
Robbery Committed under Circumstances
.................................................................... 222
f. Article 298 – Execution of Deeds by
Means of Violence or Intimidation ......... 222
SECTION 2. Robbery By the Use of Force
Upon Things ............................................. 222
g. Article 299 – Robbery in an Inhabited
House/Public Building or Edifice Devoted
to Worship ................................................ 223
h. Article 300 – Robbery in an Uninhabited
Place and by a Band.................................. 224
i. Article 301 – What is an Inhabited House,
Public Building or Building Dedicated to
Religious Worship and Their Dependencies
.................................................................... 224
j. Article 302 – Robbery in an Uninhabited
Place or in a Private Building .................. 224
k. Article 303 – Robbery of Cereals, Fruits,
or Firewood in an Uninhabited Place or
Private Building ........................................ 225
l. Article 304 – Possession of Picklocks or
Similar Tools ............................................. 225
m. Article 305 – False Keys ..................... 225
2. Chapter II: Brigandage ................................... 226
PD 532: Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway
Robbery Law of 1974.....................................226
a. Article 306 – Brigandage ...................... 226
b. Article 307 – Aiding and Abetting a Band
of Brigands ................................................ 227
3. Chapter III: Theft.......................................227
a. Article 308 – Who are Liable for Theft
.................................................................... 227
b. Article 309 – Penalties ......................... 228
c. Article 310 – Qualified Theft .............. 229
d. Article 311 – Theft of Property of the
National Library and National Museum. 230
4. Chapter IV: Usurpation .............................230
a. Article 312 – Occupation of Real Property
or Usurpation of Real Rights in Property
.................................................................... 230
b. Article 313 – Altering Boundaries or
Landmarks................................................. 231
5. Chapter V: Culpable Insolvency ...............231
a. Article 314 – Fraudulent Insolvency ... 231
6. Chapter VI: Swindling and Other Deceits
..........................................................................231
a. Article 315 – Swindling or Estafa........ 231
c. Article 317 – Swindling a Minor.......... 239
d. Article 318 – Other Deceits ................ 240
Chapter VII: Chattel Mortgage .....................240
a. Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or Pledge of
Mortgaged Property ................................. 240
Chapter VIII : Arson and Other Crimes
Involving Destruction ....................................240
a. Articles 320-326B (Initially repealed by PD
1613, but reinstated partially by P.D. 1744
and further amended by RA 7659) ......... 240
Arson under PD 1613, as Terrorism ...... 242
Chapter IX – Malicious Mischief ..................242
a. Art. 327 - Who are Liable for Malicious
Mischief ..................................................... 242
b. Art. 328 - Special Cases of Malicious
Mischief [OP- CM]................................... 243
c. Art. 329 – Other Mischiefs .................. 243
d. Art. 330 – Damage and Obstruction to
Means of Communication ....................... 243
e. Art. 331 – Destroying or Damaging
Statues, Public Monuments or Paintings 244
10. Chapter X – Exemption from Criminal
Liability Against Property ..............................244
a. Art. 332 – Persons Exempt from Criminal
Liability ...................................................... 244
K. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY [ARTS. 333
- 346] .................................................................... 245
1. Chapter I – Adultery and Concubinage... 245
a. Article 333 – Adultery .......................... 245
b. Article 334 – Concubinage .................. 246
Chapter II – Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness
......................................................................... 247
a. Article 335 – When and How Rape is
Committed (repealed by RA No. 8353) .. 247
b. Article 336 - Acts of Lasciviousness ... 247
3. Chapter III – Seduction, Corruption of
Minors and White Slave Trade ..................... 248
a. Article 337 - Qualified Seduction ........ 248
b. Article 338 - Simple Seduction ............ 250
c. Article 339 - Acts of Lasciviousness with
the Consent of the Offended Party ........ 251
d. Article 340 - Corruption of Minors (as
amended by BP Blg. 92) ........................... 251
e. Article 341 - White Slave Trade........... 252
4. Chapter IV - Abduction........................... 252
a. Article 342 - Forcible Abduction......... 252
b. Article 343 - Consented Abduction .... 253
5. Chapter V: Provisions Relating to the
Preceding Chapters of Title 11 ..................... 254
a. Article 344 - Prosecution of Private
Offenses .................................................... 254
b. Article 345: Civil Liability of Persons
Guilty of Crimes Against Chastity .......... 255
c. Article 346 – Liability of Ascendants,
Guardians, Teachers and Other Persons
Entrusted with the Custody of the Offended
Party ........................................................... 255
L. CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF
PERSONS [ARTS. 347 - 352] ........................... 256
1. Chapter I: Simulation of Births and
Usurpation of Civil Status............................. 256
a. Article 347 - Simulation of Births,
Substitution of One Child for Another, and
Concealment or Abandonment of a
Legitimate Child........................................ 256
b. Article 348 - Usurpation of Civil Status
.................................................................... 256
2. Chapter II: Illegal Marriages ..................... 257
a. Article 349 – Bigamy ............................ 257
Elements [LeNSEs]: ................................. 257
b. Article 350 - Marriage Contracted against
Provisions of Laws ................................... 258
c. Article 351 - Premature Marriage
(Repealed by RA No. 10655) ................... 258
d. Article 352 - Performance of Illegal
Marriage Ceremony .................................. 258
M. CRIMES AGAINST HONOR [ARTS. 353 364] ...................................................................... 260
1. Chapter I – Libel ....................................... 260
SECTION 1. Definition, Forms, And
Punishment of This Crime ...................... 260
a. Article 353 - Libel ................................. 260
b. Art. 354 – Requirement of Publicity... 261
c. Art. 355 – Libel by Means of Writings or
Similar Means ............................................ 263
d. Art. 356 – Threatening to Publish and
Offer to Prevent such Publication for a
Compensation ........................................... 264
e. Art. 357 – Prohibited Publication of Acts
Referred to in the Course of Official
Proceedings ............................................... 264
f. Art. 358 – Slander ................................. 265
g. Art. 359 – Slander by Deed ................. 265
SECTION 2. General Provisions ........... 266
h. Art. 360 – Persons Responsible for Libel
.................................................................... 266
i. Art. 361 – Proof of Truth ..................... 267
j. Art. 362 – Libelous Remarks ................ 268
2. Chapter II – Incriminatory Machinations 268
a. Art. 363 – Incriminating Innocent Persons
.................................................................... 268
b. Art. 364 – Intriguing Against Honor .. 268
N. QUASI-OFFENSES .................................... 270
a. Art. 365 – Criminal Negligence ........... 270
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS ............................ 272
I.
ANTI-CHILD PORNOGRAPHY ACT
OF 2009 [SECS. 3 (A-C), 4 AND 5, R.A. 9775]
273
Acts penalized by R.A. 9775 ..........................273
Definition of Child .........................................273
Explicit Sexual activity ...................................273
II. ANTI-FENCING LAW OF 1979 [SECS. 2 TO
6, P.D. 1612] ....................................................... 274
Fencing ............................................................274
Fence ......................................................... 274
Liability of Officials of Juridical Persons......274
Presumption of Fencing ................................274
Fencing v. Theft .............................................275
III.
ANTI-GRAFT
AND
CORRUPT
PRACTICES ACT [R.A. 3019, AS AMENDED
BY R.A. 3047, P.D. 677, P.D. 1288, B.P. BLG. 195
AND R.A. 10910]............................................... 276
OFFENDERS COVERED BY R.A. 3019 .276
CORRUPT PRACTICES PENALIZED ....276
IV. ANTI-HAZING ACT OF 2018 [R.A. 8049,
AS AMENDED BY R.A. 11053] ..................... 281
Hazing .............................................................281
Prohibition on Hazing. ..................................281
V. ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING ACT OF
2001 [R.A. 9160] ................................................. 283
Money Laundering Offense...........................283
Predicate Crimes / “Unlawful Activities” ....283
Jurisdiction of Money Laundering Cases .....284
Covered Persons [Sec 3 (a), R.A. 9160] ........285
Penalties...........................................................287
VI.
ANTI-PHOTO
AND
VIDEO
VOYEURISM ACT OF 2009 [SECS. 3 AND 4,
R.A. 9995] ........................................................... 289
VII. ANTI-PLUNDER ACT [SECS. 1, 2 AND 6,
R.A. 7080, AS AMENDED BY R.A. 7659] .... 291
VIII. ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009 [SECS. 3
(A,B), 4 AND 5, R.A. 9745] .............................. 293
IX. ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS ACT
OF 2003 [SECS. 3 TO 12, R.A. 9208] .............. 295
X. ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF 2004 [SECS.
3, 5 AND 26, R.A. 9262] ................................... 301
XI. ANTI-WIRE TAPPING ACT [SECS. 1 TO 4,
R.A. 4200]............................................................ 305
XII. BOUNCING CHECKS LAW [B.P. BLG.
22] ........................................................................ 307
XIII. COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS
DRUGS ACT OF 2002 [R.A. 9165 AS
AMENDED BY R.A. 10640] ........................... 309
XIV. CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT OF
2012 [R.A. 10175] ............................................... 316
PUNISHABLE ACTS .................................. 316
XV. NEW ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT OF 2016
[SECS. 3 TO 4, R.A. 10883] .............................. 320
XVI.
SPECIAL
PROTECTION
OF
CHILDREN
AGAINST
ABUSE,
EXPLOITATION, AND DISCRIMINATION
ACT [SECS. 3 (A), 5 AND 10, R.A. 7610] ...... 321
XVII. SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE [P.D.
NO. 1689] ........................................................... 325
CRIMINAL LAW I
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
A. Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita
Mala in Se
(“Evil in
Itself”
Definition
A crime or an
act that is
inherently
immoral, such
as murder,
arson, or rape
[Black’s Law
Dictionary, 9th
ed.].
General
Rule: RPC
As to
Laws
Violated
As to Use
of Good
Faith as a
Defense
Exception: A
crime is mala
in se, even if
punishable
under a
special law,
when the acts
are inherently
immoral (e.g.,
plunder)
[Estrada v.
Sandiganbaya
n, G.R. No.
148560
(2001)].
Valid defense
Mala
Prohibita
(“Prohibited
Evil”)
An act that is
considered a
crime
because it is
prohibited by
statute,
although the
act itself is
not
necessarily
immoral
[Black’s Law
Dictionary,
9th ed.].
Special Laws
As to
Criminal
Intent as
an
Element
As to
Degree of
Accomplishment
As to
Effect of
Mitigating
and
Aggravating
Circumstances
General
Rule: Not a
valid defense
Exceptions:
1. Civilian
guards acting
in good faith
in carrying
firearms with
no intention
of committing
an offense
were able to
claim lack of
As to
Degree of
Participation
Criminal intent
is necessary.
Taken into
account in
determining
the penalty to
be imposed.
Taken into
account in
determining
the imposable
penalty.
Degree of
participation
of each
offender is
taken into
account.
*Presuppo
ses more
than one
(1)
offender
As to
Persons
Criminally
Liable
Principal,
accomplice &
accessory.
Penalty is
computed
based
Page 2 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
intent as a
defense.
2. Accused
has a
pending
application
for
permanent
permit to
possess a
firearm
[People v.
Mallari, G.R.
No. L-58886
(1988)].
Criminal
intent is not
necessary.
Not taken
into account;
the act is
punishable
only when
consummated.
Not taken
into account
in
determining
the
imposable
penalty,
unless
provided for
by special
law.
Degree of
participation
of each
offender is
not taken into
account and
all who
participated
in the act are
punished to
the same
extent.
Only the
principal is
liable.
Penalty of
offenders is
CRIM1
As to
Stages of
Execution
As to
Division
of
Penalties
CRIMINAL LAW
whether he is
a principal
offender or
merely an
accomplice or
accessory.
same
whether they
acted as
mere
accompli-ces
or accessories.
There are
three stages:
attempted,
frustrated &
consummated.
Penalties may
be divided
into degrees
and periods.
No stages of
execution.
There is no
such division
of penalties.
B. Applicability and Effectivity of the
RPC
1. Generality
General Rule:
Penal laws are obligatory on all persons who
live or sojourn in Philippine territory, regardless
of nationality, gender, or other personal
circumstances, subject to the principles of
public international law and to treaty
stipulations [Art. 14, NCC].
Exceptions:
a. Treaty Stipulations
b. Laws of Preferential Application
c. Principles of Public International Law
d. Warship Rule
a. Treaty Stipulations [Arts. 2 and 14,
NCC]
The Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) signed
on Feb. 10, 1988 is an agreement between the
Philippine and US Government regarding the
treatment of US Armed Forces visiting the
Philippines.
Rules on Jurisdiction under the VFA
Crime
Jurisdiction
Crime is
Philippines has
punishable under
exclusive
Philippine laws, but jurisdiction.
not under US laws.
Crime is
US has exclusive
punishable under
jurisdiction.
US laws, but not
under Philippine
laws.
Crime is
punishable under
both US and
Philippine laws.
Philippines has
primary but
concurrent
jurisdiction with the
US.
Rules on Concurrent Jurisdiction [Art. V (3),
VFA]
General Rule: Philippine authorities shall have
the primary right to exercise jurisdiction over
offenses committed by United States
personnel.
Exceptions:
a. If the offense was committed solely
against the property or security of the
United States.
b. If the offense was solely against the
property or person of United States
personnel.
c. If the offense arose out of any act or
omission done in performance of
official duty.
Note: The authorities of the Philippines and the
United States shall notify each other of the
disposition of all cases in which both the
authorities of the Philippines and the United
States have the right to exercise jurisdiction.
Offenses Relating to Security for purposes
of the VFA [Art. V (2)(c), VFA]
a. Treason
b. Sabotage
c. Espionage
d. Violation of any law relating to national
defense
Waiver of Jurisdiction
The authorities of either government may
request the authorities of the other government
to waive their primary right to exercise
jurisdiction in a particular case.
General Rule: Philippine authorities will, upon
request by the United States, waive their
primary right to exercise jurisdiction.
Exceptions: In cases of particular importance
to the Philippines, for example, crimes
punishable under:
a. R.A. 7659 (Heinous crimes)
b. R.A. 7610 (Child Abuse cases)
c. R.A. 9165 (Dangerous Drugs cases)
Page 3 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Laws of Preferential Application [Art.
2, NCC]
RA No. 75 penalizes acts which would impair
the proper observance by the Republic and
inhabitants of the Philippines of the immunities,
rights, and privileges of duly accredited foreign
diplomatic representatives in the Philippines.
Rules on Jurisdiction [Secs. 4 to 5, R.A. 75]
General Rule: The following persons are
exempt from arrest and imprisonment, and
their properties exempt from distraint, seizure
and attachment [AMS]:
a. Ambassadors
b. Public Ministers
c. Domestic Servants of ambassadors or
ministers
Exceptions: If the writ or process sued out or
prosecuted is [PhDs]:
a. Against a person who is a citizen or
inhabitant of the Philippines,
provided:
i. The person is in the service of
an ambassador or a public
minister; and
ii. Process is founded upon a
debt contracted before he
entered upon such service.
b. Against the Domestic Servant of an
ambassador or a public minister,
provided:
i. The name of the servant has
been
registered
in
the
Department of Foreign Affairs
(DFA), and transmitted by the
Secretary of Foreign Affairs to
the Chief of Police of the City of
Manila; but
ii. The registration was only made
after the writ or process has
been issued or commenced.
Note: R.A. No. 75 is not applicable when the
foreign country adversely affected does not
provide similar protection to our diplomatic
representatives [Sec. 7, R.A. No. 75].
c. Principles of Public International Law
Who are Exempt [SCAMMP]
a. Sovereigns and other heads of state
b. Charges d’ affaires
c. Ambassadors
d. Ministers
e. Minister resident
f.
Plenipotentiary [Art. 14, Vienna
Convention on Diplomatic Relations]
Who are Not Exempt [CVC]
a. Consuls
b. Vice-consuls
c. Other Commercial representatives of
foreign nations who do not possess
such status and cannot claim the
privileges and immunities accorded to
ambassadors and ministers [Sec. 249,
Wheaton, International Law].
Condition for Immunity to Apply
Diplomatic immunity only applies when the
diplomatic officer is engaged in the
performance of his official functions [Minucher
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142396 (2003)].
d. Warship Rule
A warship of another country, even though
docked in the Philippines, is considered an
extension of the territory of its respective
country [Art. 27, United Nations Convention on
the Laws of the Sea].
2. Territoriality
General Rule:
Penal laws of the country have force and effect
only within its territory. It cannot penalize
crimes committed outside its territory.
Scope of Territory
The territory of the country is not limited to the
land where its sovereignty resides but includes
also its maritime and interior waters as well as
its atmosphere [Art. 2, RPC].
Theory on Aerial Jurisdiction – Absolute
Theory
The subjacent state has complete jurisdiction
over the atmosphere above it subject only to
the innocent passage by aircraft of a foreign
country.
If the crime is committed in an aircraft, no
matter how high, as long as it is within the
Philippine atmosphere, Philippine criminal law
will govern. The Philippines has complete and
exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above
its territory [Art. 1, Convention on International
Civil Aviation].
Page 4 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Exceptions [SCIONS] [Art. 2, RPC]:
a. Crimes committed while on a Philippine
Ship or airship
b. Forging/Counterfeiting of Coins or
Currency Notes in the Philippines
c. Introduction of #2 into the country
d. Offenses committed by public officers
or employees in the exercise of their
functions
e. Crimes against National Security and
the law of nations, defined in Title One
of Book Two of this Code
b. Forging/Counterfeiting of Coins or
Currency Notes in the Philippines [Art.
2 (2), RPC]
a. Crimes
committed
aboard
a
Philippine ship or airship [Art. 2 (1),
RPC]
c. Introduction of Forged/Counterfeited
Obligations and Securities in the
Country [Art. 2 (3), RPC]
Requisites:
a. Crime is committed while the ship is
treading in:
i. Philippine
waters
(intraterritorial), or
ii. The high seas (extraterritorial).
b. The ship or airship must not be within
the territorial jurisdiction of another
country.
c. The ship or airship must be registered
in the Philippines under Philippine laws
[US v. Fowler, G.R. No. 496 (1902)].
Those who introduced the counterfeit items are
criminally liable even if they were not the ones
who counterfeited the obligations and
securities. On the other hand, those who
counterfeited the items are criminally liable
even if they did not introduce the counterfeit
items.
Difference between jurisdiction of Merchant
Vessels and Foreign Warships Merchant
Vessels (applying English Rule)
Acts committed on a merchant vessel within
the territorial limits of the Philippines are
subject Philippine penal laws if they breach
public order [People v. Wong Cheng, G.R. No.
L-18924 (1922)] and local courts are not
deprived of jurisdiction over offenses on board
a merchant vessel if they disturb the order of
the country [US v. Bull, G.R. No. L-5270
(1910)].
Crimes committed in the exercise of their
functions
a. Direct bribery [Art. 210]
b. Qualified Bribery [Art. 211-A]
c. Indirect bribery [Art. 211]
d. Corruption [Art. 212]
e. Frauds against the public treasury [Art.
213]
f. Possession of prohibited interest [Art.
216]
g. Malversation of public funds or
property [Art. 217]
h. Failure to render accounts [Art. 218]
i. Illegal use of public funds or property
[Art. 220]
j. Failure to make delivery of public funds
or property [Art. 221]
k. Falsification by a public officer or
employee by abuse of his official
position [Art. 171]
l. Crimes committed in relation to the
performance of a public officer or
employee of his/her duties in a foreign
country.
Foreign Warships are reputed to be the
territory of the country to which they belong and
are not subject to the laws of another state [US
v. Fowler, G.R. No. L-496 (1902)].
• Nationality of Vessel – determined by
the country of registry and not its
ownership.
• Example: A Filipino-owned vessel
registered in China must fly the
Chinese flag.
Forgery
Committed by giving a treasury or bank note or
any instrument payable to bearer or to order
the appearance of a true genuine document or
by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting or
altering, by any means, the figures, letters,
words, or signs contained therein [Art. 169,
RPC].
d. When Public Officers or Employees
Commit an Offense in the Exercise of
their Functions [Art. 2 (4), RPC]
Page 5 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Embassy
Embassy grounds are considered as
extensions of the sovereignty of the country
occupying them [Minucher v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 142396 (1992)].
e. Crimes against National Security and
the Law of Nations [Art. 2 (5), RPC]
Crimes against national security
a. Treason [Art. 114]
b. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason [Art. 115]
c. Misprision of treason [Art. 116]
d. Espionage [Art. 117]
e. Terrorism [R.A. 9372]
Crimes against the law of nations
a. Inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals [Art.118]
b. Violation of neutrality [Art. 119]
c. Correspondence with hostile country
[Art. 120]
d. Flight to enemy’s country [Art.121]
e. Piracy in general and mutiny on the
high seas or in Philippine waters [Art.
122]
f. Terrorism [R.A. 9372]
Note: Crimes against public order (e.g.,
rebellion, coup d’etat, sedition) committed
abroad is under the jurisdiction of the host
country.
Human Security Act
Sec. 58: Subject to the provision of an existing
treaty of which the Philippines is a signatory
and to any contrary provision of any law of
preferential application, the provisions of this
Act shall apply to individuals who although
physically outside the territorial limits of
the Philippines [TSCG]:
a. Commit, conspire or plot to commit any
of the crimes defined and punished in
this Act inside the Territorial limits of
the Philippines;
b. Commit any of the said crimes on
board Philippine Ship or Philippine
airship;
c. Commit said crimes against Philippine
Citizens or persons of Philippines
descent, where their citizenship or
ethnicity was a factor in the
commission of the crime; and
d. Commit said crimes directly against the
Philippine Government. [Sec. 58, R.A.
No. 9372].
Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020
Repealed the Human Security Act of 2007.
Sec. 49 of the Anti-Terror Law now provides
that extraterritoriality shall apply to [OTSECG]:
a. Filipino Citizens or Nationals
Who commit any of the acts defined
and penalized under Sec. 4–12 of this
Act Outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the Philippines;
b. Individual
Persons,
although
physically outside the territorial
limits of the Philippines – who
commit any of the said crimes:
a. Inside the Territorial limits of
the Philippines;
b. On board Philippine Ship or
Philippine airship;
c. Within
any
Embassy,
consulate,
or
diplomatic
premises belonging to or
occupied by the Philippine
government in an official
capacity;
d. Against Philippine Citizens or
persons of Philippine descent,
where their citizenship or
ethnicity was a factor in the
commission of the crime; and
e. Directly against the Philippine
Government.
Specific Rule for Aliens:
If the individual who committed said crimes
outside the territorial limits of the Philippines is
neither a citizen nor a national, the Philippines
shall exercise jurisdiction only when such
individual enters or is inside the territory of the
Philippines.
In the absence of any request for extradition or
denial thereof, from the State where the crime
was committed or where such alien was a
citizen or national, the Anti-Terrorism Council
(ATC) shall refer the case to the:
a. Bureau of Immigration (BI) for
deportation; or
b. Department of Justice (DOJ) for
prosecution ...in the same manner as if
the act constituting the offense had
been committed in the Philippines
[Sec. 49, RA No. 11479].
Page 6 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Effects of Repeal:
3. Prospectivity
No felony shall be punishable by any penalty
not prescribed by law prior to its commission
[Art. 21, RPC].
Absolute/
Total Repeal
Nature of
Repeal
Without prejudice to Art. 22, felonies and
misdemeanors, committed prior to the
effectivity of the RPC, shall be punished in
accordance with the Code or Acts in force at
the time of their commission [Art. 366, RPC].
C. Interpretation of Penal Laws
Equipoise Doctrine
When the evidence of the prosecution and the
defense are equally balanced, the scale should
be tilted in favor of the accused, according to
the constitutional presumption of innocence
[Tin v. People, G.R. No. 126480 (2001)].
Spanish Text of the RPC Prevails over its
English Translation
In the construction or interpretation of the
provision of the RPC, the Spanish text is
controlling, because it was approved by the
Philippine Legislature in its Spanish text
[People v. Manaba, G.R. No. L-38725 (1933)].
Effect as
to Pending
Cases
Crime
punished by
repealed law is
decriminalized/
no longer
punishable, so
it is
obliterated.
Example:
When the
repealing law
fails to
penalize the
offense under
the old law.
Pending cases
are dismissed
and unserved
penalties are
remitted.
D. Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws
General Rule:
No felony shall be punishable by any penalty
not prescribed by law prior to its commission
[Art. 21, RPC].
Exception:
Insofar as they favor the person guilty of a
felony although at the time of the publication of
such laws, a final sentence has been
pronounced and the convict is serving the
same [Art. 22, RPC].
Effect
when
Sentence
is Already
Being
Served
Offenders are
entitled to
release.
Exceptions to the Exception:
1. The new law is expressly made
inapplicable to pending actions or
existing cause of actions; and
2. The offender is a habitual criminal.
Rationale:
The punishability of an act must be reasonably
known for the guidance of society. [People v.
Jabinal, G.R. No. L-300661 (1974)].
Partial/
Relative
Repeal
Crime
punished
under the
repealed
law
continues to
be a crime.
If repeal is
favorable to
the
accused,
repealing
law must be
applied
except
when
reservation
in the law
states it
does not
apply to
pending
cases.
The more
lenient law
must be
applied
except
when: (1)
reservation
exists in
law; or (2)
when
offender is
a habitual
criminal.
Effects of Amendment:
Amendment
Effect
Makes penalty
New law applies
lighter
(see Exception
above)
Page 7 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
Makes penalty
heavier
Increases fine but
decreases penalty of
imprisonment
CRIMINAL LAW
Law in force at the
time of commission
of the offense
applies
Not ex post facto, so
law and penalty is
retroactively applied
[Cruz]
Page 8 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Less Grave Felonies
II. FELONIES
A. Criminal
Felonies
Liabilities
and
1. Classification of Felonies (Grave,
Less Grave, and Light Felonies)
DEFINITION OF TERMS
1. Crime.
An act committed or omitted in violation
of a public law forbidding or
commanding it [Ching v. Secretary of
Justice, G.R. No. 164317 (2006)].
2. Felony.
Crime punishable under the Revised
Penal Code (RPC).
3. Offense.
Crime punishable under special laws.
4. Misdemeanor
Minor infraction of the law, such as a
violation of an ordinance.
Classification According to Penalties [Art.
9]:
1. Grave Felonies
2. Less Grave Felonies
3. Light Felonies
Importance of Classification is to
Determine:
1. Whether these felonies can be
complexed;
2. The prescription of the crime and of the
penalty; and
3. The duration of subsidiary penalty to be
imposed.
a. Grave Felonies
Those to which the law attaches the capital
punishment or penalties which in any of their
periods are afflictive. It includes those
punishable by:
1. Reclusion perpetua
2. Reclusion temporal
3. Perpetual or Absolute Disqualification
4. Perpetual or Temporary Special
Disqualification
5. Prision mayor
6. Fine more than ₱1,200,000.00
Those which the law punishes with penalties
which in their maximum period are correctional.
It includes those punishable by:
1. Prision correccional
2. Arresto mayor
3. Suspension
4. Destierro
5. Fine not exceeding ₱1,200,000 but is
not less than ₱40,000
c. Light Felonies [Art. 7]
It includes those punishable by:
1. Arresto menor; or
2. Fine not exceeding ₱40,000; or
3. Both of the above
When Punishable
General Rule: Only when consummated.
Exception: If it involves crimes committed
against persons or property.
Who are Punished
Principals and accomplices only [Art. 16, RPC].
Examples of Light Felonies [MATHS]:
1. Malicious mischief when the value of
the damage does not exceed ₱40,000
or cannot be estimated [Art. 328, RPC,
as amended by R.A. 10951]
2. Alteration of boundary marks
3. Theft when the value of the thing stolen
is less than ₱500 and theft is
committed under the circumstances
enumerated under Art. 308 (3) [Art.
309, (7) and (8), RPC, as amended by
R.A. 10951]
4. Intriguing against Honor
5. Slight physical injuries
Reconciling Discrepancy in Treatment of a
Fine Amounting to Exactly ₱40,000
• Art. 9 in re: Art. 25 - light felony; use
this article in determining prescription
of crimes.
• Art. 26 - correctional penalty; use this
article in determining prescription of
penalty.
Page 9 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Abberatio Ictus, Error in Personae,
and Praeter Intentionem
Article 4. Criminal Liability – Criminal liability shall
be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be different from
that which he intended.
Wrongful Act Different from that Intended is
Punishable.
Rationale: El que es causa de la causa es
causa del mal causado. “He who is the cause
of the cause is the cause of the evil caused.”
The presumption is that a person intends the
ordinary consequences of his voluntary act
[People v. Toling, G.R. No. L-27097 (1975)].
One who commits an intentional felony is
responsible for all the consequences which
may naturally and logically result therefrom,
whether foreseen or intended or not [People v.
Herrera, G.R. Nos. 140557-58 (2001)].
Requisites [I-DC]:
1. An Intentional felony has been committed.
2. The wrong done to the aggrieved party is
the
Direct,
natural
and
logical
Consequence of the felony committed by
the offender.
Proximate Cause
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 [Abrogar v. Cosmos
Bottling Company and INTERGAMES, Inc.,
G.R. No. 164749 (2017)].
When not Considered as Proximate Cause:
1. There is an active force between the
felony and resulting injury.
2. Resulting injury is due to the intentional
act of victim.
Efficient Intervening Cause
An intervening cause, to be considered
efficient, must be "one not produced by a
wrongful act or omission, but independent of it,
and adequate to bring the injurious result.”
[Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Company and
INTERGAMES, Inc, G.R. No. 164749 (2017)]
Three (3) Modes under Art. 4 (1)
Definition
Penalty
Error in
Mistake in Penalty for
personae
identity.
lesser crime
in its
A felony is
maximum
intended,
period [Art.
but there is
49]
a mistake in
the identity
of the victim;
injuring one
person
mistaken for
another.
Aberratio
Mistake in Penalty for
ictus
blow.
graver
offense in its
When an
maximum
offender
period [Art.
intending to
48 on
do an injury
complex
to one
crimes]
person
actually
inflicts it on
another.
Praeter
No
Mitigating
intentionem intention to circumstance
commit a
of not
grave so
intending to
wrong.
commit a
grave so
wrong [Art.
13]
In certain cases, the Court ruled that the
mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to
commit so grave a wrong cannot be
appreciated where the acts employed by the
accused were reasonably sufficient to produce
the death of the victim [People v. Sales, G.R.
No. 177218 (2011)].
There is no felony in the following
instances:
1. There is no law punishing the crime
(i.e., attempting suicide is not a crime,
per se) [See U.S. v. Villanueva, G.R.
No. 10606 (1915)].
2. There is a justifying circumstance (i.e.,
one acting in self-defense is not
committing a felony) [Art. 11].
Page 10 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Impossible Crimes
Article 4. Criminal Liability – Criminal liability shall
be incurred:
xxx
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 on account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.
Rationale:
To suppress criminal propensity or criminal
tendencies. Objectively, the offender has not
committed a felony, but subjectively, he is a
criminal.
Requisites [OPP-EI-III-NV]:
1. Act performed would be an Offense
against Persons or Property.
2. Act was done with Evil Intent.
3. Its accomplishment is inherently
Impossible, or that the means
employed is either Inadequate or
Ineffectual.
4. Act performed does Not constitute a
Violation of another provision of the
RPC.
DEFINITION OF TERMS:
1. Inadequate
Insufficient (e.g. small quantity of
poison).
2. Ineffectual
Means employed did not produce the
result expected (e.g. pressed the
trigger of the gun not knowing that it is
empty).
3. Inherent Impossibility
Can pertain to:
a. Legal impossibility – where
the intended acts, even if
completed, do not amount to a
crime [Intod v. CA, G.R. No.
103119 (1992)].
Example: Killing a person who
is already dead [Intod v. CA,
G.R. No. 103119 (1992)].
b. Physical
or
factual
impossibility
– Extraneous
circumstances unknown to the
actor or beyond his control
prevent the consummation of
the intended crime.
Example: The alteration, or
even destruction, of a losing
sweepstakes
ticket
could
cause no harm to anyone and
would not constitute a crime
were it not for the attempt to
cash the ticket so altered as a
prize-winning number. [People
v. Balmores, G.R. No. L-1896
(1950)]
No Attempted or Frustrated Impossible
Crime
Since the offender in an impossible crime has
already performed the acts for the execution of
the same, there could be no attempted
impossible crime.
There is no frustrated impossible crime either,
because the acts performed by the offender
are considered as constituting a consummated
offense.
Not a Defense Impossibility of accomplishing
the criminal intent is not a defense but an act
penalized in itself.
Page 11 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Impossible Crime v. Attempted v. Frustrated v. Consummated
Impossible Crime
Attempted
Frustrated
Consummated
Mens Rea
✓
✓
✓
✓
Concurrence
✓
✓
✓
✓
✗
Not produced by
reason of inherent
impossibility or
employment of
inadequate means
✗
Not produced by
reason of
desistance
✗
Not produced by
reason of causes
independent of the
will of the perpetrator
✓
✗
✗
✗
✓
Result
Causation
4. Stages of Execution
THREE (3) STAGES OF ACTS OF
EXECUTION
1. Attempted
When the offender commences the
commission of a felony directly by overt
acts but does not produce the felony by
reason of some cause or accident
other than his own spontaneous
desistance.
2. Frustrated
When the offender performs all the acts
of execution which would produce the
felony but does not produce it by
reason of causes independent of the
will of the perpetrator.
3. Consummated
When all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are
present; the felony is produced.
TWO (2) PHASES OF FELONY
1. Subjective Phase
It is that portion of the act constituting
the crime, starting from the point where
the offender begins the commission of
the crime to that point where he still has
control over his acts, including their
natural course [People v. Villanueva,
G.R. No. 160188 (2007)].
2. Objective Phase
It is that portion of acts after the
subjective phase, the result of the acts
of execution [People v. Villanueva,
supra].
• It has been held that if the
offender never passes the
subjective phase of the
offense, the crime is merely
attempted. On the other hand,
the subjective phase is
completely passed in case of
frustrated crimes, for in such
instances, "[s]ubjectively the
crime is complete." [People v.
Villanueva, supra]
DEVELOPMENT OF A CRIME
1. Internal Acts
Intent, ideas and plans; not punishable,
even if, had they been carried out, they
would constitute a crime [Reyes, Book
1].
2. External Acts
a. Preparatory Acts – means or
measures
necessary
for
accomplishment of a desired
object or end [People v. Lizada,
G.R. Nos. 143468-71 (2003)].
(in this case, a crime)
b. Acts of Execution – Usually
overt acts with a logical relation
to a particular concrete offense
and is already punishable
under the RPC [People v.
Lamahang, G.R. No. 43530
(1935)].
FACTORS IN DETERMINING STAGE OF
EXECUTION OF FELONY
1. Manner of Committing the Crime
a. Formal
Crimes
–
consummated in one instant,
no attempt [Albert, cited in
Reyes, Book 1 at 120].
Formal crimes such as libel are
not
punishable
unless
Page 12 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
consummated
[Disini
v.
Secretary of Justice, G.R. No.
203335 (2014)].
Example: The mere act of
selling or even acting as a
broker to sell marijuana or
other
prohibited
drugs
consummates
the
crime.
[People v. Marcos, G.R. No.
83325 (1990)]
b. Crimes Consummated by
Mere Attempt or Proposal by
Overt Act
Examples: Flight to enemy’s
country
[Art.
121]
and
Corruption of Minors [Art. 340]
c. Crimes Consummated by
Mere Agreement
Examples: For betting in
sports contests and corruption
of public officer [Art. 197 and
Art. 212], the manner of
committing the crime requires
the meeting of the minds
between the giver and the
receiver [US v. Basa, 8 Phil. 89
(1907)].
d. Material
Crimes
– those
committed with three (3) stages
of execution.
2. Nature of the Crime Itself
There are certain crimes requiring a
specific intent.
Examples: Robbery, Theft, Rape
(See: Discussion on Specific Criminal
Intent)
THREE (3) STAGES OF EXECUTION:
a. Attempted
Elements [CNDO]:
a. The
offender
Commences
the
commission of the felony directly by
overt acts.
b. He does Not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the
felony.
c. The non-performance of all acts of
execution was Due to cause or
accident Other than his own
spontaneous desistance.
When is a Crime Commenced:
a. There are external acts.
b. Such external acts have a direct
connection with the crime intended to
be committed.
Definition of Terms:
a. Overt Act – Some physical activity or
deed, indicating the intention to commit
a particular crime, more than a mere
planning or preparation, which if
carried out to its complete termination
following its natural course, without
being frustrated by external obstacles
nor by the spontaneous desistance of
the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense [Rait v. People, G.R. No.
180425 (2008)].
b. Desistance
General Rule: Desistance is an
absolutory cause which negates
criminal liability provided that the
desistance was made when the acts
done have not yet resulted in any
felony. Desistance is recognized only
in the attempted stage of the felony.
Exemption: In certain cases, although
negated by the attempted stage, there
may be other felonies arising from his
act.
Example: An attempt to kill that results
in physical injuries still leads to liability
for the injuries inflicted.
b. Frustrated
Elements [AFN]:
a. Offender performs All the acts of
execution
b. All the acts performed would produce
the Felony as a consequence
c. But the felony is Not produced by
reason of causes independent of the
will of the perpetrator.
Not all crimes have a Frustrated Stage
General Rule: Felonies that do not require any
result do not have a frustrated stage.
Crimes which do not admit of frustrated
stage [RABT]:
a. Rape – Once there is penetration, no
matter how slight it is, the offense is
consummated [People v. Orita, G.R.
No. 88724 (1990)].
b. Arson – The crime of arson is already
consummated even if only a portion of
Page 13 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
the wall or any part of the house is
burned. The consummation of the
crime does not depend upon the extent
of the damage caused [People v.
Hernandez, G.R. No. L-31770 (1929)].
c. Bribery and Corruption of Public
Officers – If there is a meeting of the
minds, there is consummated bribery
or consummated corruption [US v.
Basa, 8 Phil. 89 (1907)].
d. Theft – Once there is unlawful taking,
theft is consummated. It does not
matter how long the property was in the
possession of the accused; it does not
matter whether the property was
disposed of or not [Valenzuela v.
People, G.R. No. 160188 (2007)].
c. Consummated
Requisite:
All the elements necessary for its execution
and accomplishment are present.
Indeterminate Offense
It is one where the intent of the offender in
performing an act is not certain. The accused
may be convicted of a felony defined by the
acts performed by him up to the time of
desistance.
The intention of the accused must be viewed
from the nature of the acts executed by him and
the attendant circumstances, and not from his
admission.
Attempted v. Frustrated v. Consummated
Attempted
Felony
Frustrated
Felony
Consummated
Felony
As to Acts Performed
Overt acts of
execution
are started
BUT
Not all acts
of execution
are present
All acts of
All acts of
execution
execution are
are finished finished
BUT
Crime
sought to be
committed
is not
achieved
As to Why a Felony is Not Produced
Due to
reasons
other than
the
spontaneous
desistance
of the
perpetrator
Due to
–
intervening
causes
independent
of the will of
the
perpetrator
As to Position in the Timeline
Offender still
in subjective
phase
because he
still has
control of his
acts,
including
their natural
cause.
Offender is
already in
the
objective
phase
because all
acts of
execution
are already
present and
the cause of
its nonaccomplishment is
other than
the
offender’s
will
Page 14 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Offender is in
the objective
phase as all
acts of
execution are
already present
and a felony is
produced
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Real or Material Plurality v. Continuing
Crime
5. Continuing Crimes
Continuing Crime
A single crime consisting of a series of acts
arising from a single criminal resolution or
intent not susceptible of division.
Requisites [PA-UP-UCIP]:
1. Plurality of Acts;
2. Unity of Penal provision infringed upon;
and
3. Unity of Criminal Intent and Purpose
One Larceny Doctrine
For prosecution of theft cases, the one larceny
doctrine provides that the taking of several
things, whether belonging to the same or
different owners, at the same time and place,
constitutes one larceny only so long as there is
a single criminal impulse [Santiago v. People,
G.R. No. 109266 (1993)].
Examples:
1. Insurrection, Rebellion, Subversion,
and other crimes and offenses
committed in the furtherance, on the
occasion thereof, or incident thereto [In
the Matter of Petition for Habeas
Corpus of Roberto Umil, G.R. No.
81567 (1990)].
2. Eight robberies as component parts of
a general plan [People v. De la Cruz,
G.R. No. L-1745 (1950)].
How Applied
Whenever the Supreme Court concludes that
the criminals should be punished only once,
because they acted in conspiracy or under the
same criminal impulse:
• It is necessary to embody these crimes
under one single information.
• It is necessary to consider them as
complex crimes even if the essence of
the crime does not fit the definition of
Art 48, because there is no other
provision in the RPC.
Application to Special Laws
The concept is applicable to crimes under
special laws. This is in line with Art. 10, which
states that the RPC shall be supplementary to
special laws, unless the latter provides the
contrary.
Real or Material
Plurality
Continuing Crime
There is a series of acts performed by the
offender.
As to the Number of Crimes Committed
Each act performed
constitutes a
separate crime
because each act is
generated by a
criminal impulse
The different acts
constitute only one
crime because all of
the acts performed
arise from one
criminal resolution.
Examples on Real Plurality:
1. The act of firing one’s revolver twice in
succession, killing one person and
wounding another [U.S. v. Ferrer, 1
Phil. 56 (1901)].
2. Two persons are killed one after
another by different acts [People v.
Olfindo, 47 Phil. 1 (1924)].
Transitory Crime v. Continuing Crime
Offense where some acts material and
essential to the crimes and requisite to their
commission occur in one territory and some
acts are done in another [AAA v. BBB, G.R. No.
212448 (2018)].
The theory is that a person charged with a
transitory offense may be tried in any
jurisdiction where the offense is in part
committed [Tuzon v. Cruz, G.R. No. L-27410
(1975)].
Examples:
1. Estafa – its necessary elements
(deceit and damage) may take place in
different
territorial
jurisdictions
[Gamboa v. CA, G.R. No. L-41054
(1975)]
2. Violation of BP No. 22 (Bouncing
Checks Law) [Uy v. CA, G.R. No.
119000 (1997)]
Page 15 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
6. Complex Crimes and Composite
Crimes [Art. 48]
a. Compound Crime
Requisites [S-S21]:
1. That only a Single act is performed by
the offender
2. That the single act produces:
a. 2 or more grave felonies; or
b. 1 or more grave and 1 or more
less grave felonies, or 2 or
more less grave felonies.
Examples:
1. A single bullet killing two persons
[People v. Pama, C.A., 44 O.G. 3339
(1992)].
2. The act of raping a girl, causing her
physical injuries which required
medical attention for about 20 days.
This is a complex crime of rape with
less serious physical injuries [U.S. v.
Andaya, 34 Phil. 690 (1916)].
Light Felonies
Light felonies produced by the same act should
be treated and punished as separate offenses
or may be absorbed by the grave felony.
b. Complex Crime
Requisites [2-N-SS]:
1. That at least 2 offenses are committed
2. That one or some of the offenses must
be Necessary to commit the other
• Does not need to be
“indispensable means”
3. That both or all the offenses must be
punished under the Same Statute.
When No Complex Crime Proper
1. Subsequent acts of intercourse, after
forcible abduction with rape, are
separate acts of rape.
2. When trespass to dwelling is a direct
means to commit a grave offense.
3. When one offense is committed to
conceal the other.
4. Where one of the offenses is penalized
by special law.
5. There is no complex crime of rebellion
with murder, arson, robbery, or other
common.
6. In case of continuous crimes.
7. When the other crime is an
indispensable element of the other
offense.
GENERAL
RULES
IN
COMPLEXING
CRIMES
1. Information – only one (1) shall be
filed
2. Jurisdiction – When two crimes
produced by a single act are
respectively within the exclusive
jurisdiction of two courts of different
jurisdiction, the court of higher
jurisdiction shall try the complex crime.
3. Penalty
• Where both penalties provide
for imprisonment - penalty to
be imposed is the penalty for
the most serious crime, applied
in its maximum.
• Where one of the penalties is
imprisonment and the other is
fine - only the penalty of
imprisonment
should
be
imposed.
4. When the other offense is not
proven – accused can be convicted of
the other.
Art. 48 is Not Applicable in the following
instances:
1. When the crimes have common
elements;
2. When the crimes involved are subject
to the rule of absorption;
3. Where the two offenses resulting from
a single act are specifically punished
as a single crime.
Example: Less serious physical
injuries with serious slander of deed,
since this is punished under Art. 265 (2)
4. Acts penalized under Art. 365 (those
resulting criminal negligence) [Ivler v.
Modesto-San Pedro, supra].
5. In special complex crimes or composite
crimes.
c. Special Complex Crimes
In substance, there is more than one crime; but
from the eyes of the law, there is only one. The
law treats it as a single crime for which it
prescribes a single penalty. It is also called a
composite crime.
Page 16 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites [2-SI-SCI]:
1. 2 or more crimes are committed
2. But the law treats them as a Single,
Indivisible, and unique offense
3. Product of Single Criminal Impulse
Examples:
1. Robbery with Homicide [Art. 294 (1)]
2. Robbery with Rape [Art. 294 (2)]
3. Kidnapping with serious physical
injuries [Art. 267 (3)]
4. Rape with Homicide [Art. 335]
Compound Crime v. Complex Crime Proper v. Special Complex Crime
Compound Crime
Complex Crime Proper
Special Complex Crime
(delito compuesto)
(delito complejo)
(delito especial complejo)
Definition
Single act constitutes two or
An offense is a necessary
The law fixes one penalty for
more grave or less grave
means to commit another
two or more crimes committed.
felonies [Art. 48].
offense [Art. 48].
Elements
Requisites [S-S21]:
Requisites [2-N-SS]:
Requisites [2-SI-SCI]:
1. That only a Single act is
1. That at least 2 offenses are
1. 2 or more crimes are
performed by the offender
committed
committed
2. That the single acts
2. That one or some of the
But the law 2. treats them as a
produces:
offenses must be Necessary to Single, Indivisible, and unique
a. 2 or more grave felonies,
commit the other
offense
or
3. That both or all the offenses 3. Product of Single Criminal
b. 1 or more grave and 1 or
must be punished under the
Impulse
more less grave felonies, or
Same Statute.
2 or more less grave felonies
Imposable Penalty
Penalty for most serious crime Penalty for most serious crime That which is indicated in the
shall be imposed in its
shall be imposed in its
Revised Penal Code
maximum period [Art. 48]
maximum period [Art. 48]
B. Circumstances
Criminal Liability
Affecting
Circumstances Affecting Criminal Liability,
Distinguished
As to
As to
As to
presepresence
lawfulnce of
of
ness
civil
criminal
of act
liabililiability
ty
Justifying No
No
No
Felony Criminal
Civil
Liability
Liability
[Art. 11]
Except
Par. 4
ExempThere
With
ting
is
a
Civil
Felony
Liability
Except
Par. 4
&7
Mitigating
Aggravating
Alternative
Decreased
Criminal
Liability
Increased
Criminal
Liability
Increased
or
Decreased
Criminal
Liability
[Art. 15]
With
Civil
Liability
1. Justifying Circumstances
Justifying Circumstances
Where the act of the person is said to be in
accordance with the law, so that such person
is deemed not to have transgressed the law.
[Art. 11, RPC]
• Basis: Lack of dolo
• Criminal Liability: None; there is no
crime committed, the act being
justified.
Page 17 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
•
•
CRIMINAL LAW
Civil Liability: None, except in par. 4,
Art. 11 (avoidance of greater evil),
where the civil liability is borne by the
persons benefited by the act in
proportion to the benefit they may have
received [Art. 101, RPC].
Burden of Proof: Rests on the
accused [People v. Corecor, G.R. No.
L-63155 (1988)].
Requisites of Each Circumstance [D3AFS]:
Justifying
Requisites
Circumstance
Defense of
1. Unlawful aggression;
person, right,
2. Reasonable necessity of
property, or
means
employed
to
honor (URL)
prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient
provocation on the part of
the person defending
himself.
Defense of
1. Unlawful aggression;
relatives
2. Reasonable necessity of
(URN)
means
employed
to
prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient
provocation on part of
relative, or, in case of
provocation, the one
making the defense had
No part therein.
Defense of
1. Unlawful aggression;
strangers
2. Reasonable necessity of
(URI)
the means employed to
prevent or repel it; and
3. The person defending
was not Induced by
revenge, resentment or
other evil motive.
Avoidance of
1. Evil sought to be
greater evil
avoided actually Exists.
(ENIM)
2. Evil or injury must Not
have been produced by the
one invoking the justifying
circumstances.
3. Injury feared be greater
than that done to avoid it;
and
4. There are no other
practical and less harmful
Means of preventing it.
Fulfillment of
1. Offender acted in
duty or lawful
Performance of duty or in
exercise of
the lawful exercise of a
right (PN)
right or office; and
Obedience to
Superior Order
(OPM)
2. The injury caused or the
offense committed be the
Necessary consequence
of the due performance of
duty or the lawful exercise
of such right or office.
1. Order must have been
issued by a superior;
2. The order is for some
lawful Purpose; and
3. Means used to carry it
out must be lawful.
a. Defense of Person, Rights, Property
and Honor (Self-Defense)
Requisites [URL]:
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of means
employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the
part of the person defending himself.
Why Self-Defense is Lawful
• Impulse of self-preservation;
• State cannot provide protection for
each of its constituents [Castanares v.
Court of Appeals, Nos. L-41269-70
(1979)].
No Accidental Self-Defense
Self-defense implies a deliberate and positive
overt act of the accused to prevent or repel an
unlawful aggression of another with the use of
reasonable means. The accused has freedom
of action, and is aware of the consequences of
his acts. From necessity, and limited by it,
proceeds the right of self-defense [People v.
Toledo, G.R. No. L-28655 (2004)].
REQUISITES:
1. Unlawful Aggression
Unlawful aggression is an indispensable
element of self-defense, whether complete or
incomplete under Articles 11 or 13,
respectively [People v. San Juan, G.R. No.
144505 (2002)].
Peril to one’s life, limb, or right is actual and
imminent.
It
presupposes
actual,
sudden,
and
unexpected attack or imminent danger thereof,
not merely threatening or intimidating attitude
[People v. Colinares, G.R. No. 182748 (2011)].
Page 18 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Rules in Unlawful Aggression:
a. Aggression must be unlawful.
b. The peril to one’s life, limb, [People v.
Sumicad, G.R. No. 35524 (1932)] or
right is actual and imminent [People v.
Crisostomo, G.R. No. L-38180 (1981)].
c. Unlawful aggression must be a
continuing circumstance or must have
been existing at the time the defense is
made [People v. Dijan, G.R. No.
142682 (2002)].
d. Retaliation is not allowed when
unlawful aggression ceases [People v.
Cajurao, G.R. No. 122767 (2004)].
Exception: When the aggressor
retreats to obtain a more advantageous
position to ensure the success of the
initial attack, unlawful aggression is
deemed to continue [Reyes, Book 1].
e. Picking up a weapon is unlawful
aggression if circumstances show that
the intention is to harm the defendant.
[People v. Javier, 46 O.G. No. 7 (1950)]
f. Mere belief of an impending attack is
not sufficient but in relation to “mistake
of fact,” the belief of the accused may
be considered in determining the
existence of unlawful aggression
[People v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-8611
(1956)].
Considerations in Determining Existence of
Unlawful Aggression:
a. Physical & objective circumstance (e.g.
wound received by deceased) [People
v. Dorico, G.R. No. L-31568 (1973)]
b. Lack of motive of person defending
himself [People v. Berio, G.R. No.
40602 (1934)]
c. Conduct of accused immediately after
the incident [People v. BoholstCaballero, G.R. No. L-23249 (1974)]
When in Retaliation
When the killing of the deceased by the
accused was after the attack made by the
former, the accused must have no time nor
occasion for deliberation and cool thinking.
When unlawful aggression ceases, the
defender has no longer any right to kill or
wound the former aggressor, otherwise,
retaliation and not self-defense is committed
[People v. Bates, G.R. No. 139907 (2003)].
Lawful Aggression
Aggression is lawful when it is done:
a. For the fulfillment of a duty [People v.
Gayraina, G.R. Nos. 39270 & 29271
(1934)]
b. In the exercise of a right in a more or
less violent manner [U.S. v. Merced &
Patron, G.R. No. 14170 (1918)]
No Unlawful Aggression
There is no unlawful aggression in the following
circumstances:
a. When there is an agreement to fight
and the challenge to fight was
accepted [People v. Navarro, G.R. No.
L-1878 (1907)].
Exception: When the aggression
which is ahead of an agreed time or
place is unlawful aggression [Severino
Justo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L8611 (1956)].
b. When the paramour kills the offended
husband who was assaulting him
because the husband’s aggression
was lawful [Art. 247, RPC] [U.S. v.
Merced, G.R. No. 14170 (1918)].
c. Reasonable force made by a police
officer to arrest a suspect [People v.
Calip, et al., 3 C.A. Rep. 808].
2. Reasonable
Employed
Necessity
of
Means
Requisites:
a. Necessity of the:
• course of action taken
• means employed
b. The above must be reasonable [Art. 11
(1), RPC]
Doctrine of Rational Equivalence
Rational equivalence presupposes the
consideration not only of the nature and quality
of the weapons used by the defender and the
assailant, but of the totality of circumstances
surrounding the defense vis-à-vis the unlawful
aggression [Espinosa v. People, G.R. No.
181071 (2010)].
As to whether the means employed is in
proportion to the harm done does not depend
on harm done, but the imminent danger of such
injury [People v. Gutual, G.R. No. 115233
(1996)].
Perfect equality between the weapon used by
the one defending himself and that of the
aggressor is not required, nor is the material
Page 19 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
commensurability between the means of attack
and defense. Rational equivalence is enough
[People v. Samson, G.R. No. 214883 (2015)].
Provocation is sufficient when it is
proportionate to the aggression [People v.
Boholst-Caballero, supra].
Test of Reasonableness [Escoto v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 118002 (1997)]
Reasonableness depends upon the:
a. Nature and quality of the weapon used
by the aggressor
b. Aggressor’s
physical
condition,
character,
size,
and
other
circumstances
c. Circumstances of those of the person
defending himself
d. Place and occasion of the assault
Insults
General Rule: Verbal argument
considered sufficient provocation.
When the Assault was Without Use of
Weapon
General Rule: A man is not justified in taking
the life of one who assaults him with his fist
only, without the use of a dangerous weapon.
Defense of Property
The defense of property rights can be invoked
if there is an attack upon the property, although
it is not coupled with an attack upon the person
of the owner of the premises, so long as all the
elements for justification must however be
present [People v. Narvaez, G.R. No. L-3346667 (1983)].
Exception: Where the person assaulted has
retreated to the wall and uses in a defensive
way the only weapon at his disposal [People v.
Sumicad, G.R. No. 35524 (1932)].
Note: The general rule contemplates the
situation where the contestants are in the open
and the person can opt to run away.
Rules in the Use of Firearms
a. If the attacker is already disarmed –
there is no need to further use violence
[People v. Masangkay, G.R. No. L73461 (1988)].
b. If the attacker was disarmed but
struggled to re-obtain the weapon –
violence may be justified [People v.
Rabandaban, G.R. No. L-2228 (1950)].
c. The one defending must aim at the
defendant and not indiscriminately fire
his deadly weapon [People v.
Galacgac, C.A., 54 O.G. 1027].
Interpretation
This element should be interpreted liberally in
favor of the law-abiding citizen. [People v. So,
5 CAR [2s] 671, 674]
3. Lack of Sufficient Provocation
The accused who claims self-defense must not
have provoked the aggression of the victim.
is
not
Exception: Insults in vulgar language are.
SUBJECTS OF SELF-DEFENSE
1. Defense of person
2. Defense of rights
3. Defense of property [People v.
Narvaez, G.R. No. L-33466-67 (1983)]
EXAMPLES OF OTHER SUBJECTS OF
SELF-DEFENSE
1. Defense of Home
Violent entry to another’s house at
nighttime; by a person who is armed
with a bolo; and forcing his way into the
house, shows he was ready and
looking for trouble [People v. Mirabiles,
45 O.G., 5th Supp., 277].
2. Defense of Honor and Reputation
Placing a hand by a man on the
woman’s upper thigh is unlawful
aggression [People v. Jaurigue, C.A.
No. 384 (1946)].
A slap on the face is also considered as
unlawful aggression since the face
represents a person and his dignity
[Rugas v. People, G.R. No. 147789
(2004)].
Stand Your Ground Principle
A person is justified in the use of deadly force
and does not have a duty to retreat if he
reasonably believes that such force is
necessary to prevent imminent death or great
bodily harm to himself or herself [U.S. v.
Domen, G.R. No. L-12963 (1917)].
Page 20 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Defense of Relatives
d. State of Necessity (Avoidance of a
Greater Evil)
Requisites [URL]
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of means
employee; and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on part of
relative, or, in case of provocation, the
one making the defense had no part
therein.
Relatives Covered by Par. 2 [SAD-SiRC]
1. Spouse
2. Ascendants
3. Descendants
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted
Siblings, or relatives by affinity in the
same
degrees
(parents-in-laws,
children-in-law, siblings-in-law)
5. Relatives by Consanguinity within 4th
civil degree
Person Being Defended Still in Danger
Unlawful aggression can be made to depend
on the honest belief of the one making a
defense. However, one may no longer be
exempt from criminal liability when he or the
person being defended is no longer in danger
of bodily harm by the aggressor [US v.
Esmedia, G.R. No. L-5740 (1910)].
c. Defense of Stranger
Requisites [URN]
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed; and
3. Person defending was Not induced by
revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive
Note: Motive is relevant only in this kind of
defense.
Rationale: What one may do in his defense,
another may do for him. The ordinary man
would not stand idly by and see his companion
killed without attempting to save his life [U.S. v.
Aviado, G.R. No. 13397 (1918)].
Stranger
Any person not included in the enumeration of
relatives under par. 2 of Art. 11.
Requisites [ENIM]:
1. Evil to be avoided actually Exists;
2. Evil or injury is Not produced by the one
invoking the justifying circumstance;
3. Injury feared by greater than that done
to avoid it; and
4. No other practical and less harmful
Means of preventing it.
Civil Liability
It is only in this paragraph that the person
accused incurs civil liability despite the
justifying circumstance. Said liability is borne
by the person benefited by the act.
State of Necessity
There is necessity when the situation is of
grave peril, actual or imminent. It is
indispensable that the state of necessity is not
brought about by intentional provocation on the
part of the party invoking the same. [People v.
Retubado, G.R. No. 124058 (2003)]
Kind of Evil
The evil contemplated includes injury to
persons and damage to property. This greater
evil must not be brought about by the
negligence or imprudence of the accused. [Ty
v. People, G.R. No. 149275 (2004)]
e. Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise
of Right or Office
Requisites [PN]:
1. The accused acted in the Performance
of a duty or on the lawful exercise of a
right or office; and
2. The injury caused or offense
committed
be
the
Necessary
consequence of the due performance
of duty or the lawful exercise of such
right or office.
Police Officers
The law does not clothe police officers with
authority to arbitrarily judge the necessity to kill,
but must be within reasonable limits [People v.
Ulep, G.R. No. 132547 (2000)].
Warning Shot
To justify the killing by a policeman of a
suspected robber as fulfillment of his lawful
duty, he must have first fire a warning shot
Page 21 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
before shooting. [Mamangun v. People, G.R.
No. 149152 (2007)]
However, the directive to issue a warning
contemplates a situation where several options
are available to the officers. When the threat to
the life of the law enforcer was imminent and
there was no other option but to use force, a
police officer conducted himself in the lawful
exercise of a right. [People v. Cabanlig, G.R.
No. 148431 (2005)].
f. Obedience to an Order Issued for
Some Lawful Purpose
Requisites [OPM]
1. An Order has been issued by a
superior
2. Such order must be for some lawful
Purpose; and
3. The Means used by the subordinate to
carry out said order is lawful.
Examples:
1. Where the accused acted upon orders of
superior officers that they, as military
subordinates, could not question, and
obeyed in good faith, without being aware
of their illegality, without any fault or
negligence on their part, the act is not
accompanied by criminal intent. A crime is
not committed if the mind of the person
performing the act be innocent [People. v.
Beronilla, G.R. No. L-4445 (1955)].
2. One who prepared a falsified document
with full knowledge of its falsity is not
excused even if he merely acted in
obedience to the instruction of his superior,
because the instruction was not for a lawful
purpose [People. v. Barroga, G.R. No. L31563 (1930)].
3. A soldier who tortured to death the
deceased in obedience to the order of his
sergeant is not exempt from liability
because the order to torture the deceased
was illegal, and the accused was not bound
to obey it [People. v. Margen, et al., G.R.
No. L-2681 (1950)].
2. Exempting Circumstances [Art. 12]
Exempting Circumstances
Grounds for exemption from punishment
because the agent of the crime is wanting any
of the conditions which make the act voluntary
or negligent.
The reason for the exemption lies on the
complete absence of intelligence, freedom of
action, or intent, or on the absence of
negligence on the part of the accused.
[Guevarra v. Almodovar, G.R. No. 75256
(1989)]
Burden of Proof
Prosecution has the burden of proof to
establish the guilt of the accused. However,
once the defendant admits the commission of
the offense charged, but raises an exempting
circumstance as a defense, the burden of proof
is shifted to him. [People v. Concepcion, G.R.
No. 148919 (2002)]
Justifying v. Exempting Circumstances
Justifying
Exempting
CircumCircumstances
stances
[Art. 11,
[Art. 12,
RPC]
RPC]
As to
It affects the
It affects the
Effect of
act, not the
actor, not the
Circumactor.
act.
stance
As to
The act is The
act
Lawfulness considered to complained
of Act
have
been of is actually
done within wrongful, but
the bounds of the actor is
law; hence, not liable.
legitimate
and lawful in Since the act
the eyes of complained
the law.
of is actually
wrong, there
Since the act is a crime,
is considered but since the
lawful, there
actor acted
is no crime.
without
voluntariness
or
negligence,
there is no
dolo or
culpa.
Page 22 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
As to
Liability
CRIMINAL LAW
There is no
criminal
liability and
no civil
liability
(except:
avoidance of
greater evil
where civil
liability is
borne by
persons for
whose
benefit the
harm has
been
prevented).
There is no
criminal
liability but
there is civil
liability
(except:
accident;
insuperable
cause).
Uncontrollabl
e
fear
(ERIGE)
Requisites of Each Circumstance [IMDAIUI]
Exempting
Requisites
Basis
Circumstance
Insanity
or Imbecile or Absence
imbecility
insane
of
person
did intelligenc
not act during e
lucid interval
Minority;
1. Accused is Absence
Without
15 years old of
Discernment
and Below; intelligenc
(15Band
e
Bet1518
2. Accused is
WD)
Between 15
and 18 years
old, and he
acted Without
Discernment
Accident
1. A person is Lack
of
(LDAW)
performing a negligence
Lawful act;
and intent
2. Act was
done
with
Due care;
3. He causes
an injury to
another
by
mere
Accident; and
4.
Without
fault
or
intention of
causing it.
Irresistible
1. There is Absence
force (PIT)
compulsion is of freedom
by means of
Insuperable
or
lawful
cause (RFLi)
Physical
force;
2.
Physical
force must be
Irresistible;
and
3.
Physical
force
must
come from a
Third person.
1. Existence
of
an
uncontrollabl
e fear
2. Fear must
be Real and
Imminent.
3. Fear of an
injury
is
Greater than
or Equal to
that
committed.
1. That an act
is Required
by law to be
done;
2. That a
person Fails
to
perform
such act;
3. That his
failure
to
perform such
act was due
to
some
Lawful
or
insuperable
cause
Absence
of freedom
Lack
intent
of
a. Insanity or Imbecility
Imbecile
One who, while advanced in age, has a mental
development comparable to that of a child
between 2 and 7 years of age [People v.
Cayetano, G.R. Nos. 112429-30 (1997)].
Feeblemindedness is not Imbecility
For imbecility, it is necessary that there is a
complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing the act. Feeblemindedness may,
however, be considered a mitigating
circumstance [People v. Formigones, G.R. No.
L-3246 (1950)].
Page 23 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Insanity
A complete deprivation of intelligence in
committing the act, but capable of having lucid
intervals. Mere abnormality of mental faculties
is not enough especially if the offender has not
lost consciousness of his acts [People v.
Formigones, supra].
General Rule: Insanity is an exempting
circumstance
Exception: During a lucid interval, the insane
acts with intelligence, thus, is not exempt from
criminal liability.
Remission of Symptoms
One suffering from psychosis who takes
medication is “in remission of symptoms”;
meaning, he would not actively exhibit the
symptoms of psychosis and it is only when one
fails to take his medication and/or drinks
alcohol that the symptoms of psychosis may be
triggered, depriving one of his will. However,
that one is in remission of symptoms or has
failed to take the prescribed medicine is not a
conclusive finding as to the sanity of the
accused at the time of the commission of the
crime. Psychotic may have varying degrees of
awareness of the consequences of his acts,
which awareness would also depend on the
degree of psychosis at the time of the
commission of the act [People v. Antonio, Jr.,
G.R. No. 144266 (2002)].
Rules in Insanity
1. Presumption of Sanity
Burden of proof of insanity is on the
defense [People v. Aquino, G.R. No.
87084 (1990)].
2. Insanity should exist before or at the
moment of the act or acts under
prosecution [People v. Aquino, supra]
Insanity subsequent to commission of
crime is not exempting. He is
presumed to be sane when he
committed it [U.S. v. Guevara, G.R. No.
9265 (1914)].
3. There must be a complete
deprivation of intelligence in
committing the act.
Mere abnormality of the mental
faculties will not exclude imputability
[People v. Formigones, supra; Art. 13,
par. 9, RPC].
How Proven
The state or condition of a person’s mind can
only be measured and judged by his behavior.
Opinion Testimony
Establishing the insanity of an accused
requires opinion testimony which may be given
by a witness who is intimately acquainted with
the accused, by a witness who has rational
basis to conclude that the accused was insane
based on the witness’ own perception of the
accused, or by a witness who is qualified as an
expert, such as a psychiatrist. The testimony or
proof of the accused’s insanity must relate to
the time preceding or coetaneous with the
commission of the offense with which he is
charged [People v. Madarang, G.R. No.
132319 (2000)].
TWO (2) TESTS: Test of:
1. Cognition - Whether the accused
acted with complete deprivation of
intelligence; and
2. Volition - Whether the accused acted
in total deprivation of freedom of will
[People v. Rafanan, G.R. No. L-54135
(1991)].
Mental Illnesses Covered
Cases covered under this article are:
[MEPSleD]
1. Malignant malaria, which affects the
nervous system [People v. Lacena,
G.R. No. 46836 (1940)]
2. Epilepsy [People v. Mancao and
Aguilar, G.R. No. L-26361 (1927)]
3. Psychosis or schizophrenia, except
when in remission of symptoms
[People v. Antonio, Jr., G.R. No.
144266 (2002)]
4. Somnambulism:
Sleep-walking
[People v. Taneo, G.R. No. L-37673
(1933)]
5. Dementia praecox [People v. Bonoan,
G.R. No. L-45130 (1937)]
Conditions Not Considered as Insanity
1. Amnesia – in and of itself, it is no
defense to a criminal charge unless it is
shown by competent proof that the
accused did not know the nature and
quality of his action and that it was
wrong [People v. Tabugoca, G.R. No.
125334 (1998)].
2. Craziness – Unusual behaviors, such
as smiling to oneself and calling a
Page 24 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
chicken late at night, are not proof of
complete absence of intelligence
because not every aberration of the
mind or mental deficiency constitutes
insanity [People v. Miraña, G.R. No.
219113 (2018)].
3. Pedophilia – Despite his affliction, a
pedophile could still distinguish
between right and wrong [People v.
Diaz, G.R. No. 130210 (1999)].
Juridical Effects of Insanity
When Insanity
is Present
Effect on liability
At the time of Exempt from liability
the commission [People v. Formigones,
of the crime
supra]
During Trial
He is criminally liable but
the proceedings will be
suspended
and
the
accused is committed to a
hospital.
After Judgment Execution of judgment is
or while serving suspended
and
the
sentence
accused is committed to a
Hospital.
The period of confinement
in the hospital is counted
for the purpose of the
prescription
of
the
penalty.
b. Minority
Note: Pars. 2 and 3 of Art. 12, and Art. 80 of
the RPC, have been amended/repealed by
P.D. 603, as amended, and R.A. 9344.
JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT
OF 2006 (R.A. 9344)
Definition of Terms:
1. Child - person under 18 years.
2. Child in conflict with the law - child
who is alleged as, accused of, or
adjudged as, having committed an
offense under Philippine laws. [Sec.
4(e), R.A. 9344]
3. Intervention – a series of activities
designed to address issues that
caused the child to commit an offense.
It may take the form of an individualized
treatment program which may include
counseling, skills training, education,
and other activities that will enhance
his/her psychological, emotional, and
psycho-social well-being [Sec. 4(l),
R.A. 9344]
When Exempt from Criminal Liability:
1. A child 15 years or under at the time of
the commission of the offense shall be
exempt from criminal liability. A child is
deemed to be 15 years of age on the
date of his/her 15th birthday.
2. A child above 15 years but below 18
years of age who acted without
discernment shall be exempt from
criminal liability. [Sec. 6, R.A. 9344]
In both cases, the child shall be subjected to an
intervention program. [Sec. 6, R.A. 9344]
Discernment
Capacity of the child at the time of the
commission of the offense to understand the
differences between right and wrong and the
consequences of the wrongful act. [Sec. 4,
A.M. No. 01-1-18-SC, Revised Rule on
Children in Conflict with the Law]
Presumption of Minority
A child in conflict with the law enjoys the
presumption of minority. [Sec. 5, A.M. No. 011-18-SC]. In case of doubt as to the age of the
child, it shall be resolved in his/her favor. [Sec.
7, R.A. 9344]
Determination of Age
1. Child’s birth certificate
2. Baptismal certificate
3. Other pertinent documents
4. In the absence of such documents, age
may be based on:
a. Testimony of the child
b. Testimony of a member of the
family related by affinity or
consanguinity
c. Testimony of other persons
d. Physical appearance of the
child
e. Other relevant evidence [Sec.
5, A.M. No. 01-1-18-SC]
Any person alleging the age of the child in
conflict with the law has the burden of proving
the age of such child. [Sec. 7, R.A. 9344]
Page 25 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Civil Liability
The exemption from criminal liability does not
include exemption from civil liability, which
shall be enforced in accordance with existing
laws. [Sec. 6, R.A. 9344]
General Rule: The parents shall be liable for
damages.
Actus me invite factus non est meus actus.
An act done by me against my will is not my
act.
The person invoking this circumstance must
show that the force exerted was such that it
reduced him to a mere instrument who acted
not only without his will but against it [People v.
Lising, G.R. No. 106210-11 (1998)].
Exception: If they were able to prove that they
were exercising reasonable supervision over
the child at the time the child committed the
offense and exerted reasonable effort and
utmost diligence to prevent or discourage the
child from committing another offense. [Sec.
20-D, R.A. 9344, as amended by R.A. 10630]
The duress, force, fear or intimidation must be
present, imminent and impending, and of such
nature as to induce a well-grounded
apprehension of death or serious bodily harm if
the act is not done [People v. Villanueva, G.R.
No. L-9529 (1958)].
c. Accident
e. Uncontrollable Fear
An unintended and unforeseen injurious
occurrence; something that does not occur in
the usual course of events or that could not be
reasonably anticipated; an unforeseen and
injurious·occurrence not attributable to
mistake, negligence, neglect, or misconduct
[Calera v. Hoegh Fleet Services Philippines,
Inc., G.R. No. 250584 (2021)].
Requisites [ERIGE]
1. Existence of an uncontrollable fear
2. Fear must be Real and Imminent.
3. Fear of an injury is Greater than or
Equal to that committed [People v.
Petenia, G.R. No. L-51256 (1986)].
Requisites [LDAW]
1. A person is performing a Lawful act;
2. Act was done with Due care;
3. He causes injury by mere Accident;
and
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.
Accident v. Avoidance of greater evil
Accident
Avoidance
[Art. 12 (4)] of Greater
Evil
[Art. 11 (4)]
As to Type of Exempting
Justifying
Circumstance
As to Cause Offender
Offender
of Damage
accidentally deliberately
causing the caused the
damage.
damage.
d. Irresistible Force
Requisites [PIT]
1. There was compulsion by means of
Physical force
2. Physical force must be Irresistible
3. Physical force comes from a Third
person
Fear should not be speculative, fanciful, or
remote. Such compulsion must leave no
opportunity to the accused for escape or selfdefense in equal combat [People v. Moreno,
G.R. No. L-64 (1946)].
In Treason
In the eyes of the law, nothing will excuse that
act of joining an enemy, but the fear of
immediate death [People v. Bagalawis, G.R.
No. L-262 (1947)].
Uncontrollable Fear v. Irresistible Force
Irresistible Uncontrollable
Force
Fear
As
to Irresistible
Uncontrollable
Recipient
force must fear may be
of
operate
generated by a
Force/Fear directly
threatened act
upon
the directly to a
person of third person.
the
accused.
As to Type Injury
Evil
feared
of
feared may must be greater
Evil/Injury be lesser or at least equal
Feared
degree
to the damage
than
the caused to avoid
damage
it.
caused by
Page 26 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
the
accused.
As
to Offender
Source of uses
Force/Fear physical
force
or
violence to
compel
another
person to
commit a
crime.
proper, in view of the number and nature of the
conditions of exemption present or lacking.
Offender
employs
intimidation or
threat
in
compelling
another
to
commit a crime.
INSUPERABLE OR LAWFUL CAUSE
Insuperable
It means insurmountable. A cause which has
lawfully, morally or physically prevented a
person to do what the law commands [People
v. Bandian, G.R. No. 45186 (1936)].
Requisites [RFLi]
1. An act is Required by law to be done
2. The person Fails to perform such act
3. His failure to perform such act was due
to some Lawful or insuperable cause
Examples:
1. 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 [People v.
Bandian, supra].
2. A municipal president was exempt from
liability in the arbitrary detention of a
prisoner because it was impossible to
deliver him to the nearest judicial
authority within the period provided by
law given the only means of
transportation available [U.S. v.
Vincentillo, G.R. No. L-6082 (1911)].
3. Mitigating Circumstances [Art. 13]
a. Incomplete
Exemption
Justification
or
Article 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime
committed is not wholly excusable. – A penalty
lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by
law shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly
excusable by reason of the lack of some of the
conditions required to justify the same or to exempt
from criminal liability in the several cases mentioned
in Article 11 and 12, provided that the majority of
such conditions be present. The courts shall impose
the penalty in the period which may be deemed
Applicability
Applicable when not all the requisites
necessary to justify the act or to exempt from
criminal liability under articles 11 and 12 are
attendant. Provided, the majority of such
conditions are present.
Effect
The courts have the discretion of imposing the
penalty lower by one or two degrees than that
prescribed by law, in view of the number and
nature of the conditions of exemption present
or lacking.
Rules on Incomplete Justification
1. When the justifying or exempting
circumstance has only two (2)
requisites, the presence of one
element is sufficient [People v. Macbul,
G.R. No. L-48976 (1943)].
2. Incomplete justification is a privileged
mitigating circumstance (it cannot be
offset by aggravating circumstances)
[People v. Ulep, supra].
INCOMPLETE SELF-DEFENSE, DEFENSE
OF RELATIVES AND STRANGERS
1. Unlawful Aggression - should always
be present to be appreciated as a
mitigating circumstance.
2. Ordinary mitigating circumstance - if
only unlawful aggression is present.
3. Privileged mitigating circumstance if two of the three requisites are present
[People v. Oanis, G.R. No. L-47722
(1943)].
b. Under 18 or Over 70 Years Old
(Conditional Minority)
Article 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person
under eighteen years of age. – When the offender is
a minor under eighteen years and his case is one
coming under the provisions of the paragraphs next
to the last of Article 80 of this Code, the following
rules shall be observed:
1. A person aged fifteen years of age or under
at the time of the commission of the
offense shall be exempt from criminal
liability [R.A. 9344, Sec. 6, as amended by
R.A. 10630, Sec. 3].
2. Upon a person over fifteen and under
eighteen years of age, the penalty next
lower than that prescribed by law shall be
imposed, but always in the proper period.
Page 27 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Effect of Minority of the Offender
When the offender is a minor under 18 years,
the penalty next lower than that prescribed by
law shall be imposed, but always in the proper
period [People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239
(2011)].
Age
15 and below
Above 15 but under
18
Over 70
How appreciated
Exempting
circumstance
Without
discernment:
Exempting
circumstance
With discernment:
Privileged Mitigating
Circumstance
Ordinary Mitigating
Circumstance
except when the
penalty imposable is
death, in such case,
the penalty shall be
reduced to reclusion
perpetua.
c. No Intention to Commit So Grave a
Wrong (Praeter Intentionem)
Praeter Intentionem
The offender had no intention to commit a
grave so wrong as what was actually
committed. [Art. 13 (3), RPC].
Requisites [NED]
There is Notable and Evident Disproportion
between the means employed to execute the
criminal act and its consequences [U.S. v.
Reyes, G.R. No. 12635 (1917)].
Applicability
Only applicable to offenses resulting in death,
physical injuries, or material harm (including
property damage) [People v. Galang de
Bautista, C.A., 40 O.G. 4473].
When Not Applicable
1. Where the acts were reasonably
sufficient and did actually produce the
death of the victim. [People v. Sales,
G.R. No. 177218 (2011)]
2. Cases involving defamation or slander.
[People v. Galang de Bautista, supra]
Considerations in Determining Existence of
Praeter Intentionem
The intention, as an internal act, is judged not
only by the proportion of the means employed
by him to the evil produced by his act, but also
by the:
1. Weapon used [People v. Reyes, G.R.
No. 42117 (1935), People v. Datu
Baguinda, G.R. No. L-14388 (1960)]
2. Part of the body injured [People v.
Banlos, G.R. No. L-3412 (1950)]
3. Injury inflicted [People v. Flores, G.R.
No. 27093 (1927)]
4. Manner it is inflicted. [People v. Banlos,
G.R. No. L-3412 (1950)]
5. Subsequent acts of the accused
immediately after committing the
offense. [People v. Ural, G.R. No. L30801 (1974)]
d. Sufficient Provocation or Threat
Provocation
Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the
offended party capable of exciting, inciting, or
irritating anyone [Pepito v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 119942 (1999)].
Threat
Threat must not be offensive and positively
strong, otherwise, it may result to unlawful
aggression, justifying self-defense. See:
discussion on self-defense [People v.
Guysayco, G.R. No. 4912 (1903)].
Requisites [SOPDI]
1. Provocation must be Sufficient.
2. It must Originate from the offended
party.
3. It must be Personal and Directed to the
accused.
4. It must be Immediate to the act.
5. When there is an interval of time
between the provocation and the
commission of the crime, the
perpetrator has time to regain his
reason [People v. Pagal, G.R. No. L32040 (1977)].
Page 28 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Provocation as a
Requisite of
Incomplete
Self-Defense
Provocation as a
Mitigating
Circumstance
it was held that the influence thereof, by reason
of its gravity, lasted until the moment the crime
was committed [People v. Parana, G.R. No. L45373 (1937)].
It pertains to its
absence on the part
of
the
person
defending himself.
[People v. CA, G.R.
No. 103613 (2001)]
It pertains to its
presence on the part
of the offended party.
[People v. CA, G.R.
No. 103613 (2001)]
However, this circumstance cannot be
considered where sufficient time has elapsed
for the accused to regain his composure
[People v. Ventura, G.R. No. 148145-46
(2004)].
BAR TIP: The common set-up given in a bar
problem is that of provocation given by
somebody against whom the person provoked
cannot retaliate; thus the person provoked
retaliated on a younger brother or on the father.
Although in fact, there is sufficient provocation,
it is not mitigating because the one who gave
the provocation is not the one against whom
the crime was committed.
Look at two criteria
1. Element of time; consider:
a. Material lapse of time, and
b. Effect of the threat of
provocation.
2. If at the time the offender committed
the crime, he is still suffering from
outrage of the threat or provocation
done to him., then he will still get the
benefit of this mitigating circumstance.
e. Immediate Vindication of a Grave
Offense
Requisites [GC-V-N]
1. That there be a Grave offense done to
the one Committing the felony, his
spouse, ascendants, descendants,
legitimate, natural or adopted brothers
or sisters, or Relatives by affinity within
the same degree.
2. That the felony is committed in
Vindication of such grave offense. A
lapse of time is allowed between the
vindication and the doing of the grave
offense.
3. The vindication need Not be done by
the person upon whom the grave
offense was committed.
Lapse of Time Allowed
Although the grave offense which engendered
the perturbation of mind was not so immediate,
Gravity of Personal Offense
The question whether or not a certain personal
offense is grave is dependent on the following
must be decided by the court, having in mind
[TimPlaS]:
1. Time when the insult was made;
2. Place; and
3. Social standing of the person.
Provocation v. Vindication
Provocation
[Art. 13 (6)]
As to
It is made
Offended
directly only
Party
to the
person
committing
the felony.
As to
Graveness
of Offense
The offense
need not be
a grave
offense.
As to
Immediateness of
Offense
The
provocation
or threat
must
immediately
precede the
act.
It Is a mere
spite against
the one
giving the
provocation
or threat.
As to
Subject of
Offense
Page 29 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Vindication
[Art. 13 (5)]
The grave
offense may
be
committed
against the
offender’s
relatives
mentioned
by law.
The
offended
party must
have done a
grave
offense to
the offender
of his
relatives.
The grave
offense may
be
proximate,
which admits
of an interval
of time.
It concerns
the honor of
the person.
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
f. Passion or Obfuscation
Requisites [I-P-AUS-L]:
1. The accused acted upon an Impulse
[Art. 13 (6), RPC];
2. The impulse must be so Powerful that
it naturally produces passion or
obfuscation in him [Art. 13(6), RPC;
People v. Danafrata, G.R. No. 143010
(2003)];
3. That there be an Act, both Unlawful
and Sufficient to produce such
condition of mind [People v. Comillo,
G.R. No. 186538 (2009)]; and
4. That said act which produced the
obfuscation was not far removed from
the commission of the crime by a
considerable Length of time, during
which the perpetrator might recover his
normal equanimity [Del Poso v.
People, G.R. No. 210810 (2016)].
There is passion or obfuscation when there are
causes naturally producing in a person the
following:
1. Powerful excitement
2. Loss of reason and self-control
3. Diminution the exercise of his will
power [U.S. v. Salandanan, G.R. No.
951 (1902)].
When Not Applicable
1. When the act is committed in a spirit of
lawlessness or revenge [People v.
Bates, G.R. No. 139907 (2003)].
2. If the cause of loss of self-control is
trivial and slight, obfuscation is not
mitigating [U.S. v. Diaz, G.R. No. 5155
(1910)].
3. Act causing obfuscation does not come
from the offended party [Alforte v.
People, G.R. No. 159672 (Notice)
(2014)].
Passion/Obfuscation vs. Irresistible Force
Passion or
Irresistible
Obfuscation
Force
[Art. 13 (6)]
[Art. 12 (5)]
As to Type
Mitigating
Exempting
of CircumCircumCircumstance
stance
stance
As to Role
Does not
Physical
of Physical
involve
force is a
Force
physical
condition
force.
sine qua
non.
As to
Source of
Circumstance
As to
Source of
Sentiments
Passion/
obfuscation
comes from
the offender
himself.
Must arise
from lawful
sentiments
to be
mitigating.
Irresistible
force comes
from a third
person.
Irresistible
force is
unlawful.
Passion/Obfuscation vs. Provocation
Passion or Provocation
Obfuscation [Art. 13 (4)]
[Art. 13 (6)]
As to
Provocation comes from the
Source of
injured party.
Provocation
As to
The offense
Must
Immediatewhich
immediately
ness of
endangers
precede the
Commisthe
commission
sion
perturbation
of the crime.
of the mind
need not be
immediate. It
is only
required that
the influence
thereof lasts
until the
moment the
crime is
committed.
In both, the effect is the loss
of reason and self-control
on the part of the offender.
Passion and Obfuscation Considered
Alongside Other Circumstances. Passion
and obfuscation cannot be considered
separately from:
1. Treachery
(Aggravating
Circumstance). Passion cannot coexist with treachery because in
passion, the offender loses his control
and reason while in treachery the
means employed are consciously
adopted [People v. Germina, G.R. No.
120881 (1998)].
2. Provocation
(Mitigating
Circumstance). They cannot be
considered as two separate mitigating
circumstances.
If
these
two
circumstances are based on the same
facts, they should be treated together
Page 30 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
as one mitigating circumstance
[Romera v. People, G.R. No. 151978
(2004)].
3. Vindication
(Mitigating
Circumstance). Vindication of a grave
offense and passion or obfuscation
cannot be counted separately and
independently.
If
these
two
circumstances arise from one and the
same incident, they should be
considered as only one mitigating
circumstance [People v. Torpio, G.R.
No. 138984 (2004)].
g. Voluntary Surrender or Plea of Guilt
1. Voluntary Surrender
Requisites [NA-SV]:
1. Offender has Not been actually
Arrested
Exception: Where a person, after
committing the offense and having
opportunity to escape, voluntarily
waited for the agents of the authorities
and voluntarily gave up, he is entitled
to the benefit of the circumstance, even
if he was placed under arrest by a
policeman then and there [People v.
Parana, G.R. No. L-45373 (1937)].
2. Offender Surrendered himself to a
person in authority or to the latter’s
agent
Person in authority – one directly
vested with jurisdiction. [Art. 152]
Agent of person in authority –
person, who, by direct provision of law,
or by election or by competent
authority, is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the
protection and security of life and
property and any person who comes to
the aid of persons in authority. [Art.
152]
Examples:
a. When the accused surrenders
himself to the commanding
officer [Ebajan v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 77930-31
(1989)].
b. When the accused who first
surrendered to the Municipal
Court later surrenders himself
to
the
Constabulary
headquarters of the province
[People v. Casalme, G.R. No.
L-18033 (1966)].
3. Surrender was Voluntary
Surrender is voluntary if it is
spontaneous either because he:
a. Acknowledges his guilt., or
b. Wishes to save them the
trouble and expenses that
would be necessarily incurred
in his search and capture
[Andrada v. People, G.R. No..
135222 (2005)]
Not Considered Voluntary Surrender
1. Merely requesting a policeman to
accompany the accused to the police
headquarters [People v. Flores, G.R.
No. 137497 (1994)].
2. If the only reason for the supposed
surrender is to ensure the safety of the
accused whose arrest is inevitable, the
surrender is not spontaneous and
hence not voluntary [People v. Pinca,
G.R. No. 129256 (1999)].
3. When the accused surrendered only 14
days after the commission of the
offense, as this shows that his
surrender was merely an afterthought
[People v. Agacer, G.R. No. 177751
(2011)].
2. Plea of Guilt
Requisites [SOP]:
1. Offender Spontaneously confessed his
guilt;
2. Confession of guilt was made in Open
court; and
3. Confession of guilt was made Prior to
the presentation of evidence [People v.
Crisostomo, G.R. No. L-32243 (1988)].
Legal Effects
General Rule: While the plea of guilty is
mitigating, it is also considered an admission of
all material facts alleged in the information,
including aggravating circumstances. The
admission covers both the crime and its
attendant circumstances qualifying and/or
aggravating [People v. Jose, G.R. No. L-28232
(1971)].
Exception: Plea of guilty cannot be held to
include treachery and evident premeditation
Page 31 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
where the evidence adduced does not
adequately disclose its existence [People v.
Gravino, G.R. No. L-31327-29 (1983)].
2. Physical defect must have a Relation to
the commission of the crime [REYES,
Book 1]
When Mitigating
1. Change of plea if made at the first
opportunity when his arraignment was
first set [People v. Hermino, G.R. No.
45466 (1937)].
2. Withdrawal of plea of not guilty before
presentation
of
evidence
by
prosecution [People v. Kayanan, G.R.
No. L-30355(1978)].
3. A plea of guilty on an amended
information will be considered as an
attenuating
circumstance
if
no
evidence was presented in connection
with the charges made therein [People
v. Ortiz, G.R. No. L-19585 (1965)].
Note: Illness must only diminish and not
deprive the offender of the consciousness of
his acts. Otherwise, he will be exempted from
criminal liability [People v. Javier, G.R. No.
130654 (1999)].
When Not Mitigating
1. Conditional plea of guilty - It is when
an accused admits his guilt provided
that a certain penalty be imposed upon
him [People v. Moro Sabilul, G.R. No.
L-3765 (1951)].
2. Extrajudicial Confession – It is not
voluntary confession because it was
made outside the court [People v.
Pardo, G.R. No. L-562 (1947)].
3. Plea of Guilt on Appeal - Plea must
be made at the first opportunity [People
v. Hermino, G.R. No. 45466 (1937)].
i. Illness
Requisites [DWP-DC]:
1. Illness of the offender must Diminish
the exercise of his Will-Power.
2. Illness should Not Deprive the offender
of Consciousness of his acts [People v.
Javier, G.R. No. 130654 (1999)].
Illness vs. Insanity
Illness
[Art. 13 (9)]
Definition Refers only
to diseases
of
pathological
state that
trouble the
conscience
or will.
Plea to a Lesser Offense
The accused may be allowed to plead guilty to
a lesser offense which is necessarily included
in the offense charged, with the consent of the
offended party and prosecutor. This may be
done at arraignment or after withdrawing his
plea of not guilty [Sec. 2, Rule 116, ROC].
h. Physical Defects
Requisites:
1. The offender is:
a. Deaf and Dumb
b. Blind, or
c. Otherwise suffering from some
physical defect which thus
restricts his means of:
i. Action
ii. Defense, or
iii. Communication
with
his fellow beings
As to
Effect
Diminution of
intelligence.
Page 32 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Insanity
[Art. 12 (1)]
Insanity is a
“manifestation
in language or
conduct, of
disease or
defect of the
brain, or a
more or less
permanently
diseased or
disordered
condition of
the mentality,
functional or
organic, and
characterized
by perversion,
inhibition, or
by disordered
function of the
sensory or of
the intellective
faculties, or by
impaired or
disordered
volition”
[People v.
Dungo, G.R.
No. 89420
(1991)].
Complete
deprivation of
intelligence
[People v.
CRIM1
How
Appreciated
CRIMINAL LAW
Mitigating
circumstance
Ambal, G.R.
No. 52688
(1980); People
v. Renegado,
G.R. No. L27031 (1974);
People v.
Cruz, 109 Phil.
288, 292;
People v.
Puno y
Filomeno,
G.R. No. L33211 (1981)].
Exempting
circumstance
j. Analogous Mitigating Circumstances
Any other circumstance of similar nature and
analogous to the nine mitigating circumstances
enumerated in Art. 13 may be mitigating.
Examples:
1. Stealing because of extreme poverty is
considered as analogous to incomplete
state of necessity [People v. Macbul,
G.R. No. 48976 (1943)].
2. Over 60 years old with failing sight is
considered as analogous to over 70
years of age mentioned in par. 2
[People v. Reantillo, G.R. No L-45685
(1938)].
3. Voluntary restitution of stolen goods is
considered as analogous to voluntary
surrender [People v. Luntao, 50 O.G.
1182].
4. Impulse of jealous feelings is
considered as analogous to passion
and obfuscation [People v. Libria, G.R.
No. L-6585 (1954)].
5. Testifying for the prosecution, without
previous discharge is considered as
analogous to a plea of guilty [People v.
Navasca, G.R. No. L-29107 (1977)].
6. Voluntarily taking a stolen cow back to
the authorities to save them the time
and effort of looking for the cow is
considered as analogous to voluntary
surrender [Canta v. People, G.R. No.
140937 (2001)].
4. Aggravating Circumstances [Art.
14]
KINDS OF AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. GENERIC. Those that can generally
apply to all crimes. Nos. 1, 2, 3
(dwelling), 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 14, 18, 19, and
20 except “by means of motor
vehicles”. A generic aggravating
circumstance may be offset by a
generic mitigating circumstance.
2. SPECIFIC. Those that apply only to
particular crimes. Nos. 3 (except
dwelling), 15, 16, 17 and 21.
3. QUALIFYING. Those that change the
nature of the crime (i.e. Art. 248
enumerate the qualifying AC which
qualifies the killing of person to
murder). If two or more possible
qualifying circumstances were alleged
and proven, only one would qualify the
offense and the others would be
generic aggravating.
Examples of qualifying aggravating
circumstances:
a. Circumstance of treachery or
evident premeditation qualifies
the killing of a person to
murder. [Art. 248]
b. Circumstances of grave abuse
of confidence and calamity
qualifies the crime of theft to
qualified theft. [Art. 310]
c. Circumstances of minority or
taking advantage of public
office qualifies the crime of
simple seduction to qualified
seduction. [Art. 337]
Generic v. Specific v. Qualifying [Reyes,
Book 1]
Generic
Specific
Qualifying
As to Penalty Imposed
Increases
the penalty
to the
maximum
period.
Increases
the penalty
to the
maximum
period.
Page 33 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
It places the
author of the
crime in such a
situation as to
deserve another
penalty, as
specially
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
prescribed by
law.
As to Applicability
Applicable
to all
crimes.
Applicable
to
particular
crimes.
Applicable only
to relevant
provisions
where such
circumstances
were specified
(e.g. Art. 248Murder).
As to the Nature of the Circumstance
It is not an
ingredient
of the
crime. It
only affects
the penalty
to be
imposed.
It is not an
ingredient
of the
crime. It
only affects
the penalty
to be
imposed.
Circumstance
affects the
nature of the
crime itself such
that the
offender shall
be liable for a
more serious
crime.
Circumstance is
actually an
ingredient of the
crime.
As to being offset
Can be
offset by an
ordinary
mitigating
circumstance.
Can be
offset by
ordinary
mitigating
circumstance.
Cannot be
offset by any
mitigating
circumstance.
4. INHERENT. Those that are already
elements of the felony and are thus no
longer considered against the offender
in the determination of the felony.
[Boado Comprehensive Reviewer, p.
55]
5. SPECIAL. Those which arise under
special conditions to increase the
penalty of the offense and cannot be
offset by mitigating circumstances:
a. Quasi-recidivism [Art. 160]
b. Complex crimes [Art. 48]
c. Error in personae [Art. 49]
d. Taking advantage of public
position [Art. 171]
e. Membership
in
an
organized/syndicated
crime
group [Art. 62]
f. Certain
Circumstances
in
relation to Arson [Sec. 4, P.D.
1613]
Penalty Not Increased Despite Presence of
Aggravating Circumstances:
1. Aggravating circumstances which are
included by the law in defining a crime
and prescribing the penalty [Art. 62,
par. 1].
2. Aggravating circumstances inherent in
the crime to such a degree that it must
of
necessity
accompany
the
commission thereof [Art. 62, par. 2].
Aggravating Circumstances Personal to
Offenders
Aggravating circumstances which arise from:
1. Moral attributes of offender (evident
premeditation);
2. His private relations with offended
party (consanguinity and affinity); and
3. Any other personal cause (recidivism).
Effect: Above circumstances shall only serve
to aggravate the liability of the principals,
accomplices, and accessories as to whom
such circumstances apply [Art. 62, par. 3].
Aggravating Circumstances which Depend
on the Knowledge for their Application
The following circumstances shall serve to
aggravate the liability of only the persons who
had knowledge of them at the time of the
execution of the act or their cooperation
therein:
1. Circumstances related to the material
execution of the act; and
2. Circumstances related to the means
employed to accomplish it (e.g.
nighttime) [Art. 62, par. 4]
Aggravating/Qualifying Circumstance Must
be Alleged in the Information
Every Complaint or Information must state the
qualifying and aggravating circumstances
[Sec. 8, Rule 110, Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure]. If not alleged, they may still be
considered in the award for damages [People
v. Evina, G.R. Nos. 12430-31 (2003)].
Page 34 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites of Aggravating Circumstances [PuCoRDAOP NiCARHAP IECSTIU BUMOC]
Aggravating
Circumstance
Requisites
Basis
Par. 1. Taking
advantage of Public
office
[PIPAM]
1. Offender is a Public Officer
2. Such officer used the Influence, Prestige or
Ascendancy which his office gives him
3. The same was used as Means by which he
realizes his purpose.
Personal
circumstance of the
offender and the
means to secure the
commission of the
crime
Par. 2. In Contempt
of or with insult to
public authorities
[ENOKP]
1. Public authority is Engaged in the exercise of his
functions.
2. Public authority is Not the person against whom
the crime is committed.
3. Offender Knows him to be a public authority.
4. His Presence has not prevented the offender
from committing the criminal act.
Lack of respect for
the public authorities
Par. 3. With insult or [RASD]
lack of regard due to 1. Insult or disregard was made on account of:
offended party by
a. Rank – designation or title used to fix the
reason of Rank,
relative position of the offended party in
age, or sex
reference to others. There must be a
difference in the social condition of the
offender and offended party
b. Age - May refer to old age or tender age of
the victim.
c. Sex - Refers to the female sex [(People v.
Inggo, G.R. No. 140872 (2003)]
2. Such insult or disregard was Deliberately
intended.
Personal circumstances of the
offended party
Par. 3. Dwelling
[BS(ReCo) + NP]
1. Act was committed in the dwelling, which may
pertain to a:
1. Building; or
2. Structure, which is
3. Exclusively used for Rest and
Comfort.
2. Offended party must Not give Provocation.
Place of the commission of the crime
Par. 4. Abuse of
confidence
[TAF]
1. Offended party had Trusted the offender.
2. Offender Abused such trust by committing a
crime against the offended party.
3. The abuse of confidence Facilitated the
commission of the crime.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 4. Obvious
ungratefulness
[TAU]
1. Offended party Trusted the offender;
2. Offender Abused such trust; and
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Page 35 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
Aggravating
Circumstance
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites
Basis
3. Act was committed with obvious
Ungratefulness.
Par. 5. In the palace
of the Chief
Executive or in his
presence, or where
public authorities
are engaged in the
discharge of their
duties, or in a Place
dedicated to
religious worship
Crime was committed: [PalPreDRW]
1. In the Palace of the Chief Executive, or
2. In his Presence, or
3. Where public authorities are engaged in the
Discharge of their duties, or
4. In a place dedicated to Religious Worship
Place of the commission of the crime
Par. 6. Nighttime,
uninhabited place,
by a band
Circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place or
band: [FES]
1. Facilitated the commission of the crime;
[Reyes, Book 1, p. 364]; and
2. Was Especially Sought for by the offender to
insure the commission of the crime or for the
purpose of impunity; [People v. Pardo, G.R.
No. L-562 (1947)].
Time, place, and
means of the
commis-sion of the
crime
Par. 7. On occasion
of a Calamity
The offender must take advantage of the calamity
or misfortune
Time and place of the
commis-sion of the
crime
Par. 8. Aid of Armed
men or means to
ensure impunity
[ArMC AAA]
1. That the armed men or persons took part in
the Commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly; and
2. Accused Availed himself of their Aid or relied
upon them when the crime was committed.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 9. Recidivism
[TPCSC]
1. Offender is on Trial for an offense;
2. He was Previously Convicted by final judgment
of another crime;
3. That both the 1st and 2nd offenses are
embraced in the Same title of the Code; and
4. Offender is Convicted of the new offense.
Inclination to commit
crime
Par. 10. Reiteracion
or Habituality
[TP-SEG2-C]
1. Accused is on Trial for an offense;
2. He Previously Served sentence for another
offense to which the law attaches:
1. an equal or greater penalty, or
2. 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.
Inclination to commit
crime
Page 36 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Aggravating
Circumstance
Par. 11. Price,
reward, or promise
Requisites
[TOAI]
1. There must be Two or more principals
1. One who gives or Offers price or
promise
2. One who Accepts it
2. Price, reward, or promise must be for the
purpose of Inducing another to perform the deed.
Basis
Motivating power
The price, reward or promise need not: [MAD]
1. Consist of or refer to Material things; or
2. Be Actually Delivered; it being sufficient that the
offer made by the principal by inducement was
accepted by the principal by direct participation
before the commission of the offense.
Par. 12. Inundation,
fire, poison,
explosion, etc.
Crime was committed by means of: [IFPESIDO]
1. Inundation
2. Fire
3. Poison
4. Explosion
5. Stranding of a vessel
6. Intentional damage to a vessel
7. Derailment of a locomotive
8. Any Other artifice involving great waste and ruin
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 13. Evident
premeditation
Prosecution must prove: [TAL]
1. Time when the offender determined to commit
the crime;
2. An Act manifestly indicating that the culprit has
clung to his determination; and
3. A sufficient Lapse of time between the
determination and execution, to allow him to reflect
upon the consequences of his act and to allow his
conscience to overcome the resolution of his will.
Means and ways
employed in
commission of the
crime
Par. 14. Craft, fraud,
or disguise
That the crime was committed by means of:
1. Craft: Intellectual trickery and cunning on the
part of the accused;
2. Fraud: Insidious words or machinations used to
induce the victim to act in a manner which would
enable the offender to carry out his design; or
3. Disguise: Any device to conceal identity
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 15. Superior
strength or means
to weaken defense
[NIP]
1. There is a Notorious Inequality of forces
between victim and aggressor.
2. Offender Purposely used excessive force out of
proportion to the means of defense available to the
persons attacked.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 16. Alevosia
(Treachery)
[CAN]
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Page 37 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
Aggravating
Circumstance
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites
Basis
1. Offender Consciously Adopts particular means,
methods, or forms tending directly and specially to
ensure the execution of the crime.
2. The employment of such means gave the
offended party No opportunity to defend himself or
retaliate.
Par. 17. Ignominy
The means employed or the circumstances
brought about must tend to make the effects of the
crime more humiliating or to put the offended party
to shame.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 18. Unlawful
entry
Entrance is effected by a way not intended for the
purpose.
Means and ways
employed in
commission of the
crime
Par. 19. Breaking
wall, floor, roof
[WaRFDWiE]
1. Breaking the Wall, Roof, Floor, Door, or Window
is a means to the commission of the crime; and
2. Breaking was used as a means to effect
Entrance and not merely for escape.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Par. 20. With aid of
persons Under 15
Commission of the crime is committed with the aid
of children under 15 years of age
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Repress practice of
criminals to avail of
minors and take
advantage of their
irresponsibility
Par. 20. By Motor
vehicles, airships, or
other similar means
Par. 21. Cruelty
[MS-MC(GoCaF)]
1. That any of the following was used:
a. Motorized vehicles; or
b. Other efficient means of transportation
Similar to automobile or airplane.
2. The same was used as Means of Committing
the crime, such as by using the same to:
a. Go to the place of the crime
b. Carry away the effects thereof; and
c. Facilitate their escape
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
[DIUE]
1. Injury caused be was Deliberately Increased by
causing other wrong;
2. Other wrong was Unnecessary for the Execution
of the purpose of the offender.
Means and ways
employed in commission of the crime
Page 38 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
To counteract the
great facilities found
by modern criminals
as means to commit
crime, and flee and
abscond
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Taking Advantage of Public Office
Kind: Generic & Special
Circumstance [R.A. 7659]
Aggravating
Requisites [PIPAM]
1. Offender is a Public Officer
2. Such officer used the Influence,
Prestige or Ascendancy which his
office gives him
3. The same was used as Means by
which he realizes his purpose. [U.S. v.
Rodriguez, G.R. No. 6344 (1911)]
Test: “Did the accused abuse his office in order
to commit the crime?” [U.S. v. Rodriguez, G.R.
No. 6344 (1911)]
If the accused could have perpetrated the
crime even without occupying his position,
there is no abuse of public position [People v.
Villamor, G.R. Nos. 140407-08 (2002)].
b. Contempt
Authorities
or
Insult
to
Public
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites [ENOKP]
1. Public authority is Engaged in the
exercise of his functions
2. Public authority is Not the person
against whom the crime is committed
3. Offender Knows him to be a public
authority
4. His Presence has not prevented the
offender from committing the criminal
act.
Note: If the crime is committed against the
public authority while in the performance of his
duty, the offender commits direct assault
instead [Art. 148, RPC].
Effect of Failure to Allege Knowledge in
Information
Failure to expressly allege in the Information
that the accused had the knowledge that the
person attacked was a person in authority does
not render the information defective so long as
there are facts therein from which it can be
implied that the accused knew that the person
attacked was a person in authority [People v.
Balbar, G.R. Nos. L-20216-17 (1967)].
c. Insult or Disregard of the Respect
Due the Offended Party on Account of
His: (a) Rank; (b) Age; or (c) Sex, or that
It Be Committed in the Dwelling of the
Offended Party
These may be considered singly when their
elements are distinctly perceived and can
subsist independently [People v. Santos, 91
Phil. 320, 327-328 (1952)].
1. Insult or Disregard
Kind: Specific Aggravating Circumstance
Specific to crimes against persons or honor
[People v. Pagal, G.R. No. L-32040 (1977)].
Requisites: [RASD]
1. Insult or disregard was made on
account of:
a. Rank – designation or title
used to fix the relative position
of the offended party in
reference to others. There
must be a difference in the
social condition of the offender
and offended party
b. Age - May refer to old age or
tender age of the victim.
c. Sex - Refers to the female sex
[Art. 14 (3), RPC]
2. Such insult or disregard was
Deliberately intended
Deliberately Intended
There must be evidence that in the commission
of the crime, the accused deliberately intended
to offend or insult the sex or age of the offended
party [People v. Mangsat, G.R. No. L-34675].
Not
Considered
as
Aggravating
Circumstance:
1. When the offender acted with passion
and obfuscation [People v. Ibañez,
G.R. No. 197813].
2. When there exists a relationship
between the offended party and the
offender [People v. Valencia, G.R. No.
L-39864 (1993)].
3. When the condition of being a woman
is indispensable in the commission of
the crime (e.g., rape, abduction, or
seduction). [Reyes, Book 1, p. 348]
Page 39 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Guidelines to Prove Age
1. The Court established the guidelines in
appreciating age, either as an element
of the crime or as a qualifying
circumstance, as follows:
2. Best evidence - original or certified
true copy of the certificate of live birth
of such party.
3. In the absence of a certificate of live
birth, similar authentic documents
(e.g., baptismal certificate and school
records which show the date of birth)
4. In the absence of the foregoing,
testimony, if clear and credible, of the
victim's mother or a member of the
family either by affinity or consanguinity
who is qualified to testify on matters
respecting pedigree such as the exact
age or date of birth of the offended
party pursuant to Section 40, Rule 130
of the Rules on Evidence shall be
sufficient under the following
circumstances:
a. If the victim is alleged to be
below 3 years of age and what
is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 7 years old;
b. If the victim is alleged to be
below 7 years of age and what
is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 12 years old;
c. If the victim is alleged to be
below 12 years of age and what
is sought to be proved is that
she is less than 18 years old.
5. In the absence of the foregoing, the
complainant's testimony will suffice
provided that it is expressly and clearly
admitted by the accused.
Note: It is the prosecution that has the burden
of proving the age of the offended party. The
failure of the accused to object to the
testimonial evidence regarding age shall not be
taken against him [People v. Arpon, G.R. No.
183563 (2011)].
2. Act Committed in Dwelling
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites [BS(ReCo) + NP]
1. Act was committed in the dwelling,
which may pertain to a:
a. Building; or
b. Structure, which is
c. Exclusively used for Rest and
Comfort.
2. Offended party must Not give
Provocation.
Dwelling
Building or structure, exclusively used for rest
and comfort. It is not necessary that the victim
owns where she lives or dwells. A lessee,
boarder, or bedspacer can consider such place
as his home, the sanctity of which the law
seeks to uphold [People v. Daniel, G.R. No. L40330 (1978)].
Dwelling includes dependencies such as the
foot of the staircase and enclosure under the
house [U.S. v. Tapan, G.R. No. 6504 (1911)].
Dwelling cannot be appreciated as an
aggravating circumstance when the rape is
committed on the ground floor of a two-story
structure, the lower floor being used as a video
rental store and not as a private place of abode
or residence [People v. Tao, G.R. No. 133872
(2000)].
Dwelling v. Domicile
Dwelling should not be understood in the
concept of a domicile. A person can have more
than one dwelling.
Considered
as
Aggravating
Circumstances:
1. Even without entry to dwelling - it is
enough that the victim was attacked
inside his own house [People v.
Ompaid, G.R. No. L-23513 (1969)].
2. When crime was committed outside
the dwelling - Dwelling is still
aggravating if the commission of the
crime began inside the dwelling [U.S. v.
Lastimosa, G.R. No. 9178 (1914)].
Not Considered as an Aggravating
Circumstance:
1. When both offender and offended party
are occupants of the same house [U.S.
v. Rodriguez, supra.], and this is true
even if offender is a servant of the
house [People v. Caliso, supra].
2. When the owner of the dwelling gave
sufficient and immediate provocation
[People v. Molina y Flores, G.R. No.
129051 (1999)].
3. Crimes where Dwelling is Inherent:
Page 40 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Trespass to Dwelling [Art. 280,
RPC]
b. Robbery with force upon things
[Art. 299, RPC]
d. Abuse of Confidence or Obvious
Ungratefulness
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
1. Abuse of Confidence
Requisites: [TAF]
1. Offended party Trusted the offender
2. Offender Abused such trust
3. Abuse of confidence Facilitated the
commission of the crime
Confidence
Confidence between the offender and the
offended party must be immediate and
personal. If two persons just met for the first
time, there can be no personal or immediate
relationship upon which confidence might rest
between them [People v. Mandolado, G.R. No.
L-51304-05 (1983)].
Abuse
Confidence
is an
Inherent
Circumstance of:
1. Qualified seduction [Art. 337, RPC]
2. Qualified theft [Art. 310, RPC]
3. Estafa
by
conversion
or
misappropriation [Art. 315, RPC]
4. Malversation [Art. 217, RPC]
2. Obvious Ungratefulness
Requisites: [TAU]
1. Offended party Trusted the offender
2. Offender Abused such trust
3. Act was committed with obvious
Ungratefulness
e. Crime was Committed in the Palace
of the Chief Executive or In His
Presence, or Where Public Authorities
are Engaged in the Discharge of their
Duties, or In A Place Dedicated to
Religious Worship
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Four (4) Circumstances Contemplated
Crime was committed: [PalPreDRW]
1. In the Palace of the Chief Executive, or
2. In his Presence, or
3. Where public authorities are engaged
in the Discharge of their duties, or
4. In a place dedicated to Religious
Worship.
Note: Offender must have the intention to
commit a crime when he entered the place
[People v. Jaurigue, C.A. No. 384 (1946)].
Where public authorities are engaged in the
discharge of their duties (Par. 5) v.
Contempt or insult to public authorities
(Par. 2)
Public
Contempt
Authorities
or Insult to
Engaged in
Public
Discharge
Authorities
of Duties
(Par. 2)
(Par. 5)
Public authorities are
engaged in the performance
of their duties.
As to Acts
Crime was
Crime was
Punished
committed in committed in
a place here the presence
public
of a public
authorities
authority
are engaged engaged in
in the
the
discharge of performance
their duties.
of his
function,
regardless of
the place.
As to
Offended
Public
Offended
party may or authority
Party
may not be
should not
the public
be the
authority.
offended
party.
f. Crime was Committed (1) in the Night
Time, or (2) in an Uninhabited Place, or
(3) by a Band, Whenever Such
Circumstances May Facilitate the
Commission of the Offense
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites:
Circumstances of nighttime, uninhabited place
or band: [FES]
1. Facilitated the commission of the
crime;
Page 41 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Was Especially Sought for by the
offender to insure the commission of
the crime or for the purpose of impunity
[People v. Pardo, G.R. No. L-562
(1947)].
Can be Considered Separately
General Rule: If they concur in the
commission of the crime, they are considered
as one aggravating circumstance.
Exception: When the following are present:
1. When their elements are distinctly
perceived
2. When they can subsist independently.
3. When it reveals a greater degree of
perversity [People v. Santos, G.R. No.
L41-89 (1952)].
2. Uninhabited Place
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
[People v. Desalisa, G.R. No. 95262 (1994)].
Solitude must be sought to better attain the
criminal purpose [People v. Aguinaldo, G.R.
No. 33843 (1931)].
When place of crime could be seen and the
voice of the victim could be heard from a
nearby house, the place of the crime is not
“uninhabited” [People v. Laoto, G.R. No. 1928
(1928)].
1. Nighttime (Nocturnidad)
3. Band (Cuadrilla)
The commission of the crime must begin and
be accomplished in the nighttime (after sunset
and before sunrise, cf. Art. 13, Civil Code).
It is necessary that there be more than three
armed malefactors acting together in the
commission of the offense [Art. 14(6); People
v. Atencio, G.R. No. L-22518 (1968)]
Two (2) Tests for Nocturnity
1. Objective test – nighttime is
aggravating because the darkness
facilitated the commission of the
offense; [People v. Pardo, G.R. No. L562 (1947)] and
2. Subjective test – nighttime is
aggravating because the darkness was
purposely sought by the offender
[People v. Ventura, supra].
Nighttime and Treachery
General Rule: Nighttime is absorbed in
treachery if it is part of the treacherous means
to insure the execution of the crime [People v.
Ong, G.R. No. 34497 (1975)].
Exception: Where both the treacherous mode
of attack and nocturnity were deliberately
chosen upon the same case. Both may be
perceived distinct from one another [People v.
Berdida, G.R. No. L-20183 (1966)].
Well-lit place
When the place is illuminated by light,
nighttime is not aggravating [People v. Bato,
G.R. No. L-23405 (1967)].
This aggravating circumstance requires that
there should be at least four persons who
commit the crime, all of whom should be
armed. Even if there are four offenders, but
only three or less are armed, it is not a band.
Here, there is no evidence that all four accused
were armed at the time of the perpetration of
the crime. Hence, this circumstance cannot be
appreciated against the appellants [People v.
Solamillo, G.R. No. 123161 (2003)].
If only two of the accused carried firearms, en
cuadrilla cannot be appreciated as aggravating
circumstance [People v. Oco, G.R. Nos.
137370-71 (2003)].
Requisites:
1. More than three malefactors
2. All of them should be armed [People v.
Solamillo, supra; People v. Oco, supra]
3. Malefactors acted together in the
commission of the offense
Abuse of superior strength and use of firearms
are absorbed by the aggravating circumstance
of by a band [People v. Escabarte, G.R. No. L42964 (1988)].
Page 42 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Not
Considered
as
Aggravating
Circumstance in Brigandage
Brigandage is committed by more than three
armed persons forming a band of robbers [Art.
306, RPC]. Thus, that the crime was committed
by a band is inherent in the definition of the
crime and is not aggravating [Reyes, Book 1,
p. 374].
g. On the Occasion of a Conflagration,
Shipwreck, Earthquake, Epidemic or
Other Calamity or Misfortune
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Rationale: The debased form of criminality of
one who, in the midst of a great calamity,
instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to
their suffering by taking advantage of their
misfortune and despoiling them [U.S. v.
Rodriguez, G.R. No. 6344 (1911)].
Requisite:
Offender must take advantage of the calamity
or misfortune.
“Or Other Calamity or Misfortune”
Refers to other conditions of distress similar to
“conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake or
epidemic.”
commission of the crime acted under
the same plan and for the same
purpose [People v. Piring, G.R. No.
45053 (1936)].
3. Casual presence, or when the offender
did not avail himself of their aid nor
knowingly count upon their assistance
in the commission of the crime [U.S. v.
Abaigar, G.R. No. 1255 (1903)].
By a Band (Par. 6) v. Aid of Armed Men (Par.
8)
By a Band
With Aid of
(Par. 6)
Armed Men
(Par. 8)
As to
Requires
At least 2
Number of
more than 3 armed men
Malefactors
armed
malefactors
(at least 4)
As to
Band
Armed men
Degree of
members
are mere
Participation are all
accomplices
principals
[Reyes,
[Reyes,
Book 1, p.
Book 1, p.
376]
372]
i. Recidivism
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
h. Aid of Armed Men or Persons Who
Insure or Afford Impunity
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites: [ArMAAA]
1. Armed men or persons took part in the
commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly; and
2. Accused Availed himself of their Aid or
relied upon them while the crime was
committed.
Armed Men
Persons equipped with weapons. It also covers
armed women [People v. Licop, G.R. No.
L06061 (1954)].
Not Considered as an Aggravating
Circumstance:
1. When both the attacking party and the
party attacked were equally armed.
[Albert]
2. When the accused as well as those
who cooperated with him in the
Requisites [TPCSC]
1. Offender is on Trial for an offense;
2. He was Previously Convicted by final
judgment of another crime;
3. Both the first and second offenses are
embraced in the Same title of the Code;
4. Offender is Convicted of the new
offense.
See: Recidivism under Multiple Offenders for
detailed discussion
j. Reiteracion
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites: [TP-SEG2-C]
1. Offender is on Trial for an offense.
2. He was Previously Served sentence
for:
a. Another offense of Equal or
Greater penalty than the new
offense; or
Page 43 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
b. 2 or more crimes of lighter
penalty
3. Offender is Convicted of the new
offense.
See: Reiteracion under Multiple Offenders for
detailed discussion.
k. In Consideration of a Price, Reward,
or Promise
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites: [TOAI]
1. There must be Two or more principals:
a. One who gives or Offers price
or promise; and
b. One who Accepts it [Reyes,
Book 1].
2. Price, reward, or promise must be for
the purpose of Inducing another to
perform the deed. [Reyes, Book 1]
The price, reward or promise need not: [MAD]
1. Consist of or refer to Material things; or
2. Be Actually Delivered; it being
sufficient that the offer made by the
principal by inducement was accepted
by the principal by direct participation
before the commission of the offense.
[Regalado, pp. 100-101]
When this circumstance is present, it affects
not only the person who received the price or
reward, but also the person who gave it.
[Reyes, Book 1]
Voluntarily giving such price or reward without
previous promise, as an expression of
appreciation for the sympathy and aid, is not
takn into consideration to increase the penalty
[U.S. v. Flores, G.R. No. 9008 (1914)].
l. Committed by Means of Inundation,
Fire, Poison, Explosion, Stranding of a
Vessel or Intentional Damage Thereto,
Derailment of a Locomotive, or By the
Use of Any Other Artifice Involving
Great Waste and Ruin
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites: [IFPESIDO]
Crime was committed by means of:
1. Inundation
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Fire
Poison
Explosion
Stranding of a vessel
Intentional damage to a vessel
Derailment of a locomotive
Any Other artifice involving great waste
and ruin
Use of Fire as to Arson and Murder
1. If intent is to kill – crime is murder and
fire is considered as a qualifying
circumstance, even if the house is
burned in the process. [Art. 248, RPC]
2. If the intent is to destroy property –
crime is arson even if someone dies as
consequence [People v. Paterno, et al.,
G.R. No. L-2665 (1950)].
m. Evident Premeditation
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Requisites [TAL]
The prosecution must prove:
1. The Time when the offender
determined to commit the crime;
2. An Act manifestly indicating that the
culprit has clung to his determination;
and
3. Sufficient Lapse of time between the
determination and execution, to allow
him to reflect upon the consequences
of his act and to allow his conscience
to overcome the resolution of his will
[People v. Raquipo, G.R. No. 90766
(1990)].
Evident premeditation must be based on
external facts which are evident, not merely
suspected, which indicate deliberate planning
[People v. Abadies, G.R. No. 135975 (2002)].
There must be direct evidence showing a plan
or preparation to kill, or proof that the accused
meditated and reflected upon his decision to kill
the victim. Criminal intent must be evidenced
by notorious outward acts evidencing a
determination to commit the crime. In order to
be considered an aggravation of the offense,
the circumstance must not merely be
"premeditation" but must be "evident
premeditation" [People v. Abadies, G.R. No.
135975 (2002)].
Page 44 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Essence of premeditation
1. An opportunity to coolly and serenely
think and deliberate
a. On the meaning; and
b. Consequences of what he
planned to do.
2. An interval long enough for his
conscience and better judgment to
overcome his evil desire and scheme
[People v. Durante, G.R. No. L-31101
(1929)].
Note:
• Premeditation must be based upon
external facts, and must be evident,
not merely suspected indicating
deliberate planning [People v. Mariano,
G.R. No. 134847 (2000)].
• The date and time when the offender
determined to commit the crime is
essential, because the lapse of time
for the purpose of the third requisite is
computed from that date and time
[Rabor v. People, G.R. No. 140344
(2000)].
• Conspiracy
presupposes
premeditation [U.S. v. Cornejo, G.R.
No. 9773 (1914)] Exception: When
conspiracy is merely implied [People v.
Upao Moro, G.R. No. L-6771 (1957)].
• It is not necessary that the accused
premeditated the killing of a
particular individual. If the offender
premeditated on the killing of any
person (general attack), it is proper to
consider
as
an
aggravating
circumstance because whoever was
killed was contemplated in the
premeditation [US v. Manalinde, G.R.
No. L-5292 (1909)].
Not
Considered
as
Aggravating
Circumstance:
1. Anger or Grudge - The mere
existence of ill-feeling or grudge
between the parties is not sufficient to
establish premeditated killing. There
must be an outward act showing or
manifesting criminal intent [People v.
Bernal, G.R. No. 113685 (2002)].
2. Crimes Where Premeditation is
Inherent:
a. Preconceived act – where the
accused would execute the
preconceived act only after
having thought out the method
by which he intends to
accomplish it (e.g. arson, theft,
estafa, etc.) [People v. Cu,
G.R. No. L-13413 (1977)].
b. Robbery; except in robbery
with
homicide
if
the
premeditation includes the
killing of the victim [People v.
Valeriano, G.R. No. L-2159
(1951)].
c. Treason [People v. Racaza,
G.R. No. L-365 (1942)]
3. Error in personae – Premeditation is
not aggravating when there is mistake
of identity as the victim is not the object
of premeditation [People v. Dueño,
G.R. No. L-31102 (1979)].
4. Aberratio ictus – When the victim is
different
from
that
intended,
premeditation is not aggravating
[People v. Hilario, et al., G.R. No.
128083 (2001)].
n. Craft, Fraud,
Employed
or
Disguise
was
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Crime was committed by means of:
1. Craft - It is chicanery resorted to by the
accused to aid in the execution of his
criminal design [People v. Zea, G.R.
No. L-23109 (1984)].
2. Fraud - When there is a direct
inducement by insidious words or
machinations, fraud is present. [People
v. Labuguen, G.R. No. 127849 (2000)]
3. Disguise - When one uses some
device to prevent recognition [People
v. Bermas, G.R. Nos. 76416 & 94312
(1999)].
TEST: Whether the device or
contrivance was intended to or did
make identification more difficult, such
as the use of a mask, false hair or
beard [People v. Reyes, G.R. No.
118649 (1998)].
If Disguise was Ineffective
When in spite of the use of disguise, the culprits
were recognized by the victim, disguise is not
considered as an aggravating circumstance
[People v. Sonsona, G.R. No. L-8966 (1956)].
Page 45 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Craft v. Fraud v. Disguise
Craft
1. Advantage of Superior Strength
Fraud
Disguise
As to Purpose
Done in
order to not
arouse
suspicion
Done to induce
Done to
someone through conceal
insidious words
identity
and
machinations
Craft and Fraud absorbed in Treachery
Craft and fraud may be absorbed in treachery
if they have been deliberately adopted as the
means, methods or forms for the treacherous
strategy. Otherwise, they may co-exist
independently where they are adopted for a
different purpose in the commission of the
crime [People v. Lab-eo, supra].
Not Considered as an Aggravating
Circumstance
1. Qualified theft [Art. 310, RPC] – Craft
is an element of qualified theft [People
v. Tiongson, C.A., 59 O.G. 4521].
2. Crimes where Fraud is inherent:
a. Preventing the meeting of
Congress and similar bodies
[Art. 143, RPC]
b. Violation of parliamentary
immunity [Art. 145, RPC]
c. Crimes against public interest
under Chapter Three
d. Crimes committed by public
officers under Chapter Three
e. Execution of deeds by means
of violence or intimidation [Art.
298, RPC]
f. Crimes against property under
Chapters 5 and 6
g. Marriage contracted against
the provisions of the law [Art.
350, RPC]
h. Rape
through
fraudulent
machination [Art. 266-A (1)(c),
RPC]
o. (i) Taking Advantage of Superior
Strength; or (ii) Means were Employed
to Weaken the Defense
Kind: Specific Aggravating Circumstance
To use purposely excessive force out of
proportion to the means of defense available to
the person attacked [People v. Martinez, G.R.
No. L-31755 (1980)].
Requisites: [NIP]
1. There is a Notorious Inequality of
forces between victim and aggressor
[People v. Barcelon, G.R. No. 144308
(2002)].
2. Offender Purposely used excessive
force out of proportion to the means of
defense available to the persons
attacked [People v. Sansaet, G.R. No.
139330 (2002)].
Considerations in Determining Abuse of
Superior Strength
1. Age;
2. Size; and
3. Strength of the parties [People v.
Cabato, G.R. No. L-37400 (1988)]
The means used must not totally eliminate
possible defense of the victim, otherwise it will
fall under treachery.
Not Considered as an Aggravating
Circumstance:
1. When one who attacks is overcome
with passion and obfuscation [Reyes,
Book 1]
2. When quarrel arose unexpectedly
[U.S. v. Badines, G.R. No. 1951
(1905)]
3. When treachery is present, superior
strength is absorbed. [People v. Mobe,
G.R. No. L-1292 (1948)]
4. Crimes where Abuse of Superior
Strength is Inherent:
a. Parricide [People v. Galapia,
G.R. Nos. L-39303-05 (1978)]
b. Rape [People v. de Leon, G.R.
No. 128436 (1999)]
Note: For superior strength to aggravate a
crime, it must be clearly shown that there was
deliberate intent to take advantage of it. The
mere fact that the accused were superior in
number is not sufficient to consider the use of
superior strength [People v. Martinez, supra].
Page 46 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
By a Band v. Abuse of Superior Strength
By a band
Abuse of superior
strength
When the offense is
committed by more
than 3 armed
malefactors
regardless of the
comparative
strength of the
victim.
The gravamen of
abuse of superiority
is the taking
advantage by the
culprits of their
collective strength to
overpower their
weaker victims.
2. Means Employed to Weaken Defense
The offender employs means that materially
weakens the resisting power of the offended
party [People v. Ducusin, G.R. No. 30724
(1929)].
Where one, struggling with another, suddenly
throws a cloak over the head of his opponent,
and, while in this situation, wounds or kills him
employs means to weaken the defense [U.S. v.
Devela, G.R. No. 1542 (1904)].
This aggravating circumstance is appreciated
where the accused intentionally intoxicated the
victim [People v. Ducusin, supra].
p. Treachery (Alevosia)
Kind: Specific Aggravating Circumstance;
Specific to crimes against persons
Requisites: [CAN]
1. Offender
Consciously
Adopts
particular means, methods, or forms
tending directly and specially to ensure
the execution of the crime.
2. The employment of such means gave
the offended party No opportunity to
defend himself or retaliate [Art. 14, par.
16, RPC].
The essence of treachery is that by virtue of the
means, method or form employed by the
offender, the offended party was not able to put
up any defense [People v. Tiozon, G.R. No.
89823 (1991)].
Appreciation of Treachery Does Not
Depend on the Results
The treacherous character of the means
employed in the aggression does not depend
upon the result thereof but upon the means
itself. Thus, frustrated murder could be
aggravated by treachery [People v. Parana,
G.R. No. 45373 (1937)].
Sudden Attack
The mode of attack must be consciously
adopted. The accused must make some
preparation to kill the deceased in such manner
as to insure the execution of the crime or to
make it impossible or hard for the person
attacked to defend himself or retaliate [People
v. Tumaob, G.R. Mo. 125690 (1998)].
Treachery may still be appreciated even when
the victim was forewarned of danger to his
person. What is decisive is that the execution
of the attack made it impossible for the victim
to defend himself or to retaliate [People v.
Malejana, G.R. No. 145002 (2006)].
Hence, a sudden attack by the assailant,
whether frontally or from behind, is treachery if
he deliberately adopted such mode of attack
with the purpose of depriving the victim of a
chance to either fight or retreat [People v. Labeo, supra].
In a 2019 decision penned by J. Zalameda, the
Court emphasized that the mere suddenness
of an attack does not necessarily equate to
treachery. Even though the victim may have
been unarmed and was stabbed at the
doorstep, that it was done in broad daylight, in
a house shared with other tenants, and within
the immediate view and proximity of the
witness, negates that the attack was done
deliberately to ensure the victim would not be
able to defend himself, or to retreat, or even to
seek help from others [People v. Dela Cruz,
G.R. No. 227997 (2019)].
Example of Frontal Attack: There is
treachery when the victim is shot, albeit
frontally, with his hands raised to show that he
would not fight, or because of fright, or to try to
ward off the shots that were to come [People v.
Dulos, G.R. No. 107328 (1994)].
Continuous
and
Non-continuous
Aggression
1. When aggression is continuous –
treachery must be present in the
beginning of the assault. [U.S. v.
Balagtas, G.R. No. 6432 (1911)]
Page 47 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. When
aggression
was
not
continuous – in that there was an
interruption, it is sufficient that
treachery was present at the moment
the fatal blow was given [U.S. v.
Baluyot, G.R. No. 14476 (1919)].
Degree of Proof
Treachery cannot be presumed. The
suddenness of the attack does not, of itself,
suffice to support a finding of alevosia, so long
as the decision was made all of a sudden and
the victim’s helpless position was accidental
[People v. Lubreo, G.R. No. 74146 (1991)].
Conspiracy
When there is conspiracy in the commission of
a crime, treachery can be appreciated against
all conspirators [People v. Ong, G.R. No. L34497 (1975)].
No Aggravating Circumstance:
1. When the offended party was able to
put up a defense [People v. Butler,
G.R. No. L-50276 (1983)]
2. When victim’s helpless position was
accidental [People v. Cadag, G.R. No.
L-13830 (1961)]
3. When there was no other witness to the
offense or when such witness could not
provide full details of the attack.
[People v. Tiozon, G.R. No. 89823
(1991)]
4. Crimes where treachery is inherent:
a. Murder by poisoning [People v.
Caliso, G.R. No. L-37271
(1933)]
b. Treason [People v. Racaza,
supra]
Treachery
Absorbs
the
Following
Aggravating Circumstances: [CANAMBES]
1. Craft [People v. Malig, G.R. No. L-2083
(1949)]
2. Abuse of superior strength [People v.
Siaotong, G.R. No. L-9242 (1957)]
3. Nighttime [People v. Corpuz &
Serquiña, G.R. No. L-12718 (1960)]
4. Aid of Armed men [People v. Siaotong,
supra]
5. Band [People v. Ampo-an, G.R. No.
75366 (1990)]
6. Employing means to weaken the
defense [People v. Siaotong, supra]
7. Disregard of Sex [People v. Clementer,
G.R. No. L-33490 (1974)]
Treachery v. Evident Premeditation
Treachery
Evident
Premeditation
As to
Swiftness and
Cool thought
essen- unexpectedness and reflection
ce
of the attack
upon the
unsuspecting
and unarmed
victim who does
not give the
slightest
provocation
[People v. Rebamontan, G.R. No. 125318
(1999)]
q. Ignominy
Kind: Specific Aggravating Circumstance;
Specific to the following [C MaRia CLaRa]
1. Coercion (light or grave) [People v.
Cantong, C.A., 50 O.G. 5899]
2. Murder [U.S. v. de Leon, G.R. No. 522
(1902)]
3. Wanton Robbery for personal gain
[People v. Racaza, supra]
4. Crimes against Chastity
5. Less serious physical injuries [Art. 265,
RPC]
6. Rape
Ignominy
It is a circumstance pertaining to the moral
order, which adds disgrace to the material
injury caused by the crime [People v. Acaya,
G.R. No. L-72998 (1988)].
When Appreciated
Ignominy is appreciated when the offense is
committed in a manner that tends to make its
effect more humiliating, adding to the victim’s
moral suffering. Thus, where the victim was
already dead when his body or a part thereof
was dismembered, ignominy cannot be taken
against the accused [People v. Cachola, G.R.
No. 135047 (2004)].
Examples:
1. Raping a woman from behind. It is
something which offends the morals of
the offended woman because this is
how animals do it [People v. Siao, G.R.
No. 126021 (2000)].
2. Examining a woman’s genitals before
raping her in the presence of her old
father were deliberately done to
Page 48 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
humiliate her, thereby aggravating and
compounding her moral sufferings
[People v. Bumidang, G.R. No. 130630
(2000)].
r. Unlawful Entry
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Unlawful Entry
There is unlawful entry when an entrance is
effected by a way not intended for that purpose
[Art. 14 (18), RPC].
Inherent in the Following Crimes:
1. Trespass to dwelling under Art. 280
[Reyes, Book 1]
2. Robbery with force upon things under
Art. 299(a) and Art. 302 [Reyes, Book
1]
Effect if Dwelling and Unlawful Entry are
Both Present
Dwelling and unlawful entry are taken
separately in murders committed in a dwelling
[People v. Barruga, G.R. No. 42744 (1935)].
s. As a Means to the Commission of the
Crime, a Wall, Roof, Floor, Door, or
Window Be Broken
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
Entrance
Actually
Happened
Used as
Means of
Committing
the Crime
Yes
No
No
Yes
When Breaking of Door or Window is Lawful
When an officer, after giving notice of his
purpose and authority, is refused admittance:
1. To make an arrest in any building or
enclosure where the person to be
arrested is or is reasonably believed to
be [Rule 113, Sec. 11, Revised Rules
of Criminal Procedure];
2. To effect search in the place of directed
search [Rule 126, Sec. 7, Revised
Rules of Criminal Procedure];
3. To liberate himself or any person
lawfully aiding him when unlawfully
detained in the place of directed search
[Rule 126, Sec. 7, Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure].
For Entrance, Not Escape/Exit
This circumstance is aggravating only when
the offender resorted to any means in order to
enter the place [Reyes, Book 1].
No Aggravating Circumstance:
Inherent in Robbery with force upon things
under Art. 299 (a) and Art. 302.
Requisites: [WaRFDWiE]
1. Any of the following be broken:
a. Wall
b. Roof
c. Floor
d. Door
e. Window
2. Breaking was used as a means to
effect Entrance and not merely for
escape.
t. Crime was Committed (a) With the Aid
of Persons Under Fifteen Years of Age
or (b) By Means of Motor Vehicles,
Motorized Watercraft, Airships, or Other
Similar Means
Unlawful Entry v. Breaking
Unlawful
Entry
[Art. 14
(18)]
Rationale: To repress the frequent practice
resorted to by professional criminals of availing
themselves of minors taking advantage of their
lack of criminal responsibility (since minors are
given leniency when they commit a crime)
[Reyes, Book 1].
Actual
Breaking of
the
Entrance
No
Breaking of
Wall, Roof,
etc.
[Art. 14
(19)]
Yes
Kind: Generic Aggravating Circumstance
1. With the Aid of Persons Under 15 Years
Old
2. By Means of a Motor Vehicle
Requisites: [MS-MC(GoCaF)]
1. That any of the following was used:
Page 49 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Motorized vehicles; or,
b. Other efficient means of
transportation
Similar
to
automobile or airplane.
2. That the same was used as Means of
Committing the crime, such as by using
the same to:
a. Go to the place of the crime
b. Carry away the effects thereof;
and
c. Facilitate their escape [People
v. Espejo, G.R. No. L-27708
(1970)]
dead or
alive.
v. Special Aggravating and Qualifying
Circumstances
Other Special Aggravating and Qualifying
Circumstances [SELDA]
1. Organized or Syndicated crime group
2. Use of Explosives
3. Use of Loose firearms
4. Use of Dangerous drugs
5. Arson under P.D. 1613
u. Cruelty
1. Organized or Syndicated Crime Group
Kind: Specific Aggravating Circumstance;
Specific to crimes against persons
Organized/syndicated crime group
A group of two or more persons collaborating,
confederating, or mutually helping one another
for purposes of gain committing any crime [Art.
62, RPC as amended by R.A. 7659].
Requisites [DIUE]:
1. That the injury caused be Deliberately
Increased by causing the other wrong
2. The other wrong was Unnecessary for
the Execution of the purpose of the
offender
For cruelty to exist, there must be proof
showing that the accused delighted in making
their victim suffer slowly and gradually, causing
him unnecessary physical and moral pain in
the consummation of the criminal act [People
v. Catian, G.R. No. 139693 (2002)].
Outraging the Corpse
If the victim was already dead when the acts of
mutilation were being performed, this would
also qualify the killing to murder due to
outraging of his corpse [Art. 248, par. 6, RPC].
There must be proof that the wounds inflicted
on the victim were done while he was still alive
in order to be considered cruelty [People v.
Pacris, G.R. No. 69986 (1991)].
Ignominy v. Cruelty
Ignominy
As to Type
Shocks the
of Suffering moral
conscience
of man
As to
It pertains to
Whether the the moral
Vicim has
order,
to be Alive
whether or
not the
victim is
Cruelty
Physical
Refers to the
physical
suffering of
the victim so
victim has to
be alive.
Effect
When a crime is committed by an
organized/syndicated group, and the purpose
of such crime was to gain, the maximum
penalty shall be imposed [Art. 62, RPC as
amended by R.A. 7659].
Crimes where Purpose is to Gain: [TERI]
1. Theft
2. Estafa
3. Robbery
4. Illegal recruitment
2. Use of Explosives
The Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal/
Unlawful Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in,
Acquisition or Disposition, of Firearms,
Ammunition or Explosives [P.D. 1866, as
amended by R.A. 8294] provides that the use
of explosives or incendiary devices in the
commission of a crime, resulting to death of a
person, shall be considered an aggravating
circumstance.
Requisites [RS-HaREID]
1. Offender commits a crime in the RPC
or in a Special law;
2. In its commission, the offender uses
any of the following:
a. Hand grenade/s
b. Rifle grenade/s
Page 50 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Other Explosives such as
pillbox,
Molotov
cocktail
bombs, and fire bombs
d. Other
Incendiary
devices
capable
of
producing
destructive
effect
on
contiguous objects or causing
injury or death to any person;
and
3. Results in the Death of a person [Sec.
3, P.D. 1866, as amended by R.A.
8294].
3. Use of “Loose Firearms”
Special Aggravating Circumstance
RA 10591 or the Comprehensive Firearms and
Ammunition Regulation Act (2013) expressly
repealed Sec. 1 of P.D. 1866 as amended:
Loose firearms: [UPI SOLAR]
Pertains to firearms that are
1. Unregistered;
2. Possessed by non-licensee;
3. Illegally manufactured
4. Stolen;
5. Obliterated;
6. Lost;
7. Altered; or
8. With Revoked license [Sec. 3(v),
R.A. 10591]
Rules:
• To be considered as an aggravating
circumstance – if the use of a loose
firearm is inherent in the commission of
a crime punishable under the RPC or
other special laws [Sec. 29, R.A.
10883]
If the crime committed is penalized with
a maximum penalty lower than that
prescribed for illegal possession of
firearm – penalty for illegal possession
of firearm shall instead be imposed.
If the crime committed is penalized by
the law with a maximum penalty
equal to that imposed for illegal
possession of firearms – penalty of
prision mayor in its minimum period
shall be imposed in addition to the
penalty for the crime committed.
•
To be absorbed as an element of the
crime – if the violation is in furtherance
of, or incident to, or in connection with
the crime of rebellion, insurrection, or
attempted coup d’ etat, such violation
shall be absorbed as an element of the
said crimes [Sec. 29 (2), R.A. 10591].
•
To be considered as a separate and
distinct offense - If the crime is
committed by the person without using
the loose firearm, the violation of this
Act shall be considered as a distinct
and separate offense. [Sec. 29 (3),
R.A. 10591]
Special Aggravating Circumstance
RA 8294 does not specify whether or not the
use of an unlicensed firearm in murder or
homicide is generic or special aggravating. It
merely states that the use of the unlicensed
firearm is appreciated as “aggravating.”
In Palaganas v. People [G.R. No. 165483
(2006)], the Court interpreted this as making
the use of unlicensed firearm in murder or
homicide as special aggravating. Applying the
logic of Palaganas by analogy, Section 29 in
RA 10591 should be interpreted as assigning
the use of loose firearms as special
aggravating as well.
4. Use of Dangerous Drugs
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstance
A positive finding for the use of dangerous
drugs is a qualifying aggravating circumstance
and the application of the penalty provided for
in the RPC shall be applicable [Sec. 25, R.A.
9165].
5. Arson under P.D. 1613
Special Aggravating Circumstance
The following are considered special
aggravating circumstances when the crime of
Arson is committed; that the crime was
committed: [BaHaGS]
1. For the Benefit of another
2. Because
of
Hatred
towards
owner/occupant
3. With Intent to Gain
4. By a Syndicate
Syndicate
Offense is committed by a syndicate if it is
planned or carried out by a group of three (3)
or more persons [Sec. 4, P.D. 1613].
Page 51 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Under Art. 62 of RPC, a syndicate needs at
least TWO persons. Under P.D. 1613, a
syndicate needs at least THREE persons.
exception of accessories falling within
the provisions of paragraph 1 of the
next preceding article [Art. 20, RPC].
5. Alternative Circumstances [Art. 15]
Exception: When said relatives
profited themselves or assisted the
offender to profit by the effects of the
crime [Art. 19 (1), RPC].
Alternative Circumstances
Those which must be taken into consideration
as aggravating or mitigating according to the
nature and effects of the crime and the other
conditions attending its commission [Art. 15].
TYPES UNDER ART. 15. [RIE]
1. Relationship
2. Intoxication
3. Degree of Education/instruction
a. Relationship
The alternative circumstance of relationship
shall be taken into consideration when the
offended party is the: [SAD SiRA]
1. Spouse
2. Ascendant
3. Descendant
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother
or sister (Siblings)
5. Relative by Affinity in the same degree
of the offender [People v. Marco, G.R.
No. 132392 (2001)]
Relatives by Affinity
Includes in-laws, stepfather, or stepmother,
stepchild and the like. It is the duty of the
stepparents to bestow upon their stepchildren
a mother’s or father’s affection, care and
protection [People v. Bersabal, G.R. No. 24532
(1925)].
Other relatives included
The relationship of stepfather or stepmother
and stepson or stepdaughter is included by
analogy as similar to that of ascendant and
descendant [People v. Bersabal, G.R. No.
24532 (1925); People v. Portento, C.A., 38
O.G. 46].
Relationship as Exempting Circumstance:
1. When the accessory is related to the
principal.
General Rule: This includes spouses,
ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural, and adopted brothers and
sisters, or relatives by affinity within the
same degrees, with the single
2. Death
under
exceptional
circumstances. A legally married
person who having surprised his
spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person who
shall inflict upon them physical injuries
of any other kind (i.e. less serious and
slight physical injuries) [Art. 247, RPC].
3. Select Crimes Against Property. For
crimes of theft, swindling (estafa), and
malicious mischief there is no criminal
liability if they be caused by the
following persons [SADRAS-WiS-BS]:
a. Spouses, Ascendants and
Descendants, or Relatives by
Affinity in the Same line.
b. The Widowed Spouse with
respect to the property which
belonged to the deceased
spouse before the same shall
have
passed
into
the
possession of another; and
c. Brothers and Sisters and
brothers-in-law and sisters-inlaw, if living together [Art. 322,
RPC].
Relationship as Mitigating Circumstance:
1. In crimes against property [RUFA]
a. Robbery [Arts. 294-302, RPC]
b. Usurpation [Art. 312, RPC]
c. Fraudulent insolvency [Art.
314, RPC]
d. Arson [Arts. 321-322, 325-326,
RPC]
2. When the crime is less serious or
slight physical injuries – if the
offended party is a relative of a lower
degree than the offender [Art. 263,
RPC].
3. In trespass to dwelling - Where a
son-in-law, believing his wife to be in
her father's house, attempted to force
an entry therein, the relationship is to
Page 52 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
be considered in mitigation [U.S. v.
Ostrea, 2 Phil. 93, 95 (1903)].
Relationship as Aggravating Circumstance:
Crimes Against
Person
Crimes Against
Chastity
General Rule:
Higher degree; or
Relatives of the same
level [People v.
Alisub, 69 Phil. 362
(1969)].
Relationship is
always aggravating
[People v. Orilla,
G.R. Nos. 14894940 (2004)].
b. Intoxication
Requisites to be Considered as Mitigating
Circumstance: [DSC-NHD-NWIR]
1. Act was done due to alcoholic intake of
the offender, he suffers from
Diminished Self-Control.
2. Offender is Not a Habitual Drinker.
3. Offender did Not take the alcoholic
drink With the Intention to Reinforce his
resolve to commit crime [Reyes, Book
1]
When Aggravating Circumstance
1. If intoxication is habitual; or
2. If it is intentional to embolden offender
to commit crime [Reyes, Book 1].
Exception:
Always aggravating
in the following:
1. Serious Physical
Injuries [Reyes, Book
1]
2. Homicide or
Murder [Reyes, Book
1]
3. Rape [People v.
Delen, G.R. No.
194446 (2014)]
Meaning of Habitual Drunkard
A habitual drunkard is one given to intoxication
by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. The
habit should be actual and confirmed. It is
unnecessary that it be a matter of daily
occurrence [People v. Camano, G.R. Nos. L36662-6 (1982)].
Relationship Not Appreciated:
1. When relationship is an element of
the offense: [PAC]
a. Parricide
b. Adultery
c. Concubinage [Reyes, Book 1]
2. For Persons Attached by CommonLaw Relations. The law cannot be
stretched to include such relations
because there is no blood relationship
or legal bond that links the parties
[People v. Atop, G.R. Nos. 124303-05
(1998)].
3. For Relationships by Affinity.
Relationships by affinity should not be
deemed to aggravate the crime in the
absence of evidence to show that the
offended party is of a higher degree in
the relationship than that of the
offender [People v. Canitan, G.R. No.
L-16498 (1963)].
Accused’s State of Intoxication Must be
Proved
The defendant testified that before the murder,
he took a bottle of wine and drank little by little
until he got drunk. The policeman who arrested
the accused testified that the latter smelled of
wine and vomited. The Court held that the
evidence presented was not satisfactory to
warrant a mitigation of the penalty. [People v.
Noble, supra]
The person pleading intoxication must prove
that he took such quantity of alcoholic
beverage, prior to the commission of the crime,
as would blur his reason [People v. Bernal,
G.R. No. 132791 (2002)].
c. Degree of Education or Instruction
Low Degree of Education or Instruction
The court may exercise its sound discretion to
justify a more lenient treatment of an “ignorant
and semicivilized offender” [U.S. v. Marqui,
G.R. No. 8931 (1914)].
General Rule:
Low degree of education is a mitigating
circumstance [U.S. v. Reguera, G.R. No. L16639 (1921)].
Page 53 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Lack of instruction is generally mitigating,
except in crimes against property and chastity
[People v. Baltazar, G.R. No. L-30557 (1980)].
Exceptions [ProChaTRaM]:
1. Crimes against Property [U.S. v.
Pascual, G.R. No. L-3777 (1908)], theft
and robbery [U.S. v. Marqui, G.R. No.
8931 (1914)]
2. Crimes against Chastity [People v.
Baltazar, supra]
3. Treason [People v. Lansanas, G.R. No.
L-1622 (1948)]
4. Rape; No one is so ignorant as not to
know that the crime of rape is wrong
and in violation of the law [U.S. v.
GamillaI, G.R. No. 13981 (1918)]
5. Murder or homicide; to kill is forbidden
by natural law which every rational
being is endowed to know and feel
[People v. Laspardas, G.R. No. L46146 (1979)]. One does not have to
be educated or intelligent to be able to
know that it is unlawful to take the life
of another person even if it is to redress
a wrong committed against him
(People v. Lapaz, G.R. No. 68898
(1989)].
If the accused studied up to sixth grade, the
Court said that “that is more than sufficient
schooling to give him a degree of instruction as
to properly apprise him of what is right and
wrong” [People v. Pujinio, G.R. No. L-21690
(1969)].
Illiteracy (not able to read and write) alone
is insufficient
The fact that [the accused] thumbmarked the
document attesting of the promulgation of the
decision, a sign that he did not know how to
write, is not sufficient to prove the existence of
this alternative circumstance [People v. Ripas,
G.R. No. L-6246 (1954)].
Not illiteracy alone but also lack of sufficient
intelligence are necessary to invoke the benefit
of this circumstance. A person able to sign his
name but otherwise so densely ignorant and of
such low intelligence that he does not realize
the full consequences of a criminal act, may still
be
entitled
to
this
mitigating
circumstance [People v. Ripas, supra].
On the other hand, another unable to write
because of lack of educational facilities or
opportunities, may yet be highly or
exceptionally intelligent and mentally alert that
he easily and ever realizes the full significance
of his acts, in which case he may not invoke
this mitigating circumstance in his favor
[People v. Ripas, supra].
High degree of education or Instruction
The alternative circumstance of instruction may
be considered as aggravating circumstance
when the accused took advantage of his
education or instruction in committing the
crime.
6. Absolutory Causes
Absolutory Causes
Those where the act committed is a crime but
for reasons of public policy and sentiment there
is no penalty imposed [People v. Talisic, G.R.
No. 97961 (1997)].
Types of Absolutory Causes [IPON]:
1. Instigation
2. Pardon by the offended party
3. Other absolutory causes
4. Acts Not covered by law and in case of
excessive punishment [Art. 5, RPC].
a. Instigation
Instigation
It is the means by which the accused is lured
into the commission of the offense charged in
order to prosecute him [People v. Bartolome,
G.R. No 191726 (2013)].
The law officers conceive the commission of
the crime and suggest it to the accused, who
adopts the idea and carries it into execution
(People v. De la Peña, G.R. No. 92534 (1991)].
The involvement of a law officer in the crime
itself in the following manner:
1. He induces a person to commit a crime
for personal gain.
2. He doesn’t take the necessary steps to
seize the instrument of the crime & to
arrest the offenders before he obtained
the profits in mind.
3. He obtained the profits in mind, even
though afterwards does take the
necessary steps to seize the
instrument of the crime and to arrest
the offenders.
Page 54 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Instigation as defense against government
Instigation is recognized as a valid defense that
can be raised by an accused. To use this as a
defense, however, the accused must prove
with sufficient evidence that the government
induced him to commit the offense (People v.
Legaspi y Lucas, G.R. No. 173485 (2011)].
Entrapment is Different from Instigation
There is entrapment when law officers employ
ruses and schemes to ensure the
apprehension of the criminal while in the actual
commission of the crime. There is instigation
when the accused was induced to commit the
crime [People v. Periodica, Jr., G.R. No. 73006
(1989)].
As to Origin
of the
Crime
The means
originate
from the
mind of the
criminal.
As to
Means
A person
has planned
or is about to
commit a
crime and
ways and
means are
resorted to
by a public
officer to
trap and
catch the
criminal.
As to
Conviction
or Acquittal
Not a bar to
the
prosecution
and
conviction of
the
lawbreaker.
The difference in the nature of the two lies in
the origin of the criminal intent. In entrapment,
the mens rea originates from the mind of the
criminal. The idea and the resolve to commit
the crime comes from him. In instigation, the
law officer conceives the commission of the
crime and suggests to the accused who adopts
the idea and carries it into execution [People v.
Periodica, Jr., supra].
The legal effect of entrapment and instigation
are also different. Xxx Entrapment does not
exempt the criminal from liability. Instigation
does [People v. Periodica, Jr., supra].
The law officers shall not be guilty to the crime
if they have done the following:
1. He does not induce a person to commit
a crime for personal gain or is not
involved in the planning of the crime.
2. Does take the necessary steps to seize
the instrument of the crime and to
arrest the offenders before he obtained
the profits in mind.
Entrapment v. Instigation
Entrapment
As to
Ways and
Nature
means are
resorted to
for the
purpose of
trapping and
capturing the
lawbreaker
in the
execution of
his criminal
plan.
Instigation
The
instigator
practically
induces the
would-be
accused into
the
commission
of the
offense and
himself
becomes a
co-principal.
The law
enforcer
conceives
the
commission
of the crime
and
suggests to
the accused
who carries
it into
execution.
A public
officer or a
private
detective
induces an
innocent
person to
commit a
crime and
would arrest
him upon or
after the
commission
of the crime
by the latter.
The accused
must be
acquitted
because the
offender
simply acts
as a tool of
the law
enforcers.
b. Pardon by Offended Party
Crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not
be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by
the offended spouse. The offended party
cannot institute criminal prosecution without
including both the guilty parties, if they are both
alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have
consented or pardoned the offenders [Art. 344,
RPC].
See: Art. 344 for detailed discussion.
Page 55 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Other Absolutory Causes
[DALS-PARTS]
1. Death
under
exceptional
circumstances [Art. 247, RPC]
2. Accessories in light felonies [Art. 16,
RPC]
3. Light felonies not consummated [Art.
16, RPC]
4. Spontaneous desistance [Art. 6, RPC]
5. Prescription of crimes [Art. 89, RPC]
6. Accessories exempt under Art. 20 [Art.
20, RPC]
7. Exemptions from criminal liability for
cases of theft, swindling and malicious
mischief, by virtue of his Relationship
to the offended party. [Art. 332, RPC]
8. Trespass to dwelling to prevent serious
harm to self [Art. 280, RPC]
9. Discovering secrets through Seizure of
correspondence of the ward by their
guardian [Art. 219, RPC]
C. Persons Liable and Degree of
Participation
1. Principals,
Accessories
Accomplices,
and
Persons Criminally Liable [Art. 16, RPC]
When more than one person participated in the
commission of the felony, the law looks into
their participation. The RPC classifies them as:
1. Principal
2. Accomplice
3. Accessory
This classification is true only under the RPC
and not under special laws, because the
penalties under the latter are never graduated.
If the crime is punishable under special laws,
the more appropriate term would be
“offender/s, culprit/s, accused”.
Grave and Less Grave Felonies v. Light
Felonies [Art. 16, RPC]
Grave and Less Grave
Felonies
All participants
(principal,
accomplice,
accessory) are
criminally liable.
Light Felonies
Only principal
and accomplice
are liable.
Parties to a Crime
1. Active Subject – the offender (e.g.,
principal, accomplice, accessory).
General Rule: Only natural persons
can be the active subjects of a crime
due to the highly personal nature of
criminal
responsibility.
Juridical
persons cannot be active subjects.
Rationale: Only natural persons can
act with personal malice or negligence.
Moreover,
penalties
such
as
substitution of deprivation of liberty
(subsidiary
imprisonment)
for
pecuniary penalties in case of
insolvency, or destierro can only be
executed against individuals.
Exception: Special laws where
corporations are expressly penalized
for their violations (e.g. Corporation
Law, Public Service Law, Securities
Law, Election Code, etc.).
Officers of Corporation are Liable
General Rule: If the offender is a
corporation, the directors, trustees,
stockholders, members, officers, or
employees may be held liable if they
are responsible for the violation or
indispensable to the commission of the
offense
[Sec.
171,
Revised
Corporation Code].
2. Passive Subject – the injured party.
a. Principals [Art. 17]
Requisites to be Considered as Principal
Principal by Principal
Principal by
Direct
by
IndispensaParticipaInduceble
tion [PCP]
ment
Cooperation
[IDC]
[PAC-CI]
1. Offender
1.Indu1. Offender
Participated
cement
Participated in
in the
was made the criminal
criminal
with the
resolution such
resolution;
Intention
that there is
and
of
Anterior
procuring Conspiracy or
the
unity of
commiscriminal
sion of
purpose and
intention
Page 56 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
2. Offen-der
Carried out
their plan
and
Personally
took part in
its execution
by acts
which
directly
tended to
the same
end [People
v. Ong Chiat
Lay, G.R.
No. L-39086
(1934)].
CRIMINAL LAW
the crime;
and
before the
commission of
the crime.
conjectures. Proof beyond reasonable doubt is
required to establish the presence of criminal
conspiracy [People v. Jorge, G.R. No. 99379
(1994)].
2. Said
inducement is
the
Determining
Cause of
the
commission of
the crime
by the
material
executor
[US v.
Indanan,
G.R. No.
L-8187
(1913)].
2. Cooperation
in the
commission of
the offense by
performing
another act
which is
Indispensable,
and without
which it would
not have been
accomplished
[REYES, Book
1].
2. Principal by Inducement [RPC, Art. 17
(2)]
1. Principal by Direct Participation [RPC,
Art. 17 (1)]
An active participant in the commission of the
offense. One who participated in the criminal
resolution to commit the offense [People v.
Solomon, G.R. No. 77206 (1988)].
Those who cooperate in the commission of the
crime by performing overt acts which by
themselves are acts of execution [People v.
Pilola, G.R. No. 121828 (2003)].
Those who directly forces or induces others to
commit a criminal act.
Requisites [IDC]:
1. Inducement be made with the Intention
of procuring the commission of the
crime
2. Said inducement is the Determining
Cause of the commission of the crime
by the material executor [US v.
Indanan, G.R. No. L-8187 (1913)].
TWO (2) WAYS OF INDUCEMENT
1. By using irresistible force or
causing uncontrollable fear
a. Irresistible Force - Such
physical force as would
produce an effect upon the
individual that despite all his
resistance, it reduces him to a
mere instrument.
Force,
fear,
duress,
or
intimidation must be present,
imminent, impending; and of
such nature as to induce a wellgrounded apprehension of
death or serious bodily harm if
the act be done [People v.
Anod, G.R. No. 186420 (2009].
Requisites: [PCP]
1. Offender Participated in the criminal
resolution; and
2. Offender Carried out their plan and
Personally took part in its execution by acts
which directly tended to the same end
[People v. Ong Chiat Lay, supra]
b. Uncontrollable Fear – Such
fear that must be grave, actual,
serious and of such kind that
majority
of
men
would
succumb to such moral
compulsion.
Principal by Direct Participation in a
Conspiracy
In order to convict [the accused conspirator] as
a principal by direct participation, it is
necessary that conspiracy among him and his
co-accused be proved. Conspiracy; like any
other ingredient of the offense, must be proved
as sufficient as the crime itself through clear
and convincing evidence, not only by mere
Mere threat of future injury is
not sufficient. Compulsion must
be such that it reduced the
offender to a mere instrument
acting not only without will but
against his will as well. It must
be of such character to leave
the accused no opportunity for
escape [Ty v. People, G.R. No.
149275 (2004)].
Page 57 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. By giving of price or offering of
reward or promise or using words of
command
a. By giving of price or offering
of reward or promise – The
one giving the price or offering
the reward or promise is a
principal by inducement while
the one committing the crime in
consideration thereof is a
principal by direct participation.
There is collective criminal
responsibility.
b. By using words of command
– person who used the words
of command is a principal by
inducement while the person
who committed the crime
because
of
the
words
command is a principal by
direct participation.
Requisites of Using Words of
Command: [II-DPM]
a. The one who made the
command must have:
i. Intention of procuring
the commission of the
crime
ii. Ascendancy/Influence
over the person who
acted
iii. Words used must be:
iv. So Direct, efficacious,
and powerful to amount
to
physical/moral
coercion
v. Uttered Prior to the
commission of the
crime
vi. Material executor has
no personal reason to
commit
the
crime
[Reyes, Book 1].
Principal by Inducement v. Proposal to
Commit a Felony [Reyes, Book 1]
Principal by Proposal to
Inducement
Commit a
Felony
As to
Inducement to commit a
Purpose
crime
As to
Liable only
Person to
Liability
when crime
whom
is committed proposal is
by principal
made should
As to
Crimes
Included
by direct
participation
Involves any
crime
not commit
the crime
Proposal to
be
punishable
must involve
only treason/
rebellion
Effect of Acquittal of Principal by Direct
Participation
General Rule: Conspiracy is negated by
acquittal of co-defendant. One cannot be held
guilty of having instigated the commission of a
crime without first being shown that the crime
has been actually committed by another
[People v. Ong Chiat Lay, supra].
Exception: When principal actor is acquitted
because he acted without malice or criminal
intent. [People v. Po Giok To, G.R. No. L-7236
(1955)].
3.
Principal
by
Indisipensable
Cooperation [RPC, Art. 17 (3)]
Those who cooperate in the commission of the
offense by another, without which it would not
have been accomplished.
Requisites [PAC-CI]:
1. Participation in criminal resolution such
that there is Anterior Conspiracy or unity of
criminal purpose and intention before the
commission of the crime.
2. Cooperation in the commission of the
offense by performing another act which is
Indispensable and without which it would
not have been accomplished [Reyes,
Book 1].
Cooperation
To cooperate is to help, to aid, and
presupposes knowledge of the ultimate
purpose in view [Samson v. CA, G.R. Nos. L10364 & L-10376 (1958)].
b. Accomplices [Art. 18]
An accomplice cooperates in the execution of
the offense by previous or simultaneous acts,
provided he has no direct participation in its
execution or does not force or induce others to
commit it, or his cooperation is not
indispensable to its accomplishment [People v.
Mandolado, supra].
Page 58 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites: [CD-CR]
a. Community of Design: Knowing and
concurring with the criminal design of
the principal by direct participation
b. Cooperation in the execution of the
offense by previous/simultaneous acts
with
the
intent
of
supplying
material/moral aid; and
c. Relationship between acts of the
principal and those attributed to the
accomplice [Reyes, Book 1]
Knowledge of Actual Crime Not Required
One can be an accomplice even if he did not
know of the actual crime intended by the
principal, provided he was aware that it was an
illicit act [People v. Doctolero, G.R. No. 34386
(1991) ].
Accomplice does Not Decide the Crime
Accomplices do not decide whether the crime
should be committed; they merely assent to the
plan of the principal by direct participation and
cooperate in its accomplishment [People v.
Pilola, G.R. No. 121828 (2003)].
As to
When
Criminal
Intention is
Known
As to Who
Decides to
Commit
the Crime
As to
Authorship
of the
Crime
From its
inception,
because
they
themselves
have
decided
upon such
course of
action.
Conspirators
decide that
a crime
should be
committed.
Conspirators
are the
authors of a
crime.
Accomplice in Bigamy
A person, whether man or woman, who
knowingly consents or agrees to be married to
another already bound in lawful wedlock is
guilty as an accomplice in the crime of bigamy.
[Santiago v. People, G.R. No. 200233 (2015)]
Liability of Accomplice
The liability of accomplices is less than
principals and they shall be meted with the
penalty next lower in degree (1 degree) than
that prescribed by law [Arts. 52, 54, & 56,
RPC].
It is also possible for an accomplice to be liable
as such for a different crime than what the
principal committed, such as when he/she
provides transport for someone committing
robbery but does not participate in the killing
committed by the latter [People v. Doble, G.R.
No. L-30028 (1982)].
Conspirator v. Accomplice
Conspirator
As to
They know
Criminal
of and join in
Design
the criminal
design.
Accomplice
They know
and agree
with the
criminal
design.
Only after the
principals
have reached
the decision
to commit it.
Accomplices
merely assent
to the plan
and
cooperate in
its
accomplishment.
Accomplices
are merely
instruments
who perform
acts that are
useful for, but
not essential
to, the
perpetration
of the offense,
giving
material/moral
aid without
conspiracy.
c. Accessories [Art. 19]
PUNISHABLE ACTS OF ACCESSORIES
[PACE]:
1. Profiting themselves or Assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the
crime
Examples:
a. Profiting
Themselves
–
Receiving stolen property
knowing that it had been stolen
[People v. Tanchoco, G.R. No.
L-38 (1946)].
Note: This must be with the
consent of the principal,
otherwise he is a principal of
theft
[Reyes,
Book
1]
b. Assisting the Offender to
Profit by the Effects of the
Crime - Knowingly receiving
stolen property and selling it for
the thief’s profit [US v.
Page 59 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Galanco, G.R. No. 4440
(1908)]
An accessory should not be in
conspiracy with the principal
[US v. Tan Tiap Co, G.R. No.
11643 (1916)]
2. Concealing/destroying the body of the
crime to prevent its discovery
Body of the Crime (“corpus delicti”)
Fact of the commission of the crime,
not the physical body of the deceased
[Rimorin v. People, G.R. No. 146481
(2003)].
Examples:
a. Assisting in the burial of a
homicide victim to prevent the
discovery of the crime [US v.
Leal, G.R. No. 432 (1902)]
b. Making the victim appear
armed to show the necessity of
killing him [US v. Cuison, G.R.
No. L-6840 (1911)]
c. Concealing
the
effects/instruments
of
the
crime, such as concealing a
gun [Reyes, Book 1]
3. Harboring/concealing/assisting in the
Escape of the principal of the crime
committed by either a public officer or
a private person
Elements under the Two (2) Classes of
Accessories
Public Officer
[PAHAL]
Private Person
[PH-TPaMAPH]
Offender is a
Public officer
who acts with
Abuse of his
public functions
Offender is a Private
person
Offender Harbors/conceals/assists in the
escape of the principal
Principal
commits Any
crime except
Light felonies
Crime is either Treason,
Parricide, Murder,
Attempt against the life of
the President, or principal
is known to be Habitually
guilty of another crime
Liability of Accessories
Liability is subordinate to the principal because
their participation is subsequent to the
commission of the crime [US v. Mendoza, G.R.
No. 7540 (1912)]. The penalty to be imposed
for accessories is two (2) degrees lower than
that prescribed for the felony [Art. 53, 55, & 57
RPC].
Effect of Acquittal of Principal
General Rule: If the facts alleged are not
proven or do not constitute a crime, the legal
grounds for convicting the accessory do not
exist [US v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 7540 (1912)].
Exemption: If the principal was convicted but
not held criminally liable for an exempting
circumstance (i.e. insanity, minority, etc.) [Art.
12, RPC], the accessory may still be held
criminally liable since the crime was still
committed [US v. Villaluz, G.R. No. 10726
(1915)]. Determination of the liability of the
accessory can proceed independently of that of
the principal [Vino v. People, G.R. No. 84163
(1989)].
Exemptions from Criminal Liability
An accomplice is exempted from criminal
liability when:
1. Crime is a light felony [Art. 19 (c),
RPC]; or
2. Principal is a relative under the
exemptions in RPC Art. 20, except if
said accessory has profited or assisted
the principal in profiting from the crime
Relatives Included Under Art. 20 [SADBSR]
a. Spouse
b. Ascendant
c. Descendant
d. Legitimate/natural/adopted Brother
or Sister
e. Relative by affinity within the same
degree
Rationale: The ties of blood and the
preservation of the cleanliness of one’s name,
which compels one to conceal crimes
committed by relatives so near as those
mentioned in this article [People v. Mariano,
G.R. No. 134847 (2000)].
Page 60 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Principal v. Accomplice v. Accessory
Principal
Accom-plice Accessory
[Art. 17]
[Art. 18]
[Art. 19]
As to Acts Committed
One who:
One who
One who:
1. Directly
cooperated in 1. Made a
participated
the
profit from
in the
commission
or assisted
offense; or
of the offense the
2. Induced
without being
offender in
or forced
covered by
profiting
others to
Art. 17.
from effects
commit the
of the
crime; or
crime; or
3.
2. ConceaCommitted
led or
acts which
destroyed
are
the body of
indispenthe crime;
sable to the
or
commission
3.
of the crime.
Harbored,
concealed
or assisted
in the
escape of
the
principal.
As to Imposable Penalty
Penalty
1 degree
2 degrees
prescribed
lower [Arts.
lower [Arts.
by law
52, 54, & 56,
53, 55, &
RPC]
57, RPC]
As to When Acts Were Committed
During the
Before or
After the
commission after the
commission
of the
commission
of the
offense
of the offense offense
Except:
When there
is a
conspiracy
and the
principal has
already
performed
his part prior
to its
commission.
[People v.
Santos,
G.R. No.
117873
(1997)]
As to Necessity of Cooperation
IndispensaNot
Not
ble to the
indispensaindispensacommission ble
ble
of the crime
d. Special Laws
Anti-Fencing Law v. Anti-Piracy and
Highway
Robbery
Law
of
1974
v. Accomplice
Anti-Piracy
Antiand
Fencing
Highway
Accessory
Law
Robbery
[Art. 19 (1)]
[P.D. 1612]
Law [P.D.
532]
As to Punishable Act
Knowingly
Knowingly
Profiting
profiting or
acquiring or
themselves
assisting the receiving
or assisting
principal to
property
the offender
profit by the taken by
to profit by
effects of a
pirates or
the effects of
robbery or
brigands or
the crime
theft
in any
manner
benefiting
therefrom
As to Crimes Applicable
Robbery
Robbery of
Any Crime
or Theft
Theft
Whether Possession Beings About
Presumption of Committing the Crime
Mere
No such
No such
possession
presumption. presumption.
brings about
the
presumption
of fencing.
As to Imposable Penalty
Higher than
Penalty
2 degrees
mere
imposed for
lower than
accessory to the
that of the
robbery/theft accomplice
principal
[Sec. 3, P.D. [Sec. 4, P.D. [Art. 53 to
1612]
532]
55, RPC]
Decree
Penalizing
Obstruction
of
Apprehension and Prosecution of Criminal
Offenders [P.D. 1829]
Any person who knowingly or willfully
obstructs, impedes, frustrates or delays the
apprehension of suspects and the investigation
and prosecution of criminal cases, shall be
punished:
Page 61 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
1. Prision correccional in its maximum
period, or
2. Fine ranging from PhP 1,000 – 6,000,
or
3. Both
Accessory v. Principal in Obstruction of
Justice
Accessory
Laws
[Art. 19 (3)]
Penalizing
“Obstruction
of Justice”
[P.D. 1829]
As to Acts
Harboring,
Knowingly or
Punished
concealing,
willfully
or assisting
obstructing,
in the
impeding,
escape of
frustrating, or
the principal delaying the
of the crime apprehension
of suspects
and the
investigation
and
prosecution
of criminal
cases
As to
Offender is
Offender is
Liability of
merely an
liable as the
the
accessory to principal of
Offender
the crime
P.D. 1829.
charged and
another
person is
charged as
the
principal.
As to
If
Applies to
Crimes
committed
any crime
Applicable
by private
person
– only
applies to
the specified
crimes (e.g.,
treason,
parricide,
murder,
attempt
against the
life of the
President,
or principal
is habitually
guilty of
another
crime)
If
committed
by public
officer
– applies to
any crime,
except light
felonies
e. Conspiracy and Proposal [Art. 8]
Rule on When Conspiracy and Proposal
Constitutes a Crime
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
punishable only in the cases in which the law
specially provides a penalty therefor [Art. 8,
RPC].
1. Conspiracy as a Felony
Exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it [Art. 8, RPC].
Agreement may be oral or written, express or
implied.
Requisites of Conspiracy [ACE]:
1. Two or more persons come to an
Agreement.
2. Agreement pertains to a Commission
of a felony; and
3. Execution of the felony was decided
upon.
Note: Mere knowledge, acquiescence to or
agreement to cooperate, is not enough to
constitute one as party to conspiracy, absent
any active participation in the commission of
the
crime.
Conspiracy
transcends
companionship [People v. Patano, G.R. No.
129306 (2003)].
Examples
of
Felonious
Conspiracy
[METRICS DATA]:
1. Monopolies and combinations in
restraint of trade [Art. 186, RPC]
2. Espionage [Sec. 3, C.A. 616]
3. Treason [Art. 115, RPC]
4. Rebellion [Art. 136, RPC]
5. Insurrection [Art. 136, RPC]
6. Coup d’état [Art. 136, RPC]
7. Sedition [Art. 141, RPC]
Page 62 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
8. Selected acts under the Dangerous
Drugs Act [Sec. 26, R.A. 9165]
9. Arson [Sec. 7, P.D. 1613]
10. Terrorism [Sec. 4, R.A. 9372]
11. Access device fraud [Sec. 11, R.A.
8484]
As to
Quantum of
Proof
Conspiracy
as a crime
must be
established
beyond
reasonable
doubt.
As to
Crimes
Applicable
Only applies
conspiracy
to commit
treason,
coup d’etat,
rebellion,
insurrection,
and
sedition.
Conspiracy as a Felony v. Conspiracy as a
Manner of Incurring Criminal Liability
Conspiracy as a felony refers to the mere
agreement to commit the said acts and NOT
the actual execution thereof [People v. Fabro,
G.R. No. 114261 (2000)].
Conspiracy
as a Felony
As to Stage
How
Incurred
As to Legal
Requiremen
ts
Preparatory
acts
Mere
agreement
RPC must
specifically
punish the
act of
conspiring
(and
proposing).
The acts
must be
accomplishe
d, else the
conspiracy
is absorbed
and the act
itself is
punished.
Conspiracy
as Basis for
Incurring
Criminal
Liability
Executory
acts
Commission
of overt acts
Participants
acted in
concert or
simultaneou
sly or in any
way which is
indicative of
a meeting of
the minds
towards a
common
criminal goal
or criminal
objective.
The act of
meeting
together is
not
necessary
as long as a
common
objective can
be discerned
from the
overt acts.
The act must
be
accomplishe
d, if there is
only
conspiracy
or proposal,
there is no
crime to be
punished.
Conspiracy
must be
established
by positive
and
conclusive
evidence
[People v.
Laurio, G.R.
No. 181539
(1991)].
Any crime
2. Conspiracy as a Manner of Incurring
Criminal Liability
Liability When Conspiracy is Established
General Rule: The act of one becomes the act
of all. All who participated therein, irrespective
of the quantity or quality of his participation is
liable equally, whether conspiracy is preplanned or instantaneous [Reyes, Book 1].
Exception – Unless one or some of the
conspirators committed some other crime
which is not part of the intended crime.
Exception to the Exception – When the act
constitutes a “single indivisible offense.”
Collective Criminal Responsibility v.
Individual Criminal Responsibility
Collective
Individual
Criminal
Criminal
Responsibili- Responsibility
ty
As to
When
When each of
Definition offenders are the
criminally
participants in
liable in the
an offense is
same manner responsible
and to the
only for the
same extent
consequences
of his own
Page 63 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
As to
Liability
CRIMINAL LAW
Once
conspiracy is
proven, the
act of one is
the act of all
[People v.
Zafra, G.R.
No. 225784
(2019)] and
they all share
the same
liability as coprincipals
[People v.
Aliben, G.R.
No. 140404
(2003)].
acts in the
absence of
previous
conspiracy,
unity of
criminal
purpose and
intention, or
community of
criminal
design [U.S.
v. Magcomot,
G.R. No. 4329
(1909)]
Each of the
participants is
responsible
only for his
own acts
[Araneta, Jr.
v. Court of
Appeals, G.R.
No. 43527
(1990)].
2. Presumption of Conspiracy (Band)
Conspiracy need not be proved if the
existence of the band is clearly
established (e.g, crime of robbery with
a band). The law presumes the
attendance of conspiracy so much so
that "any member of a band who is
present at the commission of a robbery
by the band, shall be punished as
principal of any of the assaults
committed by the band, unless it be
shown that he attempted to prevent the
same" [People v. Peralta, supra].
Note: Spontaneity does not preclude
conspiracy, which after all, can be
consummated in a moment’s notice — through
a single word of assent to a proposal or an
unambiguous handshake. Yet it is more difficult
to presume conspiracy in extemporaneous
outbursts of violence; hence, the demand that
it be established by positive evidence [Li v.
People, G.R. No. 127962 (2004)].
Doctrine of Implied Conspiracy
Conspiracy 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, G.R. Nos. 134823-25 (2003)].
Degree of Proof
General Rule: Conspiracy must be
established by positive and conclusive
evidence, not by conjectures or speculations.
[People v. Laurio, G.R. No. 181539 (1991)]
Exceptions:
1. Circumstantial Evidence may be
Used
Conspiracy may be established
through the collective acts of the
accused before, during and after the
commission of a felony that all the
accused aimed at the same object, one
performing one part and the other
performing another for the attainment
of the same objective; and that their
acts, though apparently independent,
were in fact concerted and cooperative,
indicating closeness of personal
association, concerted action and
concurrence of sentiments [People v.
Talaogan, G.R. No. 178198 (2008)].
Existence of Implied Conspiracy must be
based on:
1. Overt acts done before, during, or after
the commission of the crime; or
2. Words, remarks or language used
before, during or after the commission
of the crime [People v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 158754 (2007)].
The above must show that they acted in unison
with each other, evincing a common purpose
or design. It must be shown that they
cooperated in the commission of the offense,
either morally, through advice, encouragement
or agreement or materially through external
acts indicating a manifest intent of supplying
aid in the perpetration of the crime in an
efficacious way [People v. Ramos, G.R. No.
118570 (2004)].
No Criminal Liability in the Following
Cases:
1. Mere acquiescence to or approval of the
commission of the crime, without any act of
criminal participation, shall not render one
Page 64 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
criminally liable as co-conspirator [People
v. Izon, G.R. L-10397 (1958)].
However, having community of design with
the principal does not prevent a malefactor
from being regarded as an accomplice if his
role in the perpetration of the homicide or
murder was, relatively speaking, of a minor
character [People v. Nierra, G.R. No. L32624 (1980)].
2. If the party desisted from the
commission of the crime [People v. Timbol,
G.R. Nos. L-47471-3 (1944)].
Wheel or Circle Conspiracy v. Chain
Conspiracy
1. Wheel or Circle Conspiracy - there is a
single person or group (the hub) dealing
individually with two or more other persons
or groups (the spokes).
2. Chain Conspiracy - there is successive
communication and cooperation in much
the same way as with legitimate business
operations between manufacturer and
wholesaler, then wholesaler and retailer,
and then retailer and consumer [Estrada v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148965 (2002)].
When the person who has decided to commit a
felony proposes its execution to some other
person or persons [Art. 8, RPC].
Requisites: [DP]
1. Decision to commit a felony; and
2. Proposal to execute to other
person/persons.
It is not necessary that the person to whom the
proposal is made agrees to commit it [Reyes,
Book 1].
Proposals Punishable by Law [ReCIT]:
1. Rebellion [Art. 136, RPC]
2. Coup d’ etat [Art. 136, RPC]
3. Insurrection [Art. 136, RPC]
4. Treason [Art. 115, RPC]
f. Multiple Offenders
Four Forms of Repetition:
1. Recidivism/Reincindencia [Art. 14 (9),
RPC]
2. Habituality/Reiteracion [Art. 14 (10),
RPC]
3. Multi-recidivism/Habitual Delinquency
[Art. 62 (5), RPC]
4. Quasi-recidivism [Art. 160, RPC]
1. Recidivism
Recidivist
One who, at the time of his trial for one crime,
shall have been previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime embraced in the
same title of the RPC [People v. Lagarto, G.R.
No. 65833 (1991)].
Requisites: [TPSC]
1. Offender is on Trial for a felony
2. He was Previously convicted by final
judgment of another crime
3. Both the first and second felonies are
embraced in the Same title of the RPC
4. Offender is Convicted of the new
offense
Offender is on Trial for an Offense
What is controlling is the time of trial, not the
time of commission of the crime. It is meant to
include everything that is done in the course of
the trial, from arraignment until after the
sentence is announced by the judge in open
court [People v. Lagarto, supra].
Rules in Counting Number of Convictions
1. If both offenses were committed on the
same date, they shall be considered as
only one, hence, they cannot be
separately counted in order to
constitute recidivism.
2. If judgments of conviction handed
down on the same day shall be
considered as only one conviction.
When is there Conviction by Final
Judgment
1. After lapse of period for perfecting
appeal (15 days);
2. When sentence has been partially or
totally served;
3. Accused waived in writing his right to
appeal; or
4. Accused has applied for probation.
[Rule 120, Sec. 7, ROC].
Effect of the following:
• Pardon on the first felony – the first
conviction is still counted to make him
a recidivist, since pardon does not
obliterate the fact of his prior conviction
Page 65 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
•
CRIMINAL LAW
[People v. Lacao, Sr., G.R. No. 95320
(1991)].
Amnesty on the first felony – his
former conviction would not be
aggravating. According to Art. 89,
amnesty extinguishes not only the
penalty but also its effects [US v.
Sotelo, G.R. No. L-9791 (1914)].
Special Laws Not Contemplated
In recidivism, the crimes committed should be
felonies. There is no recidivism if the crime
committed is a violation of a special law
[People v. Lauleco, C.A., 36 O.G. 956].
2. Habituality (Reiteracion)
Requisites: [TPE2LC]
1. Offender is on Trial for an offense
2. He Previously served sentence for:
a. Another offense to which the
law attaches Equal or greater
penalty; or
b. 2 or more crimes to which it
attaches Lighter penalty than
that for the new offense
3. Offender is Convicted of the new
offense
3. Quasi-Recidivism [Art. 160]
Requisites [CBD]
1. Convicted by final judgment of one
offense.
2. Committed a new felony Before/During
service of such sentence. [Art. 160,
RPC]
3. Has already served out his original
sentence or if he completing it after
reaching such age.
Exception: If by reason of his conduct, he is
deemed not worthy of such clemency.
4. Multi-Recidivism/Habitual Delinquency
Requisites [T-FIRE, 10-2, 10-3]
1. Offender had been convicted of any of
the crimes of [T-FIRE]: Theft;
Falsification; serious or less serious
physical Injuries; Robbery; Estafa.
2. After conviction or after serving his
sentence, he again committed, and,
within 10 years from his release or first
conviction, he was again convicted of
any of the said crimes for the 2nd time
3. After his conviction of, or after serving
sentence for the second offense, he
again committed, and, within 10 years
from his last release or last conviction,
he was again convicted of any of said
offenses, the 3rd time or oftener [Art.
62, RPC].
Note: Computation of the 10-year period can
start from either the conviction OR release of
the accused in his previous crime and shall end
with the date of his conviction in the
subsequent crime [People v. Lacsamana, G.R.
No. L-46270 (1938)].
Reiteracion and Quasi-recidivism Cannot
be Simultaneous
Since reiteracion provides that the accused
has duly served the sentence for previous
conviction/s, or is legally considered to have
done so, quasi-recidivism cannot at the same
time constitute reiteracion, hence the latter
cannot apply to a quasi-recidivist [People v.
Layson, G.R. No. L-25177 (1969)].
Coverage
• It applies to all participants (e.g.,
principals, accomplices, accessories)
because it reveals persistence in them
of the inclination to wrongdoing and of
the perversity of character that led
them to commit the previous crime.
• It applies to any stage of the
execution (attempt, frustration, or
consummation) because subjectively,
the offender reveals the same degree
of depravity or perversity as the one
who commits a consummated crime.
Pardon [Art. 160(2), RPC]
General Rule: A quasi-recidivist may be
pardoned and pardon is to be given to a convict
who:
1. Is not a habitual criminal;
2. Is already at the age of seventy (70)
years; and
Not An Ex Post Facto Law
The imposition of the additional penalty on
habitual delinquents are not unconstitutional
because such law is neither an ex post facto
law nor an additional punishment for future
crimes. It is simply a punishment on future
crimes on account of the criminal propensities
Page 66 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
of the accused [People v. Montera, G.R. No. L34431 (1931)].
Recidivism
Inherent
in
Habitual
Delinquency
A habitual delinquent is necessarily a recidivist.
In
penalizing
him,
the
aggravating
circumstance of recidivism has to be taken into
account. However, for the purpose of fixing the
additional penalty, recidivism cannot be taken
as an aggravating circumstance for the reason
that it is inherent in habitual delinquency
[People v. Tolentino, G.R. No. L-48740 (1942)].
5th and
succeeding
Rules in Counting Convictions [Reyes, Book
1]
1. Convictions on the same day are
counted as one.
2. Crimes committed on the same date,
although convictions are on different
dates, are counted as one.
3. Crime committed during the minority of
the offender is not considered.
4. Commission of any of the crime need
not be consummated.
Required Allegations in Information
The information must contain dates of [PLO]:
1. Commission of Previous crimes
2. Last conviction or release
3. Other previous convictions or releases
[People v. Venus, G.R. No. 45141
(1936)].
Note:
•
•
Plea of guilty which fails to allege the
dates of the commission of previous
offences, convictions, and of releases
is not an admission of habitual
delinquency, but recidivism [People v.
Masonson, G.R. No. 45249 (1936)].
Failure to object admission of decision
showing dates of previous convictions
cures the failure to allege said dates in
the information [People v. Nava, C.A.,
58 O.G. 4750].
Penalties
Nth
Conviction
3rd
4th
Penalty
Plus
Prescribed
penalty on
the last
crime
prision
correccional
(med. and max.
periods)
prision mayor
(min. and med.
periods)
Page 67 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
prision mayor
(max. period)
to reclusion
temporal (min.
period)
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Limitation: 30 years. In no case shall the total
of the 2 penalties imposed upon the offender
exceed 30 years.
The imposition of such additional penalties is
mandatory and is not discretionary.
Recidivism v. Reiteraction v. Quasi-Recidivism v. Habitual Delinquency
Recidivism/ ReincinHabituality/ Reiteracion/
Quasi-Recidivism
dencia
Repetition
[Art. 160]
[Art. 14 (9)]
[Art. 14 (10)]
As to Nature
As to When the Second (2nd) Crime was Committed
After conviction of 1st
After serving sentence for
After conviction of
crime
the 1st crime
1st crime – but
before serving
sentence for the 1st
crime, or while
serving such
sentence
As to the Crimes Committed
2nd conviction – for
Offender has been previouOffender is convican offense embraced
sly punished of:
ted for a 2nd felony.
in the same title of
1. One (1) offense – to
RPC
which the law attaches equal Note: 1st crime may
or greater penalty; or
be a felony or
2. Two (2) offenses – to
offense but the 2nd
which the law attaches
crime must be a
lighter penalty
felony.
Note: Previous and subsequent offenses must NOT be
embra-ced in the same title of
the RPC.
As to Type of Aggravating Circumstance
Special AggraGeneric Aggravating Circumstance
vating Circumstance
As to Effect on Penalty
If not offset by any
Same as recidivism but not
Imposes the maximitigating circumalways an aggravating
mum of the penalty
stance, increase the
circum-stance as Court
for the new offense,
penalty only to the
should exercise discretion in and cannot be
maximum.
favor of the accused if the
offset by any
previous offenses of the
mitigating circumoffender are against property stance.
and not directly against
persons and applying
habituality would result in a
penalty of death.
As to Proof/Other Requirements
Proof of Recidivism
Proof of Habituality
Proof of QuasiIt is necessary to
Requires presentation of
Recidivism
allege recidivism in the certified copies of the
Requires the
information and to
sentence rendered against
presentation of a
attach thereto certified
the accused except when
certified copy of the
Page 68 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Habitual Delinquency
[Art. 62 (5)]
Within 10 years
from his last
release or
conviction
At least 3 convictions are required.
Offender is found
guilty for the 3rd
time or oftener
of the following
crimes [T-FIRE]:
1. Theft
2. Falsification
3. Less serious or
serious physical
Injuries
4. Robbery
5. Estafa
Extraordinary
Aggravating
Circum-stance
An additional
penalty shall be
imposed.
Required
Allegations in
Information
CRIM1
copies of the
sentences render-ed
against the accused.
The trial court may still
give such aggravating
circum-stance credence if the accused
does not object to the
presentation. [People
v. Molina, G.R. Nos.
134777-78 (2000)]
CRIMINAL LAW
the defendant pleads guilty
to the information alleging
reiteracion [People v.
Monterey y Quindoza, G.R.
No. 109767 (1996)].
sentence convicting
an accused [People
v. Gaorana, G.R.
Nos. 109138-39
(1998)].
Page 69 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The information
must contain
dates of [PLO]:
1. Commission of
Previous crimes
2. Last conviction
or release
3. Other previous convictions
or releases
[People v. Venus,
G.R. No. 45141
(1936)].
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Perpetual or temporary special
disqualification (e.g., Arts. 226-228,
RPC)
3. Suspension (e.g., Art. 236, RPC)
D. Penalties
1. Imposable Penalties
Prescribed vs. Imposable
Penalty Actually Imposed
Prescribed
Penalty
Imposable
Penalty
Penalty vs.
Penalty
Actually
Imposed
As to Definition
An initial
penalty as a
A single
general
fixed
prescription
Penalty after
penalty
for the
the attending or (also
felonies
modifying
called a
defined
circumstances
straight
therein
have been
penalty)
which
appreciated
chosen
consists of a
by the
range of
court
period of
time.
Example: As Applied to homicide
One ordinary
aggravating
17 years,
and no
4 months
mitigating
Reclusion
and 1 day
circumstances:
temporal
of
reclusion
reclusion
temporal in its
temporal
maximum
period
2. Classification
Major Classification
1. Principal Penalties - Those expressly
imposed by the court in the judgment of
conviction.
2. Accessory Penalties - Those that are
deemed included in the imposition of
the principal penalties.
3. Subsidiary Penalties
- Those
imposed in lieu of principal penalties,
i.e., imprisonment in case of inability to
pay the fine [Reyes, Book 1].
Either Principal or Accessory
The following may be principal or accessory
penalties, because they are formed in the two
general classes: [Reyes, Book 1]
1. Perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification
Other Classifications
1. According to Divisibility [Reyes,
Book 1]
Divisible. Those that have fixed
duration and can be divided into three
periods: minimum, medium, maximum.
a. Reclusion temporal
b. Prision mayor
c. Prision correccional
d. Suspension
e. Destierro
f. Arresto mayor
g. Arresto menor
Indivisible. Those that have no fixed
duration.
h. Death
i. Reclusion perpetua
j. Perpetual absolute/special
disqualification
k. Public censure
2. According to Subject-Matter
a. Corporal – Death.
b. Deprivation of freedom –
Reclusion, prision, arresto.
c. Restriction of freedom –
Destierro.
d. Deprivation of Rights –
Disqualification, suspension.
e. Pecuniary – Fine.
3. According to Gravity [Art. 9, 25, and
26, RPC]
a. Capital
b. Afflictive
c. Correctional
d. Light
3. Duration and Effects
SCALE OF PRINCIPAL PENALTIES [Art. 25,
RPC]
1. Capital Punishment: Death
2. Afflictive Penalties [RP, RT, PAD,
TAD, PSD, TSD, PM]
a. Reclusion Perpetua,
b. Reclusion Temporal,
c. Perpetual
or
Temporary
Absolute Disqualification,
Page 70 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
d. Perpetual
or
Temporary
Special Disqualification,
e. Prision Mayor.
3. Correctional Penalties [PC, AM, S,
Des]
a. Prision Correccional
b. Arresto Mayor
c. Suspension
d. Destierro
4. Light Penalties [Am,Pc]
a. Arresto menor
b. Public censure
5. Penalties Common to the Three
Preceding Classes [FB]
a. Fine
b. Bond to keep the peace.
Scale of Accessory Penalties
1. Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification
2. Perpetual or Temporary Special
Disqualification
3. Suspension from public office, the right
to vote and be voted for, the profession
or calling
4. Civil Interdiction,
5. Indemnification,
6. Forfeiture
or
confiscation
of
instruments and proceeds of the
offense,
7. Payment of costs
Penalties involving Death/Imprisonment (Deprivation of Freedom)
Penalty
Duration
Accessories
Capital Punishment
Death
Indivisible
Death, when not
Indivisible
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification; and
executed due to
2. Civil interdiction for 30 years, if not expressly
pardon or commutation
remitted in the pardon [Art. 40, RPC]
(REPEA-LED)
Afflictive Penalties
Reclusion Perpetua
20 years & 1 day
1. Civil interdiction for life or during the period of
to 40 years
the sentence as the case may be
(Indivisible) [Art.
2. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification which the
27, RPC]
offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to
the principal penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon [Art. 41,
RPC]
Reclusion Temporal
12 years & 1 day
1. Civil interdiction for life or during the period of
to 20 years [Art.
the sentence as the case may be.
27, RPC]
2. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification which the
offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to
the principal penalty, unless the same shall have
been expressly remitted in the pardon [Art. 41,
RPC].
Prision Mayor
6 years & 1 day to 1. Temporary Absolute Disqualification
12 years [Art. 27,
2. Perpetual Special Disqualification from the right
RPC]
to suffrage which the offender shall suffer although
pardoned as to the principal penalty unless the
same shall have been expressly remitted in the
pardon [Art. 42, RPC].
Correctional Penalties
Prision Correccional
6 months & 1 day
1. Suspension from public office
to 6 years [Art. 27, 2. Suspension from the right to follow a profession
RPC]
or calling
3. Perpetual Special Disqualification for the right of
suffrage, if the duration of the imprisonment shall
exceed 18 months [Art. 43, RPC]
Arresto Mayor
1 month & 1 day to 1. Suspension of right to hold office
6 months [Art. 27,
2. Suspension of the right of suffrage during the
RPC]
term of the sentence [Art. 44, RPC]
Page 71 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
Arresto Menor
CRIMINAL LAW
Light Penalties
1 day to 30 days
1. Suspension of right to hold office
[Art. 27, RPC]
2. Suspension of the right of suffrage during the
term of the sentence [Art. 44, RPC]
Penalties involving Deprivation of Rights
Penalty
Duration
Afflictive Penalties
Perpetual Absolute
Disqualification
For life
Temporary
Absolute
Disqualification
6 years & 1 day to 12 years except when
disqualify-cation penalty is imposed as an
accessory penalty, in which case its
duration shall be that of the principal
penalty [Art. 27, RPC].
Perpetual Special
Disqualification
For life
Temporary Special
Disqualification
6 years & 1 day to 12 years except when
disqualification penalty is imposed as an
accessory penalty, in which case its
duration shall be that of the principal
penalty [Art. 27, RPC].
Suspen-sion
Destierro
Correctional Penalties
6 months & 1 day to 6 years except when
the penalty of disqualification is imposed
as an accessory penalty, in which case its
duration shall be that of the principal
penalty [Art. 27, RPC].
6 months & 1 day to 6 years [Art. 27, RPC]
Effects
1. Deprivation of public office,
even if by election
2. Deprivation of right to vote
& be voted for
3. Disqualification from public
office held
4. Loss of retirement rights
[Art. 30, RPC]
1. Deprivation of public office,
even if by election
2. Deprivation of right to vote
& be voted for during
sentence
3. Disqualification from public
office held during sentence
4. Loss of retirement rights
[Art. 30, RPC]
1. Deprivation of office,
employment, profession, or
calling affected
2. Disqualification from similar
offices or employments [Art.
31, RPC]
3. Right to suffrage (vote in
any popular election for public
office or be elected to such
office) [Art. 32, RPC]
1. Deprivation of office,
employment, profession, or
calling affected
2. Disqualification from similar
offices or employment [Art.
31, RPC]
3. Right to suffrage (vote in
any popular election for public
office or be elected to such
office) [Art. 32, RPC]
1. Public office
2. Profession or calling
3. Suffrage [Art. 33, RPC]
Prohibition to enter w/in 25250 km radius from the
designated place [Art. 87,
RPC]
Page 72 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Capital Punishment
The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases
in which it must be imposed under existing
laws, except in the following cases (reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed):
1. When the guilty person be more than
seventy (70) years of age or below
eighteen (18) years of age at the time
of the commission of the crime [Art. 47,
RPC, as amended by R.A. 9344]
2. When upon appeal or automatic review
of the Supreme Court, the required
majority vote is not obtained for the
imposition of the death penalty [Art. 47,
RPC, as amended by R.A. 9346].
Abolition of Death Penalty
R.A. 9346 (Act Prohibiting the Imposition of
Death Penalty) provides for:
1. Prohibition on death penalty [Sec. 1,
R.A. 9346]
2. Repeal of R.A. 8177 (Act Designating
Death by Lethal Injection) and R.A.
7659 (Death Penalty Law) [Sec. 1, R.A.
9346]
3. In lieu of death penalty, following shall
be imposed:
a. Reclusion perpetua - if the
law violated uses the RPC’s
nomenclature; and
b. Life imprisonment - if it does
not [Sec. 2, R.A. 9346]
Constitutional Prohibition
In the constitutional prohibition on death
penalty [Art. III, Sec. 19(1), 1987 Constitution],
the latter is placed in a “suspensive condition”
or in a “state of hibernation.” It is included in the
computation of penalty but not imposed.
"Death" as used in Art. 71, RPC, shall no longer
form part of the equation in the graduation of
penalties. For example, the determination of
his penalty for attempted rape shall be
reckoned not from two degrees lower than
death, but two degrees lower than reclusion
perpetua [People v. Bon, G.R. No. 166401
(2006)].
Note: that the death penalty remains in the
RPC; R.A. 9346 merely prohibits its imposition
Heinous Crimes Remain “Heinous.”
Debarring the death penalty through R.A. 9346
did not declassify those crimes previously
catalogued as "heinous" (in R.A. 7659). R.A.
9346’s amendments extend only to the
application of the death penalty but not to the
definition or classification of crimes. It does not
serve as a basis for the reduction of civil
indemnity and other damages that adhere to
heinous crimes [People v. Bon, supra].
b. Reclusion Perpetua
Duration
In R.A. 7659, the penalty of reclusion perpetua
is now accorded a defined duration ranging
from twenty (20) years and one (1) day to forty
(40) years.
Indivisibility
Reclusion perpetua remains to be an indivisible
penalty and, when it is the prescribed penalty,
should be imposed in its entirety, i.e., reclusion
perpetua sans a fixed period for its duration,
regardless of any mitigating or aggravating
circumstance that may have attended the
commission of the crime [People v. Ticalo,
G.R. No. 138990 (2002)].
Considering that it is an indivisible penalty, it is
also unnecessary for the court to specify the
length of imprisonment [People v. Ramirez,
G.R. No. 138261 (2001)].
Life Imprisonment v. Reclusion Perpetua
[People v. Ballabare, G.R. No. 108871 (1996)]
Cadena
Reclusion
Perpetua (Life
Perpetua
Imprisonment)
As to
Imposed for
Prescribed
Offenses
serious
under the
offenses
RPC
penalized by
special laws
As to
No accessory
With
Accessory penalties
accessory
Penalties
penalties
As to
Does not
Entails
Duration
appear to have imprisonany definite
ment for at
extent or
least 30
duration
years after
which the
convict
becomes
eligible for
pardon
although
the
Page 73 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
maximum
period shall
in no case
exceed 40
years
A.M. No. 15-08-02-SC, in rel. to Sec. 3, R.A.
9346
Conditions
Effect
Convicted of
Ineligible for parole under
offense
Indeterminate Sentence
punished with
Law (ISLAW)
or reduced to
reclusion
perpetua
When death
No need to use
penalty is not
qualification of “without
warranted
eligibility for parole” as
convicted persons
penalized with an
indivisible penalty are not
eligible for parole
When death
Must use qualification
penalty is
“without eligibility for
warranted, if
parole” to qualify
not for R.A.
reclusion perpetua and to
9346
emphasize that the
accused should have
been sentenced to suffer
the death penalty if not
for R.A. 9346.
c. Destierro
Applicability
Destierro applies in the following cases: [FICE]
1. In case of Failure to give bond for good
behavior [Art. 284, RPC]
2. Serious physical Injuries
3. Penalty of Concubine in concubinage
[Art. 334, RPC]
4. Death under Exceptional circumstance
[Art. 247, RPC]
5. In cases where after reducing the
penalty by one or more degrees,
destierro is the proper penalty.
[REYES, Book 1]
or within the 25-250 km. radius specified [Art.
87, RPC].
Although destierro does not constitute
imprisonment, it is still a deprivation of liberty.
Art. 29 of the RPC applies when the penalty is
destierro [People v. Bastasa, G.R. No. L-32792
(1979)].
Penalties
Common
to
Afflictive,
Correctional, and Light Penalties
a. Fines
Classification of Penalties
[Art. 26, RPC, as amended by Sec. 2, RA
10951]
Afflictive
More than Php1,200,000
Php40,000 to
Correctional
Php1,200,000
Light
Below Php40,000
Classification of Penalty
Art. 26 merely classifies fine and has nothing to
do with the definition of offenses. Hence, Art. 9
should prevail over Art. 26 where the
prescription of a crime and not the prescription
of a penalty is the question [People v. Yu Hai,
G.R. No. L-9598 (1956)].
Rules in Fines
1. The court can fix any amount of the fine
within the limits established by law but
must consider:
a. Mitigating and aggravating
circumstances
b. Wealth or means of the culprit
[Art. 66, RPC]
2. When the law does not fix its minimum
– the determination of the amount of is
left to the sound discretion of the court,
provided
within
the
maximum
authorized by law [People v. Quinto,
G.R. No. 40934 (1934)].
3. Fines are not divisible
Duration
Destierro lasts from 6 months and 1 day to 6
years [Art. 27, RPC].
Increasing or Reducing Fine
Fines are graduated into degrees when
imposing them upon accomplices and
accessories
or
in
principals
in
frustrated/attempted felonies [Arts. 50-57,
RPC].
Nature of Destierro
Those sentenced to destierro are not allowed
to enter the place/s designated in the sentence
If it is necessary to increase/reduce the penalty
of fine by 1 or more degrees it shall be
increased/reduced respectively or each degree
Page 74 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
by one-fourth (¼) of the maximum
prescribed amount by law without changing
the minimum. This shall also be observed with
fines that are made proportional [Art. 75, RPC].
This does not apply when there is no minimum
amount fixed by law, in which case the amount
imposed is left to the sound discretion of the
courts [People v. Quinto, G.R. No. L-40934
(1934)].
Fine with
Maximum
Minimum
v.
Fine
Without
Fine With
Minimum
As to What
Fixes the
Maximum
As to the
Court
Imposing
the
Minimum
When Court
Also Fixed
the
Maximum
Fine
Without
Minimum
In both, the law fixes the
maximum of the fine.
The Court
cannot
change the
minimum.
The Court
can impose
an amount
higher than
the
maximum.
The Court
can impose
any amount
not
exceeding
the
maximum.
The Court
cannot
impose an
amount
higher than
the
maximum.
b. Bond to Keep Peace
Effect of Penalty: [2SDD]
1. Offender must present two (2) sureties
who shall undertake that the offender
will not commit the offense sought to be
prevented and that they will pay a
court-determined amount if said
offense be committed.
2. Offender must Deposit amount to the
clerk of court.
3. Offender must be Detained if he cannot
give the bond.
a. Grave/less grave felonies - not
more than 6 months
b. Light penalties - not more than
30 days for light penalties. [see
Art. 35, RPC]
Duration
The bond to keep the peace shall be required
to cover such period of time as the court may
determine [Art. 27, RPC, as amended by R.A.
7659].
Applicability
General Rule: Since according to Art. 21 no
felony shall be punishable by any penalty not
prescribed by law prior to its commission, and
the bond to keep the peace is not specifically
provided for by the Code for any felony, it shall
be required to cover such a period of time as
the court may determine [As amended by
Section 21, R.A. No. 7659].
Exception: Bond to keep the peace is
required of a person making a grave or light
threat [Art. 284, RPC].
Bond to Keep Peace v. Bail Bond
Bond to
Bail Bond
Keep the
Peace
As to
Penalty for
Posted to
Purpose/
offense of
provisional
Applicability grave/light
release of a
threat
person
arrested/
accused of a
crime
Termination of Parental Authority
Unless subsequently revived by a final
judgment, parental authority also terminates
[Art. 229, RPC]:
1. Upon
judicial
declaration
of
abandonment of the child in a case filed
for the purpose; or
2. Upon final judgment of a competent
court divesting the party concerned of
parental authority; xxx
4. Application and Graduation of
Penalties
When Duration of Penalty Begins [Art. 28,
RPC]
When Duration of
Scenario
Penalty Commences
When offender is Duration of temporary
in prison
penalties is from the
day on which the
judgment of conviction
becomes final.
When offender is Duration of penalty
not in prison
consisting of
deprivation of liberty is
from the day the
offender is placed at
Page 75 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
the disposal of judicial
authorities for the
enforcement of the
penalty.
For other
From the day on
penalties
which the offender
commences to serve
his sentence.
When the
From the date of the
accused, who
promulgation of the
was in custody,
decision of the
appealed
appellate court.
[Ocampo v. CA, G.R.
No. L-7469 (1955)]
Temporary Penalties
If offender is
From day on which
undergoing
the judgment of
preventive
conviction becomes
imprisonment
final, but offender is
entitled to a deduction
of full time or 4/5 of
the time of detention
If offender is not
From the day on
under detention
which the offender
because offender commences to serve
was released on
his sentence
bail
Examples of Temporary Penalties:
1. Temporary absolute disqualification
2. Temporary special disqualification
3. Suspension
Examples of penalties
deprivation of liberty:
1. Imprisonment
2. Destierro
consisting
in
Rules in Deducting Period of Preventive
Imprisonment [Art. 29, RPC]
General Rule: Offenders who underwent
preventive imprisonment shall be credited in
the service of their sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty, with the full time during
which they were under preventive
imprisonment, if they agree voluntarily in
writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules
imposed upon convicted prisoners.
Exceptions:
1. They are recidivists/have been
convicted previously twice or more
times of any crime; and
2. They failed to surrender voluntarily
when summoned for the execution of
their sentence.
Note: Credit for preventive imprisonment for
the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
deducted from 30 years.
Other Rules [Art. 29, RPC]
Scenario
Effect
If detention
Credited in the
prisoner does not
service of his
agree to abide by
sentence with fourthe same
fifths (4/5) of the
disciplinary rules
time during which he
imposed upon
has undergone
convicted
preventive
prisoners
imprisonment (as
amended by R.A.
6127).
If accused’s period Released
of preventive
immediately without
imprisonment is
prejudice to the
equal to/more than continuation of the
the possible max.
trial thereof or the
imprisonment of
proceeding on
the offense
appeal, if the same
charged to which
is under review (as
he may be
amended by EO
sentenced and his
214, 1988).
case is not yet
terminated
Exceptions: If the
accused is absent
without justifiable
cause at any stage
of the trial, court
may motu proprio
order the rearrest of
the accused.
Recidivists, habitual
delinquents,
escapees and
persons charged
with heinous crimes
are also excluded.
If maximum
Released after thirty
penalty to which
(30) days of
the accused may
preventive
be sentenced is
imprisonment (as
destierro
amended by EO
214, 1988).
If penalty imposed Convict should be
after trial is less
released
than the full time
immediately [Reyes,
or four-fifths of the Book 1].
time of the
Page 76 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
preventive
imprisonment
a. Indeterminate Sentence Law (R.A.
4103, As Amended by Act No. 4225)
Purpose
The law is intended to favor the defendant,
particularly to shorten his term of
imprisonment, depending upon his behavior
and his physical, mental and moral record as a
prisoner, to be determined by the Board of
Indeterminate Sentence.
Why “Indeterminate Sentence”
After serving the minimum, the convict may be
released on parole, OR if he is not fitted for
release, he shall continue serving his sentence
until the end of the maximum [People v.
Ducosin, G.R. No. L-38332 (1933)].
Mandatory
Application of ISLAW is mandatory because
the law employs the phrases “convicts shall be
sentenced” and “the court shall sentence the
accused to an indeterminate sentence” [People
v. Yu Lian, CA 40 OG 4205].
Applicability
General Rule: Applicable to those sentenced
with imprisonment exceeding one (1) year.
• Application of the law is based on
the penalty actually imposed. Hence,
in a case where the court imposes a
penalty
of
prisión
correccional
minimum (6 months and 1 day), ISLAW
does not apply [People v. Moises, G.R.
No. L-32495 (1975)].
Exceptions:
Not applicable when unfavorable to the
accused [People v. Nang Kay, 88 Phil. 515,
519]
The following are excluded from coverage:
[Sec. 2, ISLAW]
1. Convicted of Piracy
2. Habitual delinquents (but applies to
recidivists).
3. Convicted of offenses punished with
death penalty or Life imprisonment.
However, when there are two
mitigating circumstances, despite the
offense being punishable by reclusion
temporal to death, ISLAW applies.
[People v. Roque, 90 Phil 142, 146
(1951)]
4. Those who shall have escaped from
confinement or Evaded service of
sentence
5. Those whose maximum term of
imprisonment does Not exceed one
year.
6. Those sentenced to the penalty of
Destierro or Suspension.
7. Convicted of misprision of Treason,
Rebellion, Espionage, Sedition.
8. Convicted of Treason, conspiracy or
proposal to commit treason
9. Those who Violated the terms of
conditional pardon granted to them by
the Chief Executive
10. Those who had been sentenced by
final Judgment at the time of the
approval of this law.
Note: ISLAW was approved on June 19, 1965.
Maximum and Minimum Terms
Law
Maximum
Minimum
Term
Term
Penalty which
Court’s
could be
discretion,
properly
provided that
imposed under
the minimum
the rules of the
term is
RPC, in view of anywhere
the attending
within the
circumstances.
range of the
penalty next
Basis:
lower to that
Imposable
prescribed by
penalty (after
the RPC for
considering
the offense,
RPC
mitigating or
without regard
aggravating
to its 3 periods
circumstances)
[Sec. 1,
[Sec. 1, ISLAW] ISLAW].
Special
Law
Maximum term
shall not
exceed the
maximum fixed
by the special
Page 77 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Basis:
Prescribed
penalty, not
the imposable
penalty
[People v.
Temporada,
supra].
Minimum term
shall not be
less than
minimum
specified by
the law.
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
law [Sec. 1,
ISLAW].
Presence of
attending
circumstances
does not affect
the imposition
of the penalty.
Exception:
When the
special law
adopts the
technical
nomenclature
and signification
of penalties
under RPC,
indeterminate
sentence is
based on rule
intended for
crimes
punishable by
RPC [Imbo v.
People, G.R.
No. 197712
(2015)].
Exception:
When the
special law
adopts the
technical
nomenclature
and
signification of
penalties
under RPC,
indeterminate
sentence is
based on rule
intended for
crimes
punishable by
RPC [Imbo v.
People,
supra].
Factors in Fixing Minimum Penalty [People
v. Ducosin, 59 Phil 109, 118 (1933)]
Criminal as an individual
1. Age of the criminal
2. General health and physical conditions
3. Mentality, heredity and personal habits
4. Previous conduct, environment, mode
of life, and criminal record
5. Previous education (intellectual &
moral)
6. Proclivities
and
aptitudes
for
usefulness or injury to society
7. Demeanor during trial and attitude with
regard to the crime committed
8. Gravity of the offense
Criminal as a member of society
1. Relationship toward his dependents,
family and associates, and their
relationship with him
2. Relationship towards society at large
and the State
Rules in Authorizing Prisoner to be
Released on Parole
Whenever the prisoner shall have served the
minimum penalty imposed on him, and it shall
appear to the Board of Indeterminate Sentence
that such prisoner is fitted for release, the
Board may authorize his release on parole,
upon terms and conditions as may be
prescribed.
Whenever the prisoner on parole during the
period of surveillance violates any of the
conditions, Board may issue an order for his
arrest where the prisoner shall serve the
unexpired portion of the maximum sentence.
[Secs. 6 and 8, R.A. 4103, as amended by Act
No. 4225]
Other Rules in Application of Penalties
1. Incomplete Accident
a. If guilty of grave felony:
Arresto mayor in its maximum
period to prision correccional in
its minimum period
b. If guilty of less grave felony:
Arresto mayor in its minimum
and medium periods [Art. 67,
RPC]
2. Incomplete Exemption or
Justification
a. When deed is not wholly
excusable by reason of lack of
some conditions required for
exempting
or
justifying
circumstances – a penalty
lower by one or two degrees
shall be imposed, provided that
majority of the conditions are
present [Art. 69, RPC].
b. Incomplete justification is a
privileged
mitigating
circumstance (it cannot be
offset
by
aggravating
circumstances) [People v.
Ulep, supra].
3. Incomplete Self-Defense, Defense of
Relatives and Strangers
a. Unlawful
Aggression
–
should always be present to be
appreciated as a mitigating
circumstance [U.S. v. Navarro,
7 Phil. 713].
b. Ordinary
mitigating
circumstance – if only
unlawful aggression is present.
Page 78 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Privileged
mitigating
circumstance – if two of the
three requisites are present
[People v. Oanis, G.R. No. L47722 (1943)].
4. Impossible Crimes - The penalty for
persons who committed impossible
crimes [Art. 4(2), RPC] is arresto mayor
or a fine (Php200 – 500) [Art. 59, RPC].
5. Accessory Penalties
a. Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification
Effects [DOVDOP] [Art. 30, RPC]
1. Deprivation of any public Office or
employment of offender; even if by
election.
2. Deprivation of the right to Vote in any
election or to be voted upon;
3. Disqualification for the Offices or public
employments and for the exercise of
any of the rights mentioned.
4. Loss of rights to retirement pay or
Pension.
Duration
1. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification
– during the lifetime of the convict and
even after the service of the sentence
[Ocampo v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 225973
(2016)].
2. Temporary
Absolute
Disqualification – during the term of
the sentence, except as to:
a. Deprivation of the public office
or employment; and
b. Loss of all rights to retirement
pay or other pension for any
office formerly held [Art. 30 (3),
RPC].
Additional Penalty for Certain Accessories
Accessories falling within Art. 19 (3) of the RPC
who act with abuse of their public functions,
harbored, concealed, or assisted in the escape
of the principal of the crime shall suffer the
additional penalty:
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification
– for grave felonies
2. Temporary absolute disqualification
– for less grave felonies
b. Perpetual or Temporary Special
Disqualification
For Public Office, Profession or Calling [Art.
31, RPC]
1. Deprivation of the office, employment,
profession or calling affected; and
2. Disqualification for holding similar
offices or employments during the
period of disqualification.
For Exercise of Right to suffrage [Art. 32,
RPC]
1. Deprivation of the right to vote in any
election for popular office; and
2. Deprivation of right to be elected in
such office.
No Denial of Right
It is presumed those convicted of a felony are
unfit to exercise the privilege of suffrage or to
hold office. The exclusion must for this reason
be adjudged a mere disqualification, imposed
for protection and not for punishment, the
withholding of a privilege and not the denial of
a personal right [People v. Corral, G.R. No. L42300 (1936)].
Duration
1. Perpetual
Disqualification
or
Suspension – perpetually [Art. 30,
RPC]
2. Temporary
Disqualification
or
Suspension – if imposed as an
accessory penalty, the duration is the
same as that of the principal penalty.
[Art. 30 (3)(2), RPC]
c. Suspension from Public Office, the
Right to Vote and Be Voted For, the
Right to Practice a Profession or Calling
Effects
Involves disqualification from: [Art. 33, RPC]
1. Holding such office and holding
another office having similar functions
during the period of suspension
2. Exercising such profession
3. Exercising right of suffrage
Duration
Term of the sentence. [Art. 33, RPC]
Page 79 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
accused or to third person) shall be
destroyed.
d. Civil Interdiction
Effects [Art. 34, RPC]
Deprivation of the following rights: [PAG-MAMAP]
1. Parental Authority
2. Guardianship over the ward, either as
to the person or property of any ward
3. Marital Authority
4. Right to MAnage Property and to
dispose of the same by acts inter
vivos.
Other Effects under the Civil Code:
1. Offer given by the convict before
acceptance is conveyed shall become
ineffective [Art. 1323, NCC]
2. Dissolution [of partnership] is caused:
(7) By the civil interdiction of any
partner [Art. 1830, NCC]
3. Civil interdiction of a general partner
dissolves the partnership, unless the
business is continued by the remaining
general partners:
a. Under a right so to do stated in
the certificate, or
b. With the consent of all
members. [Art. 1860, NCC]
4. Agency is extinguished: (3) By the [xxx]
civil interdiction [xxx] of the agent [Art.
1919, NCC]
e. Indemnification or Confiscation of
Instruments or Proceeds of the Offense
Generally
Effects
Forfeiture in favor of the Government of the
proceeds of the crime and the instruments or
tools with which it was committed [Art. 45,
RPC].
Rules: [Art. 45, RPC]
1. Every penalty imposed carries with it
the forfeiture of the proceeds of the
crime and the instruments or tools used
in the commission of the crime.
2. Proceeds and instruments or tools of
the crime are confiscated and forfeited
in favor of the Government.
3. Property of a third person not liable for
the offense, is not subject to
confiscation and forfeiture.
4. Property not subject of lawful
commerce (whether it belongs to the
Forfeiture as Additional Penalty
When the proceeds or instruments of the crime
are not confiscated prior to the final judgment
of sentence, the court cannot modify, alter or
change the sentence to confiscate such [U.S.
v. Hart, 24 Phil. 578, 581-582]. It is an
additional penalty, and amounts to an
increase of the penalty already imposed,
placing the accused in double jeopardy [People
v. Sanchez, G.R. No. L-9768 (1957)].
SPECIAL
LAWS
PROVIDING
CONFISCATION OF PROPERTY
FOR
An Act Declaring Forfeiture in Favor of the
State Any Property Found to Have Been
Unlawfully Acquired by Any Public Officer
or Employee and Providing for the
Proceedings Therefor [RA No. 1379]
If the public officer is unable to show that the
property in question was lawfully acquired, the
court shall declare this property forfeited in
favor of the State. Such judgment may not be
rendered within six months before any general
election, nor three months before any special
election [Sec. 6, R.A. 1379].
Plunder Law [RA No. 7080]
The Court shall declare any and all ill-gotten
wealth and their interests and other income
and assets including the properties and shares
of stocks derived from the deposit or
investment thereof, forfeited in favor of the
State [Sec. 2, R.A. 7080].
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act [RA
No. 3019]
Any prohibited interest or unexplained wealth
out of proportion to the offender’s lawful
income, shall be forfeited or confiscated in
favor of the State [Sec. 9, R.A. 3019].
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002, as amended [RA No. 9165]
All equipment and paraphernalia used for the
production of illegal drugs shall be confiscated
and forfeited in favor of the government.
After conviction in the RTC, the Court shall
immediately schedule a hearing for the
confiscation and forfeiture of all the proceeds
of the offense. However, during the
proceedings before the RTC, no property or
Page 80 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
income may be forfeited or confiscated [Sec.
20, R.A. 9165].
2016 Revised Implementing Rules and
Regulations of R.A. 9160, or the Anti-Money
Laundering Act, as amended.
Monetary instruments or property that are the
proceeds of money laundering shall be
forfeited in favor of the Government. If this
cannot be enforced, the court may order the
offender to pay an amount equal to the value of
the monetary instrument or property [Rule XII].
f. Payment of Costs
Exclusion
Not allowed against the Republic of the
Philippines. [Rule 142, Sec. 1, ROC]
What are Included
1. Fees, and
2. Indemnities, in the course of judicial
proceedings.
[Art. 37, RPC]
Expenses of Litigation
Costs of suit are the expenses of litigation
allowed and regulated by the Rules of Court to
be assessed against or to be recovered by a
party in litigation [People v. Bergante, et. al.,
G.R. No. 12036970 (1998)].
Order of Payment
The civil liabilities of a person found guilty of
two or more offenses shall be satisfied by
following the chronological order of the dates of
the judgments rendered against him [Art. 72,
RPC].
Applicable in case the property of the offender
is not sufficient to pay all his pecuniary
liabilities. The order of payment being [Art. 39,
RPC]:
1. Reparation of the damage caused
2. Indemnification
of
consequential
damages
3. Fine
4. Costs of the proceedings
6. Subsidiary Imprisonment
Definition
It is imposed upon the accused and served by
him in lieu of the fine which he fails to pay on
account of insolvency [People v. Alapan, G.R.
No. 199527 (2018)] at the rate of one day for
each amount equivalent to the highest
minimum wage rate prevailing in the
Philippines at the time of the rendition of
judgment of conviction by the trial court,
subject to rules provided for in Article 39 [Art.
39, RPC, as amended by R.A. 10159].
Nature
It is NOT an accessory penalty. Therefore, the
culprit cannot be made to go subsidiary
imprisonment unless the judgment expressly
so provides [People v. Fajardo, G.R. No. 43466
(1938)].
Accordingly, an accused cannot be made to
undergo subsidiary imprisonment in case of
insolvency to pay the fine imposed upon him
when the subsidiary imprisonment is not
imposed in the judgment of conviction [Ramos
v. Gonong, G.R. No. L-42010 (1976)].
Rules as to Subsidiary Imprisonment [Art.
39, RPC]
Duration of
Penalty Imposed
Subsidiary
Imprisonment
Shall not exceed 1/3
of the term of the
sentence and shall
Prisión
not continue for more
correccional or
than 1 year.
arresto; and fine
Fine Only
Fraction or part of a
day not counted.
Grave or less grave
felony: Shall not
exceed 6 months.
Light felony: Shall not
exceed 15 days.
Higher than
prisión
correccional
Penalty not to be
executed by
confinement, but
of fixed duration
In case financial
circumstances of
the convict
should improve
Page 81 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
No subsidiary
imprisonment.
Same deprivations as
those of the principal
penalty, under the
same rules as in the
first 3 cases above.
Convict shall pay the
fine, notwithstanding
fact that he suffered
subsidiary personal
liability therefor.
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Not an Alternative
A convict—who has property (a) not exempt
from execution and (b) sufficient enough to
meet the fine—cannot choose to serve the
subsidiary penalty [Art. 39, par. 5, RPC].
When Not Applicable
1. When the penalty imposed is higher
than prisión correccional [Art. 39, par.
3, RPC]
2. For failure to pay the reparation of the
damage caused, indemnification of the
consequential damages, and the costs
of the proceedings
3. When the penalty imposed is a fine and
a penalty not to be executed by
confinement in a penal institution and
which has no fixed duration
Note: Subsidiary imprisonment can be
imposed for violation of special laws pursuant
to Art. 10 of the RPC, which provides that the
RPC shall be supplementary to special laws;
unless, the special law provides that subsidiary
imprisonment shall not be imposed [Art. 10,
RPC; Jao Yu v. People, G.R. No. 134172
(2004)].
E. Execution and Service of
Penalties
EXECUTION OF PENALTIES
When and How a Penalty is to Be Executed
1. No penalty shall be executed except by
final judgment
2. Penalties cannot be executed in a form
or any circumstances/incidents other
than that prescribed or authorized by
law
3. The law and the special regulations of
institutions in which penalties are to be
suffered shall be observed with regard
to the character of work, time of
performance,
other
incidents
connected therewith, relationships of
convicts to others, relief they may
receive, and their diet
4. Regulations shall provide for:
a. Separation of the sexes in
different
institutions/
departments
b. Correction and reform of
convicts [Art. 78, RPC]
When Judgment Becomes Final
General Rule: No penalty shall be executed
except by virtue of a final judgment [Art. 78,
RPC]. A judgment becomes final after the
lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal
[Rule 120, Sec. 7, ROC].
Exception: If the defendant has expressly
waived in writing his right to appeal or when
accused applied for probation [Rule 120, Sec.
7, ROC].
Place of Execution of Sentence
Penalty
Place
Reclusion
In the places and penal
perpetua,
establishments
reclusion
provided by the
temporal,
Administrative Code or
prision mayor,
by law [Art. 86, RPC].
prision
correccional
and arresto
mayor
Arresto menor
Either in:
1. Municipal jail; or
2. House of the
defendant under the
surveillance of an
officer of the law, when
the court so provides,
taking into
consideration the
health of the offender
and other satisfactory
reasons [Art. 88, RPC].
Destierro
Not allowed to enter
the place/s designated
in the sentence nor
within the 25-250 km.
radius specified [Art.
87, RPC].
Simultaneous Service of Sentence
General Rule: When the culprit has to serve 2
or more penalties, he shall serve them
simultaneously.
Exception: If the nature of the penalties (e.g.
deprivation of liberty) does not permit
simultaneous service, the order of their
respective severity shall be followed [Art. 70,
RPC].
Deprivation of Liberty
Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty
cannot be served simultaneously by reason of
Page 82 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
the nature of such penalties [In re: Pete Lagran,
G.R. No. 147270 (2001)].
What can be simultaneously served with
one another [DDDDS Bond Fine CCP]
1. Perpetual absolute Disqualification
2. Perpetual special Disqualification
3. Temporary absolute Disqualification
4. Temporary special Disqualification
5. Destierro
6. Suspension
7. Bond to keep the peace and Fine
8. Civil interdiction
9. Confiscation and payment of costs
10. Public censure [In re: Pete Lagran,
G.R. No. 147270 (2001)]
All of the above can be served simultaneously
with imprisonment, except destierro [In re: Pete
Lagran, G.R. No. 147270 (2001)].
1. Three-Fold Place
Three-Fold Rule [3-40] [Art. 70, RPC]
1. Maximum duration of convict’s
sentence: Shall not be more than
three (3) times the length of time
corresponding to the most severe
penalty imposed upon him.
2. Limitation
of
maximum
period: Period shall in no case exceed
forty (40) years.
3. Effect if total imposed sentence is
more than the maximum allowed: No
other penalty shall be inflicted after the
sum total of those imposed equals the
same maximum period.
Note: Three-fold rule applies although the
penalties were imposed for different crimes, at
different
times,
and
under
separate
informations [Torres v. Superintendent, G.R.
No. 40373 (1933)].
Basis of Duration of Penalties
1. Duration of perpetual penalties (pena
perpetua) – shall be computed at thirty
(30) years [Art. 70, RPC].
2. Duration of the sentence refers to
several penalties for different offenses
not yet served out, but only when the
convict
must
serve continuous
imprisonment for several offenses
a. If sentence for one offense was
already
served,
that
imprisonment will not be
considered for the purpose of
the three-fold rule if after
release he commits again and
is convicted of new offenses.
b. Only penalties not yet served
out
can
be
served
simultaneously [In re: Pete
Lagran, G.R. No. 147270
(2001)].
3. If sentence is indeterminate, basis of
duration is the maximum term of the
sentence [People v. Desierto, C.A., 45
O.G. 4532].
4. “The most severe penalty” – includes
equal penalties, such as when
sentenced to multiple cases of the
same offense [Aspra v. Dir. of Prisons,
85 Phil. 737, 738].
Applicability of Rule
This rule only applies when the convict has to
serve at least four (4) sentences and cannot
exceed three-fold the most severe. If only 2 or
3 penalties corresponding to different crimes
committed by the convict are imposed, it is not
possible to apply the three-fold rule [Art. 70,
RPC].
Subsidiary Imprisonment
The three-fold rule does not preclude
subsidiary imprisonment for failure to pay a
fine, provided that the principal penalty does
not exceed 6 years. The provision of Art. 70
that "no other penalty to which he may be liable
shall be inflicted after the sum total of those
imposed equals the said maximum period,"
only means that the convict shall not serve the
excess over the maximum of three-fold the
most severe penalty.
Illustration:
“B” was found guilty in 17 criminal cases, the
most severe penalty imposed was 6 months
and 1 day, plus a fine of PI,000, with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of insolvency. After
serving 18 months and 3 days in prison, B filed
a petition for habeas corpus, contending that
applying the three-fold rule, he cannot be made
to serve more time. In deciding the case, the
SC ruled that the subsidiary imprisonment for
nonpayment of the fine cannot be eliminated so
long as the principal penalty is not higher than
6 years of imprisonment even if he already
served three-fold of the most severe penalty.
Page 83 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Applying said rule, if petitioner would not be
able to pay the fine, the maximum duration of
his imprisonment shall be 18 months and 3
days of the principal penalty plus 6 months and
1 day of subsidiary imprisonment for failure to
pay the fine, or a total of 2 years and 4 days
[Bagtas v. Director of Prisons, 84 Phil. 692, 698
(1949)].
Not “Imposition of Penalty,” but “Service”
Court must impose all the penalties for all the
crimes of which the accused is found guilty, but
in the service of the same, they shall not
exceed three times the most severe and shall
not exceed 40 years – three fold maximum
penalty [Mejorada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
Nos. L-51065-72 (1987)].
2. Probation Law [P.D.
Amended by R.A. 10707]
968,
As
Definition of Terms [Sec. 3, P.D. 986]
1. Probation – a disposition under which
a defendant, after conviction and
sentence, is released subject to
conditions imposed by the court and to
the supervision of a probation officer.
2. Probationer – person placed on
probation
3. Probation officer – one who
investigates for the court a referral for
probation or supervises a probationer
or both.
Nature
Probation Law is not a penal statute. Courts
have no authority to invoke a liberal
interpretation of it in this case as its words
leave no room for doubt or interpretation
[Llamado v. CA and Gaw, G.R. No. 84850
(1989)].
Probation is not a right but a privilege subject
to the discretion of the court. The discretion is
exercised primarily for the benefit of society as
a whole and only secondarily for the personal
advantage of the accused [Amandy v. People,
G.R. No. L-76258 (1988)].
a. Applicability
Probation may be granted whether the
sentence imposes a term of imprisonment or a
fine only.
May be extended to children in conflict with
the law
After convicting and sentencing a child in
conflict with the law, and upon application at
any time, the court may place the child on
probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence
in account of his/her best interest. As such Sec.
4, P.D. 968 is amended accordingly [Sec. 42,
R.A. 9344].
Disqualified Offenders
1. Those sentenced to serve a max. term
of more than six (6) years [Sec. 9(a),
P.D. 968].
2. Crimes against national security
convicts [Sec. 9(b), P.D. 968].
3. Those previously convicted by final
judgement of an offense punished by
imprisonment of more than six (6)
months and one (1) day and/or fine of
more than one hundred thousand
pesos (P1,000.00) [Sec. 9(c), P.D.
968].
4. Those who have been once in
probation under this Decree [Sec. 9(d),
P.D. 968].
5. Those who are already serving
sentence at the time the substance
provisions of this Decree became
applicable pursuant to Section 33
hereof [Sec. 9(e), P.D. 968].
6. Drug trafficker and pushers, regardless
of penalty imposed by court, cannot
avail of Probation Law privileges, as
amended by the Comprehensive
Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 [Sec. 24.
R.A. 9165].
b. Grant, Manner, and Conditions [Sec.
4, R.A. 10707]
1. Application for Probation - defendant
must file an application for probation
within the period for appeal.
Effect of filing of application –
deemed as waiver of the right to
appeal.
2. Application shall not be entertained
or granted – if defendant has
perfected the appeal from the judgment
of conviction.
Exception: When a judgment of
conviction
imposing
a
non-
Page 84 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
probationable
penalty
is
appealed/reviewed and modified to a
probationable penalty, the defendant
shall be allowed to apply for probation
based on the modified decision before
it becomes final.
Note: Accused shall lose the benefit of
probation should he seek a review of
the modified decision which already
imposes a probationable penalty.
3. Filing of application based on
modified decision – application shall
be filed in the trial court where the
judgment
imposing
a
nonprobationable penalty was rendered or
where such case has been re-raffled.
4. If several defendants have taken
further appeal –other defendants may
apply for probation by submitting a
written application and attaching
thereto a certified true copy of the
judgment of conviction.
Dimakuta Doctrine (Rules on Appeals)
Appeal must be limited to the following
grounds:
1. Appeal
merely
intended
for
the correction
of
the
penalty
imposed by the lower court, which
when corrected would entitle the
accused to apply for probation; and
2. Appeal is merely intended to review the
crime for which the accused was
convicted and that the accused should
only be liable to the lesser offense
which is necessarily included in the
crime for which he was originally
convicted and the proper penalty
imposable is within the probationable
period [Dimakuta v. People, G.R. No.
206513 (2015)].
What Must be Averred in the Notice of
Appeal
1. That
an
earlier
motion
for
reconsideration was filed but was
denied by the trial court;
2. That the appeal is only for reviewing
the penalty imposed by the lower court
or the conviction should only be for a
lesser crime necessarily included in the
crime charged in the information; and
3. That the accused-appellant is not
seeking acquittal of the conviction
[Dimakuta v. People, G.R. No. 206513
(2015)].
When Appeal Bars Grant of Probation
1. When the accused is convicted by the
trial court of a crime where the penalty
imposed is within the probationable
period or a fine, and the accused files
a notice of appeal; and
2. When the accused files a notice of
appeal which puts the merits of his
conviction in issue, even if there is an
alternative prayer for the correction of
the penalty imposed by the trial court or
for a conviction to a lesser crime, which
is necessarily included in the crime in
which he was convicted where the
penalty is within the probationable
period [Dimakuta v. People, G.R. No.
206513 (2015)].
Note: The Dimakuta decision was issued on
October 2015, but R.A. 10707—which
amended the Probation Law—was signed into
law on November 2015.
c. Grant of Probation
Discretion of the Court
Even if a convicted person falls within the
classes of those qualified for probation, the
grant of probation is not automatic or
ministerial [Amandy v. People, G.R. No. L76258 (1988)].
An order placing defendant on "probation" is
not a "sentence" but is rather in effect, a
suspension of the imposition of sentence. It is
not a final judgment but is rather an
"interlocutory judgment" [Baclayon v. Mutia,
G.R. No. L-59298 (1984)].
Criteria for Grant of Probation [Sec. 8, P.D.
968]
The following should be considered in deciding
to place an offender under probation: [AMChEAP]
1. Available institutional and community
resources
2. Mental condition of the offender
3. Character,
4. Antecedent,
5. Environment,
6. Physical condition of the offender
Page 85 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Reasons for Denying Probation [Sec. 8, P.D.
968]
1. The offender is in need of correctional
treatment
best
provided
thru
commitment to an institution.
2. There is undue risk that the offender
will commit another offense during the
probation period.
3. Probation
will
depreciate
the
seriousness of the offense committed.
Effects of Grant of Probation
1. The execution of sentence shall be
suspended for such period and upon
such terms and conditions as the trial
court may deem best [Sec. 4, P.D. 968]
2. Probation does not extinguish civil
liability, as it only affects the criminal
aspect of the case. [Budlong v.
Apalisok, G.R. No. L-60151 (1983)]
3. Accessory penalties are deemed
suspended [Baclayon v. Mutia, G.R.
No. L-59298 (1984)]
Note: An order granting or denying probation
shall not be appealable [Sec. 4 P.D. 968].
Conditions of Probation [Sec. 10, P.D. 968]
1. Mandatory Conditions. Probation
orders shall contain conditions
requiring probationer to:
a. Present
himself
to
his
supervising probation officer at
the place specified in the order
within 72 hours from receipt of
said order; and
b. Report to the probation officer
at least once a month at the
time and place specified by
said
officer.
2. Discretionary Conditions. The two
conditions above are mandatory
conditions; the rest in sec. 10 are
discretionary
conditions
(e.g.
cooperate with a program of
supervision;
meet
his
family
responsibilities; or devote himself to a
specific employment). Moreover, the
conditions enumerated under Sec. 10
are not exhaustive. The courts are
allowed to impose practically any term
it chooses, the only limitation being that
it does not jeopardize the constitutional
rights of the accused [Salgado v. CA,
et al., G.R. No. 89606 (1990)].
Period of Probation [Sec. 14, P.D. 968]
Scenario
Duration
When sentenced to
Probation shall not
imprisonment of not
exceed 2 years
more than 1 year
When sentenced to
Shall not exceed 6
more than 1 year
years
When sentenced to a Shall be twice the
fine and made to
total days of
suffer subsidiary
subsidiary
imprisonment
imprisonment
d. Violation of Probation Order
Upon the failure of the probationer to comply
with any of the conditions prescribed in the
order, or upon his commission of another
offense, he shall serve the penalty imposed for
the offense under which he was placed on
probation [Sec. 11, P.D. No. 968].
Arrest [Sec. 15, P.D 968]
At any time during the probation, the court may
issue a warrant to arrest the probationer for
violation of the conditions of the probation.
Once arrested and detained, probationer shall
be brought to court for a hearing of the violation
charged. The defendant may be admitted to
bail pending such hearing.
Additionally, it must be noted that:
1. The violation of the conditions of
probation must be serious to justify the
issuance of a warrant of arrest.
2. Defendant may be admitted to bail
pending hearing.
o Hearing is summary in nature,
but the probationer shall have
the right to be informed of the
violation charged and to
adduce evidence in his favor.
3. Court is not bound by the technical
rules of evidence.
4. If the violation is established, the court
may revoke or continue his probation
and modify the conditions.
5. If revoked, the court shall order the
probationer to serve the sentence
originally imposed.
6. The order revoking the grant of
probation or modifying the term and
conditions thereof is not appealable
[Sec. 15, P.D. 968].
Page 86 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
e. Termination of Probation
Order of Final Discharge [Sec. 16, R.A.
10707]
An order of final discharge of the probationer
shall be issued by the Court:
1. After the period of probation; and
2. Upon consideration of the report and
recommendation of the probation
officer, upon finding that probationer
fulfilled the terms and conditions of his
probation.
Whether
Crime is
Obliterated
Note: The probationer and the probation officer
shall each be furnished with a copy of such
order.
Effect of Final Discharge [Sec. 16, R.A.
10707]
The final discharge of the probationer shall
operate to:
1. Restore to him all civil rights lost or
suspended as a result of his conviction;
and
2. Totally extinguish his criminal liability
as to the offense for which probation
was granted.
Termination of Period, not the same as
Expiration of Probation Period
The expiration of the probation period alone
does not automatically terminate probation;
probation is not coterminous with its period.
There must first be an order of final discharge
issued by the court, based on the report and
recommendation of the probation officer [Bala
v. Martinez, G.R. No. 67301 (1990)].
f. Probation v. Pardon
Definition
Probation
Probation is
a disposition
under which
a defendant,
after
conviction
and
sentence, is
released
subject to
conditions
imposed by
the court and
to the
supervision
of a
Pardon
It is an act of
grace
proceeding
from the
power
entrusted with
the execution
of the laws
which
exempts the
individual on
whom it is
bestowed
from the
punishment
the law inflicts
probation
officer [Sec.
3, P.D. 968;
Budlong v.
Apalisok,
G.R. No. L60151
(1983)].
Does not
obliterate the
crime of
which the
person under
probation
has been
convicted
[Office of the
Court
Administrator
v. Librado,
A.M. P-941089
(1996)].
Granting
Authority
By the Court
[Sec. 10,
R.A. 10707]
Effect on
Accessory
Penalties
Accessory
penalties are
deemed
suspended
once
probation is
granted
[Baclayon v.
Mutia, G.R.
No. L-59298
(1984)].
Page 87 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
for the crime
he has
committed
[Llamas v.
Orbos, G.R.
No. 99031
(1991).].
Does not
obliterate the
crime; it only
abolishes the
punishment.
Pardon looks
forward and
relieves the
offender from
the
consequences
of a convicted
offense, that
is, it abolishes
or forgives the
punishment
[People v.
Patriarca, Jr.,
G.R. No.
135457
(2000)].
By the Chief
Executive
[U.S. v.
Guarin, 30
Phil. 85, 87]
A pardon shall
not work the
resoration of
the right to
hold public
office, or the
right of
suffrage,
unless such
rights be
expressly
restored by
the terms of
the pardon.
A pardon shall
in no case
exempt the
culprit from
the payment
of the civil
indemnity
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
imposed upon
him by the
sentence [Art.
36, RPC].
3. Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act
(R.A. 9344, As Amended)
a. Scope
It shall cover the different stages involving
children at risk and children in conflict with the
law from prevention to rehabilitation and
reintegration [Sec. 1, R.A. 9344].
Definition of Terms
1. Child – refers to a person under the
age of eighteen (18) years. [Sec. 4(c),
R.A. 9344]
2. Children at risk, definition – Refers to
a child vulnerable to and at the risk of
committing criminal offenses because
of personal, family and social
circumstances, such as, but not limited
to (a) economic/sexual exploitation, (b)
truancy, (c) abandoned/neglected, or
(e) abuse. [Sec. 4(d), R.A. 9344]
3. Child in Conflict with the Law (CICL)
– Refers to a child who is alleged as,
accused of, or adjudged as, having
committed an offense under Philippine
laws. [Sec. 4(e), R.A. 9344]
Offenses Contemplated under R.A. 9344
1. Offenses – any act or omission
whether punishable under special laws
or the Revised Penal Code, as
amended [Sec. 4(o), R.A. 9344].
2. Status Offenses – refers to offenses
which discriminate only against a child,
while an adult does not suffer any
penalty for committing similar acts (i.e.
curfew violations; truancy, parental
disobedience and the like) [Sec. 4(r),
R.A. 9344].
3. Victimless Crimes – offense where
there is no private offended party [Sec.
4(u), R.A. 9344].
Offenses Not Applicable to Children [Sec.
58, R.A. 9344]
Persons below eighteen (18) years of age shall
be exempt from prosecution for the crime of:
1. Prostitution [Art. 202, RPC]
2. Mendicancy [P.D. 1563]
3. Sniffing of rugby [P.D. 1619]
Such prosecution being inconsistent with the
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the
Child. However, said persons shall undergo
appropriate counseling and treatment program.
Determination of Age [Sec. 7, R.A. 9344]
Presumption of Minority: There is a
presumption of minority. S/he shall enjoy all the
rights of a child in conflict with the law until s/he
is proven to be 18 years old or older.
In assessing the attendance of the mitigating
circumstance of minority, all doubts should be
resolved in favor of the accused, it being more
beneficial to the latter. [People v. Sarcia, G.R.
No. 169641 (2009)]. In fact, in several cases,
this Court has appreciated this circumstance
on the basis of a lone declaration of the
accused regarding his age [People v. Sarcia,
G.R. No. 169641 (2009), citing People v.
Calpito, G.R. No. 123298 (2003)].
Proof of Age
The age of the child shall be determined
according to the rules established by Section 7
of R.A. 9344:
1. Best evidence is an original or certified
true copy of certificate of live birth.
2. In its absence, similar authentic
documents
such
as
baptismal
certificates and school records
showing the date of birth may be used.
3. In the absence of documents under 1
and 2 due to loss, destruction or
unavailability, the testimony of the
child, a member of the family related by
affinity or consanguinity, of other
persons, the physical appearance of
the child, or other relevant evidence
shall suffice.
The person alleging the age of the child in
conflict with the law has the burden to prove
such age. In all cases involving a child, the
court shall make a categorical finding as to the
age of the child [Sec. 7, R.A. 9344].
b. Intervention Program
Intervention
Refers to a series of activities which are
designed to address issues that caused the
child to commit an offense. It may take the form
of an individualized treatment program which
may include counseling, skills training,
education, and other activities that will enhance
Page 88 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
his/her psychological, emotional and psychosocial well-being [Sec. 4(l), R.A. 9344].
and where appropriate, the
DSWD.
Community-based Programs on Juvenile
Justice and Welfare
Community-based programs on juvenile justice
and welfare shall be instituted by the LGUs
through the LCPC, school, youth organizations
and other concerned agencies.
In such case, authorities shall give
notice to the local social welfare and
development officer who will determine
the
appropriate
programs
in
consultation with the child and to the
person having custody over the child.
The LGUs shall provide community–based
services which respond to the special needs,
problems, interests and concerns of children
and which offer appropriate counselling and
guidance to them and their families.
2. If the child referred to herein has been
found by the Local Social Welfare and
Development Office (LSWD) to be
abandoned, neglected or abused by
his parents, or in the event that the
parents will not comply with the
prevention program, the proper petition
for involuntary commitment shall be
filed by the DSWD or the LSWD
pursuant to P.D. 603 (The Child and
Youth Welfare Code).
These programs shall consist of three levels:
1. Primary intervention – includes
general measures to promote social
justice and equal opportunity, which
tackle perceived root causes of
offending;
2. Secondary intervention – includes
measures to assist children at risk; and
3. Tertiary intervention – includes
measures to avoid unnecessary
contact with the formal justice system
and other measures to prevent reoffending [Sec. 19, R.A. 9344].
c. Diversion
When Applied
If it has been determined that the child taken
into custody is fifteen (15) years old or below
[Sec. 20, R.A. 9344].
When Applied
If the child is over fifteen (15) years old but
below eighteen (18) years old and the child
acted with discernment [Sec. 6, R.A. 9344].
Duty of Authorities [Sec. 20, R.A. 9344]
The authority which will have an initial contact
with the child has the duty to:
1. Immediately release the child to the
custody of his/her parents or guardian,
or in the absence thereof, the child’s
nearest relative.
Also, the maximum penalty for the offense the
CICL is charged with, should be imprisonment
of not more than twelve (12) years, regardless
of the fine or fine alone regardless of the
amount. In such case, before arraignment of
the child in conflict with the law, the court shall
determine whether or not diversion is
appropriate [Sec. 37, R.A. 9344].
Exception: If the parents, guardians or
nearest relatives cannot be located, or
if they refuse to take custody, the child
may be released to a:
a. Duly
registered
nongovernmental or religious
organization;
b. Barangay official or a member
of Barangay Council for the
Protection of Children (BCPC);
or
c. Local social welfare and
development officer; or when
Diversion Program
Program that the child in conflict with the law is
required to undergo after he/she is found
responsible for an offense, without resorting to
formal court proceedings [Sec. 4(j), R.A. 9344].
System of Diversion [Sec. 23, R.A. 9344]
Children in conflict with law shall undergo
diversion programs without undergoing court
proceedings subject to the conditions herein
provided:
1. Where the imposable penalty for the
crime committed is not more than
six (6) years imprisonment
a. The law enforcement officer or
Punong Barangay, with the
assistance of the local social
welfare
and
development
Page 89 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
officer or other members of the
LCPC,
shall
conduct
mediation, family conferencing
and conciliation
b. Where appropriate, indigenous
modes of conflict resolution are
adopted in accordance with the
best interest of the child with a
view to accomplishing the
objectives of restorative justice
and the formulation of a
diversion program.
c. The child and his/her family
shall be present in these
activities.
2. In victimless crimes where the
imposable penalty is not more than
six (6) years imprisonment - the local
social welfare and development officer
shall meet with the child and his/her
parents or guardians for the
development of the appropriate
diversion and rehabilitation program, in
coordination with the BCPC;
3. Where the imposable penalty for the
crime committed exceeds six (6)
years imprisonment - diversion
measures may be resorted to only by
the court.
When There is No Diversion [Secs 27 and 28,
R.A. 9344]
There is no diversion in the following cases:
1. If the offense does not fall under Sec.
23 (a) and (b)
a. Sec. 23 (a) – where the
imposable penalty is not more
than 6 years imprisonment
b. Sec. 23 (b) in victimless crimes
where the imposable penalty is
not more than 6 years
imprisonment
2. If the child, his/her parents or guardian
does not consent to a diversion
In the above cases, the following procedures
shall apply:
1. The Punong Barangay handling the
case shall forward the records of the
case to the proper authorities within 3
days, whereupon the case shall be filed
according to the regular process.
2. The Law Enforcement officers and
judicial officers to determine whether or
not the child should remain under
custody and correspondingly charged
in court.
d. Court Proceedings
Automatic Suspension of Sentence
Suspended Sentence is the holding in
abeyance of service of the sentence imposed
by the court upon a finding of guilt of the CICL
who will undergo rehabilitation.
Court shall determine the civil liability of a guilty
child under eighteen (18) y/o. Instead of
convicting the child, the court shall place the
CICL under suspended sentence. Suspension
of sentence shall be applied even if the juvenile
is already 18 years of age or more at the time
of the pronouncement of his/her guilt [Sec. 38,
R.A. 9344].
However, the suspension of sentence lasts
only until the child in conflict with law reaches
the maximum age of 21 [Sec. 40, R.A. 9344].
Upon suspension of sentence and after
considering the various circumstances of the
child, the court shall impose the appropriate
disposition measures as provided in the
Supreme Court Rule on Juveniles in Conflict
with the Law [Sec. 38, R.A. 9344].
CICL in suspended sentence
Children in conflict with the law, whose
sentences are suspended may, upon order of
the court, undergo any or a combination of
disposition measures best suited to the
rehabilitation of the child pursuant to Supreme
Court Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the
Law.
If the community-based rehabilitation is availed
of by a child in conflict with the law, he/she shall
be released to parents, guardians, relatives or
any other responsible person in the
community. Under the supervision and
guidance of the LSWD officer, and in
coordination with his/her parents/guardian, the
child in conflict with the law shall participate in
community-based programs [Sec. 52, R.A.
9344].
Agricultural Camps and other Training
Facilities [Sec. 51, R.A. 9344]
A child in conflict with the law may, after
conviction and upon order of the court, be
Page 90 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
made to serve his/her sentence, in lieu of
confinement in a regular penal institution, in an
agricultural camp and other training facilities
that may be established, maintained,
supervised and controlled by the BUCOR, in
coordination with the DSWD.
As
regards
the
appellant’s
possible
confinement in an agricultural camp or other
training facility in accordance with Section 51
of R.A. 9344, this Court held in People v.
Jacinto that the age of the child in conflict with
the law at the time of the promulgation of the
judgment is not material. What matters is that
the offender committed the offense when
he/she was still of tender age [People v.
Gamboa, G.R. No. 172707 (2013)].
Hence, if the accused is already more than 21
years old by the time of the pronouncement of
his guilt, the Court has no choice but to render
judgment. Nonetheless, he may avail of Sec.
51, whereupon he may serve his sentence in
an agricultural camp or training facility [People
v. Gamboa, G.R. No. 172707 (2013)].
P.D. 603 (The Child and Youth Welfare
Code) as amended v. R.A. 9344 (Juvenile
Justice and Welfare Act of 2006)
PD 603
RA 9344
Circumstances for Exemption
1. Child 9 years of
age or under at
time of
Child 15 years of age
commission of
or under shall be
offense
exempt from criminal
2. Child more than
liability, regardless of
9 years old but
whether or not s/he
less than 15 at the
acted with
time of
discernment
commission of
offense
However, child is
subject to intervention
Except: If the
program
child acted
[Sec. 20, R.A. 9344].
with discernment
[Sec. 189, P.D.
603]
As to Proceedings
Child over 9 years Child below 15 years
and under 15
and below – case
years of age who
shall be immediately
acted w/
dismissed and the
discernment –
child shall be returned
court shall
to the custody of
determine
parent/guardian [Sec.
imposable
20, R.A. 9344].
penalty, including
If there be none, CICL
any civil liability
shall be released to
chargeable
(a) NGO/religious
against him.
organization (b)
However, instead
Barangay
of pronouncing
official/BCPC (c)
judgment of
LSWD officer/DSWD
conviction, the
[Sec. 20, R.A. 9344].
court may
suspend all further Child above 15 years
proceedings and
but below 18 years of
shall commit such age who acted with
minor to the
discernment shall be
custody or care of subjected to the
the DSWD or to
appropriate
any training
proceedings:
institution
1. Intervention Programs
operated by the 2. Diversion Programs
government, or
[Sec. 38, R.A. 9344].
duly licensed
agencies or any
other responsible
person, until he
shall have
reached 21 years
of age or, for a
shorter period as
the court may
deem proper [Sec.
189 and 192, P.D.
603].
Suspension of Sentence
No automatic
Suspension of
suspension of
sentence is
sentence. Youthful automatic. Instead of
offender should
pronouncing the
apply for a
judgment of
suspended
conviction, the court
sentence and it is
shall place the child
discretionary on
in conflict with law
the court to
under suspended
approve the
sentence, without
application
need of application
[Reyes, Book 1].
[Sec. 38, R.A. 9344].
Discharge [Sec. 39, R.A. 9344]
The court shall dismiss the case against the
child whose sentence has been suspended
and against whom disposition measures have
been issued, and shall order the final discharge
of the child:
1. Upon recommendation of the social
worker who has custody of the child;
and
Page 91 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
2. If it finds that the objective of the
disposition measures have been
fulfilled.
The discharge of the child in conflict with the
law shall not affect the civil liability resulting
from the commission of the offense, which shall
be enforced in accordance with law.
Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law
to Court [Sec. 40, R.A. 9344]
In the following cases, the child in conflict with
the law shall be brought before the court for
execution of judgment:
1. If the court finds that the objective of
the disposition measures imposed
upon the CICL have not been fulfilled;
or
2. If the CICL has willfully failed to comply
with the conditions of his/her
disposition or rehabilitation program.
Credit in Service of Sentence
The CICL shall be credited in the services of
his/her sentence with the full time spent in
actual commitment and detention under R.A.
9344 [Sec. 41, R.A. 9344].
4.
Republic
Act
No.
10592
(Amendments to Articles 29, 94, 97,
98, and 99 of the RPC)
Preventive Imprisonment
A temporary confinement in a correctional
facility of a Person Deprived of Liberty (PDL),
while undergoing investigation or awaiting final
judgment [Rule II, Section 1(q), Revised IRR of
RA 10592 (2019)].
Period
of
Preventive
Imprisonment
Deducted from Term of Imprisonment [Art.
29, RPC as amended by RA 10592]
Offenders or accused who have undergone
preventive imprisonment shall be credited in
the service of their sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty.
The full time or four-fifths of the time during
which offenders have undergone preventive
imprisonment shall be deducted from the
penalty imposed
1. Full time if detention prisoner agrees
voluntarily in writing after being
informed of the effects and with the
assistance of counsel to abide by the
same disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners.
2. Four-fifths of time if detention prisoner
does not agree to abide by the same
disciplinary rules imposed upon
convicted prisoners, and he shall do so
in writing with the assistance of a
counsel.
Credit and Computation of Preventive
Imprisonment
1. For the penalty of reclusion perpetua
shall be deducted from thirty (3) years
2. For purposes of immediate release
shall be the actual period of detention
with good conduct time allowance.
a. If accused is absent without
justifiable cause at any stage of
trial, the court may order his
arrest.
b. Good Conduct Allowances are
granted to
i. Any offender qualified
for credit for preventive
imprisonment pursuant
to Art. 29 of the RPC,
as amended by RA
10592
ii. Any prisoner in
1. Penal
institution
2. Rehabilitation
or
Detention
Center
3. Any other local
jail [Art. 97,
RPC
as
amended
by
RA 10592]
c. The allowance is not applicable
to:
i. Recidivists
ii. Habitual delinquents
iii. Escapees
iv. Persons charged with
heinous crimes [Art.
29, RPC as amended
by RA 10592]
Page 92 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Criminal liability is partially extinguished in
the following cases: [GoCoCo PaPS]
1. Conditional pardon
2. Commutation of sentence
3. Good conduct allowances [Art. 94,
RPC as amended by R.A. 10592]
4. Special time allowance for loyalty [Art.
94, RPC as amended by R.A. 10592]
5. Parole
6. Probation
a. Allowance for Good Conduct which
Culprit May Earn While He is
Undergoing Preventive Imprisonment
for Serving Sentence [Art. 97, RPC]
Applicability
General Rule: Allowance is granted to any
prisoner in:
1. Penal institution
2. Rehabilitation or detention center
3. Other local jail [Art. 97, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592]
Exceptions: The allowance is not applicable
to:
1. Recidivists
2. Habitual delinquents
3. Escapees
4. Persons charged with heinous crimes
[Art. 29 RPC as amended by R.A.
10592]
Effect
Computation of preventive imprisonment for
purposes of immediate release shall be the
actual period of detention with good conduct
time allowance. Provided, if the accused is
absent without justifiable cause at any stage of
the trial, the court may motu proprio order the
rearrest of the accused [Art. 29, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592].
Effect of Appeal
Appeal does not deprive entitlement to good
conduct allowance [Art. 97, RPC as amended
by R.A. 10592].
Note: Allowance for good conduct, once
granted, cannot be revoked [Art. 99, as
amended by R.A. 10592].
Who Grants Time Allowances Under Arts.
97 & 98
1. Director of the Bureau of Corrections
2. Chief of BJMP
3. Wardens
of
provincial,
district,
municipal, and city jails [Art. 99, RPC
as amended by R.A. 10592]
Good Conduct Allowances
Time in Penal
Deduction from
Institution
period of sentence
20 days for each
First 2 years
month of good
behavior
23 days for each
3rd to 5th year
month of good
behavior
25 days for each
Following years
month of good
until 10th year
behavior
30 days for each
11th and
month of good
successive years
behavior
15 days for each
Any time during
month of study,
period of
teaching or mentoring
imprisonment
service time rendered
[Art. 97, RPC as amended by R.A. 10592]
b. Special Time Allowance [Art. 98]
Special Time Allowance
Deduction in the period of the sentence of a
prisoner during the calamity or catastrophe
mentioned in Art. 158 (i.e. conflagration,
earthquake, explosion or similar catastrophe;
or mutiny in which he has not participated). [Art.
98, RPC]
Scenario
When prisoner, having
evaded his sentence, gives
himself up to authorities
within 48 hours following
issuance of proclamation by
Chief Executive announcing
the passing away of the
calamity
When prisoner chooses to
stay in place of confinement.
[Art. 98, RPC]
Deduction
from Period
of Sentence
1/5 of period
of sentence
2/5 of period
of sentence.
Special time allowance for loyalty applies to
any prisoner whether undergoing preventive
imprisonment or serving sentence [Art. 98,
RPC as amended by R.A. 10592].
Page 93 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
5. Community Service Act [R.A. No.
11362; A.M. No. 20-06-14-SC]
choose to appeal the conviction [A.M.
No. 20-06-14-SC].
Definition
Community service shall consist of any actual
physical activity which
1. Inculcates civic consciousness
2. Intended towards the improvement of a
public work or promotion of a public service
[Art. 88a (3), RPC as amended by RA
11362].
3. Shall be rendered in the place where the
crime was committed, under such terms as
the court shall determine.
Application for Community Service
Applications must be filed within the period to
perfect an appeal and shall be resolved within
five days from filing.
Offenses Contemplated
It authorizes the court, in its discretion, to
require community service in lieu of
imprisonment for offenses punishable by
arresto menor and arresto mayor [RA 11362].
Note: The privilege of rendering community
service in lieu of imprisonment shall be availed
of only once [RA 11362].
In Exercising Discretion of the Court
The following shall be taking into consideration
by the court in allowing community service:
1. Gravity of offense
2. Circumstances of the case
3. Welfare of the society
4. Reasonable probability that the
accused shall not violate the law while
rendering the service.
Rehabilitative Counseling
The accused shall be required to undergo
rehabilitative counseling under the social
welfare and development officer of the city or
municipality concerned with the assistance of
the Department of Social Welfare and
Development (DSWD) [Art. 88a, Par. 2 RPC as
amended by RA 11362].
Duties of all judges concerned
All judges concerned, after promulgation of
judgment or order where the penalty for the
offense is arresto menor or arresto mayor shall:
1. Inform the accused in open court that
he has an option to apply that the
penalty be served by rendering
community service
2. Explain to the accused that the same
will be barred to apply for community
service or probation should he or she
The court shall immediately notify the following
upon receipt of the application:
1. Barangay chairperson or authorized
representative of the barangay where
the crime was committed
2. Representative from the provincial or
city’s Probation Office
3. Local government unit’s Social Welfare
Development Officer (SWDO) [A.M.
No. 20-06-14-SC].
Note: The Court may resort to electronic
service of the notices to the said officers [A.M.
No. 20-06-14-SC].
Scenario
Effect
Accused fails to
appear at the
said hearing,
except for
justified reasons
Such will be a ground to
deny the application
and a warrant of arrest
shall be issued against
the accused [A.M. No.
20-06-14-SC].
Accused violates
the terms of the
community
service
Court shall order his rearrest and accused
shall serve the full term
of the penalty, as the
case may be, in jail, or
in the house of the
defendant as provided
under Article 88 [Art.
88a (2), RPC as
amended by RA
11362].
Accused fully
complies with the
terms of the
community
service
Court shall order the
release of the
defendant unless
detained for some other
offense [Art. 88a, (2)
RPC as amended by
RA 11362].
Accused has
undergone
preventive
imprisonment.
The period shall be
deducted from the term
of community service
Page 94 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
[A.M. No. 20-06-14SC].
F.
Extinction
of
Criminal
Liabilities (As Amended by R.A.
No. 10592)
1. Total Extinction
Criminal liability is totally extinguished in
the following cases: [CP DeSAAM]
1. Prescription of Crime
2. Prescription of Penalty
3. Death of the convict
4. Service of sentence
5. Amnesty
6. Absolute pardon
7. Marriage of the offended woman, as
provided in Art. 344 of the RPC.
a. By Prescription of Crime
Prescription
The loss by the State of the right to prosecute
and punish the crime or to demand the service
of the sentence imposed [Santos v.
Superintendent, G.R. No. L-34334 (1930)].
Ground for Motion to Quash
Under the Rules of Court, the failure of the
accused to assert the extinction of the offense
in a motion to quash shall not be deemed a
waiver of such ground. Prescription of crime
may be raised anytime including during appeal
[Recebido v. People, G.R. No. 141931
(2000)].
Prescription of Crimes [Art. 90, RPC]
Prescriptive
Penalty Provided by Law
Period
Death, reclusion perpetua,
20 years
or reclusion temporal
Other afflictive penalties
15 years
Correctional penalties
10 years
(except Arresto Mayor)
Arresto Mayor
5 years
Prescriptive
Crime
Period
Libel or other similar
1 year
offenses
Oral Defamation and
6 months
Slander by Deed
Light Offenses
(e.g., arresto menor, public
censure)
2 months
Fine
Prescriptive
Period
Afflictive (Exceeds
P1,200,000)
Correctional (1,200,000 to
P40,000)
Light (Less than P40,000)
15 years
10 years
2 months
Note:
•
•
•
Subsidiary penalty for nonpayment not
considered in determining the period
When fine is an alternative penalty
higher than the other penalty which is
by imprisonment, prescription of the
crime is based on the fine [People v.
Basalo, 101 Phil 57, 61 (1957)].
When the penalty is a compound one,
the highest penalty is the basis of the
application of the rules in Art. 90
[People v. Cruz, 108 Phil 255 (1960)].
Commencement Period for Computation
General Rule: The running of the prescriptive
period should commence from the day
following the day on which the crime was
committed [People v. Del Rosario, 97 Phil 67,
70 (1955)].
Exceptions:
1. Blameless ignorance doctrine: If
violation was not known at the time of
its commission, the prescription begins
to run only from the discovery thereof
[Presidential Ad-Hoc Fact Finding
Committee on Behest Loans v.
Ombudsman Desierto, G.R. No.
130140 (2011)].
Note: It is discovery of crime, NOT
discovery of offender. The fact that the
culprit is unknown will not prevent the
period
of
prescription
from
commencing to run. [Romualdez v.
Marcelo, G.R. Nos. 165510-33
(2005)]]. It is not necessary that the
accused be arrested [People v. Joson,
46 Phil. 380, 284].
2. False testimony: From time principal
case is finally decided [People v.
Maneja, 72 Phil 256 (1941)].
Page 95 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Election offenses
a. If the discovery is incidental to
judicial
proceedings,
prescription begins when such
proceedings terminate.
b. If the falsification committed by
inspectors in connection with
the counting of votes and
preparation of election returns
was known to the protestants
and their election watchers
before the filing of the election
protests,
the
period
of
prescription begins from the
date of commission of the
offense [People v. Cariño, 56
Phil 109 (1931)].
4. Continuing
crimes:
Prescriptive
period cannot begin to run because the
crime does not end [Arches v.
Bellasillo, 81 Phil 190 (1948)].
Circumstances when computation of period
is interrupted [RPC, Art. 91]
1. Upon filing of complaint or
information
It shall commence to run again when
such proceedings terminate without the
accused being convicted or acquitted,
or unjustifiably stopped for any reason
not imputable to the accused.
Note: Termination must be final as to
amount to a jeopardy that would bar a
subsequent prosecution.
2. When offender is absent from
Philippine archipelago
Prescription for Special Laws and
Municipal Ordinances [Sec. 1, Act No. 3326]
Prescriptive
Penalty Provided by Law
Period
Imprisonment of 6 years
12 years
and more
Imprisonment of 2 years
and more but less than 6
8 years
years
Imprisonment for more
than 1 month, but less
4 years
than 2 years
Imprisonment of not
1 year
more than
1 month
Fine
Crime
1 year
Prescriptive
period
Violation of municipal
ordinances
2 months
Violation of National
Internal Revenue Code
5 years [Sec.
281, National
Internal Revenue
Code of 1997]
Violations of orders,
decisions and
60 days [Sec. 28,
regulations, of or
Public Service
conditions of certificate
Act (C.A. No.
of convenience by the
146)]
Public Service
Commission
Note: The above are not applicable where the
special law provides for its own prescriptive
period [Sec. 1, Act No. 3326].
b. By Prescription of Penalty
Prescription
The State or the People loses the right to
prosecute the crime or to demand the service
of the penalty imposed [Santos v.
Superintendent, 55 Phil. 345].
Prescription of Penalties [Art. 92, RPC]
Prescriptive
Penalty Imposed
Period
Death and Reclusion
20 years
Perpetua
Other
Afflictive
15 years
Penalties
Correctional Penalties 10 years
Arresto Mayor
5 years
Light Penalties
1 year
Elements for Application of Prescription of
Penalty
1. Penalty is imposed by final judgment.
2. Convict evaded service of sentence by
escaping during the term of his
sentence.
3. The convict who has escaped from
prison has not given himself up, or
been captured, or gone to a foreign
country with which we have no
extradition treaty or committed another
crime.
Page 96 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
4. The penalty has prescribed because of
the lapse of time from the date of the
evasion of service of the sentence by
the convict [Pangan v. Gatbalite, G.R.
No. 141718 (2005)].
Note: "Escape" in legal parlance and for
purposes of Art. 93 and 157 of the RPC means
unlawful departure of prisoner from the limits of
his custody. Clearly, one who has not been
committed to prison cannot be said to have
escaped
therefrom
[Del
Castillo
v.
Torrecampo, G.R. No. 139033 (2002)].
Commencement Date of Prescription
Period
Period commences to run from the date when
the culprit evaded the service of sentence [Art.
93, RPC].
When Interrupted
1. Convict gives himself up [Art. 93, RPC]
2. Convict is captured [Art. 93, RPC]
3. Convict goes to a foreign country with
which the Philippines has no
extradition treaty [Art. 93, RPC]
4. Convict commits any crime before the
expiration of the period of prescription
[Art. 93, RPC]
5. Convict accepts grant of conditional
pardon [People v. Puntillas, G.R. No.
45269 (1938)].
Prescription of Crime v. Prescription of
Penalty
Prescription of Crime
Prescription of
Penalty
As to Right Forfeited
Right of the State to
Right to execute
prosecute
the penalty
As to Conviction
None; Prosecution has
There is already
not yet begun
a final and
executory
judgment
As to Commencement
From the day following
From the time
the day the crime was
the convict
committed or the
evades
discovery of the crime
sentence or
by the offended party or detention
the authorities or their
agents
c. By Death of the Convict
General Rule: Death of the accused pending
appeal of his conviction extinguishes his
criminal liability as well as the civil liability
based solely thereon.
Exception: Claim of civil liability survives
notwithstanding the death of the accused, if the
same may also be predicated on a source of
obligation other than delict, such as law,
contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-delicts
[People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007 (1994)].
d. By Service of Sentence
e. By Amnesty
An act of the sovereign power granting oblivion
or general pardon for a past offense [Brown v.
Walker, 161 U.S. 602 (1896)].
Erases not only the conviction but the crime
itself [Art. 89, par. 3, RPC].
It is granted to classes of persons or
communities who may be guilty of political
offenses, generally before or after the
institution of the criminal prosecution and
sometimes after conviction [People v. Casido,
G.R. No. 116512 (1997), citing Barrioquinto v.
Fernandez, G.R. No. L-1278 (1949)].
f. By Absolute Pardon
Pardon
An act of grace proceeding from the power
entrusted with the execution of the laws, which
exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed
from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime
he has committed. It is a voluntary act of the
sovereign, granting outright remission of guilt
and declaring of record that a particular
individual is to be relieved of the legal
consequences of a particular crime [Llamas v.
Orbos, G.R. No. 99031 (1991), citing 67A
C.J.S. Pardon and Parole S 3].
Absolute pardon
The total extinction of the criminal liability of the
individual to whom it is granted without any
condition. It restores to the individual his civil
and political rights and remits the penalty
imposed for the particular offense of which he
was convicted [Sec. 2(q), Revised Rules and
Page 97 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Regulations of the Board of Pardons and
Parole].
is as if he
has
committed
no offense.
Other Effects of Pardon
1. Does not work the restoration of the
right to hold public office or the right of
suffrage, unless such rights be
expressly restored by the terms of the
pardon [Art. 36, RPC].
Although pardon restores his eligibility
for appointment to that office, the
pardoned convict must reapply for a
new appointment [Monsanto v.
Factoran, G.R. No. 78239 (1989)].
2. Culprit is not exempt from payment of
civil indemnity imposed upon him by
the sentence [Art. 36, RPC].
Limitations on Pardoning Power [ACNI]
1. Power can be exercised only After
Conviction.
Thus in applying for pardon, the convict
must Not appeal the judgment of
conviction or the appeal must be
abandoned.
As to
Burden of
Proof
Public act of
which the
court shall
take judicial
notice.
As to
Requirement of
Final
Judgment
As to
Effect on
Recidivism
Valid only
when there
is final
judgment
2. Power does not extend to cases of
Impeachment [Cristobal v. Labrador,
G.R. No. 47941 (1940)].
Note: The pardoning power of the President
cannot be limited by legislative action. Arts. 3641 only operates as a procedural proscription.
[Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC and Estrada, G.R.
No. 206666 (2015)].
Amnesty v. Absolute Pardon
Amnesty
As to
Scope
As to Time
of Exercise
As to
Nature
Blanket
pardon to
classes of
persons
guilty of
political
offenses
May still be
exercised
before trial
or
investigation
Looks
backward. It
Absolute
Pardon
Includes any
crime and is
exercised
individually
As to
Effect on
Civil
Liability
relieved from
the
consequences
of the offense,
but rights are
not restored
unless
explicitly
provided by
the terms of
the pardon.
Private act of
the President
and must be
pleaded and
proved by the
person
pardoned.
Valid if given
either before
or after final
judgment
Recidivism
Recidivism
cannot be
applies.
applied to
Pardon does
crimes
not erase
committed
effects of
subsequent conviction
to another
[U.S. v.
crime for
Sotelo, G.R.
which the
No. 9791
offender
(1914)].
was granted
amnesty.
Amnesty
erases
conviction
and its
effects [Art.
89 (3),
RPC].
Both do not extinguish civil
liability.
Person is
already
convicted
g. By the Marriage of the Offended
Woman and the Offended in the Crimes
of Rape, Abduction, Seduction, and
Acts of Lasciviousness [Art. 344, RPC]
Looks
forward. He is
General Rule: A pardon of the offended party
does not extinguish criminal action [Art. 23,
RPC].
Page 98 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Exception: As to those mentioned under Art.
344
Effect of Marriage [Art. 344, RPC]
1. Marriage of the offender with the
offended party in seduction, abduction,
acts of lasciviousness and rape,
extinguishes criminal action or remits
the penalty already imposed.
2. It also extinguishes the criminal actions
against the co-principals, accomplices,
and accessories.
Note: The second point does not apply to rape
since it has ceased to be a crime against
chastity, but is now a crime against persons, it
now appears that marriage extinguishes that
penal action and penalty only as to the principal
(i.e., husband) and not as to the accomplices
and accessories [Art. 266 and Art. 344, RPC].
Pardon of Offended Party in Offenses Other
than those in Art. 344
Only civil liability is extinguished. A crime
committed is an offense against the State. Only
the Chief Executive can pardon the offenders
[Art. 23, RPC].
2. Partial Extinction
Criminal liability is partially extinguished in
the following cases: [GoCoCo PaPS]
1. Conditional pardon
2. Commutation of sentence
3. Good conduct allowances
4. Special time allowance for loyalty
5. Parole
6. Probation
a. By Conditional Pardon [Art. 95, RPC]
Conditions
Conditional Pardon refers to the exemption of
an individual, within certain limits or conditions,
from the punishment which the law inflicts for
the offense he had committed resulting in the
partial extinction of his criminal liability [Section
2(q), Revised Rules and Regulations of the
Board of Pardons and Parole (2002)].
Any person who has been granted conditional
pardon shall incur the obligation of complying
strictly with the conditions imposed therein [Art.
95, RPC].
Effect of Non-Compliance
Non-compliance with any of the conditions
specified shall result in the revocation of the
pardon and the penalty of prision correccional
in its minimum period shall be imposed upon
the convict. However, if the penalty remitted by
the granting of such pardon be higher than 6
years, he shall then suffer the unexpired
portion of his original sentence [Art. 159, RPC].
Conditions Explicitly Stipulated
Pardon itself must be explicitly imposed. A
“whereas” in the preamble of the pardon stating
that “Joseph Ejercito Estrada has publicly
committed to no longer seek any elective
position or office” does not make the pardon
conditional [Risos-Vidal v. COMELEC and
Estrada, supra].
b. By Commutation of Sentence [Art. 96,
RPC]
The commutation of the original sentence for
another of a different length and nature shall
have the legal effect of substituting the latter in
the place of the former [Art. 96, RPC].
c. Allowance for Good Conduct which
Culprit Earn while He is Serving
Sentence [Art. 97, RPC]
Applicability
General Rule: Allowance is granted to any
prisoner in:
1. Penal institution
2. Rehabilitation or detention center
3. Other local jail [Art. 97, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592]
Exceptions: The allowance is not applicable
to:
1. Recidivists
2. Habitual delinquents
3. Escapees
4. Persons charged with heinous crimes
[Art. 29 RPC as amended by R.A.
10592]
Effect
Computation of preventive imprisonment for
purposes of immediate release shall be the
actual period of detention with good conduct
time allowance. Provided, if the accused is
absent without justifiable cause at any stage of
the trial, the court may motu proprio order the
Page 99 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
rearrest of the accused [Art. 29, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592].
Effect of Appeal
Appeal does not deprive entitlement to good
conduct allowance [Art. 97, RPC as amended
by R.A. 10592].
Note: Allowance for good conduct, once
granted, cannot be revoked.
Time allowances such as GCTA, TASTM, and
STAL, once validly granted by the authorized
official to a qualified PDL, shall not be revoked
[Rule 9, Section 3, Revised Implementing
Rules and Regulations of RA 10592 (2019)].
Who Grants Time Allowances under Arts.
97 & 98
1. Director of the Bureau of Corrections
2. Chief of BJMP
3. Wardens
of
provincial,
district,
municipal and city jails [Art. 99, RPC as
amended by R.A. 10592]
Good Conduct Allowances
Time in Penal
Deduction from
Institution
period of sentence
20 days for each
First 2 years
month of good
behavior
23 days for each
3rd to 5th year
month of good
behavior
25 days for each
Following years
month of good
until 10th year
behavior
30 days for each
11th and
month of good
successive years
behavior
15 days for each
Any time during
month of study,
period of
teaching or mentoring
imprisonment
service time rendered
[Art. 97, RPC as amended by R.A. 10592]
d. Special Time Allowance [Art. 98]
Special Time Allowance
Deduction in the period of the sentence of a
prisoner during the calamity or catastrophe
mentioned in Art. 158 (i.e. conflagration,
earthquake, explosion or similar catastrophe;
or mutiny in which he has not participated). [Art.
98, RPC]
Deduction
from Period
of Sentence
Scenario
When prisoner, having
evaded his sentence, gives
himself up to authorities
within 48 hours following
issuance of proclamation by
Chief Executive announcing
the passing away of the
calamity
When prisoner chooses to
stay in place of
confinement.
[Art. 98, RPC]
1/5 of period
of sentence
2/5 of period
of sentence.
Special time allowance for loyalty applies to
any prisoner whether undergoing preventive
imprisonment or serving sentence [Art. 98
RPC, as amended by R.A. 10592].
e. By Parole
Parole
The conditional release of an offender from a
correctional institution after he has served the
minimum of his prison sentence [Sec. 2(l),
Revised Rules and Regulations of the Board of
Pardons and Parole].
g. By Probation
Probation
A disposition under which a defendant after
conviction and sentence is released subject to
conditions imposed by the court and to the
supervision of a probation officer [Sec. 3(a),
P.D. 968 (Probation Law)].
3. Compromise
Desistance
and
Affidavit
of
Criminal liability cannot be the subject of a
compromise, for a criminal case is committed
against the People, and the offended party may
not waive or extinguish the criminal liability.
Compromise is not one of the grounds
prescribed by RPC for the extinction of criminal
liability [Trinidad v. Ombudsman, G.R. No.
166038 (2007); Art. 2034, New Civil Code; Art.
23, RPC].
Courts disfavor affidavits of desistance or
retraction [People v. Orje, G.R. No. 189579
(2011) citing People v. Soriano, G.R. No.
Page 100 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
178325 (2008), 546 SCRA 514, 521; citing
People v. Alicante, 388 Phil. 233, 258 (2000)]
as they can be easily secured from poor or
ignorant witnesses, usually for monetary
considerations or threats of violence. There
must be other circumstances which, when
coupled with retraction or desistance, creates
doubt as to the truth of the plaintiff’s testimony
[People v. Orje, G.R. No. 189579 (2011)].
Effect of Acquittal in Criminal Action
General Rule: The court may acquit an
accused on reasonable doubt and still order
payment of civil damages already proved in the
same case without need for a separate civil
action. The reason for this is that the accused
has already been accorded due process
[Maximo v. Gerochi, Jr., G.R. Nos. L-47994-97
(1986)].
Civil liability arising from an offense, however,
may be the subject of compromise. Such
compromise shall not extinguish the imposition
of the legal penalty [Art. 2034, New Civil Code].
Exceptions:
1. Acquittal in the criminal action for
negligence does not preclude the
offended party from filing a separate
civil action to recover damages, based
on the new theory that the act is a
quasi-delict [Art. 2177, NCC].
2. Facts from which the civil action might
arise do not exist (e.g., the defendant
was acquitted because he was not the
perpetrator of the felony).
G. Civil Liabilities Arising from
Criminal Cases
1. General Rule [Art. 100]
Basis of Civil Liability
From the standpoint of its effects, a crime has
a dual character:
1. As an offense against the State
because of the disturbance of the
social order and
2. As an offense against the private
person injured by the crime unless it
involves the crime of treason, rebellion,
espionage, contempt and others
(wherein no civil liability arises on the
part of the offender either because
there are no damages to be
compensated or there is no private
person injured by the crime) [Nuguid v.
Nicdao, G.R. No. 150785 (2006)].
An act or omission xxx gives rise to civil liability
because it caused damage to another.
Additionally, what gives rise to civil liability is
the obligation and the moral duty of everyone
to repair or make whole the damage caused to
another, by reason of his own act or omission,
whether done intentionally or negligently [Chua
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 150793 (2004)].
Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or
negligently causes damage to another, shall
indemnify the latter for the same [Art. 20, CC].
Exemption from criminal liability does not
include exemption from civil liability [Rule 111,
Sec. 2 (4), Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure].
Determination of Civil Liability [WRIP]
General Rule: Civil liability arising from the
commission of the felony is deemed instituted
with the criminal action [Rule 111, Sec. 1(a),
ROC].
With the implied institution of the civil action in
the criminal action, the two actions are merged
into one composite proceeding, with the
criminal action predominating the civil [Quinto
v. Andres, G.R. No. 155791 (2005)].
Exceptions: [WRIP] When the offended party:
1. Waives his right to file a civil action
2. Reserves his right to Institute it
separately, or
3. Institutes the civil action Prior to the
criminal action.
Reservation of Right to File
A reservation of the right to file a separate civil
action only gives the party aggrieved the right
to choose under which body of laws he must
bring the civil action, either under the:
1. RPC – where the recovery may be
defeated by proof that the acts on
which the action is based do not exist,
or
2. New Civil Code – where the same
proof is required to preclude recovery,
or proof of diligence in the selection
and employment of the employee.
Page 101 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Institution of Separate Civil Action
Commencement of criminal action is not a
condition precedent to the filing of civil action
arising from a crime. However, civil action
arising from crime cannot be instituted in
the following cases:
When Civil
Effect
Action is
[Rule 111, Sec.
Instituted
2, Rules of Court]
Civil action is
suspended until final
judgment is rendered in
Before criminal the criminal action.
action has
The civil and criminal
commenced
actions may be
consolidated so that
they are tried and
decided jointly.
Cannot be instituted
After criminal
until after final judgment
action has
has been rendered in
commenced
the criminal action.
Said rule applies only when the plaintiff in the
civil action is the offended party in the criminal
action and both cases arise from the same
offense.
Independent Civil Actions
An independent civil action may be filed in the
following cases:
1. Violations of fundamental rights [Art.
32, NCC]
2. Defamation, fraud and physical injuries
[Art. 33, NCC]
3. Failure or refusal of a member of the
police force to render aid or protection
to any person in case of danger to life
or property [Art. 34, NCC]
4. When there is fault or negligence, there
being no pre-existing contract between
the parties (quasi-delict) [Art. 2176,
NCC].
Note: Responsibility for quasi-delicts is
separate from civil liability arising from
negligence under the RPC, but the plaintiff
cannot recover damages twice from the same
act or omission [Art. 2177, CC].
2. What Civil Liability Includes
What is Included in Civil Liability [Art. 104,
RPC]
The civil liability established in Arts. 100, 101,
102, and 103 of this Code includes:
1. Restitution;
2. Reparation of the damage caused;
and
3. Indemnification
for
consequential
damages.
a. Restitution
Restitution of the thing itself must be made
whenever possible, with allowance for any
deterioration or diminution of value as
determined by the court [Art. 105, RPC].
Note: Restitution should apply when offense is
proven, even if accused is acquitted [People v.
Alejano, G.R. No. L-33667 (1930)].
General Rule: The thing itself shall be
restored, even though it be found in the
possession of a third person who has acquired
it by lawful means.
Exception: In cases where the thing has been
acquired by the third person in the manner and
under the requirements which, by law, bar an
action for its recovery [Art. 105, RPC].
Hence, restitution may not be allowed in the
following cases:
1. If the possessor of a movable or of
which the owner has been unlawfully
acquired, acquired it in good faith at a
public sale, the owner cannot acquire
its return without reimbursing the price
thereof [Art. 559, CC].
2. When purchaser is an innocent
purchaser for value of a property
covered by a Torrens title [Sec. 39, Act
No. 496].
3. When a sale is authorized by the
original owner of the property [U.S. v.
Evangelista, G.R. No. 4109 (1908)].
4. When liability to return a thing arises
from a contract, not from a criminal act.
In such case, the court cannot order its
return in the criminal case [People v.
Pantig, G.R. No. L-8325 (1955)].
If Thing is Damaged
If the value of the thing taken is decreased, the
court may order the offender to pay the amount
representing
deterioration
[People
v.
Mostasesa, G.R. No. L-5684 (1954)].
Page 102 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Reparation
The court shall determine the amount of
damage, taking into consideration the price of
the thing, whenever possible, and its special
sentimental value to the injured party, and
reparation shall be made accordingly [Art. 106,
RPC].
This applies when restitution is not possible
[People v. Dalena, G.R. Nos. 11387-R and
11388-R (1954)].
Computation [Art. 106, RPC]
REPARATION = actual value of lost item
which cannot be recovered + sentimental
value to original owner
c. Indemnification
Indemnification for consequential damages
shall include not only those caused the injured
party, but also those suffered by his family or
by a third person by reason of the crime [Art.
107, RPC].
Indemnity v. Restitution
Restitution is applicable to crimes against
property; whereas indemnity is applicable to
crimes against persons.
Art. 104 (civil liabilities) v. Art. 38 (providing
for the order of payment of pecuniary
liabilities)
Civil
Pecuniary
Liabilities
Liabilities
[Art. 104]
[Art. 38]
Similarities Reparation, indemnification
As to
Restitution
Not
Restitution
applicable
As to Fine
Not
Fine, costs
and Costs
applicable
of
proceedings
When Injuries are Sustained
Actual damage from injuries = whatever he
spent to treat wounds + doctor’s fees +
medicine + salary/wages unearned because
of inability to work + damages due to loss of
limb/etc.
Lost earnings
General Rule: There must be documentary
proof to support the indemnity for loss of
earning capacity.
Exceptions:
1. When the deceased is self-employed
and earning less than minimum wage;
or
2. When the deceased was employed as
a daily wage worker earning less than
minimum wage [People v. Mallari, G.R.
No. 145993 (2003)].
Computation:
Loss of Earning Capacity = [2/3 x (80 – age
of the deceased)] x [50% x annual gross
income]
If there is proof of actual amount of living
expenses, instead of using 50% of annual
gross income:
Net Gross Income = gross annual income –
living expenses
[Abrogar v. Cosmos Bottling Corporation, G.R.
No. 164749 (2017)]
Temperate Damages
Given when pecuniary losses were suffered
but amount cannot be proven with certainty.
Also, when income of victim is not sufficiently
proven [Pleno v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L56505 (1988)].
Moral Damages
This includes physical suffering, mental
anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched
reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock,
social humiliation, and similar injury [Art. 2217,
CC].
It may be recovered in the following and
analogous cases: [Art. 2219, CC]
1. Crime resulting to physical injuries
2. Seduction, abduction, rape, or other
lascivious acts
3. Adultery/concubinage
4. Illegal/arbitrary detention/arrest
5. Illegal search
6. Libel, slander, or any other form of
defamation
7. Malicious prosecution
For rape, moral damages may additionally be
awarded without need for pleading or proof of
the basis thereof [People v. Arizapa, G.R. No.
131814 (2000)].
Page 103 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
Exemplary Damages
Corrective damages are deterrent to serious
wrongdoings, and vindication of undue
sufferings. This is imposed when there are:
1. One
or
more
aggravating
circumstances; or
2. When crime is extremely reprehensible
or outrageous [People v. Combate,
G.R. No. 189301 (2010)].
However, plaintiff must first show he is entitled
to moral, temperate, or compensatory
damages before exemplary damages are
awarded [Art. 2234, CC].
Damages to be Awarded
The following damages is to be awarded for
crimes involving the death of victim where the
penalty imposed consists of indivisible
penalties (e.g., Murder, Parricide, Infanticide,
etc) or for simple/qualified rape [People v.
Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124 (2016)].
Where the penalty imposed is death but
reduced to reclusion perpetua because
of RA 9346
Civil indemnity
Moral damages
P100,000
Exemplary damages
Where the penalty imposed is reclusion
perpetua, other than the abovementioned
Civil indemnity
Moral damages
P75,000
Exemplary damages
Attorney’s fees
When defendant’s act or omission has
compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third
persons or incur expenses to protect his
interest [Art. 2208, CC].
Interest
6% per annum [Sps. Abella v. Abella, G.R. No.
195166 (2015)].
same – upon the heirs of the person
liable.
2. Action
to
demand
restoration,
reparation, and indemnification –
descends to the heirs of the person
injured.
Rules on Liability
1. If there are two or more persons
civilly liable for a felony - the courts
shall determine the amount for which
each must respond [Art. 109, RPC].
2. Liability of principals, accomplices,
and accessories - each within their
respective class, shall be liable
severally
(in
solidum)
among
themselves for their quotas, and
subsidiaries for those of the other
persons liable.
Order of enforcement of liability: first
against the property of the principals;
next, against that of the accomplices,
and, lastly, against that of the
accessories.
Right of person who paid: Right of
action against the others for the
amount of their respective shares [Art.
110, RPC].
3. Liability of person who benefited
from the proceeds of the felony –
any person who has participated
gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony
shall be bound to make restitution in an
amount equivalent to the extent of such
participation [Art. 111, RPC].
In Case of Death of Offender
When Death
Effect
Occurred
After final
Civil liability is possible
judgment
[Rule 86, ROC].
Before final
Civil liability is dismissed
judgment
[Art. 89(1), RPC].
3. Persons Civilly Liable
Upon Whom Obligation Devolves [Art. 108,
RPC]
1. Obligation to make restoration,
reparation
for
damages,
or
indemnification
for
consequential
damages and actions to demand the
4. Extinction of Civil Liability
Offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy
the civil liability resulting from the crime
committed by him, notwithstanding the fact that
he has served his sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not
been required to serve the same by reason of
Page 104 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
amnesty, pardon, commutation of sentence or
any other reason [Art. 113, RPC].
Modes of Extinguishing Civil Liability
Civil liability established in Arts. 100, 101, 102,
and 103 of the RPC shall be extinguished in the
same manner as obligations, in accordance
with the provisions of the Civil Law [Art. 112,
RPC].
Obligations are extinguished:
1. By payment or performance;
2. By the loss of the thing due;
3. By the condonation or remission of the
debt;
4. By the confusion or merger of the rights
of creditor and debtor;
5. By compensation;
6. By novation [Art. 1231, CC].
5. Special Cases
a. Insanity, imbecility, and those over 9
and below 15
Civil Liability of Parents of Minors
General Rule: A minor over 15 years of age
who acts with discernment is not exempt from
criminal liability, that is why the RPC is silent as
to the subsidiary liability of his parents [Sec. 6,
Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006].
Under the Art. 2180 of the Civil Code, the father
and, in case of his death or incapacity, the
mother, are responsible for the damages
caused by the minor children who live in their
company.
Exception: Parents/guardians can avoid civil
liability by proving that there was no fault or
negligence on their part [Paleyan v. Bangkili,
G.R. No. L-22253 (1971)].
Civil Liability of Guardians
The persons having the insane or minor under
their legal authority or control are primarily
liable to pay the civil liability. If it is proven that
there was no fault or negligence on their part,
those exempted from the crime shall respond
with their own property not exempt from
execution [Art. 2180(3), CC].
b. State of Necessity
There is no civil liability in justifying
circumstances except in par. 4 of Art. 11 (state
of necessity), wherein the person who was
benefited by the act which causes damage to
another is the one civilly liable [Tan v. Standard
Vacuum Oil, G.R. No. L-4160 (1952)].
c. Irresistible Force and Uncontrollable
Fear
The persons using violence or causing the fear
are primarily liable. If there be no such persons,
those doing the act shall be liable secondarily
[Art. 101, par. 7, RPC].
d. Innkeepers and Similar Persons
General Rule: Innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and
any other persons or corporations shall be
civilly liable for crimes committed in their
establishments in the following cases:
1. In default of the persons criminally
liable.
2. For the restitution of goods taken by
robbery or theft within their houses
from guests lodging therein.
Exception: No liability shall attach in case of
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons unless committed by the innkeeper's
employees [Art. 102, RPC].
Elements under Paragraph 1
1. Innkeeper, tavernkeeper, or proprietor
of establishment or his employee must
have committed a violation of municipal
ordinance or some general or special
police regulation.
2. Crime was committed in such inn,
tavern or establishment.
3. The person criminally liable is
insolvent.
Elements under Paragraph 2
1. Guests notified the innkeeper or the
person representing him of the deposit
of their goods within the inn or house,
in advance.
2. The guest followed the directions of the
innkeeper or his representative with
respect to the care of the vigilance over
such goods.
3. Such goods of the guests lodging
therein were taken by robbery with
Page 105 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM1
CRIMINAL LAW
force upon things or theft committed
within the inn or house.
6. Subsidiary
Persons
Liability
of
Other
Subsidiary liability shall also apply to
employers,
teachers,
persons,
and
corporations engaged in any kind of industry
for felonies committed by their servants, pupils,
workmen, apprentices, or employees in the
discharge of their duties [Art. 103, RPC].
Elements:
1. Employer,
Teacher,
Person
or
Corporation is engaged in any kind of
industry.
2. Any of their Servants, Pupils,
Workmen, Apprentices or employees
commits a felony while in the discharge
of his duties.
3. The said employee is Insolvent and
has Not Satisfied his civil liability.
4. Employee was Convicted in a criminal
action.
How Enforced
There must be a motion for subsidiary writ of
execution against the employer and upon proof
that the employee is insolvent [Basilio v. Court
of Appeals, 385 Phil. 21 (2000)].
Note:
1. Private persons without business or
industry are not subsidiarily liable but
may be primarily liable under culpa
aquiliana [Steinmetz v. Valdez, G.R.
No. 47655 (1941)].
2. Employer has the right to take part in
the defense of his employee. [Miranda
v. Malate Garage & Taxicab, G.R. No.
L-8943 (1956)].
Page 106 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW 2
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM2
A.
CRIMES
AGAINST
NATIONAL SECURITY AND
THE LAW OF NATIONS
[ARTS. 114-123]
These crimes may be prosecuted although the
criminal act or acts were committed outside of
Philippine territorial jurisdiction.
This is one of the instances where the RPC
may be given extraterritorial application under
Article 2 (5) thereof. However, prosecution can
proceed only if offender is:
a. Within Philippine territory, or
b. Brought to the Philippines pursuant to
an extradition treaty.
General Rule: Almost all of these are crimes
committed only in times of war.
Exceptions: Offenses that can be committed
in times of peace:
a. Espionage [Art. 117, Revised Penal
Code] – This is also covered by
Commonwealth Act No. 616 which
punishes conspiracy to commit
espionage.
b. Inciting to War or Giving Motives for
Reprisals [Art. 118, Revised Penal
Code] – This can be committed even if
the Philippines is not a participant.
c. Violation of Neutrality [Art. 119,
Revised Penal Code] – The Philippines
is not a party to an on-going war.
1. Chapter I: Crimes against
National Security
a. Article 114 - Treason
General Concepts
1. Treason – breach of allegiance to a
government, committed by a person
who owes allegiance to it [U.S. v. Abad,
G.R. No. 976 (1902)]
2. Two (2) Modes of Commission [LA]:
a. Levying War
b. Adherence to the Enemy and
Giving of Aid and Comfort
3. Place of Commission
CRIMINAL LAW
a. by a Filipino citizen – can be
committed outside of the
Philippines.
b. by an alien – must be
committed in the Philippines.
4. Nature: Continuing offense – It may be
committed by one single act, by a
series of acts, or by several series
thereof, not only in a single time, but in
different times, it being a continuous
crime [People v. Victoria, G.R. No. L369 (1947)].
Elements
Mode 1: Levying
War [AWLAT]
Mode 2:
Adherence to the
Enemy and Giving
of Aid and
Comfort [AWAG]
1. Offender is a Filipino or Resident alien
owing Allegiance to the Government of the
Philippines
2. There is a War in which the Philippines is
involved
3.
The
offender
Levies war against
the government
4. There must be an
actual Assembly of
men; and
5. It is for the purpose
of
executing
a
Treasonable design
by force [See U.S. v.
Lagnason, G.R. No.
1582, March 28,
1904]
3. Offender Adheres
to the enemies and
Gives them aid or
comfort
Allegiance
The obligation for fidelity and obedience which
the individual owes to the government under
which he lives, or to his sovereign in return for
the protection he receives [Laurel v. Misa, G.R.
No. L-409 (1947)].
Nature: Allegiance can be [Laurel v. Misa,
G.R. No. L-409 (1947)]:
a. Permanent – obligation of fidelity and
obedience which a citizen or subject
owes to his government or sovereign.
Page 108 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
b. Temporary – obligation of fidelity and
obedience which a resident alien owes
to his government.
Adherence
An intent to betray; when a citizen intellectually
or emotionally favors the enemy and harbors
sympathies or convictions [Cramer v. US, 65
Sup. Ct. 918 (1945)].
Adherence may be proved [ONC]:
1. By One witness;
2. From the Nature of the act itself; or
3. From the Circumstances surrounding the act
[People v. Adriano, G.R. No. L-477 (1947)].
Aid or Comfort
An act which strengthens or tends to
strengthen the enemy and an act which
weakens or tends to weaken the power of the
traitor’s country to resist or to attack the enemy
[Cramer v. US, supra].
The overt act of aid and comfort to the enemy
must be intentional. [Id.]
CRIMINAL LAW
Two Ways of Proving Treason [Art.
114, par. 2, Revised Penal Code]
1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to
the same overt act; or
a. Two
witness
rule:
The
testimony of two witnesses is
required to prove the overt act
of giving aid or comfort, but it is
not necessary to prove
adherence. Each of the
witnesses must testify to the
whole overt act; or if it is
separable, there must be two
witnesses to each part of the
overt act [People v. Escleto,
G.R. No. L-1006 (1949)].
2. Confession of accused in open court.
Aggravating Circumstances
Aggravating Circumstances
Allowable [ICAG]
Not Allowable/
Inherent
Circumstances
[EAT]
1. Ignominy
[People v.
Adlawan, 83
Phil. 195, G.R.
No. L-456
(1949)]
2. Cruelty [Id.]
3. Amount or
degree of aid
[People v.
Caña, 87 Phil.
577, G.R. No.
L-1678, Nov.
10, 1950]
4. Gravity of
separate
distinct acts of
treason [Id.]
1. Evident
premeditation
[People v.
Racaza, G.R.
No. L-365, Jan.
21, 1949]
2. Abuse of
Superior
strength
[People v.
Racaza, G.R.
No. L-365, Jan.
21, 1949;
People v.
Adlawan, 83
Phil. 195, G.R.
No. L-456
(1949)]
3. Treachery
[People v.
Roble, G.R.
No. L-433
(1949)]
Acts not constituting treason
a. “Commandeering" of women to satisfy
the lust of Japanese officers or men or to
enliven the entertainments held in their
honor. Sexual and social relations with
the Japanese did not directly and
materially tend to improve their war
efforts or to weaken the power of the US
[People v. Perez, supra].
b. Acceptance of public office and
discharge of official duties under the
enemy [People v. Sison, P.C. 42 O.G.
748].
Treatment of common crimes connected
with the charge of Treason
General
common
treason,
separate
treason.
Rule: When the killings and other
crimes are charged as overt acts of
they cannot be regarded: (a) as
crimes, or (b) as complexed with
Exception: The rule would not preclude the
punishment of murder or other common
crimes, if the prosecution should elect to
prosecute the culprit specifically for these
crimes, instead of relying on them as an
element of treason [People v. Prieto, G.R. No.
L-399 (1948)].
Page 109 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Article 116 – Misprision of Treason
Defenses Against Treason
Defenses Against Treason
Elements [CCC]:
Acceptable (DL)
Unacceptable (SL)
1.
Duress
or
uncontrollable fear
[El
Pueblo de
Filipinas
v.
Bagalawis,
G.R.
No. L-262 (1947)]
1.
Suspended
allegiance and change
in sovereignty [Laurel
v. Misa, G.R. No. L409 (1947)]
2.
Lawful
obedience to a de
facto Government
[Go Kim Cham v.
Valdez, G.R. No.
L-5 (1945)]
2. Loss of citizenship
by the mere joining of
army of the enemy
[People v. Manayao,
G.R. No. L-322 (1947)]
b. Article 115 – Conspiracy
Proposal to Commit Treason
and
1. Offender is a Citizen of the Philippines
2. He has knowledge of Conspiracy to
commit
treason
against
the
government
3. He Conceals or does not disclose and
make known the same as soon as
possible to the governor or fiscal of the
province in which he resides, or the
mayor or fiscal of the city in which he
resides
Punishment
•
•
Punishment imposed is as an
accessory to treason.
However, the offender is still a principal
to the crime of misprision of treason.
Hence, Art. 20 of the RPC, exempting
certain accessories related to the
persons involved in a crime, does not
apply in this case. [REYES]
Misprision of Treason v. Treason
Elements
Conspiracy to
commit Treason
[WaTLAD]
Proposal to commit
Treason [WOnLAP]
Treason
[Art. 114]
As to the Offender
1. There is a War in which the Philippines is
involved
2. At least two
persons agree to:
a.
Levy
war
against
the
government; or
b. Adhere to the
enemies,
giving
them
aid
or
comfort
Misprision of
Treason
[Art. 116]
2. At least one person
decides to
a. Levy war against the
government; or
b. Adhere to the
enemies, giving them
aid or comfort
3. They decide to 3.
That
person
commit it
proposes its execution
to other persons
The two-witness rule does not apply (in
conspiracy and proposal) because this is a
separate and distinct offense from that of
treason [US v. Bautista, G.R. No. L-2189
(1906)].
Offender is a Filipino Offender may be a
Citizen
Filipino or Resident
alien
owing
Allegiance to the
Government of the
Philippines
Acts Punished
What is punished is
the concealment or
failure to disclose of
a conspiracy to
commit treason
What is punished is
the act of:
(1) levying war; or
(2) adherence to the
enemy
and
the
giving of aid and
Since the provision comfort
speaks
only
of
“knowledge of any
conspiracy against”
and not knowledge
of treason actually
committed
by
another,
it
presupposes
that
Page 110 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
the crime of treason
is
not
yet
consummated [Art.
116, Revised Penal
Code]
As to the Penalty
Penalty is equivalent Principal offender is
to
that
of
an punished by reclusion
accessory to treason. perpetua to death and
a fine not to exceed
However,
the P4,000,000 pesos.
offender is still a
principal to the crime Likewise, an alien,
of
misprision
of residing
in
the
treason. Hence, Art. Philippines,
who
20 of the RPC which commits
acts
of
provides
for treason as defined in
accessories who are paragraph 1 of this
exempt from criminal Article
shall
be
liability does not punished by reclusion
apply in this case. temporal to death and
[Art. 20, Revised shall pay a fine not to
Penal Code]
exceed P4,000,000
pesos. [RA 10951]
d. Article 117 – Espionage
Punishable Acts [Two (2) Modes] [ED]
1. By Entering, without authority therefor,
a warship, fort, or naval or military
establishment or reservation to obtain
any information, plans, photographs, or
other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the
Philippines
2. Disclosing by public officer of
confidential information to a foreign
representative
Distinctions between Mode 1 and
Mode 2
Mode 1: Entering
without Authority
[EAPD]
Mode 2: Disclosing
by a Public Officer
[PPD]
As regards the Elements
1. Offender Enters a
Warship, Fort, or
Naval or Military
Establishment
or
1. That the offender
is a Public officer;
2. That he has in his
Possession
the
articles,
data
or
Reservation;
[WaFoNaMER]
2. He has no
Authority;
3. His Purpose is to
obtain information,
plans, photographs
or other data of a
confidential nature
4. What is sought to
be
obtained
is
relative
to
the
Defense
of
the
Philippines.
information
of
a
confidential
nature
relative
to
the
defense
of
the
Philippines,
by
reason of the public
office he holds;
3. That he Discloses
their contents to a
representative of a
foreign nation.
As to the Offender
Offender can be any Offender should be a
person who has no public officer
authority to obtain
information, plans,
etc.
As regards the information
Information need not
be obtained. The
intention to obtain
information
is
sufficient.
Articles, data or
information
of
confidential
nature
are disclosed.
Espionage vs. Treason
Espionage
[Art. 117]
Treason
[Art. 114]
As to the Offender
Offender can be a citizen or an alien
When committed
May be committed Committed only
both in times of times of war
war and in times of
peace
in
How committed
May be committed Limited to two (2) ways
in many ways
of:
Page 111 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
a. Levying of war; and
b. Adhering to the
enemy and giving him
CRIM2
aid or comfort
SECTION 2. Provoking
Disloyalty in Case of War
War
and
e. Article 118 – Inciting to War or
Giving Motives for Reprisals
Elements [UPE]:
1. Offender
performs
Unlawful
or
unauthorized acts
2. The acts:
a. Provoke or give occasion for a
war involving or liable to
involve the Philippines; or
b. Exposure of Filipino citizens to
reprisals on their persons or
property
f. Article 119 - Violation of Neutrality
Elements [WRV]:
1. There is War in which the Philippines is
not involved
2. There is a Regulation issued by a
competent authority to enforce
neutrality
3. Offender Violates the regulation
g. Article 120 – Correspondence with
Hostile Country
Elements [WC-PCU]:
1. There is War in which the Philippines is
not involved
2. Offender makes Correspondence with
an enemy country or territory occupied
by enemy troops
3. The correspondence is either –
a. Prohibited by the government,
or
b. Carried on in Ciphers or
conventional signs; or
c. Containing
notice
or
information which might be
Useful to the enemy
CRIMINAL LAW
Qualifying Circumstance for (c):
If the offender intended to aid the enemy by
giving such notice or information, the penalty
will be reclusion temporal to death.
Note: In this case, the offender may either be
prosecuted under this Article or for Treason.
For practical purposes, prosecution under this
Article is more expeditious because it will not
require application of the two-witness rule.
Correspondence
This is communication by means of letters
which pass between those who have friendly or
business relations [See Merriam-Webster
Dictionary]
• Even if the correspondence contains
innocent
matters,
if
the
correspondence has been prohibited
by the Government, it is punishable.
[Art. 120, Revised Penal Code]
• Prohibition by the Government is not
essential in instances (b) and (c). [Id.]
h. Article 121 – Flight to Enemy’s
Country
Elements [WAAP]:
1. There is a War in which the Philippines
is involved
2. Offender owes Allegiance to the
government
3. Offender Attempts to flee or go to an
enemy country.
4. Going to the enemy country is
Prohibited by competent authority
Notes:
• Aliens may be Guilty - The allegiance
contemplated in this article is either
natural or temporary allegiance, unlike
in other provisions such as Art. 114 and
116 which have a qualification of “not
being a foreigner” [Art. 121, Revised
Penal Code]
• Mere attempt consummates the felony
when
prohibited
by
competent
authority consummates the felony [Id.]
Page 112 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
i. Article 122 – Piracy in General and
Mutiny on the High Seas or in
Philippine Waters
Piracy vs. Mutiny
Piracy
Mutiny
As to the Attacker
Elements of Piracy
Mode 1: Attacking
or seizing the
vessel [VCASI]
Mode 2: Seizing the
cargo [VNSI]
1. The Vessel is on the high seas or
Philippine waters
2. Offender may be
a Complement or
passenger of the
vessel
2. Offenders are
Neither members of
its complement nor
passengers of the
vessel
3. The Offender 3. Offenders are
Attacks or Seizes Neither members of
the vessel
its complement nor
passengers of the
vessel
4. There is Intent to gain
High Seas
The parts of the seas that are not included in
the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial
seas, or in the internal waters of a state, or in
the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic
state. [Convention on the Law of the Sea]
Jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes
has no territorial limits. Pirates are in law
hostes humani generis. Piracy is a crime not
against any particular State but against all
mankind. It may be punished in the competent
tribunal of any country where the offender may
be found or into which he may be carried
[People v. Lol-lo and Saraw, supra].
Mutiny
Mutiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior
officer, or the raising of commotions and
disturbances on board a ship against the
authority of its commander [Bouvier’s Law
Dictionary, Vol. 2, p. 2283].
Persons who attack
the vessel or seize
its
cargo
are
strangers to said
vessels
Persons who attack
the vessel or seize its
cargo are members of
the
crew
or
passengers
As to necessity of intent to gain
Intent to gain is Intent to gain is not
essential
essential.
The
offenders may only
intend to ignore the
ship’s officers or they
may be prompted by a
desire
to
commit
plunder.
Piracy as defined in Art. 122 of the
Revised Penal Code (as amended by
R.A. 7659) vs. Piracy as provided in
P.D. 532 (“Anti-Piracy and AntiHighway Robbery Law of 1974”)
Art. 122 of the
Revised Penal
Code, as
amended by R.A.
7659
P.D. 532
Article 122 of the
Revised
Penal
Code, before its
amendment,
provided that piracy
must be committed
on the high seas by
any person not a
member
of
its
complement nor a
passenger thereof.
Upon
its
amendment
by
Republic Act No.
7659, the coverage
of the pertinent
provision
was
widened to include
offenses committed
“in
Philippine
waters.”
On the other hand,
under
Presidential
Decree
No.
532
(issued in 1974), the
coverage of the law on
piracy embraces any
person including “a
passenger or member
of the complement of
said
vessel
in
Philippine
waters.”
Hence, passenger or
not, a member of the
complement or not,
any person is covered
by the law.
Page 113 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
[People v. Tulin, G.R. No. 111709, (2001)]
Note: Republic Act No. 7659 neither
superseded nor amended the provisions on
piracy under Presidential Decree No. 532.
There is no contradiction between the two
laws. There is likewise no ambiguity and
hence, there is no need to construe or interpret
the law. All the presidential decree did was to
widen the coverage of the law, in keeping with
the intent to protect the citizenry as well as
neighboring states from crimes against the law
of nations [People v. Tulin, G.R. No. 111709,
(2001)].
j. Article 123 – Qualified Piracy
Qualifying
MHPR]:
Circumstances
[B-FA-
1. Whenever the vessel is seized by
Boarding or Firing upon the same;
2. Whenever the pirates have Abandoned
their victims without means of saving
themselves; or
3. Whenever the crime is accompanied
by Murder, Homicide, Physical injuries
or Rape
This is a special complex crime, regardless of
the number of victims. [People v. Siyoh, G.R.
No. L-57292 (1986)]
“Pirates”
It seems as if “pirates” in paragraph 2 should
actually be in paragraph 1 because in
paragraph 1, the mutineers, being already in
the vessel, cannot seize the vessel by boarding
or firing upon the same. [Art. 123, Revised
Penal Code]
Page 114 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM2
B. CRIMES AGAINST THE
FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF
THE STATE [ARTS. 124 133]
1. Chapter I: Arbitrary Detention
or Expulsion, Violation of
Dwelling,
Prohibition,
Interruption, and Dissolution of
Peaceful Meetings and Crimes
Against Religious Worship
SECTION 1 – Arbitrary Detention or
Expulsion
a. Article 124 - Arbitrary Detention
Arbitrary Detention [Art. 124, Revised Penal
Code]
Any public officer or employee who without
legal grounds detains a person.
Elements [PWD]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He Detains a person
3. Detention is Without a legal ground;
detention is without legal ground if not
made
under
the
following
circumstances [CIA]:
a. Upon the Commission of a
crime;
b. Violent Insanity; or
c. Any other Ailment requiring
compulsory confinement of the
patient in a hospital [Art. 124,
Par. 2, RPC]
Public officer or employee
The public officers must be vested with
authority to detain or order the detention of
persons accused of a crime (i.e. policemen and
other agents of the law, the judges or mayors
and barangay captains) [Milo v. Salanga, G.R.
No. L-37007, (1987)].
Detention
Refers to the actual confinement of a person in
an enclosure, or in any manner detaining and
depriving him of his liberty [People v. Flores,
CRIMINAL LAW
G.R. No. 116488, (2001), citing People vs.
Gungon, G.R. No. 119574 (1998)].
It can refer to both physical and psychological
restraint [People v. Fabro, G.R. No. 208441
(1998)].
Penalty Based on Length of Wrongful
Detention
Has
not Arresto Mayor in its
exceeded
3 maximum period to
days
prision correccional
in its minimum period
More than 3 Prision Correccional in its
days but not medium
period
and
more than 15 maximum periods.
days
More than 15 Prision Mayor
days but not
more than 6
months
Exceeded
months
6 Reclusion temporal
Notes:
1. Minimum period for arbitrary detention
– Art 124 does not fix the minimum
period of detention [US v. Braganza,
G.R. No. L-3971].
2. Arbitrary detention may be committed
through imprudence. The offense falls
under Art. 365 par. 2 in connection with
Art. 124, par. 1 [People v. Misa, C.A.,
36 O.G. 3496].
b. Article 125 - Delay in the Delivery of
Detained Persons to the Proper
Judicial Authorities
Elements [PDF-12-18-36]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He Detains a person for some legal
ground (includes valid warrantless
arrests)
3. He Fails to deliver such person to the
proper judicial authorities within –
a. 12 hours for light penalties
b. 18 hours for correctional
penalties
c. 36 hours for afflictive or capital
penalties
Page 115 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
[Sayo v. Chief of Police, G.R.
No. L-2128 (1948)]
Delivery
It may also mean constructive delivery (e.g.,
by the filing of the correct information with the
proper court) or the turning over the person
arrested to the jurisdiction of the court. The
purpose is to determine whether the offense is
bailable or not [Sayo v. Chief of Police, G.R.
No. L-2128 (1948)].
When a Judge is not Available
Where a judge is not available, the arresting
officer is duty bound to release the person
detained, if the maximum hours for detention
provided under Art. 125 of the RPC have
already expired [Albior v. Auguis, A.M. P-011472 (2003)].
Waiver: Before the complaint or information is
filed, the person arrested may ask for a
preliminary investigation in accordance with
Rule 112 of the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure, but he must sign a waiver of the
provisions of Article 125 of the RPC in the
presence of his counsel. [Rule 112, Sec. 7
par.2]
Arbitrary
Delivery
Detention
vs.
Delay
in
Arbitrary
Detention
[Art. 124]
Delay in Delivery of
Detained Persons
[Art. 125]
General Rule: Delivery should be made within
12, 24, or 36 hours, depending on the
imposable penalty
No warrant of arrest
No warrant of arrest,
BUT arrest was made
with legal ground/s.
Exception: For those charged with or is
suspected of terrorism or conspiracy to commit
terrorism, the applicable period is 14 days,
which may be extended by a further 10
calendar days if it is established that (1) further
detention of the person/s is necessary to
preserve evidence related to terrorism or
complete the investigation; (2) further detention
of the person/s is necessary to prevent the
commission of another terrorism; and (3) the
investigation is being conducted properly and
without delay [Sec. 29, R.A. 11479].
From the beginning, The detention is legal
the detention is in the beginning, BUT
illegal
the illegality of the
detention starts from
the expiration of any
of
the
periods
specified in Art. 125.
Period to Deliver
Computation of periods
An election day or special holiday, should not
be included in the computation of the period
prescribed by law for the filing of
complaint/information in courts in cases of
warrantless arrests, it being a ‘no-office day’
[Soria v. Desierto, G.R. No. 153524 (2005),
citing Medina v. Orozco, G.R. No. L-26723
(1966)]
Circumstances
considered
determining the liability of
offender [MH-OTI]
in
the
1. Means of communication;
2. Hour of arrest; and
3. Other circumstances such as:
a. Time of surrender;
b. Material possibility for the fiscal
to make the Investigation file in
time the necessary information
c. Article 126 - Delaying Release
Elements [P-DSPP]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. Offender without good reason Delays
the:
a. Service of the notice of the
judicial or executive order for
the release of the prisoner or
detention prisoner;
b. Performance of such judicial or
executive order for the release
of the prisoner or detention
prisoner; or
c. Proceedings upon a petition for
the release of such person
d. Article 127 – Expulsion
Elements [P-EC-N]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He either:
a. Expels any person from the
Philippines; or
Page 116 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
b. Compels a person to change
residence
3. Offender is Not authorized to do so by
law
Note: Only a court, by final judgment, can
compel a person to legally change his
residence. The city mayor of Manila committed
the crime of expulsion when he ordered certain
prostitutes to be transferred to Davao
WITHOUT observing due process since they
have not been charged with any crime.
[Villavicencio v. Lukban, G.R. No. L-14639,
(1919)].
Mode 2 - •
Search
without
previous
consent
of
owner
e. Article 128 – Violation of Domicile
Elements [PN-ESR] :
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He is Not authorized by judicial order
3. He performed the following acts:
a. Entered the dwelling against
the will of the owner;
b. Searched for papers or other
effects therein without the
previous consent of such
owner; or
c. Refused to leave the premises,
after having surreptitiously
entered such dwelling and
having been required to leave
the same.
Qualifying circumstances [N-Nr] [Art.
128, (2), Revised Penal Code]:
1. Nighttime; or
2. Papers or effects not constituting
evidence of a crime are Not returned
immediately after the search
•
Mode 3 - •
Refusal
to
leave
the
premises
after
(a)
surreptitious
entry and (b)
after
being
required to
leave
the
same
Mode 1, Mode 2, and Mode 3
Mode 1 - •
Entrance to
dwelling
against the
will of the
Owner
•
Dwelling – a building or
structure, exclusively
used for rest and
comfort; a combination
house and store is not
considered a “dwelling”
[People v. Magnaye, 89
Phil. 233, 239]
Against the Will of the
Owner - presupposes
opposition or
prohibition by the
owner, whether
express or implied, and
CRIMINAL LAW
not merely the absence
of consent [People v.
Luis Sane, C.A. 40
O.G., Supp. 5, 113;
See U.S. v. Arceo, G.R.
No. 1491, March 5,
1904]
Search – the
examination of a
person’s body or
property or other area
that a person would
reasonably expect to
consider as private,
conducted by a law
enforcement officer for
the purpose of finding
evidence of a crime
[See U.S. v. Delos
Reyes, G.R. No. 6800,
November 16, 1911].
Silence of the Owner
during the Warrantless
Search - may show
implied waiver [Rojas
v. Sps. Matillano, G.R.
No. 141176, May 27,
2004].
The entry by itself does
not consummate the
crime; there must be a
directive to leave once
discovered, and noncompliance with such
directive. In other
words, what constitutes
the crime is the refusal
of the offender to leave
the premises when
required to do so – not
the entrance into the
dwelling.
Notes:
• Inhabitant is Sufficient – although the
code speaks of the owner of the
premises, an inhabitant would be
sufficient if he is the lawful occupant of
the dwelling [See U.S. v. Delos Reyes,
G.R. No. 6800, November 16, 1911].
• Not Authorized by Judicial Order when he is not armed with a search
warrant duly issued by the court [U.S.
v. Delos Reyes, G.R. No. 6800,
November 16, 1911].
Page 117 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Rule 113, Rules of Court: A public officer who
breaks into the premises incurs no liability
when a person to be arrested enters said
premises and closes it thereafter, provided that
the officer first gives a notice of arrest.
According to People v. Doria [G.R. No. 125299
(1999)] and People v. Elamparo [G.R. No.
121572 (2000)], the following are the accepted
exceptions to the warrant requirement:
a. Search incidental to an arrest;
b. Search of moving vehicles;
c. Evidence in plain view;
d. Stop and frisk;
e. Customs searches; and
f. Consented warrantless search.
[M]ere suspicion or a hunch will not validate a
"stop and frisk." A genuine reason must exist,
in light of the police officer's experience and
surrounding conditions, to warrant the belief
that the person detained has weapons
concealed about him. A "stop-and-frisk" serves
a two-fold interest:
a. The general interest of effective crime
prevention and detection, which
underlies the recognition that a police
officer
may,
under
appropriate
circumstances and in an appropriate
manner, approach a person for
purposes of investigating possible
criminal behavior even
without
probable cause; and
b. The more pressing interest of safety
and self-preservation which permit the
police officer to take steps to assure
himself that the person with whom he
deals is not armed with a deadly
weapon that could unexpectedly and
fatally be used against the police officer
[Malacat v. CA, G.R. No. 123595
(1997)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
Mode 1: Procuring
Search Warrant
Without
Just Cause [PSC]
Mode 2: Exceeding
Authority or Using
Unnecessary
Severity in the
Execution [PSE]
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He procures a 2. He has already
Search warrant
legally procured a
Search warrant
3. There is no just
Cause
Note: The true test
of lack of just cause
is
whether
the
affidavit filed in
support
of
the
application
for
search warrant has
been drawn in such
a
manner
that
perjury could be
charged
thereon
and the affiant be
held
liable
for
damages caused.
The oath required
must refer to the
truth of the facts
within the personal
knowledge of the
applicant or his
witnesses [Alvarez
v. CFI, et al., 64
Phil. 33].
f. Article 129 - Search Warrants
Maliciously Obtained and Abuse in the
Service of those Legally Obtained
Two (2) Modes of Commission:
1. Procuring a search warrant without just
cause; or
2. Exceeding his authority or by using
unnecessary severity in executing a
search warrant legally procured
Page 118 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
3. He Exceeds his
authority or uses
unnecessary severity
in executing the same
• "Exceeding
authority" could
include seizing
property not
covered by the
search warrant
[Uy Kheytin, et
al. v. Villareal,
et al., 42 Phil.
886], or
executing the
warrant during
the nighttime
without express
permission from
the court [Rule
126, Sec. 9,
Rules of Court;
Cacho-Olivares
v. Ermita, G.R.
No. 171409,
May 3, 2006].
These do not
always involve
"unnecessary
severity."
• "Unnecessary
severity" refers
to use of
unnecessary
force in
executing the
warrant. The
officers may be
acting within
their authority in
seizing the
property as
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
authorized by
the court, but
they did so in
such a way as
to, e.g., cause
undue damage
to property.
g. Article 130 - Searching Domicile
Without Witnesses
Elements [PASO]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. He is Armed with search warrant
legally procured
3. He Searches the domicile, papers or
other belongings of any person
4. The Owner, or any members of his
family, or two witnesses residing in the
same locality are not present
Witnesses – must be of sufficient age and
discretion residing within the same locality
[Rule 126, Sec. 8, Rules of Court]
Note: Section 8 mandates that the search of a
house, room, or any other premise be made in
the presence of the lawful occupant thereof or
any member of his family or in the absence of
the latter, in the presence of two (2) witnesses
of sufficient age and discretion residing in the
same locality [Cacho-Olivares v. Ermita, G.R.
No. 171409, May 3, 2006]. From this, it can be
seen that, only in the absence of the lawful
occupant thereof or any member of his family,
can two witnesses be resorted to for
compliance with the requirements for the
proper execution of a search. In other words,
this “two witness” rule is not an alternative
option when (a) the lawful occupant or (b) any
member of his family, is present.
Rationale: Search in the presence of
witnesses specified by the law is mandatory to
ensure regularity in the execution of the search
warrant [People v. Gesmundo, G.R. No. 89373
(1993)].
Crimes under Section Two Violation
of
Domicile,
Distinguished
Violation
of
Domicile
[Art. 128]
Search
Warrants
Maliciously
Obtained or
Abuse in its
Service
[Art. 129]
NO
A warrant is
warrant is present, BUT
present
(1)
warrant
was
maliciously
obtained; or
(2) there was
abuse in its
execution
Searching
Domicile
Without
Witnesses
[Art. 130]
A warrant is
present, BUT
there was a
defect in its
implementation
SECTION 3 – Prohibition, Interruption
and Dissolution of Peaceful Meetings
h.
Article
131
Interruption and
Peaceful Meetings
Prohibition,
Dissolution of
Elements [OP - PHA]:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He Performs any of the following acts:
a. Prohibiting, interrupting, or
dissolving,
without
legal
ground, the holding of a
peaceful meeting
b. Hindering any person from:
i. Joining any lawful
association; or
ii. Attending any of its
meetings
c. Prohibiting or hindering any
person from Addressing, either
alone or together with others,
any petition to the authorities
for the
i. Correction of abuses;
or
ii. Redress of grievances
Page 119 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Disturbance of a Municipal Council
Meeting
Interrupting and dissolving the meeting of a
municipal council by a public officer is a crime
against a legislative body, which is in violation
of Sec. 1 of Act. No. 1755 [People v. Alipit, G.R.
No. 18853 (1922)]
SECTION 4 - Crimes Against Religious
Worship
i. Article 132 - Interruption of Religious
Worship
Elements [PRD]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or employee
2. Religious
ceremonies
or
manifestations of any religion are about
to take place or are going on
3. Offender prevents or disturbs the same
Qualifying circumstance:
If the crime is committed with violence or
threats.
Actual Religious Ceremony Must be
Conducted
There must actually be a religious ceremony
being conducted on that occasion, either by
itself or in conjunction with some other activity
of the religious denomination. If the offense
was committed only in a meeting or rally of a
sect, it would be punishable under Art. 131
[People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 13633 (1955)].
j. Article 133 - Offending the Religious
Feelings
CRIMINAL LAW
as there is a “religious ceremony”, it need not
be celebrated in a place of worship. The phrase
“during the celebration” is separated by the
word “or” from the phrase “place devoted to
religious worship” which indicates that the
“religious ceremony” need not be celebrated in
a place of worship. [Art. 133, Revised Penal
Code]
Acts
Notoriously
Feelings
Offensive
to
[RWP]:
1. Ridicules or makes light of anything
constituting religious dogma
2. Works or scoffs at anything devoted to
religious ceremonies
3. Plays with or damages or destroys any
object of veneration of the faithful
[People v. Baes, G.R. No. L-46000
(1939)]
Whether or not an act is offensive to the
religious feelings is a question of fact which
must be adjudged only according to the
feelings of the Catholics and not those of other
faithful ones. [Id.]
Interruption of Religious Worship vs.
Offending the Religious Feelings
Interruption of
Religious Worship
[Art. 132]
Offending the
Religious Feelings
[Art. 133]
As to the offender
Public officer
employee
Elements [PD - NO]:
1. Acts complained of were performed
a. In a Place devoted to religious
worship, or
b. During the celebration of any
religious ceremony
2. The acts must be Notoriously Offensive
to the feelings of the faithful
“Place devoted to religious worship”
is separated by the word “or” from
“During the Celebration”
If the acts were performed in the place of
worship, it is not necessary that there is a
religious ceremony going on. Similarly, so long
Page 120 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
or Any person, whether
a public officer or
private individual [See
People v. Baes, G.R.
No. L-46000 (1939)]
CRIM2
C.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PUBLIC ORDER [ARTS. 134
- 160]
1. Chapter I: Rebellion, Coup
d’etat, Sedition, and Disloyalty
a. Article 134
Insurrection
-
Rebellion
or
Elements: [PA-PRD]
1. There is a Public uprising
2. There must be taking of Arms against
the government
3. The Purpose of the uprising or
movement is to:
a. Remove from the allegiance to
the government or its laws the
Philippine territory or any part
thereof, or any body of land,
naval, or other armed forces; or
b. Deprive the Chief Executive or
Congress, wholly or partially, of
any of their powers or
prerogatives.
The crime of rebellion is consummated at
the very moment a group of rebels rise publicly
and take arms against the government for the
purpose of overthrowing the same by force.The
gravamen of the crime of rebellion is an armed
public uprising against the government [Art.
134, Revised Penal Code; See Aquino,
Revised Penal Code II].
Principle of Absorption
All crimes, whether punishable under special or
general law, which are mere components or
ingredients, or committed in furtherance
thereof, become absorbed in the crime of
rebellion and cannot be isolated and charged
as separate crimes themselves [People v.
Hernandez G.R. No. 6025 (1964) & Enrile v.
Amin, G.R. No. 93335 (1990)].
Note: Of course, this principle is a matter of
defense to be interposed by the alleged
offender. If the prosecutor
alleges that
separate crimes were NOT committed in
furtherance of rebellion, the courts will not
disturb such exercise of discretion. The alleged
offender has the burden of proving that the
separate crimes are political crimes [See
CRIMINAL LAW
Ocampo v. Abando, G.R. No. 176830, 11 Feb.
2014].
The following does not constitute
Rebellion:
•
•
Mere Silence or Omission [US v.
Ravidas, G.R. No. 1503 (1903)]
Membership in a rebel organization
does not automatically qualify as
rebellion. In deciding if the crime
committed is rebellion, not murder, it
becomes imperative for our courts to
ascertain whether or not the act was
done in furtherance of a political end.
The political motive of the act should be
conclusively demonstrated. In such
cases, the burden of demonstrating
political motive falls on the defense,
motive, being a state of mind which the
accused, better than any individual,
knows [People v. Lovedioro, G.R. No.
112235 (1995)].
Rebellion vs. Treason
Rebellion (Art. 134)
Treason (Art. 114)
The levying of war
against
the
government during
peace time for any
purpose mentioned
in Art. 134
The levying of war
was meant to aid the
enemy; or if it would
also
constitute
adherence to the
enemy, giving him
aid and comfort
Always
involves
taking
up
arms
against
the
government.
Mere adherence to
the enemy by giving
aid and comfort is
sufficient
The
purpose
is The
purpose
of
merely to substitute levying war is to help
the government with the enemy.
the rebels’ own form
of government
Rebellion vs. Insurrection
Rebellion
[Art. 134]
Insurrection
[Art. 138]
Object
is
to
completely
overthrow
and
supplant the existing
Object is to effect
some change of
minor importance or
to
prevent
the
Page 121 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
government
exercise
of
governmental
authority with respect
to particular matters
or subjects
Rebellion vs. Sedition
Rebellion
[Art. 134]
Sedition
[Art. 139]
There must be taking It is sufficient that the
up of arms against public uprising be
the government.
tumultuous.
● Tumultuous – if
caused by more than
three (3) persons
who are armed or
provided with means
of violence. [See Art.
153, Revised Penal
Code]
The
purpose
always political.
is The purpose may be
political or social.
● Sedition, in its
general sense, is
raising
of
commotions
or
disturbances in the
State [People v.
Cabrera, 43 Phil. 64]
b. Article 134-A - Coup d’État
Elements: [MSAS]
1. Offender is a person or persons
belonging to the Military or police or
holding
any
public
office
or
employment;
2. It is committed by a Swift attack
accompanied by violence, intimidation,
threat, strategy or stealth;
3. The attack is directed Against the duly
constituted authorities of the Republic
of the Philippines, or any military camp
or
installation,
communication
networks, public utilities or other
facilities needed for the exercise and
continued possession of power;
4. The purpose of the attack is to Seize or
diminish state power.
CRIMINAL LAW
As to who commits the swift attack:
• It may be committed Singly or
Collectively
• It Requires as a principal offender a
member of the AFP, PNP, or a Public
officer with or without civilian support
c. Art 135 - Penalty for Rebellion,
Insurrection or Coup d’état
Persons
liable
for
rebellion,
insurrection or coup d’état
1. The leaders: [PL]
a. Rebellion or Insurrection any person who Promotes,
maintains or heads a rebellion
or insurrection; or
b. Coup d’etat - any person who
Leads, directs or commands
others to undertake a coup
d’état
2. The participants: [PGSD]
a. Rebellion or Insurrection any person who Participates or
executes the commands of
others;
b. Coup d’etat:
i. Any person in the
Government
service
who participates or
executes directions or
commands of others;
or
ii. Any person not in the
government
service
who
participates,
Supports,
finances,
abets or aids in
undertaking a coup
d’état.
c. Rebellion, Insurrection or
Coup d’etat – If under the
command of unknown leaders,
the following shall be Deemed
as leaders of the rebels: Those
who [DSS]:
i. Directed the others,
ii. Spoke for others; or
iii. Signed receipts and
other
documents
issued in their name,
on behalf of the rebels.
Page 122 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
d. Article 136 - Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Coup d’état,
Rebellion or Insurrection
Punishable Acts:
1. Conspiracy to commit coup d’état,
rebellion or insurrection
2. Proposal to commit coup d’état,
rebellion or insurrection
CRIMINAL LAW
not be in conspiracy with the rebels, otherwise,
he is himself guilty of rebellion because in
conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all
[People v. Bello, 428 SCRA 388, G.R. No.
124871, May 13, 2004].
f. Article 138 - Inciting to Rebellion or
Insurrection
Elements: [AIM]
Elements
Mode 1: Conspiracy
to Commit Coup
d’etat, Rebellion or
Insurrection [TD]
Mode 2: Proposal
to Commit Coup
d’etat,
Rebellion or
Insurrection [SP]
1. Two or more
persons come to an
agreement to swiftly
attack or to rise
publicly and take arms
against
the
Government for any of
the
purposes
of
rebellion or
insurrection;
1. A person has
decided to Swiftly
attack or to rise
publicly and take
arms against the
Government for any
of the purposes of
rebellion
or
insurrection;
2. They Decide to 2. Such person
commit it.
Proposes
its
execution to some
other person or
persons.
e. Article 137 - Disloyalty of Public
Officers or Employees
Elements: [P-CFDA]
1. Offender is a Public officer or
employee;
2. Offender Commits any of the following
acts:
a. Failing to resist a rebellion by
all the means in their power;
b. Continuing to Discharge the
duties of their offices under the
control of the rebels
c. Accepting appointment to
office under Them.
The crime presupposes rebellion committed by
other persons; there is no disloyalty if there is
no rebellion going on [U.S. v. Ravidas, et al,
G.R. No. 1503, Mar. 14, 1905]. Offender must
1. Offender does not take Arms or is not
in
open
hostility
against
the
government;
2. He Incites others to the execution of
any of the acts of rebellion;
3. The inciting is done by Means of
speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems,
banners
or
other
representations tending to the same
end.
Note: There is no crime of inciting to treason.
Art. 138 specifically punishes the act of inciting
others to execute any of the acts specified in
Art. 134, which are Rebellion or Insurrection.
Inciting to Rebellion vs. Proposal to
Commit Rebellion
Proposal to Commit
Rebellion
Inciting to
Rebellion
As to the Commission of Rebellion itself
The offender induces another to commit
rebellion. Rebellion should not be actually
committed by the persons to whom it is
proposed or who are incited. Otherwise, they
become principals by inducement in the
crime of rebellion.
As to Decision to Commit the Rebellion
The
person
who There is no need
proposes has decided that the offender
to commit rebellion.
has decided to
commit rebellion.
As to How Committed
The
person
who The act of inciting
proposes
the is done publicly.
execution of the crime
uses secret means.
Page 123 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
property of any public officer or
employee;
d. To commit, for any political or
social end, any act of hate or
Revenge
against
private
persons or any social classes;
or
e. To Despoil for any political or
social end, any person,
municipality or province, or the
national government of all its
property or any part thereof.
g. Article 139 – Sedition
Elements: [PFP - PEIRD]
1. Offenders
rise
tumultuously;
Publicly
and
Tumultuous – if caused by more than
three (3) persons who are armed or
provided with means of violence. [See
Art. 153, Revised Penal Code]
2. Offenders employ Force, intimidation,
or other means outside of legal
methods;
3. Purpose is to attain any of the following
objects:
a. To prevent the Promulgation or
execution of any law or the
holding of any popular election;
b. To prevent the national
government or any provincial
or municipal government or
any
public
officer
from
Exercising its or his functions,
or prevent the execution of an
administrative order;
c. To Inflict any act of hate or
revenge upon the person or
Note: Sedition, in its general sense, is raising
of commotions or disturbances in the State
[People v. Cabrera, 43 Phil. 64].
Use of Unlicensed Firearm Absorbed
Under R.A. 8294 (Act Amending PD No. 1866
or the Firearms Law), sedition absorbs the use
of unlicensed firearm as an element thereof;
hence, it is not an aggravating circumstance,
and the offender can no longer be prosecuted
for illegal possession of firearm. [R.A. 8294,
Sec. 1]
Sedition vs. Rebellion vs. Coup d’ Etat vs. Treason
Sedition
[Art. 139]
Coup d’etat
[Art. 134-A]
Rebellion
[Art. 134)]
Treason
[Art. 114]
As to the Nature of the Crime
Crime against Public Order
Crime against national
security and law of the
nations
As to the Purpose
May be political or
social.
Always political; to To seize or diminish
overthrow
the state power
existing
government
To aid the Enemy
As to the Acts Committed
It is sufficient that
the public uprising
is tumultuous.
There must be
taking
up of arms against
the government.
There is a swift attack
accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat,
strategy or stealth;
As to the Offender
Page 124 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
It is the violation by a
subject of his
allegiance
to his sovereign.
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
There is no distinction as to who may commit
Offender belongs to the There is no distinction
military or police or as to who may commit
holding any public office
or employment
As to Requirement of Public Uprising
Requires a public
Requires a public No Requirement, may be No Requirement
and tumultuous uprising uprising,
or carried out singly or
multitude of people simultaneously
h. Art. 140 - Penalty for sedition
Article 140. Penalty for sedition. The leader
of a sedition shall suffer the penalty of prision
mayor in its minimum period and a fine not
exceeding P2,000,000 pesos.
Other persons participating therein shall suffer
the penalty of prision correccional in its
maximum period and a fine not exceeding
P1,000,000 pesos. (Reinstated by E.O. No.
187; As amended by R.A. No. 10951, August
29, 2017)
i. Article 141 - Conspiracy to Commit
Sedition
Elements: [TD]
1. Two or more persons come to an
agreement and a decision to rise
publicly and tumultuously to attain any
of the objects of sedition;
2. They Decide to commit it.
Note: Art. 141 only punishes conspiracy to
commit sedition. As Art. 8 of the Revised Penal
Code provides that conspiracy and proposal to
commit a felony are punishable only when the
law provides a penalty therefor, there is then no
felony of proposal to commit sedition. [Art. 8,
141, Revised Penal Code]
j. Article 142 - Inciting to Sedition
Mode 1. Inciting others to the
accomplishment of any of the acts
which constitute sedition by means of
speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, etc.
Elements: [DIM]
1. Offender does not take Direct part in
the crime of sedition;
2. He
Incites
others
to
the
accomplishment of any of the acts
which constitute sedition;
3. The inciting is done by Means of
speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, cartoons, banners, or other
representations tending towards the
same end.
Mode 2. Uttering seditious words or
speeches which tend to disturb the
public peace;
Mode 3. Writing, publishing, or
circulating scurrilous libels against
the government or any of the duly
constituted authorities thereof, which
tend to disturb the public peace.
Elements for Modes 2 and 3: [DU - DISL]
1. Offender does not take any Direct part
in the crime of sedition.
2. He Uttered words or speeches and
writing, publishing or circulating
scurrilous libels that:
a. Tend to Disturb or obstruct any
lawful officer in conducting the
functions of his office;
b. Tend to Instigate others to
cabal and meet together for
unlawful purposes;
c. Suggest or incite rebellious
conspiracies or riots; or
d. Lead or tend to stir up the
people against the lawful
authorities or to disturb the
peace of the community, the
safety and order of the
government
Page 125 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Words that tend to create a danger of
public uprising
If the words used tend to create a danger of
public uprising, then those words could
properly be the subject of a penal clause
[People vs. Perez, G.R. No. L-6025-26].
Note: As a General Rule, the curtailment of free
speech can only be valid if it passes the "Clear
and Present Danger" test (there is an imminent
danger of an evil, which has a high probability
of serious injury to the State; See Primicias v.
Fugoso, 80 Phil. 71); but owing to the language
of Art. 142 (i.e., the use of the word
"tend/tends"), Sedition used the lower
"Dangerous Tendency" test.
Mode 4: Knowingly concealing such
evil practices
Ordinarily, “Knowingly concealing such evil
practices” is an act done by an accessory after
the fact, but under this provision, the act is
treated and punished as that of the principal.
[REYES, Book 2]
Crimes where Proposal, Conspiracy,
or Inciting is Punishable
Crimes
where
Proposal to
Commit is
Punishable
[ReCIT]
Crimes
where
Conspiracy
is
Punishable
[TRICS]
Crimes
where
Inciting is
Punishable
[RIS]
1. Rebellion
2. Coup d’
etat
3.Insurrection
4. Treason
1. Treason
1. Rebellion
2. Rebellion
2.Insurrection
3.Insurrection 3. Sedition
4.
Coup
d’etat
5. Sedition
2. Chapter II: Crimes against
Popular Representation
SECTION
1.
Crimes
against
Legislative Bodies and Similar Bodies
Elements: [MP]
1. There is a projected or actual Meeting
of Congress or any of its committees or
subcommittees,
constitutional
committees or divisions thereof, or of
any provincial board or city or
municipal council or board;
2. Offender, who may be any person,
Prevents such meetings by:
a. Force; or
b. Fraud
b. Article 144
Proceedings
-
Disturbance
of
Elements: (CA-DB)
1. There is a meeting of Congress or any
of its committees or subcommittees,
constitutional
commissions
or
committees or divisions thereof, or of
any provincial board or city or
municipal council or board;
2. Offender does any of the following
Acts:
a. He Disturbs any of such
meetings;
b. He Behaves while in the
presence of any such bodies in
such a manner as to interrupt
its proceedings or to impair the
respect due it.
Preventing a Meeting (Art. 143) vs.
Disturbance of Proceeding (Art. 144)
Acts tending to
prevent the meeting
[Art. 143]
Disturbance of
Proceedings
[Art. 144]
As to Purpose
Prevent the meeting Disturb the conduct
from happening
of a meeting
As to the Offender
Can be conducted by any person (no
distinction made)
a. Article 143 - Acts Tending to
Prevent the Meeting of the Assembly
and Similar Bodies
Page 126 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
SECTION 2. Violation of Parliamentary
Immunity
c. Article 145 - Violation
Parliamentary Immunity
of
Two (2) Modes of Commission:
1. Using force against a member of Congress
2. Arrest or Search made while Congress is in
session
Mode 1: Using force, intimidation,
threats, or frauds to prevent any
member of Congress from attending the
meetings of Congress or of any of its
committees
or
subcommittees,
constitutional
commissions
or
committees or divisions thereof, or
from expressing his opinion or casting
his vote;
Elements: [UP - AEC]
1. Offender Uses force, intimidation,
threats or fraud;
2. The Purpose of the offender is to
prevent any member of Congress from:
a. Attending the meetings of the
Congress or of any of its
committees or constitutional
commissions;
b. Expressing his opinion; or
c. Casting his vote.
Note: The offender in mode 1 may be any
Person.
Mode 2: Arresting or searching any
member thereof while Congress is in
regular or special session, except in
case such member has committed a
crime punishable under the Code by a
penalty higher than prision mayor.
Elements: [PACC]
1. Offender is a Public officer of
employee;
2. He Arrests or searches any member of
Congress;
3. Congress, at the time of arrest or
search, is in regular or special session;
4. The member arrested or searched has
not committed a Crime punishable
CRIMINAL LAW
under the Code by the penalty of
prision mayor or higher.
Parliamentary Immunity
Members of Congress cannot be arrested for
offenses punishable by a penalty less than
prision mayor (6 years and 1 day to 12 years),
while Congress is in session. They can be
prosecuted after Congress adjourns. [Art. VI,
Sec. 11, 1987 Constitution]
Rationale: Under Sec. 11, Art. VI of the 1987
Constitution, parliamentary immunity is only
applicable in cases wherein the offense is
“punishable by not more than six years
imprisonment.” This is contrary to Art. 145
which provides that there is only no violation of
parliamentary immunity when the crime is
punishable by a penalty higher than prision
mayor. In other words, under the Revised
Penal Code provision, parliamentary immunity
would cover crimes with a penalty of up to 12
years. This is contrary to the Constitution,
because the Revised Penal Code cannot
expand the immunity granted under Sec. 11,
Art. VI. Therefore, Art. 145 should be deemed
amended by the 1987 Constitution.
Art. 145, Mode 1, Using force to
prevent vs. Art. 143, Acts tending to
prevent
Violation of
Parliamentary
Immunity [Art. 145
(Mode 1)]
Acts Tending to
Prevent the
Meeting of
Assembly and
Similar Bodies
[Art. 143]
As to Act Punished
Using
force,
intimidation, threats
or frauds to prevent
any member of
Congress
from
attending
the
meetings
of
Congress or of any of
its committees or
subcommittees, etc.
Page 127 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The prevention or
the projected or
actual meeting of
congress, or any of
its committees or
actual
committee,
etc.
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Chapter III: Illegal Assemblies
and Associations
a. Article 146 - Illegal Assemblies
Two (2) Modes of Commission:
1. Meeting attended by armed persons for
the purpose of committing any of the
crimes punishable under the Code
2. Meeting in which the audience is
incited to the commission of the crime
of treason, rebellion or insurrection,
sedition, or direct assault
Mode 1 vs. Mode 2
Mode 1: For the
purpose of
committing any of
the crimes
punishable under
the Code. [MAP]
Mode 2: Audience
is incited to the
commission of the
crime of treason,
insurrection,
sedition, or direct
assault [MAI]
1. There is a Meeting, a gathering or group
of persons, whether in a fixed place or
moving;
2. Meeting is attended 2.
Meeting
is
by Armed persons
attended by Any
persons, whether
armed or not;
3. Purpose of the
meeting is to commit
any of the crimes
punishable under the
Code.
3.
Audience
is
Incited
to
the
commission of the
crime of treason,
rebellion
or
insurrection,
sedition or direct
assault.
If any person present at the meeting
carries an unlicensed firearm, it will be
presumed that:
a. The purpose of the meeting is to
commit acts punishable under the
RPC; and
b. He is considered a leader or organizer
of the meeting.
b. Article 147 - Illegal Associations
The following are illegal associations [CM]:
Associations totally or partially organized for:
1. The purpose of committing any of the
Crimes punishable under the Code;
2. Some purpose contrary to public
Morals.
Persons liable:
1. Founders, directors and president of
the association;
2. Mere members of the association.
Public Morals – matters which affect the
interest of society and public convenience, not
limited to good customs [Black’s Law
Dictionary]
Illegal
Assembly
Association
Illegal Assembly
[Art. 146]
vs.
Illegal
Illegal
Association
[Art. 147]
As to Requirement of Actual Meeting
There must be
actual
meeting
assembly
an Actual meeting not
or necessary.
As to Act Punished
Persons liable for illegal assembly:
a. The organizer or leaders of the
meeting; or
b. Persons merely present at the meeting,
who must have a common intent to
commit the felony of illegal assembly.
What is punished are What is punished
the meeting and the is the act of
attendance therein
forming or
organizing
the
association
As to Persons Liable
a.
organizers
or
leaders of the meeting
b. persons present at
the meeting
Page 128 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
a.
founders,
directors,
president
b. members
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
4. Chapter IV: Assault upon, and
Resistance and Disobedience to
Persons in Authority and Their
Agents
a. Article 148 - Direct Assaults
Two (2) Modes of Commission:
1. Without public uprising, by employing
force or intimidation for the attainment of
any of the purposes enumerated in
defining the crimes of rebellion and
sedition
2. Without public uprising, by attacking,
by employing force or by seriously
intimidating or by seriously resisting
any person in authority or any of his
agents, while engaged in the
performance of official duties, or on
occasion of such performance.
Mode 1 vs. Mode 2
Mode 1. For the
attainment of
any of the
purposes of
rebellion and
sedition [EAN]
Mode 2. Acts against
any person in
authority or any of
his agents [AAPKN]
1.Offender
Employs force or
intimidation actual
meeting
or
assembly
1.Offender makes an
Attack, employs force,
makes
a
serious
intimidation, or makes a
serious resistance
2. The Aim of the
offender is to
attain any of the
purposes of the
crime of rebellion
or any of the
objects of the
crime of sedition
2.The person assaulted
is a person in Authority
or his agent;
3.At the time of the
assault, the person in
authority or his agent is
engaged in the actual
Performance of official
duties, or that he is
assaulted by reason of
the past performance of
official duties
Note: This
is
tantamount
to
rebellion
or
sedition, except
that there is no
4.Offender Knows that
public uprising.
the one he is assaulting
is a person in authority
or his agent in the
exercise of his duties.
3./5.There is No public uprising
Under Mode 2
Classifications of direct assault [SQ]:
1. Simple assault
2. Qualified assault.
Qualifying Circumstances [WP-LH]:
1. There is a Weapon employed in the
attack
2. The offender is a Public officer
3. The offender Lays Hands on a public
authority
“Person in Authority” and “Agent of a
Person in Authority”
Any person directly vested with jurisdiction,
whether as an individual or as a member of
some court or governmental corporation,
board, or commission, shall be deemed a
person in authority.
A person who, by direct provision of law or by
election or by appointment by competent
authority, is charged with the maintenance of
public order and the protection and security of
life and property, such as a barrio councilman,
barrio policeman and barangay leader and any
person who comes to the aid of persons in
authority, shall be deemed an agent of a
person in authority.
Non-Exclusive Enumeration of Persons
in Authority [Art. 152, Revised Penal
Code, as amended by PD No. 299, Sept.
19, 1973 and Batas Pambansa Blg. 873,
June 12, 1985]
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Barrio Captain
Barangay Chairman
Municipal mayor
President of sanitary division
Provincial fiscal
Teachers and Professors
Those charged with the supervision of
public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities
Lawyers in the actual performance of
their professional duties or on the
occasion of such performance
Page 129 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Non-Exclusive Enumeration of Agents
of Persons in Authority [Art. 153,
Revised Penal Code]
●
●
●
●
Barrio Councilman
Barrio Policeman
Barangay Leader
Any person who comes to the aid of
persons in authority
Public Officer Not in Authority
If the public officer is not a person in authority,
the assault on him is an aggravating
circumstance in Art. 14, no. 3 (rank). There
must be, however, intent to disregard the
victim’s rank. [Art. 14, par. 3, Revised Penal
Code]
b. Article 149 - Indirect Assaults
Elements: (FAU)
1. A person in authority or his agent is the
victim of any of the Forms of direct
assault defined in Article 148;
2. A person comes to the Aid of such
authority or his agent;
Note: A person coming to the aid of a
person in authority is deemed an agent
of a person in authority (see Art. 152).
Thus, if such person is attacked as
well, it will be Direct, not Indirect
Assault. Essentially, Indirect Assault
can only be committed if a person
coming to the aid of an AGENT of a
person in authority is attacked as well.
3. Offender makes Use of force or
intimidation upon such a person
coming to the aid of the authority or his
agent.
CRIMINAL LAW
committees, subcommittees or divisions, or by
any commission or committee chairman or
member authorized to summon witnesses;
Mode 2: By refusing to be Sworn or placed
under affirmation while being before such
legislative or constitutional body or official;
Mode 3: By refusing to Answer any legal
inquiry or to produce any books, papers,
documents, or records in his possession, when
required by them to do so in the exercise of
their functions;
Mode 4: By Restraining another from attending
as a witness in such legislative or constitutional
body;
Mode 5: By Inducing disobedience to a
summons or refusal to be sworn by any such
body or official.
d. Article 151 - Resistance and
Disobedience to a Person in Authority
or the Agents of Such Person
Mode 1 vs. Mode 2
Mode 1: Resistance
and Serious
Disobedience [PRI]
Mode 2: Simple
disobedience
[ADS]
1.
A
person
in
authority or his agent
is engaged in the
Performance of official
duty or gives a lawful
order to the offender
a. An Agent of a
person in authority
is engaged in the
performance
of
official duty or gives
a lawful order to the
offender
Note: Indirect assault presupposes that direct
assault was committed.
2. Offender Resists or b. Disobeys such
seriously
disobeys agent of a person in
such
person
in authority
authority or his agent
c. Article 150 - Disobedience to
summons issued by the National
Assembly,
its
Committees
or
Subcommittees, or divisions
3. The act of the c.
Such
offender
is
not disobedience is not
Included
in
the of a Serious nature.
provision of Articles
148, 149 and 150.
Acts Punishable: [OSARI]
Mode 1: By refusing, without legal excuse, to
Obey summons of Congress, its special or
standing committees and subcommittees, the
Constitutional
Commissions
and
its
Note: The nature of the resistance
is merely SIMPLE RESISTANCE.
SERIOUS RESISTANCE, the act
punishable as Direct Assault.
Revised Penal Code]
Page 130 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
in Art. 151
If there is
is already
[Art. 148,
CRIM2
Resistance and Serious Disobedience
The accused must have knowledge that the
person giving the order is a peace officer [US
v. Bautista, supra].
Serious Disobedience vs. Direct Assault
Serious
Disobedience
[Art. 151]
Direct Assault
[Art. 148]
Person in authority or
his agent must be in
actual performance of
his duties
Person in authority
or his agent must
be engaged in the
performance
of
official duties or he
is assaulted by
reason of the past
performance
of
official duties
Committed only by Committed in two
resisting or seriously modes (see Art.
disobeying a person in 148, Mode 2 above)
authority or his agent
Use of force in There
is
resistance is not so employed
serious
force
e. Article 152 - Persons in authority
and agents of persons in authority
Persons in Authority
Persons, whether an individual or as a member
of some court or government corporation,
directly vested with jurisdiction, power and
authority to govern and execute the laws.
Examples:
1. Barrio captain
2. Barangay Chairman
3. Municipal mayor
4. President of sanitary division
5. Provincial fiscal
6. Teachers and Professors
7. Those charged with the supervision of
public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities
Agent of Person in Authority
Person charged with: (1) the maintenance of
public order, and (2) the protection and security
of life and property.
CRIMINAL LAW
Examples:
1. Barrio Councilman
2. Barrio Policeman
3. Barangay Leader
4. Any person who comes to the aid of a
person in authority
5. Chapter V: Public Disorders
a. Article 153 - Tumults and Other
Disturbances of Public Order Acts
Punishable: [SIODB]
Mode 1: Causing any Serious disturbance in a
public place, office or establishment.
Mode
2:
Interrupting
or
disturbing
performances, functions or gatherings, or
peaceful meetings, if the act is not included in
Arts. 131 (prohibition, interruption and
dissolution of peaceful meetings) and 132
(interruption of religious worship).
Mode 3: Making any Outcry tending to incite
rebellion or sedition in any meeting,
association or public place.
Mode 4: Displaying placards or emblems
which provoke a disturbance of public order in
such place;
Mode 5: Burying with pomp the body of a
person who has been legally executed.
Qualifying Circumstance: If the disturbance
or interruption caused is of a tumultuous
character.
• Tumultuous – if caused by more than
three (3) persons who are armed or
provided with means of violence
Prohibition of Peaceful Meetings vs.
Tumultuous Disturbance
Prohibition,
Interruption and
Dissolution of
Peaceful
Meetings (Art.
131)
Tumultuous
Disturbance (Art.
153)
Offender is a public Offender is a private
officer, who is NOT individual who is NOT
a
participant a participant (stranger)
(Stranger)
Page 131 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Inciting to Sedition or Rebellion vs.
Mode 3 of Art. 153
Inciting to
Sedition or
Rebellion (Art.
131)
Mode 3 (Art. 153)
As to the manner of commission
May
be
done Done only through
through speech or speech (outcry)
writing
As to intent
Done with intent to
induce the hearers
or
readers
to
commit the crime of
rebellion or sedition
More of unconscious
outburst which is not
intentionally
calculated to induce
others to commit such
crimes
As to the Nature of the Speeches
Involved
The nature of the speeches in both acts are
either rebellious or seditious
b. Article 154 - Unlawful Use of Means
of
Publication
and
Unlawful
Utterances
Punishable Acts: [FDMP]
Mode 1: Publishing or causing to be published,
by means of printing, lithography or any other
means of publication, as news any False news
which may endanger the public order, or cause
damage to the interest or credit of the State.
Mode 2: Encouraging Disobedience to the law
or to the constituted authorities or praising,
justifying or extolling any act punished by law,
by the same means or by words, utterances or
Speeches.
Mode 3: Maliciously publishing or causing to
be published any official document or
resolution without proper authority, or before
they have been published officially.
CRIMINAL LAW
real printer’s name, or which are classified as
anonymous.
Note: Actual public disorder or actual damage
to the credit of the State is not necessary. The
mere possibility of causing such danger or
damage is sufficient, due to the phrase “which
may endanger the public order, or cause
damage to the interest or credit of the State”
[Art. 155, Revised Penal Code].
c. Article 155 - Alarms and Scandals
Punishable Acts: [DIDC]
Mode 1: Discharging any firearm, rocket,
firecracker, or other explosive within any town
or public place, calculated to cause (which
produces) alarm or danger;
Mode 2: Instigating or taking an active part in
any charivari or other disorderly meeting
offensive to another or prejudicial to public
tranquility.
Mode 3: Disturbing the public peace while
wandering about at night or while engaged in
any other nocturnal amusements.
Mode 4: Causing any disturbances or scandal
in public places while intoxicated or otherwise,
provided Art. 153 (tumults and other
disturbances of public order) is not applicable.
• Under Art. 153, disturbance must be of
a serious nature.
Note: “Calculated to cause alarm and danger”
should be “which produces alarm and danger”
according to the correct translation of the
Spanish phrase in the Revised Penal Code
(“que produzca alarma o peligro”). The
Spanish text is what is controlling in case of
doubt in interpretation of the Revised Penal
Code. [People v. Mesias, G.R. No. 45749, Jan.
29, 1938] Hence, it is the result, and not the
intent, that counts. [Art. 155, Revised Penal
Code; REYES, Book 2]
d. Article 156 - Delivering Prisoners
from Jail
Elements: [CR]
Mode 4: Printing, publishing or distributing (or
causing the same) books, pamphlets,
periodicals, or leaflets which do not bear the
1. There is a person Confined in a jail or
penal establishment; and
Page 132 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. Offender Removes therefrom such
person or helps the escape of such
person.
Consent or connivance necessary to
hold public officer guilty:
It is necessary that the public officer had
consented to, or connived in, the escape of the
prisoner under his custody or charge [Alberto
v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-31839 (1980)].
Officer must not be the custodian of
the prisoner
If the offender is a public officer who had the
prisoner in his custody or charge, he is liable
for infidelity in the custody of a prisoner under
Art. 223.
If three persons are involved, the
crimes committed are as follows:
1. Conniving with or Consenting to
Evasion [Art. 223, Revised Penal
Code] – committed by a public officer
who is in custody or charge of the
prisoner
2. Delivering Prisoners from Jail [Art. 156,
Revised Penal Code] – committed by
the stranger who helped in the escape,
or by a public officer when he is not the
custodian of the prisoner at the time the
prisoner was made to escape.
Note: If the offender is a public officer who had
the prisoner in his custody or charge, he is
liable for infidelity in the custody of a prisoner
under Article 223.
3. Evasion of service of sentence [Art. 157,
Revised Penal Code] – committed by the
prisoner who escaped
CRIMINAL LAW
6. Chapter VI: Evasion of Service
of Sentence
Evasion of Service of Sentence vs.
Evasion of Service of Sentence on the
Occasion of Calamities vs. Other
Cases of Evasion
Evasion of
Service of
Sentence
[Art. 157]
Evasion of
Service of
Sentence on
the Occasion
of Calamities
[Art. 158]
Other
Cases of
Evasion
[Art. 159]
As to the Offender
Convicted
by
final
judgment
and
is
deprived of
liberty (need
not
be
confined
e.g.
destierro)
Convicted by
final judgment
and
is
confined in a
penal
institution
Convict who
was granted
conditional
pardon
As to Circumstances Surrounding the
Evasion
Escapes
during the
term of his
imprisonment
Escapes
during
the
occasion
of
disorders,
conflagrations,
earthquakes
or
other
calamities
Violated the
terms of his
conditional
pardon
As to the Harm Inflicted
An attempt at least to evade
the penalty inflicted by the
courts upon criminals and
thus defeats the purpose of
the law of either reforming or
punishing them for having
disturbed the public order.
Page 133 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Does
not
infringe on
the right of
another
person nor
does
it
disturb the
public order;
merely an
infringement
of
the
stipulated
terms
CRIM2
Nature of Offenses
Evasion of service of sentence is a continuing
offense [Parulan v. Director of Prisons, G.R.
No. L-28519 (1968)].
a. Article 157 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence
Elements: [CSE]
1. Offender is a Convict by final judgment;
2. He is Serving sentence which consists
in the deprivation of liberty;
3. He Evades service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his
Imprisonment.
Qualifying circumstances as to
penalty imposed if such evasion or
escape takes place: [EBPC]
1. By means of unlawful Entry (this should
be by climbing or scaling the wall
(“escalamiento”), as the Spanish text is
controlling in case of doubt in
interpretation [People v. Mesias, G.R.
No. 45749, Jan. 29, 1938; Art. 157,
Revised Penal Code; REYES, Book 2]
2. By Breaking doors, windows, gates,
walls, roofs or floors;
3. By using Picklock, false keys, disguise,
deceit, violence or intimidation; or
4. Through Connivance with other
convicts or employees of the penal
institution.
Applicable to Destierro
One who, sentenced to destierro by virtue of
final judgment, and prohibited from entering the
City of Manila, enters said city within the period
of his sentence, is guilty of evasion of sentence
under Article 157 [People v. Abilong, G.R. No.
L-1960, Nov. 26, 1948].
b. Article 158 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence on the Occasion of
Disorders,
Conflagrations,
Earthquakes, or Other Calamities
Elements: [CC-DEESM-EF]
1. Offender is a Convict by final judgment,
who is confined in a penal institution;
2. There is Disorder, resulting from –
a. Conflagration;
b. Earthquake;
c. Explosion;
CRIMINAL LAW
d. Similar catastrophe; or
e. Mutiny in which he has not
participated;
3. He Evades the service of his sentence
by leaving the penal institution where
he is confined, on the occasion of such
disorder or during the mutiny;
4. He Fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the
issuance of a proclamation by the Chief
Executive announcing the passing
away of such Calamity.
Failure to Return
Leaving the penal establishment is not the
basis of criminal liability. What is punished is
the failure to return within 48 hours after the
passing of the calamity, conflagration or mutiny
had been announced.
Effect of Surrendering within 48 hours
Convicts who shall give themselves up to the
authorities within 48 hours from the issuance of
a proclamation, shall be entitled to the
deduction provided for under Art. 98 (one-fifth
of the period of his sentence).
Note: Under R.A. No. 10592, amending Art. 98
(which makes reference to Art. 158), those who
stay despite the calamities shall be given a twofifths reduction in their sentences.
c. Article 159 - Other Cases of Evasion
of Service of Sentence
Elements: [CGV]
1. Offender was a Convict;
2. He was Granted a conditional pardon by the
Chief Executive; and
3. He Violated any of the conditions of such
Pardon.
Conditional Pardon
A contract between the Chief Executive, who
grants the pardon, and the convict, who
accepts it. Since it is a contract, the pardoned
convict is bound to fulfill its conditions and
accept all its consequences according to its
strict terms [People v. Pontillas, G.R. No. L45267 (1938)].
Guilty of a Subsequent Offense
The determination of the occurrence of a
breach of a condition of a pardon, and the
Page 134 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
proper consequences of such breach, may be
a judicial act consisting of trial for and
conviction of violation of a conditional pardon
under Article 159 of the Revised Penal Code
[Torres v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 76872 (1987)].
Note: Of course, “[w]here the President opts to
proceed under Section 64 (i) of the Revised
Administrative Code [as opposed to the
determination being a judicial act], no judicial
pronouncement of guilt of a subsequent crime
is necessary, much less conviction therefor by
final judgment of a court, in order that a convict
may be recommended for the violation of his
conditional pardon.” This determination – of
the occurrence of a breach of a condition of a
pardon, and the proper consequences of such
breach – is a purely executive act and not
subject to judicial scrutiny. There is no Due
Process violation in this case because the
conditionally pardoned convict had already
been accorded judicial due process in his trial
and conviction for the offense for which he was
conditionally pardoned [Torres v. Gonzales,
G.R. No. 76872 (1987)].
7. Chapter VII: Commission of
Another Crime During Service of
Penalty Imposed for Another
Previous Offense
CRIMINAL LAW
Exception: If by reason of his conduct, he is
deemed not worthy of such clemency
As to the act committed
The first crime for which the offender is serving
sentence need not be a felony [People v.
Peralta, G.R. No. L-19069 (1968)].
The word “another” does not mean that the new
felony need be different from the one for which
the offender is serving sentence [People v.
Yabut, 58 Phil. 499 (1933)].
Quasi-Recidivism vs. Recidivism vs.
Reiteracion
Offense
QuasiRecidivism
The 2 offenses need not be
embraced in the same title of
the Code
Recidivism
There was a 2nd conviction
for an offense embraced in
the same title of the Code
Reiteracion
Offender
has
been
previously punished of:
1. One (1) offense – to which
the law attaches equal or
greater penalty; or
2. Two (2) offenses – to
which the law attaches
lighter penalty
a. Article 160 - Commission of another
crime during service of penalty
imposed for another previous offense
- Penalty
Offenses need not be
embraced in the same title of
the Code.
Elements: [CN]
1. Offender was already Convicted by
final judgment of one offense;
2. He committed a New felony before
beginning to serve such sentence or
while serving the same.
Pardon
Pardon is to be given to a convict who:
1. Is not a habitual criminal;
2. Is already at the age of seventy (70)
years;and
3. Has already served out his original
sentence or if he shall be completing it
after reaching such age
Nature
MultiRecidivism/
Habitual
Delinquency
Requisites [T-FIRE, 10-2,
10-3]
a. Offender had been
convicted of any of the
crimes of [T-FIRE]:
Theft; Falsification;
serious or less serious
physical Injuries;
Robbery; Estafa.
b. After conviction or after
serving his sentence, he
again committed, and,
within 10 years from his
release or first
conviction, he was again
convicted of any of the
Page 135 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
said crimes for the 2nd
time
c. After his conviction of, or
after serving sentence
for the second offense,
he again committed,
and, within 10 years
from his last release or
last conviction, he was
again convicted of any of
said offenses, the 3rd
time or oftener. [Art. 62,
RPC]
Note: Computation of the 10year period can start from
either the conviction OR
release of the accused in his
previous crime and shall end
with the date of his conviction
in the subsequent crime
[People v. Lacsamana, G.R.
No. L-46270 (1938)].
Recidivism Inherent in
Habitual Delinquency
A habitual delinquent is
necessarily a recidivist. In
penalizing
him,
the
aggravating circumstance of
recidivism has to be taken
into account. However, for
the purpose of fixing the
additional penalty, recidivism
cannot be taken as an
aggravating circumstance for
the reason that it is inherent
in
habitual
delinquency
[People v. Tolentino, G.R.
No. L-48740 (1942)].
See: Discussion under Multiple Offenders for
greater detail
Page 136 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
D.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PUBLIC INTEREST [ARTS.
161 - 187]
SECTION 2. Counterfeiting Coins
1. Chapter I: Forgeries
Elements: [FMC]
SECTION 1. Forging The Seal of The
Government of The Philippine Islands,
the Signature or Stamp of the Chief
Executive
1. Acts of Counterfeiting
a. Article 161 – Counterfeiting the
Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippine Islands, Forging the
Signature or Stamp of the Chief
Executive
Acts Punished [SSS]:
Forging the:
1. Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines;
2. Signature of the President; or
3. Stamp of the President.
Forgery
Falsely making or materially altering, with
intent to defraud, any writing which, if genuine,
might apparently be of legal efficacy or the
foundation of a legal liability. [Black’s Law
Dictionary]
b. Article 162 – Using Forged
Signature or Counterfeit Seal or
Stamp
c. Article 163 – Making and Importing
and Uttering False Coins
1. There be False or counterfeited coins;
2. Offender either Made, imported or
uttered such coins;
3. In case of uttering such false or
counterfeited coins, he Connived with
the counterfeiters or importers.
Kinds of Coins Covered by the Crime
1. Silver coins of the Philippines or coin of
the Central Bank (CB);
2. Coins of minor coinage of the
Philippines or CB; or
3. Coin of the currency of a foreign
country [People v. Tin Ching Ting, G.R.
No. L-4620, Jan. 30, 1952]
“To utter”
To utter includes delivery or the act of giving
them away. A counterfeited coin is uttered
when it is paid, when the offender is caught
counting the counterfeited coins preparatory to
the act of delivering them, even though the
utterer may not obtain the gain he intended
[Decisions of the Supreme Court of Spain]
Rationale for punishing the fabrication of a
coin withdrawn from circulation: There is a
possibility that the counterfeiter may later apply
his trade to the making of coins in actual
circulation [People v. Kong Leon, C.A., 48 O.G.
664].
d. Article 164 – Mutilation of Coins
Acts Punished [MI]
Elements: [SKU]
1. The Great Seal of the Republic was
counterfeited or the signature or stamp
of the Chief Executive was forged by
another person;
2. Offender Knew of the counterfeiting or
forgery; and
3. He Used the counterfeit seal or forged
signature or stamp.
Note: Offender under this article should not be
the forger. Otherwise, he will be penalized
under Article 161. [Art. 161, Revised Penal
Code]
1. Mutilating coins of the legal currency;
or
2. Importing or uttering such mutilated
coins
Elements of Mutilation: [LG]
1. Coin mutilated is of Legal tender; and
2. Offender Gains from the precious
metal dust abstracted from the coin
“Mutilation” means to take off part of the
metal either by filling it or substituting it for
another metal of inferior quality [People v. Tin
Ching Ting, G.R. No. L-4620, Jan. 30, 1952].
Page 137 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Foreign coins are not covered in this article.
[Art. 164, Revised Penal Code]
CRIMINAL LAW
counterfeiter, mutilator or importer of the coins.
[Supreme Court of Spain, June 28, 1877]
Elements of Importing or Uttering
Mutilated Coins: [IC]
Making and Importing and Uttering vs.
Mutilating
1. Offender Imported or uttered mutilated
coins; and
2. In case of uttering, the offender must
have Connived with the mutilator or
importer
PD 247: Prohibiting and Penalizing
Defacement,
Mutilation,
Tearing,
Burning or Destruction of Central
Bank Notes and Coins
It shall be unlawful for any person to willfully
deface, mutilate, tear, burn or destroy, in any
manner whatsoever, currency notes and coins
issued by the Central Bank of the Philippines.
Making and
Importing
and Uttering
[Art. 163]
Mutilating
[Art. 164]
Selling of
False or
Mutilated
Coin
[Art. 165]
Punishable Acts
That a false or
counterfeit
coin is made
imported
or
uttered.
e. Article 165 – Selling of False or
Mutilated Coin, without Connivance
That a coin
is
mutilated,
or
that
such
mutilated
coin
is
imported or
uttered.
That a coin is
counterfeited
or mutilated
or
actually
uttered.
As to Foreign Coins
Acts Punished:
1. Possession of coin, counterfeited or
mutilated by another person, with intent
to utter the same, knowing that it is
false or mutilated; or
2. Actually uttering such false or mutilated
coin, knowing the same to be false or
mutilated.
Mode 1 vs. Mode 2
Mode 1:
Possession with
intent to utter false
or mutilated coin
Mode 2: Actually
uttering such false
or mutilated coin
Elements: [PIK]
1. Possession of
counterfeited
or
mutilated coin;
2. With Intent to
utter; and
3. With Knowledge
of such defect/s.
Elements: [UK]
1. Actually Uttering
such
false
or
mutilated coin; and
2. With Knowledge of
such defect/s.
Constructive Possession
Counterfeiting
of
foreign
currency
is
punishable
Mutilating
foreign
coins is not
punishable
under this
article
Counterfeiting
of
foreign
currency
is
punishable
Requirement of Legal Tender
Coins must be Must be of Not required
silver coins of legal
to be legal
the Phil. or tender
tender
CB, or coin of
minor coinage
or currency of
a
foreign
country
Requirement of Connivance in case of
Uttering
There must be
connivance
with
the
counterfeiters
or importers
Possession prohibited in this article is not only
actual and physical possession, but also that of
a constructive one, or the subjection of the
thing to one’s control. [People v. Umali, CA 46
O.G. 2648] The possessor should not be the
Page 138 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
There must
be
connivance
with
the
mutilator or
importer in
case
of
uttering.
No
requirement
of connivance
in case of
uttering.
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
SECTION 3. Forging Treasury or Bank
Notes, Obligations and Securities;
Importing and Uttering False or
Forged Notes, Obligations and
Securities
f. Article 166 – Forging Treasury or
Bank Notes or Other Documents
Payable to Bearer; Importing and
Uttering Such False or Forged Notes
and Documents
Elements: [B-FImU]
1. There is an instrument payable to
Bearer; and
2. The offender commits any of the
following acts:
a. Forged or falsified a treasury or
bank note or a document
payable to bearer;
b. Imported such false or forged
obligations or notes; or
c. Uttered such false or forged
obligations
or
notes
in
connivance with the forgers or
importers.
“Forging” – By giving any treasury or bank
note, or any instrument payable to bearer, or to
order the appearance of a true and genuine
document. [Art. 169, Revised Penal Code]
“Falsification” – By erasing, substituting,
counterfeiting or altering by any means, the
figures, letters, words, or signs contained
therein. [Id.]
When Payable to Bearer: [N.I.L.]
1. When expressed to be so payable
2. When payable to a person named
therein or bearer
3. When payable to the order of a fictitious
or non-existing person, and such fact
was known to the person making it so
payable
4. When the name of the payee does not
purport to be the name of any person
5. When the only or last endorsement is
an endorsement in blank.
g. Article 167 – Counterfeiting,
Importing, and Uttering Instruments
Not Payable to Bearer
Elements: [OFC]
1. There is an Instrument payable to
Order or other document of credit not
payable to bearer;
2. Offender either Forged, imported or
uttered such instrument; and
3. In case of uttering, he Connived with
the forger or importer.
When Payable to Order
An instrument is payable to order where it is
drawn payable to the order of a specified
person or to him or his order. [N.I.L]
2. Acts of Forgery
h. Article 168 – Illegal Possession and
Use of False Treasury or Bank Notes
and Other Instruments of Credit
Elements: [N-KUPo]
1. Any treasury or bank Note or certificate
or other obligation and security:
2. Offender Knows that any of those
instruments is forged or falsified; and
a. There is an instrument payable
to bearer, to order or other
document of credit not payable
to bearer;
b. Said instrument is forged or
falsified by another person;
3. He either –
a. Uses any of such forged or
falsified instruments; or
b. Possesses the same, with
intent to use
Presumption of Material Author
The rule is that if a person had in his
possession a falsified document and he made
use of it, taking advantage of it and profiting
thereby, the presumption is that he is the
material author of the falsification [People v.
Sendaydiego, G.R. No. L-33254 (1978)].
Page 139 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
i. Article 169 – How Forgery is
Committed
Acts punished [GE]
1. By Giving to a treasury or bank note or
any instrument payable to bearer or to
order
mentioned
therein,
the
appearance of a true and genuine
document; or
2. By Erasing, substituting, counterfeiting,
or altering by any means the figures,
letters, words, or sign contained
therein.
Possession and Knowledge
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Offender Alters the same;
3. He has no proper Authority; and
4. Alteration has Changed the meaning of
the documents.
Falsification vs. Forgery
Forgery
[Art. 169]
Falsification
[Art. 170]
As used in Article
169, forgery refers to
the falsification and
counterfeiting
of
treasury or bank
notes
or
any
instruments payable
to bearer or to roder.
The commission of
any of the 8 acts
mentioned in Article
171 on legislative
(only the act if
making alteration) or
public or official,
commercial
or
private documents
or
wireless
or
telegraph
messages.
Possession of genuine treasury notes of the
Philippines, any of “the figures, letters, words
or signs contained” in which had been erased
and/or altered, with knowledge of such erasure
and alteration, and with the intent to use such
notes in enticing another to advance funds for
the avowed purpose of financing the
manufacture of counterfeit treasury notes of
the Philippines, is punishable under Art. 168 in
relation to Art. 166 (1) [Del Rosario v. People,
G.R. No. L-16806 (1961)].
k. Article 171 – Falsification by Public
Officer, Employee or Notary or
Ecclesiastical Minister
How Forgery May be Committed
Elements: [PAF - CApAUDMAI]
Forgery can be committed through the use of
genuine paper bills that have been withdrawn
from circulation, by giving them the
appearance of some other true and genuine
document [People v. Galano, C.A. 54 O.G.
5899].
Section 4. Falsification of
Legislative, Public, Commercial,
and Private Documents and
Wireless,
Telegraph
and
Telephone Messages
3. Acts of Falsification
j. Article 170 – Falsification
Legislative Documents
of
Elements: [BAACh]
1. There is a Bill, resolution or ordinance
enacted or approved or pending
approval by either House of the
Legislature or any provincial board or
municipal council;
1. Offender is a Public officer, employee,
or notary public;
2. He takes Advantage of his official
position; and
3. He Falsifies a document by committing
any of the following acts:
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting,
signature
or
rubric;
b. Causing it to Appear that
persons have participated in
any act or proceeding when
they did not in fact so
participate;
c. Attributing to persons who
have participated in an act or
proceeding statements other
than those in fact made by
them;
d. Making Untruthful statements
in a narration of facts;
e. Altering true Dates;
f. Making any alteration or
intercalation in a genuine
document which changes its
Meaning;
Page 140 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
g. Issuing in an Authenticated
form:
• A document purporting to
be a copy of an original
document when no such
original exists, or
• Including in such a copy a
statement contrary to, or
different from, that of the
genuine original; and
h. Intercalating any instrument or
note relative to the issuance
thereof in a protocol, registry,
or official book.
Ecclesiastical Minister’s Liability
The ecclesiastical minister is liable with respect
to any record or document that its falsification
may affect the civil status of persons [Art. 171,
Revised Penal Code].
Offender Takes Advantage of his
Official Position When:
1. He has the duty to make or prepare, or
intervene in the preparation of the
document; or
2. He has the official custody of the
document he falsifies. [Id.]
Par. 1: Counterfeiting or imitating any
handwriting, signature or rubric. [Id.]
2. Such person/s
participate.
CRIMINAL LAW
did Not in fact
Par. 3: Attributing to persons who
have participated in an act or
proceeding statements other than
those in fact made by them [Id.]
Elements: [PSA]
1. Person/s Participated in an act or
proceeding
2. Such person/s made Statements in
that act or proceeding; and
3. Offender, in making a document,
Attributed to such person/s statements
other than those they in fact made.
Par. 4: Making untruthful statements
in a narration of facts [Id.]
Elements: [D-OFW]
1. Offender makes in a Document
statements in a narration of facts
2. He has a legal Obligation to disclose
truth of facts
3. Facts narrated are absolutely False;
and
4. Perversion of truth in the narration was
made with the Wrongful intent of
injuring a third person.
Narration of Facts Required
Acts Punished: [CI]
1. Counterfeiting
imitating
any
handwriting, signature or rubric; or
a. There should be an intent to
imitate, or an attempt to imitate
b. Two signatures, the genuine
and the forged, should bear
some resemblance.
2. Imitating (Feigning) - simulating a
signature, handwriting or rubric out of
one which does not actually exist.
Par. 2: Causing it to appear that
persons have participated in any act
or proceeding when they did not in
fact so participate. [Id.]
Elements: [AN]
1. Offender caused it to Appear in a
document that a person/s participated
in an act or proceeding.
There must be a narration of facts, not a
conclusion of law [Beradio v. CA, G.R. Nos. L49483-86 (1981)]. The person making the
narration of facts must be aware of the falsity
of the facts narrated by him [U.S. Gonzaga, 14
Phil. 562].
Falsification by Omission
There can be falsification by omission. An
assistant bookkeeper is guilty of falsification by
intentionally not putting a record in his personal
account of chits and destroying them so he
could avoid paying the same [People v. Dizon,
G.R. No. 144026 (2006)].
Par. 5: Altering true dates [Id.]
Elements: [DA]
1. Date must be essential
2. Alteration of the date must affect the
veracity of the documents or the effects
Page 141 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
thereof (such as dates of birth,
marriage, or death).
Note: This pertains to alteration of a true date
(not a non-existent date). An example would be
the alteration of dates on official receipts to
prevent discovery of malversation [Typoco Jr v.
People, G.R. Nos. 221857 & 222020 (2017)].
Par 7: Issuing in an authenticated
form a document purporting to be a
copy of an original document when no
such original exists, or including in
such a copy a statement contrary to,
or different from, that of the genuine
original [Id.]
Date Must be Essential
Persons Liable
Falsification under this paragraph only when
the date mentioned in the document is
essential. The alteration of the date or dates in
a document must affect either the veracity of
the document or the effects thereof [People v.
Reodica and Cordero, 62 Phil. 567].
Dates in the police blotter, book of records
of arrest, bail bond and return of warrant of
arrest are essential because the dates will
show that there was a delay in the preliminary
investigation of the case, in violation of the
circular of the CFI [People v. Montano and
Cabagsang, 57 Phil. 599].
Par. 6: Making any alteration or
intercalation in a genuine document
which changes its meaning [Id.]
Elements: [A-GAF]
1. There be an Alteration (change) or
intercalation (insertion) on a document.
2. It was made on a Genuine document.
3. Alteration or intercalation has changed
the meaning of the document.
4. Change made the document speak
something False
Change or Insertion Must Affect the
Integrity of the Document
Change or insertion must affect the integrity or
effects of the document. Furthermore, the
alteration should make the document speak
something false [People v. Pacana, 47 Phil.
48]. Otherwise, it would merely be a correction
[U.S. v. Mateo, 25 Phil. 324].
1. Custodian– Authentication of a
document can only be made by the
custodian or the one who prepared and
retained a copy of the original.
a. Purporting to be a copy of the
original when no such original
exists.
b. Including in a copy a statement
contrary to, or different from,
that of the genuine original.
2. Private Person - a private person who
cooperates with a public officer in the
falsification of a public document is
guilty of the crime and incurs the same
liability and penalty [U.S. v. Ponte, 20
Phil. 379].
Par. 8. Intercalating any instrument or
note relative to the issuance thereof in
a protocol, registry or official book.
Pars. 1 to 5
Pars. 6 to 8
May be a genuine There must be a
(later falsified) or an genuine document .
entirely
fabricated
document.
l. Article 172 – Falsification by Private
Individual and Use of Falsified
Documents
Types of Documents:
Type of
Document
Public
Document
Description
A
document
created,
executed or issued by a public
official in response to the
exigencies of the spublic
service, or in the execution of
which
a
public
official
intervened [US v. Asensi,
Page 142 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
G.R. No. 11165 (1916)].
Official
Document
A document which is issued
by a public official in the
exercise of the functions of his
office. Note: An official
document is also a public
document as it falls within the
larger class called public
documents [US v. Asensi,
G.R. No. 11165 (1916)].
Private
Document
A
deed
or
instrument
executed by a private person
without the intervention of a
notary public or other person
legally authorized, by which
document some disposition or
agreement
is
proved,
evidenced or set forth [US v.
Orera, G.R. No. 3810 (1907)].
Commercial Any document defined and
Document
regulated by the Code of
Commerce or any other
commercial law. They are
used by merchants or
businesspersons to promote
or facilitate trade or credit
transactions [Malabanan v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.
186329, 186584, 198598
(2017)].
Mode 1: Falsification of public, official
or commercial document by a private
individual
Elements: [NoFaDo]
1. Offender is a Private individual or
Public officer or employee who did Not
take advantage of his official position;
2. He committed any act of Falsification
(Art. 171);
3. The falsification was committed in a
public,
official,
or
commercial
Document or letter of exchange.
Mode 2: Falsification of
document by any person
private
Elements: [F-eII-PD]
1. Offender committed any of the acts of
Falsification except Article 171(7), that
is:
a. Issuing in an authenticated
form a document purporting to
be a copy of an original
document when no such
original exists, or
b. Including in such a copy a
statement contrary to, or
different from, that of the
genuine original;
2. Falsification was committed in any
Private document;
3. Falsification causes Damage to a third
party or at least the falsification was
committed with intent to cause such
damage.
Mode 3: Use of falsified document
Elements in introducing in a judicial
proceeding [KFI]
1. Offender Knew that the document was
falsified by another person;
2. The False document is in Articles 171
or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He Introduced said document in
evidence in any judicial proceeding.
Elements in use
transaction [KEUD]
in
any
other
1. Offender Knew that a document was
falsified by another person;
2. False document is Embraced in
Articles 171 or 172 (1 or 2);
3. He Used such document;
4. The use caused Damage to another or
at least used with intent to cause
damage.
Wrongful Intent Not Required in Public
Documents
General Rule: Wrongful intent is required in
falsification of private documents [See U.S. v.
Paraiso, 1 Phil. 127]. Falsification through
imprudence implies lack of such intent, thus
there is no crime of falsification of a private
document through negligence or imprudence.
Page 143 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Exceptions: In case of public and
commercial documents: The existence of a
wrongful intent to injure a third person is not
necessary when the falsified document is a
public document [Siquian v. People, supra].
In this particular crime, the controlling
consideration lies in the public character of a
document; and the existence of any prejudice
caused to third persons or, at least, the intent
to cause such damage becomes immaterial
[Goma v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 168437
(2009)].
This applies as well to commercial documents,
because as to this kind of document, a credit is
sought to be protected [See People v. Go, G.R.
No. 191015, Aug. 6, 2014].
Presumption
The possessor of a falsified document is
presumed to be the author of the falsification
[People v. Manansala, G.R. No. L-38948
(1933)].
Prescription
The prescriptive period commences from the
time the offended party had constructive notice
of the alleged forgery after the document was
registered with the Register of Deeds [People
v. Villalon, G.R. No. 43659 (1990)].
Falsification by
Public Officer,
Employee or
Notary or
Ecclesiastical
Minister [Art. 171]
Falsification by
Private Individual
and Use of
Falsified
Documents [Art.
172]
As to Offender
Committed by any Committed by any
public
officer, private individual, or
employee, or notary any person who
commits
such
punishable acts.
As to Acts Committed
Acts
involve
falsification
of
documents
by
CApAUDMAI (See:
Art. 171 discussion).
Acts
involve
falsification
of
documents
by
CApAUDMAI (See:
Art. 171 discussion).
Documents
Page 144 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
falsified
may
pertain to: Any
public or official
document, or letter of
exchange,
or
commercial
documents
CRIM2
m. Article 173 – Falsification of
Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and
Telephone Messages, and Use of Said
Falsified Messages
Mode 1: Uttering fictitious wireless,
telegraph or telephone message
Elements: [OEU]
1. Offender is an Officer or Employee of
the government or an officer or
employee of a private corporation,
engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone
message; and
2. He Utters fictitious wireless, cable,
telegraph or telephone message of any
system.
Mode 2: Falsifying wireless, telegraph
or telephone message
Elements: [OEF]
1. Offender is an Officer or Employee of
the government or an officer or
employee of a private corporation,
engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone
message; and
2. He Falsifies wireless, cable, telegraph
or telephone message of any system.
Mode 3: Using such falsified message
Elements: [KUR]
1. Offender Knew that wireless, cable,
telegraph, or telephone message was
falsified by an officer or employee of
the government or an officer or
employee of a private corporation
engaged in the service of sending or
receiving wireless, cable or telephone
message;
2. He Used such falsified dispatch; and
3. The use Resulted in the prejudice of a
third party or at least there was intent
to cause such prejudice.
CRIMINAL LAW
business of sending or receiving wireless,
telegraph or telephone messages. But a
private individual can be held criminally liable
as principal by inducement. [See People v.
Yamson-Dumancas, 320 SCRA 584, G.R. No.
13352728, Dec. 13, 1999]
SECTION 5. Falsification of Medical
Certificates, Certificates of Merit Or
Service and The Like
n. Article 174 – False Medical
Certificates, False Certificates of
Merits of Service, Etc.
Persons liable [Ph-PO-Pr]
1. Physician or surgeon - issues a false
certificate in connection with the
practice of his profession (it must refer
to the illness or injury of a person);
2. Public Officer - issues a false certificate
of merit of service, good conduct or
similar circumstances; or
3. Private person - falsifies a certificate
falling within the classes mentioned in
the two preceding subdivisions.
o. Article
Certificates
175
–
Using
False
Elements: [IKU]
1. False certificate was Issued by the
following:
a. Physician or surgeon issues a
false Medical certificate, in
connection with the practice of
his profession;
b. Public officer issues a false
certificate of Merit of service,
good conduct or similar
circumstances;
c. Private Person falsifies a
certificate falling within the 2
preceding subdivisions.
2. Offender Knows that the certificate was
false;
3. He Uses the same.
Employee of a Corporation
A private individual cannot be a principal by
direct participation in falsification of telegraphic
dispatches under Article 173, unless he is an
employee of a corporation engaged in the
Page 145 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
SECTION 6. Manufacturing, Importing
And Possession of Instruments or
Implements
Intended
for
the
Commission of Falsification
p. Article 176 – Manufacturing and
Possession
of
Instruments
or
Implements for Falsification
CRIMINAL LAW
The mere act of knowingly and falsely
representing oneself to be an officer is
sufficient. It is not necessary that he perform an
act pertaining to a public officer [Art. 177,
Revised Penal Code; See Gigantoni v. People,
No. L-74727, Jun 16, 1988, 162 SCRA 158,
162-163].
Mode 2: Usurpation of Official
Functions (excess of authority)
Acts punished: [MII]
1. Making or Introducing into the
Philippines any stamps, dies, marks, or
other instruments or implements for
counterfeiting or falsification; or
2. Possession with Intent to use the
instruments
or
implements
for
counterfeiting or falsification made in or
introduced into the Philippines by
another person.
Constructive Possession
As in Article 165, the possession contemplated
here is possession in general, that is, not only
actual, physical possession, but also
constructive possession or the subjection of
the thing to one’s control [People v. Andrada,
C.A. 64 O.G. 5751].
The implements confiscated need not form a
complete set [People v. Santiago et al., C.A. 48
O.G. 4401].
2. Chapter II: Other Falsities
SECTION 1. Usurpation of Authority,
Rank, Title, and Improper Use of
Names, Uniforms and Insignia
a. Article 177 – Usurpation
Authority or Official Functions
of
Mode 1: Usurpation of Authority (no
connection
with
the
office
represented)
Elements: [KO]
1. Offender Knowingly and falsely
represents himself;
2. As an Officer, agent or representative
of any department or agency of the
Philippine government or of any foreign
government.
Elements: [PAP-WiL]
1. Offender Performs any act;
2. Act pertains to any person in Authority
or public officer of the Philippine
government
or
any
foreign
government, or any agency thereof;
3. Under Pretense of official position;
4. Without being Lawfully entitled to do
so.
In usurpation of official functions, it is essential
that the offender should have performed an act
pertaining to a person in authority or public
officer, in addition to other requirements [Art.
177, Revised Penal Code; See Gigantoni v.
People, No. L-74727, Jun 16, 1988, 162 SCRA
158, 162-163].
Good Faith as Defense
In prosecutions for usurpation of official
functions, good faith is recognized as a
defense [Ruzol v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.
186739-960 (2013)].
b. Article 178 – Using Fictitious and
Concealing True Name
Mode 1: Using Fictitious Name
Elements: [NaP-CED]
1. Offender uses a Name other than his
real name;
2. He uses the fictitious name Publicly;
3. Purpose of use is to:
a. Conceal a crime;
b. Evade the execution of a
judgment; or
c. Cause Damage
Damage Must be to Public Interest
If the purpose is for causing damage, it must be
damage to public interest which is the essence
of the felonies under the Title. If it is damage to
Page 146 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
private interest, the crime will be estafa under
Art 315 2(a) [Art. 178, Revised Penal Code;
See U.S. v. To Lee Piu, G.R. No. 11522
(1916)].
Mode 2: Concealing True Name
Elements: [CoP]
1. Offender Conceals his true name and
other personal circumstances;
2. Purpose is only to conceal his identity.
Use of Fictitious Name vs. Concealment
of True Name
Use of Fictitious
Name
Element of Publicity
Concealing True
Name
Publicity
necessary
not
Purpose
is
to Merely to conceal
conceal a crime, identity.
evade execution of
judgment,
cause
damage
c. Article 179 – Illegal Use of Uniforms
and Insignia
CRIMINAL LAW
other official uniform, decoration or
regalia of a foreign State or one nearly
resembling the same, with intent to
deceive or mislead. [Sec. 3]
3. EO No. 297 – punishes the illegal
manufacture, sale, distribution and use
of PNP uniforms, insignias and other
SECTION 2. False Testimony
d. Article 180 – False Testimony
Against a Defendant
Elements: [P-TK-A/C]
1. There is a criminal Proceeding;
2. Offender Testifies falsely under oath
against the defendant therein;
3. Offender Knows that it is false;
4. Defendant against whom the false
testimony is given is either Acquitted or
Convicted in a final judgment.
Liability of Witness
A witness who gave the false testimony is liable
even if his testimony was not considered by the
court. There is no such qualification in the
provision, as whether the defendant is
convicted or acquitted the person who gave
false testimony is punished [Art. 180, Revised
Penal Code]
Elements: [Us-ON-I]
1. Offender makes Use of insignia,
uniforms or dress;
2. The insignia, uniforms or dress
pertains to an Office Not held by such
person or a class of persons of which
he is not a member;
3. Said insignia, uniform or dress is used
publicly and Improperly.
Note: Wearing the uniform of an imaginary
office is not punishable [Art. 179, Revised
Penal Code].
Intent to Deceive
General Rule: The offender must make use of
insignia, uniforms or dresses with intent to
deceive.
Exceptions: Intent is not necessary under:
1. RA No. 492 – punishes the wearing of
insignia, badge or emblem of rank of
the members of the AFP. [Sec. 2]
2. RA No. 75 – punishes the unauthorized
wearing of any naval, military, police or
Finality of Judgment
Complainant must wait for the finality of
judgment in the case where the false testimony
was given because the penalty for the violation
of Art. 180 depends upon the penalty imposed
by the court in the case of the defendant,
wherein the false testimony was given.
● Defendant - death; False tesitifer reclusion temporal
● Defendant - reclusion perpetua or
reclusion temporal; False tesitifer prision mayor
● Defendant - any other afflictive penalty;
False tesitifer - prision correccional
● Defendant - correctional penalty, fine,
or acquitted; False tesitifer - reclusion
temporal
Rule: Defendant must be sentenced to at least
a correctional penalty (Prision correccional,
Arresto mayor, Suspension,or Destierro), or a
fine, or must be acquitted.
Page 147 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Hence, when the accused is sentenced by
arresto menor, he shall not be liable for false
testimony [Reyes, Book II].
● Reason: Arresto menor is a light
penalty, hence not contemplated by
Art. 180(4)
e. Article 181 – False Testimony
Favorable to the Defendant
CRIMINAL LAW
Perjury
Perjury is a crime other than false testimony in
criminal cases or false testimony in civil cases,
which are perversions of truth in judicial
proceedings [false testimony under Arts. 180 to
182]; it is an offense which covers false oaths
not taken in the course of judicial proceedings
[US v. Estraña, G.R. No. 5751 (1910)].
Elements of Perjury: [MaBe-WiRe]
Elements: [GFC]
1. A person Gives false testimony;
2. In Favor of the defendant;
3. In a Criminal case.
Testimony need not be Beneficial to
the Defendant
The testimony need not be beneficial to the
defendant. It is not necessary that the
testimony should directly influence the decision
of acquittal, it is sufficient that it was given with
the intent to favor the accused. [Reyes, Book
II]
f. Article 182 – False Testimony in Civil
Cases
Elements: [FaC-RK-KMI]
1. False testimony is given in a Civil case;
2. Testimony Relates to the issues
presented in said case;
3. Offender Knows that testimony is false;
4. Testimony is Malicious; and
5. It was given with an Intent to affect the
issues in said case.
Suspension of Criminal Action
Pending the determination of the falsity of the
subject testimonies in the civil case, the
criminal action for false testimony must be
suspended. [Reyes, Book II]
g. Article 183 – False Testimony in
Other Cases and Perjury in Solemn
Affirmation
1. Offender Makes a statement under
oath or executes an affidavit upon a
material matter;
2. Statement or affidavit is made Before a
competent officer, authorized to
receive and administer oaths;
3. Offender makes a Willful and
deliberate assertion of a falsehood in
the statement or affidavit;
4. The sworn statement or affidavit
containing the falsity is Required by
law; made for a legal purpose.
No Perjury through Negligence or
Imprudence
This is because of the requirement that the
assertion of a falsehood be made willfully and
deliberately. Hence, good faith or lack of malice
is a defense in perjury. [Id]
Subornation of Perjury
Subornation of perjury is committed by a
person who knowingly and willfully procures
another to swear falsely and the witness
suborned does testify under circumstances
rendering him guilty of perjury as a principal by
inducement [US v. Ballena, 18 Phil. 382].
The fact that subornation of perjury is not
expressly penalized in the Revised Penal Code
does not mean that the direct induction of a
person by another to commit perjury has
ceased to be a crime, because said crime is
fully within the scope of that defined in Art. 17
(2), RPC [People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 45618,
(1938)].
Material vs. Relevant vs. Pertinent
[Reyes]
Acts Punished [TM]
1. Falsely Testifying under oath; or
2. Making a false affidavit.
Note: The false testimony should not be in a
judicial proceeding [Diaz v. People, G.R. No. L65006 (1990)].
Material
Relevant
Pertinent
Directed to Tends in any Concerns
prove a fact reasonable
collateral
in issue
degree
to matters
Page 148 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
establish
probability or
improbability
of a fact in
issue
which make
more or less
probable the
proposition
at issue
Note: There is no perjury if the sworn statement
is not important, essential or material [US v.
Jurado, G.R. No. 10719].
Perjury vs. Untruthful Statements in a
Narration of Facts
Perjury
[Art. 183]
Untruthful
Statements in a
Narration of Facts
[Art. 171 par. 4]
Statement is made Statement is made in
before a competent a document, in a
officer, under oath.
narration of facts.
h. Article 184 – Offering
Testimony in Evidence
False
Elements: [OK-Ma]
1. Offender Offers in evidence a false
witness or testimony;
2. He Knows that the witness or the
testimony was false;
3. The offer was Made in any judicial or
official proceeding.
Offer of Evidence
Offer of evidence begins at the moment a
witness is called to the stand and interrogated
by counsel. The witness must testify. [Rule
132, Rules of Court]
3. Chapter III: Frauds
SECTION
1.
Machinations,
Monopolies and Combinations
a. Article 185 – Machinations in Public
Auctions
Crime is Consummated by: [SA]
1. Mere Solicitation of gift or promise as
consideration for not bidding, or
2. By mere Attempt to cause prospective
bidders to stay away from an auction.
Mode 1: Soliciting
Gifts or Promises
Mode 2: Attempting
to cause bidders to
stay away by
threats, gifts,
promises or any
other artifice
1. There is a Public auction
2. Offender Solicits
any gift or a promise
from any of the
bidders
2. Offender Attempts
to cause the bidders
to stay
away from that public
auction
3. Such gift or
promise
is
the
Consideration for
his refraining from
taking part in that
public auction
3. It is done by
Threats,
gifts,
promises or any other
artifice
4. Offender has the Intent to cause the
reduction of the price of the thing auctioned.
b. [REPEALED] Article 186
Monopolies and Combinations
Restraint of Trade
–
in
Note: This article has been repealed by the
Philippine Competition Act, which was signed
into law on July 21, 2015.
SECTION 2. Frauds in Commerce and
Industry
c. Article 187 – Importation and
Disposition of Falsely Marked Articles
or Merchandise Made of Gold, Silver,
or other Precious Metals or their
Alloys
Elements: [Im-FaK]
1. Offender Imports, sells or disposes of
any of those articles or merchandise
(i.e. gold, silver, other precious metals
or their alloys)
2. The stamps, brands, or marks of those
articles of merchandise Fail to indicate
the actual fineness or quality of said
metals or alloys
Page 149 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. Offender Knows of such failure to
indicate the actual fineness or quality of
the metals or alloys
Article 187 does not apply to the manufacturer
of misbranded articles who alters the quality or
fineness of anything pertaining to his art or
business – he would be liable for estafa under
Art. 315(2)(b).
[REPEALED] d. Article 188 –
Substituting and Altering Trademarks and Trade-names
Note: This article has been repealed by The
Intellectual Property Code, which took effect on
Jan. 1, 1998.
[REPEALED] e. Article 189 – Unfair
Competition
and
Fraudulent
Registration of Trade-mark or Tradename.
Note: This article has been repealed by The
Intellectual Property Code, which took effect on
Jan. 1, 1998.
[REPEALED]
CRIMES
RELATIVE TO OPIUM AND
OTHER
PROHIBITED
DRUGS
Note: Arts. 190-194 were repealed by R.A.
6425, known as the “Dangerous Drugs Act of
1972.” R.A. No. 9165, known as the
“Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002” in turn repealed RA No. 6425.
Page 150 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM2
F.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PUBLIC MORALS [ARTS.
194 - 202]
1. Chapter I: Gambling and
Betting
a. PD. 1602 (Anti-Gambling Law)
as amended by RA 9287 [AntiIllegal Numbers Games Law]
Note: Articles 195-199 of the RPC, R.A. 3063
(Horse
racing
Bookies),
P.D.
449
(Cockfighting), P.D. 483 (Game Fixing), P.D.
510 (Slot Machines) in relation to Opinion Nos.
33 and 97 of the Ministry of Justice, P.D. 1306
(Jai-Alai Bookies) and other City and Municipal
Ordinances or gambling which are inconsistent
with this decree are hereby repealed [Sec. 3,
PD 1602]
Gambling
Gambling is any game or scheme, whether
upon chance or skill, wherein wagers
consisting of money, articles or value or
representative of value are at stake or made
[Sec. 1, PD 1602]
f. Article 199 – Illegal Cockfighting
[amended by PD 449]
ACTS PUNISHED: [TaP-PoM-BaS]
Note: Article 195, which enumerates the acts
punishable, has been wholly repealed by Sec.
1, PD 1602.
1. Taking part, directly or indirectly, in any
illegal or unauthorized activities or
games of:
a. Cockfighting, jueteng, jai alai or
horse racing to include bookie
operations and game fixing,
numbers, bingo and other
forms of lotteries;
b. Cara y cruz, pompiang and the
like;
c. 7-11 and any game using dice;
d. Black jack, lucky nine, poker
and its derivatives, monte,
baccarat, cuajao, pangguingue
and other card games;
CRIMINAL LAW
e. Paik que, high and low,
mahjong, domino and other
games using plastic tiles and
the likes;
f. Slot machines, roulette, pinball
and
other
mechanical
contraptions and devices;
g. Dog racing, boat racing, car
racing and other forms of
races;
h. Basketball, boxing, volleyball,
bowling, pingpong and other
forms of individual or team
contests to include game fixing,
point shaving and other
machinations;
i. Banking or percentage game,
or any other game scheme,
whether upon chance or skill,
wherein wagers consisting of
money, articles of value or
representative of value are at
stake or made;
2. Knowingly Permitting any form of
gambling referred to in the preceding
subparagraph to be carried on in an
inhabited or uninhabited place or in any
building, vessel or other means of
transportation owned or controlled by
him.
Qualifying Circumstance: If the place where the
illegal gambling is carried on has a reputation
of a gambling place or that prohibited gambling
is frequently carried on therein, or the place is
a public or government building or barangay
hall, a higher penalty will be imposed [Sec.
1(a)(1), PD 1602]
3. Possessing any lottery list, paper or
other matter containing letters, figures,
signs or symbols pertaining to or in any
manner used in the mentioned games
of lotteries and numbers which have
taken place or about to take place,
knowingly and without lawful purpose
in any hour of any day.
4. Maintaining or conducting above
gambling schemes.
Maintainer, Manager or Operator
Any person who maintains, manages or
operates any illegal number game in a specific
area from whom the coordinator, controller or
supervisor, and collector or agent take orders.
[Sec. 2(i), RA 9287]
Page 151 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Qualifying Circumstance: If the maintainer,
conductor or banker of said gambling schemes
is a government official, or where such
government official is the player, promoter,
referee, umpire, judge or coach, the official
shall be temporarily absolutely disqualified and
higher penalty will be imposed [Sec. 1(c), PD
1602]
5. Failing to abate illegal gambling or take
action in connection therewith by a
Barangay official who has knowledge
of the existence of a gambling house or
place in his jurisdiction.
6. Any Security officer, security guard,
watchman, private or house detective
of
hotels,
villages,
buildings,
enclosures and the like which have the
reputation of a gambling place or
where gambling activities are being
held.
CRIMINAL LAW
chance to obtain a prize. It has 3 elements: 1)
Consideration, 2) Chance, 3) Prize or some
advantage or inequality in amount or value
which is in the nature of a prize [U.S. vs. Filart,
G.R. No. 10263 (1915)].
Spectators are Not Liable in Gambling
A mere bystander or spectator in a gambling
game is not criminally liable because he does
not take part therein [U.S. vs. Palma, G.R. No.
2188, (1905)].
b. RA 9287: INCREASING THE
PENALTY
FOR
ILLEGAL
NUMBERS GAMES
Playing for Money is Not an Essential Element
When the law names the games, punishing any
person who take part therein, its purpose is to
prohibit absolutely those games regardless
whether or not money is involved [U.S. v.
Rafael, 23 Phil. 184].
Illegal Numbers Game
Informer’s Reward
Any person who shall disclose information that
will lead to the arrest and final conviction of the
malefactor shall be rewarded 20% of the cash
money or articles of value confiscated or
forfeited. [Sec. 3, PD 1602]
Letter of Instruction No. 816
The games of domino, bingo, poker when not
played with five cards stud, cuajo,
pangguingue and mahjong, provided that they
are played as parlor games or for home
entertainment, and provided further, that they
are not played in places habitually used for
gambling and the betting is not disguised to
defeat the intent of Presidential Decree No.
1602, are hereby exempted.
Lottery
It is a scheme for the distribution of prizes by
chance among persons who have paid, or
agreed to pay, a valuable consideration for the
Elements: [CCP]
1. Consideration;
2. Chance; and
3. Prize or some advantage or inequality
in amount or values which is in the
nature of a prize [Uy v. Palomar, G.R.
No. L-23248, (1969)]
No Lottery when there is Full Value of
Money
There is no lottery when there is full value for
money and the prize is merely incidental, this
is because the player obtains full value of his
money.
Any form of illegal gambling activity which uses
numbers or combinations thereof as factors in
giving out jackpots. [Sec. 2(a), RA 9287]
Persons Liable [Sec. 3, RA 9287]:
The law punishes any person who
participates in any illegal numbers game
who: [BS-VCCMFC]
1. Acts as a Bettor;
2. Acts as a Personnel or Staff of an
illegal numbers game operation;
3. Allows his Vehicle, house, building or
land to be used in the operation of the
illegal numbers games;
4. Acts as a Collector or agent;
5. Acts as a Coordinator, controller or
supervisor;
6. Acts as a Maintainer, manager or
operator;
7. Acts as a Financier or capitalist; and
8. Acts as protector or Coddler.
Possession
Paraphernalia
evidence
of
as
Gambling
Prima
Facie
Possession of any gambling paraphernalia and
other materials used in the illegal numbers
game operation shall be deemed prima facie
Page 152 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
evidence of any offense covered by this Act.
[Id.]
CRIMINAL LAW
any game, races and other sports contest.
[Sec. 1(a), PD 483]
c. Article 196 – Importation, Sale and
Possession of Lottery Tickets and
Advertisements
Game-fixing
Acts Punished: [IPSS]
1. Importing into the Philippines from any
foreign place or port any lottery ticket or
advertisement;
2. Possessing, knowingly and with intent
to
use,
lottery
tickets
or
advertisements;
3. Selling or distributing the same in
connivance with the importer; and
4. Selling or distributing the same without
connivance with the importer [Reyes,
Book Two]
Presumption of Intent
The possession of any lottery ticket or
advertisement is prima facie evidence of an
intent to sell, distribute or use the same. [Art.
196 (3), RPC]
Lottery Tickets Need Not be Genuine
It is not necessary that the lottery tickets be
genuine, as it is enough that they be given the
appearance of lottery tickets [U.S. vs. Reyes,
G.R. 7260, (1912)].
d. Article 197 – Betting in Sports
Contests (Repealed by PD 483)
PD 483 - PENALIZING BETTING,
GAME FIXING OR POINT-SHAVING
AND MACHINATIONS IN SPORT
CONTESTS
Prohibited Acts
Game-fixing, point-shaving, machination, as
defined in the preceding section, in connection
with the games of basketball, volleyball,
softball, baseball; chess, boxing bouts,
"jaialai", "sipa", "pelota" and all other sports
contests, games or races; as well as betting
therein except as may be authorized by law
[Sec. 2, PD 483]
Betting
Betting money or any object or article of value
or representative of value upon the result of
Any arrangement, combination, scheme or
agreement by which the result of any game,
races or sports contests shall be predicted
and/or known other than on the basis of the
honest playing skill or ability of the players or
participants. [Sec. 1(b), PD 483]
Point-shaving
Any such arrangement, combination, scheme
or agreement by which the skill or ability of any
player or participant in a game, races or sports
contests to make points or scores shall be
limited deliberately in order to influence the
result thereof in favor of one or other team,
player or participant therein. [Sec. 1(c), PD
483]
Game-machinations
Any other fraudulent, deceitful, unfair or
dishonest means, method, manner or practice
employed for the purpose of influencing the
result of any game, races or sport contest.
[Sec. 1(d), PD 483]
Offenders Punished [Sec. 3, PD 483]:
[OOG]
1. An Official, such as promoter, referee,
umpire, judge, or coach in the game,
race or sports contests, or the manager
or sponsor of any participating team,
individual or player therein, or
participants or players in such games,
races or other sports contests;
2. Any other Offender;
3. An official or employee of any
Government
office
or
agency
concerned with the enforcement or
administration of laws and regulations
on sports.
e. Article 198 – Illegal Betting On
Horse Races [Repealed by Act. 309,
as amended by RA 983]
Acts Punished: [BM]
1. Betting on horse races during the
periods not allowed by law; and
2. Maintaining or employing a totalizer or
other device or profit therefrom, during
periods not allowed by law.
Page 153 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Games and Amusements Board
The supervision and regulation of horse-races
in the Philippines shall be vested in a
Commission on Races (now called the Games
and Amusements Board) [RA 309, as
amended by RA 983].
Days When Horse Racing is Allowed
vs. Days when Horse Racing is NOT
Allowed [RA 309 Sec. 4, as amended
by Sec. 1, RA. 983]
Days When Horse
Racing is
Permitted [SSH IRVThF]
1.
Sundays
reserved by
Commission;
Days When Horse
Racing is Not
Permitted
[JD-VThF]
not 1. July 4th of each
the year [RA 137]
2. December 30 of
2. 24 Saturdays as each year [RA 229]
determined by the
Commission; and
3. Any registration or
Voting day [RA 180]
3. Legal Holidays,
except:
4. Holy Thursday
a. Independence and Good Friday
Day;
b. Rizal Day;
c. Registration or
Voting day;
d. Holy Thursday;
and
e. Good Friday
Persons Liable [Art. 199, as amended
by PD 449]: [DOrC-FA]
1. Any person who directly or indirectly
participates in cockfights, by betting
money or other valuable things on a
Day other than those permitted by law;
2. Any person who directly or indirectly,
Organizes cockfights at which bets are
made, on a day other than those
permitted by law;
3. Any person who directly or indirectly
participates in cockfights, at a place
other than a licensed Cockpit.
4. When the offender is the Financer,
owner, manger or operator of cockpit,
or the gaffer, referee or bet taker in
cockfights; or
5. Allowing, promoting or participating in
any other kind of gambling in the
premises
of
cockfights
during
cockfights.
Days Cockfighting is allowed [Sec.
5(d), PD 449]:
Race held the Same Day is a Separate
Offense
Any race held in the same day at the same
place shall be held punishable as a separate
offense [Art. 198(2), RPC].
1. Sundays;
2. Legal Holidays, EXCEPT:
a. Rizal Day;
b. Independence Day;
c. National Heroes Day;
d. Holy Thursday;
e. Good Friday;
f. Election or Referendum Day;
and
g. During the Registration Days
for Election or Referendum;
3. During local fiestas for not more than 3
days; and
4. During provincial, city or municipal,
agricultural, commercial or industrial
fair, carnival or exposition for a similar
period of 3 days
f. Article 199 – Illegal Cockfighting
[amended by PD 449]
Spectators in a Cockfight Are Not
Liable
Cockfighting
The decree [Sec. 8, PD 449] does not punish a
person attending as a spectator in a cockfight.
Shall embrace and mean the commonly known
game or term "cockfighting derby, pintakasi or
tupada", or its equivalent terms in different
Philippine localities. [Sec. 4(a), PD 449]
Page 154 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Chapter II: Offenses Against
Decency and Good Customs
a. Article 200 – Grave Scandal
Elements: [PSNP]
1. The offender Performs an Act/s;
2. Such act/s are highly Scandalous as
offending against decency or good
customs;
3. The highly scandalous conduct is Not
expressly falling within any other Art. of
the RPC; and
Note: In conducts involving
lasciviousness, it is grave
scandal only where there is
mutual consent. (Boado)
4. The act/s complained of are committed
in a Public place or within the Public
knowledge or view [U.S. vs.
Samaniego, G.R. No. 5115, (1909)].
Grave Scandal
Consists of acts which are offensive to decency
and good customs which, having been
committed publicly, have given rise to public
scandal to persons who have accidentally
witnessed the same [U.S. v. Catajay, 6 Phil.
399].
Decency
Propriety of conduct, proper observance of the
requirement of modesty, good taste, etc. [See
U.S. v. Kottinger, 45 Phil. 352].
Customs
Established usage and social conventions
carried on by tradition and enforced by social
disapproval of any violation thereof [See
Black’s Law Dictionary].
Act/s Must be Performed In:
1. Public place; or
2. Private place within public knowledge
or view [U.S. vs. Samaniego, G.R. No.
5115, (1909)]
Public Place vs. Private Place [U.S. vs.
Samaniego, G.R. No. 5115, (1909)]
Public Place
Private Place
Public View Requirement
required
knowledge
required.
is
Degree of Publicity
Criminal
Liability Degree of publicity is
arises irrespective of an essential element
whether the immoral of the crime.
act is open to the
public’s view.
Note: When the act is committed at night, in a
private house, and only one person was
present, this does not constitute the degree of
publicity which is an essential element of the
crime [U.S. vs. Catajay, G.R. No. 2785,
(1906)].
b. Article 201 – Immoral Doctrines,
Obscene Publications and Exhibitions
and Indecent Shows (as amended by
PD 960 and 969)
Persons Liable: [PA-ExGSRDC-S]
1. Those who shall Publicly expound or
proclaim doctrines openly contrary to
public morals;
2. Authors
of
obscene
literature,
published with their knowledge in any
form; the editors publishing such
literature; and the owners/operators of
the establishment selling the same;
Note: Author is liable only when it is published
with his knowledge [Art. 201, Revised Penal
Code]
3. Those who, in theaters, fairs,
cinematographs or any other place,
Exhibit, indecent or immoral plays,
scenes, acts or shows, whether live or
in film, which are prescribed by virtue
hereof, and shall include those which:
a. Glorify criminals or condone
crimes;
b. Serve no other purpose but to
satisfy the market for violence,
lust or pornography;
c. Offend any race or Religion;
d. Tend to abet traffic in and use
of prohibited Drugs; and
e. Contrary to law, public order,
morals, and good customs,
established policies, lawful
orders, decrees and edicts
Public view is not Public view or public
Page 155 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
4. Those who shall Sell, give away or
exhibit films, prints, engravings,
sculpture or literature which are
offensive to morals.
Distribution is the Act Punished
Hence, the isolated, casual or occasional act of
giving such kind of literature to a single
recipient is not punishable [People v.
Tempongko, 1 C.A. Rep. 317].
Definition of Terms:
1. Moral - Implies conformity with the
generally accepted standards of
goodness or rightness in conduct or
character, sometimes, specifically to
sexual conduct [See Fernando v. CA,
510 SCRA 351, G.R. No. 159751, Dec.
6, 2006, re: Obscenity; see also
REYES, Book II]
2. Indecency - An act against the good
behavior and a just delicacy [U.S. vs.
Kottinger, G.R. No. L-20569, (1923)]
3. Obscenity - Something offensive to
chastity, decency or delicacy [U.S. vs.
Kottinger, G.R. No. L-20569, (1923)]
The test of obscenity:
1. The test is objective.
2. It is more on the effect upon the viewer
and not alone on the conduct of the
performer.
3. If the material has the tendency to
deprave and corrupt the mind of the
viewer then the same is obscene and
where such obscenity is made publicly,
criminal liability arises.
4. As long as the pornographic matter or
exhibition is made privately, there is no
crime committed under the Revised
Penal Code because what is protected
is the morality of the public in general.
Cases on Obscenity
Postcards of Philippine inhabitants in
native attire were not considered
obscene because the aggregate
judgment of the community, and the
moral sense of the people were not
shocked by those pictures. They were
not offensive to chastity but merely
depicted persons as they actually lived
[People v. Kottinger, G.R. No. L-20569
(1923)].
CRIMINAL LAW
The reaction of the public during the
performance of a dance by one who
had nothing to cover herself with,
except nylon patches over her breasts
and too abbreviated pair of nylon
panties to interrupt her stark
nakedness should be made the gauge
in the determination of whether the
dance or exhibition was indecent or
immoral [People v. Aparici, C.A. 52
O.G. 249 (1955)].
An actual exhibition of the sexual act
can have no redeeming feature—no
room for art. Therefore, it is a clear and
unmitigated obscenity [People v.
Padan, G.R. No. L-7295 (1957)].
Miller Test of Obscenity: [From Miller v.
California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) – adopted in
Fernando v. CA, G.R. No. 159751 (2006)]
1. Whether the average person, applying
contemporary standards, would find
the work, taken as a whole, appeals to
prurient interest (excessive interest in
sexual matters);
2. Whether the work depicts, in a patently
offensive
way,
sexual
conduct
specifically defined by the applicable
state law;
3. Whether the work, taken as a whole,
lacks serious literary, artistic, political
or scientific value.
Note: This is the prevailing law as held in
Demata v. People, (G.R. No. 228583, 15
September 2021). However, this case was
decided beyond the cut-off point for the 2022
Bar being 30 June 2021.
Publicity is Essential to be Liable
Mere possession of obscene materials, without
intention to sell, exhibit, or give them away, is
not punishable since the purpose of the law is
to prohibit the dissemination of obscene
materials to the public [Fernando v. CA, G.R.
No. 159751, (2006)].
c. Article 202 – Vagrants and
Prostitutes (as amended by RA 10158)
Note: RA 10158 has decriminalized Vagrancy,
thus Art. 202 now penalizes prostitution only
and all pending cases that that were or are
under the provisions of Article 202 of the RPC
Page 156 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
on Vagrancy prior to its amendment by this RA
10158 shall be dismissed upon effectivity of the
Act. [Sec. 2, RA 10158]
Also: Although beyond the June 30, 2021 cutoff for the 2022 Bar Exams, R.A. 11862 –
passed in 2022 – has amended the AntiTrafficking in Persons Act, and repealed this
provision.
Prostitution [Art. 202(2), RPC]
A woman is a prostitute when:
1. She Habitually indulges in:
a. Sexual intercourse, or
b. Lascivious conduct
2. For Money or profit.
The Following are NOT Acts of Prostitution:
1. One sexual encounter for money does
not make a woman a prostitute. The
provision uses the qualifier “habitually”.
[Art. 202, Revised Penal Code]
2. Several intercourses with different men
does not make a woman a prostitute, if
there is no evidence that she indulged
in sexual intercourse for money or
profit. [Id.]
Note: See the Special Penal Laws Reviewer for
a more in-depth discussion on prostitution visà-vis the Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act.
Notably, “prostitutes” under the Act are under a
different contemplation. Namely, (a) prostitutes
can be men or women, and (b) under the
ATPA, prostitutes are victims and not
perpetrators. The perpetrators are those who
abuse them.
Page 157 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
G. CRIMES COMMITTED BY
PUBLIC OFFICERS [ARTS.
203 - 245]
1.
Chapter
Provisions
I:
Preliminary
a. Article 203 – Who Are Public
Officers
Coverage of GOCCs
GOCCs created by law are covered while
GOCCs registered with the SEC (including
sequestered companies) are not [Macalino v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 140199-200
(2002)].
Based on RA 8249, presidents, directors,
trustees, and managers of all GOCCs,
regardless of type, are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan when they
are involved in graft and corruption [People v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 167304 (2009)].
Elements [P-SEA-LEA]:
A public officer is one who:
1. Takes part in the Performance of public
functions in the government;
2. Performs in said government or in any
of its branches public duties as an
Employee, Agent or Subordinate
official, of any rank or class; and
3. His authority to take part in the
performance of public functions or to
perform public duties must be:
a. By direct provision of the Law;
b. By popular Election; or
c. By Appointment by competent
authority
“Public Officers” Includes Every Public
Servant
The term “public officers” embraces every
public servant from the highest to lowest rank.
The distinction between “officer” and
“employee” for the purposes of the RPC is
obliterated [Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
Nos. 140199-200 (2002)].
“Public Officer”
includes elective and appointive officials and
employees, permanent or temporary:
1. Career or non-career service, including
military and police personnel, whether
compensated or not [Sec. 3(b), RA
6713]
2. Classified or unclassified or exempt
service receiving compensation, even
nominal, from the government. [Sec.
2(c), RA 3019]
What are Considered “Official Duties”
Those which are in one’s capacity to perform
by reason of his office [Dacumos v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 95000 (1991)].
2. Chapter II: Malfeasance and
Misfeasance in Office
Malfeasance
The performance of
(Direct Bribery and an act which ought
Indirect Bribery)
not to be done.
Misfeasance (see Improper
Arts. 204-207: acts performance
of
by a judge)
some act which
might lawfully be
done.
Nonfeasance
(Prosecution)
Omission of some
act which ought to be
performed.
SECTION 1. Dereliction of Duty
a. Article 204 – Knowingly Rendering
Unjust Judgment; and
b. Article 205 – Judgment Rendered
Through Negligence
Elements
Knowingly
Rendering Unjust
Judgment
[JSUK]
[Art. 204]
Judgment
Rendered Through
Negligence
[JSMN]
[Art. 205]
1. Offender is a Judge
2. He renders a judgment in a case
Submitted to him for decision
3.
Judgment
Unjust
Page 158 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
is 3.
Judgment
Manifestly unjust
is
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
4. Judge Knows that 4. It is due to his
his
judgment
is inexcusable
unjust
Negligence
or
ignorance
As to Requirement of Bad Faith
Required.
Accordingly,
mere
error which was
committed in good
faith is a proper
defense [Heirs of
Yasin v. Felix, A.M.
No.
RTJ-94-1167
(1995)].
Not required in 205
because it is based
on negligence or
ignorance.
Bad Faith in rendering an unjust decision
must still be proven
Malice or bad faith on the part of the judge in
rendering an unjust decision must still be
proved and failure on the part of the
complainant to prove the same warrants the
dismissal of the administrative complaint
[Alforte v. Santos, A.M. No. MTJ-94-914
(1995)].
Test to Determine an Unjust Order or
Judgment
The test to determine whether an order or
judgment is unjust is that such may be inferred
from the circumstances that it is contrary to law
or is not supported by evidence [Louis Vuitton
S.A. v. Judge Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-92-643
(1992)].
Unjust
vs.
Judgment
Manifestly
Unjust
Unjust Judgment
Manifestly Unjust
Judgment
One
which
is
contrary to law or is
not supported by the
evidence, or both
One which is so
manifestly contrary
to law that even a
person having basic
knowledge of the law
cannot doubt the
injustice. Abuse of
discretion or mere
error of judgment is
not punishable [See
Black’s
Law
Dictionary;
Louis
Vuitton S.A. v. Judge
A judgment is said to
be unjust when it is
contrary
to
the
standards of conduct
prescribed by law
[Louis Vuitton S.A. v.
Judge
Villanueva,
A.M. No. MTJ-92-
643 (1992)]
Villanueva, A.M. No.
MTJ-92-643 (1992) ].
Sources of Unjust Judgment [ERB]
1. Error,
2. Ill will or Revenge, or
3. Bribery. [Reyes, Book II]
Declaration that Decision/Order is
Unjust
Before a criminal action against a judge for
violation of Articles 204 and 205 can be
entertained, there must be a trial or
authoritative judicial declaration that his
decision or order is really unjust which may
result from either an action of certiorari or
prohibition in a higher court. [De Vera v.
Pelayo, G.R. No. 137354 (2000)]
Not Applicable to Collegiate Courts
The offense refers only to a judgment of an
individual judge in his court, and not to the
judgment rendered in a collegial court by the
members thereof [In Re: Wenceslao Laureta,
G.R. No. L-68635 (1987); In Re: Joaquin T.
Borromeo, A.M. No. 93-7-696-0 (1995)].
Rationale: This is because collegiate courts
reach their collective judgment after due
deliberation and consultation among the
members. [Id.]
c. Article 206 – Unjust Interlocutory
Order
Elements [J-KuMi]:
1. Offender is a Judge; and
2. He performs any of the following acts:
a. Knowingly rendering an unjust
interlocutory order or decree;
or
b. Rendering a Manifestly unjust
interlocutory order or decree
through
inexcusable
negligence or ignorance.
d. Article 207 – Malicious Delay in the
Administration of Justice
Elements [JP-DeM]:
1. Offender is a Judge;
2. There is a Proceeding in his court;
Page 159 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. He Delays in the administration of
justice; and
4. The delay is Malicious, that is, with
deliberate intent to inflict damage on
either party in the case.
e. Article 208 – Prosecution of
Offenses; Negligence and Tolerance
•
Also known as Prevaricacion
Punishable Acts [RT]:
1. Maliciously Refraining from instituting
prosecution against violators of the
law; or
2. Maliciously Tolerating the commission
of offenses.
Elements:
Mode 1: Refraining
from Instituting
Prosecution [PNM]
Mode 2: Tolerating
the Commission of
Offenses [PTM]
1. Offender is a public officer or officer of
the law who has a duty to cause the
Prosecution of, or to prosecute, offenses;
2. Dereliction of duty:
knowing
the
commission of the
crime, he does Not
cause
the
prosecution of the
criminal
2. Dereliction of duty:
knowing that a crime
is about to be
committed,
he
Tolerates
its
commission
3. Malice and deliberate intent to favor the
violator of the law
Who are Public Officers
Officers of the prosecution department, whose
duty is to institute criminal proceedings for
felonies upon being informed of their
perpetration (e.g., city attorney, fiscal) [See
Macalino v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos.
140199-200 (2002)], Sec. 3(b), RA 6713, Sec.
2(c), RA 3019].
Who are Officers of the Law
Those who, by reason of the position held by
them, are duty-bound to cause prosecution and
punishment of offenders (e.g., chief of police,
barrio captain). [Id.]
CRIMINAL LAW
Crime Must Be Proven
“Negligence” means neglect of duty by
maliciously failing to move the prosecution and
punishment of the delinquent. The crime
committed by the law violator must be proved
first [US v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 7540 (1912)].
Liability of Offender
1. Liability is as a principal in dereliction of duty
not merely an accessory to the crime. The
article directly punishes dereliction of duty. [Art.
208, Revised Penal Code]
Liability of the public officer who,
having the duty of prosecuting the
offender, harbored, concealed, or
assisted in the escape of the latter, is
that of a principal in the crime of
dereliction of duty in the prosecution of
the offense.
Liability under PD 1829
(Penalizing obstruction of apprehension and
prosecution of criminal offenders) - any person
who solicits, accepts, or agrees to accepting
any benefit in consideration of abstaining from,
discounting, or impeding the prosecution of a
criminal offender is liable [Sec. 1(g), PD 1829].
f. Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by an
Attorney or a Solicitor – Revelation of
Secrets
Punishable Acts [DRO]:
1. Causing Damage to his client, either:
2. Revealing any of the secrets of his
client learned by him in his professional
capacity;
a. By any malicious breach of
professional duty;
b. By inexcusable negligence or
Ignorance.
3. Undertaking the defense of the
Opposing party in the same case,
without the consent of his first client,
a. After having undertaken the
defense of said first client, or
b. After
having
received
confidential information from
said client.
Page 160 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Requirement of Damage
[Reyes, Book II; Art. 209, Revised Penal
Code]
Mode 1:
Malicious
Breach or
Inexcusable
Negligence
Required;
without
damage,
at
most he will be
administratively
liable
(e.g.,
suspension or
disbarment
under the CPR)
Mode 2:
Mode 3:
Revealing Undertaking
of Secrets Defense of
Opposing
Party
Not
required;
revelation
in itself is
punishable
[Id.]
Penalty
Prision
Correcional
minimum
OR a fine
ranging from
P40,000 to
P200,000
OR both
Not
required;
what
is
punished is
the taking of
the
case
without the
consent of
his 1st client
Privileged
Communication
covers Past Crimes
only
A distinction must be made between
confidential communications relating to past
crimes already committed, and future crimes
intended to be committed by the client. The
attorney-client privilege only covers past
crimes [People v. Sandiganbayan, supra].
Revelation of any of the secrets of the
client (Art. 209) cf. RA 3019 Sec. 3(k)
Art. 209
Punishable Revealing
Act
any of the
secrets
of
his
client
learned by
him in his
professional
capacity
RA 3019 Sec.
3 (k)
Divulging
valuable
information of
a confidential
character,
acquired
by
his office or by
him
on
account of his
official position
to
unauthorized
persons,
or
releasing such
information in
advance of its
authorized
release date
Page 161 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Imprisonment
for not less
than one year
nor more than
ten years (1
year < x < 10
years)
Perpetual
disqualification
from
public
office
Confiscation
or forfeiture in
favor of the
Government of
any prohibited
interest
and
unexplained
wealth
manifestly out
of proportion
to his salary
and
other
lawful income
CRIM2
SECTION 2. Bribery
g. Article 210 – Direct Bribery
Punishable Acts [CER]:
1. Agreeing to perform/performing, in
consideration of any offer, promise,
gift, or present – an act constituting a
CRIMINAL LAW
Crime in connection with the
performance of his official duty
2. Accepting a gift in consideration of the
Execution of an act which does not
constitute a crime, in connection with
the performance of his official duty
3. Agreeing to Refrain/refraining from
doing something in his official duty in
consideration of a gift or promise.
Elements:
Mode 1: Agreeing to commit/
committing a Crime [PACD]
Mode 2: Execution of an Act Mode
3:
Agreeing
to
that is unjust but is not a refrain/refraining from doing
crime [PAUD]
his duty [PARD]
1. Offender is a Public officer under Article 203
2. Accepts an offer or a promise 2. Accepts a Gift or present by
or receives a gift or present by himself or through another
himself or through another
The GIFT must have a value or
be capable of pecuniary
estimation. It could be in the
form of money, property or
services. It cannot consist of a
mere offer or promise of a gift.
2. Accepts an offer or a
promise or receives a gift or
present by
himself or through another
3.In consideration of which, he 3. In consideration of which, he
agrees to perform an act agrees to execute an act which
constituting a Crime
does not constitute a crime, but
the act must be Unjust
3. In consideration of which, he
agrees to Refrain from doing
something which it is his official
duty to do
If the act required of the public
officer amounts to a crime and
he commits it, he shall be liable
for the penalty corresponding to
the crime.
4. The act which offender agrees to perform or which he executes be connected with the
performance of his official Duties
As to Acceptance of Gift
Not required (acceptance of Required. The gift must have a Not required (acceptance of
offer is sufficient).
value or must be capable of offer is sufficient).
pecuniary estimation. It cannot
consist of a mere offer or
promise of a gift. [Reyes, Book
II]
Page 162 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
No Stage of Frustrated Bribery
If one party does not concur, then there is no
agreement and not all the acts necessary to
commit the crime were present. [Art. 210,
Revised Penal Code; Regalado]
Temporary Performance of Public
Functions
Temporary performance of public functions is
sufficient to constitute a person a public officer
for purposes of bribery. [Maniego v. People,
G.R. No. L-2971 (1951)]
CRIMINAL LAW
Bribery exists when the gift is:
1. Voluntarily offered by a private person;
2. Solicited by the public officer and
voluntarily delivered by the private
person; or
3. Solicited by the public officer but the
private person delivers it out of fear of
the consequences should the public
officer perform his functions (here the
crime by the giver does not fall under
corruption of public officials due to the
involuntariness of the act). [People v.
Sope, G.R. No. L-16 (1946)]
Direct Bribery vs. RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) Sec. 3(b) vs. Indirect Bribery
vs. Qualified Bribery [Merencillo v. People, G.R. No. 142369-70, (2007)]
Direct Bribery
[Art. 210, RPC]
Sec 3(b) RA 3019
Indirect Bribery
[Art. 211, RPC]
Qualified Bribery
[Art. 211-A, RPC]
As to Promise or Gift
Acceptance
of
a Mere
request
or
promise or offer or demand of a gift,
receipt of a gift or present, share,
present is required
percentage or benefit
is enough
The gift must be
accepted by the public
officer.
The
acceptance of a mere
promise or offer of
such gift does not
make a public officer
liable under Art 211
The refusal to arrest or
prosecute an offender
must
be
in
consideration of any
offer, promise, gift, or
present
As to Scope
Wider
and
more
general scope:
a. Performance of an
act
constituting
a
crime;
b. Execution of an
unjust act which does
not constitute a crime;
and
c. Agreeing to refrain
or refraining from doing
an act which is his
official duty to do
Limited to contracts or
transactions involving
monetary
consideration where
the public officer
has the authority to
intervene under the
law
Simply offered by
reason of his office and
not
for
the
performance
of
a
specific act
Page 163 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The
public
officer
entrusted with law
enforcement refrains
from
arresting
or
prosecuting
an
offender
who has
committed a crime
punishable
by
reclusion
perpetua
and/or death
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
h. Article 211 – Indirect Bribery
Elements [PuGO]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He accepts Gifts;
3. Gifts are offered to him by reason of his
Office.
Direct Bribery vs. Indirect Bribery
Direct Bribery
[Art 210, RPC]
Indirect Bribery
[Art 211]
As to Requirement of Acceptance of Gift
Mere acceptance of
the promise or offer
of
such
gift
consummates
the
crime (1st and 3rd
modes).
Acceptance of the
gift is only necessary
for the 2nd mode.
The gift must be
accepted by the
public officer. The
acceptance of a
mere promise or
offer of such gift does
not make a public
officer liable under
Art 211.
Reason for the Gifts/Promise/Offer
In consideration of
the agreement of the
officer to
perform or refrain
from doing an act or
the commission of a
crime.
By reason of his
office and not for the
performance of a
specific act.
No Frustrated or Attempted Stages
Always in the consummated stage, because it
is committed by accepting gifts offered to an
official by reason of his office. If the gift is
rejected, there is no bribery. If the gift is
accepted, there is bribery. [Art. 211, Revised
Penal Code; Reyes, Book II]
Mere Physical Receipt is Insufficient
There must be clear intention on the part of the
public officer to take the gift offered and
consider the property as his own for that
moment.
Mere
physical
receipt
unaccompanied
by
any
other
sign,
circumstance or act to show such acceptance
is not sufficient. [Formilleza v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 75160 (1988)]
i. Article 211-A – Qualified Bribery
Elements [LAC]:
1. Offender is a public officer entrusted
with Law enforcement;
2. He refrains from Arresting or
prosecuting an offender who has
committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death;
3. Offender refrains from arresting or
prosecuting in Consideration of any
offer, promise, gift, or present.
Effect if Penalty Imposable is Lower
than Reclusion Perpetua or Death
“Gift" refers to a thing or a right to dispose of
gratuitously, or any act or liberality, in favor of
another who accepts it, and shall include a
simulated sale or an ostensibly onerous
disposition thereof. It shall not include an
unsolicited gift of nominal or insignificant value
not given in anticipation of, or in exchange for,
a favor from a public official or employee. [Sec.
3(c), RA 6713]
“Receiving any gift" includes the act of
accepting directly or indirectly a gift from a
person other than a member of the public
officer's immediate family, in behalf of himself
or of any member of his family or relative within
the fourth civil degree, either by consanguinity
or affinity, even on the occasion of a family
celebration or national festivity like Christmas,
if the value of the gift is under the
circumstances manifestly excessive. [Section
2(c), RA 3019]
If the penalty imposed is lower than reclusion
perpetua and/or death, the crime is direct
bribery and dereliction of duty. [Art. 210,
Revised Penal Code]
Absorption
The dereliction of the duty punished under
Article 208 of the Revised Penal Code is
absorbed in Qualified Bribery.
Guilt of Offender is a Prejudicial
Question
The guilt of the offender is a prejudicial
question to the liability of the officer for qualified
bribery. [US v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 7540
(1912)]
Qualifying Circumstance
If it is the public officer who demands or asks
for such gift, the penalty is death. [Art. 211-A,
Revised Penal Code]
Page 164 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
j. Article 212 – Corruption of Public
Officials
Elements [OB]:
1. Offender makes Offers or promises or
gives gifts or presents to a public
officer; and
2. Offers or promises are made or the
gifts or presents given to a public
officer, under circumstances that will
make the public officer liable for direct
Bribery or indirect bribery.
Person Offering (Offeror) is Punished
The offender is the giver of the gift or the offeror
of the promise. This applies even if the gift was
demanded by the public officer. [Reyes, Book
II]
CRIMINAL LAW
penalized in the same manner as the offenderpublic officer and prohibited from transacting
business in any form with the government.
Corruption of Public Officials vs.
Bribery
Corruption of
Public Officials
Bribery
As to the Offender
The offender is the The offender is the
giver of gifts or public officer who
offeror of promise
accepts such offers
or gifts (See: Arts.
210 to 211-A)
Note: Under RA 3019, the person giving a gift,
present, etc, under sec. 3 shall also be
Corruption of Public Officials cf. RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)
Sec. 3 (a)
Art. 212
RA 3019 Sec. 3(a)
Punishable
Act
The offender makes offers,
promises,
or
gives
gifts/presents to a public
officer under circumstances
that will make the public
officer liable for direct
bribery or indirect bribery
Persuading, inducing or influencing another public
officer to perform an act constituting a violation of
rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent
authority or an offense in connection with the official
duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be
persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense.
Penalty
The
same
penalties Imprisonment for not less than one year nor more
imposed upon the officer than ten years (1 year < x < 10 years)
corrupted
Perpetual disqualification from public office
Confiscation or forfeiture in favor of the Government
of any prohibited interest and unexplained wealth
manifestly out of proportion to his salary and other
lawful income
Page 165 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
No Frustrated Stage
There is no frustrated corruption or bribery
because both crimes require the concurrence
of the will of the corruptor and public officer.
[Art. 212, Revised Penal Code]
Forfeiture of Property in Favor of the
State [R.A. 1379]
Whenever any public officer or employee has
acquired during his incumbency an amount of
property which is manifestly out of proportion to
his salary as such public officer or employee
and to his other lawful income and the income
from legitimately acquired property, said
property shall be presumed prima facie to have
been unlawfully acquired. If the respondent is
unable to show to the satisfaction of the court
that he has lawfully acquired the property in
question, then the court shall declare such
property, forfeited in favor of the State.
The following shall be exempt from
prosecution or punishment for the
offense with reference to which his
information and testimony was given:
1. Any person who voluntarily gives
information about any violation of
a. Articles 210, 211, and 212 of
the RPC;
b. R.A. 3019, as amended;
c. Section 345 of the Internal
Revenue Code and Section
3604 of the Tariff and Customs
Code and other provisions of
the said Codes penalizing
abuse or dishonesty on the part
of
the
public
officials
concerned;
d. Other
laws,
rules
and
regulations punishing acts of
graft, corruption and other
forms of official abuse;
2. Any person who willingly testifies
against any public official or employee
for such violation. (Section 1, PD 749)
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal
Exactions and Transactions
a. Article 213 – Fraud Against the
Public Treasury and Similar Offenses
Punishable Acts: [EnD-ReC]
1. Entering into an agreement with any
interested party or speculator or
making use of any other scheme, to
defraud the government, in dealing
with any person with regard to
furnishing supplies, the making of
contracts, or the adjustment or
settlement of accounts relating to
public property or funds;
2. Demanding, directly or indirectly, the
payment of sums different from or
larger than those authorized by law, in
collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and
other imposts;
3. Failing voluntarily to issue a Receipt,
as provided by law, for any sum of
money collected by him officially, in the
collection of taxes, licenses, fees and
other imposts;
4. Collecting or receiving, directly or
indirectly, by way of payment or
otherwise, things or objects of a nature
different from that provided by law, in
the collection of taxes, licenses, fees
and other imposts
Elements of Fraud against Public
Treasury (par.1) [POED]:
1. Offender is a Public officer
2. He took advantage of his public office;
he intervened in the transaction in his
Official capacity
3. He Entered into an agreement with any
interested party or speculator or made
use of any other scheme with regard to:
a. Furnishing supplies
b. The making of contracts or
c. Adjustment or settlement of
accounts relating to public
property or funds
4. Accused had intent to Defraud the
Government
Page 166 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Art. 213, par. 1 cf. RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) Sec. 3(g)
Art. 213, par. 1
RA 3019 Sec. 3 (g)
Punishable Act
Entering into an agreement with
any interested party or speculator
or making use of any other
scheme,
to
defraud
the
government, in dealing with any
person with regard to furnishing
supplies, the making of contracts,
or the adjustment or settlement of
accounts relating to public property
or funds
Entering, on behalf of the
Government, into any contract or
transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same,
whether or not the public officer
profited or will profit thereby
Penalty
Prision Correcional medium to Imprisonment for not less than one
prison mayor minimum OR a fine year nor more than ten years (1 year
ranging
from
P40,000
to < x < 10 years)
P2,000,000 OR both
Perpetual disqualification
from
public office
Confiscation or forfeiture in favor of
the Government of any prohibited
interest and unexplained wealth
manifestly out of proportion to his
salary and other lawful income
Not necessary for Government to Actually
be Defrauded
It is consummated by merely entering into
agreement or by merely making use of other
schemes to defraud the government. [Art. 213,
Revised Penal Code]
Elements of Illegal Exactions (par. 2-4)
[CDRC]:
1. Offender is a public officer entrusted
with the Collection of taxes, licenses,
fees and other imposts;
2. He is guilty of the following acts or
omissions:
a. Demanding
directly
or
indirectly, payment of sums
different from or larger than
those by law;
b. Failing voluntarily to issue a
Receipt as provided by law, for
any sum of money collected by
him officially; or
c. Collecting or receiving, directly
or indirectly, by way of payment
or otherwise, things or object of
a nature different from that
provided by law
Persons Liable
General Rule: Only specific public officers are
liable and this can only be committed
principally by a public officer whose official duty
is to collect taxes, license fees, import duties
and other dues payable to the government.
[Art. 213, Revised Penal Code]
Exception: BIR and Customs employees are
not covered by the article. The NIRC or the
Revised Administrative Code is the applicable
law. [Art. 213, Revised Penal Code]
Receipt must be an Official Receipt
The act of receiving payment due the
government without issuing a receipt will give
rise to illegal exaction even though a
provisional receipt has been issued. What the
law requires is a receipt in the form prescribed
by law, which means official receipt.
When Estafa
Exaction
instead
of
Illegal
When, by means of deceit, the public officer
demanded or collected a greater fee than those
prescribed by law, the crime committed is
Page 167 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
estafa and not illegal exaction. [US v. Lopez,
G.R. No. L-3968 (1908)]
b. Article 214 – Other Frauds
Elements [PACo]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He takes Advantage of his official
position; and
3. He Commits any of the frauds or
deceits enumerated in Article 315 to
318 (estafa, other forms of swindling,
swindling a minor, other deceits).
Penalty of Special Disqualification
CRIMINAL LAW
connected with the estate or property in
the
appraisal,
distribution
or
adjudication of which they had acted;
and
3. Guardians and executors with respect
to the property belonging to their wards
or the estate.
Fraud is Not Necessary
The act is punished because of the possibility
that fraud may be committed or that the
offender will place his own interest above the
Government or the party he represents [US v.
Udarbe, G.R. No. 9945 (1914)]
Additional penalty of temporary special
disqualification in its maximum period to
perpetual special disqualification, apart from
the penalties imposed in Arts 315-318. [Art.
214, Revised Penal Code]
Intervention by Virtue of Public Office
c. Art. 215 – Prohibited Transactions
4. Chapter IV: Malversation of
Public Funds or Property
Intervention must be by virtue of the public
office held. The contracts the official intervenes
in must have a connection with his office.
[Reyes, Book II]
Elements [AIIJ]:
1. Offender is an Appointive public officer;
2. He becomes Interested, directly or
indirectly, in any transaction of
exchange or speculation;
3. He becomes interested during his
Incumbency; and
4. Transaction takes place within the
territory subject to his Jurisdiction;
Example of Transactions of Exchange or
Speculation
Buying and selling stocks, commodities, land,
etc. wherein one hopes to take advantage of an
expected rise or fall in price. Although
purchasing of stocks or shares in a company is
a simple investment and not a violation of the
article, regularly buying securities for resale is
speculation. [Reyes, Book II]
d. Article 216 – Possession of
Prohibited Interest by a Public Officer
Persons liable [PEG]:
1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly,
became interested in any contract or
business in which it was his official duty
to intervene;
2. Experts, arbitrators, and private
accountants who, in like manner, took
part in any contract or transaction
See: Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Anti-Plunder Act in relation to
this chapter.
a. Article 217 – Malversation of Public
Funds or Property - Presumption of
Malversation
Modes [AT-PeM]:
1. Appropriating public funds or property;
2. Taking or misappropriating the same;
3. Consenting, or through abandonment
or negligence, Permitting any other
person to take such public funds or
property; and
4. Being otherwise guilty of the
Misappropriation or malversation of
such funds or property
Elements Common to All Modes
[PCPA]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He had the Custody or control of funds
or property by reason of the duties of
his office;
3. He was accountable for Public funds or
property;
4. He
Appropriated,
took,
misappropriated or consented or,
Page 168 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
through abandonment or negligence,
permitted another person to take them.
Note:
Malversation
is
also
called
embezzlement. Note the word “embezzled” in
the phrase “or equal to the total value of the
property embezzled” in the penultimate
paragraph of Article 217. [Art. 217, Revised
Penal Code; Reyes, Book II]
Appropriation
CRIMINAL LAW
whether belonging to national or local
government, and he misappropriates
the same [Article 222, Revised Penal
Code]; or
4. Is constituted as the Depositary or
administrator of funds or property
seized or attached by public authority
even though said funds or property
belong to a private individual [Article
222, Revised Penal Code].
Appropriation involves every attempt to
dispose of public funds or property without a
right to do so. [Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. Nos. 103501-03 (1997)]
Sheriffs and receivers are included.
They fall under the term “administrator.” [See
Azarcon v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 116033,
Feb. 26, 1997]
Can be Committed with Malice or Through
Negligence or Imprudence.
• Negligence - omission of reasonable
care and caution which an ordinary
prudent person would have used in the
same
situation. The measure of
negligence is the standard of care
commensurate with the
occasion.
[Leano v. Domingo, G.R. No. 84378
(1998)]
• Good Faith as a Defense - For
malversation not committed through
negligence, good faith is a defense as
it negates criminal intent. [Quizo v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 77120
(1987)]
Judicial Administrator Not Covered
A judicial administrator in charge of settling the
estate of the deceased is not covered by the
article. Conversion of effects in his trust makes
him liable for estafa. [See Azarcon v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 116033, Feb. 26,
1997]
Private Property Covered
Private property is included, provided it is:
1. Attached;
2. Seized; or
3. Deposited by public authority. [Art. 222,
Revised Penal Code; People v. De la
Serna, C.A. 40 O.G. Supp. 12, 159]
Presumption of Misappropriation
Persons Liable
General Rule: Offender is a Public Officer
• Accountable Office - The nature of the
duties of the public officer, not the
name of the office, is controlling. Thus,
a clerk who receives money or property
belonging to the government, in the
course of his employment, for which he
is bound to account, may be liable
under Article 217. [Rueda v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 129064
(2000)]
Exception: Private persons may also
commit malversation. Such as when a
private person: [CoA-CuD]
1. Acts in Conspiracy with a public officer
in committing malversation;
2. Has become an Accomplice or
accessory to a public officer who
commits malversation;
3. Is made the Custodian in whatever
capacity of public funds or property,
When a demand is made upon an accountable
officer and he cannot produce the fund or
property involved, there is a prima facie
presumption that he had converted the same to
his own use. [Art. 217, Revised Penal Code;
See People v. Wa-Acon, G.R. No. 164575
(2006)]
When Presumption of Misappropriation
will not Arise
The presumption will not arise if there is an
issue as to the accuracy of the audit findings,
and if the fact that the funds are missing was
not indubitably established. [Dumagat v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 96915, (1992),
quoting Tinga v. People, L-57650, 160 SCRA
483 (1988)]
Demand and Damage Are Not
Necessary Elements of Malversation
Demand as well as damage to the government
are not necessary elements. Demand merely
Page 169 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
raises a prima facie presumption that missing
funds have been put to personal use. Damage
to the government is immaterial because the
penalty is based on the amount involved.
[Morong Water District v. Office of the Deputy
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 116754 (2000)]
Direct Evidence Not Required for
Conviction
An accountable public officer may be convicted
even in the absence of direct evidence, where
he has not been able to satisfactorily explain
the absence of the public funds. [Estepa v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 59670 (1990)]
Restitution
Returning the malversed funds is not
exempting, it is only mitigating. [Perez v.
People, 544 SCRA 532]
CRIMINAL LAW
any other person to take money,
the public funds/property goods or other
personal
property
Need for Damage
Not required
Necessity of Prior Demand
Not necessary
Malversation vs. Estafa
Malversation
[Art. 217]
Estafa
[Art. 315]
Nature of Funds
Public
Private
As to the Offender
Offender is usually a
public officer who is
accountable for the public
funds/property
Offender is a
private
individual
or
even a public
officer who is
not accountable
for
public
funds/property
Means of Commission
Crime is committed by
appropriating, taking, or
misappropriating/consenti
ng
or
through
abandonment
or
negligence,
permitting
Crime
is
committed by
misappropriatin
g, converting, or
denying having
received
Required
[Reyes, Book II]
Malversation, Estafa, and Qualified Theft of
Public Funds/Property
Malversation
[Art. 217]
When Crime is Estafa instead of
Malversation
The funds or property must be received in an
official capacity, in which case, the crime is
Malversation. Otherwise, the crime committed
is estafa. [US v. Solis, G.R. No. L-2828 (1906)]
Required
Estafa
[Art. 315]
Qualified
Theft
[Art. 310]
As to Offender
Accountable
Public Officer
Offender
who is not
accountable
and
has
acquired
juridical
possession
thereof and
took it with
abuse
of
confidence
or deceit
Offender
who
has
mere
physical
possession
and took the
property with
abuse
of
confidence
b. Article 218 – Failure of Accountable
Officer to Render Accounts
Elements [PART]:
1. Offender is Public officer, whether in
the service or separated therefrom by
resignation or any other cause;
2. He is an Accountable officer for public
funds or property;
3. He is Required by law or regulation to
render account to the Commission on
Audit, or to a provincial auditor;
4. He fails to do so for a period of Two
months after such accounts should be
rendered.
Page 170 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Demand and Misappropriation Not
Necessary
It is sufficient that a public officer fails to render
account for a period of time, when it is required
by a law or regulation [Art. 218, Revised Penal
Code; Lumauig v. People, G.R. No. 166680,
Jul. 7, 2014]
c. Article 219 – Failure of a
Responsible Public Officer to Render
Accounts Before Leaving the Country
3.
Offender is a Public officer;
He is an Accountable officer for public
funds or property;
He Unlawfully leaves or attempts to
leave the Philippine Islands without
securing a certificate from the
Commission on Audit showing that his
accounts have been finally settled.
Leaving must be Unlawful
The act of leaving the country must be
unauthorized or not permitted by law. [Art. 219,
Revised Penal Code]
d. Article 220 – Illegal Use of Public
Funds or Property
•
v.
Malversation (Art.
217)
Technical
Technical
Malversation (Art
220)
Nature of Funds
Public Funds
As to the Offender
Accountable Public Officers
Elements [PAU]:
1.
2.
Malversation
Malversation
Also known as Technical Malversation
Elements [P-PAO]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. There are Public funds or property
under his administration;
3. Such
fund
or
property
were
Appropriated by law or ordinance;
4. He applies such public fund or property
to any public use Other than for which
it was appropriated for.
Technical Malversation
Appropriation of Funds
No such requirement Must
be
appropriated by Law
or Ordinance
What is Done with the Funds
Applied to personal Applied to public use
use and benefit of other than what it
the
offender
or was appropriated for
another person
Good faith as a Defense
For malversation not
committed through
negligence,
good
faith is a defense as
it negates criminal
intent. [Quizo v.
Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 77120
(1987)]
Good faith is not a
defense. Technical
malversation is
malum prohibitum.
[Ysidoro v. People,
685 SCRA 637]
e. Article 221 - Failure to Make
Delivery of Public Funds or Property
Punishable Acts [FaR]:
Illegal use of public funds or property is also
known as technical malversation. The term
technical malversation is used because in this
crime, the fund or property involved is already
appropriated or earmarked for a certain public
purpose. Despite the public purpose, the act is
punished because it remains a violation of the
appropriations
law
[Parungao
vs.
Sandiganbayan, et al. G.R. No. 96025 (1991)].
1. Failing to make payment by a public
officer who is under the obligation to
make such payment from Government
funds in his possession
2. Refusing to make delivery by a public
officer who has been ordered by
competent authority to deliver any
property in his custody or under his
administration
Page 171 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
Mode 1: Failing to
Make Payment
[PPM]
Mode 2: Refusing
to make delivery
[PDM]
1. Public officer has government funds in
his possession
2. Obligation to make 2.
Obligation
to
Payment from such Deliver any property
funds
in his custody or
under
his
administration
3. Maliciously fails to perform the obligation
Basis of Penalty
•
•
Failure to make payment: fine shall be
5 to 25% of the amount he fails to pay
Refusal to make delivery. [Art.
221(1)(2), Revised Penal Code]
f. Article 222 – Officers Included in the
Preceding Provisions
Note: This article provides that private
individuals may also be held liable for the
crimes under Art 217 to 221.
Officers Include:
1. Private individuals who, in any
capacity, have charge of any national,
provincial or municipal funds, revenue,
or property
2. Administrator or depositary of funds
or property that has been attached,
seized or
deposited by public
authority, even if owned by a private
individual.
See: Art. 217 for extensive discussion
5. Chapter V: Infidelity of
Public Officers
SECTION 1. Infidelity in the Custody
Of Prisoners
a. Article 223 – Conniving With or
Consenting to Evasion
Elements [P-CEC]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He had in his Custody or charge a
prisoner, either detention prisoner or
prisoner by final judgment;
3. Such prisoner Escaped from his
custody;
4. He was in Connivance with the
prisoner in the latter’s escape. (“shall
consent to the escape”)
Classes of Prisoners Involved [FD]
1. Those sentenced by Final judgment;
and
2. Detention
prisoners
who
are
temporarily held in legal custody
What is Not Considered as Infidelity in
Custody
Leniency, laxity, and release of a detention
prisoner who could not be delivered to judicial
authorities within the time fixed by law is not
infidelity in the custody of a prisoner. [People v.
Lancanan, G.R. No. L-6805 (1954)]
Actual Evasion Even Without Actual
Escape
There is real actual evasion of service of a
sentence when the custodian permits the
prisoner to obtain a relaxation in his
imprisonment and to escape the punishment of
being deprived of his liberty, thus making the
penalty ineffectual, although the convict may
not have fled. This includes allowing prisoners
to sleep and eat in the officer’s house or utilize
the prisoner’s services for domestic chores.
[US v. Bandino, G.R. No. 9964 (1915)]
Page 172 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Consenting to Evasion [Art. 223] v.
Delivering Prisoners From Jail
Consenting to
Evasion
[Art. 223]
Delivering
Prisoners from Jail
[Art. 156]
As to Who may Commit
By a public officer
having the legal
charge or custody of
a prisoner.
By an outsider or by
a public officer who
does NOT have the
official charge or
custody
of
the
prisoner.
As to the Manner of Commission
By conniving or By removing from jail
consenting to the a prisoner confined
escape of a prisoner. therein or helping in
the escape of such
prisoner.
[AMURAO]
b. Article 224 – Evasion through
Negligence
Elements [P-CoN]:
Deliberate Non-performance of Duty
This covers only positive carelessness and
definite laxity which amounts to deliberate
nonperformance of duties. [Rodillas v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-58652 (1988)]
Recapture does not lead to exculpation
The fact that the public officer recaptured the
prisoner who had escaped from his custody
does not afford complete exculpation. [People
vs. Quisel, C.A., 52 O.G. 6975]
Liability of Escaping Prisoner:
•
Elements [PCE-CN]:
1. Offender is a Private person;
2. Conveyance or custody of a prisoner or
person under arrest is confided to him;
3. Prisoner or person under arrest
Escapes;
4. Offender Consents to the escape, or
that the escape takes place through
his Negligence.
Not Applicable if Private Person made the
Arrest
Art. 225 is not applicable if a private person
was the one who made the arrest and he
consented to the escape of the person he
arrested. [REYES, Book 2]
Consenting to Evasion [Art. 225] vs.
Delivering Prisoners from Jail
Consenting to
Evasion
[Art. 225]
Delivering
Prisoners from Jail
[Art. 156]
As to who may Commit
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He is charged with the Conveyance or
custody of a detention prisoner or
prisoner by final judgment;
3. Such prisoner escapes through
Negligence
•
c. Article 225 – Escape of Prisoner
under the Custody of a Person Not a
Public Officer
If he is a prisoner by final judgment
- liable for evasion of service (Art. 157)
If he is a detention prisoner - he does
not incur criminal liability [Art. 224]
By a Private Person
who acts as a
custodian of the
Prisoner.
By an outsider or by
a public officer who
does NOT have the
official charge or
custody
of
the
prisoner.
SECTION 2. Infidelity in the Custody
Of Documents
d.
Article
Concealment,
Documents
226
–
Removal,
or Destruction of
Elements [P-ReDeCo-ED]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He Removes, Destroys or Conceals a
document or papers;
3. Said document or papers should have
been Entrusted to such public officer by
reason of his office;
4. Damage, whether serious or not, to a
third party or to the public interest has
been caused.
Page 173 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Note: Damage in this article may consist in
mere alarm to the public or in the alienation of
its confidence in any branch of the government
service.
Offender Must be Officially Entrusted with
the Documents
Can only be committed by the public officer
who is made the custodian of the document in
his official capacity. [Art. 226]
Removal Must be for Illicit Purpose
If the act of removal is done with lawful motives
such as to save the documents from imminent
danger of loss or destruction, there would be
no crime committed. However, illicit motive is
not required if the mode is concealment or
destruction. [Manzanaris vs. People, 127
SCRA 201]
Damage Caused
Damage in this article may consist in mere
alarm to the public or in the alienation of its
confidence in any branch of the government
service. [Kataniag v. People, G.R. No.48398
(1984)]
Documents
1. Documents must be complete and
one by which a right could be
established or an obligation could be
extinguished. If the writings are mere
forms, there is no crime. [People v.
Camacho, G.R. No.18688 (1923)]
2. A book is not a document. A
document is a written instrument by
which something is proven or made of
record [People v. Agnis, G.R. No. L19676 (1923)]
3. “Papers”
includes
checks,
promissory notes, and paper money.
[Webster’s Dictionary]
Consummated upon Removal
Removal is consummated upon taking or
secreting away of the document from its usual
place. It is immaterial whether or not the illicit
purpose of the offender has been
accomplished. [Kataniag v. People, G.R.
No.48398 (1984)]
CRIMINAL LAW
forward the letters to their destination. [People
vs. Irineo, C.A., 53 O.G. 2827]
Revelation Of
Secrets By An
Officer
[Art. 229]
Removal,
Concealment or
Destruction of
Documents
[Art. 226]
The papers contain
secrets
and
therefore should not
be published, and
the public officer
having
charge
thereof removes and
delivers
them
wrongfully to a third
person.
The papers do not
contain secrets but
their removal is for
an illicit purpose.
e. Article 227 – Officer Breaking Seal
Elements [P-CSB]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He is charged with the Custody of
papers or property;
3. These papers or property are Sealed
by proper authority;
4. He Breaks the seal or permits them to
be broken.
In "breaking of seal", the word "breaking"
should not be given a literal meaning. The
custodian is liable even if the seal was not
actually broken because the custodian
managed to open the parcel without breaking
the seal.
Damage/Intent to Cause Damage Not
Necessary
Where documents are sealed by competent
authorities, it is evident that the purpose
thereof is to ensure their preservation. It is
sufficient that the seal is broken, even if the
contents are not tampered with.
f. Article 228 – Opening of Closed
Documents
Elements [PCON]:
Delivery of Documents to Wrong Person
Delivering documents to the wrong party is
infidelity in the custody thereof. This could
cover failure on the part of the post office to
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. Any Closed papers, documents, or
objects are entrusted to his custody;
3. He Opens or permits to be opened said
closed papers, documents or objects;
Page 174 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
4. He does Not have proper authority.
Act should not be under Art 227
If the public officer had to break a seal to open
the closed document, he is liable under Art 227.
CRIMINAL LAW
Revelation of Secrets vs. Infidelity in
the Custody of Documents
Revelation of
Secrets by an
Officer (Art 229)
g. Article 229 – Revelation of Secrets
by an Officer
Infidelity in
Custody of
Documents/Papers
by Removing the
Same (Art 226)
Content of the Papers
Punishable Acts [ReD]:
1. Revealing any secrets known to the
offending public officer by reason of his
official capacity
2. Wrongfully Delivering papers or copies
of papers of which he has charge and
which should not be published
Mode 2: Wrongful
delivery of papers
[P-PWD]
1.Offender is a Public officer
2. He knows of a 2. He has charge of
Secret by reason of Papers which should
his official capacity
not be published
Papers do not
contain secrets.
Damage Involved
Damage is to public
interest
Elements:
Mode 1: Revelation
of Secrets [P-SRD]
Papers contain
secrets/papers
which should not be
published.
Damage is to public
interest or third
persons
h. Article 230 – Public Officers
Revealing
Secrets
of
Private
Individuals
Elements [PSR]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He knows of the Secrets of a private
individual by reason of his office;
3. He Reveals such secrets without
authority or justifiable reason.
Secrets must affect
public interest. If
the secret revealed
does not involve
public interest, no
crime is committed.
Secrets of private
individuals are not
included. [Art. 229,
Revised Penal Code;
REYES, Book 2]
Custody Required
“Charge” - means
custody or control. If
he
is
merely
entrusted with the
papers and not with
the custody thereof,
he is not liable under
this article.
Damage to a
necessary.
3. He Reveals such
secret
without
authority
or
justifiable reasons
3. He Wrongfully
delivers
those
papers or copies
thereof to a third
person
Revelation of Secrets by an Officer vs.
Public Officer Revealing Secrets of
Private Individual
4. There is Damage to public interest
private
individual
is
not
When the Offender is a Lawyer
When the offender is a public attorney or a
solicitor, the act of revealing the secret should
not be covered by Art 209 (Betrayal of Trust).
Revelation of
Secrets by an
Officer
[Art. 229]
Public Officer
Revealing Secrets
of a Private
Individual
[Art. 230]
Nature of the Secret
Secret
involves Secret involves
public interest
private individual
Page 175 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
a
CRIM2
Necessity for Damage
Damage to public Damage to public
interest is essential
interest is essential
R.A. No. 3019 Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act Section 3 (k) - Divulging
valuable information of a confidential
character, acquired by his office or by him on
account of his official position to unauthorized
persons, or releasing such information in
advance of its authorized release date.
CRIMINAL LAW
5. Offender Disobeys his superior despite
the disapproval of the suspension.
This does not apply if the order of the superior
is illegal. [Art 11(6), Revised Penal Code]
c. Article 233 – Refusal of Assistance
Elements [P-CoM]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. A competent authority demands from
the offender that he lend his
Cooperation
towards
the
administration of justice or other public
service;
3. Offender Maliciously fails to do so
6.
Chapter
VI:
Other
Offenses or Irregularities by
Public Officers
Official Duty of Public Officer
SECTION 1. Disobedience, Refusal of
Assistance, and Maltreatment Of
Prisoners
To be liable, the public officer must have the
obligation, by reason of his office, to render
assistance in the administration of justice or
other public service.
a. Article 231 – Open Disobedience
Elements [Je-JWR]:
1. Officer is a Judicial or executive officer;
2. There is a Judgment, decision or order
of a superior authority;
3. Such judgment, decision or order was
made Within the scope of the
jurisdiction of the superior authority and
issued with all the legal formalities;
4. He openly Refuses to execute the said
judgment, decision or order, which he
is duty bound to obey without any legal
justification.
b. Article 232 – Disobedience to the
Order of Superior Officer When Said
Order Was Suspended by Inferior
Officer
Elements [PES-DiDi]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. An order is issued by his superior for
Execution;
3. He Suspended the execution of such
order;
4. His
superior
Disapproves
the
suspension of the execution of the
order; and
d. Article 234 – Refusal to Discharge
Elective Office
Elements [ERL]:
1. Offender is elected by popular Election
to a public office;
2. He Refuses to be sworn in or to
discharge the duties of said office;
3. There is no Legal motive for such
refusal to be sworn in or to discharge
the duties of said office.
Only for Elective Officials
Once an individual is elected to an office by the
will of the people, discharge of duties becomes
a matter of duty, not only a right. This only
applies for elective, not appointive officers. [Art.
234, Revised Penal Code]
e. Article 235 – Maltreatment of
Prisoners
Elements [PCM]:
1. Offender is a Public officer or
employee;
2. He has under his Charge a prisoner or
detention prisoner;
3. He Maltreats such prisoner by
overdoing himself in the correction or
handling of a prisoner or detention
prisoner under his charge by:
Page 176 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Imposition of punishment not
authorized by the regulations;
b. Inflicting such punishments
(those authorized) in a cruel
and humiliating manner.
c. Maltreating such prisoners to
extort a confession or to obtain
some information from the
prisoner.
Offender Must Have Direct Custody
This is committed only by such public officer
charged with direct custody of the prisoner.
[Punzalan v. People, G.R. No.L-8820 (1956)]
If the public officer is not the custodian of the
prisoner and he manhandles the latter - crime
is physical injuries. [People vs. Baring, C.A., 37
O.G. 1366]
Cannot be Complexed with other
Crimes
Maltreatment of prisoners cannot be
complexed with homicide, physical injuries,
orother crimes as the article says “in addition to
his liability for the physical injuries or damage
caused…” [Art. 235, Revised Penal Code]
Qualifying Circumstance
If the maltreatment was done in order to extort
confession, the penalty is qualified to the next
higher degree. [Art. 235, Revised Penal Code]
Torture
If the acts of maltreatment constitute torture,
there is a separate criminal liability from the
crime under the RPC. Torturous acts are not
absorbed in, nor do they absorb other crimes.
[Section 15, RA 9745]
Note: See the Special Penal Laws Reviewer for
an in-depth discussion on RA 9745 [“The AntiTorture Act of 2009”].
Other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment
Deliberate and aggravated treatment or
punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of
this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or
agent of a person in authority against a person
under his/her custody, which attains a level of
severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or
debasement to the latter. [Sec. 3(b), R.A.
9745].
Acts of Torture vs.
Maltreatment
Acts of Torture
Maltreatment
Definition
Torture refers to an
act by which severe
pain or
suffering,
whether
physical or mental, is
intentionally inflicted
on a person for such
purposes as:
a. obtaining
from him/her
or a third
person
information or
a confession;
b. punishing
him/her for an
act he/she or
a third
person has
committed or
is suspected
of having
committed;
c. or intimidating
or coercing
him/her or a
third person;
d. or for any
reason based
on
discrimination
of any kind,
when such
pain or
suffering is
inflicted by or
at the
instigation of
or with the
consent or
acquiescence
of a person in
authority or
agent of a
person in
authority.
It does not include
pain
or
suffering
arising only from,
Page 177 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The maltreatment:
(1) must relate to
the correction or
handling of the
prisoner, or
(2) must be for the
purpose of extorting
a confession or of
obtaining
some
information from the
prisoner.
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Comparison Between Art. 234 and Art.
236
inherent
in
or
incidental to lawful
sanctions [Sec. 3(a),
R.A. 9745].
Refusal to
Discharge Elective
Office
[Art. 234]
Note: The elements of
torture would refer to
the severity or gravity
of
the
pain
or
suffering, intent to
injure, and purposes
+ state involvement.
Anticipation of
Duties of a Public
Officer
[Art. 236]
As to Nature of Position
Officer is elected
Officer is elected or
appointed
As to Act Punished
Extent of Injuries
Can be Physical or
Mental/Psychological.
It does not include
pain
or
suffering
arising only from,
inherent
in
or
incidental to lawful
sanctions.
Does not require
physical
injuries.
Any
kind
of
punishment
not
authorized
or
although authorized
if
executed
in
excess
of
the
prescribed degree
is covered.
The officer, without
legal motive, refuses
to be sworn in or
discharge the duties
of his office.
The
offender
assumes
the
performance of the
duties of the office
without having been
sworn in or giving the
bond required by
law.
g.
Article
237
–
Prolonging
Performance of Duties and Powers
Penalty
Punished under R.A. Punished under Art.
9745
236 of the RPC
SECTION
2.
Anticipation,
Prolongation, and Abandonment of
the Duties and Powers of Public Office
f. Article 236 – Anticipation of Duties
of a Public Officer
Elements [ESAN]:
1. Offender is Entitled to hold a public
office or employment, either by election
or appointment;
2. The law requires that he should first be
Sworn in and/or should first give a
bond;
3. He Assumes the performance of the
duties and powers of such office; and
4. He has Not taken his oath of office
and/or given the bond required by law
Elements [PPC]:
1. Offender is holding a Public office;
2. Period provided by law, regulations or
special provision for holding such
office, has already expired; and
3. He Continues to exercise the duties
and powers of such office
Officers Covered
The offenders here are those who can be
suspended, separated, declared over-aged, or
dismissed. Those who cannot be, cannot be
said to be able to continue to exercise the
duties of powers of office. [Art. 237, Revised
Penal Code; REYES, Book 2]
h. Article 238 – Abandonment of Office
or Position
Elements [PRNA]:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He formally Resigns from his position;
3. His resignation has Not yet been
accepted; and
4. He Abandons his office to the
detriment of public service.
Page 178 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Note: Resignation must be written or formal. A
verbal resignation is not the kind of resignation
contemplated by the set-up of the Civil Service
System. [People v. Santos, C.A. 55 O.G. 5566]
Requisites for Resignation [InAA]
1. Intention to relinquish part of the term
2. Act of relinquishment
3. Acceptance by the proper authority
[LRTA v. Salvana, G.R. No. 192074
(2014)]
Qualifying Circumstance
The offense is qualified when the purpose of
the abandonment is to evade the discharge of
duties of preventing, prosecuting, or punishing
any of the crimes falling within Title One
(Crimes against National Security and the Law
of the Nations) and Chapter One of Title Three
(Rebellion, Coup d’état, Sedition, and
Disloyalty) of book two of the RPC. [Art. 238,
Revised Penal Code]
Abandonment of Office v. Dereliction
of Duty
Abandonment of
Office or Position
[Art. 238]
Dereliction of Duty
[Art. 208]
As to Offender
Committed by any Committed only by
public officer
public officers who
have the duty to
institute prosecution
for the punishment of
violations of the law
CRIMINAL LAW
SECTION 3. Usurpation of Powers and
Unlawful Appointments
i. Article 239 –
Legislative Powers
Usurpation
of
Elements [EJ-MAS]:
1. Offender is an Executive or Judicial
officer, who encroaches upon the
powers of the Legislative branch by:
a. Making General Rules or
regulations beyond the scope
of his authority; or
b. Attempting to repeal a law; or
c. Suspending the execution
thereof.
j. Article 240 – Usurpation
Executive Functions
of
Elements [JAO]:
1. Offender is a Judge;
2. That he:
a. Assumes a power pertaining to
the executive authorities, or
b. Obstructs
the
executive
authorities in the lawful
exercise of their powers.
Note: If the offender is not a judge [i.e. a
councilor usurping the functions of a mayor] the
crime is punishable under Art 177 (Usurpation
of Authority or Official Function). [See People
v. Hilvano, 99 Phil. 655]
k. Article 241 – Usurpation of Judicial
Functions
As to Abandonment
There
is
actual
abandonment
through resignation
to
evade
the
discharge of duties
Public officer does
not abandon his
office but merely fails
to
prosecute
a
violation of the law.
Elements [Ex-AO]:
1. Offender is an officer of the Executive
branch;
2. That he:
a. Assumes judicial powers, or
b. Obstructs the execution of any
order or decision rendered by
any judge within his jurisdiction.
l. Article 242 – Disobeying Request for
Disqualification
Elements:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
Page 179 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. A proceeding is Pending before such
public officer;
3. There is a Question brought before the
proper
authority
regarding
his
jurisdiction, which is not yet decided;
4. He has been lawfully required to
Refrain
from
continuing
the
proceeding;
5. He Continues the proceeding.
Note: The disobedient officer is liable even if
the jurisdictional question is resolved in his
favor. The act punished is the continuation of
proceedings even if there is a pending
jurisdictional question. The resolution of the
jurisdictional question in the offender’s favor is
not a factor. [Art. 242, Revised Penal Code;
REYES, Book 2]
m. Article 243 – Orders or Request by
Executive Officer to Any Judicial
Authority
Elements:
1. Offender is an Executive officer;
2. He addresses any order or suggestion
to any Judicial authority;
3. The order or suggestion relates to any
case or business coming within the
exclusive Jurisdiction of the courts of
justice.
n.
Article
Appointments
244
–
Unlawful
CRIMINAL LAW
See People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. 164185, Jul. 23, 2008]
o. Article 245 – Abuses Against
Chastity
Punishable Acts [DCuW]:
1. Soliciting/making immoral or indecent
advances to a woman interested in
matters pending before the offending
officer for Decision or with respect to
which he is required to submit a report
to or consult with a superior officer;
2. Soliciting or making immoral or
indecent advances to a woman under
the offender’s Custody;
3. Soliciting or making immoral or
indecent advances to the Wife,
daughter, sister or relative within the
same degree by affinity of any person
in the custody of the offending warden
or officer.
Elements:
Mode 1:
Soliciting
to a
woman
interested
in
pending
matters
[PSP]
Mode 2:
Soliciting to a
woman
under
offender’s
custody
[PSC]
Mode 3:
Soliciting to
wife/
daughter/
sister/
relative of
person in
custody
[PSR]
1. Offender is a Public officer
Elements:
1. Offender is a Public officer;
2. He Nominates or appoints a person to
a public office;
3. Such person Lacks the legal
qualifications therefore;
4. Offender Knows that his nominee or
appointee lacks the qualification at the
time he made the nomination or
appointment.
Note:
1. Mere recommendation is not a crime,
even if such person knew that the
person recommended is not qualified.
“Nomination” is different from
“recommendation”.. [Art. 243, Revised
Penal Code]
2. Qualifications must be provided for by
law [Art. 243, Revised Penal Code;
2. He Solicits or makes immoral or indecent
advances to a woman
3. Woman
is
interested
in matters
Pending
before the
offender
for
decision,
or
with
respect to
which he is
required to
submit a
report to or
consult
3. Woman is
under
the
Custody of the
offender who
is a warden or
other
public
officer directly
charged with
the care and
custody
of
prisoners.
Page 180 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
3. Woman is
the
wife,
daughter,
sister
or
Relative
within
the
same degree
by affinity of
the person in
the custody
of
the
offender.
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
with
a
superior.
Solicitation
Solicit is to propose earnestly and persistently
something unchaste and immoral to a woman.
The advances must be immoral or indecent.
Proof of solicitation is not necessary when
there is sexual intercourse. [Black’s Law
Dictionary]
Consummated by Proposal
The crime is consummated by mere proposal.
It is not necessary that the woman should have
yielded to the solicitation of the offender. [See
Art. 245, Revised Penal Code]
Mother of Person in Custody Not Included
The mother of the person in the custody of the
public officer is not included. [See Art. 245,
Revised Penal Code]
Page 181 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
H.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PERSONS [ARTS. 246 - 266D]
1. Chapter I: Destruction of Life
SECTION
Homicide
1.
Parricide,
Murder,
a. Article 246 – Parricide
Elements: [KAA-FaMCADS]
1. A person is Killed;
2. Deceased is killed by the Accused;
3. Deceased is the Accused's:
a. Legitimate/illegitimate Father
b. Legitimate/illegitimate Mother
c. Legitimate/illegitimate
Child
(should not be less than 3 days
old,
otherwise
crime
is
infanticide)
d. Other legitimate Ascendant
e. Other legitimate Descendant
f. Legitimate Spouse
Relationship
Relationship of offender with the victim is an
essential element of this crime; except for
spouses, only relatives by blood and in direct
line are covered. An adopted child is not
covered by parricide.
Rules on Relationship of Relatives
1. Father, mother or child may be
legitimate or illegitimate
2. Other ascendants or descendants
must be legitimate
3. Child should not be less than 3 days
old, otherwise, crime is infanticide
4. Spouse must be legitimate; Muslim
husbands with several wives can be
convicted of parricide only in case the
first wife is killed. [People v. Subano,
G.R. No. L-20338 (1967)]
Note: Relationship must be alleged in the
Information to be convicted of Parricide.
[People v. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495 (2014)]
Parricide shall not be punished by
reclusion perpetua to death in the
following cases:
1. Reckless or simple imprudence [Art.
365]
2. Parricide by mistake [Art. 49]
3. Parricide
under
exceptional
circumstances [Art. 247]
b. Article 247 – Death or Physical
Injuries
Under
Exceptional
Circumstances
This article does not define a felony, rather it
serves as a defense for a person charged with
parricide, homicide or serious physical injuries.
Elements: [M-SD-KiP]
1. A legally Married person, or a parent,
surprises the following in the act of
sexual intercourse with another
person:
a. His Spouse or;
b. His Daughter, the latter under
18 years of age and living with
him;
2. He or she Kills any or both of them, or
inflicts upon any or both of them any
serious physical injury in the act or
immediately thereafter;
3. He has not Promoted or facilitated the
prostitution of his wife or daughter, or
that he or she has not consented to the
infidelity of the other spouse.
Sentence to Accused
General Rule: If all the requisites have been
met, the defendant will be sentenced to
destierro instead of the severe penalty for the
aforementioned crime [People v. Araquel, G.R.
No. L-12629].
Exception: If less serious or slight physical
injuries are inflicted, there is no criminal
liability. [Id]
Other Considerations:
1. Actual Sexual Intercourse – meaning
vaginal penetration by the penis and
does not include merely sleeping on
the same bed [People v. Gonzales,
G.R. No. 46310; People v. Bituaanan
56 Phil 23, cited in REYES, Book 2]
Page 182 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. Accused must be legally married - if
the victim is his or her spouse. [People
v. Araquel, G.R. No. L-12629]
3. Whether or not the daughter is
legitimate
or
illegitimate
is
immaterial - provided she is living with
the guilty parent [Regalado]
4. Privilege cannot be invoked without
surprise – if the accused did not
surprise the supposed offenders in the
very act of committing adultery, he
cannot invoke the privilege of Art. 247.
[People v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 46310
(1939)]
Immediately Thereafter
There is no set time as jurisprudence has held
1 hour or even 4 hours as “immediately
thereafter”. However, the act done must be a:
a. Direct result of the outrage of the
cuckolded spouse; and
b. Continuous act from the moment of the
surprising. [US v. Vargas, G.R. No.
1053, May 7, 1903]
When Article 247 does not apply: [BM]
1. If the surprising took place Before any
actual sexual intercourse could be
done.
2. If the daughter is Married.
Although the article does not use the word
“unmarried,” this article applies only when the
daughter is single because while under 18 and
single, she is still under parental authority. If
she is married, her husband alone can claim
the benefits of this article. [See Art. 247,
Revised Penal Code; REYES, Book 2]
c. Article 248 – Murder
Elements: [KAC-TCICPC-N]
1. Person was Killed;
2. Accused killed him;
3. Killing was attended by any of the
following qualifying Circumstances:
a. With
Treachery,
taking
advantage of superior strength,
aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken
the defense, or of means or
persons to insure or afford
impunity;
b. In Consideration of a price,
reward or promise;
CRIMINAL LAW
c. By means of Inundation, fire,
poison, explosion, shipwreck,
stranding
of
a
vessel,
derailment or assault upon a
railroad, fall of an airship, by
means of motor vehicles, or
with the use of any other
means involving great waste
and ruin;
d. On occasion of any of the
Calamities enumerated in the
preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a
volcano, destructive cyclone,
epidemic, or any other public
calamity;
e. With evident Premeditation;
f. With Cruelty, by deliberately
and inhumanly augmenting the
suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his
person or corpse.
4. Killing is Not parricide or infanticide.
Rules for the Application of the
Circumstances which Qualify the Killing
to Murder
1. If there are more than one alleged in
the information for murder, only one will
qualify the killing to murder and the
other circumstances will be taken as
generic aggravating circumstance.
[See People v. Dueño, 90 SCRA 23]
2. When the other circumstances are
absorbed or included in one qualifying
circumstance,
they
cannot
be
considered as generic aggravating.
[People v. Sespeñe, et al., 102 Phil.
199]
3. Any of the qualifying circumstances
enumerated in Art. 248 must be alleged
in the information. [US v. Campo, 23
Phil 369]
Element of Intent to Kill
General Rule: Offender must have intent to kill
to be liable for murder.
Exception: In murder qualified by treachery, it
is required only that there is treachery in the
attack, hence, there is murder even if offender
has no intent to kill the person assaulted.
[People vs. Abejuela, G.R. No. L-32702, Aug.
6, 1979]
Page 183 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Killing by Fire
•
•
If the primordial criminal intent of
the offender is to kill and fire was only
used as a means to do so, the crime is
only murder.
If the primordial criminal intent of
the offender is to destroy property
with the use of pyrotechnics and
incidentally, somebody within the
premises is killed, the crime is arson
with homicide, a single indivisible crime
penalized under Art. 326, which is
death as a consequence of arson.
[People v. Malngan, G.R. No. 170470,
(2006)]
Outraging vs. Scoffing
Outraging
Scoffing
Definition
To
commit
an To leer and implies a
extremely vicious or showing
of
deeply insulting act. irreverence.
Refusal to be Operated On; Not a Defense
Refusal of the deceased to be operated on
does not relieve the offender of the criminal
liability for his death. [People v. Sto. Domingo,
G.R. No. 3783 (1939)]
Intent to kill
General Rule: Conclusively presumed when
death results.
Exception: Evidence of intent is crucial to a
finding of attempted or frustrated homicide
[Yapyuco v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 12074446]
Physical Injuries
Accused is liable for physical injuries if there is
no intent to kill on the part of the offender in an
attempted or frustrated homicide. [See People
v. Delim, G.R. No. 142773 (2003)]
Accidental Homicide
Example
The act of an
accused in having
anal intercourse with
the woman after
killing her. [People v.
Butler, 120 SCRA
281]
CRIMINAL LAW
imprudence. [People v. Castillo, C.A. No. 227
(1946)]
When the intestines
of the dead were
removed and hung
around the neck of
the victim’s brother
“as a necklace” and
the lungs and liver
were described as
“pulutan.” [People v.
Carmina, 193 SCRA
429]
d. Article 249 – Homicide
Elements: [KJ-IQ]
1. Person was Killed;
2. Offender killed him without any
Justifying circumstances;
3. Offender had the Intention to kill
4. Killing was not attended by any of the
Qualifying circumstances of murder, or
by that of parricide or infanticide
No offense of Frustrated Homicide through
Imprudence.
The element of intent to kill in frustrated
homicide is incompatible with negligence or
It is the death of a person brought about by a
lawful act performed with proper care and skill
and without homicidal intent, there is no felony.
[Id]
e. Article 250 - Penalty for Frustrated
Parricide, Murder or Homicide
Courts may impose a penalty: [Art. 250,
Revised Penal Code]
1. 2 degrees lower for frustrated parricide,
murder, or homicide
2. 3 degrees lower for attempted
parricide, murder, or homicide.
The imposition of a penalty lower by one
degree than that imposed under Arts. 50 and
51 depends on the courts, in view of the facts
of the case. [Id]
Note: that under the RPC, the following
penalties shall be imposed:
1. Frustrated Felony - the penalty next lower
in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony [Art. 50, RPC].
2. Attempted Felony - the penalty lower by
two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony shall be imposed [Art. 51,
Revised Penal Code].
Page 184 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Note: Any attempt on, or conspiracy against,
the life of the Chief Executive of the Philippines
or that of any member of his family, or against
the life of any member of his cabinet or that of
any member of the latter’s family, shall suffer
the penalty of death. [P.D. No. 1110-A]
f. Article 251 - Death Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
Tumultuous Affray
It is a commotion in a confused manner to an
extent that it would not be possible to identify
who the killer is if death results, or who inflicted
the serious physical injury, but the person or
persons who used violence are known. [See
Wacoy v. People, G.R. No. 213792 (2015)]
Note: It exists when at least four persons took
part, as implied by the use of the word “several”
which means more than two but not very many
[See Art. 251; Revised Penal Code; REYES,
Book 2].
Elements: [SGQKAI]
1. There are Several persons;
2. They do not compose Groups
organized for the common purpose of
assaulting and attacking each other
reciprocally;
3. These several persons Quarreled and
assaulted one another in a confused
and tumultuous manner;
4. Someone was Killed in the course of
the affray;
5. It cannot be Ascertained who actually
killed the deceased; and
6. The person or persons who inflicted
serious physical injuries or who used
violence can be Identified.
Persons Liable [IK]
1. Person or persons who Inflicted the
serious physical injuries
2. If it is not Known who inflicted the
serious physical injuries on the
deceased, all persons who used
violence upon the person of the victim
are liable.
Presence of Conspiracy
If there is conspiracy, this crime is not
committed. The crime would be murder or
homicide. [See Wacoy v. People, G.R. No.
213792, Jun. 22, 2015]
CRIMINAL LAW
g. Article 252 - Physical Injuries
Caused in Tumultuous Affray
Elements: [TSIK]
1. There is a Tumultuous affray;
2. A participant or some participants
thereof Suffered serious physical
injuries or physical injuries of a less
serious nature only;
3. Person
responsible
cannot
be
Identified; and
4. All those who appear to have used
violence upon the person of the
offended party are Known.
Presence of Violence
All those who appear to have used violence
shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree
than that provided for the serious physical
injuries inflicted. [Art. 265, Revised Penal
Code]
Death Caused in Tumultuous Affray
vs. Physical Injuries Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
Death Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
[Art. 251]
Physical Injuries
Caused in
Tumultuous Affray
[Art. 252]
Participants
The person
the course
affray need
one
of
participants
affray.
killed in
of the
not be
the
in the
The injured party in
the crime of physical
injuries inflicted in a
tumultuous
affray
must be one or some
of the participants.
[REYES, BOOK 2]
h. Article 253 - Giving Assistance to
Suicide
Giving Assistance to Suicide
Giving assistance to suicide means giving
means (e.g., arms, poison, etc.) or whatever
manner of positive and direct cooperation (e.g.,
intellectual aid, suggestions regarding the
mode of committing suicide, etc.). [REYES,
Book 2]
Page 185 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Modes: [AL]
1. Assisting another to commit suicide,
whether the suicide is consummated or
not;
2. Lending his assistance to another to
commit suicide to the extent of doing
the killing Himself.
Note: The person who attempts to commit
suicide is not criminally liable; only the person
assisting him or her. [Id.] Of course, if the
suicide was consummated, there is obviously
no criminal liability on the part of the person
who killed himself/herself since he/she would
be dead
Euthanasia – commonly known as mercy
killing; the practice of painlessly putting to
death a person suffering from some incurable
disease.
● A doctor who resorts to euthanasia of
his patient may be liable for murder.
But if the patient himself asks to be
killed by his doctor, this Article applies.
[Id.]
i. Article 254 - Discharge of Firearms
Elements: [DN]
1. Offender Discharges a firearm against
or at another person.
2. Offender has No intention to kill that
person.
Crime as long as Initially Aimed at
Offended Party
The crime is the discharge of firearm, even if
the gun was not pointed at the offended party
when it fired, as long as it was initially aimed by
the accused at or against the offended party
[People v. Cupin, C.A., 40 O.G., Supp. 11, 21,
cited in REYES, Book 2]
If Offended Party is Hit and Wounded
If in the discharge of a firearm, the offended
party is hit and wounded, there is a complex
crime of discharge of firearm with serious or
less serious physical injuries. [People v.
Arquiza, G.R. No. 42128-42129]
CRIMINAL LAW
interficendi must be established with the same
degree of certainty as is required of the other
elements of the crime. [Dado v. People, G.R.
No. 131421 (2002)]
Discharge of Firearms vs. Homicide
Discharge of
Firearms
[Art. 254]
Homicide/Murder
[Arts. 248/249]
As to Intent to Kill
There must be no There is intent to kill
intent to kill
(conclusively
presumed if a person
died)
As to Rationale
The discharge was Intent was to kill
intended merely to another
frighten or cause
alarm to the offended
party [People v.
Hinolan, C.A., 47
O.G. 3596, cited in
Reyes, Book Two].
Alarms and Scandals vs. Discharge of
Firearms vs. Grave Threats
Discharge
of Firearms
[Art. 254]
Alarms and
Scandals
[Art. 155]
Grave
Threats
[Art. 282]
As to the Place
At any place Public place
(and aimed
at a specific
person)
At any place
As to Purpose
To intimidate To
cause To demand
or frighten a disturbance
money
or
person
or scandal
impose any
other
condition
Animus Interficendi
Intent to kill or animus inteficendi cannot be
automatically drawn from the mere fact that the
use of firearms is dangerous to life. Animus
Page 186 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
SECTION 2. Infanticide and Abortion
j. Article 255 – Infanticide
Not mitigating
Elements: [C-3]
1. Child was killed by the accused;
2. Deceased child was less than 3 days
old (72 hours).
Persons Liable:
1. Father or mother of the child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate; or
2. Any other legitimate ascendant of the
child
3. A Stranger [Art. 255, Revised Penal
Code]
Must be Born Alive
It is necessary that the child be born alive and
viable (capable of independent existence). [US
v. Vedra, G.R. No. 4779 (1908)]
Mitigating Circumstance
Only the mother and maternal grandparents
are entitled to mitigating circumstances of
concealing the mother’s dishonor. [Art. 255,
Revised Penal Code]
Other Persons who Cooperate
Others who cooperate with the mother or
grandparent for killing a child less than 3 days
old will suffer the penalty for murder. (US v.
Aquino, G.R. No. 11653]
Parricide vs. Infanticide [Art. 246, 255,
Revised Penal Code, Reyes]
Parricide
[Art. 246]
Infanticid
[Art. 255]
As to Basis of Crime
Based
relationship
offender and
victim
As to Applicability of Mitigating
Circumstance of Concealment of
Dishonor
on Based on the age of
of the child (must be
the less than 3 days old)
Mitigating
circumstance
k. Article 256 - Intentional Abortion
Elements: [PVi-DI]
1. There is a Pregnant woman;
2. Violence is exerted, or drugs or
beverages administered, or that the
accused otherwise acts upon such
pregnant woman;
3. As a result of the above acts, the fetus
Dies, either in the womb or after having
been expelled therefrom; and
4. Abortion is Intended.
Punishable Acts [VAAW]
1. Use of Violence upon the pregnant woman;
2. Acting, but without using violence and
without the consent of the woman. (e.g., by
administering drugs or beverages upon such
pregnant woman without her consent.)
3. Acting (by administering drugs or
beverages), With the consent of the pregnant
woman.
Persons Liable:
1. Person who intentionally caused the
abortion under Art. 256; and
2. Pregnant woman if she consented, with
her liability defined under Art. 258
Abortion
The willful killing of the fetus in the uterus or the
violent expulsion of the fetus from the maternal
womb which results in the death of the fetus.
[See People v. Paycana, 551 SCRA 657, G.R.
No. 179035, Apr. 16, 2008]
Frustrated Abortion
Committed if the fetus that is expelled is viable
and, therefore, not dead. [Id]
As to Identity of the Victim
May be committed Victim need not be a
against a relative
relative
Complex Crime of Murder/Physical
Injuries and Abortion
If the mother as a consequence of abortion
suffers death or physical injuries, there is a
complex crime of murder or physical injuries
and abortion. [Id]
Page 187 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Impossible Crime
If the woman turns out not to be pregnant and
someone performs an abortion upon her, he is
liable for an impossible crime if the woman
suffers no physical injury. [Id]
Abortion vs. Infanticide [People v.
Paycana, 551 SCRA 657, G.R. No.
179035 (2008)]
Abortion
[Art. 256]
Infanticide
[Art. 255]
administering drugs
or beverages upon
her)
3. Acting with the
consent
of
the
pregnant woman
(e.g., administering
drugs or beverages)
As to Intent
Abortion is intended
Fetus could not Fetus could sustain
sustain independent an independent life
life. No legal viability. after separation from
the mother’s womb.
l. Article 257 - Unintentional Abortion
Elements: [PVID]
1. There is a Pregnant woman;
2. Violence is used upon such pregnant
woman without intending an abortion;
3. The violence is Intentionally exerted;
4. Result of violence – fetus Dies, either
in the womb or expelled therefrom
As to Knowledge of Pregnancy
Accused has knowledge as to the pregnancy
of the woman.
m. Article 258 - Abortion Practiced by
the Woman Herself or by Parents
Elements: [PIC-HCP]
Killed by Husband
If the pregnant woman was killed by violence
by her husband, the crime committed is the
complex crime of parricide with unintentional
abortion. [People v. Paycana, 551 SCRA 657,
G.R. No. 179035 (2008)]
Intentional Abortion vs. Unintentional
Abortion
Intentional
Abortion [Art. 256]
Violence
inflicted
upon the pregnant
woman
is
intentionally exerted
by the accused, but
without intending an
abortion.
Unintentional
Abortion
[Art. 257]
As to Mode of Commission
Committed by:
Committed only by
1.
Using
any violence, that is,
violence upon the actual physical force.
person of the
pregnant woman
2. Acting without
using violence and
without the
consent
of
the
woman
(e.g.,
1. There is a Pregnant woman who
suffered an abortion;
2. Abortion is Intended;
3. Abortion is Caused by –
a. Pregnant woman Herself;
b. Any other person, with her
Consent; or
c. Any of her Parents, with her
consent for the purpose of
concealing her dishonor.
Liability:
a. Pregnant Woman – under (a), (b), (c);
liable under this Article
b. Third Person - under (b); liable under
Art. 256 (Intentional Abortion)
c. Parents – if the parents acted with the
pregnant woman’s consent under (c) to
conceal her honor, they are also liable
under this article. [Art. 258, Revised
Penal Code]
Mitigating Circumstances
Penalty of a pregnant woman is mitigated if her
purpose is to conceal her dishonor. [Art. 258,
Revised Penal Code] There is no mitigation for
Page 188 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
parents of the pregnant woman even if the
purpose is to conceal dishonor in abortion,
unlike in infanticide. [Art. 258, Revised Penal
Code]
Intentional Abortion vs. Abortion
Practiced by the Woman Herself
Intentional
Abortion [Art. 256]
Abortion Practiced
by the Woman
Herself
[Art. 258]
As to Liability
Third person who Only the woman
caused the abortion herself
or
her
is liable
parents can be liable
As to Consent
Abortion could have
been done with or
without the consent
of
the
pregnant
woman.
Woman must have
consented to the
abortion. Parents are
liable if they acted
with the pregnant
woman’s consent to
conceal her dishonor
n. Article 259 - Abortion by a
Physician or Midwife and Dispensing
of Abortives
1. Physician or midwife who, taking
advantage of their scientific knowledge
or skill, shall cause an abortion or
assist in causing an abortion.
2. A pharmacist who, without proper
prescription from a physician, shall
dispense any abortive. [Art. 259,
Revised Penal Code]
(for
1. Offender is a Pharmacist;
2. No proper Prescription from
physician; and
3. Offender Dispenses any abortive.
a
Imposable Penalty
The penalties provided for intentional abortion
shall be imposed in the maximum period. [Art.
259, Revised Penal Code]
It is not necessary that the pharmacist
knows that the abortive would be used to
cause an abortion.
What is punished is the dispensing of the
abortive without the proper prescription. It is
not necessary that the abortive be actually
used either. [See Art. 259, Revised Penal
Code]
SECTION 3. Duel
o. Article 260 - Responsibility of
Participants in a Duel
Modes: [DIC]
1. Killing one’s adversary in a Duel;
2. Inflicting upon such adversary physical
injuries; or
3. Making a Combat although no physical
injuries have been inflicted.
Persons Liable: [KS]
Persons Liable
Elements
Midwifes):
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements (for Pharmacists): [PPD]
Physicians
or
[PIPA]
1. Pregnant suffered an abortion;
2. Abortion is Intended;
3. Offender is a Physician or midwife, who
caused or assisted in causing the
abortion; and
4. Said physician or midwife took
Advantage of his or her scientific
knowledge or skill.
1. The person who Killed or inflicted
physical injuries upon his adversary, or
both combatants in any other case, as
principals.
2. The Seconds, as accomplices.
Definition of Terms
1. Duel - Formal or regular combat
previously concerted between 2 parties
in the presence of two or more seconds
of lawful age on each side, who make
the selection of arms and fix all other
conditions of the fight. [Black’s Law
Dictionary; See REYES, Book 2]
2. Seconds - Persons who make the
selection of arms and fix the other
conditions of the fight. [Id]
Imposable Penalty if Death Results
If death results, the penalty is the same as that
for homicide. [Id]
Page 189 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Pre-Concerted Agreement to Fight
Self-defense cannot be invoked if there was a
pre-concerted agreement to fight, but if the
attack was made by the accused against his
opponent before the appointed place and time,
there is an unlawful aggression, hence, selfdefense can be claimed. [Justo v. CA, G.R. No.
L-8611]
generation; deprives
the offended, either
totally or partially, of
some
essential
organ
for
reproduction.
[REYES, Book 2]
p. Article 261 - Challenging to a Duel
clipping off any part
of the body of the
offended party, other
than the essential
organ
for
reproduction,
to
deprive him of that
part of his body.
[REYES, Book 2]
As to Purpose
Modes: [CIS]
1. Challenging another to a duel;
2. Inciting another to give or accept a
challenge to a duel; or
3. Scoffing at or decrying another publicly
for having refused to accept a
challenge to fight a duel.
Persons Responsible:
1. Challengers
2. Instigators [REYES, Book 2]
Challenging to Duel Different from
Challenging to Fight
The person making the challenge must have in
mind a formal combat to be concerted between
him and the one challenged in the presence of
two or more seconds. [Art. 261, Revised Penal
Code; See People v. Tacomoy, G.R. No. L4798, Jul. 16, 1951]
2. Chapter II: Physical Injuries
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Anti-Hazing Act of 2018 and
R.A. 9262 (anti-VAWC Act) in relation to Arts.
263 to 266.
a. Article 262 – Mutilation
Mutilation
Lopping or clipping off of some part of the body
[U.S. v. Bogel, 7 Phil. 285; REYES, Book 2]
Punishable Acts
Mode 1: Castration
Mode 2: Mayhem
As to Body Part
Castration is the Intentionally making
mutilation of organs other mutilation, that
necessary
for is, by lopping or
Mutilation is
deliberately
caused
Purposely
and
Intent
Offender must have the intention to deprive the
offended party of a part of his body. If there is
no such intention, the crime will be serious
physical injuries. [Aguirre v. Sec. of Justice,
547 SCRA 431, G.R. NO. 170723 (2008)]
If victim under 12 years of age
Under Sec. 10, RA 7610 (Special Protection of
Children Act), the penalty for other intentional
mutilation is reclusion perpetua. Specifically,
RA 7610 provides that the penalty for the
commission of acts punishable under Articles
248, 249, 262, paragraph 2, and 263,
paragraph 1 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the
Revised Penal Code, for the crimes of murder,
homicide, other intentional mutilation, and
serious physical injuries, respectively, shall be
reclusion perpetua when the victim is under
twelve (12) years of age.
b. Article 263 - Serious Physical
Injuries
Modes of Commission: [WoBAA]
1.
2.
3.
4.
By Wounding;
By Beating;
By Assaulting; or
By Administering injurious substance.
(Art. 264, Revised Penal Code)
Serious Physical Injuries
They are when the injured person, in
consequence of the physical injuries inflicted—
[I-SMI-DMUI90-30]
1. Becomes
Insane,
an
imbecile,
impotent or blind
2. If the person injured:
Page 190 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
a. Loses the use of Speech or the
power to hear or to smell, or
loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an
arm, or a leg, or
b. Loses the use of any such
Member; or
c. Becomes Incapacitated for the
work in which he was
theretofore habitually engaged,
in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted;
3. If the person injured:
a. Becomes Deformed; or
b. Loses any other Member of his
body; or
c. Loses the Use thereof; or
d. Becomes Ill or incapacitated for
the performance of the work in
which he was habitually
engaged for more than 90
Days;
4. Becomes ill or incapacitated for labor
for more than 30 days (but must not be
more than 90 days).
•
•
•
Characteristics of par. 2
•
•
•
•
•
In physical injuries, there must be no intent to
kill, otherwise the crime is frustrated/attempted
murder or homicide as the case may be. [See
People v. Delim, G.R. No. 142773, Jan. 28,
2003]
•
Physical Injuries vs. Attempted or
Frustrated Homicide
No intent to
offended party
Attempted or
Frustrated
Homicide [Art. 249]
kill May be committed
even if no physical
injuries are inflicted
and the offender has
intent to kill party
•
•
Insanity – deranged or perverted
condition of mental faculties and is
manifested in language and conduct.
[People v. Domingo, G.R. No. 184343]
Imbecility - a more or less advanced
decay and feebleness of the
intellectual faculties [Black’s Law
Dictionary]
It covers any other part of the body
which is not a principal member of the
body.
Fingers of the hand are not principal
members and the loss of such falls
under the third type. However, if it is
proven that the loss of the fingers
resulted in the loss of the use of the
hand itself, it would fall under the
second type. [US v. Punsalan, G.R.
No. 7539 (1912)]
Elements of Deformity: [UAV]
1. Physical Ugliness,
2. Permanent and definite Abnormality,
and
3. Conspicuous and Visible.
Illness or Incapacity under Pars 2, 3,
and 4.
•
Characteristics of par. 1
Loss of power to hear - must be of
both ears. If hearing in only one ear is
lost, it falls under par. 3.
Blindness – requires the loss of an eye
only, thus mere weakness of vision is
not contemplated [id.]
Loss of the use of hand or
incapacity for work - must be
permanent.
All the body parts mentioned are
principal members of the body (eye,
hand, foot etc.) [Id]
Characteristics of par. 3
Intent to Kill
Physical Injuries
[Art. 263]
CRIMINAL LAW
Impotence - an inability to copulate,
includes sterility.
Blindness - must be of two eyes, as
the loss of one eye is punished under
par. 2
Penalty is 1 degree higher when the
victim is under 12 years of age. [Sec.
10, R.A. 7610]
•
•
What is required is illness or incapacity
and not medical attendance. [People v.
Obia, C.A. 45 O.G. 2568]
Injured party must have a vocation
at the time of the injury - Incapacity
therefore must relate to a certain kind
of work only [See U.S. v. Bugarin, 16
Phil. 189]
Work - includes studies or preparation
for a profession. Mere lessening of
Page 191 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
•
CRIMINAL LAW
efficiency due to injury is not
incapacity. [Id]
Type of Work
a. Par. 3 – work in which the offended
party is habitually engaged
b. Par. 4 – any type of labor
No Attempted or Frustrated Physical
Injuries
This felony is defined by the gravity of the
injury. It is a crime of result. As long as there is
no injury, there can be no attempted or
frustrated stage thereof. [See Art. 263, Revised
Penal Code]
Committed
Imprudence
through
Reckless
Serious physical injuries may be committed by
reckless imprudence or by simple imprudence
or negligence under Art. 365 in relation to Art.
263.
Qualifying Circumstances:
1. If it is committed against any of the persons
referred to in the crime of parricide under
Article 246;
2. If any of the circumstances qualifying murder
attended its commission. [Art. 263, Revised
Penal Code]
Note: The said qualified penalties are not
applicable to parents who inflict serious
physical injuries upon their children by
excessive chastisement [Art, 263 (7), Revised
Penal Code]
c. Article 264 - Administering Injurious
Substances or Beverages
d. Article 265 - Less Serious Physical
Injuries
Elements: [IMP]
1. Offended party:
a. Is Incapacitated for labor for 10
days or more (but not more
than 30 days); or
b. Needs Medical attendance for
the same period of time;
2. Physical injuries must not be those
described in the Preceding articles.
Qualified
Injuries
Less
Addition of a Fine
not exceeding
P50,000
[Sec. 60, RA 10951
in re: Art. 265]
Serious
Physical
Higher Penalty
Imposed
1. There is
a The victim is either:
manifest intent to
insult or offend the 1.
Offender’s
injured person; or
parents, ascendants,
guardians,
2.
There
are curators or teachers;
circumstances
or
adding ignominy to
the offense.
2. Persons of rank or
person in authority,
provided the crime is
not direct assault.
e. Article 266 - Slight Physical Injuries
and Maltreatment
Modes [1-9-PI]
Elements: [IKI]
1. Offender Inflicted any serious physical
injury;
2. It
was
done
by
Knowingly
administering to him any injurious
substance or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or
credulity; and
3. There was no Intent to kill.
Note: Art 264 does not apply when the resulting
Physical Injuries are Less Serious or Light as
they will be treated under Art. 265 or Art. 266,
as the case may be. Art. 264 specifically
mentions “any serious physical injury” [Art.
264, Revised Penal Code]
1. Physical injuries incapacitated the
offended party for labor from 1-9 days,
OR required medical attendance
during the same period;
2. Physical injuries did not Prevent the
offended party from engaging in his
habitual work or did not require medical
attendance; or
3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without
causing any injury.
Duration of Incapacity or Medical
Attendance
In the absence of evidence as to the duration
of the offended party’s incapacity for labor or
Page 192 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
medical attendance, the crime is only slight
physical injuries. [People v. Arranchado, G.R.
No. L-13943]
Supervening Event Converting the
Crime
Supervening event converting the crime into
serious physical injuries after the filing of the
information for slight physical injuries can still
be the subject of amendment or of a new
charge. [People v. Manolong, G.R.No. L-2288]
Slapping of Offended Party
General Rule: Slapping is a form of illtreatment which is a form of slight physical
injuries.
CRIMINAL LAW
Physical Injuries vs. Attempted or
Frustrated Homicide
Physical Injuries
[Art. 263, 265, 266]
Attempted or
Frustrated
Homicide
Existence of Physical Injuries
General
Rule:
The May
be
offender
must
have committed even
inflicted physical Injuries if no physical
injuries inflicted
Exception:
Maltreatment
(Art.
266(3))
Intent to Kill
Exception: If the slapping is done to cast
dishonor upon the person slapped, or to
humiliate or embarrass the offended party out
of a quarrel or anger, the crime is slander by
deed. [See Art. 359, Revised Penal Code]
No intent to
offended party
kill the With intent to kill
offended party
3. Chapter III : Rape
Summary:
Gravity
Injury
Days
Serious Incapacity
from Permanent
[Art.
habitual work
236]
Illness/incapacity
Over
90
from habitual work
days
a. Article 266 - A – Rape (as amended
by RA 8353)
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer portion
on R.A. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Act) in relation to this
section.
Less
Incapacity
from 10-30 days
Serious labor/medical
[Art.
attendance required
265]
Note: R.A. 11648 amends several provisions
related to Rape, R.A. 7610, Crimes Against
Chastity and Crimes Against Public Morals.
Notably, among others, the threshold age for
statutory rape has been adjusted to 16 years
old. However, it was only approved on March
4, 2022. This is beyond the June 30, 2021 cutoff for the 2022 Bar Exam.
Slight
[Art.
266]
Mode 1: Rape by Sexual Intercourse
Elements: [MCC-FRM12]
Illness/incapacity
from labor
31-90 days
Incapacity
from 1-9 days
labor/medical
attendance required
Physical
injuries Regardless
which
did
not of Days
prevent
the
offended party from
engaging in habitual
work nor did it
require
medial
attendance
1. Offender is a Man;
2. Offender had Carnal knowledge of a
woman;
3. Such act is accomplished under any of
the following Circumstances:
a. By using Force, threat or
intimidation;
b. When the woman is deprived of
Reason or is otherwise
unconscious;
c. By means of fraudulent
Machination or grave abuse of
authority; or
Page 193 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
d. When the woman is under 12
years of age (Statutory Rape)
or is demented.
Note: Under R.A. 11648 (not included
in the 2022 Bar Exam), rape by sexual
intercourse has become "gender-less."
A woman or man can be the
perpetrator or victim. Moreover, under
the same law, there is a “sweetheart
clause” wherein “there shall be no
criminal liability on the part of a person
having carnal knowledge of another
person sixteen (16) years of age when
the age difference between the parties
is not more than three (3) years, and
the sexual act in question is proven to
be consensual, non-abusive, and nonexploitative”
Classifications of Rape
Rape by Sexual
Intercourse
Sexual Assault
As to Offended Party
Against a Woman
Against a Woman or
Man
As to Offender
Always a Man
Can
now
be
committed by a man
or woman, that is, if a
woman or a man
uses an instrument
on an orifice of male
or woman
As to Commission of Offense
Mode 2: Rape through Sexual Assault
Elements: [SM-PI-C-FDM12]
1. Offender commits an act of Sexual
assault;
2. Act is committed by any of the following
Means:
a. By inserting his Penis into
another person's mouth or anal
orifice; or
b. By inserting any Instrument or
object into the genital or anal
orifice of another Person;
3. Act is accomplished under any of the
following Circumstances:
a. By using Force or intimidation;
or
b. When the woman is Deprived
of
reason
or
otherwise
unconscious; or
c. By means of fraudulent
Machination or grave abuse of
authority; or
d. When the woman is under 12
years of age or demented.
Chronological Age or Intellectual Disability
In determining whether a person is twelve (12)
years of age under par. (d), the interpretation
should be in accordance with either the
chronological age of the child if he or she is not
suffering from intellectual disability, or the
mental age if intellectual disability is
established [People v. Quintos, G.R. No.
199402, (2014)].
Sexual intercourse
Inserting a finger
inside the genital of a
woman or man is
rape through sexual
assault within the
context of object
Complete Penetration is Not Necessary
In rape, from the moment the offender has
carnal knowledge of the victim, he actually
attains his purpose, all the essential elements
of the offense have been accomplished
[People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724 (1990)].
Moreover, it is not the number of times that
appellant ejaculated but the penetration or
‘touching’ that determines the consummation
of the sexual act [People v. Ferrer, G.R. No.
142662 (2001); People v. Orilla, G.R. Nos.
148939-40 (2004)].
Note: There is NO crime of frustrated rape. [Id.]
Rules
on
Circumstances
●
Accompanying
In general, it cannot be forgotten that –
ultimately – the gravamen of rape is
sexual intercourse with a woman
against her will or without her consent.
This is what must be supported by the
evidence of the prosecution. Other
details which do not bear on the very
fact of the commission of the offense
Page 194 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
are insignificant [People v. XXX, G.R.
No. 244609 (2020)].
1. Force, Threat or Intimidation – It is
not necessary that the force employed
against the complaining woman in rape
be so great or of such a character as
could not be resisted. It is enough that
the force used is sufficient to
consummate the culprit's purpose of
copulating with the offended woman
[People vs. Savellano, G.R. No.
L31227 (1974)].
2. Deprived of Reason or Unconscious
– means that the victim has no will to
give consent intelligently and freely
[People v. Layson, C.A. 37 O.G. 318;
REYES, Book 2].
3. Drowsiness - state of being drowsy,
i.e., ready to fall asleep or half-asleep
[People v. Salarza, G.R. No. 117682
(1997)].
4. Statutory Rape - rape of a woman who
is below 12 years of age; victim is
conclusively presumed incapable of
giving consent to sexual intercourse
with another [People v. Negosa, G.R.
Nos. 142856-7 (2003)].
Note: R.A. 11648 amends several provisions
related to Rape, R.A. 7610, Crimes Against
Chastity and Crimes Against Public Morals.
Notably, among others, the threshold age for
statutory rape has been adjusted to 16 years
old. However, it was only approved on March
4, 2022. This is beyond the June 30, 2021 cutoff for the 2022 Bar Exam.
CRIMINAL LAW
found in Art. 266-D of the Revised Penal Code
[See also People vs. Las Piñas, Jr., G.R. No.
133444, (2002); People v. Metin, G.R. No.
140781 (2003)].
Note: When the offender in rape has an
ascendancy on influence over the girl i.e. a
father over his daugher, it is not necessary that
she put up a determined resistance [People v.
Metin, G.R. No. 140781 (2003)].
Moral Ascendancy or Influence
Moral ascendancy or influence exercised by
the accused over the victim substitutes for the
element of physical force or intimidation such
as those committed by:
1. Fathers against their daughters
[People v. Bayona, G.R. No. 133343
(2000)]
2. Stepfathers
against
their
stepdaughters [People v. Vitor, G.R.
No. 113690 (1995)]
3. A godfather against his goddaughter
[People v. Casil, G.R. No. 110836
(1995)]
4. Uncles against their nieces [People v.
Betonio, G.R. No. 119165 (1997)]
5. The first cousin of the victim’s mother
[People v. Perez, G.R. No. 129213
(1999)]
Qualified and Simple
When Absorbed
Seduction;
Rape by means of fraudulent machinations and
grave abuse of authority absorbs the crime of
qualified and simple seduction. [Id.]
Seclusion Not Necessary
Rule on Resistance
Rule: Any physical overt act manifesting
resistance against the act of rape in any degree
from the offended party, or where the offended
party is so situated as to render her/him
incapable of giving valid consent, may be
accepted as evidence in the prosecution of the
acts punished under Article 266-A. [Art. 266-D,
Revised Penal Code]
Note: It must be noted that the legal principle
that there must be manifest and tenacious
resistance from the offended in acts of rape –
physical struggle, not mere initial resistance or
verbal refusal [See REYES, Book 2 citing
People vs. Lago, CA, 45 OG 1356] – IS NO
LONGER CONTROLLING in light of the rule
Rape may, likewise, be committed in a room
adjacent to where the victim's family is
sleeping, or even in a room shared with other
people [People v. Glivano, G.R. No. 177565
(2008)].
Evidence
Any physical overt act manifesting resistance
against the act of rape in any degree from the
offended party; or Where the offended party is
so situated as to render him/her incapable of
giving his consent [Art. 266-D, Revised Penal
Code].
Sweetheart Doctrine
Operates on the theory that the sexual act is
consensual. It requires proof that the accused
Page 195 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
and the victim were lovers and that she
consented to the sexual relations [People v.
Udang, G.R. No. 210161, (2018)].
It was previously ruled that being sweethearts
does not negate the commission of rape
because such does not give the appellant the
license to have sexual intercourse against the
victim’s will [People vs. Olesco, G.R. No.
174861, (2011)].
However, in the later case of People vs. Udang
[id.], it has been ruled that the theory may apply
in acts of lasciviousness and rape, felonies
committed against or without the consent of the
victim, it operates on the theory that the sexual
act was consensual. It requires proof that the
accused and the victim were lovers and that
she consented to the sexual relations.
Exception: Sweetheart doctrine cannot be
invoked in instances involving sexual
intercourse and lascivious conduct involving
child abuse cases under RA 7610, where the
victim abused cannot validly give their consent
to another person. In cases involving minors,
consent is immaterial [id.].
CRIMINAL LAW
Rape Shield Rule
In prosecutions for rape, evidence of
complainant's past sexual conduct, opinion
thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be
admitted unless, and only to the extent that the
court finds, that such evidence is material and
relevant to the case. [Sec. 6, R.A. 8505 (“Rape
Victim Assistance and Protection Act of 1998”);
See also People vs. Udang, id.]
Marital Rape
Prior to RA 8353, a husband cannot be guilty
of rape, however, under Art. 266-C of RA 8353,
he may now be held guilty [People v. Jumawan,
G.R. No. 187495 (2014)].
Special Complex Crime
1. When the rape is attempted and a
homicide is committed by reason of or
on the occasion of attempted rape; and
2. When by reason of or on occasion of
consummated rape, homicide is
committed. [Art. 266-B, Revised Penal
Code]
Designation of the Crime & Imposable Penalty [People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363
(2019)]
Designation of the Crime & Imposable Penalty
Age of Victim:
Under 12 years old or
demented
12 years old or below 18, or
18 under special
circumstances
18 years old
and above
(i.e., 18 and above but are
unable to fully take care of
themselves or protect
themselves from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation
or discrimination because of
a physical or mental disability
or condition - Sec. 3(a), R.A.
7610)
Crime Committed:
Acts
of
Lasciviousness
committed
against
children exploited in
prostitution or other
sexual abuse
Acts of Lasciviousness
under Article 336 of the
RPC in relation to Section
5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
reclusion temporal in its
medium period
Lascivious conduct under Not
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610: applicable
reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion
perpetua
Page 196 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Sexual
Assault
committed
against
children exploited in
prostitution or other
sexual abuse
Sexual Assault under
Article 266-A(2) of the RPC
in relation to Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610: reclusion
temporal in its medium
period
Lascivious Conduct under Not
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610: applicable
reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion
perpetua
Sexual Intercourse
committed
against
children exploited in
prostitution or other
sexual abuse
Rape under Article 266A(1) of the RPC: reclusion
perpetua, except when the
victim is below 7 years old
in which case death
penalty shall be imposed
Sexual Abuse under Section Not
5(b) of R.A. No. 7610: applicable
reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion
perpetua
Note: This is subject to
R.A. No. 9346 entitled "An
Act
Prohibiting
the
Imposition
of
Death
Penalty in the Philippines."
Rape
by
knowledge
Rape by
Assault
carnal Rape under Article 266- Rape under Article 266-A(1)
A(1) in relation to Art. 266- in relation to Art. 266-B of the
B of the RPC: reclusion RPC: reclusion perpetua
perpetua, except when the
victim is below 7 years old
in which case death
penalty shall be imposed
Sexual Sexual Assault under
Article 266-A(2) of the RPC
in relation to Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610: reclusion
temporal in its medium
period
Note: R.A. 11648 amends several provisions
related to Rape, R.A. 7610, Crimes Against
Chastity and Crimes Against Public Morals.
Notably, among others, the threshold age for
statutory rape has been adjusted to 16 years
old. However, it was only approved on March
4, 2022. This is beyond the June 30, 2021 cutoff for the 2022 Bar Exam.
b. Article 266 - B – Qualified Rape
Qualifying Circumstances
1. If the victim: [18-C-7-M]
a. Is under 18 yrs. old, & the
offender
is
a
parent,
ascendant,
step-parent,
guardian,
relative
by
consanguinity or affinity w/in
the 3rd civil degree, or the
Lascivious Conduct under
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
reclusion temporal in its
medium period to reclusion
perpetua
Rape under
Article 266A(1) of the
RPC:
reclusion
perpetua
Sexual
Assault under
Article 266A(2) of the
RPC: prision
mayor
common law spouse of the
parent of the victim
b. Is under the Custody of the
police / military authorities / law
enforcement agency
c. Is a religious and such
legitimate vocation is known by
the offender before or at the
time of rape
d. Is a child below 7 yrs. old;
e. Suffered permanent or physical
Mutilation or disability by
reason or on the occasion of
rape
2. If the offender: [SAPMF]
a. Is afflicted with a Sexually
transmissible disease & the
virus / disease is transmitted to
the victim;
b. Is a member of the AFP / PNP
/ any law enforcement agency /
Page 197 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
penal institution, & took
advantage of his position;
c. Knew of the Pregnancy of the
offended party at the time of the
commission of rape;
d. Knew of the Mental disability,
emotional disorder, or physical
handicap of the offended party
at the time of the commission of
rape
3. If Rape is committed in Full view of the
spouse, parent, any of the children, or
other relatives w/in the 3rd civil degree
of consanguinity
CRIMINAL LAW
his/her consent. [Art. 266-D, Revised
Penal Code]
Note: Special qualifying circumstances have to
be alleged in the information for it to be
appreciated [People v. Gallo].
c. Art. 266 - C - Effect of Pardon
The following shall extinguish the criminal
action or the penalty imposed:
1. Subsequent valid marriage between
the offender and the offended party,
but only as to the husband.
2. Subsequent forgiveness by the wife as
the offended party when the legal
husband is the offender, provided their
marriage is not void ab initio. [Art. 266C, Revised Penal Code]
Applicability of Pardon; Only to Principals
Pardon is not applicable to accomplices,
accessories and multiple rapes. Since rape is
now categorized as a crime against persons,
marriage extinguishes the penal action only as
to the principal [See Art. 344, Revised Penal
Code which shows effect of pardon on all
involved, as regards crimes against chastity]
Moreover, this does not apply where multiple
rape was committed because while marriage
with one defendant extinguishes criminal
liability, it cannot be extended to acts
committed by others [People v. Bernardo, et
al., C.A. 38, O.G. 3479].
d. Art. 266 - D - Presumptions
Evidence which may be accepted:
1. Any physical overt act manifesting
resistance against the act of rape in
any degree from the offended party; or
2. Where the offended party is so situated
as to render him/her incapable of giving
Page 198 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
I.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PERSONAL LIBERTY AND
SECURITY [ARTS. 267 - 292]
1. Chapter I: Crimes Against
Liberty
SECTION 1. Illegal Detention
a. Article 267 - Kidnapping and
Serious Illegal Detention
Elements
1. Offender is a Private individual or a
Public Officer who has no duty under
the law to detain a person;
2. He Kidnaps or detains another, or in
any other manner deprives the latter of
his liberty;
3. Detention or kidnapping is Illegal; and
4. In the commission of the offense, any
of the following circumstances is
present:
a. Kidnapping lasts for More than
3 days;
b. It is committed Simulating
public authority;
c. Any Serious physical injuries
are inflicted upon the person
kidnapped or detained or
Threats to kill him are made;
or
d. Person kidnapped or detained
is a Minor, Female, or a
Public officer.
e. The penalty shall be death
where the kidnapping or
detention was committed for
the purpose of extorting
Ransom from the victim or
any other person, even if
none of the circumstances
above-mentioned were present
in the commission of the
offense.
Essential Element of kidnapping –
deprivation of the offended party’s liberty under
any of the four instances enumerated [People
v. Suarez, G.R. No. L-27352 (1969)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Lack of Consent is a Fundamental Element
The involuntariness of the seizure and
detention is the very essence of the crime.
Although the victim may have initially
consented to go with the offender to a place,
but the victim is thereafter prevented, with the
use of force, from leaving the place where he
was brought to with his consent and is detained
against his will, the offender is still guilty of
kidnapping and serious illegal detention
[People v. Pickrell, G.R. No. 120409 (2003)].
Detention is Illegal when it is not ordered by
competent authority nor permitted by law [U.S.
v. Mendoza, 8 Phil. 468].
Placing Victim in an Enclosure is Not
Necessary, as long as he is deprived, in any
manner, of his liberty. It suffices that there be
actual or manifest restraint on the person or
liberty of the victim [People v. Crisostomo, et
al., 46 Phil. 775].
Lack of Freedom to Leave at Will is
Sufficient
Leaving a child in the house of another, where
he had freedom of locomotion but not the
freedom to leave it at will, deprives him of
liberty [People v. Acosta, 60 O.G. 6999].
Qualifying Circumstances:
When any of the following circumstances are
present, the penalty shall be death:
1. When the victim is Killed or Dies as a
consequence of the detention.
2. When the victim is Raped.
3. When victim is subjected to Torture or
dehumanizing acts.
Note: Regardless of the presence or absence
of the above qualifying circumstances, the
penalty shall be death when a kidnapping is
done for the purpose of extorting a ransom
[People v. Cenahonon, G.R. 169962 (2007)].
Ransom
Means money, price or consideration paid or
demanded for the redemption of a captured
person that would release him from captivity.
No specific form of ransom is required and it
does not matter whether or not ransom was
actually paid [People v. Jatulan, G.R. No.
171563 (2007)].
• Actual demand for ransom is
unnecessary, as long as it can be
proven that the kidnapping was done
Page 199 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
for the purpose of extorting money
[People v. Gregorio y Amar, G.R. No.
194235 (2016)]
Elements of Kidnapping for Ransom
[LDR]
1. Intent on the part of the accused to
deprive the victim of Liberty
2. Actual Deprivation of liberty
3. Motive of the accused: extorting
Ransom for release of victim [People
v. Ejandra, G.R. No 174659 (2008)]
Special Complex Crime of Kidnapping
with Murder/Homicide
Where the person kidnapped is killed in the
course of the detention, regardless of whether
the killing was purposely sought or was merely
an afterthought, the crime is a special
complex crime and the maximum penalty
shall be imposed as provided by the last
paragraph of Art. 267. [Art. 267, Revised Penal
Code as amended by R.A. 7659, Sec. 8; R.A.
7659 is cited in People v. Ramos, G.R. No.
118570 (1998)]
When Murder and not Kidnapping
a. If the primary and ultimate purpose
of the accused is to kill the victim the incidental deprivation of the victim’s
liberty does not constitute kidnapping
but is merely a preparatory act to the
killing and is absorbed by the killing of
the victim [People v. Delim, G.R. No.
142773 (2003)].
b. If from the acts of the accused it
cannot be inferred that the latter’s
purpose was to actually detain or
deprive the victim of his liberty - the
subsequent killing of the victim did not
constitute the crime of kidnapping. The
demand for ransom does not convert
the crime into kidnapping, if no
deprivation of liberty was involved
[People v. Padica, G.R. No. 102645
(1993)].
When grave
kidnapping
coercion
and
not
When a woman was carried away from her
house by her fiancé to the latter’s house, not
behind closed doors but watched, to force her
to marry him [People v. Dauatan, CA 35 O.G.
450].
Illegal
Detention
vs.
Arbitrary
Detention [REYES, Book 2]
Illegal Detention
[Art. 267]
Arbitrary Detention
[Art. 124]
As to Offender
Private individual or
public
officer/employee
who has no legal
duty to detain a
person
Public
officer/employee
with a legal duty to
detain persons
As to Acts Committed
Offender
kidnaps, Public officer detains
detains, or otherwise a person without
deprives a
legal ground.
person of liberty.
As to Classification
Crime
against Crime against the
personal liberty
fundamental laws of
the State
b. Article 268 - Slight Illegal Detention
Elements
1. Offender is a Private individual;
2. S/he Kidnaps or detains another, or
in any other manner deprives the
victim of liberty.
3. Kidnapping or detention is Illegal; and
4. Crime was committed Without the
attendance
of
any
of
the
circumstances enumerated in Article
267.
Liability of Person Furnishing the
Place
The liability of one who furnishes the place
where the offended party is being held captive
is that of a principal and not of an accomplice
[Art. 268, par. 2]
Privileged Mitigating Circumstance
The penalty is lowered if:
1. Offended party is voluntarily Released
within 3 days from the start of illegal
detention;
2. Without Attaining the intended
purpose; and
Page 200 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. Before the institution of the Criminal
action.
Note: Voluntary release will only mitigate
criminal liability if crime was slight illegal
detention. If serious, it has no effect [Asistio v.
Hon. San Diego, G.R. No. L-21991 (1964)].
c. Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest
CRIMINAL LAW
Crime
against
Liberty
Crime Against Fundamental
Law of the State
Cause for Detention
Detention is without legal Detention is
ground
for
some
legal ground
How Crime is Committed
Elements
1. Offender Arrests or detains another
person;
2. Purpose of the offender is to Deliver
him to the proper authorities; and
3. Arrest or detention is Not authorized
by law or there is no reasonable ground
therefor.
By making
an arrest not
authorized
by law
Offender
The offender may be a private individual or a
public officer but the public officer must not be
vested with the authority to arrest or be acting
in his official capacity [Duropan v. People, G.R.
No. 230825, Jun. 10, 2020, See People v.
Malasugui, 63 Phil. 221, G.R. No. L-44335, Jul.
30, 1936].
Arbitrary Detention vs. Unlawful
Arrest vs. Delay in the Delivery of
Detained Persons [REYES, Book 2]
Unlawful
Arrest
[Art. 269]
Arbitrary
Detention
[Art. 124]
Delay in
Delivery of
Detained
Persons
[Art. 125]
By detaining
a
person
without legal
ground
although the
offender has
authority to
make arrests
By failing to
deliver such
person to the
proper
judicial
authority
within
a
certain
period
SECTION 2. Kidnapping of Minors
d. Article 270 - Kidnapping and Failure
to Return a Minor
Elements
1. Offender is Entrusted with the
custody of a minor person (under 18
years of age)
2. He Deliberately fails to restore the
said minor to his parents or guardians
When Offender is a Parent
The penalty is arresto mayor.
Revised Penal Code]
[Art. 271,
As to Offender
Any person
Public Officer
As to Purpose of the Offender
Intention to
bring
the
offender to
the
proper
authority and
file a case
No intention
to bring the
offender to
the
proper
authorities.
Intention is
merely
to
detain him.
Intention to
bring
the
offender to
the
proper
authority and
file a case
Failure to Return a Minor included in
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
Detention
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor is
necessarily included in kidnapping and serious
illegal detention of a minor under Article 267(4)
since it constitutes deprivation of liberty
[People v. Generosa, G.R. No. L-69236
(1986)].
As to the Classification
Page 201 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Failure to Return Minor vs. Serious
Illegal Detention
Failure to Return
a Minor
[Art. 270]
Kidnapping and
Serious Illegal
Detention of Minors
[Art. 267]
As to Offender
Offender
is Offender
is
not
entrusted with the entrusted with the
custody of the custody of the minor.
minor
Hence, where a minor
child was taken without
the
knowledge
and
consent of his parents,
the crime is kidnapping
and serious illegal
detention under Article
267.
[People
v.
Mendoza, G.R. No.
180501 (2008)]
As to Act Punished
What is punished is
the
deliberate
failure
of
the
offender
having
custody of the
minor to restore
him to his parents
or guardians
What is punished is the
illegal detaining or
kidnapping of the
minor
Minor Need Not Actually Abandon his
Home
The minor should not leave his home of his own
free will. What constitutes the crime is the act
of inducing a minor to abandon the home of his
guardian, and it is not necessary that the minor
actually abandons the home [People v.
Apolinar, C.A., 62 O.G. 9044].
Parents may Commit the Crime
Father or mother may commit the crimes in Art.
270 and 271 where they are living separately
and the custody of the minor children is given
to one of them. [Art. 271, Revised Penal Code]
SECTION 3. Slavery and Servitude
f. Article 272 – Slavery
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Anti-Trafficking in Persons
Act of 2003, in relation to this section.
Elements
1. Offender Purchases, Sells, Kidnaps
or Detains a human being; and
2. Purpose of the offender is to Enslave
such person.
Qualifying Circumstance
The penalty is increased if the purpose of the
offender is to assign the offended party to some
immoral traffic. [Art. 272, par. 2]
e. Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to
Abandon His Home
Elements [MI]:
1. Minor (under 18) is living in the home
of his parents or guardians or the
person entrusted with his custody; and
2. Offender Induces said minor to
abandon such home.
Requisites of Inducement
Inducement must be: [AID]
1. Actual,
2. Committed with criminal Intent, and
3. Determined by a will to cause Damage
[People v. Paalam, C.A, 54 O.G. 82678268].
g. Article 273 - Exploitation of Child
Labor
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Anti-Trafficking in Persons
Act of 2003, in relation to this section.
Elements [RAD]:
1. Offender Retains a minor in his
services;
2. It is Against the will of the minor; and
3. It is under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a Debt incurred by an
ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of such
minor.
Page 202 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
h. Article 274 - Services Rendered
Under Compulsion in Payment of Debt
when the value of the
services
as
reasonably
assessed is not
applied toward the
liquidation of the
debt. [Section 3(c)]
Elements [HoLA-Pay]:
1. Offender compels a debtor to work for
him, either:
a. As a Household servant; or
b. Farm Laborer;
2. It is Against the debtor’s will;
3. Purpose is to require or enforce
Payment of a debt.
Service under Compulsion
Exploitation of Child Labor
Service under
Compulsion
[Art. 274]
vs.
Exploitation of
Child Labor
[Art. 273]
Only the debtor is The
victim
may
compelled to work
either be the debtor
himself or a person
under his/her control
The debtor must be
compelled to work
either
as
a
household servant or
farm laborer
As to the Victim
Does not distinguish Victim must be a
whether or not the minor
victim is a minor
As to the Person Compelled to Work
The debtor himself is The
minor
is
the one compelled to compelled to render
work for the offender services for the
supposed debt of his
parents or guardian
As to Nature of Work
Limited to household
work or farm labor
Service is not limited
Service under Compulsion
Bondage under RA 9208
vs.
Debt
Service under
Compulsion
[Art. 274]
Debt Bondage
[RA 9208]
Crime whereby the
debtor is compelled
to work for the
offender as a servant
or farm laborer to
require or enforce
payment of a debt,
against the former’s
will.
The pledging by the
debtor of his/her
personal services or
labor or those of a
person under his/her
control as security or
payment for a debt,
when the length and
nature of services is
not clearly defined or
There
is
no
specification as to
the nature of the
work. However, the
length and nature of
services must not be
clearly defined, or
the value of the
services
as
reasonably
assessed is not
applied toward the
liquidation of the
debt.
Must be against No indication that it
debtor’s will
should be against
debtor’s
will
or
against the will of a
person under the
debtor’s control, as
long as the services
were pledged as
security or payment
of a debt, subject to
the conditions under
Section 3(c).
See: Special Penal Laws Reviewer for an indepth discussion on Anti-Trafficking in Persons
Act of 2003, particularly Secs. 3 to 12 of the
law, for trafficking of persons is in the nature of
modern-day slavery.
Page 203 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. Chapter II: Crimes Against
Security
SECTION 1. Abandonment of Helpless
Persons and Exploitation of Minors
•
•
CRIMINAL LAW
The child under 7 years old must be
found in an unsafe place. This is
implied by the obligation under the
provision to bring the child “to a safe
place”. [id]
It is immaterial that the offender does
not know that the child is under seven.
[id]
a. Article 275 - Abandonment of
Persons in Danger and Abandonment
of Own Victim
b. Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor
Punishable Acts
Elements
1. Failing to render assistance to any
person whom the offender finds in an
Uninhabited place, wounded or in
danger of dying when he can render
such assistance without detriment to
himself, unless such omission shall
constitute a more serious offense.
2. Failing to help or render assistance to
another whom the offender has
Accidentally wounded or injured;
3. Failing to deliver a Child, under seven
years of age, whom the offender has
found abandoned, to the authorities or
to his family, or by failing to deliver him
to a safe place.
Elements of the First Punishable Act
1. Place is Uninhabited;
2. Accused found there a person
Wounded or in danger of dying;
3. Accused can render assistance
Without detriment to himself; and
4. Accused Fails to render assistance.
Uninhabited Place
Whether a place is to be considered
uninhabited or not depends on the possibility
of a person receiving assistance from another.
The place may still be considered uninhabited
even if there are many houses around if the
possibility of receiving assistance is remote
[People v. Dizon, G.R. No. 134802, Oct. 26,
2001].
Note:
•
This provision does not apply when the
offender intentionally wounds another.
The use of the word “accidentally”
implies the act must be an accident. If
the act is intentional, the offender will
face the consequences of such act
instead [Art. 275, Revised Penal Code]
1.
2.
3.
4.
Offender has the Custody of a child;
Child is under Seven years of age;
He Abandons such child; and
He has No intent to kill the child when
the latter is abandoned.
Qualifying Circumstances [DD]:
1. When the Death of the minor resulted
from such abandonment; or
2. If the life of the minor was in Danger
because of the abandonment.
Abandonment
Permanent,
conscious
and
deliberate
abandonment is required. Abandonment is not
the momentary leaving of a child but is a
deprivation of care and protection from danger
to his person [People v. Bandian, G.R. No.
45186 (1936)].
No Presumption of Intent to Kill
An intent to kill cannot be presumed from the
death of the victim in the crime of abandoning
a minor under Art. 276. Since Art. 276 is
inapplicable when the act shall constitute a
more serious offense, an intent to kill – if
proven – will cause the imposition of a different
penalty based on a different offense. [Art. 276]
Loss of Parental Authority
If the offender is the parent of the minor who is
abandoned, he shall be deprived of parental
authority. [Art. 332, New Civil Code]
c. Article 277 - Abandonment of Minor
by Person Entrusted With Custody;
Indifference of Parents
Punishable Acts :
1. Delivering a minor to a public institution
or other persons without the consent of
Page 204 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
the one who entrusted such minor to
the care of the offender or, in the
absence of that one, without the
consent of the proper authorities;
2. Neglecting his (offender’s) children by
not giving them the Education which
their station in life requires and
financial condition permits
Elements of Paragraph 1:
a. Offender was in charge of the Rearing
or education of a minor;
b. He Delivers said minor to a public
institution or other persons; and
c. No Consent was obtained from the one
who entrusted such child to the
offender; or if such person is absent,
the proper authorities have not
consented to it.
Abandonment of Minor by Person
Entrusted
with
Custody
vs.
Abandonment of a Minor
Abandonment by
Person Entrusted
with Custody
[Art. 277]
Abandonment of
Minor
[Art. 276]
As to Custody of the Offender
Custody specific to Custody in general
the
rearing
or
education of the child
As to Age of the Minor
Minor must be under Minor must be under
18
7
As to Act of Abandonment
Elements of Paragraph 2 [PES]:
a. Offender is a Parent;
b. He neglects his children by not giving
them Education; and
c. His Station in life requires such
education and his financial condition
permits it.
Note:
•
•
Termination of obligation to educate
children – such obligation terminates if
the mother and children refuse without
good reason to live with the accused
[People v. Miraflores, C.A.-G.R. No.
43384].
Failure to give education must be
due to deliberate desire to evade
such obligation – if the parents
cannot give education because they
had no means to do so, then they will
not be liable under this article [People
v. Francisco, C.A. 51 O.G. 1941, citing
7 Viada, Codigo Penal 5, Ed. 223].
Minor is delivered to Minor is abandoned
a public institution or in such a way as to
other person
deprive him of care
and protection
d. Article 278 - Exploitation of Minors
Punishable Acts [DEDDI]:
1. Causing any boy or girl under 16
years of age to perform any
Dangerous feat of balancing, physical
strength or contortion, the offender
being any person;
2. Employing children under 16 years of
age who are not the children or
descendants of the offender in
Exhibitions of acrobat, gymnast, ropewalker, diver, or wild-animal tamer, the
offender being an acrobat, etc., or
circus manager or engaged in a similar
calling;
3. Employing any Descendant under 12
years of age in dangerous exhibitions
enumerated in the next preceding
paragraph, the offender being engaged
in any of the said callings;
4. Delivering a child under 16 years of
age gratuitously to any person
following any of
the callings
enumerated in mode 2, or to any
habitual vagrant or beggar, the
offender being an ascendant, guardian,
teacher or person entrusted in any
capacity with the care of such child;
Page 205 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
5. Inducing any child under 16 years of
age to abandon the home of its
ascendants, guardians, curators or
teachers to follow any person engaged
in any of the callings mentioned in
paragraph 2 or to accompany any
habitual vagrant or beggar, the
offender being any person.
Qualifying Circumstances:
Delivery of the child in consideration of any
price, compensation, or promise. [Art. 278,
Revised Penal Code]
Other Effects if Offender is Convicted:
1. Guardian or Curator – shall be
removed as such.
2. Parents – may be deprived of their
parental authority, temporarily or
perpetually, at the court’s discretion
[Art. 278, Revised Penal Code].
Exploitation of Minors vs. Inducing a
Minor to Abandon his Home [REYES,
Book 2]
Exploitation of
Minor
[Art. 278]
Inducing a Minor to
Abandon His Home
[Art. 271]
As to Purpose
Purpose is to follow Purpose is to simply
any person engaged induce the minor to
in any of the callings leave his home.
mentioned
As to Age of Victim
Victim is under 16 Victim is a minor
years or 12 years of (below 18 years of
age
age)
Page 206 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
CRIM2
Exploitation of Minors [Art. 278] vs. RA 7610
Exploitation of Minors
[Art. 278]
CRIMINAL LAW
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation, and Discrimination Act
As to Age of Victim
Below 16 years of age
a. Exploitation of Minors
(Pars. 1, 2, 4 and 5) [Art.
278]
Below 12 years of age
a. Exploitation of Minors
(Par. 3) [Art. 278]
“Children” refers to person below eighteen (18) years of age or
those over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or
protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or
condition. [Section 3(a)]
As to Acts Punishable
See list above: Punishable Acts
[DEDDI].
a. Any person who shall commit any other acts of child
abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be responsible for
other conditions prejudicial to the child’s development
b. Any person who shall keep or have in his company a
minor, twelve (12) years or under or who in ten (10)
years or more his junior in any public or private place,
hotel, motel, beer joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension
house, sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other
tourist resort or similar places
c. Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer a minor to
any one prohibited by RA 7610 to keep or have in his
company a minor
d. Coercing, forcing, or intimidating a street child or any
other child to: (1) Beg or use begging as a means of
living; (2) Act as conduit or middlemen in drug
trafficking or pushing; or (3) Conduct any illegal
activities. [Section 10]
Summary of Ages of Minors
Minor is one who is:
1. Below 18 years of age
a. Kidnapping and Failure to Return a Minor [Art. 270]
b. Abandonment of Minor Entrusted with His Custody; Indifference of Parents [Art. 277]
c. Swindling a Minor [Art. 317]
2. Below 16 years of age
a. Exploitation of Minors (Pars. 1, 2, 4 and 5) [Art. 278]
3. Below 12 years of age
a. Exploitation of Minors (Par. 3) [Art. 278]
4. Below 7 years of age
a. Abandoning a Minor [Art. 276]
b. Abandonment of helpless persons in danger and abandonment of one’s own victim (Par
3) [Art. 275(3)]
Page 207 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
e. Article 279 – Additional Penalties
for Other Offenses
Other Penalties may be Imposed
The penalties prescribed in Art 275-278 shall
not prevent the imposition of penalties under
other provisions of the RPC upon the same
offender.
SECTION 2. Trespass to Dwelling
f. Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to
Dwelling
Elements [PEW]
1. Offender is a Private person;
2. He Enters the dwelling of another; and
3. Such entrance is against the latter’s
Will.
Qualifying Circumstance:
Offense is committed by means of violence or
intimidation.
It is not necessary that the dwelling be the
permanent dwelling of the person. A person’s
room in a hotel may be considered a dwelling.
It also includes a room where one resides as a
boarder [U.S. v. Silvano, 31 Phil. 510].
CRIMINAL LAW
offender (qualified trespass) [US v. Abanto,
G.R. No. 5266. February 16, 1910].
● Violence or intimidation may take
place immediately after the entrance
[US v. Arceo, G.R. No. 1491 (1904)].
Implied Prohibition
1. If the entry is made through a way not
intended for entry, it is presumed to be
against the will of the occupant
(example, entry through a window)
[People v. Marcial, CA. 50 0G 3122].
2. When one enters the dwelling of
another at late hour of the night after
the occupants have retired and closed
their doors does so against their will.
Prohibition is presumed [US v. Mesina,
G.R. No. 6717 (1911); US v. Panes,
G.R. 7987 (1913)].
Crime Committed if a Person is Killed
If a person was killed after trespass by the
offender, the following crimes are committed:
1. If there was no intent to kill when he
entered: separate crimes of homicide
or murder, and trespass to dwelling.
2. If there was intent to kill when he
entered: the crime is homicide or
murder with dwelling as an aggravating
circumstance [See People v. Delim,
G.R. No. 142773, Jan. 28, 2003].
Authority to Invite into House
All members of a household are presumed to
have authority to extend an invitation to enter
the house [US v. Dulfo, G.R. No. 4133 (1908)].
Prohibition Required
General Rule: Prohibition must be in existence
prior to or at the time of entrance. The entrance
must be against the presumed, or implied, or
express prohibition of the occupant. Lack of
permission does not amount to prohibition
[People v. De Peralta, G.R. No. 17332 (1921)].
Exception: Prohibition is not necessary when
violence or intimidation is employed by the
Owners may be Guilty of Trespass
Trespass may be committed by the owner of a
dwelling (i.e. lessor enters the house leased to
another against the latter’s will). [People v.
Almeda et al.,15 Phil 223]
What is Not Considered Trespass
[PSC]:
1. Entrance to another’s dwelling made
for the purpose of Preventing some
serious harm to himself, the occupants
of the dwelling, or a third person.
2. If the purpose is to render some
Service to humanity or justice.
3. If the place where entrance is made is
a Café, tavern, inn, and other public
house, while the same are open.
Page 208 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Violation of Domicile vs. Trespass to
Dwelling
Violation of
Domicile
[Art. 128]
Trespass to
Dwelling
[Art. 280]
Qualified Trespass vs. Other Forms of
Trespass [REYES, Book 2]
Qualified Trespass
to Dwelling
[Art. 280]
Classification
Crimes
against Crime
Fundamental Laws Security
of the State
Other Forms of
Trespass
[Art. 281]
As to Offender
against
Offender is a private Offender
person
person
is
any
As to the Premises Entered
As to Offender
Public officer or Private individual
employee,
not
authorized by any
judicial order
As to Manner of Commission
1.
Entering
the Entering the dwelling
dwelling against the against the will of the
will of the owner
owner.
2.
Surreptitiously
entering the dwelling
and refusing to leave
after being required
to do so.
Offender
dwelling
enters
a Offender
enters
closed premises or
fenced estate
As to Place
Place entered
inhabited
is Place entered
uninhabited
is
As to Act Punished
Entering the dwelling Entering the closed
against the will of the premises or the
owner
fenced
estate
without securing the
permission of the
owner or caretaker.
As to Prohibition
g. Article 281 - Other Forms of
Trespass
Prohibition to enter is Prohibition to enter
express or implied
must be manifest
Elements
1. Offender enters the Closed premises
or the fenced estate of another;
2. Entrance is made while either of them
is Uninhabited; \
3. Prohibition to enter is Manifest; and
4. Trespasser has Not secured the
permission of the owner or the
caretaker thereof.
SECTION 3. Threats and Coercion
h. Article 282 - Grave Threats
Punishable Acts
1. Threatening another with the infliction
upon his person, honor or property or
that of this family of any wrong
amounting to a crime and demanding
money or imposing any other condition,
even though not unlawful, and the
offender Attained his purpose;
2. Making such threat Without the
offender attaining his purpose;
Page 209 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. Threatening another with the infliction
upon his person, honor or property or
that of his family of any wrong
amounting to a Crime, the threat not
being subject to a condition.
As soon as the threats came to the knowledge
of the offended party [People v. Bueza, G.R.
No. 242513 (2020)].
Commission of Crime Threatened
Elements:
Mode 1:
Threatening,
even if not
unlawful
[TCDA]
CRIMINAL LAW
When Consummated
Mode 2:
Threat w/o
attaining
purpose
[TCDN]
Mode 3:
Threat of
crime
[TCNN]
1. Offender Threatens another person with
the infliction upon the latter’s person, honor
or property, or upon that of the latter’s
family, of any wrong.
2. Such wrong amounts to a Crime.
3. There is a Demand for
money or that any other
condition is imposed, even
though not unlawful.
3. Threat is
Not subject
to
a
condition.
4. Offender 4. Offender
Attains
his does
Not
purpose
attain
his
purpose.
If there is another crime actually committed or
the objective of the offender is another crime
and the threat is only a means to commit or a
mere incident to its commission, the threats are
absorbed by the latter.
Example: When threats are made and money
or property is demanded on the spot, the crime
may be robbery with intimidation [US v. Osorio,
G.R. No. 6660 (1912)].
Sec. 1(h) of PD 1829 (Obstruction of
Justice)
Threatening the infliction of any wrong upon
another’s person, honor, or property or that of
any of his immediate family members or the
imposition of a condition, whether lawful or
unlawful, shall be punished as obstruction of
justice when the purpose of such is to prevent
a person from appearing in the investigation of,
or official proceedings in criminal cases [Sec
1(h), P.D. No. 1829].
i. Article 283 - Light Threats
Third Type of Grave Threats
The third type of grave threats must be serious
and deliberate; the offender must persist in the
idea involved in his threats. The threat should
not be made in the heat of anger, because such
is punished under Article 285. If the condition
is not proved, it is grave threats of the third type
[U.S. v. Paguiran, G.R. No. 5348, (1909)].
Qualifying Circumstance:
If the threat was made in writing or through a
middleman, penalties imposed will be that of
the maximum period [Art. 282, Revised Penal
Code].
Elements
1. Offender makes a Threat to commit a
wrong;
2. Wrong does Not constitute a crime;
3. There is a Demand for money or that
other condition is imposed, even
though not unlawful; and
4. Offender has Attained his purpose or
that he has Not attained his purpose.
Note: Blackmailing may be punished under this
article, in that what is threatened is a “wrong
not constituting a crime” [See Art. 283, Revised
Penal Code]
Offended Party Need Not be Present
It is not necessary that the offended party was
present at the time the threats were made. It is
sufficient that the threats came to the
knowledge of the offended party [People v.
Bueza, G.R. No. 242513 (2020)].
Page 210 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Grave Threats vs. Light Threats
[REYES, Book 2]
Grave Threats
[Art 282]
Light Threats
[Art 283]
Acts Threatened to be Committed
Act
threatened Act threatened does
amounts to a crime
not amount to a
crime
As to Demand for Money
Demand is not an Demand
for
essential
element money/imposition of
under mode 3.
any condition is an
essential
element
whether attained or
not.
Not a distinct penalty A distinct penalty
k. Article 285 – Other Light Threats
Punishable Acts
1. Threatening another with a Weapon;
2. Drawing such weapon in a quarrel,
unless it be in lawful self-defense;
3. Orally threatening another, in the heat
of Anger, with some harm constituting
a Crime, without persisting in the idea
involved in his threat; and
4. Orally threatening to do another any
harm Not constituting a felony.
If Uttered in Anger
j. Article 284 - Bond for Good Behavior
If the threats are directed to a person who is
absent and uttered in a temporary fit of anger,
the offense is only other light threats [People v.
Fontanilla, G.R. No. 39248 (1934)].
When a Person is Required to Give
Bail Bond
Other Light Threats vs. Grave/Light
Threats
When the offender threatens another under the
circumstances mentioned in:
1. Art. 282 (Grave Threats); or
2. Art. 283 (Light Threats).
Other Light Threats Grave Threats and
[Art 285]
Light Threats [Arts.
282 and 283]
As to Demand/Condition
Bond for Good Behavior vs. Bond to
Keep the Peace
[REYES, Book 2]
Bond for Good
Behavior
[Art 284]
Bond to Keep the
Peace
[Art 35]
As to Applicability to Cases
Applicable only to Not applicable to any
grave threats and particular case
light threats
Effect of Failure to Give
He
shall
sentenced
destierro.
be He shall be detained
to for a period not
exceeding 6 months
(if prosecuted for
grave/less
grave
felony)
or
not
exceeding 30 days
(light felony)
No
demand
for In certain cases,
money or condition is demand or condition
imposed
is material
As to Threat
Threat
is
deliberate
not Threat is deliberate
l. Article 286 - Grave Coercions
Threats vs. Coercion
Threats
Coercion
As to Threatened Harm
Threatened harm is Threatened
harm
future
and must be imminent,
conditional
actual,
and
immediate
As a Penalty
Page 211 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
As to Whom Violence is Directed
Intimidation
is Intimidation
is
directed against the directed against the
victim or his family
victim only
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Preventing another to perform any
Religious act [Art. 286, Revised Penal
Code]
Grave Coercion vs. Illegal Detention
[REYES, Book 2]
Elements
Mode 1:
Preventing
something not
Prohibited by Law
[PVN]
Mode 2:
Compelling
Another to do
Something against
his Will [CVN]
1.
Offender
Prevented another
from
doing
something
not
prohibited by law
1.
Offender
Compelled another
to do something
against is will; be it
right or wrong
Grave
Coercion
[Art. 286]
by
Violence,
threats
or
3. Restraint is Not made under authority of
law or in the exercise of any lawful right
When Prevention is Not Considered
Coercion
a. Interruption of religious worship [Art.
132, RPC].
b. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of
the Assembly and similar bodies. [Art.
143, RPC].
c. Violation of parliamentary Immunity.
[Art. 145, RPC].
d. Light coercion [Art. 287, RPC].
When Compulsion is not Considered
Coercion
a. Expulsion [Art 127, RPC]
b. Kidnapping of debtor to compel him to
pay [Art. 267, RPC]
When Consummated
Coercion is consummated even if the offended
party did not accede to the purpose of coercion
[US v. Cusi, G.R. No. 3699 (1908)].
Qualifying Circumstances [SRR]
1. Violation of the exercise of the right of
Suffrage
2. Compelling another to perform any
Religious Act
Maltreatment
of Prisoners
[Art. 235]
As to Offender
Any person
2. Effected
intimidation
Illegal
Detention
[Art. 267268]
Private
individual
Public Officer
or employee
As to Offended Party
Offended party is not a Offended party
prisoner
is a prisoner
As to Essential Element
Coercion or
prevention
by violence,
threats or
intimidation
.
Actual
confinement
or restraint
of
the
person
There is no
clear intent
of depriving
of liberty.
Maltreatment
related
to
correction/
handling
of
prisoner or to
extort
a
confession or
information
m. Article 287 - Light Coercions
Elements:
1. Offender must be a Creditor;
2. He Seizes anything belonging to his
debtor;
3. Seizure of the thing is accomplished by
means of Violence or a display of
material force producing intimidation;
and
4. Purpose of the offender is to Apply the
same to the payment of the debt.
Note: Any other coercion or unjust vexation is
also punishable under this provision.
Unjust Vexation
It includes any human conduct which, although
not productive of some physical or material
Page 212 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
harm would, however, unjustifiably annoy or
vex an innocent person. [People v. Sumingwa,
G.R. No. 183619 (2009)]
A man who kissed a girl and held her tightly to
his breast is guilty of unjust vexation (People v.
Climaco, 46 OG 3186). But the conduct of the
accused should not be lascivious, for
otherwise, he is liable for acts of lasciviousness
under Art. 366. [People v. Añonuevo, 36 OG
2018]
Grave Coercion vs. Unjust Vexation
[REYES, Book 2]
Grave Coercion
[Art. 286]
Unjust Vexation
[Art. 287]
As to Violence and Intimidation
There is violence or There is no violence
intimidation
or intimidation
Light Coercion vs. Robbery vs. Estafa
[BOADO]
Light
Coercion
[Art. 287]
Robbery
[Art. 294]
Estafa by
Means of
Deceit
[Art. 315
(2 & 3)]
Property
Value of the
seized
is property
applied
to seized
is
debt
by greater than
means
of the debt and
violence.
violence,
intimidation
or use of
force upon
things
is
employed
n. Article
Coercions
288
-
No obligation
on the part of
the offended
party
(no
debt
is
involved) but
deceit
caused
damage to
him.
Other
Similar
Punishable Acts
1. Forcing or compelling, directly or
indirectly, or knowingly permitting the
forcing or compelling of the laborer or
employee of the offender to Purchase
merchandise of commodities of any
kind from him;
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements
a. Offender is any person, agent
or Officer of any association or
corporation;
b. He or such firm or corporation
has employed Laborers or
employees;
c. He forces or compels, directly
or indirectly, or knowingly
permits to be forced or
compelled, any of his or its
laborers or employees to
Purchase merchandise or
commodities of any kind from
him or from said firm or
corporation.
2. Paying the wages due his laborer or
employee by means of Tokens or
object other than the legal tender
currency of the Philippines, unless
expressly requested by such laborer or
employee.
Elements [TON]:
a. Offender (employer) pays the
wages due a laborer or
employee by means of Tokens
or object;
b. Those tokens or Objects are
not the legal tender currency of
the Philippines;
c. Such employee or laborer does
Not expressly request that he
be paid by means of tokens or
objects.
o.
Article
289
Formation,
Maintenance, and Prohibition of
Combination of Capital or Labor
through Violence or Threats (repealed
by Labor Code) place labor code
provision which repealed
Elements [ViCo]:
1. Offender employs Violence or
threats, in such a degree as to compel
or force the laborers or employers in
the free and legal exercise of their
industry or work; and
2. Purpose is to organize, maintain or
prevent Coalitions of capital or labor,
strike of laborers or lockout of
employers.
Page 213 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Note: The punishable acts contemplated under
this article, are now covered by Art. 259 of the
Labor Code (Unfair Labor Practices). Art. 303
of the same, provides for the penalties to be
imposed (not less than P1,000 nor more than
P10,000, or imprisonment of not less than
three months nor more than three year, or both
such fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of
the court). Art. 317, also of the same code,
prescribes that all provisions of existing laws
inconsistent with the Labor Code are hereby
repealed. Art. 289 of the Revised Penal Code
is included.
3. Chapter III: Discovery and
Revelation of Secrets
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Cybercrime Prevention Act
of 2012 and the Anti-Wire Tapping Act in
relation to this Chapter
a. Article 290 - Discovering Secrets
through Seizure of Correspondence
Elements
1. Offender is a Private individual or a
public officer not in the exercise of his
official function;
2. He Seizes the papers or letters of
another;
3. Purpose is to Discover the secrets of
such another person; and
4. Offender is Informed of the contents of
the papers or letters seized.
Note: Discovering secrets through seizure of
correspondence cannot be committed through
negligence. The accused must be dictated by
the desire to discover secrets [See People v.
Otto, Jr., C.A., 50 O.G. 3127].
Persons Not Covered by Art. 290
Provision is not applicable to parents,
guardians, or persons entrusted with the
custody of minors placed under their care or
custody, and to the spouses with respect to the
papers or letters of either of them. [Art. 290,
Revised Penal Code]
Qualifying Circumstance
Offender reveals the contents to a third person.
[Art. 290, par. 2, Revised Penal Code]
CRIMINAL LAW
b. Article 291 - Revealing Secrets with
Abuse of Office
Elements
1. Offender is a Manager, Employee or
Servant;
2. He Learns the secrets of his principal
or master in such capacity; and
3. He Reveals such secrets.
Damage Immaterial
An employee, manager, or servant who reveals
the secret of his master or principal shall be
liable regardless of the damage suffered by the
principal or master. There is no requirement of
damage in the provision. [See Art. 291,
Revised Penal Code]
Secrets Learned in the Course of
Employment
Essence of this crime is that the offender
learned of the secret in the course of his
employment, based on the qualifier “in such
capacity”. With the reason being that no one
has a right to the personal privacy of another.
[See Art. 291, Revised Penal Code]
Discovering Secrets through Seizure
of Correspondence v. Public Officer
Revealing
Secrets
of
Private
Individual vs. Revealing Secrets with
Abuse of Office
Discovering
Secrets
through
Seizure of
Correspondence [Art.
290]
Public
Officer
Revealing
Secrets of
Private
Individual
[Art. 230]
Revealing
Secrets
with Abuse
of Office
[Art. 291]
As to Offender
Private
Public
Individual
or Officer
Public Officer
not
in
the
exercise of his
official
functions
Manager,
Employee or
Servant
serving
a
Principal or
Master
As to Where Secrets are Contained
Papers
or No specific No
Page 214 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
specific
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
letters
another
of medium.
What
is
necessary
is that the
offender
learns of
the secret
by reason
of
his
office
medium.
The offender
learns of the
secret
by
reason
of
her or his
employment.
As to Revelation of Secrets
Secrets need Secrets must be revealed
not
be
revealed.
c. Article 292 - Revelation of Industrial
Secrets
Elements
1. Offender is a person in charge,
employee
or
workman
of
a
manufacturing
or
industrial
Establishment;
2. The manufacturing or industrial
establishment has a Secret of the
industry which the offender has
learned;
3. Offender Reveals such secrets; and
4. Prejudice is caused to the owner.
Note:
•
•
Secrets must relate to manufacturing
processes, as opposed to generally
used processes for in such case they
are secret [REYES, Book 2]
The revelation of the secret might be
made even after the employee or
workman had ceased to be connected
with the establishment, as the article
did not state the time when the secret
should be revealed . [Art. 292, Revised
Penal Code]
Page 215 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
J.
CRIMES
AGAINST
PROPERTY [ARTS. 293 332]
1. Chapter I: Robbery in General
a. Article 293 – Who Are Guilty of
Robbery
Classifications of Robbery: [ViFo]
1. Robbery with Violence against, or
intimidation of persons [Arts. 294, 297
& 298]; and
2. Robbery by use of Force upon things
[Arts. 299 & 302]
Elements of Robbery in General:
1. There is a Personal property
belonging to another;
2. There is unlawful Taking of that
property;
3. The taking must be with Intent to gain;
and
4. There is:
a. Violence against or intimidation
of any person; or
b. Force used upon things
1. There is a Personal property belonging to
another;
Rules:
a. Property taken must be personal – if
real property/right is the one usurped,
the crime is usurpation under Art. 312.
[Castrodes v. Cubelo, G.R. No. L47033, [Jun. 16, 1978]]
b. Prohibited articles may be the
subject of a Robbery - example:
Opium [U.S. v. Sana Lim, G.R. No.
9604, (1914)]
c. Person from whom the personal
property taken need not be the
owner - possession of the property is
sufficient [U.S. v. Albao, G.R. No.
9369, [Dec. 24, 1914]]
d. Co-owner or Partner cannot commit
Robbery - following the rule that
property stolen must belong to another;
a co-owner or partner cannot commit
robbery with regard to the coownership or partnership property.
[Arts. 484, 1811, New Civil Code; See
CRIMINAL LAW
also other provisions on partnership
and co-ownership]
2. There is unlawful Taking of that property;
Taking - Depriving the offended party of
ownership of the thing taken with the character
of permanency [Bernal vs. CA, G.R. No. L32798, (1988)]
Unlawful taking is complete:
a. As to Robbery with Violence against
or Intimidation of Persons – From the
moment the offender gains possession
of the thing, even if the culprit had no
opportunity to dispose of the same
[People v. Salvilla, G.R. No. 86163,
(1990)].
b. As to Robbery with Force Upon
Things – Theft or robbery is
consummated after the accused had
taken material possession of the thing
with intent to appropriate the same,
although his act of making use of the
thing was frustrated [U.S. v. Adiao, 38
Phil. 754].
When Crime is Estafa and not Robbery
If the thing is lawfully seized and the idea of
misappropriating it is conceived only after it
came into their possession, the crime
committed would be estafa [U.S. v. Sana Lim,
G.R. No. 9604, (1914)].
3. The taking must be with Intent to gain;
and
Intent to Gain is Presumed
Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful
taking of personal property belonging to
another, unless taken with the belief that it was
his own [Omana v. People, G.R. No. L-46807,
citing People v. Sia Teb Ban, 54 Phil. 52].
Elements of “Personal Property belonging
to Another” and “Intent to Gain” must
concur:
a. If the accused, with intent to gain, took
from another, personal property which
turned out to be his own property, the
property not belonging to another, he
cannot be held liable for robbery;
b. If he took personal property from
another, believing that it was his own
property, but in reality it belonged to the
offended party, there being no intent to
Page 216 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
gain, he cannot be held liable for
robbery.
4. There is:
a. Violence against or intimidation of
any person; or
b. Force used upon things.
General Rule: Violence or intimidation must be
present before the taking of personal property
is complete.
Exception: When violence results in:
a. Homicide;
b. Rape;
c. Intentional mutilation; or
d. Any of the serious physical injuries
penalized in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art.
263;
Taking of personal property is robbery
complexed with any of those crimes under Art.
294, even if the taking was already complete
when the violence was used by the offender.
Violence must be Against the Person
Offended
The violence must be against the person of the
offended party, not upon the thing taken
[Ablaza v. People, G.R. No. 217722, (2018);
Del Rosario v. People, G.R. No. 235739
(2019)]].
Violence Against or Intimidation of
Persons vs. Force Upon Things
Violence Against
or Intimidation of
Persons
Force Upon Things
As to Effect
Whenever violence
against
or
intimidation of any
person is used, the
taking of personal
property belonging to
another is always
robbery
There is robbery only
if force is used to:
[EBF]
1. Enter the building;
2. Break doors,
wardrobes, chests,
or any other kind of
locked or sealed
furniture
or
receptacle inside the
building; or
3. Force them open
outside after taking
the same from the
building [Art. 299 &
302, RPC]
As to Basis of Penalty
Penalty depends on:
[RIn]
1. Result of the
violence used (e.g.,
whether homicide,
rape or physical
injuries were also
committed); and
2.
Existence
of
Intimidation.
If committed in an
inhabited
house,
public building, or
edifice devoted to
religious worship, the
penalty is based on:
[VA]
1. Value of the thing
taken; and
2. Whether offenders
carry Arms
Value of the thing
taken is immaterial.
[id.]
Effect When Both Violence or
Intimidation and Force Upon Things are
Present
When the offender takes personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain and
employs violence against or intimidation on any
person, the crime is robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons, even if the
robbery was committed after the offender had
entered the same through a window, or after
breaking its door or wall [Napolis v. CA, G.R.
No. 197562, (2015)].
SECTION 1. Robbery with Violence
Against or Intimidation of Persons
b. Article 294 – Robbery with Violence
or Intimidation of Persons
Punishable Acts:
1. When by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime of Homicide is
committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied by
Rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of such
robbery any of the physical injuries
resulting in Insanity, imbecility,
impotency or blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason or on occasion of
robbery, any of the Physical injuries
penalized in Art. 263(2) [Serious
Physical Injuries] is inflicted;
Page 217 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
a. Loss of the use of speech or
the power to hear or to smell, or
the loss of an eye, a hand, a
foot, an arm or a leg; or
b. Loss of the use of any such
member; or
c. Incapacity for the work in which
the
injured
person
is
theretofore habitually engaged
is inflicted.
5. If the violence or intimidation employed
in the commission of the robbery is
carried
to
a
degree
clearly
Unnecessary for its commission.
6. When in the course of its execution, the
offender inflicted upon any person Not
responsible for the commission of the
robbery any of the Physical Injuries
covered by Art 263(3 & 4) of the RPC;
when the person injured:
a. Becomes deformed; or
b. Loses any other member of his
body; or
c. Loses the use thereof; or
d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for
the performance of the work in
which he is habitually engaged
for labor for more than 90 days;
or
e. Becomes ill or incapacitated for
labor for more than 30 days,
but not more than 90 days.
7. If the Violence employed by the
offender:
a. Does not cause any of the
serious
physical
injuries
defined in Art. 263, or
b. If the offender employs
intimidation only.
Note: The crime defined in this article is a
special complex crime [Art. 294, Revised Penal
Code; People v. Palema, G. R. No. 228000
(2019)].
This article only applies where robbery with
violence against or intimidation of persons
takes place without entering an inhabited
house under the circumstances in Art. 299
(Robbery in an Inhabited House or Public
Building). When both robbery with intimidation
or violence under Art. 294 and robbery in an
inhabited house under Art. 299 are committed,
both crimes shall be complexed. In such a
case, the penalty for the more serious crime
shall be imposed [Napolis vs. CA, G.R. No. L –
28865, (1972)].
Special Complex Crimes Under Art.
294:
1. Robbery with Homicide
Homicide - is to be understood in its generic
sense as to include parricide and murder
[People v. Diu, G.R. No. 201449 (2013)].
Robbery must be the Main Purpose
A conviction for robbery with homicide requires
certitude that the robbery was the main
purpose and objective of the criminals and that
the killing was merely incidental, resulting
merely by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery [People vs. Salazar, G.R. No. 99355,
(1997)].
“By reason or on occasion of the robbery”means that the homicide or serious physical
injuries must be committed in the course or
because of the robbery. Otherwise, they shall
be separate offenses [People v. Torres, G.R.
No 130661 (2011); People v. Mabasa, 65 Phil.
568; People v. Atanacio, G.R. No. L-11844,
(1960)].
Absorption of Other Felonies Committed
All the felonies committed by reason of or on
the occasion of the robbery (e.g., rape,
intentional mutilation, etc.) are integrated into
one and individisible felony of robbery with
homicide [People v. Madrelejos, G.R. No.
225328, (2018), citing People v. Ebet, G.R. No.
181635, (2010].
When Not Complexed
In the following instances, there will be two
separate crimes of homicide or murder and
robbery:
1. When homicide was not committed by
reason of or on occasion of the robbery
2. When intent to take was merely an
afterthought; such as when the idea of
taking the personal property of another
with intent to gain came to the mind of
the offender after he had killed the
victim [People v. Toleng, 91 SCRA
382].
However, homicide may precede robbery or
may occur after the robbery. What is essential
is that there be a direct and intimate
relation/connection between the robbery and
killing, provided that the taking is not merely an
afterthought [People v. Jabiniao, G.R. No.
Page 218 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
179499, (2008); People v. De Jesus, G.R.
No.134815, (2004)].
There is Robbery with Homicide even if:
a. The killing is done to suppress
evidence, as long as the robbery is “the
reason” of the homicide [People vs.
Madrid, G.R. No. L-3023, (1951)]
b. The death of a person supervened by
mere
accident
[People
vs.
Mangulabnan, G.R. No. L-8919,
(1956)]
c. The person killed was a bystander and
not the person robbed [People vs.
Barut, G.R. No. 179943, (2009)]
d. The person killed was one of the
robbers, and the killer was the police
officer pursuing him. [People v.
Casabuena, G.R. No. 246580, (2020)]
Covers Multiple Killings
The concept of robbery with homicide does not
limit the taking of life to one single victim.
All the homicides or murders are merged in the
composite, integrated whole, so long as all the
killings were perpetrated by reason or on the
occasion of the robbery. [People vs. Madrid,
id.]
All Participants Are Principals
General Rule: All those who took part as
principals in the robbery would also be held
liable as principals of the single and indivisible
felony of robbery with homicide
Exception: When it clearly appears that one or
some of them endeavored to prevent the same.
[People vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. 139697,
(2004)]
Note: There is no crime of robbery with murder.
If treachery is present, it shall be considered as
a generic aggravating circumstance [People
vs. Abang, G.R. No. L-14623, (1960)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Robbery with Homicide vs. Highway
Robbery
Robbery with
Homicide
[Art. 294]
Highway Robbery
[PD 532]
As to the Proof Required for Conviction
Conviction
for
robbery
with
homicide
merely
requires proof that
the homicide was
committed by reason
or on the occasion of
a robbery
Conviction
for
highway
robbery
requires proof that
several
accused
were organized for
the
purpose
of
committing
it
indiscriminately.
[REYES, Book 2]
2. Robbery with Rape
Like in robbery with homicide, the offender
must have the intent to take the personal
property belonging to another with intent to
gain, and such intent must precede the rape
[People v. Canastre, G.R. No. L-2055, (1948)].
Note: Even if the rape was committed in
another place, it is still robbery with rape [US
vs. Tiongco, G.R. No. L-12270, (1918)].
Rape may be Committed before taking the
Personal Property
The intention of the culprits from the beginning
was to take personal property. Even if the rape
was committed before the taking, they are
guilty of robbery with rape [People v. Canastre,
G.R. No. L-2055 (1948)].
No Crime of Robbery with Attempted Rape
Art. 294, par. 2, which punishes robbery with
rape (consummated) does not cover robbery
with attempted rape [People v. Cariaga, C.A.,
54 O.G. 4307].
Covers Multiple Rapes
All rapes are merged in the composite
integrated whole that is robbery with rape and
it does not matter whether the rape occurred
before, during or after the robbery [People v.
Seguis, G.R. No. 135034, (2001)].
Note: Additional acts of rape committed on
same occasion of robbery will not increase the
penalty, also they shall neither be considered
aggravating circumstances [People v. Regala,
G.R. No. 130508, (2000)].
Page 219 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Rape as an Aggravating Circumstance
When Rape and Homicide co-exist in the
commission of Robbery, Rape is considered as
an aggravating circumstance [People vs.
Ganal, G.R. No. L-1990, (1950)].
All Participants are Principals
Based on the concept of conspiracy, all
robbers may be held liable for robbery with
rape even if not all of them committed the crime
of rape [People vs. Balacanao, G.R. No.
118133, (2003)].
3. Robbery with Arson
In robbery with arson, it is essential that the
robbery precedes the arson.
CRIMINAL LAW
Threats to Extort Money vs. Robbery
through Intimidation [REYES, Book 2]
Threats to Extort
Money
[Art. 282]
Robbery Through
Intimidation
[Art. 294]
As to the Nature of the Intimidation
Conditional or future
Actual
Immediate
and
As to How Intimidation is Done
May be through an Personal
Intermediary
As to Whom Intimidation is Directed
There must be an intent to commit robbery, and
no killing, rape or intentional mutilation should
be committed in the course of the robbery, or
else arson will only be considered as an
aggravating circumstance [People v. Jugieta,
G.R. No. 202124, (2016); U.S. v. Bulfa, G.R.
NO. 8468, (1913)].
May refer to the Directed only to the
person, honor or person of the victim
property
of
the
offended party or
that of his family
4. Robbery with Serious Physical Injuries
Any injuries not under Art. 263 or not serious in
nature will fall under a Simple Robbery [Art.
294, par. 5, Revised Penal Code].
Gain
is
immediate
In Robbery with Unnecessary Violence and
Intimidation under par. 4, the Violence need not
result in Physical Injuries; all that Art. 294
requires is that the violence be unnecessary for
the commission of the robbery. [Art. 294 (4),
Revised Penal Code]
5. Simple Robbery
Under Par. 5 or Simple Robbery, this involves
slight or less serious physical injuries, which
are absorbed in the crime of robbery as an
element thereof [U.S v. Barroga, 21 Phil. 161;
People v. Mandia, 60 Phil. 372].
Note: Violence or intimidation may enter at any
time before the owner is finally deprived of his
property. The provision does not specify
exactly when. [Art. 294, Revised Penal Code]
As to the Culprit’s Gain
not Gain is immediate
Robbery vs. Bribery
Robbery
[Arts. 293 & 294]
Bribery
[Art. 210-211-A]
As to the Manner of Commission
Victim is deprived of Victim
voluntarily
his personal property parts with his money
by
violence, or property.
intimidation or force
upon things.
As to Purpose of Deprivation of Property
Offender
simply Money
or
gift
intends to gain.
obtained by the
person bribed was
meant
as
consideration for the
agreement
of
performance or nonperformance of an
act
Page 220 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
c. Art. 295 – Robbery with Physical
Injuries Committed in an Uninhabited
Place and by a Band or With the Use
of a Firearm on a Street, Road or Alley
Qualified Robbery with Violence
Against or intimidation of Persons
[Art. 294 (3)(4)(5)]:
If committed: [U-BAES]
1. In an Uninhabited place, or
2. By a Band, or
3. By Attacking a moving train, street car,
motor vehicle, or airship, or
4. By
Entering
the
passengers’
compartments in a train, or in any
manner taking the passengers thereof
by surprise in the respective
conveyances; or
5. On a Street, road, highway, or alley,
and the intimidation is made with the
use of Firearms
Note: Above circumstances must be alleged in
the Information. Moreover, these 5 qualifying
circumstances cannot be offset by a generic
mitigating circumstance [People v. Solar, G.R.
No. 225595. Aug. 6, 2019; People vs.
Mendoza, G.R. No. 133382, Mar. 9, 2000, 327
SCRA 695].
Uninhabited place
One where there are no houses at all, a place
at a considerable distance from the town, or
where the houses are scattered at a great
distance from each other [U.S. v. Salgado,
G.R. No. 4498, (1908)].
CRIMINAL LAW
penalty upon all the malefactors shall
be the maximum of the corresponding
penalty provided by law, without
prejudice to the criminal liability for
illegal possession of such firearms.
3. Any member of a band who was
present at the commission of a robbery
by the band, shall be punished as
Principal of any of the assaults
committed by the band, unless it be
shown that he attempted to prevent the
crime.
Requisites for Liability for the Acts of
Other Members:
1. He was a Member of the band.
2. He was Present at the commission of a
robbery by that band.
3. Other members of the band committed
an Assault.
4. He did not attempt to Prevent the
assault.
Note: Conspiracy is presumed when robbery is
committed by band [People v. De la Rosa, G.R.
No. L-3609, (1951)].
No Crime of “Robbery with Homicide in a
Band”
If the robbery with homicide is committed by a
band, the indictable offense would still be
denominated as "robbery with homicide" under
Art. 294(1), but the circumstance that it was
committed by a band would be appreciated as
an ordinary aggravating circumstance [People
v. Apduhan Jr., G.R. No. L-19491, (1968)].
Use of Loose Firearm
Imposable Penalty
Offender found liable under this article shall be
punished by the maximum periods of the
proper penalties in Art. 294. [Art. 295, Revised
Penal Code]
d. Art. 296 – Definition of a Band and
Penalty Incurred by the Members
thereof
Rule:
1. When at least 4 (more than 3) armed
malefactors
take
part
in
the
commission of a robbery, it is deemed
committed by a band.
2. When any of the Arms used in the
commission of robbery is not licensed,
The use of a loose firearm, when inherent in
the commission of a crime punishable under
the RPC or other special laws, shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
Provided, that if the crime committed with the
use of a loose firearm is penalized by the law
with a max penalty which is lower than that
prescribed for illegal possession of firearm, the
penalty for illegal possession of firearm shall be
imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime
charged [Sec. 29, RA 10591]
Note: Use of an unlicensed firearm by a band
cannot be offset by a generic mitigating
circumstance [People v. De Leon, G.R. No.
179943, (2009)].
Page 221 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
e. Article 297 – Attempted and
Frustrated Robbery Committed under
Circumstances
Elements:
1. There is Attempted or Frustrated
robbery
2. A Homicide is committed on the same
occasion
Homicide in its Generic Sense
Homicide under Art. 297 is used in its generic
sense and includes multiple homicides,
murder, parricide, or even infanticide [People v.
Madrelejos y Quililan, G.R. No. 225328
(2018)].
Imposable Penalty:
General Rule: Reclusion temporal in its
maximum period to reclusion perpetua
Exception: If the homicide deserves a higher
penalty. Thus, in an attempted or frustrated
robbery, and the killing of the victim is qualified
by treachery or relationship, the proper penalty
for murder or parricide shall be imposed
because it is more severe [Art. 297, Revised
Penal Code].
If Homicide is not Consummated, the
crimes of Robbery and Attempted or
Frustrated Homicide:
1. May be Considered as separate
crimes;
2. May be Complexed [Art. 48]
Attempted or Frustrated robbery with
Serious Physical Injuries, Art. 48 is
applicable
When the offense committed is attempted or
frustrated robbery with serious physical
injuries, Art. 48 (penalty for complex crimes) is
applicable, since the felony would fall neither
under Art. 294 which covers consummated
robbery with homicide nor under Art. 297 which
covers attempted or frustrated robbery with
homicide [People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. 2676,
(1939)].
f. Article 298 – Execution of Deeds by
Means of Violence or Intimidation
Elements:
1. Offender has Intent to defraud another;
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Offender Compels him to sign,
execute, or deliver any public
instrument or document; and
3. Compulsion is by means of Violence or
Intimidation.
Note:
● "Public" describes the word
"instrument" only. This is supposed by
the Spanish text, which is controlling in
interpretation [People v. Mesias, G.R.
No. 45749, Jan. 29, 1938]. Hence, this
article applies even if the document
signed, executed or delivered is a
private or commercial document.
[REYES, Book 2]
● Art 298 is not applicable if the
document is void [Id.]
Execution of Deeds by Means of
Violence or Intimidation vs. Grave
Coercion
Execution of Deeds
by Means of
Violence or
Intimidation
[Art. 298]
Grave Coercion
[Art. 286]
As to the Manner of Commission
Violence is used in
compelling
the
offended party to
sign or deliver the
document,
with
intent to defraud
Violence is used in
compelling
the
offended party to
sign or deliver the
document, without
intent to defraud
[Reyes, Book 2]
SECTION 2. Robbery By the Use of
Force Upon Things
Robbery by the use of force upon things is
committed only when either: [299-302-N]
1. Offender entered a house or building
by any of the means specified in Art.
299 or Art. 302; or
2. Even if there was No entrance by any
of those means, he broke a wardrobe,
chest, or any other kind of locked or
closed or sealed furniture or receptacle
in the house or building, or he took it
away to be broken or forced open
outside. [Art. 299 (b), Revised Penal
Code]
Page 222 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
g. Article 299 – Robbery in an
Inhabited House/Public Building or
Edifice Devoted to Worship
Mode 1: Entering Effected Through
Force
Elements: [E-E-T]
1. Offender Entered: [HBR]
a. An inhabited House; or
b. Public Building
c. Edifice devoted to Religious
worship
2. Entrance was effected by any of the
following means: [OBFN]
a. Through an Opening not
intended for entrance or
egress;
b. By Breaking any wall, roof, or
floor, or door or window;
c. By using False keys, picklocks
or similar tools; or
d. By using any fictitious Name or
pretending the exercise of
public authority.
3. Once inside the building, offender Took
personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain.
CRIMINAL LAW
offender merely inserted his hand
through an opening in the wall or used
a pole through the window to get the
clothes inside the room, while the
offender remained outside the house or
building, there is no robbery because
no entrance of his body was made
[People v. Adorno, C.A. 40 O.G. 567].
2. There must be an intention to take
personal property. If there is no
evidence to show that the intention of
the accused was to commit robbery
upon entering the building, the crime
committed is attempted trespass to
dwelling under Art. 280 (2), RPC
[People v. Tayag, G.R. L-40512,
(1934)].
3. Means enumerated must be used to
enter the house. It does not refer to
the method used to exit [REYES, Book
2], nor to open a trunk in the house
[U.S. vs. Macamay, G.R. No. 11952,
(1917)].
False Keys
The genuine key must be stolen, not taken by
force or with intimidation, from the owner.
Otherwise, the crime would be robbery with
intimidation of persons [See Art. 305, Revised
Penal Code].
Imposable Penalty
Penalty depends on the value of property taken
and on whether or not the offender carries
arms. [Art. 299, Revised Penal Code]
Picklocks
Picklocks or similar tools are those specially
adopted to the commission of the crime of
robbery. [Art. 304, Revised Penal Code]
Inhabited House vs. Public Building
Inhabited House
[Art. 301]
Public Building
[Art. 301]
Use of Fictitious Names or Pretending
to Exercise Authority Must be the
Efficient Cause
Any shelter, ship or
vessel constituting
the dwelling of one or
more persons even
though
the
inhabitants thereof
are
temporarily
absent
therefrom
when the robbery is
committed.
Every
building
owned
by
the
Government
or
belonging
to
a
private person but
used or rented by the
Government,
although temporarily
unoccupied by the
same.
It seems that using fictitious names or
pretending to exercise of public authority must
be the efficient cause of the opening by the
offended party [See People v. Urbano et al., 50
Phil. 90].
Rules:
1. Offender must "enter the house or
building in which the robbery is
committed." The whole body must
enter the building or house. Thus, if the
Mode 2: Acquisition of Property
through Force
Elements: [I-GBT]
1. Offender is Inside a dwelling house,
public building, or edifice devoted to
religious worship, regardless of the
circumstances under which he entered
it.
2. Offender takes personal property
belonging to another, with intent to
Page 223 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Gain, under any of the following
circumstances:
a. Breaking of doors, wardrobes,
chests, or any other kind of
locked or sealed furniture or
receptacle; or
b. Taking such furniture or objects
away to be broken or forced
open outside the place of the
robbery.
Note:
•
•
Entrance into the building by any of the
means mentioned in 299 (a) is not
required in robbery under 299 (b), as
implied by the use of “or"
Door" refers only to "doors, lids, or
opening sheets" of furniture or other
portable receptacles — not to inside
doors of a house or building, based on
the construction of the provision which
implies that an entrance should be
effected through the door.
There is No Robbery in the following cases:
1. When the use of false keys was to open
a wardrobe from which the offender
took personal property; Art. 299(b)
requires that the same be broken, not
merely opened
[See Art. 299(b),
Revised Penal Code]
2. When a person opens by force a
certain locked or sealed receptacle
which has been confided into his
custody and takes the money
contained therein, is guilty of estafa
and not robbery [See Art. 315, Revised
Penal Code (with unfaithfulness or
abuse of confidence)]
h. Article 300 – Robbery in an
Uninhabited Place and by a Band
Elements: [RBU]
1. Robbery in an inhabited house, public
building or edifice devoted to religious
worship
2. Committed by a Band; and
3. In an Uninhabited place.
a. The inhabited house, public
building or edifice devoted to
religious worship must be
located in an uninhabited place
or location [U.S. v. Morada,
G.R. No. L-8138, (1912)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Note: Qualified robbery with violence or
intimidation of persons [Art. 295, Revised
Penal Code] is committed in an uninhabited
place OR by a band.
i. Article 301 – What is an Inhabited
House, Public Building or Building
Dedicated to Religious Worship and
Their Dependencies
Inhabited House vs. Public Building [See:
Art. 299, Revised Penal Code]
Dependencies
All interior courts, corrals, warehouses,
granaries or inclosed places contiguous to the
building or edifice, having an interior entrance
connected therewith, and which form part of
the whole. [Art. 301(2), Revised Penal Code]:
[CIP]
1. Contiguous to the building;
2. Must have an Interior entrance
connected therewith;
3. Form Part of the whole. [Art. 301,
Revised Penal Code]
Note: Orchards and other lands used for
cultivation or production are not included in the
terms of the next preceding paragraph, even if
closed, contiguous to the building and having
direct connection therewith. [Art 301 (3),
Revised Penal Code]
j. Article 302 – Robbery in an
Uninhabited Place or in a Private
Building
Elements: [U-OBFaSeR-G]
1. Offender Entered an Uninhabited place
or a building which was not a dwelling
house, public building, nor edifice
devoted to religious worship.
2. That
any
of
the
following
circumstances was present:
a. Entrance was effected through
an Opening not intended for
entrance or egress; or
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside
door or window was Broken; or
c. Entrance was effected through
the use of False keys, picklocks
or other similar tools; or
Page 224 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any
Sealed or closed furniture or
receptacle was broken; or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle
was Removed, even if the
same
be
broken
open
elsewhere.
3. That with intent to Gain, the offender
took therefrom personal property
belonging to another.
Note:
•
•
k. Article 303 – Robbery of Cereals,
Fruits, or Firewood in an Uninhabited
Place or Private Building
Imposable Penalty
In cases enumerated in Arts. 299 and 302, the
penalty is 1 degree lower when robbery
consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or
firewood. [Art. 303, Revised Penal Code]
Cereals
The "uninhabited place" mentioned in
Art. 302 is a building, because
paragraphs Nos. 1 and 3 speak of
"entrance," which necessarily refers to
a building.
Breaking padlock is use of force upon
things [Estioca v. People, G.R. No.
173876, Jun.. 27, 2008].
Building
Includes any kind of structure used for storage
or safekeeping of personal property, ex. freight
car and warehouse [U.S. vs. Magsino, G.R.
No. 1339, (1903)].
Use of Fictitious Name or Pretense of
Authority
Notably, the use of fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public authority is
not a means of entering the building under this
article. This is because the place is uninhabited
and no person could be deceived thereby. [Art.
302 in relation to Art. 299(a), Revised Penal
Code; See REYES, Book 2]
Furniture or receptacle here is "sealed or
closed."
The furniture or receptacle here is "sealed or
closed” as opposed to Art. 299, where it is
either "locked or sealed." Consequently, it
would seem then that taking property from a
closed but not sealed receptacle is merely theft
in this situation. The receptacle should have
been broken to constitute robbery. [Art. 302 in
relation to Art. 299(a), Revised Penal Code;
See REYES, Book 2]
Seedlings which are the immediate product of
the soil [See People v. Mesias, 65 Phil. 267].
The palay must be kept by the owner as
“seedling” or taken for that purpose by the
robbers [People v. Rada, et al., G.R. No. L16988, Dec. 30, 1961, 3 SCRA 880; People v.
Taugan, C.A.-G.R. No. 1287-R, May 26, 1949].
l. Article 304 – Possession
Picklocks or Similar Tools
of
Elements:
1. Offender possesses Picklocks or
similar tools;
2. Such picklocks or similar tools are
especially adopted to the commission
of Robbery; and
3. Offender does Not have a lawful cause
for such possession.
Qualifying Circumstance:
If the person who makes such tools is a
locksmith, the penalty is higher.
m. Article 305 – False Keys
False Keys include: [304-GO]
1. Tools mentioned in Art. 304 (picklocks
or other similar tools)
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner.
3. Any keys Other than those intended by
the owner for use in the lock forcibly
opened by the offender.
A lost or misplaced key found by another and
not returned to its rightful owner is considered
as a false key stolen from the owner. [See Art.
305, Revised Penal Code]
Page 225 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. Chapter II: Brigandage
PD 532: Anti-Piracy and AntiHighway Robbery Law of 1974
Highway Robbery/Brigandage
The seizure of any person for ransom, extortion
or other unlawful purposes, or the taking away
of the property of another by means of violence
against or intimidation of person or force upon
things of other unlawful means, committed by
any person on any Philippine Highway. [Sec. 2
(e), PD 532]
Philippine Highway
Refers to any road, street, passage, highway
and bridges or other parts thereof, or railway or
railroad within the Philippines used by persons,
or vehicles, or locomotives or trains for the
movement or circulation of persons or
transportation of goods, articles, or property or
both. [Sec. 2 (c), PD 532]
Elements: [HIV]
1. Robbery takes place along a Philippine
Highway;
2. Act of Robbery must be Indiscriminate,
it should not be an isolated case; and
3. Victim was not predetermined [Abay,
Jr. V. People. G.R. No. 165896,
(2008)].
Note: The robbery must be directed not only
against specific, intended or perceived victims,
but against any and all prospective victims [Id.]
Evidence
It is highway robbery only when it can be
proven that the malefactors primarily organized
themselves for the purpose of committing that
crime [Ibañez vs. People, G.R. No. 204990,
(2017)].
Person Considered as an Accomplice
[Sec. 4, id.]:
Any person who knowingly and in any manner:
1. Aids or Protects pirates or highway
robbers/brigands, such as:
a. Giving them information about
the movement of police or
other peace officers of the
government, or
b. Acquires or receives property
taken by such pirates or
brigands; or
CRIMINAL LAW
c. In any manner derives any
benefit therefrom; and
2. Any person who directly or indirectly
Abets the commission of piracy or
highway robbery or brigandage
Note: It shall be presumed that any person who
does any of the acts provided in this Section
has performed knowingly, unless the contrary
is proven.
a. Article 306 – Brigandage
Elements:
1. There be at least 4 armed persons
2. They formed a Band of robbers
3. Purpose of formation is to:
a. Commit Robbery in the
highway; or
b. Kidnap for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom;
or
c. Attain by means of force and
Violence any other purpose.
Note: If any of the arms carried by the offenders
is an unlicensed firearm, all are presumed
highway robbers or brigands.
[Art. 306,
Revised Penal Code]
Arms
The arms carried by the members of the band
of robbers may be any deadly weapon. Thus,
Brigandage may be committed without the use
of a firearm [People v. De la Rosa, et al., C.A.,
49 O.G. 2863].
Highway Robbery vs. Brigandage
Highway
Robbery
[PD 532]
Brigandage
[Art. 306]
Robbery
in a Band
[Art. 296]
As to Purpose
Indiscriminately
commit
robbery
on
Philippine
highways.
Page 226 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
1. Commit
robbery in a
Highway
2. Kidnap to
extort or get
ransom
3. Attain any
other
purpose by
force
or
violence
To Commit
robbery,
but
not
necessarily
on
highways.
CRIM2
As to the Number of Robberies
Committed
Indiscriminate,
not isolated.
To commit To commit
several
a particular
robberies
robbery.
As to the Formation of Band
Offenders need Offenders must be in a
not constitute a band (i.e. at least 4)
band; a single
offender may
commit
the
crime.
As to the Conspiracy among the
Members
Mere
conspiracy to
constitute is not
punishable.
Mere
formation of
a band for
any purpose
indicated in
Art. 306 is
punishable
Mere
conspiracy
to commit
robbery is
not
punishable.
As to the Victim
Victim is Not Victim is Preconceived.
Preconceived
[REYES, Book 2]
b. Article 307 – Aiding and Abetting a
Band of Brigands
Elements:
1. There is a Band of brigands;
2. Offender Knows the band to be of
brigands; and
3. Offender does any of the following
acts:
a. In any manner Aids, abets or
protect such band of brigands;
or
b. Gives them Information of the
movements of the police or
other peace officers; or
c. Acquires or receives the
property taken by such
brigands.
CRIMINAL LAW
performed them knowingly, unless the contrary
is proven. [Art. 307, Revised Penal Code]
3. Chapter III: Theft
a. Article 308 – Who are Liable for
Theft
Summary of Modes of Commission
Under Art. 308:
MODE
Elements
Mode 1 1. Offender takes the Personal
[PIW]
property of another without the
latter’s consent;
2. Taking was with Intent to gain;
and
3. Taking was Without violence
against or intimidation of persons
nor force upon things.
Mode 2 1. Offender found Lost property;
[LF]
and
2. Fails to deliver the same to the
local authorities or to its owner.
Mode 3 1. Offender maliciously Damaged
[DR]
the property of another; and
2. Removes or makes use of the
fruits or object of the damage
caused by them.
Mode 4 1. Offender entered an Enclosed
[EFAH] estate or a field without the
consent of its owner;
2. Trespass is Forbidden or the
enclosed estate or field belongs to
Another; and
3. Hunt or fish upon the same or
gather fruits, cereals or other
forest or farm products.
Note: Fishing should not be in the
fishpond within the field or estate,
otherwise it is Qualified Theft. [See
Art. 310, Revised Penal Code]
[Reyes, Book 2]
Note: It is presumed that the person performing
any of the acts provided in Art. 307 has
Page 227 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Theft vs. Robbery
Theft
[Art. 306]
Robbery
[Arts. 293-294]
Presence of Violence
Offender does not There is violence or
use
violence
or intimidation or Force
intimidation
of upon things
persons or force
upon things
[Reyes, Book 2]
CRIMINAL LAW
Unlawful disposition of the share belonging to
a partner or a joint owner may be a violation of
a contract and a trespass upon the rights of
another, but it is not an act constituting the
crime of theft [U.S. vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 2867,
(1906)].
Rationale: Before the dissolution of the
partnership or the division of the property held
in common, no part of the property of the
partnership or the property held in common
truly belongs to a partner or co-owner [See Art.
484-485, 1811, New Civil Code; See also other
provisions on Co-Ownership and Partnership].
Mode 1: Taking of Personal Property
of Another Without Violence or
Intimidation of Persons or Force upon
Things
Mode 2: Failure to
Property
“Without consent”
Consent contemplated in this element of theft
refers to consent freely given and not to one
which may only be inferred from mere lack of
opposition [See Pua Yi Kun v. People, G.R.
No. L-26256, Jun. 26, 1968; See Decisions of
the Supreme Court of Spain, Dec. 1, 1897].
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
discussion on the Anti-Fencing Law of 1979.
When Consummated
Theft is complete from the moment the
offender had full possession of the thing, even
if he did not have an opportunity to dispose of
the same. [People v. Sevilla, G.R. No. 86163,
1990]. Accordingly, there is no crime of
frustrated theft [Valenzuela v. People et al.,
G.R. No. 160188, Jun. 21, 2007].
Objects Considered Personal Property:
1. Electricity and Gas [US vs. Carlos,
G.R. No. 6295, (1911)]
2. Promissory Notes and checks [People
vs. Koc Song, G.R. No. L-45043,
(1936)]
3. Telecommunication or Telephone
Service [Laurel v. Abrogar, G.R. No.
155076, (2009)]
4. Water [RA 8041/National Water Crisis
Act]
Joyride constitutes intent to gain.
A joyride in an automobile taken without the
consent of its owner constitutes "taking with
intent to gain" [People vs. Bustinera, G.R. No.,
148233, (2004)].
No Theft in Sale of Partner or of Co-owned
Property
Return Lost
The law does not require knowledge of the
owner of the lost property [People vs. Panotes,
et al., C.A., 36 O.G. 1008; People vs. Silverio,
C.A., 43 O.G. 2205].
"Lost property" embraces loss by stealing.
A finder who fails deliberately to return the thing
lost may be considered more blameworthy if
the loss was by stealing than through some
other means [People v. Rodrigo, G.R. No. L18507].
Note: Art. 308 (1) is not limited to actual finder
[US v. Santiago, G.R. No. L-9375, (1914)]. It
may include a policeman to whom it is
entrusted or misappropriated the same [People
v. Avila, G.R. No. L-19786, (1923)].
It is Necessary to Prove [TBO]:
1. The Time of the seizure of the thing;
2. That it was a lost property Belonging to
another; and
3. That the accused had the Opportunity
to return or deliver the lost property to
its owner or to the local authorities but
refrained from doing so. [Id]
b. Article 309 – Penalties
The basis of the penalty in theft is:
[SPC]
1. Value of the thing Stolen, or
2. Value and nature of the Property taken,
or
Page 228 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. Circumstances that impelled the culprit
to commit the crime. [Art. 309, Revised
Penal Code; See REYES, Book 2]
c. Article 310 – Qualified Theft
Theft is qualified if:
1. Committed by a Domestic servant; or
2. Committed with Grave abuse of
confidence; or
3. If the property stolen consists of:
a. Motor vehicle
b. Mail matter
c. Large Cattle
d. Coconuts taken from the
premises of a plantation; or
e. Fish taken from a fishpond or
fishery; or
4. Property is taken on the occasion of
fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic
eruption, or any other Calamity,
vehicular accident or civil disturbance.
Note: Penalties for qualified theft are 2 degrees
higher than those respectively specified in Art.
309. [Art. 310, Revised Penal Code]
Abuse of Confidence must be Grave.
There must be an allegation that by reason of
dependence, guardianship or vigilance,
between the accused and the offended party,
that has created a high degree of confidence
between them, which the accused abused
[People vs. Koc Song, Id.].
Note: Theft by a housemate is not always
qualified. Living together under the same roof
engenders some confidence, but it is not
necessarily grave. [See Art. 310, Revised
Penal Code, See also REYES, Book 2]
Coconuts and Fish
When the coconuts or fish are stolen in any
other place (aside from the plantation or
fishpond), it is simple theft. [Art. 308, Revised
Penal Code]
Receipt and Misappropriation of Teller
Bank Teller who received the money and
appropriated the same for personal gain
committed theft and not estafa because the
teller has no juridical possession, only material,
the theft is qualified due to the confidence
reposed on the teller [Roque vs. People, G.R.
No. 138954, (2004)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Timber Smuggling or Illegal Cutting of Logs
Any person, whether natural or juridical, who
directly or indirectly cuts, gathers, removes, or
smuggles timber, or other forest products,
either from any of the public forest, forest
reserves and other kinds of public forests,
whether under license or lease, or from any
privately owned forest lands in violation of
existing laws, rules and regulation shall be
guilty of the crime of qualified theft. [Sec. 1,
P.D. 330]
Anti-Cattle Rustling Law of 1974 [PD
533]
Note:: the nature of the penalty imposed by the
law is based on the RPC, thus P.D. 533 is
deemed an amendment of the RPC [People vs.
Macatanda, G.R. No. L-51368, (1981)].
Elements: [TC]
1. Taking away by any means, method or
scheme; and
2. Of any Large Cattle, without the
Consent of the owner/raiser [Sec. 2 (c),
P.D. 533]
Note:
•
•
It is immaterial whether or not for profit
or gain, or whether committed with or
without violence against or intimidation
of any person or force upon things.
[Sec. 2 (a), id.]
It includes the killing of large cattle or
taking its meat or hide without the
consent of the owner/raiser. [Sec. 2 (a),
id.]
Large Cattle
Includes the cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass, or
other domesticated member of the bovine
family. [Sec. 2(a), id.]
Presumption of Cattle Rustling.
Failure to exhibit the required documents shall
be prima facie evidence that the large cattle in
his possession, control or custody are the fruits
of the crime of cattle rustling. [Sec. 7, id.]
“Highgrading” or Theft of Gold [P.D.
581]
Prohibited Acts: [TRET]
Any person who, without the consent of the
operator of the mining claim:
Page 229 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
1. Take gold-bearing ores or rocks from a
mining claim or mining camp;
2. Remove, collect or gather gold-bearing
ores or rocks in place;
3. Extract or remove the gold from such
ores or rocks; or
4. Prepare and Treat such ores or rocks
to recover or extract the gold contents
thereof. [Sec. 1, P.D. 581]
Presumption
The unauthorized possession by any person
within a mining claim or mining camp of goldbearing ores or rocks or of gold extracted or
removed from such ores or rocks, shall be
prima facie evidence that they have been
stolen from the operator of a mining claim.
[Sec. 2, id.]
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements:
1. Offender takes Possession of any real
property or usurps any real rights in
property
2. Real property or real rights Belong to
another
3. Violence against or intimidation of
persons is used by the offender in
occupying real property or usurping
real rights in property; and
4. There is Intent to gain.
Rules on Violence or Intimidation
•
d. Article 311 – Theft of Property of the
National Library and National Museum
•
This provision penalizes property stolen from
the National Library or National Museum.
Violence or intimidation must be the
means used in occupying real
property. Art. 312 does not apply
when the violence or intimidation took
place subsequent to the entry into the
property [People vs. Dimacutak, et al.,
C.A., 51 O.G. 1389].
If there is no violence or
intimidation: There is only civil
liability. [Id.]
Imposable Penalty
Imposable Penalty
General Rule: Penalty is fixed without regard
to the value of the property of the National
Library or National Museum. [Art. 311]
General Rule: Art. 312 does not provide the
penalty of imprisonment for the crime of
occupation of real property or usurpation of real
rights in property, the penalty is only fine. [Art.
312]
Exception: if the crime is committed with grave
abuse of confidence, the penalty for qualified
theft shall be imposed, because Art. 311 says:
"unless a higher penalty should be provided
under other provisions of this Code." [Id.]
4. Chapter IV: Usurpation
a. Article 312 – Occupation of Real
Property or Usurpation of Real Rights
in Property
Exception: The offender who may have
inflicted physical injuries in executing acts of
violence shall suffer the penalty for physical
injuries also. [Art. 312]
Theft/Robbery vs. Occupation of Real
Property or Usurpation of Real Rights
in Property Art. 312
Theft/Robbery
[Art. 308/Art. 293]
Punished Acts: [PU]
1. Taking Possession of any real property
belonging to another by means of
violence against or intimidation of
persons; or
2. Usurping any real rights in property
belonging to another by means of
violence against or intimidation of
persons. [Art. 312]
Occupation or
Usurpation
[Art. 312]
As to the Intent to Gain
There is intent to Gain
As to the Property Involved
Personal Property
Real property or real
right
As to the Act Involved
Page 230 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Taking
Occupation
Usurpation
or
b. Article 313 – Altering Boundaries or
Landmarks
1. There are Boundary marks or
monuments of towns, provinces, or
estates, or any other marks intended to
designate the boundaries of the same;
and
2. Offender Alters said boundary marks.
Note: Intent to gain is not necessary.
[GUEVARA, as cited in REYES, BOOK 2]
Alter
Any alteration of boundary marks is enough to
constitute the material element of the crime.
Destruction of a stone monument or taking it to
another place, or removing a fence, is altering.
[ALBERT; as cited in REYES, BOOK 2]
V:
Culpable
Insolvency Law
No
need
Insolvency
Proceedings.
for Crime should have
been committed after
the institution of
insolvency
Note: Offender need proceedings
not be adjudged
bankrupt
or
insolvent.
Imposable Penalty
Higher penalty is imposed if the offender is a
merchant.
6. Chapter VI: Swindling and
Other Deceits
a. Article 315 – Swindling or Estafa
a. Article 314 – Fraudulent Insolvency
Elements: [D-DAP]
1.
2.
3.
4.
Fraudulent
Insolvency
[Art. 314]
As to the Requirement of Insolvency
Proceedings
Elements: [BA]
5.
Chapter
Insolvency
Fraudulent Insolvency vs. Insolvency
Law
Offender is a Debtor;
His obligations are Due and payable.
He Absconds with his property.
It is with Prejudice to his creditors.
Note: Actual prejudice, not intention alone, is
required. [People vs. Sy Gesiong, 60 Phil. 614].
Real Property May be Involved
"Abscond" does not require that the debtor
should depart and physically conceal his
property. Hence, real property could be the
subject matter of fraudulent insolvency [People
vs. Chong Chuy Limgobo, G.R. 20995, (1923)].
Prejudice to the Creditors
Contemplates the transfer of or disposing of
the offender’s property to keep it out of reach
of his creditors resulting in the nonenforcement of a writ of execution [Dee v.
People, G.R. No. 136785, (2000)].
Elements of Estafa in general: [DCDD]
1. Accused Defrauded another:
a. by abuse of Confidence, or
b. by means of Deceit; and
2. Damage or prejudice capable of
pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third person.
Damage or prejudice may consist of:
[MPP]
1. Offended party being deprived of his Money
or property as a result of defraudation;
2. Disturbance in Property rights; or
3. Temporary Prejudice [People vs. Santiago,
54 Phil. 814]
Ways of Committing Estafa: [U-FF-M]
Mode
Sub-modes
Mode 1: With
Unfaithfulness
or Abuse of
Confidence
[UCS]
1. With Unfaithfulness
[Art. 315 (1)(a)]
2.
With
Abuse
of
Confidence
[Art.
315
(1)(b)]
3. By taking undue
advantage
of
the
Page 231 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Signature in blank [Art.
315 (1)(c)]
Mode 2: By
Means
of
False
Pretense
or
Fraudulent
Acts [NAB-CF]
1. Using fictitious Name or
false pretenses and other
similar deceits [Art. 15
(2)(a)];
2. By Altering the quality,
fineness or weight of
anything pertaining to his
art or business [Art. 315
(2)(b)]
3. By pretending to have
Bribed any government
employee [Art. 315(2)(c)]
4. By post-dating a Check
with no funds or is not
sufficient to cover the
amount of the check. [Art.
315 (2)(d)]
5. By obtaining Food,
refreshment
or
accommodation
with
intent to defraud [Art. 315
(2)(e)]
Mode 3: By 1. By inducing another to
Fraudulent
Sign any document [Art.
Means [SGD] 315 (3)(a)];
2. By resorting to some
fraudulent practice to
insure
success
in
Gambling [Art. 315 (3)(b)]
3.
By
Removing,
concealing or destroying
Documents
[Art.
315
(3)(c)]
Note: The three modes of committing estafa
may be reduced to two only—subdivision No. 1
as estafa with abuse of confidence, and the
2nd and 3rd forms as estafa by means of
deceit. [Art. 315 (2) and (3)]
1. Estafa with Unfaithfulness or Abuse of
Confidence [Art. 315(a)]
a. Estafa with Unfaithfulness [Art 315
(a)(1)]
Elements: [OnAD]
1. Offender has an Onerous obligation to
deliver something of value;
2. He Alters its substance, quantity, or
quality; and
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Damage or prejudice is caused to
another.
Rules:
1. There must be an existing obligation
to deliver something of value, and
the offender in making the delivery has
altered the following of the thing
delivered. [Art. 315 (1)(a)]
a. Substance; or
b. Quality; or
c. Quantity; and
2. There must be an agreement as to
quality – When there is no agreement
as to the quality of the thing to be
delivered, the delivery of the thing not
acceptable to the complainant is not
estafa [People vs. Bastiana, et al.,
C.A., 54 O.G. 4300].
Illegal Consideration
Estafa is committed even though such
obligation be based on an immoral or illegal
consideration. [Art. 316, (1)[a]]
b. Estafa with Abuse of Confidence [Art.
315 (1)(b)]
Elements:
1. Money, goods, or other personal
property was Received by the offender:
a. In Trust, or
b. On Commission, or
c. For Administration; or
d. Under any Other obligation
involving the duty to make
delivery of, or to return the
same;
2. That there be:
a. Misappropriation; or
b. Conversion of such money or
property by the offender; or
c. Denial on his part of such
receipt;
3. Such misappropriation or conversion or
denial is to the Prejudice of another;
and
4. That there is a demand made by the
offended party to the offender.
Demand Not Required by law but serves as
circumstantial evidence
The law does not require a demand as a
condition precedent to the existence of the
crime of embezzlement. It so happens only that
failure to account, upon demand for funds or
Page 232 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
property held in trust, is circumstantial
evidence of misappropriation [Tubb v. People,
G.R. No. L-9811 (1957)]. In other words, a
demand is unnecessary when there is other
evidence of misappropriation of goods by the
defendant.
Note:
a. Other obligations involving the duty
to make delivery of, or to return the
same - includes quasi-contracts and
certain contracts of bailment ex.
Commodatum [US vs. Yap Jong, G.R.
No. 10675, (1916)].
b. Deceit - not an essential requisite of
estafa with abuse of confidence [U.S.
vs. Pascual, 10 Phil. 621].
Rationale: Thing to be delivered or returned
must be the very object received [US vs.
Figueroa, G.R. No. L-6748, (1912)].
Misappropriation vs. Conversion
Misappropriate
Conversion
Act
of
taking Act of using or
something for one’s disposing
of
own benefit
another's property as
if it were one's own
or devoting it to a
purpose
or
use
different from that
agreed upon.
Juridical Possession
Possession
vs.
Material
Juridical
Possession
Material
Possession
Possession
which
gives the transferee
a right over the thing
which the transferee
may set up even
against the owner
[People vs. Noveno,
et al., C.A., 46 O.G.
1637].
Actual Possession of
Personal Property,
where the possessor
cannot claim a better
right to such property
than its owner.
In Estafa: Offender must have acquired both
material or physical possession and juridical
possession of the thing received [D'Aigle v.
People, 689 Phil. 480, 490 (2012)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Nature of
Possession
of Personal
Property
Material
Act
Misappropriation
Crime
Committed
Theft
Material and Misappropriation
Juridical
Estafa
Ownership
Misappropriation
(Material +
Juridical)
No crime,
only Civil
liability
[REYES, BOOK 2]
Note: There is no estafa when the money or
other personal property received by the
accused is not to be used for a particular
purpose or to be returned [Marquez v. Hon.
Judge of the RTC Gumaca, CA-G.R. CR No.
21298].
No Estafa in the Following Cases:
1. Momentary use of the funds without
intent to defraud [US vs. Sevillia, G.R.
No. 18056, (1922)]
2. Where the custody of personal
property is only precarious and for a
temporary purpose or for a short period
and merely the effect of such
relationship as master and servant,
employer and employee, or master and
domestic, the juridical or constructive
possession remains in the owner.
Hence, the servant, domestic, or
employee cannot be guilty of estafa
[People vs. Marcelino Nicolas, 58 O.G.
472, cited in REYES, Book 2].
"To the prejudice of another"
Contemplates prejudice not necessarily of the
owner of the property [People v. Yu Chai Ho,
G.R. No. L-29278, (1928)].
Liability of Co-Owners
General Rule: Co-owner is not liable for
estafa. [People v. Pedrasa, 62 O.G. 5571]
Exception: If, after the termination of the coownership, he misappropriates the thing which
has become the exclusive property of the
other. [People v. Pedrasa, 62 O.G. 5571]
Page 233 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
No Estafa through Negligence.
Article 315 in penalizing estafa by
misappropriation or conversion, does not
punish estafa through negligence [People vs.
Nepomuceno, C.A., 46 O.G. 6135].
Effect of Novation of Contract
General Rule: Criminal liability for estafa
already committed is not affected by
compromise or novation of contract, for it is a
public offense which must be prosecuted and
punished by the state at its own volition
[Diongzon v. Court of Appeals, 378 Phil. 1090
(1999)].
Estafa with Abuse of Confidence vs.
Malversation
Estafa with Abuse
of Confidence
[Art. 315 (1)]
Malversation
[Art. 217]
As to the Receipt of Property
Offender is entrusted with funds or property
As to the Nature of the Offense
Continuing offenses
As to the Nature of Funds/Property
Exception: If the novation occurs before the
criminal liability has incurred [Diongzon v.
Court of Appeals, 378 Phil. 1090 (1999)].
Private
Usually Public
Exception: Property
attached by public
authority even if
private [Art. 222,
RPC]
Note: Reimbursement or restitution of money
or property swindled does not extinguish
criminal liability [Sajot vs. CA, G.R. No.
109721, (1999)]
Theft vs. Estafa
Confidence
Theft/Robbery
[Art. 308]
with
Abuse
of
Estafa with Abuse
of Confidence
[Art. 315(1)]
As to the Acquisition of Property
Offender takes the Offender
receives
thing without the the thing from the
owner’s consent
offended party with
the obligation to
deliver or return the
same.
As to the Nature of Possession
Material
and Juridical possession
Physical Possession
only
[Art. 308 and Art. 315 of the RPC]
As to the Offender
Private individual or
public officer not
accountable
for
public
funds
or
property
Public
officer
accountable
for
public
funds
or
property.
As to Commission through Negligence
No estafa through Can be committed
negligence
through
abandonment
or
negligence
As to Manner of Commission
Misappropriating,
converting
or
denying
having
received
money,
goods
or
other
personal property;
Appropriating, taking
or misappropriating,
consenting
or
permitting any other
person to take the
public
funds
or
property.
As to the Offender
Private individual or
public officer not
accountable
for
public
funds
or
property
Page 234 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Public
officer
accountable
for
public
funds
or
property.
CRIM2
As to Commission through Negligence
No estafa through Can be committed
negligence
through
abandonment
or
negligence
As to Manner of Commission
Misappropriating,
converting
or
denying
having
received
money,
goods
or
other
personal property;
Appropriating, taking
or misappropriating,
consenting
or
permitting any other
person to take the
public
funds
or
property.
[id.]
c. Estafa by Taking Undue Advantage of
the Signature in Blank [Art. 315 (1)(c)]
Elements:
1. There is a Blank paper with the
signature of the offended party;
2. Offended party should have Delivered
it to the offender;
3. Document is Written by the offender,
above the signature of the offended
party, without authority to do so; and
4. Document so written creates a liability
of, or causes Damage to, the offended
party or any third person.
2. Estafa by Means of Deceit [Art. 315 (2)]
Elements: [FaPReID]
1. There must be a False pretense,
fraudulent act or fraudulent means;
2. Such false pretense, fraudulent act or
fraudulent means must be made or
executed Prior to or simultaneously
with the commission of the fraud.
3. Offended party Relied on the false
pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent
means and by reason thereof, was
Induced to part with his money or
property.
4. As a result, the offended party suffered
Damage.
Note: There is no deceit if the complainant was
aware of the fictitious nature of the pretense
[People vs. Paredes, G.R. No. L-19192
(1923)].
CRIMINAL LAW
Also: Based on the elements, there is no
requirement under this provision – as opposed
to Estafa with Abuse of Confidence under par.
1 – for an established relationship of
confidence.
a. Estafa by Using a Fictitious Name,
False Pretenses and Other Deceits [Art.
315(2)(a)]
Ways of Committing Estafa: [NPO]
1. By using fictitious Name;
2. By falsely Pretending to possess: [QPIPAC-BI]
a. Qualifications,
b. Power,
c. Influence,
d. Property,
e. Agency,
f. Credit,
g. Business or
h. Imaginary transactions; or
3. By means of Other similar deceits. [Art.
315 (2)(a)]
Note: Element of deceit is indispensable,
consisting in the false statement or fraudulent
representation was made prior to, or
simultaneously with the delivery of the thing. It
being essential that such false statement or
fraudulent representation constitutes the very
cause or the only motive which induces the
complainant to part with the thing. [id.] This is
as opposed to Estafa with Abuse of
Confidence, wherein Deceit is not an
indispensable requisite [U.S. vs. Pascual, 10
Phil. 621].
Use of Fictitious Name
There is use of fictitious name when a person
uses a name other than his real name [People
vs. Yusay, G.R. No. L-26957 (1927)].
The pretense must be false
There must be evidence that the pretense of
the accused that he possesses power,
influence, etc., is false [People v. Wilson Yee,
C.A. O.G. 1223].
b. Estafa by Altering the Quality, Fineness
or Weight of anything pertaining to his art
or business [Art. 315(2)(b)]
Page 235 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
c. Estafa by Pretending to have bribed
any
Government
Employee
[Art.
315(2)(b)]
Note:
a. Offender may still be liable for
defamation which the government
employee allegedly bribed may deem
proper to bring against the offender.
[Art. 315(2)(c), Revised Penal Code;;
See Black’s Law Dictionary]
b. If the crime is consummated - crime
is corruption of a public officer. [Id.]
Estafa by Means of Fraudulent Acts
The acts must be fraudulent; characterized by,
or founded on, deceit, trick or cheat. [Definition
of Fraud lifted from Black’s Law Dictionary]
d. Estafa by Postdating a Check or
Issuing a Check in Payment of an
Obligation
Elements: [OF]
1. Offender postdated a check, or issued
a check in payment of an Obligation;
and
2. Such postdating or issuing a check was
done when the offender had no Funds
in the bank, or his funds deposited
therein were not sufficient to over the
amount of the check.
Check issued must be Genuine
If the check is falsified and the same is cashed
with the bank, or exchanged for cash, the crime
committed is estafa through falsification of a
commercial document. [Art. 315 in relation to
Art. 171 of the Revised Penal Code; Paredes
v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 169534 (2007)]
The Post-Dating or Issuance of the Check
Must be the Efficient Cause
The check should not be postdated or issued
in payment of pre-existing obligation. [People
vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 154159, (2005)]. To
constitute estafa, the post-dating or issuance of
the check should be the efficient cause of the
defraudation. As such, it should be given either
prior to, or simultaneously with, the act of fraud.
[Id.].
● Thus, when a check was issued in
payment of a debt contracted prior to
such issuance, there is no estafa, even
if there is no fund in the bank to cover
CRIMINAL LAW
the amount of the check [People v.
Lilius, 59 Phil. 339].
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
detailed discussion of B.P. 22 (“The Bouncing
Checks Law”), especially in relation to this
provision [Art. 315, par. 2(d), Revised Penal
Code]
Prima Facie Evidence of Deceit
There is prima facie evidence of deceit when
the drawer fails to pay 3 days after receiving
notice of dishonor [Art. 315(2)(d), as amended
by RA 4885].
Stoppage of a Payment of a Check
If checks were issued by defendant and he
received money for them and stopped payment
and did not return the money and if at the time
the check was issued, he had the intention of
stopping payment, he is guilty of estafa [US vs.
Poe, G.R. No. 13969, (1919)].
Continuing Offense
Estafa by issuance of a bad check is continuing
offense [People v. Yabit, G.R. L-42902,
(1977)].
e. Estafa by Obtaining Food or
Accommodation at a Hotel, etc. [Art. 315
(2)(e)]
Punishable Acts: [FCA]
1. By obtaining Food, refreshment or
accommodation at a hotel, inn,
restaurant, boarding house, lodging
house or apartment house without
paying therefor, with intent to defraud
the proprietor or manager thereof;
2. By obtaining Credit at any of said
establishments by the use of any false
pretense; or
3. By Abandoning or surreptitiously
removing any part of his baggage from
any of said establishments after
obtaining credit, food, refreshment or
accommodation therein, without paying
therefor.
Page 236 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
3. Estafa Through Fraudulent Means [Art.
315 (3)]
a. Estafa by Inducing Another to Sign Any
Document
Elements: [ISiP-P]
1. Offender Induced the offended party to
sign a document.
2. Deceit was employed to make him
Sign the document.
3. Offended party Personally signed the
document.
4. Prejudice was caused.
Note: If the offended party is willing and ready
from the beginning to sign the document and
there is deceit as to the character or contents
of the document, because the contents are
different from those which the offended party
told the accused to state in the document, the
crime is falsification [Art. 315 (3) (a) and Art.
172 of the Revised Penal Code].
b. Estafa by Resorting to Some
Fraudulent Practice to Ensure Success in
Gambling [Art. 315 (3)(b)]
c. Estafa by Removing, Concealing or
Destroying Court Records, Office Files,
and other Documents [Art. 315 (3)(c)]
Elements: [CRD]
1. There are Court records, office files,
documents or any other papers.
2. Offender Removed, concealed or
destroyed any of them.
3. Offender had intent to Defraud another.
Note: If there is no intent to defraud, the act of
destroying a court record will be malicious
mischief. [Art. 327, Revised Penal Code; See
GUEVARA; as cited in REYES, BOOK 2]
Infidelity in Custody of Document vs. Estafa
by Removing, Concealing or Destroying a
Document
Infidelity in
Custody of
Documents
[Art. 226]
Estafa
[Art. 315, 3(c)]
As to the Manner of Commission
Both are Similar in the Manner of
CRIMINAL LAW
Commission
As to the Property Involved
Offender is a public
officer
who
is
officially
entrusted
with the custody of
documents
Offender is a private
individual or even a
public officer who is
not
officially
entrusted with the
custody
of
said
documents.
As to Intent
No Intent to Defraud
There is Intent to
Defraud
b. Article 316 – Other Forms of Swindling
Punishable Acts:
1. Conveying, selling, encumbering, or
mortgaging any real property, pretending
to be the owner of the same
Elements: [I-ROP]
a. Thing is Immovable (e.g., parcel of land or
building).
b. Offender is not the owner but Represents
himself as the owner thereof.
c. Offender executed an act of Ownership
(selling, encumbering or mortgaging the
real property).
d. Act was made to the Prejudice of the
owner or a third person [Estrellado-Mainar
v. People, G.R. No. 184320 (2015)].
Swindling
Pretenses
vs.
Swindling
[Art. 316 (1)]
Estafa
by
False
Estafa by False
Pretenses
[Art. 315, 2(a)]
As to the Property Involved
Covers immovable May cover personal
or real property
and real property.
As to the Acts Committed
Selling,
or
encumbering,
or
mortgaging any real
property, and doing
Page 237 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Pretense in owning
real or personal
property and
defrauding
the
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
some
act
of offended party.
dominion
or
ownership over the
property
to
the
damage
and
prejudice of the real
owner of the thing.
Mode 1 v. Mode 3
Pretending to be
Owner of Real
Property [Mode 1]
Wrongfully Taking
Personal Property
from Lawful
Possessor [Mode
3]
As to the Property Involved
2. By disposing of real property as free from
encumbrance, although such encumbrance
be not recorded
Elements: [DKRD]
a. Thing Disposed of is real property.
b. Offender Knew that the real property
was encumbered, whether the same
was recorded or not.
c. There was express Representation by
the offender that the real property is
free from encumbrance; and
d. Act of disposing of the real property
was made to the Damage of another.
[Naya v. Spouses Abing, G.R. No.
146770 (2003)]
Immovable Property
Personal Property
As to Ownership
Offender
merely Offender
is
the
represents himself owner
of
the
as the owner of the personal property.
immovable property
involved
As to the Acts Committed
Offender committed
an act of ownership
prejudicial to the true
owner of the property
or a third person.
Definition of Terms: [Gonzaga v. People,
G.R. No. 199774 (2015)]
1. “Dispose” – includes encumbering or
mortgaging.
2. “Encumbrance” – includes every right
or interest in the land which exists in favor
of third persons.
3. Wrongfully taking by the owner of his
personal property from its lawful possessor
Elements:
a. Offender is the Owner of personal
property.
b. Property is in the lawful Possession of
another.
c. Offender Wrongfully takes it from its
lawful possessor.
d. Prejudice is caused to the lawful
possessor or third person.
Page 238 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The
personal
property
is
wrongfully
taken
from possession of a
lawful possessor.
CRIM2
Theft vs. Other Forms of Swindling, Mode 3
Pretending to be
Owner of Real
Property [Mode 1]
Wrongfully Taking
Personal Property
from Lawful
Possessor [Mode
3]
As to the Property Involved
Personal Property
As to Ownership
Property belongs to Offender
is
the
another (offender is owner
of
the
not the owner or personal property.
possessor)
As to the Acts Committed
Offender unlawfully
takes the personal
property of another
with intent to gain.
The
personal
property
is
wrongfully
taken
from possession of a
lawful possessor
As to the Presence of Violence
Committed without Violence or Intimidation
e. Executing any fictitious contract to the
prejudice of another
Elements: [EFP]
1. Offender Executes a contract.
2. Contract is Fictitious.
3. Prejudice is caused.
f.
By accepting any compensation for
services not rendered or for labor not
performed
Elements: [AN]
1. Offender Accepts compensation for
services or labor.
2. He did Not render any service or perform
any labor.
Note: Fraud is an essential element, without
fraud, it merely is solutio indebiti. [Art. 2154,
Civil Code]
CRIMINAL LAW
g. Selling, mortgaging or encumbering
real property or properties with which
the offender guaranteed the fulfillment
of his obligation as surety
Elements: [SGS-WCR]
1. Offender is a Surety in a bond given in a
criminal or civil action.
2. Surety Guaranteed the fulfillment of such
obligation with his real property or
properties.
3. Surety Sells, mortgages, or, in any other
manner encumbers said real property.
4. That
such
sale,
mortgage,
or
encumbrance is
a. Without express authority from the
court; or
b. Made before the Cancellation of his
bond; or
c. Made before being Relieved from the
obligation contracted by him.
Note: There must be actual damage caused
under Art. 316, because the penalty is based
on the value of the damage caused, mere
intent to cause damage is not sufficient.
[Article 316, Revised Penal Code.]
c. Article 317 – Swindling a Minor
Elements: [AICD]
1. Offender takes Advantage of the
inexperience or emotions or feelings of a
minor.
2. Offender Induces such minor to: [ORT]
a. Assume an Obligation; or
b. Give Release; or
c. Execute a Transfer of any
Property right.
3. That the Consideration is: [LCO]
a. Some Loan of money; or
b. Credit; or
c. Other personal property.
4. Transaction is to the Detriment of such
minor.
Note:
Actual
proof
of
deceit
or
misrepresentation is not essential, as it is
sufficient that the offender takes advantage of
the inexperience or emotions of the minor.
Art. 317 makes no mention of a requirement
for
actual
proof
of
deceit
or
misrepresentation.
Page 239 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
d. Article 318 – Other Deceits
Punishable Acts: [NC]
1. Defrauding or damaging another by any
other deceit Not mentioned in the
preceding articles.
2. Interpreting dreams, by making forecasts,
by telling fortunes, or by taking advantage
of the Credulity of the public in any other
similar manner, for profit or gain.
Note: As in other cases of estafa, damage to
the offended party is required.
For one to be liable for "other deceits" under
the law, it is required that the prosecution must
prove the following essential elements: (a)
false pretense, fraudulent act or pretense other
than those in the preceding articles; (b) such
false pretense, fraudulent act or pretense must
be made or executed prior to or simultaneously
with the commission of the fraud; and (c) as a
result, the offended party suffered damage or
prejudice [Guinhawa v. People, G.R. No.
162822 (2005)].
See: The Special Penal Laws Reviewer for a
detailed discussion of B.P. 22 (“The Bouncing
Checks Law”), especially in relation to this
provision [Art. 315, par. 2(d), Revised Penal
Code].
Chapter VII: Chattel Mortgage
a. Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or
Pledge of Mortgaged Property
Note: Punishable acts under this Article
involve property mortgaged or pledged under
the Chattel Mortgage Law. RA 11057 or the
Personal Property Security Act has repealed
the Chattel Mortgage Law. [Sec. 66, RA
11057]
Chapter VIII : Arson and Other
Crimes Involving Destruction
a. Articles 320-326B (Initially repealed
by PD 1613, but reinstated partially by
P.D. 1744 and further amended by RA
7659)
Note: The laws on Arson in force are PD 1613
CRIMINAL LAW
and Art. 320, as amended by RA 7659. The
provisions of PD 1613 which are inconsistent
with RA 7659 (Such as Sec. 2 of PD No. 1613)
are deemed repealed. Thus, in general, the
governing law is, PD 1613, except for the
provision on Destructive Arson (Sec. 2 of PD
1613) which is now governed by the reinstated
and amended Art. 320.
Acts of Arson: [SDO]
1. Simple Arson
Elements: [BAO]
A person Burns or sets fire to:
a. Property of Another; or
b. His Own property under circumstances
which expose to danger the life or
property of another. [Sec. 1, PD 1613]
2. Destructive Arson
Burning of: [1-P-TWEE]
a. 1 or more buildings or edifices,
consequent to one single act of burning,
or as a result of simultaneous burnings,
committed on several or different
occasions.
b. Any building of public or private
ownership, devoted to the Public in
general or where people usually gather or
congregate for a definite purpose (e.g.,
for official governmental function or
business, private transaction, commerce,
trade,
workshop,
meetings
and
conferences), or merely incidental to a
definite purpose (e.g., hotels, motels,
transient dwellings, public conveyances
or stops or terminals), regardless of:
i. Whether the offender had knowledge
that there are persons in said building
or edifice at the time it is set on fire;
or
ii. Whether the building is actually
inhabited.
c. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel,
airship or airplane, devoted
to
Transportation or conveyance, or for
public use, entertainment or leisure.
d. Any building, factory, Warehouse
installation and any appurtenances
thereto, which are devoted to the service
of public utilities.
e. Any building the burning of which is for
the purpose of concealing or destroying
Page 240 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Evidence of another violation of law, or for
the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or
defrauding creditors or to collect from
insurance. [Art 320, as amended by Sec.
10 RA 7659]
CRIMINAL LAW
Prima Facie
[FISWiD2]
Evidence
of
Arson:
3. Other cases of Arson [Sec. 3, PD 1613]
Burning of any:
a. Building used as Offices of the government
or any of its agencies;
b. Inhabited house or dwelling;
c. Industrial establishment, shipyard, oil
well or mine shaft, platform or tunnel;
d. Plantation, farm, pastureland, growing
crop, grain field, orchard, bamboo grove
or forest;
e. Rice, sugar or cane Mill, or mill central; and
f. Railway or bus station, airport, wharf
or warehouse.
1. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other
Flammable or combustible substances or
materials soaked therewith or containers
thereof, or any mechanical, electrical,
chemical, or electronic contrivance
designed to start a fire, or ashes or traces
of any of the foregoing are found in the
ruins or premises of the burned building or
property.
2. If the building or property is Insured for
substantially more than its actual value at
the time of the issuance of the policy.
3. If a substantial amount of Flammable
substances or materials are Stored within
the building note necessary in the
business of the offender nor for household
use.
4. If the fire started Simultaneously in more
than one part of the building or
establishment.
5. If shortly before the fire, a substantial
portion of the effects insured and stored
in a building or property had been
Withdrawn from the premises except in
the ordinary course of business.
6. If a Demand for Money or other valuable
consideration was made before the fire in
exchange for the desistance of the
offender or for the safety of the person or
property of the victim.
7. If during the lifetime of the corresponding
fire insurance policy more than 2 fires
have occurred in the same or other
premises owned or under the control of
the offender and/or insured.
Special Aggravating Circumstance:
[HIBS]
Note:: Conspiracy to commit arson is
penalized under the law [Sec. 7, PD 1613]
Additional Acts Considered as Destructive
Arson: [2-AI]
a. When arson is perpetrated or committed
by 2 or more persons or by a group of
persons, regardless of whether their
purpose is merely to burn or destroy the
building or the burning merely constitutes
an overt act in the commission or another
violation of law.
b. Burning of: [AI]
i. Any Arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or
military powder or fireworks factory,
ordinance, storehouse, archives or
general museum of the Government.
ii. Inhabited place, storehouse or factory
of inflammable or explosive materials.
[Sec 10(2), RA 7659]
1. Offender is motivated by spite or Hatred
towards the owner or occupant of the
property burned;
2. Committed with Intent to gain;
3. Committed for the Benefit of another;
and
4. Committed by a Syndicate. [Sec. 4, PD
1613]
Note: This cannot be offset by any mitigating
circumstance [Palaganas v. People, G.R. No.
165483 (2006)].
Stages of Arson: [AFC]
1. Attempted
Arson
–
Offender
commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt acts but 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, e.g. due to the
timely intervention of another who chases
away the offender. [Article 6, Revised
Penal Code]
Illustration: Placing the rags soaked in
gasoline beside the wooden wall of the
building and lighting a match but does not
Page 241 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
continue to the setting of fire to the rag
due to some cause or accident other than
his own spontaneous desistance.
2.
Frustrated Arson
CRIMINAL LAW
separate and distinct crimes committed:
homicide/murder and arson [People v.
Malngan, G.R. No. 170470 (2006)].
Arson under PD 1613, as Terrorism
Illustration: Person is able to light or set
fire to the rags but the fire was put out
before any part of the building was
burned [US vs. Valdez, G.R. No. L14128, (1918)].
Note: It is argued that there is no such
thing as Frustrated Arson [Boado], as
illustrated in the case of People vs.
Gutierrez [G.R. No. 100699, (1996)],
wherein the court ruled that even if a
building is not completely gutted by fire,
the crime is still consummated arson, it is
enough that a portion of it is destroyed.
3. Consummated Arson – All acts
necessary to produce combustion are
present in the thing to be burnt [People
v. Hernandez, G.R. No. 31770, (1929)].
Note: Extent of damage is immaterial, as
long as a portion of it is burnt. [Id.]
Illustration: Before the fire was put out, it
had burned a part of the building, it is
consummated. [Id.]
Cases where Both Death and Burning
Occur
In cases where both burning and death occur,
in order to determine what crime/crimes
was/were perpetrated whether arson, murder
or arson and homicide/murder, it is de rigueur
to ascertain the main objective of the
malefactor:
1. If the main objective is the burning of
the building or edifice, but death results
by reason or on the occasion of arson, the
crime is simply arson, and resulting
homicide is absorbed;
2. If the main objective is to kill a
particular person who may be in a
building or edifice and fire is resorted to
as the means to accomplish such goal the
crime committed is murder only; and
3. If the objective is to kill a particular person,
and in fact the offender has already done
so, but fire is resorted to as a means to
cover up the killing, then there are two
A person who commits an act punishable as
Arson under P.D. 1613, thereby sowing and
creating a condition of widespread and
extraordinary fear and panic among the
populace in order to coerce the government to
give in to an unlawful demand, shall be guilty
of the crime of terrorism. [Sec. 3, PD 9372]
Chapter IX – Malicious Mischief
a. Art. 327 - Who are Liable for
Malicious Mischief
Malicious Mischief
Willful damaging of another's property for the
sake of causing damage due to hate, revenge
or other evil motive [People v. Tayucon, 55
O.G. 4848 (1959)].
Element: [DNS]
1. Offender deliberately caused Damage to
the property of another.
2. Such act does Not constitute arson or
other crimes involving destruction.
3. Act of damaging another's property be
committed merely for the Sake of
damaging it.
Hate, Revenge, Evil Motive
General Rule: 3rd element presupposes that
the offender acted due to hate, revenge or
other evil motive [People v. Tayucon, 55 O.G.
4848 (1959)].
Exception: It is malicious mischief even if the
act of damaging another's property was
inspired by the mere pleasure of destroying
[People vs. Siddayao, C.A., 53 O.G. 8163].
No Malicious Mischief in the following
cases:
1. If there is no malice in causing the
damage - the obligation to repair or
pay for damages is only civil. [Id.]
2. If there is intent to gain - crime
committed is Theft [Id.]
“Damage”
Includes not only loss but also diminution of
Page 242 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
what a person owns. Thus, damage to
another's house includes defacing it. [Id.]
b. Art. 328 - Special Cases
Malicious Mischief [OP- CM]
of
1. Causing damage to Obstruct the
performance of public functions;
2. Using any Poisonous or corrosive
substance.
3. Spreading any infection or contagion
among Cattle.
4. Causing damage to the property of the
National Museum or National Library,
or to any archive or registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any
other thing used in common by the
public.
CRIMINAL LAW
belonging to the the
sake
national library or damaging them
National Museum
of
c. Art. 329 – Other Mischiefs
Punished Act
Mischiefs not included in Art. 328 and
punished according to the value of the
damage caused.
Note: But, if the amount involved cannot be
estimated, the penalty of arresto menor or
fine not exceeding P200 is fixed by law. [Art.
329, Revised Penal Code]
Note: These are also called qualified malicious
mischief.
d. Art. 330 – Damage and Obstruction
to Means of Communication
Mode 1 of Art. 328 vs. Sedition
Punishable Act
Mode 1
[Art. 328]
Sedition
[Art. 139]
As to Presence of a Public and
Tumultuous Uprising
Not Present
Present
As to intention to Obstruct Public
Functions
There is intent to obstruct public functions
Theft vs. Art. 328, Mode 4
Theft
[Art. 308]
Mode 4
[Art. 328 (4)]
As to the Property Involved
Property belonging
to
the
National
Library or National
Museum.
Property belonging
to
the
National
Library or National
Museum, or to any
archive or registry,
road or any thing
used in common by
the public.
Damaging any
telephone line.
railway,
telegraph
or
Qualifying Circumstance
Higher penalty shall be imposed if it shall
result in any derailment of cars, collision, or
other accident.
Note: Derailment or collision of cars should
not have been purposely sought for by the
offender but should have just resulted from
damage to railway, telegraph or telephone
lines.
Telegraph or Telephone Lines
The telegraph or telephone lines must pertain
to a railway system.
Crimes Committed if Passengers are
Killed:
Passengers
Intent to
are Killed as a
Crime Committed
Kill
Result
Present
Present
Murder
Present
Not
Damage to
Present
Means of
Communication
As to the Acts Committed
Offender unlawfully Offender deliberately
takes
property causes damage for
Page 243 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
e. Art. 331 – Destroying or Damaging
Statues,
Public Monuments or
Paintings
Persons Liable: [SP]
1. Any person who shall destroy or
damages Statues or any other useful or
ornamental public monument; and
2. Any person who shall destroy or
damage any useful or ornamental
Painting of a public nature.
10. Chapter X – Exemption from
Criminal
Liability
Against
Property
a. Art. 332 – Persons Exempt from
Criminal Liability
CRIMINAL LAW
Relatives by Affinity – includes stepfather,
adopted father, and natural children. [Id.]
3. Widowed Spouse with respect to property
of the deceased, if:
a. Property belongs to the
deceased spouse; and
b. It has not yet passed into the
possession of a 3rd Person. [Art.
332(2), Revised Penal Code]
4. Brothers and Sisters and brothers-in-law
and sisters-in-law, if living together; and
Exemption Not Applicable to:
A. Strangers participating in the
commission of the crime. [Art. 332(4),
Revised Penal Code]
B. If complexed with another crime.
[Carungcong vs. People, G.R. No.
181409, (2010)]
Civil Liability Only
No criminal, but only civil liability shall result
from the commission of any said crimes,
committed or caused mutually by those
persons. [Art. 332(1), Revised Penal Code]
Rationale: Law recognizes the presumed
ownership of the property between
offender and the offended party (due to
relations of the persons exempted,
expounded below)
cothe
the
as
Crimes Exempted: [TSM]
1. Theft,
2. Swindling (estafa),
3. Malicious mischief.
Persons
BS]
Exempted:
[SADRAS-WS-
1. Spouses;
This includes common law spouses because
Arts. 147-148 of the Family Code provide that
common law spouses are co-owners of the
property.
2. Ascendants and Descendants, Relatives
by Affinity in the Same line;
Includes legitimate and illegitimate half-brother
and sisters, for the law did not limit the term to
legitimate and adopted full brothers or sisters
[Id.]
Page 244 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
K.
CRIMES
AGAINST
CHASTITY [ARTS. 333 - 346]
1. Chapter I – Adultery and
Concubinage
a. Article 333 – Adultery
Elements: [MaNoK]
1. Woman is Married;
2. She has sexual intercourse with a man Not
her husband;
3. As regards the man with whom she has
sexual intercourse: he Knows that she is
married.
Persons Liable: [MaMa]
1. Married woman who engages in sexual
intercourse with a man not her husband;
and
2. Man who, knowing of the marriage of the
woman, has sexual intercourse with her
[Art. 333, par. 1, Revised Penal Code]
Rules as to Marriage Requirement
1. Offended party must be legally married to
the offender at the time of the filing of the
complaint. [Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, 174
SCRA 653]
2. Adultery is committed, even if the marriage
is subsequently declared void. [Art. 333,
par. 1, Revised Penal Code]
Each Occasion a Crime
Each occasion of sexual intercourse
constitutes a crime of adultery [People v.
Zapata, G.R. No. L-3047 (1951)].
Mitigating Circumstances
1. When abandoned
The criminal liability is mitigated when
adultery is committed while being
abandoned by her husband without
justification. [Art. 333, par. 3, Revised
Penal Code]
In one case, it was held that when the
husband is believed to be dead, the wife’s
act of giving herself up to the man who lent
her a helping hand during such time of want
and need is considered a mitigating
circumstance [People v. Alberto, CA 47 OG
2438].
When applicable, both defendants shall be
entitled to the mitigating circumstance
[People v. Avelino, C.A., 40 O.G., Supp.
11, 194].
2. Recrimination
Husband’s illicit relationship does not
absolve but may mitigate wife’s liability for
adultery [People v. Florez, CA-G.R. No.
26089-CR, April 6, 1964].
Effect of Acquittal
Acquittal of one party does not automatically
acquit the other in the following cases:
1. There is no joint criminal intent, although
there is a Joint physical act [U.S. v.
Guzman, G.R. No. 11895 (1916)].
2. One of the parties is Insane; the other
sane [U.S. v. Guzman, G.R. No. 11895
(1916)].
3. Man has no Knowledge that the woman is
married [U.S. v. Guzman, G.R. No. 11895
(1916)].
4. Death of the woman during the pendency
of the action cannot defeat the trial and
conviction of the man [US v. De la Torre,
G.R. No. 8144 (1913)].
5. Even if the man left the country and could
not be apprehended, the woman can be
Tried and convicted [US v. Topiño, G.R.
No. 11895, (1916)].
Effect of Death; Paramour v. Offended
Party
Death of
Paramour
Offending wife
may still be
prosecuted.
The
requirement
that
both
offenders
should
be
included in the
complaint
is
absolute only
when the two
offenders are
alive. [Art. 344,
par. 2, Revised
Penal Code]
Page 245 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Death of Offended
Party
The proceedings
may continue. Art.
353
seeks
to
protect the honor
and reputation not
only of the living but
of dead persons as
well. [People vs.
Diego, 38 O.G.
2537]
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Pardon by the Offended Party is a bar
to prosecution for Adultery or
Concubinage
Requisites:
1. Pardon must be made before the
institution of criminal prosecution; and
2. Both offenders must be pardoned by the
offended party. [Art. 344, par. 2, Revised
Penal Code]
Note: The act of having intercourse with the
offending spouse after an adulterous conduct
is, at best, an implied pardon of said
adulterous conduct [People vs. Muguerza, et
al., 13 C.A. Rep. 1079].
Adultery vs. Prostitution
Adultery
Prostitution
[Art.202]
[Art. 333]
As to Nature of Crime
Crime
Crime
against
against
public morals
chastity
As to Persons Liable
Woman,
Married woman
whether married
or not
As to Manner of Commission
Having sexual
Habitual indulgence
intercourse
in sexual intercourse
with a man not
on
lascivious
her husband
conduct for money or
profit
b. Article 334 – Concubinage
Elements: [MaKeSCoK]
1. Man is Married;
2. He is either:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling;
b. Having Sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstance with a
woman not his wife;
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place;
and
3. As regards the woman: she Knows that he
is married.
Persons Liable: [MaW]
1. Married man; and
2. Woman who knew that the man was
married.
Definition of Terms:
1. Mistress – a woman taken by the accused
to live with him in the conjugal dwelling as
his mistress/concubine [People vs. Jesus
Hilao, et al., C.A., 52 O.G. 904].
2. Conjugal Dwelling – the home of the
husband and the wife, even if the wife
appears to be temporarily absent on any
account [People vs. Cordova, G.R. No.
19100-R (1959)].
3. Cohabit – to dwell together, in the manner
of husband and wife, for some period of
time, as distinguished from occasional
transient
interviews
for
unlawful
intercourse [People v. Pitoc, G.R. No.
18513, (1922)].
4. Scandalous Circumstances – Scandal
consists in any reprehensible word or deed
that offends public conscience, redounds
to the detriment of the feelings of honest
persons, and gives occasion to the
neighbors’ spiritual damage or ruin [People
v. Santos, 87 Phil. 687 (1950)].
Usage of Conjugal Dwelling Not Important
The fact that the wife never had a chance to
reside therein and that the husband used it
with his mistress instead, does not detract from
its nature [People v. Cordova, C.A., G.R. No.
19100-R (1959)].
Mere Cohabitation Sufficient
In the 3rd way of committing the crime, mere
cohabitation is sufficient; Proof of scandalous
circumstances not necessary [People v. Pitoc,
G.R. No. 18513 (1922)].
Liability of Married Man
A married man is not liable for concubinage
for mere sexual relations with a woman not
his wife. It must be under scandalous
circumstances [People vs. Santos, et al.,
C.A., 45 O.G. 2116].
No Knowledge that Woman is Married
A married man who is not liable for adultery
because he did not know that the woman was
married, may be held liable for concubinage.
If the woman knew that the man was married,
she may be held liable for concubinage as
well. [Id.]
Page 246 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
When Spies are
evidence
of
circumstances
Employed, no
scandalous
When spies are employed for the purpose of
watching the conduct of the accused and it
appearing that none of the people living in the
vicinity has observed any suspicious conduct,
there is no evidence of scandalous
circumstances [U.S. v. Campos Rueda, G.R.
No. L-11549 (1916)].
Chapter II – Rape and Acts of
Lasciviousness
a. Article 335 – When and How Rape is
Committed (repealed by RA No. 8353)
Note: Art. 335 has been repealed by RA
8353, otherwise known as the Anti-Rape Law
of 1997 which took effect on October 22,
1997. Renumbered as Art. 266-A of the
Revised Penal Code.
b. Article 336 - Acts of Lasciviousness
Note: Although approved beyond the June 30,
2021 cut-off point for the 2022 Bar Exams,
please take note of R.A. 11648, which
substantially amends Crimes against Chastity,
among others.
Also: For the proper nomenclature and penalty
to be imposed for offenses involving Acts of
Lasciviousness–as discussed in the case of
People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, Mar. 12,
2019–please refer to the table, in the section of
this reviewer discussing Art. 266-A (Rape).
Elements: [APeC – FoDeFraU]
1. Offender
commits
any
Act
of
lasciviousness or lewdness;
2. Act is committed against a Person of
either sex; and
3. It is
done under
any of the
following Circumstances:
a. By using Force or intimidation; or
b. When the offended party is Deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious;
c. By means of Fraudulent machination
or grave abuse of authority
d. When the offended party is Under 12
years of age or is demented.
CRIMINAL LAW
signifies a form of immorality which has
relation to moral impurity or that which is
carried in wanton manner [Lutap v. People,
G.R. No. 204061 (2018)].
• Example: When the accused not only
kissed and embraced the complainant
but fondled her breast with the particular
design to independently derive vicarious
pleasures therefrom, the element of lewd
designs exist [People v. Panopio, CA 48
OG 145].
No Frustrated or Attempted Acts of
Lasciviousness
There can be no attempted and frustrated acts
of lasciviousness. The crime of consummated
rape absorbs acts of lasciviousness [People v.
Tabarangao, G.R. No. 116535-36 (1999)].
Sweetheart Defense Inapplicable
For purposes of sexual intercourse and
lascivious conduct in child abuse cases under
RA 7610, the sweetheart defense is
unacceptable. A child exploited in prostitution
or subjected to other sexual abuse cannot
validly give consent to sexual intercourse with
another person [Malto v. People, G.R. No.
164733 (2007)].
Abuses Against Chastity vs. Crimes
Against Chastity
Abuses Against
Chastity
[Art. 246]
Crimes
Against
Chastity
[Art. 336]
Committed by
Whom
Public officer
In a majority of
cases, a private
individual
As to How Committed
Mere immoral
It is necessary that
or
indecent
some actual act of
proposal
lasciviousness
should have been
made
earnestly and
executed by the
offender.
persistently.
Lewd – obscene, lustful, indecent, lecherous;
Page 247 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Acts of Lasciviousness v. Grave
Coercion v. Unjust Vexation
Acts of
Lasciviou
s-ness
[Art. 336]
Grave
Unjust
Coercio
Vexation
n
[Art.
287]
[Art.
286]
Nature of Compulsion or Force
Compulsio
Compulsion
No
n or force
or force is
presence
is included
the very act
of
in
the
constituting
compulsion
constructiv
the offense
or force, act
e element
of
grave
of touching
of force
coercion
is a mere
incident
What Must Accompany the Act
Must
be Moral
Need not
accompanie
compulsion
be
d by acts of amounting to accompani
lasciviousne intimidation
ed by any
ss
or is sufficient
moral
lewdness
compulsion
or acts of
lasciviousn
ess
CRIMINAL LAW
Anti-Child Pornography Act of 2009, in relation
to this section.
Additional elements, according to the IRR:
a. There is intentional Touching, either
directly or through clothing, of the
genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh,
or buttocks
b. Committed against same or opposite Sex,
c. There is Intent to abuse, humiliate,
harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify the
sexual desire of any person, bestiality,
masturbation, lascivious exhibition of the
genitals or pubic area of a person.
Note: When there is introduction of an object
into the genitals, anus, or mouth, this is no
longer lascivious conduct but rape by sexual
assault [People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363,
Mar. 12, 2019].
3. Chapter III – Seduction,
Corruption of Minors and White
Slave Trade
a. Article 337 - Qualified Seduction
When Punishable Under RA No. 7610
(Special Protection of Children Against
Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act)
Acts of lasciviousness is punished under RA
No. 7610 when performed on a child below
18 years of age, exploited in prostitution or
subjected to other sexual abuse.
Elements of Lascivious
under RA No. 7610
Conduct
The following elements of sexual abuse under
Sec. 5 (b) of RA 7610 must be proven in
addition to the elements of acts of
lasciviousness:
a. Accused commits the act of Sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct.
b. Said act is performed with a child Exploited
in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse.
c. Child, whether male or female, is below 18
years of age. [Navarrete v. People, G.R.
No. 147913 (2007)]
Note: See also the Special Penal Laws
Reviewer for a discussion on the R.A. 7610 or
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act and the
Seduction - The offense that occurs when a
man entices a woman of previously chaste
character to have unlawful intercourse with
him by means of persuasion, solicitation,
promises, or bribes, or other means not
involving force. [Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th
ed.]
It applies when there is abuse of authority
(qualified seduction) or deceit (simple
seduction).
Two Classes of Seduction:
a. Seduction of a virgin over 12 years and
under 18 years of age by certain persons
such as, a person in authority, priest,
teacher or any person who, in any capacity
shall be entrusted with the education or
custody of the woman seduced.
b. Seduction of sister or descendant, whether
or not she is a virgin or over 18 years of
age.
Elements of (a):
1. Offended party is a Virgin, which is
presumed if she is unmarried and of
good reputation;
Page 248 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
2. She is Over 12 and Under 18 yrs. of age;
3. Offender had Sexual intercourse with
her; and
4. There is Abuse of authority, confidence,
or relationship on the part of the offender.
Elements of (b):
1. Offended party is the Sister or
Descendant of the offender, regardless of
the former’s age or virginity;
2. Offender had Sexual intercourse with her;
and
3. Offender is her Brother or Ascendant by
consanguinity, whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
Note:
•
•
If the sister or descendant is under 12
years of age, the crime would be
rape; and
If she is married and over 12 years of
age, it would be adultery [See Art.
333, Revised Penal Code]
Virgin - a woman of chaste character and of
good reputation. The offended party need not
be physically a virgin because virginity is
presumed if the woman is unmarried and of
good reputation [People v. Yap, G.R. No. L25176, (1968); People v. Ramos, CA, 72
O.G. 8139].
CRIMINAL LAW
Offenders in Qualified Seduction:
1. Those who abused their Authority:
a. Person in public authority
b. Guardian; or
c. Teacher
1. Person who, in any capacity, is Entrusted
with the education or custody of the
woman seduced.
2. Those who abused confidence reposed in
them:
a. Priest
b. House servant; or
c. Domestic
3. Those who abused their Relationship:
a. Brother who seduced his sister; or
b. Ascendant
who
seduced
his
descendant.
Domestic – a person usually living under the
same roof, pertaining to the same house. [U.S.
v. Santiago, G.R. No. 9118 (1913)]
Not a Continuing Offense
The loss of virginity during the minority of the
offended party consummated the offense, and
the virginity of a woman cannot be lost twice.
Carnal relations after 18 years of age does not
constitute continuation of the offense begun
when she was under 18. [People v. Bautista,
12 O.G. 2405]
Page 249 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Attempted Rape vs. Qualified Seduction
Acts of
Lasciviousness
[Art. 336]
Either sex
Attempted Rape
[Art. 266-A]
Offended Party
Woman (Rape by sexual intercourse)
Qualified Seduction
[Art. 337]
Woman
Note: Although approved beyond the June
30, 2021 cut-off point for the 2022 Bar
Exams, please take note of R.A. 11648,
which substantially amends Crimes
against
Chastity,
among
others.
Particularly,
in
“Rape by sexual
intercourse”, the offended may now be
either a man or woman.
Requisite of Sexual Intercourse
Not required, lascivious Not required, what is required is that the Element of the offense
acts are the final intent be to lie with the victim
objective sought by the
offender
Intent
Acts performed do not Acts performed clearly indicate that the Enticing a woman to unlawful
indicate that the intent of accused’s purpose was to lie w/ the sexual intercourse by promise
the accused was to lie w/ offended woman.
of marriage or other means of
the offended party.
persuasion without use of force
Consent
Not a defense; if there is Defense; consent given by the
Not a defense
consent, it can be offended party results in consensual sex
punished under Art. 339 and is not punishable
b. Article 338 - Simple Seduction
Elements: [ORSeD]
1. Offended party is Over 12 and under 18
years of age;
2. She is of good Reputation, single or
widow;
3. Offender had Sexual intercourse with
her; and
4. It was committed by means of Deceit.
Deceit
Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled
promise of marriage and this promise need not
immediately precede the carnal act [People v.
Iman, 62 Phil 92].
Promise of marriage by a married man is not a
deceit, if the woman knew him to be married.
[U.S. vs. Sarmiento, 27 Phil. 121][.
Qualified Seduction vs. Simple Seduction
Qualified Seduction Simple Seduction
[Art. 337]
[Art. 338]
Virginity
Essential element of Not an essential
the crime
element, it is enough
that the woman is
single or a widow of
good reputation and
has a chaste life [See
People v. Iman, 62
Phil. 92]
Deceit
Not an essential Essential element
element since it is
replaced by abuse
of
confidence.
[People
v.
Fontanilla, G.R. No.
L-25354 (1968)]
As to Manner of Commission
May be committed Can be committed
Page 250 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
only with abuse of even without abuse
authority, abuse of of authority, abuse of
confidence or abuse confidence or abuse
of relationship
of relationship
As to Offender
Specific offenders Any person so long
such as a person in as there is deceit.
public
authority,
priest,
house
servant, guardian,
teacher
or
any
person
entrusted
with the education or
keeping
of
the
offended
woman
seduced, a brother
seducing his sister,
or
ascendant
seducing
a
descendant.
c. Article 339 - Acts of Lasciviousness
with the Consent of the Offended
Party
Elements:
1. Offender
commits
acts
of
Lasciviousness or lewdness;
2. Acts are committed upon a woman who
is a virgin or single or widow of good
reputation, Under 18 yrs. of age but
over 12 yrs., or a sister or descendant,
regardless of her reputation or age;
and
3. Offender Accomplishes the acts by
abuse of authority, confidence,
relationship, or deceit.
"With the Consent of the Offended Party."
The offended woman may have consented to
the acts of lasciviousness being performed by
the offender on her person, but the consent is
obtained by abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship or by means of deceit.
Offended Party
Male cannot be the offended party under Art.
339; unlike Art. 336, it does not mention
“persons of either sex” as the offended party.
Circumstances for Seduction
It is necessary that it be committed under
circumstances which would make it qualified or
simple seduction had there been sexual
CRIMINAL LAW
intercourse, instead of acts of lewdness only.
Higher Degree Imposed if Victim is
Under 12
When the victim is under 12 yrs., the penalty
shall be one degree higher than that imposed
by law. [Sec. 10, RA 7610]
Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Acts of
Lasciviousness with Consent
Acts of
Lasciviousness
[Art. 336]
Acts of
Lasciviousness with
Consent
[Art. 339]
Circumstances under Which
the Crime was Committed
Committed
under Committed
under
circumstances
circumstances
which, had there which, had there
been
carnal been
carnal
knowledge,
would knowledge,
would
amount to rape
amount to either
qualified or simple
seduction
Offended Party
Offended party is a Offended
party
female or male
should
only
be
female
d. Article 340 - Corruption of Minors
(as amended by BP Blg. 92)
Punishable Act
Promoting or facilitating the prostitution or
corruption of persons underage below 18 years
old) to satisfy the lust of another.
Note: It is not necessary that the unchaste acts
shall have been done. A plain reading of Art.
340 shows that what the law punishes is the act
of a pimp who facilitates the corruption of, and
not the performance of unchaste acts upon the
minor.
"To satisfy the lust of another."
Because of this phrase, one who casts for his
own ends does not incur the sanction of the
law. This conclusion may be inferred from the
text of the law itself (“[S]hall promote or
facilitate the prostitution or corruption of
persons under age to satisfy the lust of
another”).
Page 251 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Note: See also the Special Penal Laws
Reviewer for discussions on the R.A. 7610 or
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,
Exploitation and Discrimination Act, the AntiChild Pornography Act of 2009, and the AntiTrafficking in Persons Act of 2003, in relation
to this section.
e. Article 341 - White Slave Trade
Acts Punishable: [BuPS]
1. Engaging in Business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the Services of women for the
purpose of prostitution.
Note: See also the Special Penal Laws
Reviewer for a discussion on the AntiTrafficking in Persons Act of 2003, in relation
to this section.
Corruption of Minors vs. White Slave
Trade
Corruption of Minors White Slave Trade
[Art. 340]
[Art. 341]
Minority of Victims
It is essential that the Victim need not be a
victims are minors
minor
Sex of Victims
May be of either sex Females
Profit
Not necessarily for Generally for profit
profit
Habituality
Committed by a Generally committed
single act
habitually
Prostitution vs. Slavery vs. White
Slave Trade
Prostitution
[Art. 202]
Slavery
[Art. 272]
White Slave
Trade
[Art. 341]
Prostitutes
who,
for
money
or
profit,
habitually
indulge
in
sexual
intercourse
or lascivious
Offender
Anyone who
purchases,
sells,
kidnaps or
detains
a
human being
for
the
purpose of
enslaving
Anyone who
engages in
the business
or profits by
prostitution
or
enlists
another for
purpose of
prostitution
CRIMINAL LAW
conduct
him
Note Also:
Although
beyond the
June
30,
2021 cut-off
for the 2022
Bar Exams,
R.A. 11862 –
passed
in
2022 – has
amended the
AntiTrafficking in
Persons Act
of 2003, and
repealed this
provision
[Art.
202,
Revised
Penal Code].
Consent of Women
Woman
Committed
With
or
consented
against her without
since she is will
woman’s
the
one
consent
habitually
engaged in
the act
4. Chapter IV - Abduction
a. Article 342 - Forcible Abduction
Elements: [WAL]
1. Person abducted is any Woman,
regardless of her age, civil status or
reputation;
2. Abduction is Against her will; and
3. Abduction is with Lewd designs.
Abduction
The taking away of a woman from her house
or the place where she may be for the purpose
of carrying her to another place with intent to
marry or corrupt her [People v. Crisostomo,
G.R. No. L-19034, February 17, 1923].
If Female is Under 12 years of age
If the female abducted is under 12, the crime
is forcible abduction, even if she voluntarily
goes with her abductor. [Id.]
Page 252 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Elements of Complex Crime
Forcible Abduction with Rape:
of
1. Abductor had carnal knowledge of the
abducted women; and
2. It is committed by:
a. Using force or intimidation; or
b. When the woman is deprived of
reason
or
otherwise
unconscious or when the
woman is under 12 years of
age or is demented [People v.
Domingo, G.R. No. 225743
(2017)].
Forcible Abduction with Rape vs.
Kidnapping with Rape vs. Corruption
of Minors
Forcible
Abduction
with Rape
[Art. 342]
Purpose is to
effect
his
lewd designs
on the victim
Note: Primary objective of the offender must
not be to commit rape [Id.]
Rules on Absorption
1. Forcible abduction is absorbed by rape
– if main objective was to rape the victim
[People v. Godines, G.R. No. 93410
(1991)].
2. Attempted rape is absorbed by forcible
abduction – thus, there is no complex
crime of forcible abduction with attempted
rape. [Id.]
3. Conviction of acts of lasciviousness is
not a bar to conviction of forcible
abduction [People v. Godines, G.R. No.
93410 (1991)].
Forcible
Abduction
vs.
Grave
Coercion vs. Serious Illegal Detention
Forcible
Abduction
[Art. 342]
Grave
Coercion
[Art. 286]
Serious
Illegal
Detention
[Art. 267]
As to Existence of Lewd Design
With
lewd Lewd design Lewd design
design
is not an is not an
element
element
As to Deprivation of Liberty
No
There
is There
is
deprivation
deprivation
deprivation
of liberty.
of liberty.
of liberty
Crime
against
chastity
Kidnapping Corruption of
with Rape
Minors
[Art. 267]
[Art. 340]
As to Purpose
Purpose is to
deprive the
victim of his
liberty.
Purpose is to
lend
the
victim to
illicit
intercourse
with others
As to Classification
Crime
Crimes
against
against
liberty
Chastity
b. Article 343 - Consented Abduction
Elements: [VOCoL]
1. Offended party is a Virgin;
2. She is Over 12 and under 18 yrs. of
age;
3. Offender takes her away with her
Consent, after solicitation or cajolery
from the offender;
4. Taking away is with Lewd designs.
Note: When there was no solicitation or
cajolery and no deceit and the girl voluntarily
went with the man, there is no crime committed
even if they had sexual intercourse [People v.
Palisoc, 6 C.A. Rep. 65].
Complex
Crime
of
Abduction with Rape
Consented
When a 15-year-old girl was induced by the
accused to leave her home and later was
forcibly violated by him, the accused is guilty of
the complex crime of consented abduction with
rape [People v. Amante, G.R. No. L-25604,
December 6, 1926].
Crimes against Chastity where Age
and Reputation are Immaterial:
[RAQF]
a. Rape [Art. 266-A];
b. Acts of lasciviousness against the will or
without the consent of the offended party
[Art. 336]
c. Qualified seduction of sister or descendant
Page 253 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
[Art. 337]
d. Forcible abduction [Art. 342]
Crimes against Chastity where Age
and Reputation is Material: [QS-LaCA]
a. Qualified Seduction (of a virgin over 12
and under 18) [Art. 337]
b. Simple Seduction [Art. 338]
c. Acts of Lasciviousness with the
Consent of the Offended Party [Art.
339]
d. Corruption of Minors [Art. 340]
e. Consented Abduction [Art. 343]
5.
Chapter
V:
Relating to the
Chapters of Title 11
Provisions
Preceding
a. Article 344 - Prosecution of Private
Offenses
How prosecuted:
a. Adultery and Concubinage - prosecuted
upon the complaint signed by the offended
spouse.
Criminal
prosecution
cannot
be
instituted:
1. Unless both guilty parties, if both are
alive, are included; or
2. If offended party have consented or
pardoned the offenders
b. Seduction, Abduction and Acts of
Lasciviousness - prosecuted upon the
complaint signed by the offended party –
a. Even if a minor, or
b. If of legal age and not incapacitated, only
she can file the complaint.
Criminal
prosecution
cannot
be
instituted:
a. Unless instituted by the offended party or
her parents, grandparents, or guardian;
or
b. If offender has been expressly pardoned
by the above-named persons
If a minor or incapacitated refuses to file,
either of the next succeeding persons
may file:
a. Either of the parents;
b. Either of the grandparents, maternal or
paternal;
CRIMINAL LAW
c. Legal or judicial guardian; or
d. The state, as parens patriae when the
offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she could file the
complaint and she has no known
parents, grandparents or guardians.
[Rules of Court, Rule 110, Sec. 5]
Note: The right to file the action shall be
exclusive of all other persons and shall be
exercised successively in the order provided
above [Rules of Court, Rule 110, Sec. 5].
Rape May be Prosecuted de officio
Rape is now a crime against persons, which
may be prosecuted de officio. [RA No. 8353,
Sec. 2]
Complex Crimes; Instituted by Public
Prosecutor
In case of complex crimes, where one of the
component offenses is a public crime, the
criminal prosecution may be instituted by the
public prosecutor [People v. Yu, G.R. No. L13780 (1961)].
Effect of Marriage
1. Marriage of the offender with the
offended party in seduction, abduction,
acts of lasciviousness and rape,
extinguishes criminal action or remits
the penalty already imposed [Art. 344,
Revised Penal Code].
2. It also extinguishes the criminal actions
against the co-principals, accomplices,
and accessories [Art. 344, Revised
Penal Code]
3. Marriage must be entered into in good
faith.
4. Marriage may take place even after
criminal
proceedings
have
commenced, or even after conviction
(extinguishes criminal action and
remits penalty). [Art. 344(4), Revised
Penal Code]
Pardon
Pardon of the offenders by the offended party
is a bar to prosecution for adultery or
concubinage [Art. 344, par. 2, Revised Penal
Code].
Pardon; How Given
General Rule: May be express or implied
Exception: Pardon must be express in
seduction, abduction, rape, or acts of
Page 254 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
lasciviousness.
Code].
[Art. 344(3), Revised Penal
Condonation
Condonation is forgiveness based upon the
presumption and belief that the guilty party has
repented. However, any act of infidelity to the
vows of marriage, subsequent to the
condonation constitutes a new offense [People
v. Engle and Price, 8 C.A., Rep. 495].
A victim's express or implied forgiveness of an
offense, by treating the offender as if there had
been no offense. One spouse's express or
implied forgiveness of a marital offense by
resuming marital life and sexual intimacy
[Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th ed.].
b. Article 345: Civil Liability of
Persons Guilty of Crimes Against
Chastity
Those Guilty of Rape, Seduction or
Abduction shall: [IOS - AMDO]
1. Indemnify the offended woman
2. Acknowledge the Offspring, unless the
law should prevent him from doing so
3. Support the offspring, except:
a. In cases of Adultery and
Concubinage
b. Where either of the offended
party or accused is Married
c. When paternity cannot be
Determined, such as in multiple
rape; and
d. Other instances where the law
prevents such
Civil Liability of Adulterer and Concubine
The adulterer and the concubine can be
sentenced only to indemnify for damages
caused to the offended spouse.
● The article authorizes the imposition of
indemnity in cases of concubinage against
the concubine only, but not against the
guilty husband [People v. Ramirez, 63 O.G.
7939].
● The guilty wife in adultery cannot also be
sentenced to indemnify for damages
caused to the offended husband, the law
speaks of adulterer not adulteress.
CRIMINAL LAW
contributed in giving birth to the child.
Moral Damages
Moral damages may be recovered both by the
offended party and her parents. [People vs.
Fontanilla, G.R. No. L-25354 (1968)]
c. Article 346 – Liability of
Ascendants, Guardians, Teachers and
Other Persons Entrusted with the
Custody of the Offended Party
Persons Liable:
1. Persons who Cooperate as accomplices in
rape, seduction, abduction, etc.
a. Ascendants
b. Guardians
c. Curators
d. Teachers, and
e. Any other persons, who cooperate as
accomplices with abuse of authority or
confidential relationship
2. Teachers or persons entrusted with
Education and guidance of the youth shall
be
penalized
with
disqualification
(temporary special disqualification to
perpetual special disqualification).
3. Any person falling within the Terms of this
article, and any other person guilty of
Corruption of minors for the benefit of
another, shall be punished by special
disqualification from filling the office of
guardian. [Art. 346]
Punished as Principals
The above-mentioned persons who act as
accomplices in crimes against chastity (except
adultery and concubinage) shall be punished
as principals. [Art. 346, par. 1, Revised Penal
Code]
All the Accused must Support the Offspring
All the accused must support the offspring
since any one of them may be the father and
Page 255 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
L. CRIMES AGAINST THE
CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS
[ARTS. 347 - 352]
1. Chapter I: Simulation of Births
and Usurpation of Civil Status
a. Article 347 - Simulation of Births,
Substitution of One Child for Another,
and Concealment or Abandonment of
a Legitimate Child
Punishable Acts [SimSuCo]
1. Simulation of births;
2. Substitution of one child for another;
3. Concealing or abandoning any
legitimate child with intent to cause
such child to lose its civil status
Elements:
Mode 1:
Mode 2:
Mode 3:
Simulation of Substitution Concealing or
births
of 1 child
Abandoning
for another any legitimate
child
1.
Woman 1. A child of a 1. The child
Pretends to couple
is is Legitimate
be pregnant
Exchanged
with a child
of
another
couple/
A
living child is
placed
in
place
of
another
woman’s
dead child
2. She is Not 2.
The 2.
The
actually
exchange is offender
pregnant
Without the
conceals or
Abandons
knowledge
of
the such child
respective
parents
3. She Takes
3.
The
another child
offender has
as her own on
the Intent to
the day of
cause such
supposed
child to lose
delivery
its civil status
CRIMINAL LAW
Note:
a. Object of the crime is the creation of false,
or the causing of loss of civil status.
b. Unlawful sale of a child by his father is not
a crime under this article [US v. Capillo,
G.R. No. 9279 (1915)].
Meaning of “Abandon” in the context of
Art. 347
The practice of abandoning new-born infants
and very young children at the door of
hospitals, churches and other religious
institutions. It is leaving the child at a public
place where other people may find it and
causing the child to lose its civil status [U.S. v.
Capillo, G.R. No. 9279, (1915)].
Other Persons Liable:
1. The woman who simulates the birth
and the one who furnishes the child are
both responsible as principals.
2. A physician or surgeon or public officer,
who cooperates in the execution of
these crimes, is also liable if he acts in
violation of the duties of his profession
or office. [Art. 347(3), Revised Penal
Code]
Abandonment
in
Art
347
Abandoning a Minor in Art 246
v.
Concealment or
Abandoning a Minor
Abandonment of a
[Art. 346]
Legitimate Child
[Art. 347]
As to the Offender
Any person
One who has the
custody of the child
As to Intent
To cause the child to To avoid obligation of
lose his civil status
rearing and caring for
the child
b. Article 348 - Usurpation of Civil
Status
Elements
1. A person Represents himself to be
another
2. He Assumes the filiation or the parental
or conjugal rights of such another
person; and
3. There is intent to Enjoy the rights
arising from the civil status of another.
Page 256 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Qualifying Circumstance
Validity of Marriage
The crime is qualified if the purpose is to
defraud the offended party or his heirs [Art.
348, Revised Penal Code].
1. The fact that the first marriage is void
from the beginning is not a defense. As
with voidable marriage, there must be a
judicial declaration of nullity of marriage
before contracting the second marriage
[Mercado v. Tan, G.R. No. 137110 (2000)].
Usurpation of Civil Status vs. Using
Fictitious Name vs. Estafa by Deceit
Usurpation
of Civil
Status
[Art. 348]
Using
Estafa
Fictitious
[Art. 315]
Name
[Art. 178]
As to Intent
Intent
to Intent is to Intent is to
enjoy
conceal
a defraud
rights
crime, evade another
arising
the execution (estafa
by
from
of
a means
of
another’s
judgment, or deceit)
civil status cause
must
be damage
to
present
public interest
As to Necessity of Actual Damage
Damage not necessary
Damage
or
prejudice is
necessary
2. Chapter II: Illegal Marriages
a. Article 349 – Bigamy
Elements [LeNSEs]:
1. Offender has been Legally married;
2. Marriage has Not been legally
dissolved or, in case his or her spouse
is absent, the absent spouse could not
yet be presumed dead according to
Civil Code
3. Offender contracts a Second or
subsequent marriage
4. The second or subsequent marriage
has all the Essential requisites for
validity.
Note: Bigamy does not apply to those married
under the Muslim Code [PD 2083, Art 180].
Causes Producing Legal Dissolution
of First Marriage
1. Death of one of the contracting parties
2. Judicial declaration annulling a void
marriage;
3. Judicial decree annulling a voidable
marriage
2. Validity of second marriage is a
prejudicial question. The second
marriage must have all the essential
requisites for validity in such a way that it
would have been valid were it not for the
subsistence of the first marriage. If the
second marriage is void, there is no bigamy
[People v. De Lara, 51 OG 4079].
However, note that declaration of nullity of
the second marriage due to psychological
incapacity is not a defense. Since a
marriage
contracted
during
the
subsistence of a valid marriage is
automatically void, the nullity of the 2nd
marriage is not per se an argument to avoid
criminal liability [Tenebro v. CA, G.R. No
150758 (2004)].
Note: Although beyond the June 30, 2021
cut-off date for the 2022 Bar Exams, note
the landmark case of Pulido v. People,
G.R. No. 220149, 27 July 2021, where the
Supreme Court held that the first or second
marriage may be collaterally attacked by a
person accused of Bigamy. Hence, the
validity of the first or second marriage may
already be a prejudicial question to bigamy.
The prior declaration of nullity of a marriage
is necessary only for purposes of
remarriage, but is not relevant in a bigamy
case.
Effect of Divorce
When both spouses When one spouse is
are Filipino Citizens
an alien
The divorce obtained
from foreign courts is
not valid. A spouse
who remarries is still
liable for bigamy.
One who contracts a
second
marriage
believing he was
lawfully divorced may
Page 257 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
The Filipino spouse
is capacitated to
remarry just as the
foreign spouse is.
[Art. 26, Family
Code] Thus, after
obtaining a divorce,
the Filipino spouse
may
contract
a
second
marriage
CRIM2
be liable for bigamy
through
reckless
imprudence [People
v. Schneckenburger,
G.R.
No.
2457
(1938)].
without being liable
for bigamy.
Bigamy and Concubinage
One convicted of bigamy may also be
prosecuted for concubinage as both are
distinct offenses. The first is an offense against
civil status, which may be prosecuted at the
instance of the state; the second is an offense
against chastity, and may be prosecuted only
at the instance of the offended party.
Persons Liable as Accomplices
If they have knowledge of the first marriage, the
following are liable as accomplices:
1. Second Spouse; and
2. Witness who falsely vouches for the
capacity of the contracting parties.
CRIMINAL LAW
As to Who should be Impleaded
The
offending Both the guilty parties
spouse.
The must be impleaded
second/subsequen (the offending spouse
t spouse is not and the other party).
necessarily liable
for the crime of
bigamy
and
whether
he/she
should be included
in the information
will be determined
by
the
fiscal
conducting
the
preliminary
investigation.
[People v. Schneckenburger, G.R. No 48183
(1941)]
b. Article 350 - Marriage Contracted
against Provisions of Laws
Elements
Defense has Burden of Proof
Once the prosecution has established that the
defendant was already married at the time he
contracted the second marriage, the burden of
proof to show the dissolution of the first
marriage is on the defense.
Prescription Period
Prescription commences not from the time of
commission but from the time of its discovery
by the complainant spouse. The rule of
constructive notice does not apply.
Bigamy
vs.
Concubinage
Bigamy
[Art. 349]
Adultery
and
Adultery/Concubinag
e
[Art. 333/Art. 334]
As to Nature of the Offense
Public
Offense, Private offense, crime
crime
against against chastity
status
As to Effect of Pardon
No effect
Bars prosecution
As to Who May Prosecute
At the instance of Only at the instance of
the State; thus it is the offended party
immaterial
who
initiates the action.
1. Offender Contracted marriage; and
2. He Knew at the time that:
a. Requirements of the law were Not
complied with; or
b. Marriage was in Disregard of a legal
impediment.
Note: Offender must not also be guilty of
bigamy.
Qualifying Circumstance
The crime is qualified when the consent of the
other party was obtained through violence,
intimidation, or fraud [Art. 350].
c. Article 351 - Premature Marriage
(Repealed by RA No. 10655)
Note: This provision has been repealed by RA
10655 (Act Repealing Art. 351 of the RPC),
thus decriminalizing the said article.
d. Article 352 - Performance of Illegal
Marriage Ceremony
Elements
1. Offender is Authorized to solemnize
marriages
2. He Performs or authorizes any illegal
marriage ceremony
Page 258 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Persons Liable
The following can be held liable for performing
or authorizing any illegal marriage ceremony:
1. Priests or ministers of any religious
denomination or sect, or
2. Civil authorities
Note: If the offender is not so authorized to
solemnize marriages, he is liable under Art
177, Usurpation of Authority.
Page 259 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
M.
CRIMES
AGAINST
HONOR [ARTS. 353 - 364]
1. Chapter I – Libel
SECTION 1. Definition, Forms, And
Punishment of This Crime
a. Article 353 - Libel
Note: Defamation is the proper term for libel as
used in Art. 353.
Defamation - means the offense of injuring a
person's character, fame or reputation through
false and malicious statements [MVRS Pub.
Inc. vs. Islamic Da'wah Council of the Phils.
Inc., G.R. No. 135306 (2003)].
Defamation Includes libel (written), slander
(oral), or slander by deed.
Libel vs. Slander
Libel
[Art. 355]
Defamation
committed by means
of writing, printing,
lithography,
engraving,
radio,
phonograph, painting
or theatrical
or cine-matographic
exhibition, or any
similar means
Slander
[Art. 358]
Oral defamation
CRIMINAL LAW
exhibition, or any
similar means
As to the Offended Party
Any person/s
Government or any of
its duly constituted
authorities
As to the Effect
Injures the person's Disturbs public peace.
character, fame or
reputation through
false and malicious
statements
Elements under Art. 353:
1. That there must be an Imputation of a
crime, or of a vice or defect, real or
imaginary, or any act, omission, status or
circumstance;
Imputation covers:
a. Crime allegedly committed by offended
party;
b. Vice or defect, real or imaginary of
offended party; or
c. Any Act, omission, condition, status of, or
circumstance relating to the offended party.
Imputation of criminal intention is not
libelous.
Intent to commit a crime is not a violation of
the law. This is more so, when it is a mere
assertion or expression of opinion as to
what will be the future conduct of another
[People vs. Baja, C.A., 40 O.G., Supp. 5,
206].
2. Imputation was made Publicly;
Note: There is no
distinction between
calumny, insult and
libel.
Publication
Communication of the defamatory matter to
some third person or persons [People vs.
Atencio, G.R. No. 11353 (1954)].
Defamation vs. Seditious Libel
Libel
Seditious Libel
[Art. 355]
[Art. 142 (3)]
As to Acts Committed
Committed by means Committed by writing,
of writing, printing,
publishing,
or
circulating
scurrilous
lithography,
engraving,
radio, libels
phonograph, painting
or theatrical or cinematographic
Sending a Letter is Sufficient Publication
General Rule: Writing a letter to another
person other than the person defamed is
sufficient to constitute publication [Orfanel vs.
People, G.R. No. L-26877, (1969)].
Exception: Sending a letter in a sealed
envelope through a messenger, is not
publication [Lopez vs. Delgado, G.R. No. L3499, (1907)].
3. Imputation was Malicious.
Page 260 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Malice in Fact vs. Malice in Law
Malice in Fact
Malice in Law
As to Proof Required
Proof of malice or ill Proof of malice is not
will must be proved. required, because it
Thus, it may be is presumed to exist
shown by proof of ill from the defamatory
will,
hatred
or imputation.
purpose to injure.
Presumption
Malice
is
not Presumed from a
presumed since, it is defamatory
a positive desire or imputation.
an intention to annoy
or endure.
Exception:
When
communication
is
privileged, malice is
not presumed.
As to Proof of Good Intention and
Justifiable Motive
When malice in fact Upon proof of good
is present, justifiable intention
and
motive cannot exist, justifiable
motive,
and the imputations even
if
the
become actionable.
publication
is
injurious, the
presumption
of
malice disappears.
4. Imputation was Directed to:
a. Natural; or
b. Juridical person; or
c. One who is Dead.
CRIMINAL LAW
3. If the utterance is made against a
number of people, designated by their
common surname, not separately
mentioned, then there is only one
offense [People vs. Aquinoc, 35 OG
8844, (1966)].
4. Imputation tends to cause Dishonor,
Discredit or Contempt of the person
defamed.
Dishonor vs. Discredit vs. Contempt
Dishonor
Disgrace,
shame or
ignominy
Discredit
Loss of credit
or reputation,
disesteem
Contempt
State
of
being
despised
Construction of Words
1. Meaning of the writer is immaterial;
what is taken into consideration is the
meaning that the words conveyed on
the minds of persons of reasonable
understanding, discretion and candor,
taking
into
consideration
the
surrounding circumstances which were
known to the hearer or reader [People
vs. Encarnacion, CA, 48 OG 1817].
2. Words are to be construed in their
entirety and taken in their plain,
natural and ordinary meaning, as
they would naturally be understood by
persons reading them, unless it
appears that they were used and
understood in another sense [Novicio
vs. Aggabao, G.R. No. 141332,
(2003)].
Identification of Offended Party Required
In order to maintain a libel suit, it is essential
that the victim be identifiable, although it is not
necessary that he be named [Corpus vs.
Cuarderno, Sr., G.R. No. L-16969, (1966)].
b. Art. 354 – Requirement of Publicity
When defamatory Statements are
addressed to a Number of People
General Rule: Every defamatory imputation is
presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if
no good intention and justifiable motive for
making it is shown. [Art. 354(1), Revised Penal
Code]
General Rule: Defamatory remarks directed at
a group of persons is not actionable.
Exceptions:
1. Statements are sweeping or allembracing as to apply to every
individual in that group or class. [id.];
2. Sufficiently specific so that each victim
is identifiable [Newsweek vs. IAC, G.R.
No. L-63559, (1986)].
Presumption of Malice
Rebuttal of Presumption
Presumption of malice may be rebutted, if it is
shown by the accused that:
1. Defamatory imputation is True, in case
the law allows proof of the truth of the
imputation;
2. It is published with good Intention; and
3. There is a Justifiable motive for making
it.
Page 261 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Exception: Malice is not
privileged communications.
presumed
in
Types of Privileged Communication
Privileged
Communication
(PC)
PC 1: Private
Communication
Made
to
Another in the
Performance of
a Legal, Moral
or Social Duty
[DOF]
[Art. 354 (1)]
PC 2: Fair and
true report of
Official
Proceedings
[RFC]
[Art. 354 (2)]
Requisites:
1. The person who made
the communication had
a legal, moral or social
Duty to make the
communication, or, at
least, he had an interest
to be upheld;
2. Communication is
addressed to an Officer
or a board, or superior,
having some interest or
duty in the matter; and
3. The statements in the
communication
are
made in good Faith
without malice (in fact).
1. It is a fair and true
Report of a judicial,
legislative, or other
official
proceedings
which
are
not
of
confidential nature, or of
a statement, report or
speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any
other act performed by a
public officer in the
exercise of his functions;
2. It is made in good
Faith; and
3. It is without any
Comments or remarks.
Actionable Privileged Communication
General Rule: The fact that a communication
is privileged does not mean that it is not
actionable; the privileged character simply
does away with the presumption of malice,
which the plaintiff has to prove in such a case
[Lu Chu Siong vs. Lu Tian Chong, G.R. No. L122, (1946)].
Exception:
Absolute
Privileged
Communication is not actionable even if made
CRIMINAL LAW
in
bad
faith.
Absolute
Privileged
communication is specifically recognized in the
Constitution – it pertains to statements made in
official proceedings of Congress by members
thereof, as part of their parliamentary immunity
[Osmeña vs. Pendatum, 109 Phil, 863].
Under PC 1: Private Communication
Made to Another in the Performance
of a Legal, Moral or Social Duty [Art.
354 (1)]
1. Accusation must be made in private
communication. Thus, in a case where
the accused aired them in a public meeting
instead of making the accusations in
private, it is held that is not privileged
[People vs. Jaring, C.A., 40 O.G. 3683].
Note: Unnecessary publicity destroys good
faith [People vs. Cruz, 40 O.G., Supp. 11, 15].
2. Communication may also be in a public
document [People vs. Cantos, 51 O.G.
2995].
3. That the statement is a privileged
communication is a matter of defense A privileged communication is a matter of
defense and, like all other matters of
defense, must be established by the
accused.
Exception: When in the information itself it
appears that the communication alleged to
be libelous is contained in an appropriate
pleading in a court proceeding, the
privilege becomes at once apparent and
defendant need not wait until the trial and
produce evidence before he can raise the
question of privilege [People vs. Andres,
G.R. No. L- 14548, (1960)].
4. Defense may be overcome when the
prosecution shows that: [MT]
a. Defendant acted with Malice in fact; or
b. There is no reasonable ground for
believing the charge to be True.
Under PC 2: Fair and True Report of
Official Proceedings [Art. 354(2)]
1. Communication must be pertinent and
material to the subject matter. It does not
Page 262 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
protect any unnecessary defamation [Malit
v. People, G.R. No. L-58681 (1982)].
CRIMINAL LAW
functions may constitute libel [People vs. Del
Fierro, G.R. No. 3599-R, (1950)].
2. Only matters "which are not of
confidential nature" may be published when the court, in any special case, has
forbidden the publication of certain records
in the interest of morality or decency the
same should not be published.
Note: In a case, it was held that the actuations
of a public official which were stated in the
articles impugned, referred to matters of public
interest which the citizenry ought to know and
thus were within the purview of qualified
privileged communication. After all, the public
official is subject to a closer scrutiny by
members of the media, who act as sentinels of
the public. Once the privileged character is
established, the prosecutor has to prove actual
malice, i.e., "with knowledge that it was false or
with reckless disregard of whether it was false
or not." Thus, even if the imputations involved
misconduct through an alleged affair with a
married woman, such was held to be within the
purview of qualified privileged communication.
The articles, read as a whole, indicate the
official’s alleged use of connections to stay in
position and conceal his misconduct. They
were written to end his purported abuse of
public position [Tulfo v. People, G.R. No.
187113, Jan. 11, 2021].
Note: Privilege has been strictly limited to
cases in which the right of access is secured
by law [U.S. vs. Santos, 33 Phil. 533].
Enumeration under Art. 354 is Not an
Exclusive List of Qualifiedly Privileged
Communication
It is rendered more expansive by the
Constitutional guarantee of freedom of the
press [Borja vs. CA, G.R. No. 126466, (1999)].
1. Doctrine of Fair Comment - while in
general every discreditable imputation
publicly made is deemed false, because
every man is presumed innocent until his
guilt is judicially proved, and every false
imputation
is
deemed
malicious,
nevertheless, when the discreditable
imputation is directed against a public
person in his public capacity, it is not
necessarily actionable [Borja vs. CA, id.].
2. Statements made in self defense or in
mutual controversy are often privileged
[People vs. Baja, CA, 40 OG]
3. The person libeled is justified to hit back
with another libel [People vs. Chua
Hiong, CA, 51 O.G. 1932].
Criticism vs. Defamation
Criticism
Deals only with such
things as shall invite
public attention or call
for public comment
General Rule: The defamatory statements
made by the accused must be a fair answer
to the libel made by the supposed offended
party and must be related to the imputation
made [People vs. Pelayo, Jr., 64 O.G.
1994].
Defamatory Remarks against Public
Officers
General Rule: Defamatory remarks and
comments on the conduct or acts of public
officers which are related to the discharge of
their official duties will not constitute libel if the
defendant proves the truth of the imputation
[People vs. Velasco, CA, 40 O.G. 3694].
Exception: Any attack upon the private
character of the public officer on matters which
are not related to the discharge of their official
Defamation
[Art. 353]
Follows a public
officer
into
his
private life which
has no connection
with
his
performance of his
public duties, and
falsely charges him
with evil motives,
clearly designed to
destroy
his
reputation
or
besmirch his name.
c. Art. 355 – Libel by Means of
Writings or Similar Means
Libel is Committed by Means of:
1. Writing;
2. Engraving;
3. Theatrical exhibition
4. Cinematographic exhibition;
5. Any similar means;
6. Printing;
7. Phonograph;
8. Painting;
9. Lithography; or
Page 263 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
10. Radio
CRIMINAL LAW
The word "radio" should be considered in
relation to the terms with which it is associated,
all of which have a common characteristic,
namely, their permanent nature as a means of
publication. Thus, defaming through an
amplifier constitutes the crime of oral
defamation or Slander under Art. 358 [People
vs. Santiago, G.R. No. L-17763].
Light Threats vs. Threatening to
Publish or Prevent Publication
Libelous Remarks in the Heat of
Passion; Considered Threat not Libel
Threatening to
Publish or Prevent
Publication
[Art. 356]
As to the Act Committed
Offender threatens 1. Threatens another to
another to commit publish a libel; or
an act which does 2. Offering to prevent a
not amount to a publication of a libel
crime
As to Demand for Money
Demand for money Demanding money or
or imposition of any asking for monetary
condition is an compensation
is
essential element
essential in Mode 2
(Offer to Prevent).
In such case, the offense committed is clearly
and principally that of threats; the statements
derogatory to a person named do not constitute
an independent crime of libel [People vs.
Yebra, G.R. No. L-14348, (1960)].
e. Art. 357 – Prohibited Publication of
Acts Referred to in the Course of
Official Proceedings
Similarly, although the medium of television is
not expressly mentioned, it easily qualifies
under the general provision "or any similar
means" [People vs. Casten, et al., CA-G.R. No.
07924-CR (1974)].
d. Art. 356 – Threatening to Publish
and Offer to Prevent such Publication
for a Compensation
Punishable Acts:
1. Threatening another to publish a libel
concerning him, or his parents, spouse,
child, or other members of his family.
2. Offering to Prevent the publication of
such libel for compensation, or money
consideration.
Note: Acts under this article may be known as
blackmail [U.S. vs. Eguia, et al., 38 Phil. 857].
Blackmail
May be defined as any unlawful extortion of
money by threats of accusation or exposure.
Two words are expressive of the crime —hush
money. [Id.]
Felonies Wherein Blackmail is Possible:
1. Light threats. [Art. 283]
2. Threatening to publish, or offering to
prevent the publication of, a libel for
compensation. [Art. 356, Revised
Penal Code]
Light Threats
[Art. 283]
Elements: [REMPO]
1. Offender is a:
a. Reporter;
b. Editor; or
c. Manager of a newspaper daily or
magazine.
2. He publishes facts connected with the
Private life of another; and
3. Such facts are Offensive to the honor,
virtue and reputation of said person.
Note: Prohibition applies even if such
publication is made in connection with or under
the pretext that it is necessary in the narration
of any judicial or administrative or judicial
proceeding.
Art. 357 constitutes the so-called "Gag
Law."
Newspaper reports on cases pertaining to
adultery, divorce, issues about the legitimacy
of children, etc., will necessarily be barred from
publication.
Revelation of Source of News
General Rule: The publisher, editor, columnist
or duly accredited reporter of any newspaper,
magazine or periodical of general circulation
cannot be compelled to reveal the source of
any news report or information appearing in
said publication [Sec. 1, RA 1477]
Page 264 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Exception: When the court or a House or
committee of Congress finds that such
revelation is demanded by the security of the
State. [Id.]
f. Art. 358 – Slander
Slander (Oral Defamation)
Libel committed by oral or speaking of base
and defamatory words which tend to prejudice
another in his reputation, office, trade,
business or means of livelihood [Villanueva vs.
People, G.R. No. 150351, (2006)].
Note: Slander need not be heard by the
offended party. There is oral defamation,
even if other persons and not the offended
party heard the slanderous words, because a
person's reputation is the estimate in which
others hold him [People v. Clarin, C.A., 37 O.G.
1106].
Kinds of Oral Defamation:
1. Simple slander
2. Grave slander (when it is of a serious
and insulting nature) [Villanueva vs.
People, G.R. No. 150351, (2006)].
Factors Affecting Gravity of Slander:
1. Expressions used
2. Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party
3. Circumstances surrounding the case; and
4. Social Standing and position of the
offending party [Id.]
“Putang ina mo” is a common expression
The words, "Agustin, putang ina mo" is a
common expression in the dialect that is often
employed not really to slander but rather to
express anger or displeasure. It is seldom, if
ever, taken in its literal sense [Reyes vs.
People, G.R. No. L-21528 (1969)].
g. Art. 359 – Slander by Deed
Elements:
1. Offender performs any act Not included
in any other crime against honor.
2. Such act is performed in the Presence
of other person or persons.
3. Such act casts Dishonor, Discredit or
Contempt upon the offended party.
[Art. 359, Revised Penal Code]
CRIMINAL LAW
Kinds of Slander by Deed:
1. Simple slander by deed, and
2. Grave slander by deed (of a serious
nature). [Id.]
Note: Gravity is affected by the social standing
of the offended party, the circumstances under
which the act was committed, the occasion,
etc. [Id.]
Examples of Slander by Deed
1. Slapping the face of another slander by deed if the intention of the
accused is to cause shame and
humiliation [People vs. Delfin, G.R.
Nos. L-15230 & L-15979-81, (1961)].
2. Pointing “dirty finger” or flipping off
someone is simple slander by deed
- the act connotes the phrase "Fuck
You," which is similar to the expression
"Puta" or "Putang Ina mo," in local
parlance. While it may have cast
dishonor, discredit or contempt, said
act is not of a serious nature
[Villanueva vs. People, G.R. No.
160351, (2006)].
Maltreatment by Deed vs. Slander by
Deed
Maltreatment by
Slander by Deed
Deed
[Art. 356]
[Art. 286]
As to the Act Punished
Ill-treatment
of Any act performed
another by deed, on another, not being
without causing any included in any other
Injury
crime of honor, in the
presence of others,
dishonors,
Ex. Slapping of face which
without intent to discredits or causes
contempt to another
cause dishonor
party.
Ex. Slapping with
intent
to
cause
dishonor
As to Humiliation/Shame
Suffering of shame Offended
party
or humiliation is not suffered from shame
required.
or
humiliation
caused
by
the
maltreatment.
As to Intent to Dishonor
Not Required
Required
Page 265 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
Unjust
Vexation
vs.
Acts
of
Lasciviousness vs. Slander by Deed
Unjust
Acts of
Slander by
Vexation Lasciviousness
Deed
[Art. 287]
[Art. 336]
[Art. 356]
As to the Act Punished
Act which The commission Any
act
does not of a lewd act to a performed
produce
person of either on another,
material
sex with force, or not
being
physical
deprivation
of included in
harm, but reason
or any
other
unjustly
fraudulent
crime
of
annoys or machination or honor, in the
vexes
when the victim presence of
another.
is under 12 others,
years.
which
dishonors,
discredits or
causes
contempt to
another
party.
As to Intent
To annoy To commit a To humiliate
or vex.
lewd act; no or dishonor.
intent to have
sexual
intercourse.
Note: Kissing a girl in public and touching her
breast without lewd designs, committed by a
rejected suitor to cast dishonor on the girl was
held to be slander by deed and not acts of
lasciviousness [People vs. Valencia, CA-G.R.
No. 4136-R, (1950)].
SECTION 2. General Provisions
h. Art. 360 – Persons Responsible for
Libel
Persons Liable: [PEMO]
1. Person who Publishes, exhibits or
causes the publication or exhibition of
any defamation in writing or similar
means.
2. Author or Editor of a book or pamphlet.
3. Editor or business Manager of a daily
newspaper, magazine or serial
publication.
4. Owner of the printing plant which
publishes a libelous article with his
consent and all other persons who in
CRIMINAL LAW
any way participate in or have
connection with its publication. [See
Art. 360, Revised Penal Code]
Venue [Art. 360(3), Revised Penal Code]
The criminal and civil actions for damages in
case of written defamations shall be filed
simultaneously or separately with the RTC of
the province or city:
1. Where the libelous article is Printed
and first published; or
2. Where any of the offended parties
actually Resides at the time of the
commission of the offense.
Venue when Party is a Public Officer
vs. Private Individual
Public Officer
1. If officer holds his office
in the City of Manila – the
action shall be filed before:
a. CFI of the City of
Manila; or
b. City or province
where the libelous
article is printed
and first published.
2. If the public officer does
not hold office in the City of
Manila – the action shall
be filed before:
a. CFI of the
province or city
where he held
office at the time of
commission of the
offense; or
b.
Where
the
libelous article is
printed and first
published.
[Art.
360 (3), Revised
Penal Code]
Private
Individual
Action shall be
filed before:
1. CFI of the
province or city
where
he
actually
resides at the
time of the
commission of
the offense; or
2. Where the
libelous matter
is printed and
first published.
[Art. 360 (3),
Revised Penal
Code]
Note: Civil action shall be filed in the same
court where the criminal action is filed and vice
versa. Moreover, the court where the criminal
action or civil action for damages is first filed
shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of
other courts [Art. 360(3), Revised Penal Code].
Page 266 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
i. Art. 361 – Proof of Truth
Proof of Truth is admissible in any of the
following instances:
1. When the act or omission imputed
constitutes a Crime regardless of
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Whether the offended party is a private
individual or a public officer.
3. When the offended party is a
Government employee, even if the act
or omission imputed does not
constitute a crime, provided, it is
related to the discharge of his official
duties.
Page 267 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Requisites to be Considered
Defense in Defamation.
as
Under Art. 361 (1), proof of the truth is not
enough, it must also be proven that:
1. The matter charged as libelous is True;
2. It was published with good Motives;
and
3. It was published for Justifiable ends
[Art. 361, Revised Penal Code]
Mitigation of Damages
Damages may be mitigated when:
1. There is a retraction published, which must
contain an admission of the falsity of the
libelous publication and evince a desire to
repair the wrong occasioned thereby
[Sotelo Matti v. Bulletin Publishing, G.R.
No. L-11202, (1918)].
2. That the publication of the article was an
honest mistake is not a complete defense
but serves only to mitigate damages where
the article is libelous per se. [Phee vs. La
Vanguardia, 45 Phil. 211]
Direct Evidence
The proof of the truth of the accusation cannot
be made to rest upon mere hearsay, rumors or
suspicion. It must rest upon positive, direct
evidence upon which a definite finding may be
made by the Court [U.S. vs. Sotto, G.R. No.
13990, (1918)].
j. Art. 362 – Libelous Remarks
Libelous remarks or comments connected with
the matter privileged under the provisions of
Article 354 (Requirement for Publicity), if made
with malice, shall not exempt the author thereof
nor the editor or managing editor of a
newspaper from criminal liability. [Art. 362,
Revised Penal Code]
Example: The author or the editor of a
publication who distorts, mutilates or discolors
the official proceedings reported by him, or add
comments thereon to cast aspersion on the
character of the parties concerned, is guilty of
libel, notwithstanding the fact that the
defamatory matter is published in connection
with a privileged matter [Dorr v. U.S., 11 Phil.
706].
2. Chapter II
Machinations
– Incriminatory
a. Art. 363 – Incriminating Innocent
Persons
Elements: [PIIN]
1. Offender Performs an act;
2. By such act he directly Incriminates or
imputes to an Innocent person the
commission of a crime; and
3. Such act does Not constitute perjury.
Note: This article is limited to “planting”
evidence and the like, which tends to cause
false prosecution [People v. Rivera, G.R. Nos.
L-38215-16 (1933)].
The two offenses form a complex crime, as the
two acts imputed to the accused had closely
followed each other, and that the former was a
necessary means to commit the latter, which is
only one crime [People v. Alagao, et al., G.R.
No. L-20721 (1966)].
b. Art. 364 – Intriguing Against Honor
Elements: [IB]
1. Offender makes an Intrigue; and
2. Principal purpose of such intrigue is
Blemishing the honor or reputation of
another.
Intriguing Against Honor
Any scheme or plot designed to blemish the
reputation of a person by means which consist
of some trickery.
• Akin to slander by deed, in that the
offender does not avail directly of
written or spoken words, pictures or
caricatures to ridicule his victim but of
some ingenious, crafty and secret plot,
producing the same effect [People v.
Fontanilla, C.A., 56 O.G. 193].
Page 268 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Incriminating Innocent Persons vs. Perjury by Making False Accusation
Intriguing
Against
Honor
[Art. 364]
Incriminating
Against Persons
[Art. 363]
Perjury by Making
False Accusations
[Art. 183]
Defamation
[Art. 353]
Slander
[Art. 358]
Gravamen of the Offense
Offender
makes
an
intrigue
to
blemish the
honor
or
reputation of
another
Offender directly
incriminates
or
imputes to an
innocent
person
the commission of
a crime, but does
not avail himself of
written or spoken
words
in
besmirching
the
victim's reputation.
False imputation is
made
before
a
competent
person
authorized
to
administer an oath, in
cases in which the law
requires.
Imputation made must be public and
malicious, and calculated to cause the
dishonor, discredit or contempt of the
aggrieved party.
As to the Manner of Commission
Consists of
some tricky
and secret
plot.
Limited to the act of
planting evidence
and the like, in
order to incriminate
an
innocent
person.
Involves giving of
false statement under
oath or the making of
a
false
affidavit,
imputing to a person
the commission of a
crime.
Involves
the
imputation of a
crime, or a vice or
defect, real or
imaginary, or any
act or omission or
status.
As to the Source of Derogatory Remarks
Source
cannot
be
determined
Source can be determined
Page 269 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
Oral or spoken
imputation of a
crime, or a vice or
defect, real or
imaginary, or any
act or omission or
status
CRIM2
CRIMINAL LAW
Reckless vs. Simple Imprudence
N. QUASI-OFFENSES
Reckless Imprudence
a. Art. 365 – Criminal Negligence
Punishable Acts:
1. Committing
through
Reckless
imprudence any act which, had it been
intentional, would constitute a grave or
less grave felony or light felony.
2. Committing
through
Simple
imprudence or negligence an act which
would otherwise have constituted a
grave or a less serious felony.
3. Causing damage to the Property of
another through reckless imprudence
or simple imprudence or negligence.
4. Causing through simple imprudence or
negligence some wrong which, if done
maliciously, would have constituted a
light Felony. [Art. 365, Revised Penal
Code]
Note: Imprudence or negligence is not a crime
in itself; it is simply a way of committing a crime.
Qualifying Circumstance
Failing to lend help is
circumstance. [Art. 365, RPC]
a
qualifying
Imprudence vs. Negligence
Reckless
Simple Imprudence
Imprudence
As to the Nature of the Action
Deficiency of action Deficiency
of
or
failure
in perception or failure in
precaution
advertence
To Avoid the Wrongful Acts
By
taking
the By paying proper
necessary
attention and using
precaution
once due
diligence
in
they are foreseen.
foreseeing them.
As to Effect
Both are merely means of committing a crime,
thus are not crimes in themselves.
[Ivler v. Modesto-San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716,
Nov. 17, 2010, 635 SCRA 19]
Simple
Imprudence
1. Offender does or Fails 1. There is lack
to do an act;
of Precaution
2. The doing of or the
displayed by
failure to do that act is
the offender;
Voluntary;
2. Damage
3. It was without Malice;
impending to
4. Material Damage
be caused is
results.
Not
5. There is inexcusable
immediate
lack of Precaution on
nor is the
the part of the offender,
danger
taking into
clearly
consideration his:
manifest.
[EDO]
a. Employment or
occupation;
b. Degree of
intelligence,
physical condition;
and
c. Other
circumstances
regarding persons,
time and place.
[Art. 365, Revised Penal Code]
Note: There must be injury to person/s or
damage to property as a result of the
imprudence, since “material damage results”
from it. [Id.]
Test of Negligence – Picart Test
Would a prudent man, in the position of the
person to whom negligence is attributed,
foresee harm to the person injured as a
reasonable consequence of the course about
to be pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty on
the actor to refrain from that course or to take
precaution against its mischievous results, and
the failure to do so constitutes negligence
[Picart vs. Smith, G.R. No. L-12219, (1918)].
Concurrent Negligence
Where the concurrent or successive negligent
acts or omission of two or more persons,
although acting independently of each other
are, in combination, the direct and proximate
cause of a single injury to a third person, and it
is impossible to determine in what proportion
each contributed to the injury, either is
responsible for the whole injury, even though
Page 270 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIM2
his act alone might not have caused the entire
injury [PNCC v. CA, G.R. No. 159270 (2005)].
Emergency Rule
An automobile driver who, by the negligence of
another and not by his own negligence, is
suddenly placed in an emergency and
compelled to act instantly to avoid a collision or
injury is not guilty of negligence if he makes
such a choice which a person of ordinary
prudence placed in such a position might make
even though he did not make the wisest choice
[Engada v. CA, G.R. No. 140698 (2003)].
CRIMINAL LAW
provided in the first 2 paragraphs of Art.
365;
2. When by imprudence or negligence
and with violation of the Automobile
Law, the death of a person shall be
caused.
The situation must be: [SDN]
1. Sudden and unexpected;
2. Deprive him of all opportunity for
deliberation; and
3. It must be such that the actor must
have No knowledge that unusual
consequences may result from his act
[Id.]
The following provisions do not apply to
acts penalized under Art. 365:
1. Art. 64; Art. 64 relative to mitigating
and aggravating circumstances is not
applicable to crimes committed through
negligence. [People vs. Medroso, Jr.,
G.R. No. L-37633, (1975)]
2. Art. 48; Art. 48 is a procedural device
allowing single prosecution of multiple
felonies meanwhile Art. 365 is a
substantive rule penalizing not an act
defined as a felony but "the mental
attitude behind the act, the dangerous
recklessness, lack of care or foresight”.
There is a single mental attitude
regardless
of
the
resulting
consequences. Thus, Art. 365 was
crafted as one quasi-crime resulting in
one or more consequences.
Reckless Imprudence is a Single
Crime
Note: Contributory negligence is not a defense
but only mitigates criminal liability.
Requisites for the Emergency Rule to
Apply:
Its consequences on persons and property are
material only to determine the penalty, thus
prior conviction or acquittal of reckless
imprudence bars subsequent prosecution for
the same quasi-offense [Ivler vs. ModestorSan Pedro, G.R. No. 172716 (2010)].
The defense of contributory negligence does
not apply in criminal cases through reckless
imprudence, since one cannot allege the
negligence of another to evade the effects of
his own negligence. [Genobiagon v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 40452 (1989)]
Penalties provided in Art. 365 are not
applicable in the following cases: [PA]
1. When the Penalty provided for the
offense is equal to or lower than those
Page 271 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
I.
ANTI-CHILD
PORNOGRAPHY ACT
OF 2009 [SECS. 3 (AC), 4 AND 5, R.A. 9775]
Child Pornography
Any representation, whether visual, audio, or
written combination thereof, by electronic,
mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or any
other means, of child engaged or involved in
real or simulated explicit sexual activities [Sec.
3(b), R.A. 9775]
Acts penalized by R.A. 9775
1. Hiring, employing, using, persuading,
inducing or coercing a child to perform
in the creation or production of any
form of child pornography
2. Producing, directing, manufacturing, or
creating
3. Publinshing, offering, transmitting,
selling, distributing, broadcasting,
advertising, promoting, esporing, or
importing child pornography
4. Possession with intent to sell,
distribute, publish, or broadcast
• Possession of 3 of more
articles of the same form
constitute prima facie evidence
of intent
5. Knowingly, willfully and intentionally
provide a venue for the commission of
prohibited acts
6. Such as dens, private rooms, cubicles,
cinemas, houses or in establishments
purporting to be a legitimate business
7. For film distributors, theaters and
telecommunication
companies]
Distribution of any form
8. [For parent, legal guardian or person
with custody or control of child]
Knowingly permitting the child to
engage, participate, assist in any form
of child pornography
9. Engage in the luring or grooming of
child
10. Engage in pandering of any form of
child pornography
11. Wilfully access any form of child
pornography
12. Conspiracy to commit any of these
prohibtied acts
CRIMINAL LAW
Conspiracy to commit any form
of child pornography shall be
committed when two (2) or
more persons come to an
agreement concerning the
commission of any of the said
prohibited acts and decide to
commit it;
13. Possession
• No need for intent to sell,
distribute, publish, or broadcast
•
Definition of Child
1. Person below 18 years old
2. Person over 18 years old but unable to
fully take care of himself/herself from
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of a physical or
mental disability or condition
3. Person, regardless of age, who is
presented, depicted or portrayed as a
child
4. Computer-generated,
digitally
or
manually crafted images or graphics of
a person who is represented or who is
made to appear to be a child
Explicit Sexual activity
Acts may be actual or simulated
1. Sexual intercourse
• contact involving genital to
genital, oral to genital, anal to
genital, or oral to anal
• whether between persons of
the same or opposite sex
2. Bestiality
3. Masturbation
4. Sadistic or Masochistic Abuse
5. Lascivious exhibition of the genitals,
buttocks, breasts, pubic area and/or
anus; or
6. Use of any object or instrument for
lascivious acts
Syndicated Child Pornography
Committed by 3 or more persons conspiring or
confederating with one another.
Page 273 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
II. ANTI-FENCING LAW OF
1979 [SECS. 2 TO 6, P.D.
1612]
Note: In such cases, the
penalty shall be termed
reclusion temporal and the
accessory penalty
pertaining thereto provided
in the Revised Penal Code
shall also be imposed.
Fencing
Act of any person who, with intent to gain for
himself or for another, shall buy, receive,
possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or
dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other
manner deal in any article, item, object or
anything of value which he knows, or should be
known to him, to have been derived from the
proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft. [Sec.
2, PD 1612]
Prision
correccional
in its minimum and medium
periods, if the value of the
property involved is more
than 200 pesos but not
exceeding 6,000 pesos.
Fence
Any person, firm, association corporation or
partnership or other organization who/which
commits the act of fencing. [Sec. 2, PD 1612]
in its medium period to
prision correccional in its
minimum period, if the
value of the property
involved is over 50 pesos
but not exceeding 200
pesos.
Liability of Officials of Juridical
Persons.
If the fence is a partnership, firm, corporation or
association, the president or the manager or
any officer thereof who knows or should have
known the commission of the offense shall be
liable. [Sec. 4, PD 1612]
in its medium and
maximum, if the value of
the property robbed or
stolen is more than 6,000
pesos but not exceeding
12,000 pesos.
Arresto
mayor
Presumption of Fencing
in its medium period if such
value is over five (5) pesos
but not exceeding 50
pesos.
Mere possession of any good, article, item,
object, or anything of value which has been the
subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima
facie evidence of fencing. [Sec. 5, PD 1612]
in its minimum period if
such value does not
exceed 5 pesos.
Penalty [Sec.
3, PD 1612]
Condition
if the value of the property
involved is more than
12,000 pesos but not
exceeding 22,000 pesos
Prision mayor
In its maximum, if the value
of such property exceeds
22,000 adding one year for
each additional 10,000
pesos
BUT the total penalty shall
not exceed twenty years
Clearance / Permit to Sell / Used Second
Hand Articles.
All stores, establishments or entities dealing in
the buy and sell of any good, article item, object
of anything of value obtained from an
unlicensed dealer or supplier thereof, shall
before offering the same for sale to the public,
secure the necessary clearance or permit from
the station commander of the Integrated
National Police in the town or city where such
store, establishment or entity is located. [Sec.
6, PD 1612]
Any person who fails to secure the clearance
or permit required by this section or who
violates any of the provisions of the rules and
regulations promulgated thereunder shall upon
Page 274 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
conviction be punished as a fence. [Sec. 6, PD
1612]
Fencing v. Theft
The crimes of robbery and theft, on the one
hand, and fencing, on the other, are separate
and distinct offenses. The state may thus
choose to prosecute [the accused] either under
the Revised Penal Code or P.D. No. 1612,
although the preference for the latter would
seem inevitable considering that fencing is a
malum prohibitum, and P.D. No. 1612 creates
a presumption of fencing and prescribes a
higher penalty based on the value of the
property [Dizon-Pamintuan v. People, 234
SCRA 63 (1994)].
Fencing [PD 1612]
CRIMINAL LAW
Degrees of Participation of Fence /
Accused
Liable as Principal of the Liable as an
Crime of Fencing
Accessory
under Art. 19. of
the Crime of
Theft
Theft
Mala prohibita - intent not Mala in se
required
Dolo is not required in
crimes punished by a
special statute like the
Anti-Fencing Law of 1979
[Lim v. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. 100311, (1993)]
As to act punished
Buying,
receiving,
possessing,
keeping,
acquiring,
concealing,
selling, disposing, or
dealing in any other
manner anything of value
which he knows, or
should be known to him,
to have been derived from
the proceeds of the crime
of robbery or theft
Taking
of
personal
property
of
another without
the
latter’s
consent
with intent to
gain but without
violence
against,
or
intimidation of,
with intent to gain for persons
nor
himself or for another
force
upon
things
Presumptions
Presumption of fencing - None.
mere possession of an
object or anything of value
which has been the
subject of thievery or
robbery
Page 275 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
III. ANTI-GRAFT AND
CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
[R.A. 3019, AS AMENDED
BY R.A. 3047, P.D. 677, P.D.
1288, B.P. BLG. 195 AND
R.A. 10910]
OFFENDERS COVERED BY R.A.
3019
1. Public Officers
Elective and appointive officials and
employees, permanent or temporary, whether
in the classified or unclassified or exempt
service receiving compensation, even nominal,
from the government as defined in the
preceding subparagraph [Sec. 3(b), R.A. No.
3019].
Definition of Public Officer
Sec. 3(b), R.A. No.
3019
Art. 203, RPC
Elective and
appointive officials
and employees,
permanent or
temporary, whether
in the classified or
unclassified or
exempt service
receiving
compensation, even
nominal
Public officer by
direct provision of
the law, popular
election, or
appointment by
competent authority
He/she takes part in
the performance of
public functions in
the Government of
the Philippine
Islands or performs
in said Government
or in any of its
branches public
duties as an
employee, agent or
subordinate official,
of any rank or class
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Private individuals
Any person having family or close personal
relation with any public official. Family relation
shall include the spouse or relatives by
consanguinity or affinity in the third civil degree.
The word "close personal relation" shall include
close personal friendship, social and fraternal
connections, and professional employment all
giving rise to intimacy which assures free
access to such public officer [Sec. 4].
3. Relatives
The spouse or any relative, by consanguinity or
affinity, within the third civil degree, of the
President of the Philippines, the Vice-President
of the Philippines, the President of the Senate,
or the Speaker of the House of
Representatives
CORRUPT PRACTICES
PENALIZED
1. Persuading, inducing, or influencing
another officer to commit violation [Sec.
3a]:
2 acts punished:
a. Persuading, inducing or influencing
another public officer to perform an act
constituting a violation of rules and
regulations duly promulgated by
competent authority or an offense in
connection with the official duties of the
latter
b. Allowing himself to be persuaded,
induced, or influenced to commit such
violation or offense
2. Requesting gifts in connection with
contract or transaction [Sec. 3(b)]
Directly or indirectly requesting or
receiving any gift, present, share,
percentage, or benefit, for himself or for
any other person, in connection with
any contract or transaction between the
Government and any other party,
wherein the public officer in his official
capacity has to intervene under the
law.
The definition of public officer under R.A. No.
3019 is broader because it also includes
whether permanent or temporary, or whether in
the classified, unclassified, or exempt service,
and even those who receive nominal
compensation.
Page 276 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Direct Bribery v. Sec. 3 (b) of R.A. 3019
[Merencillo v. People, G.R. No. 142369-70
(2007)]
Sec. 3 (b),
Direct
R.A. 3019
Bribery
[Art. 210,
RPC]
As to
Mere request Acceptance
Promise or
or demand of of a promise
Gift
a gift,
or offer or
present,
receipt of a
share,
gift or
percentage,
present is
or benefit is
required.
enough.
As to
Limited to
Wider and
Scope
contracts or
more
transactions
general
involving
scope:
monetary
1. Perforconsideration mance of an
where the
act
public officer constituting
has the
a crime;
authority to
2. Execution
intervene
of an unjust
under the
act which
law.
does not
constitute a
crime; and
3. Agreeing
to refrain or
refraining
from doing
an act which
is his official
duty to do.
CRIMINAL LAW
person for whom the public officer, in any
manner or capacity, has secured or obtained,
or will secure or obtain, any Government permit
or license, in consideration for the help given or
to be given, without prejudice to Section
thirteen of this Act.
4. Accepting employment in enterprise with
pending business with him [Sec. 3(d)]
Accepting or having any member of his family
accept employment in a private enterprise
which has pending official business with him
during the pendency thereof or within one year
after its termination.
5. Causing any undue injury to any party
[Sec. 3(e)]
Causing any undue injury to any party including
the Government, or giving any private party any
unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference
in the discharge of his official administrative or
judicial functions through manifest partiality,
evident bad faith or gross inexcusable
negligence.
This provision shall apply to officers and
employees of offices or government
corporations charged with the grant of licenses
or permits or other concessions.
3 modes of committing a violation under
Section 3 (e)
[Sison v. People, G.R. Nos. 170339,
170398-403 (2010)]
1. Manifest
partiality
Partiality is synonymous with
"bias" which "excites a
disposition to see and report
matters as they are wished
for rather than as they are."
[Sison v. People, supra]
2. Evident
Bad Faith
Bad faith does not simply
connote bad judgment or
negligence; it imputes a
dishonest purpose or some
moral obliquity and
conscious doing of a wrong;
a breach of sworn duty
through some motive or
intent or ill will; it partakes of
the nature of fraud
Preliminary investigation is not considered as a
contract or transaction within the purview of
Sec. 3(b) RA 3019 [Lauro Soriano, Jr. v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-65952 (1984)].
The provision refers to a public officer whose
official intervention is required by law in a
contract or transaction. If there is no law
investing an accused with the power to
intervene, they cannot be charged under said
provision [Jaravata v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
No. L-56170 (1984].
3. Requesting gifts in consideration for help
given [Sec. 3(c)]
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present or other pecuniary or material
benefit, for himself or for another, from any
Page 277 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
3. Gross
inexcusable
negligence
Negligence characterized by
the want of even slight care,
acting or omitting to act in a
situation where there is a
duty to act, not inadvertently
but willfully and intentionally
with a conscious indifference
to consequences in so far as
other persons may be
affected. It is the omission of
that care which even
inattentive and thoughtless
men never fail to take on
their own property
While all three modalities may be alleged
simultaneously in a single information for
violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019, an
allegation of only one modality without mention
of the others necessarily means the exclusion
of those not mentioned [Villarosa v. People,
G.R. Nos. 233155-63 (2020)].
Verily, an accusation for a violation of Section
3 (e) of RA 3019 committed through evident
bad faith only, cannot be considered as
synonymous to, or includes an accusation of
violation of Section 3 (e) of RA 3019 committed
through
gross
inexcusable
negligence
[Villarosa v. People, supra].
6. Neglecting to act [Sec. 3(f)]
Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or
request, without sufficient justification, to act
within a reasonable time on any matter pending
before him.
For the purpose of obtaining, directly or
indirectly, from any person interested in the
matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his
own interest or giving undue advantage in favor
of or discriminating against any other interested
party.
7. Entering into grossly disadvantageous
contracts [Sec. 3(g)]
Entering, on behalf of the Government, into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not
the public officer profited or will profit thereby.
This provision partakes of the nature of a
malum prohibitum; it is the commission of that
act as defined by the law, not the character or
CRIMINAL LAW
effect thereof, that determines whether or not
the provision has been violated. [Luciano v.
Estrella, G.R. No. L-31622 (1970)]
8. Having unlawful business interests [Sec.
3(h)]
Directly or indirectly having financial or
pecuniary interest in any business, contract or
transaction in connection with which he
intervenes or takes part in his official capacity,
or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution
or by any law from having any interest.
A mayor who has divested himself of shares in
a corporation which had a contract with the
government before his assumption to office,
even if the divestment was to a relative, is not
liable under 3(h). What the law wants to
prevent is actual intervention in a transaction in
which the public official has financial or
pecuniary interest [Trieste v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. No. 70332-43 (1986)].
9. Having material interest in transactions
requiring his approval [Sec. 3(i)]
Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, or having a material interest in
any transaction or act requiring the approval of
a board, panel or group of which he is a
member, and which exercises discretion in
such approval, even if he votes against the
same or does not participate in the action of the
board, committee, panel or group.
Presumption: Interest for personal gain shall
be presumed against those public officers
responsible for the approval of manifestly
unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transactions
or acts by the board, panel or group to which
they belong.
10. Granting license to unqualified persons
[Sec. 3(j)]
Knowingly approving or granting any license,
permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any
person not qualified for or not legally entitled to
such license, permit, privilege or advantage, or
of a mere representative or dummy of one who
is not so qualified or entitled.
11. Divulging confidential information [Sec.
3(k)]
2 acts punished:
1. Divulging valuable information of a
confidential character, acquired by his
office or by him on account of his
Page 278 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
official position to unauthorized
persons, or
2. Releasing such information in advance
of its authorized release date.
Other Offenders [Sec. 3]
1. Person giving the gift, present, share,
percentage or benefit referred to in (b)
and (c);
2. Person offering or giving to the public
officer the employment mentioned in
(d);
3. Person urging the divulging or untimely
release of the confidential information
referred to in subparagraph (k) of this
section
Together with the offending public officer, other
offenders shall be punished under Section 9 of
RA 3019 and with permanent or temporary
disqualification from transacting business in
any form with the Government, in the discretion
of the Court.
Prohibition on Members of Congress [Sec.
6]
1. Acquiring or receiving any personal
pecuniary interest in any specific
business enterprise which will be
directly and particularly favored or
benefited by any law or resolution
authored by him previously approved
or adopted by the Congress during the
same term.
2. Having such interest prior to the
approval of such law or resolution
authored or recommended by him and
continues for thirty days after such
approval to retain such interest.
This also applies to any other public officer
who recommended the initiation in Congress of
the enactment or adoption of any law or
resolution, and acquires or receives any such
interest during his incumbency.
Statement of Assets Liabilities and Net
Worth [Sec. 7]
Every public officer are required to prepare and
file a true detailed and sworn statement of
assets and liabilities, including a statement of
the amounts and sources of his income, the
amounts of his personal and family expenses
and the amount of income taxes paid for the
next preceding calendar year.
CRIMINAL LAW
SALNs are filed with their respected
department head or secretary within 30 days
after assuming office or within the month of
January of every other year, upon expiration of
term, resignation, or separation from office.
Prima Facie Evidence [Sec. 8]
A public official has been found to have
acquired during his incumbency, whether in his
name or in the name of other persons, an
amount of property and/or money manifestly
out of proportion to his salary and to his other
lawful income, that fact shall be a ground for
dismissal or removal.
Circumstances to be taken into consideration:
1. Properties in the name of the spouse
and dependents of such public official,
when
their
acquisition
through
legitimate
means
cannot
be
satisfactorily shown
2. Bank deposits in the name of or
manifestly excessive expenditures
incurred by the public official, his
spouse or any of their dependents
including but not limited to activities in
any club or association or any
ostentatious display of wealth including
frequent travel abroad of a non-official
character by any public official when
such activities entail expenses
evidently our of proportion to legitimate
income
Penalty
Acts
Penalty
Violation of Secs. 3
(Corrupt
Practices), 4
(Prohibition on
Private
Individuals), 5
(Prohibition on
certain relatives),
and 6 (Prohibition
on Members of
Congress)
1. Imprisonment for
not less than six years
and one month nor
more than fifteen
years
2. Perpetual
disqualification from
public office
3. Confiscation or
forfeiture in favor of
the Government of
any prohibited interest
and unexplained
wealth manifestly out
of proportion to his
salary and other lawful
income
Page 279 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Violation of Sec. 7
(Filing of SALN)
1. Fine of not less
than one thousand
pesos nor more than
five thousand pesos
2. Imprisonment not
exceeding one year
six months
3. Both such fine and
imprisonment, at the
discretion of the Court
CRIMINAL LAW
public officers charged with the duty of granting
licenses or permits or other concessions
[Mejorada v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. L51065-72 (1987)].
Prescription of Liability under R.A. No. 3019
Offenses under R.A. No. 3019 prescribe in 20
years.
Jaravata v. Sandiganbayan, 127 SCRA 363
(1984)
FACTS: Jaravata, as Assistant Principal of a
public high School, requested contributions
from 6 classroom teachers each to reimburse
the expenses he would incur for personally
doing the follow-up of their salary differentials.
Upon their receipt of the differentials, he
allegedly
requested
more
than
the
contributions they agreed on, and received an
excess of P194 over his actual expenses.
Jaravata was then accused of violating Sec.
3(b) of RA 3019, and was found guilty by the
Sandiganbayan.
HELD: The Court set aside the conviction,
stating that Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 refers to
a public officer whose official intervention is
required by law in a contract or transaction.
There is no law investing the petitioner with the
power to intervene in the payment of the salary
differentials of the complainants. Petitioner
merely did the follow-ups to expedite the
payment of the salary differentials. Thus, he
cannot be said to have violated the law.
DOCTRINE: Sec. 3(b) of R.A. No. 3019 refers
to a public officer whose official intervention is
required by law in a contract or transaction. If
there is no law investing an accused with the
power to intervene, they cannot be charged
under said provision.
The last sentence of paragraph (e) is intended
to make clear the inclusion of officers and
employees of offices or government
corporations which, under the ordinary concept
of “public officers” may not come within the
term. It is a strained construction of the
provision to read it as applying exclusively to
Page 280 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
IV. ANTI-HAZING ACT OF
2018 [R.A. 8049, AS
AMENDED BY R.A. 11053]
Hazing
Any act that results in physical or psychological
suffering, harm, or injury inflicted on a recruit,
neophyte, applicant, or member as part of an
initiation rite or practice made as a prerequisite
for admission or a requirement for continuing
membership in a fraternity, sorority, or
organization including, but not limited to
paddling, whipping, beating, branding, forced
calisthenics, exposure to the weather, forced
consumption of any food, liquor, beverage,
drug or other substance, or any other brutal
treatment or forced physical activity which is
likely to adversely affect the physical and
psychological health of such recruit, neophyte,
applicant, or member.
This shall also include any activity, intentionally
made or otherwise, by one person alone or
acting with others, that tends to humiliate or
embarrass, degrade, abuse, or endanger, by
requiring a recruit, neophyte, applicant, or
member to do menial, silly, or foolish tasks
[Sec. 2(a), R.A. No. 8049 as amended by R.A.
No. 11053].
Prohibition on Hazing.
1. All forms of hazing shall be prohibited
in
fraternities,
sororities,
and
organizations in schools, including
citizens' military training and citizens'
army training.
2. This prohibition shall likewise apply to
all other fraternities, sororities, and
organizations that are not schoolbased, such as community-based and
other similar fraternities, sororities and
organizations:
Exemptions for Uniformed Personnel and
Uniformed Learning Institutions
Physical, mental, and practices to determine
and enhance the physical, mental, and
psychological fitness of prospective regular
members of the AFP and the PNP as approved
by the Secretary of National Defense and
National
Police
Commission,
duly
recommended by the Chief of Staff of the AFP
CRIMINAL LAW
and Director General of the PNP, shall not be
considered as hazing purposes of this Act:
The exemption provided herein shall likewise
apply to similar procedures and practices
approved by the respective heads of other
uniformed learning institutions as to their
prospective members, nor shall this provision
apply to any customary athletic events or other
similar contests or competitions or any activity
or conduct that furthers a legal and legitimate
objective, subject to prior submission of a
medical clearance or certificate.
In no case shall hazing be made a requirement
for employment in any business or corporation"
[Sec. 3, R.A. No. 8049 as amended by R.A. No.
11053].
Dandy Dungo v. People, G.R. No. 209464, 1
July 2015
FACTS: Marlon Villanueva died of hazing on
January 14, 2006. RTC indicted Dungo and
Sibal guilty of the crime of violating Section 4 of
the Anti-Hazing Law and sentenced them to
suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Petitioners contended that their right to be
informed of the nature of the accusation has
been violated because they were charged with
assault and use of personal violence, however,
the RTC and CA instead found them guilty of
violating RA 8049 for “inducing the victim to be
present” during the initiation rites. While the
evidence proved that they were guilty of hazing
by inducement this does not necessarily
include the criminal charge of hazing by actual
participation. Thus, they cannot be convicted of
a crime not stated or necessarily included in the
information.
HELD: The Court argued that Dungo and Sibal
were charged in the amended information with
the proper offense and convicted for such.
Their involvement in the hazing of Villanueva is
not merely based on prima facie evidence but
was also established by circumstantial
evidence and an unbroken chain of events.
People v. Ltsg. Dominador Bayabos, G.R.
No. 171222, 18 February 2015
FACTS: Fernando C. Balidoy, Jr. was admitted
as probationary midshipman at the PMMA, and
was required to complete the mandatory
“Indoctrination and Orientation Period,” from
May 2 – June 1, 2001. Balidoy died on May 3,
2001 supposedly due to hazing. PMMA school
authorities (Bayabos, et. al.) were charged
Page 281 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
before the Sandiganbayan as accomplices to
hazing. Bayabos, et. al. filed a Motion to
Quash, arguing that the Information did not
contain all essential elements of the offense,
particularly that the hazing was done as
prerequisite for admission into the PMMA.
Before their arraignment, Sandiganbayan
quashed the Information on the basis of failure
to include the material facts required by the
Anti-Hazing Law, inter alia; hence, this petition.
HELD: The Court affirmed the quashal. This is
because the Information was incomplete, as it
does not allege that the acts were
prerequisite for admission or entry into the
organization, which is the 2nd essential
element of the crime of hazing. It merely
states that psychological pain and physical
injuries were inflicted on the victim, the 1st
element. As such the accused cannot be
prosecuted from that Information either as
principal or as accomplice for the crime of
hazing. Thus, the Information must be
quashed, as the ultimate facts it presents do
not constitute the crime of accomplice to
hazing.
Page 282 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
V. ANTI-MONEY
LAUNDERING ACT OF 2001
[R.A. 9160]
4.
5.
Money Laundering Offense
Money laundering is a crime whereby the
proceeds of an unlawful activity as herein
defined are transacted, thereby making them
appear to have originated from legitimate
sources. It is committed by the following:
1. Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property represents,
involves, or relates to, the proceeds of
any unlawful activity, transacts or
attempts to transact said monetary
instrument or property.
2. Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property involves the
proceeds of any unlawful activity,
performs or fails to perform any act as
a result of which he facilitates the
offense of money laundering referred to
in paragraph (a) above.
3. Any person knowing that any monetary
instrument or property is required
under this Act to be disclosed and filed
with the Anti-Money Laundering
Council (AMLC), fails to do so [Section
4, R.A. No. 9160, as amended by R.A.
No. 9194]
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Predicate Crimes / “Unlawful
Activities”
To be considered money laundering, the
transaction should involve proceeds from any
of the predicate crimes or “unlawful activities”:
‘Unlawful activity’ refers to any act or
omission or series or combination thereof
involving or having direct relation to the
following:
1. Kidnapping for ransom under Article
267 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known
as the Revised Penal Code, as
amended;
2. Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
15 and 16 of Republic Act No. 9165,
otherwise
known
as
the
Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act
of 2002;
3. Section 3 paragraphs B, C, E, G, H and
I of Republic Act No. 3019, as
15.
16.
17.
18.
CRIMINAL LAW
amended, otherwise known as the AntiGraft and Corrupt Practices Act;
Plunder under Republic Act No. 7080,
as amended;
Robbery and extortion under Articles
294, 295, 296, 299, 300, 301 and 302
of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended;
Jueteng and Masiao punished as illegal
gambling under Presidential Decree
No. 1602;
Piracy on the high seas under the
Revised Penal Code, as amended and
Presidential Decree No. 532;
Qualified theft under Article 310 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended;
Swindling under Article 315 and Other
Forms of Swindling under Article 316 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended;
Smuggling under Republic Act Nos.
455 and 1937;
Violations of Republic Act No. 8792,
otherwise known as the Electronic
Commerce Act of 2000;
Hijacking and other violations under
Republic Act No. 6235; destructive
arson and murder, as defined under the
Revised Penal Code, as amended;
Terrorism and conspiracy to commit
terrorism as defined and penalized
under Sections 3 and 4 of Republic Act
No. 9372;
Financing of terrorism under Section 4
and offenses punishable under
Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Republic Act
No. 10168, otherwise known as the
Terrorism Financing Prevention and
Suppression Act of 2012:
Bribery under Articles 210, 211 and
211-A of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, and Corruption of Public
Officers under Article 212 of the
Revised Penal Code, as amended;
Frauds and Illegal Exactions and
Transactions under Articles 213, 214,
215 and 216 of the Revised Penal
Code, as amended;
Malversation of Public Funds and
Property under Articles 217 and 222 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended;
Forgeries and Counterfeiting under
Articles 163, 166, 167, 168, 169 and
176 of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended;
Page 283 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
19. Violations of Sections 4 to 6 of Republic
Act No. 9208, otherwise known as the
Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003;
20. Violations of Sections 78 to 79 of
Chapter IV, of Presidential Decree No.
705, otherwise known as the Revised
Forestry Code of the Philippines, as
amended;
21. Violations of Sections 86 to 106 of
Chapter VI, of Republic Act No. 8550,
otherwise known as the Philippine
Fisheries Code of 1998;
22. Violations of Sections 101 to 107, and
110 of Republic Act No. 7942,
otherwise known as the Philippine
Mining Act of 1995;
23. Violations of Section 27(c), (e), (f), (g)
and (i), of Republic Act No. 9147,
otherwise known as the Wildlife
Resources
Conservation
and
Protection Act;
24. Violation of Section 7(b) of Republic
Act No. 9072, otherwise known as the
National Caves and Cave Resources
Management Protection Act;
25. Violation of Republic Act No. 6539,
otherwise known as the AntiCarnapping Act of 2002, as amended;
26. Violations of Sections 1, 3 and 5 of
Presidential Decree No. 1866, as
amended, otherwise known as the
decree Codifying the Laws on
Illegal/Unlawful
Possession,
Manufacture, Dealing In, Acquisition or
Disposition of Firearms, Ammunition or
Explosives;
27. Violation of Presidential Decree No.
1612, otherwise known as the AntiFencing Law;
28. Violation of Section 6 of Republic Act
No. 8042, otherwise known as the
Migrant Workers and Overseas
Filipinos Act of 1995, as amended by
Republic Act No. 10022;
29. Violation of Republic Act No. 8293,
otherwise known as the Intellectual
Property Code of the Philippines;
30. Violation of Section 4 of Republic Act
No. 9995, otherwise known as the AntiPhoto and Video Voyeurism Act of
2009;
31. Violation of Section 4 of Republic Act
No. 9775, otherwise known as the AntiChild Pornography Act of 2009;
32. Violations of Sections 5, 7, 8, 9, 10(c),
(d) and (e), 11, 12 and 14 of Republic
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
CRIMINAL LAW
Act No. 7610, otherwise known as the
Special Protection of Children Against
Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination;
Fraudulent practices and other
violations under Republic Act No. 8799,
otherwise known as the Securities
Regulation Code of 2000; and
Felonies or offenses of a similar nature
that are punishable under the penal
laws of other countries.
Fraudulent
practice
and
other
violations under Republic Act No. 8799,
otherwise known as "The Securities
Regulation Code of 2000;
Violation of Section 9 (a)(3) of Republic
Act No. 10697, otherwise known as the
"Strategic Trade Management Act", in
relation to the proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction and its financing
pursuant to United Nations Security
Council Resolution Numbers 1718 of
2006 and 2231 of 2015";
Violation of Section 254 of Chapter II,
Title X of the National Internal Revenue
Code of 1997, as amended, where the
deficiency basic tax due in the final
assessment is in excess of Twenty-five
million pesos (P25,000,000.00) per
taxable year, for each tax type covered
and there has been a finding of
probable cause by the competent
authority: Provided, further, That there
must be a finding of fraud, willful
misrepresenting or malicious intent on
the part of the taxpayer: Provided,
finally, That in no case shall the AMLC
institute forfeiture proceedings to
recover
monetary
instruments,
property or proceeds representing,
involving, or relating to a tax crime, if
the same has already been recovered
or collected by the Bureau of Internal
Revenue (BIR) in a separate
proceeding and
Felonies and offenses of a similar
nature that are punishable under the
penal laws of other countries. [Section
3(i), R.A. No. 9160, as amended by
R.A. No. 9194, R.A. No. 10365, R.A.
No. 11521]
Jurisdiction
of
Laundering Cases
Money
The regional trial courts shall have jurisdiction
to try all cases on money laundering. Those
Page 284 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
committed by public officers and private
persons who are in conspiracy with such public
officers shall be under the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan.
Covered Persons [Sec 3 (a), R.A.
9160]
Covered persons are required to report all
covered and suspicious transactions with the
Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) within
5 days of occurrence thereof.
Covered persons include:
1. banks, non-banks, quasi-banks, trust
entities, foreign exchange dealers,
pawnshops,
money
changers,
remittance and transfer companies and
other similar entities and all other
persons and their subsidiaries and
affiliates supervised or regulated by the
Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP);
2. insurance
companies,
pre-need
companies and all other persons
supervised or regulated by the
Insurance Commission (IC);
a. securities dealers, brokers,
salesmen, investment houses
and other similar persons
managing
securities
or
rendering
services
as
investment agent, advisor, or
consultant,
b. mutual
funds,
close-end
investment
companies,
common trust funds, and other
similar persons, and
c. other entities administering or
otherwise dealing in currency,
commodities
or
financial
derivatives based thereon,
valuable
objects,
cash
substitutes and other similar
monetary
instruments
or
property
supervised
or
regulated by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC);
3. jewelry dealers in precious metals,
who, as a business, trade in precious
metals, for transactions in excess of
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00);
4. jewelry dealers in precious stones,
who, as a business, trade in precious
stones, for transactions in excess of
One million pesos (P1,000,000.00);
CRIMINAL LAW
5. company service providers which, as a
business, provide any of the following
services to third parties:
a. acting as a formation agent of
juridical persons;
b. acting as (or arranging for
another person to act as) a
director or corporate secretary
of a company, a partner of a
partnership, or a similar
position in relation to other
juridical persons;
c. providing a registered office,
business
address
or
accommodation,
correspondence
or
administrative address for a
company, a partnership or any
other
legal
person
or
arrangement; and
d. acting as (or arranging for
another person to act as) a
nominee
shareholder
for
another person; and
6. persons who provide any of the
following services:
a. managing of client money,
securities or other assets;
b. management of bank, savings
or securities accounts;
c. organization of contributions
for the creation, operation or
management of companies;
and
d. creation,
operation
or
management
of
juridical
persons or arrangements, and
buying and selling business
entities.
7. casinos, including internet and shipbased casinos, with respect to their
casino cash transactions related to
their gaming operations. [casinos were
added by R.A. No. 10927]
8. Real estate developers and brokers
[added by R.A. No. 11521]
9. Offshore gaming operation, as well as
their service providers, supervised,
accredited or regulated by the
Philippine Amusement and Gaming
Corporation (PAGCOR) or any
government agency; [POGO added by
R.A. No. 11521]
Note: the term 'covered persons' shall exclude
lawyers
and
accountants
acting
as
Page 285 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
independent legal professionals in relation to
information concerning their clients or where
disclosure of information would compromise
client confidences or the attorney-client
relationship: Provided, That these lawyers and
accountants are authorized to practice in the
Philippines and shall continue to be subject to
the provisions of their respective codes of
conduct and/or professional responsibility or
any of its amendments.
Covered Transaction [Sec 3 (b), R.A. 9160]
Covered
transactions are
transactions
involving covered persons, to be reported to
the AMLC.
Threshold amount for covered transactions:
• General Rule: P500,000 within one (1)
banking day
• For casinos: P5,000,000 or its
equivalent in any other currency.
• For
real
estate
transactions:
P7,500,000 or its equivalent in any
other currency.
Suspicious transactions
Suspicious transactions are transactions
involving
covered
persons
where
circumstances under Section 3 (b-1) are
present. They should also be reported to the
AMLC, regardless of the amount involved.
Circumstances under Section 3 (b-1):
1. There is no underlying legal or trade
obligation, purpose or economic
justification;
2. The client is not properly identified;
3. The
amount
involved
is
not
commensurate with the business or
financial capacity of the client;
4. Taking into account all known
circumstances, it may be perceived
that the client's transaction is
structured in order to avoid being the
subject of reporting requirements
under the Act
5. Any circumstance relating to the
transaction which is observed to
deviate from the profile of the client
and/or the client's past transactions
with the covered person;
6. The transaction is in any way related to
an unlawful activity or offense under
this Act that is about to be, is being or
has been committed; or
CRIMINAL LAW
7. Any transaction that is similar or
analogous to any of the foregoing.
Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC)
AMLC is the government agency tasked to
implement the AMLC. It is composed of the
Governor of the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas as
Chairman, the Commissioner of the Insurance
Commission and the Chairman of the
Securities and Exchange Commission, as
members.
Freeze Order
AMLC previously had a unilateral authority to
freeze assets. However, pursuant to
amendments, this authority was removed from
AMLC by amendments. Under Section 10, as
amended, the Court of Appeals may issue a
freeze order upon a verified ex parte
petition by the AMLC and after determination
that probable cause exists that any monetary
instrument or property is in any way related to
an unlawful activity as defined in Section 3(i).
Freeze Order Effective Immediately
The freeze order shall be effective immediately,
for a period of twenty (20) days. Within the
twenty (20) day period, the Court of Appeals
shall conduct a summary hearing, with notice
to the parties, to determine whether or not to
modify or lift the freeze order, or extend its
effectivity.
Note: The total period of the freeze order
issued by the Court of Appeals under this
provision shall not exceed six (6) months.
If there is no case filed against a person whose
account has been frozen within the period
determined by the Court of Appeals, not
exceeding six (6) months, the freeze order shall
be deemed ipso facto lifted.
Authority to Inquire into Bank Deposits
AMLC may inquire into or examine any
particular deposit or investment, including
related accounts, with any banking institution or
non-bank financial institution upon order of any
competent court based on an ex parte
application in cases of violations of this Act,
when it has been established that there is
probable cause that the deposits or
investments, including related accounts
involved, are related to an unlawful activity as
defined in Section 3(i) hereof or a money
Page 286 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
laundering offense under Section 4 hereof
[Sec. 11, AMLA].
CRIMINAL LAW
million Philippine
pesos
(Php3,000,000.0
0)
However, no court order shall be required in
cases involving:
1. kidnapping for ransom
2. violations of Dangerous Drugs Act,
3. hijacking and other violations under
R.A. No. 6235
4. destructive arson and murder, as
defined under RPC
5. Similar felonies or offenses punishable
under penal laws of other countries
6. Terrorism and conspiracy to commit
terrorism under R.A. No. 9372
Person
convicted
under the
last
paragrap
h of
Section 4
of this
Act
Note: AMLC can also inquire into ‘related
accounts’.
‘Related accounts’ refer to accounts, the
funds and sources of which originated from
and/or are materially linked to the monetary
instrument(s) or property(ies) subject of the
freeze order(s).
Penalties
for Failure
to Keep
Records
Imprisonment from six (6)
months to one (1) year or a
fine of not less than One
hundred thousand Philippine
pesos (Php100,000.00) but
not more than Five hundred
thousand Philippine pesos
(Php500,000.00), or both,
shall be imposed on a person
convicted under Section 9(b)
of this Act.
Penalties
for
Malicious
Reporting
[Amended
by R.A. No.
9194]
Six (6) months to four (4)
years imprisonment and a
fine of not less than One
hundred thousand Philippine
pesos (Php 100,000.00) but
not more than Five hundred
thousand Philippine pesos
(Php 500,000.00), at the
discretion of the court:
Provided, That the offender is
not entitled to avail the
benefits of the Probation
Law.
Penalties
Penalties
for the
Crime of
Money
Laundering
[Amended
by R.A. No.
10365]
Person
convicted
under
Section
4(a), (b),
(c) and
(d) of this
Act
Person
convicted
under
Section
4(e) and
(f) of this
Act
Imprisonment
ranging from
seven (7) to
fourteen (14)
years and a fine
of not less than
Three million
Philippine pesos
(Php3,000,000.0
0) but not more
than twice the
value of the
monetary
instrument or
property involved
in the offense
Imprisonment
from four (4) to
seven (7) years
and a fine of not
less than One
million five
hundred
thousand
Philippine pesos
(Php1,500,000.0
0) but not more
than Three
Imprisonment
from six (6)
months to four (4)
years or a fine of
not less than One
hundred
thousand
Philippine pesos
(Php100,000.00)
but not more than
Five hundred
thousand
Philippine pesos
(Php500,000.00),
or both
Any
person
who, with
malice, or
in bad
faith,
reports or
files a
completely
unwarranted or false
information
relative to
If the offender is a
corporation, association,
partnership or any juridical
person, the penalty shall be
imposed upon the
responsible officers, as the
case may be, who
participated in, or allowed by
Page 287 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
money
laundering
transaction
against
any person
their gross negligence, the
commission of the crime.
If the offender is a juridical
person, the court may
suspend or revoke its
license.
If the offender is an alien, he
shall, in addition to the
penalties herein prescribed,
be deported without further
proceedings after serving the
penalties herein prescribed.
If the offender is a public
official or employee, he shall,
in addition to the penalties
prescribed herein, suffer
perpetual or temporary
absolute disqualification from
office, as the case may be.
Any public official or
employee who is called upon
to testify and refuses to do
the same or purposely fails to
testify shall suffer the same
penalties prescribed herein.
Penalties
for Breach
of
Confidentiality
[Amended
by R.A. No.
9194]
Imprisonment ranging from
three (3) to eight (8) years
and a fine of not less than
Five hundred thousand
Philippine pesos (Php
500,000.00) but not more
than One million Philippine
pesos (Php 1,000,000.00)
convicted
for a
violation
under
Section
9(c)
In the case of a breach of
confidentiality that is
published or reported by
media, the responsible
reporter, writer, president,
publisher, manager and
editor-in-chief shall be liable
under this Act.
Penalties
for
covered
person, its
directors,
officers or
personnel
who
knowingly
participate
d in the
Imprisonment ranging from
four (4) to seven (7) years
and a fine corresponding to
not more than two hundred
percent (200%) of the value
of the monetary instrument or
property laundered.
commission of the
crime of
money
laundering
[Amended
by R.A. No.
10365]
Page 288 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
VI. ANTI-PHOTO AND
VIDEO VOYEURISM ACT OF
2009 [SECS. 3 AND 4, R.A.
9995]
Definition of Terms [Sec. 3, R.A. 9995]
(a) "Broadcast" means to make public, by any
means, a visual image with the intent that it be
viewed by a person or persons.
(b) "Capture" with respect to an image, means
to videotape, photograph, film, record by any
means, or broadcast.
(c) "Female breast" means any portion of the
female breast.
(d) "Photo or video voyeurism" means the
act of taking photo or video coverage of a
person or group of persons performing sexual
act or any similar activity or of capturing an
image of the private area of a person or
persons without the latter's consent, under
circumstances in which such person/s
has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy,
or the act of selling, copying, reproducing,
broadcasting, sharing, showing or exhibiting
the photo or video coverage or recordings of
such sexual act or similar activity through
VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and similar
means or device without the written consent of
the person/s involved, notwithstanding that
consent to record or take photo or video
coverage of same was given by such persons.
(e) "Private area of a person" means the
naked or undergarment clad genitals, public
area, buttocks or female breast of an individual.
(f) "Under circumstances in which a person
has a reasonable expectation of privacy"
means believe that he/she could disrobe in
privacy, without being concerned that an image
or a private area of the person was being
captured; or circumstances in which a
reasonable person would believe that a private
area of the person would not be visible to the
public, regardless of whether that person is in
a public or private place.
Prohibited Acts [Sec. 4, R.A. 9995]
1. To take photo or video coverage of a
person or group of persons performing
sexual act or any similar activity or to
CRIMINAL LAW
capture an image of the private area of
a person/s such as the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public
area, buttocks or female breast without
the consent of the person/s involved
and under circumstances in which the
person/s has/have a reasonable
expectation of privacy;
2. To copy or reproduce, or to cause to
be copied or reproduced, such photo
or video or recording of sexual act or
any similar activity with or without
consideration;
3. To sell or distribute, or cause to be
sold or distributed, such photo or video
or recording of sexual act, whether it be
the original copy or reproduction
thereof; or
4. To publish or broadcast, or cause to
be published or broadcast, whether
in print or broadcast media, or show or
exhibit the photo or video coverage or
recordings of such sexual act or any
similar activity through VCD/DVD,
internet, cellular phones and other
similar means or device.
Note: The prohibition under paragraphs (b), (c)
and (d) shall apply notwithstanding that
consent to record or take photo or video
coverage of the same was given by such
person/s. Any person who violates this
provision shall be liable for photo or video
voyeurism as defined herein.
Anti-Photo and
Video Voyeurism
Act of 2009
Anti-Child
Pornography Act
of 2009
As to definition
the act of taking
photo or video
coverage of a
person or group of
persons
performing sexual
act or any similar
activity or of
capturing an image
of the private area of
a person or persons
without the latter's
consent, under
circumstances in
Page 289 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
any representation,
whether visual,
audio, or written
combination thereof,
by electronic,
mechanical, digital,
optical, magnetic or
any other means, of
child engaged or
involved in real or
simulated explicit
sexual activities.
[Sec. 3(b), RA 9775]
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
which such person/s
has/have a
reasonable
expectation of
privacy, or the act of
selling, copying,
reproducing,
broadcasting,
sharing, showing or
exhibiting the photo
or video coverage or
recordings of such
sexual act or similar
activity through
VCD/DVD, internet,
cellular phones and
similar means or
device without the
written consent of
the person/s
involved,
notwithstanding that
consent to record or
take photo or video
coverage of same
was given by such
person's. [Sec. 3 (d),
RA 9995]
internet, cellular
phones and other
similar means or
device. [Sec. 4 (d),
RA 9995]
Note: "Child" refers to a person below eighteen
(18) years of age or over, but is unable to fully
take care of himself/herself from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
because of a physical or mental disability or
condition. A child shall also refer to: (1) a
person regardless of age who is presented,
depicted or portrayed as a child as defined
herein; and (2) computer-generated, digitally or
manually crafted images or graphics of a
person who is represented or who is made to
appear to be a child as defined herein. [Sec.
3(a), RA 9775]
As to punishable act
To sell or
distribute, or cause
to be sold or
distributed, such
photo or video or
recording of sexual
act, whether it be the
original copy or
reproduction thereof;
[Sec. 4 (c), RA 9995]
To publish or
broadcast, or
cause to be
published or
broadcast, whether
in print or broadcast
media, or show or
exhibit the photo or
video coverage or
recordings of such
sexual act or any
similar activity
through VCD/DVD,
To possess any
form of child
pornography with
the intent to sell,
distribute, publish,
or broadcast:
Provided. That
possession of three
(3) or more articles
of child pornography
of the same form
shall be prima facie
evidence of the
intent to sell,
distribute, publish or
broadcast; [Sec. 4
(d), RA 9775]
Page 290 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
VII. ANTI-PLUNDER ACT
[SECS. 1, 2 AND 6, R.A.
7080, AS AMENDED BY R.A.
7659]
Definition of Terms [Sec. 1, R.A. 7080]
(a) “Public Officer” means any person holding
any public office in the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines by virtue of an
appointment, election or contract.
(b) “Government” includes the National
Government, and any of its subdivisions,
agencies or instrumentalities, including
government-owned or -controlled corporations
and their subsidiaries.
(c) “Person” includes any natural or juridical
person, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(d) “Ill-gotten wealth” means any asset,
property, business enterprise or material
possession of any person within the purview of
Section Two (2) hereof, acquired by him
directly or indirectly through dummies,
nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates by any combination or
series of the following means or similar
schemes:
1. Through misappropriation, conversion,
misuse, or malversation of public funds
or raids on the public treasury;
2. By receiving, directly or indirectly, any
commission, gift, share, percentage,
kickbacks or any other form of
pecuniary benefit from any person
and/or entity in connection with any
government contract or project or by
reason of the office or position of the
public officer concerned;
3. By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance
or disposition of assets belonging to the
National Government or any of its
subdivisions,
agencies
or
instrumentalities or government-owned
or -controlled corporations and their
subsidiaries;
4. By obtaining, receiving or accepting
directly or indirectly any shares of
stock, equity or any other form of
interest or participation including
promise of future employment in any
business enterprise or undertaking;
CRIMINAL LAW
5. By establishing agricultural, industrial
or commercial monopolies or other
combinations and/or implementation of
decrees and orders intended to benefit
particular persons or special interests;
or
6. By taking undue advantage of official
position,
authority,
relationship,
connection or influence to unjustly
enrich himself or themselves at the
expense and to the damage and
prejudice of the Filipino people and the
Republic of the Philippines.
Plunder; Penalties [Sec. 2, R.A. 7080, as
amended by R.A. 7659]
Any public officer who, by himself or in
connivance with members of his family,
relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business
associates, subordinates or other persons,
amasses, accumulates or acquires ill-gotten
wealth through a combination or series of overt
criminal acts as described in Section 1 (d)
hereof in the aggregate amount or total value
of at least Fifty million pesos (P50,000,000.00)
shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall
be punished by reclusion perpetua to death.
Any person who participated with the said
public officer in the commission of an offense
contributing to the crime of plunder shall
likewise be punished for such offense. In the
imposition of penalties, the degree of
participation and the attendance of mitigating
and extenuating circumstances, as provided by
the Revised Penal Code, shall be considered
by the court.
Forfeiture
The court shall declare any and all ill-gotten
wealth and their interests and other incomes
and assets including the properties and shares
of stocks derived from the deposit or
investment thereof forfeited in favor of the
State.
Prescription of Crimes [Sec. 6, R.A. 7080]
The crime punishable under this Act shall
prescribe in twenty (20) years. However, the
right of the State to recover properties
unlawfully acquired by public officers from them
or from their nominees or transferees shall not
be barred by prescription, laches, or estoppel.
Page 291 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
Plunder is a malum in se
Plunder is a malum in se which requires proof
of criminal intent. The application of mitigating
and extenuating circumstances in the RPC to
prosecutions under the Anti-Plunder Law
indicates quite clearly that mens rea is an
element of plunder since the degree of
responsibility of the offender is determined by
his criminal intent [Estrada v. Sandiganbayan].
Pattern of Overt or Criminal Acts
For purposes of establishing the crime of
plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each
and every criminal act done by the accused in
furtherance of the scheme or conspiracy to
amass, accumulate or acquire ill-gotten wealth,
it being sufficient to establish beyond
reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal
acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme
or conspiracy. [Sec. 4]
Main Plunderer should be Identified
The main plunderer should be identified.
Where the individuals charged were 10 public
officials, it was only proper to identify the main
plunderer or plunderers among the 10 accused
[Arroyo v. People, G.R. No. 220598 (2017)].
Page 292 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
VIII. ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF
2009 [SECS. 3 (A,B), 4 AND
5, R.A. 9745]
"Torture"
An act by which severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally
inflicted on a person for such purposes as
1. obtaining from him/her or a third person
information or a confession;
2. punishing him/her for an act he/she or
a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed;
3. or intimidating or coercing him/her or a
third person;
4. or for any reason based on
discrimination of any kind
when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at
the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a person in authority or agent
of a person in authority.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
It does not include pain or suffering arising only
from, inherent in or incidental to lawful
sanctions [Sec. 3(a), R.A. 9745].
g.
Note: The elements of torture would refer to the
severity or gravity of the pain or suffering, intent
to injure, and purposes, and State involvement,
(i.e., "by or at the instigation of or with the
consent or acquiescence of a person in
authority or agent of a person in authority.").
h.
i.
Other cruel, inhuman and degrading
treatment or punishment
Deliberate and aggravated treatment or
punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of
this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or
agent of a person in authority against a person
under his/her custody, which attains a level of
severity causing suffering, gross humiliation or
debasement to the latter. [Sec. 3 (b), R.A.
9745].
Acts of Torture [Sec. 4, R.A. 9745]
1. Physical torture is a form of treatment
or punishment inflicted by a person in
authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another in his/her
custody that causes severe pain,
exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of
one or more parts of the body, such as:
a. Systematic
beating,
headbanging,
punching,
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
p.
CRIMINAL LAW
kicking, striking with truncheon
or rifle butt or other similar
objects, and jumping on the
stomach;
Food deprivation or forcible
feeding with spoiled food,
animal or human excreta and
other stuff or substances not
normally eaten;
Electric shock;
Cigarette burning; burning by
electrically heated rods, hot oil,
acid; by the rubbing of pepper
or other chemical substances
on mucous membranes, or
acids or spices directly on the
wound(s);
The submersion of the head in
water or water polluted with
excrement, urine, vomit and/or
blood until the brink of
suffocation;
Being tied or forced to assume
fixed and stressful bodily
position;
Rape and sexual abuse,
including the insertion of
foreign objects into the sex
organ or rectum, or electrical
torture of the genitals;
Mutilation or amputation of the
essential parts of the body such
as the genitalia, ear, tongue,
etc.;
Dental torture or the forced
extraction of the teeth;
Pulling out of fingernails;
Harmful exposure to the
elements such as sunlight and
extreme cold;
The use of plastic bag and
other materials placed over the
head
to
the
point
of
asphyxiation;
The use of psychoactive drugs
to change the perception,
memory. alertness or will of a
person, such as:
The administration or drugs to
induce
confession
and/or
reduce mental competency; or
The use of drugs to induce
extreme pain or certain
symptoms of a disease; and
Other analogous acts of
physical torture; and
Page 293 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
2. "Mental/Psychological
Torture"
refers to acts committed by a person in
authority or agent of a person in
authority which are calculated to affect
or confuse the mind and/or undermine
a person's dignity and morale, such as:
a. Blindfolding;
b. Threatening a person(s) or
his/fher relative(s) with bodily
harm, execution or other
wrongful acts;
c. Confinement in solitary cells or
secret detention places;
d. Prolonged interrogation;
e. Preparing a prisoner for a
"show trial", public display or
public humiliation of a detainee
or prisoner;
f. Causing unscheduled transfer
of a person deprived of liberty
from one place to another,
creating the belief that he/she
shall be summarily executed;
g. Maltreating a member/s of a
person's family;
h. Causing the torture sessions to
be witnessed by the person's
family, relatives or any third
party;
i. Denial of sleep/rest;
j. Shame infliction such as
stripping the person naked,
parading him/her in public
places, shaving the victim's
head or putting marks on
his/her body against his/her
will;
k. Deliberately prohibiting the
victim to communicate with any
member of his/her family; and
l. Other analogous acts of
mental/psychological torture.
CRIMINAL LAW
The assessment of the level of severity shall
depend on all the circumstances of the case,
including the duration of the treatment or
punishment, its physical and mental effects
and, in some cases, the sex, religion, age and
state of health of the victim.
Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Treatment or Punishment [Sec. 5, R.A.
9745]
Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment refers to a deliberate and
aggravated treatment or punishment not
enumerated under Section 4 of this Act,
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a
person in authority against another person in
custody, which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation
or debasement to the latter.
Page 294 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
IX. ANTI-TRAFFICKING IN
PERSONS ACT OF 2003
[SECS. 3 TO 12, R.A. 9208,
as amended by R.A. No.
10364]
Definition of Terms [Sec. 3, RA 9208, as
amended by RA 10364]
(a) “Trafficking in Persons” refers to the
recruitment, obtaining, hiring, providing,
offering, transportation, transfer, maintaining,
harboring, or receipt of persons with or without
the victim’s consent or knowledge, within or
across national borders by means of threat, or
use of force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power or
of position, taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the person, or, the giving or
receiving of payments or benefits to achieve
the consent of a person having control over
another person for the purpose of exploitation
which includes at a minimum, the exploitation
or the prostitution of others or other forms of
sexual exploitation, forced labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the removal or sale of
organs.
The recruitment, transportation, transfer,
harboring, adoption or receipt of a child for the
purpose of exploitation or when the adoption is
induced by any form of consideration for
exploitative purposes shall also be considered
as ‘trafficking in persons’ even if it does not
involve any of the means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
(b) “Child” refers to a person below eighteen
(18) years of age or one who is over eighteen
(18) but is unable to fully take care of or protect
himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination because of a
physical or mental disability or condition.
(c) “Prostitution” refers to any act,
transaction, scheme or design involving the
use of a person by another, for sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct in exchange
for money, profit or any other consideration.
(d) “Forced Labor” refer to the extraction of
work or services from any person by means of
enticement, violence, intimidation or threat, use
CRIMINAL LAW
of force or coercion, including deprivation of
freedom, abuse of authority or moral
ascendancy, debt-bondage or deception.
(e) “Slavery” refers to the status or condition
of a person over whom any or all of the powers
attaching to the right of ownership are
exercised.
(f) “Sex Tourism” refers to a program
organized by travel and tourism-related
establishments and individuals which consists
of tourism packages or activities, utilizing and
offering escort and sexual services as
enticement for tourists. This includes sexual
services and practices offered during rest and
recreation periods for members of the military.
(g) “Sexual Exploitation”
refers to
participation by a person in prostitution,
pornography or the production of pornography,
in exchange for money, profit or any other
consideration or where the participation is
caused or facilitated by any means of
intimidation or threat, use of force, or other
forms of coercion, abduction, fraud, deception,
debt bondage, abuse of power or of position or
of legal process, taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the person, or giving or
receiving of payments or benefits to achieve
the consent of a person having control over
another person; or in sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct caused or facilitated by any
means as provided in this Act.
(h) “Debt Bondage” refers to the pledging by
the debtor of his/her personal services or labor
or those of a person under his/her control as
security or payment for a debt, when the length
and nature of services is not clearly defined or
when the value of the services as reasonably
assessed is not applied toward the liquidation
of the debt.
(i)
“Pornography”
refers
to
any
representation, through publication, exhibition,
cinematography, indecent shows, information
technology, or by whatever means, of a person
engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual
activities or any representation of the sexual
parts of a person for primarily sexual purposes.
Acts of Trafficking in Persons [Sec. 4, RA
9208, as amended by RA 10364]
It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
juridical, to commit any of the following acts:
Page 295 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
1. To recruit, obtain, hire, provide,
offer, transport, transfer, maintain,
harbor, or receive a person by any
means, including those done under the
pretext of domestic or overseas
employment
or
training
or
apprenticeship, for the purpose of
prostitution, pornography, or sexual
exploitation;
2. To introduce or match for money,
profit, or material, economic or other
consideration, any person or, as
provided for under Republic Act No.
6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign
national, for marriage for the purpose of
acquiring, buying, offering, selling or
trading him/her to engage in
prostitution,
pornography,
sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
3. To offer or contract marriage, real or
simulated, for the purpose of acquiring,
buying, offering, selling, or trading them
to engage in prostitution, pornography,
sexual exploitation, forced labor or
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage;
4. To undertake or organize tours and
travel plans consisting of tourism
packages or activities for the purpose
of utilizing and offering persons for
prostitution, pornography or sexual
exploitation;
5. To maintain or hire a person to
engage in prostitution or pornography;
6. To adopt persons by any form of
consideration
for
exploitative
purposes or to facilitate the same for
purposes of prostitution, pornography,
sexual exploitation, forced labor,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage;
7. To adopt or facilitate the adoption of
persons for the purpose of prostitution,
pornography,
sexual
exploitation,
forced labor, slavery, involuntary
servitude or debt bondage;
8. To recruit, hire, adopt, transport,
transfer, obtain, harbor, maintain,
provide, offer, receive or abduct a
person, by means of threat or use of
force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion,
or intimidation for the purpose of
removal or sale of organs of said
person;
CRIMINAL LAW
9. To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer,
harbor, maintain, offer, hire, provide,
receive or adopt a child to engage in
armed activities in the Philippines or
abroad;
10. To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor,
obtain, maintain, offer, hire, provide or
receive a person by means defined in
Section 3 for purposes of forced
labor, slavery, debt bondage and
involuntary servitude, including a
scheme, plan, or pattern intended to
cause the person either:
a. To believe that if the person did
not perform such labor or
services, he or she or another
person would suffer serious
harm or physical restraint; or
b. To abuse or threaten the use of
law or the legal processes.
11. To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain,
transfer, maintain, hire, offer, provide,
adopt or receive a child for purposes of
exploitation or trading them, including
but not limited to, the act of baring
and/or selling a child for any
consideration or for barter for
purposes of exploitation. Trafficking for
purposes of exploitation of children
shall include:
a. All forms of slavery or practices
similar to slavery, involuntary
servitude, debt bondage and
forced
labor,
including
recruitment of children for use
in armed conflict;
b. The use, procuring or offering
of a child for prostitution, for the
production of pornography, or
for
pornographic
performances;
c. The use, procuring or offering
of a child for the production and
trafficking of drugs; and
d. The use, procuring or offering
of a child for illegal activities or
work which, by its nature or the
circumstances in which it is
carried out, is likely to harm
their health, safety or morals.
12. To organize or direct other persons
to commit the offenses defined as acts
of trafficking under this Act.
Page 296 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Attempted Trafficking in Persons [Sec. 4-A,
RA 9208, as added by RA 10364]
When deemed as an attempt to commit
trafficking in persons: Where there are acts
to initiate the commission of a trafficking
offense but the offender failed to or did not
execute all the elements of the crime, by
accident or by reason of some cause other than
voluntary desistance.
Where the victim is a child, any of the following
acts shall also be deemed as attempted
trafficking in persons:
(a) Facilitating the travel of a child who travels
alone to a foreign country or territory
without valid reason therefor and without
the required clearance or permit from the
Department of Social Welfare and
Development, or a written permit or
justification from the child’s parent or legal
guardian;
(b) Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit
of consent or a written consent for
adoption;
(c) Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the
purpose of selling the child;
(d) Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling
the child; and
(e) Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody
thereof through any means from among
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare
centers, refugee or evacuation centers,
and low-income families, for the purpose of
selling the child.
Who are considered Accomplices: Whoever
knowingly aids, abets, cooperates in the
execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts defined in RA 9208 as
amended. [Sec. 4-B, RA 9208 as amended by
RA 10364]
Who are considered accessories: Whoever
takes part in the commission of the crime with
knowledge and has participated in committing
the same in the following manner (not as a
principal or accomplice)
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime;
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime or effects or instruments thereof, in
order to prevent its discovery;
3. By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime,
provided the accessory acts with abuse of
CRIMINAL LAW
his or her public functions or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime. [Sec.
4-C, RA 9208 as amended by RA 10364]
Acts that Promote Trafficking in Persons
[Sec. 5, RA 9208 as amended by RA 10364]
1. To knowingly lease or sublease, use or
allow to be used any house, building or
establishment for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
2. To produce, print and issue or
distribute unissued, tampered or fake
counseling certificates, registration
stickers,
overseas
employment
certificates or other certificates of any
government agency which issues
these certificates, decals and such
other markers as proof of compliance
with government regulatory and predeparture requirements for the purpose
of promoting trafficking in persons;
3. To advertise, publish, print, broadcast
or
distribute,
or
cause
the
advertisement, publication, printing,
broadcasting or distribution by any
means, including the use of information
technology and the internet, of any
brochure, flyer, or any propaganda
material that promotes trafficking in
persons;
4. To assist in the conduct of
misrepresentation
or
fraud
for
purposes of facilitating the acquisition
of clearances and necessary exit
documents from government agencies
that are mandated to provide predeparture registration and services for
departing persons for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
5. To facilitate, assist or help in the exit
and entry of persons from/to the
country at international and local
airports, territorial boundaries and
seaports who are in possession of
unissued, tampered or fraudulent travel
documents for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
6. To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the
passport, travel documents, or
personal documents or belongings of
trafficked persons in furtherance of
trafficking or to prevent them from
leaving the country or seeking redress
from the government or appropriate
agencies; and
Page 297 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
7. To knowingly benefit from, financial or
otherwise, or make use of, the labor or
services of a person held to a condition
of involuntary servitude, forced labor,
or slavery.
8. To tamper with, destroy, or cause the
destruction of evidence, or to influence
or attempt to influence witnesses, in an
investigation or prosecution of a case
under this Act;
9. To
destroy,
conceal,
remove,
confiscate or possess, or attempt to
destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or
possess, any actual or purported
passport or other travel, immigration or
working permit or document, or any
other actual or purported government
identification, of any person in order to
prevent or restrict, or attempt to prevent
or restrict, without lawful authority, the
person’s liberty to move or travel in
order to maintain the labor or services
of that person; or
10. To utilize his or her office to impede the
investigation, prosecution or execution
of lawful orders in a case under this
Act.
Qualified Trafficking in Persons [Sec. 6, RA
9208 as amended by RA 10364]
1. When the trafficked person is a child;
2. When the adoption is effected through
Republic Act No. 8043, otherwise
known as the "Inter-Country Adoption
Act of 1995" and said adoption is for the
purpose of prostitution, pornography,
sexual exploitation, forced labor,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage;
3. When the crime is committed by a
syndicate, or in large scale. Trafficking
is deemed committed by a syndicate if
carried out by a group of three (3) or
more
persons
conspiring
or
confederating with one another. It is
deemed committed in large scale if
committed against three (3) or more
persons, individually or as a group;
4. When the offender is a spouse, an
ascendant, parent, sibling, guardian or
a person who exercises authority over
the trafficked person or when the
offense is committed by a public officer
or employee;
5. When the trafficked person is recruited
to engage in prostitution with any
6.
7.
8.
9.
CRIMINAL LAW
member of the military or law
enforcement agencies;
When the offender is a member of the
military or law enforcement agencies;
When by reason or on occasion of the
act of trafficking in persons, the
offended party dies, becomes insane,
suffers mutilation or is afflicted with
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
or the Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS);
When the offender commits one or
more violations of Section 4 over a
period of sixty (60) or more days,
whether those days are continuous or
not; and
When the offender directs or through
another manages the trafficking victim
in carrying out the exploitative purpose
of trafficking.
Confidentiality [Sec. 7, RA 9208 as amended
by RA 10364]
Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges,
court personnel, social workers and medical
practitioners, as well as parties to the case,
shall protect the right to privacy of the trafficked
person.
When: At any stage of the investigation,
rescue, prosecution and trial of an offense
under RA 9208.
How:
1. Law enforcement officers, prosecutors
and judges to whom the complaint has
been
referred
may,
whenever
necessary to ensure a fair and impartial
proceeding;
2. Order a closed-door investigation,
prosecution or trial after considering all
circumstances for the best interest of
the parties;
3. The name and personal circumstances
of the trafficked person or any other
information tending to establish the
identity of the trafficked person and his
or her family shall not be disclosed to
the public.
4. Law enforcement officers, prosecutors,
judges, court personnel, social workers
and medical practitioners shall be
trained on the importance of
maintaining confidentiality as a means
to protect the right to privacy of victims
Page 298 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
and to encourage victims to file
complaints.
General Rule: It shall be unlawful for any
editor, publisher, and reporter or columnist
in case of printed materials, announcer or
producer in case of television and radio,
producer and director of a film in case of the
movie industry, or any person utilizing trimedia facilities or electronic information
technology to cause publicity of the name,
personal circumstances, or any information
tending to establish the identity of the trafficked
person.
Exception: When the trafficked person in a
written statement duly notarized knowingly,
voluntarily
and
willingly
waives said
confidentiality.
Prosecution of Cases [Section 8, RA 9208,
as amended by RA 10364]
1. WHO INITIATES INVESTIGATION:
Law enforcement agencies are
mandated to immediately initiate
investigation and counter-traffickingintelligence gathering upon receipt of
statements or affidavit from victims of
trafficking, migrant workers, or their
families who are in possession of
knowledge or information about
trafficking in persons cases.
2. WHO: Any person who has personal
knowledge of the commission of any
offense under this Act, the trafficked
person, the parents, spouse, siblings,
children or legal guardian may file a
complaint for trafficking.
3. WHERE: A criminal action arising from
violation of this Act shall be filed where
the offense was committed, or where
any of its elements occurred, or where
the trafficked person actually resides at
the time of the commission of the
offense: Provided, That the court where
the criminal action is first filed shall
acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of
other courts. [Sec. 9, RA 9208]
Can cases involving TIP be dismissed based
on affidavits of desistance executed by the
victims or their guardians? No. Public and
private prosecutors are directed to oppose and
manifest objections to motions for dismissal.
[Section 8(c), RA 9208 as amended by RA
10364]
CRIMINAL LAW
Penalties and Sanctions [Sec. 10, RA 9208,
as amended by RA 10364]
Any person
found guilty of
committing any
of the acts
enumerated in
Section 4
imprisonment of 20
years and a fine of not
less than
P1,000,000.00 but not
more than
P2,000,000.00
Any person guilty
of committing
any of the acts in
Section 4-A
imprisonment of 15
years and a fine of not
less than P500,000.00
but not more than
P1,000,000.00;
Any person guilty
of committing
any of the acts in
Section 4-B
imprisonment of 15
years and a fine of not
less than P500,000.00
but not more than
P1,000,000.00;
In every case, conviction shall cause and
carry the automatic revocation of the license
or registration of the recruitment agency
involved in trafficking. The license of a
recruitment agency which trafficked a child
shall be automatically revoked.
Any person guilty
of committing
any of the acts
enumerated in
Section 5
imprisonment of 15
years and a fine of not
less than P500,000.00
but not more than
P1,000,000.00
Any person guilty
of qualified
trafficking under
Section 6
life imprisonment and
a fine of not less
P2,000,000.00 but not
more than
P5,000,000.00
Any person who
violates Section
7
imprisonment of 6
years and a fine of not
less than P500,000.00
but not more than
P1,000,000.00
Note:
•
If the offender is a corporation,
partnership,
association,
club,
establishment or any juridical person
o the penalty shall be imposed
upon the owner, president,
partner, manager, and/or any
responsible
officer
who
participated in the commission
of the crime or who shall have
Page 299 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
knowingly permitted or failed to
prevent its commission;
o The registration with the
Securities
and
Exchange
Commission (SEC) and license
to operate of the erring agency,
corporation,
association,
religious group, tour or travel
agent, club or establishment, or
any place of entertainment
shall be cancelled and
revoked permanently. The
owner, president, partner or
manager thereof shall not be
allowed to operate similar
establishments in a different
name;
•
If the offender is a foreigner, he shall be
immediately deported after serving his
sentence and be barred permanently
from entering the country;
•
Any employee or official of government
agencies who shall issue or approve
the issuance of travel exit clearances,
passports, registration certificates,
counseling
certificates,
marriage
license, and other similar documents to
persons, whether juridical or natural,
recruitment agencies, establishments
or other individuals or groups, who fail
to observe the prescribed procedures
and the requirement as provided for by
laws, rules and regulations, shall be
held administratively liable, without
prejudice to criminal liability under this
Act. The concerned government official
or employee shall, upon conviction, be
dismissed from the service and be
barred permanently to hold public
office. His/her retirement and other
benefits shall likewise be forfeited; and
•
Conviction by final judgment of the
adopter for any offense under this Act
shall result in the immediate rescission
of the decree of adoption.
Use of Trafficked Persons [Sec. 11, RA
9208]
CRIMINAL LAW
a fine of not less than P50,000 but not more
than P100,000.
The following acts shall be exempted thereto:
If offense
involves
sexual
intercourse or
lascivious
conduct with a
child
Reclusion temporal in its
medium
period
to
reclusion perpetua or 17
years to 40
years
imprisonment and a fine
of not less than P500,000
but not more than
P1,000,000.
If offense
involves
carnal
knowledge of,
or sexual
intercourse
with a male or
female
trafficking
victim with
force or
intimidation,
unconscious
victim, or
victim under
12 years old
Fine of not less
P1,000,000 but not more
than P5,000,000 and
imprisonment
of reclusion perpetua or
40 years imprisonment
with no possibility of
parole.
Except: If the violator
knows the person that
provided prostitution
services is in fact a victim
of trafficking, the offender
shall be penalized under
Section 10 as a person
violating Section 4.
Prescriptive Period [Sec. 12, RA 9208 as
amended by RA 10364]
Trafficking cases under this Act shall prescribe
in ten (10) years.
If committed by syndicate or in large scale:
That trafficking cases committed by a syndicate
or in a large scale as defined under Section 6
shall prescribe in twenty (20) years.
Reckoning point: From the day on which the
trafficked person is delivered or released from
the conditions of bondage, or in the case of a
child victim, from the day the child reaches the
age of majority, and shall be interrupted by the
filing of the complaint or information and shall
commence to run again when the proceedings
terminate without the accused being convicted
or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any
reason not imputable to the accused.
Any person who buys or engages the
services of a trafficked person: Prision
Correccional in its maximum period to prision
mayor or 6 years to 12 years imprisonment and
Page 300 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
X. ANTI-VIOLENCE
AGAINST WOMEN AND
THEIR CHILDREN ACT OF
2004 [SECS. 3, 5 AND 26,
R.A. 9262]
Violence against women and their children
(VAWC)
Any act or a series of acts committed by any
person against a woman who is his wife, former
wife, or against a woman with whom the person
has or had a sexual or dating relationship, or
with whom he has a common child, or against
her child whether legitimate or illegitimate,
within or without the family abode, which result
in or is likely to result in physical, sexual,
psychological harm or suffering, or economic
abuse including threats of such acts, battery,
assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary
deprivation of liberty. [Sec. 3(a), RA 9262]
Battery
An act of inflicting physical harm upon the
woman or her child resulting to the physical and
psychological or emotional distress. [Sec. 3(b),
RA 9262]
VIOLENCE INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED
TO:
(1) Physical Violence: Acts that include bodily
or physical harm;
(2) Sexual violence: An act which is sexual in
nature, committed against a woman or her
child.
Sexual violence includes, but is not limited to:
1. rape, sexual harassment, acts of
lasciviousness, treating a woman or
her child as a sex object, making
demeaning and sexually suggestive
remarks, physically attacking the
sexual parts of the victim's body,
forcing her/him to watch obscene
publications and indecent shows or
forcing the woman or her child to do
indecent acts and/or make films
thereof, forcing the wife and
mistress/lover to live in the conjugal
home or sleep together in the same
room with the abuser;
CRIMINAL LAW
2. acts causing or attempting to cause the
victim to engage in any sexual activity
by force, threat of force, physical or
other harm or threat of physical or other
harm or coercion;
3. Prostituting the woman or child.
(3) Psychological violence
Acts or omissions causing or likely to cause
mental or emotional suffering of the victim such
as but not limited to intimidation, harassment,
stalking, damage to property, public ridicule or
humiliation, repeated verbal abuse and mental
infidelity. It includes causing or allowing the
victim to witness the physical, sexual or
psychological abuse of a member of the family
to which the victim belongs, or to witness
pornography in any form or to witness abusive
injury to pets or to unlawful or unwanted
deprivation of the right to custody and/or
visitation of common children.
(4) Economic abuse
Acts that make or attempt to make a woman
financially dependent which includes, but is not
limited to the following:
1. withdrawal of financial support or
preventing the victim from engaging in
any legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity, except in cases
wherein the other spouse/partner
objects on valid, serious and moral
grounds as defined in Article 73 of the
Family Code;
2. deprivation or threat of deprivation of
financial resources and the right to the
use and enjoyment of the conjugal,
community or property owned in
common;
3. destroying household property;
4. controlling the victims' own money or
properties or solely controlling the
conjugal money or properties.
Children
Those below eighteen (18) years of age or
older but are incapable of taking care of
themselves as defined under Republic Act No.
7610. As used in this Act, it includes the
biological children of the victim and other
children under her care. [Sec. 3(h), RA 9262]
ACTS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
AND THEIR CHILDREN
1. Causing physical harm to the woman
or her child;
Page 301 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
2. Threatening to cause the woman or
her child physical harm;
3. Attempting to cause the woman or her
child physical harm;
4. Placing the woman or her child in fear
of imminent physical harm;
5. Attempting to compel or compelling
the woman or her child to engage in
conduct which the woman or her child
has the right to desist from or desist
from conduct which the woman or her
child has the right to engage in, or
attempting to restrict or restricting the
woman's or her child's freedom of
movement or conduct by force or threat
of force, physical or other harm or
threat of physical or other harm, or
intimidation directed against the
woman or child.
Acts Committed With The Purpose
Or Effect Of Controlling Or
Restricting The Woman's Or Her
Child's Movement Or Conduct
This shall include, but not limited to:
a. Threatening to deprive or
actually depriving the woman
or her child of custody to
her/his family;
b. Depriving or threatening to
deprive the woman or her
children of financial support
legally due her or her family, or
deliberately
providing
the
woman's children insufficient
financial support;
c. Depriving or threatening to
deprive the woman or her child
of a legal right;
d. Preventing the woman in
engaging in any legitimate
profession,
occupation,
business
or
activity
or
controlling the victim's own
money or properties, or solely
controlling the conjugal or
common money, or properties;
6. Inflicting or threatening to inflict
physical harm on oneself for the
purpose of controlling her actions or
decisions;
7. Causing or attempting to cause the
woman or her child to engage in any
sexual activity which does not
CRIMINAL LAW
constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through
intimidation directed against the
woman or her child or her/his
immediate family;
8. Engaging in purposeful, knowing, or
reckless conduct, personally or through
another, that alarms or causes
substantial emotional or psychological
distress to the woman or her child. This
shall include, but not be limited to, the
following acts:
a. Stalking or following the
woman or her child in public or
private places;
b. Peering in the window or
lingering outside the residence
of the woman or her child;
c. Entering or remaining in the
dwelling or on the property of
the woman or her child against
her/his will;
d. Destroying the property and
personal
belongings
or
inflicting harm to animals or
pets of the woman or her child;
and
e. Engaging in any form of
harassment or violence.
9. Causing mental or emotional
anguish,
public
ridicule
or
humiliation to the woman or her child,
including, but not limited to, repeated
verbal and emotional abuse, and denial
of financial support or custody of minor
children of access to the woman's
child/children. [Sec. 5, RA 9262]
The actus reus of the offense under Section 5
(i) is the willful denial of financial support, while
the mens rea is the intention to inflict mental
or emotional anguish upon the woman. Both
must thus exist and be proven in court before a
person may be convicted of violating Section 5
(i) of R.A. 9262.
In prosecutions under Section 5 (i), therefore,
"[p]sychological violence is the means
employed by the perpetrator" with denial of
financial support as the weapon of choice. In
other words, to be punishable by Section 5 (i)
of R.A. 9262, it must ultimately be proven that
the accused had the intent of inflicting mental
or emotional anguish upon the woman, thereby
inflicting psychological violence upon her, with
the willful denial of financial support being the
Page 302 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
means selected by the accused to accomplish
said purpose. [Acharon v. People, G.R. No.
224946 (November 2021)]
Note: The cutoff date of coverage for the 2022
Bar Examinations is June 30, 2021.
Stalking
An intentional act committed by a person who,
knowingly and without lawful justification
follows the woman or her child or places the
woman or her child under surveillance directly
or indirectly or a combination thereof. [Sec.
3(d), RA 9262]
Elements of the crime of violence against
women through harassment are:
1. The offender has or had a sexual or
dating relationship with the offended
woman;
2. The offender, by himself or through
another, commits an act or series of
acts of harassment against the woman;
and
3. The harassment alarms or causes
substantial emotional or psychological
distress to her [Ang v. CA, G.R. No.
182835 (2010)].
Dating relationship refers to a situation
wherein the parties live as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage or are
romantically involved over time and on a
continuing basis during the course of the
relationship. A casual acquaintance or ordinary
socialization between two individuals in a
business or social context is not a dating
relationship. [Sec. 3(e), RA 9262]
Sexual relations refers to a single sexual act
which may or may not result in the bearing of a
common child. [Sec. 3(f), RA 9262]
RPC
provisions
have
suppletory
application
Legal principles developed from the Penal
Code may be applied in a supplementary
capacity to crimes punished under special
laws, such as R.A. No. 9262, in which the
special law is silent on a particular matter [GoTan v. Tan, G.R. No. 168852 (2008)].
Thus, the principle of conspiracy may be
applied to R.A. No. 9262. For once conspiracy
CRIMINAL LAW
or action in concert to achieve a criminal design
is shown, the act of one is the act of all the
conspirators, and the precise extent or modality
of participation of each of them becomes
secondary, since all the conspirators are
principals [Go-Tan v. Tan, supra].
Parents-in-law of the petitioner wife may be
included in the petition for issuance of
protective order in accordance with RA No.
9262 [Go-Tan v. Tan, G.R. No. 168852 (2008)].
Battered Woman Syndrome
A scientifically defined pattern of psychological
and behavioral symptoms found in women
living in battering relationships as a result of
cumulative abuse. [Sec. 3(c), RA 9262]
Battered Woman Syndrome As A Defense
Victim-survivors who are found by the courts to
be suffering from battered woman syndrome do
not incur any criminal and civil liability
notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of selfdefense under the Revised Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the
woman who was suffering from battered
woman syndrome at the time of the
commission of the crime, the courts shall be
assisted by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists.
[Sec. 26, RA 9262]
Genosa Ruling is Abandoned by RA No.
9262
Under the Genosa ruling, BWS is valid as a
defense only when all the requisites of selfdefense are present.
Sec. 26 of RA No. 9262 abandons the
precedent set by Genosa case, which states
that “victim-survivors who are found by the
courts to be suffering from battered woman
syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil
liability notwithstanding the absence of any of
the elements for justifying circumstances of
self-defense under the RPC”.
A single act of sending an offensive picture
constitutes violence against women. Under
Sec. 3 of R.A. 9262, a single act of harassment
would be enough since the objective of the law
is to protect women and children. Punishing
only violence that is repeatedly committed
would license isolated ones. To illustrate, in
Rustan Ang v. CA [G.R. No. 182835, April 20,
2010], the naked woman on the picture, her
Page 303 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
legs spread open and bearing Irish’s head and
face, was clearly an obscene picture and, to
Irish, a revolting and offensive one. Surely, any
woman like Irish, who is not in the pornography
trade, would be scandalized and pained if she
sees herself in such a picture. What makes it
further terrifying is that, as Irish testified,
Rustan sent the picture with a threat to post it
on the internet for all to see. [Reyes]
VAWC may be committed by any person,
including a woman. The law states that it may
be committed “against a woman with whom the
person has or had a sexual or dating
relationship.” The use of the gender-neutral
word “person” signifies that the law also
encompasses lesbian relationships [Garcia v.
Drilon, G.R. No. 179267, June 25, (2013)]
[Reyes].
Trafficking
[RA 9208]
White Slave
Trade
[Art. 341]
As to purpose
Giving or receiving of
payments or benefits to
achieve the consent of a
person having control
over another person for
the purpose of
exploitation which
includes at a minimum,
the exploitation or the
prostitution of others or
other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced labor
or services, slavery,
servitude or the removal
or sale of organs. [Sec.
3(a)]
Note: The giving or
receiving of payments is
not limited for the
purpose of prostitution.
Trafficking
[R.A. 9208]
Trafficking is not mere
deprivation of the
Engaging in
the business or
profiting by
prostitution or
enlisting
another for the
purpose of
prostitution
Note: The
engagement in
the business or
profiting or
enlisting
another is
entirely for the
purpose of
prostitution
CRIMINAL LAW
offended party’s liberty
but involves:
the recruitment,
transportation, transfer
or harboring, or receipt
of persons with or
without the victim's
consent or knowledge,
within or across national
borders by means of
threat or use of force, or
other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud,
deception, abuse of
power or of position,
taking advantage of the
vulnerability of the
person, or,
the giving or receiving
of payments or benefits
to achieve the consent
of a person having
control over another
person for the purpose
of exploitation
Note: The acts
mentioned must
include, at a minimum,
the exploitation or the
prostitution of others or
other forms of sexual
exploitation, forced
labor or services,
slavery, servitude or the
removal or sale of
organs. [Sec. 3(a)]
Kidnapping
[Art. 267]
The essential
element of
Page 304 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
kidnapping is the
deprivation of the
offended party’s
liberty under any
of the four
instances
provided in Art.
267. [People v.
Suarez, G.R. No.
L-27352 (1969)]
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
XI. ANTI-WIRE TAPPING
ACT [SECS. 1 TO 4, R.A.
4200]
UNLAWFUL ACTS UNDER RA 4200 [Sec. 1,
RA 4200]
It shall be unlawful for any person, not being
authorized by all the parties to any private
communication or spoken word, to:
• tap any wire or cable, or
• by using any other device or
arrangement, to secretly overhear,
intercept,
or
record
such
communication or spoken word by
using a device commonly known as a
dictaphone or dictagraph or dictaphone
or walkie-talkie or tape recorder, or
however otherwise described:
OTHER UNLAWFUL ACTS [Sec. 1, RA 4200]
It shall also be unlawful for any person, be he
a participant or not in the act or acts penalized
in the next preceding sentence:
1. to knowingly possess any tape record,
wire record, disc record, or any other
such record, or copies thereof, of any
communication or spoken word
secured either before or after the
effective date of this Act in the manner
prohibited by this law; or
2. to replay the same for any other person
or persons; or
3. to communicate the contents thereof,
either verbally or in writing, or to furnish
transcriptions
thereof,
whether
complete or partial, to any other
person:
Provided, That the use of such record or any
copies thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal
investigation or trial of offenses mentioned in
section 3 hereof, shall not be covered by this
prohibition.
PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THE ACT
[Sec. 2, RA 4200]
Any person:
1. Who willfully or knowingly does or who
shall aid, permit, or cause to be done
any of the acts declared to be unlawful
in the preceding section or
2. Who violates the provisions of the
following section or of any order issued
thereunder, or aids, permits, or causes
such violation
CRIMINAL LAW
shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by
imprisonment for not less than six months
or more than six years and with the
accessory penalty of perpetual absolute
disqualification from public office if the
offender be a public official at the time of the
commission of the offense, and, if the offender
is an alien he shall be subject to deportation
proceedings.
LAWFUL IF AUTHORIZED BY A WRITTEN
ORDER OF THE COURT [Sec. 3, RA 4200]
Nothing in this Act shall render it unlawful or
punishable for any peace officer, who is
authorized by a written order of the Court,
to execute any of the acts in the two preceding
sections in cases involving the crimes of:
treason, espionage, provoking war and
disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in the
high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal
to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion,
sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting
to sedition, kidnapping as defined by the
Revised Penal Code, and violations of
Commonwealth Act No. 616, punishing
espionage and other offenses against national
security:
Requirements for the issuance of a written
order
Such written order shall only be issued or
granted upon written application and the
examination under oath or affirmation of the
applicant and the witnesses he may produce
and a showing:
1. that there are reasonable grounds to
believe that any of the crimes
enumerated has been committed or is
being committed or is about to be
committed:
Provided, however, That in cases
involving the offenses of rebellion,
conspiracy and proposal to commit
rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition,
conspiracy to commit sedition, and
inciting to sedition, such authority shall
be granted only upon prior proof that a
rebellion or acts of sedition, as the case
may be, have actually been or are
being committed;
2. that there are reasonable grounds to
believe that evidence will be obtained
essential to the conviction of any
person for, or to the solution of, or to
Page 305 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
the prevention of, any of such crimes;
and
3. that there are no other means readily
available for obtaining such evidence.
Specifications of the order when granted or
issued
The order granted or issued shall specify:
1. the identity of the person or persons
whose
communications,
conversations, discussions, or spoken
words are to be overheard, intercepted,
or recorded and, in the case of
telegraphic
or
telephonic
communications, the telegraph line or
the telephone number involved and its
location;
2. the identity of the peace officer
authorized to overhear, intercept, or
record
the
communications,
conversations, discussions, or spoken
words;
3. the offense or offenses committed or
sought to be prevented; and
4. the period of the authorization.
• The authorization shall be effective
for the period specified in the order
which shall not exceed sixty (60)
days from the date of issuance of
the order, unless extended or
renewed by the court upon being
satisfied that such extension or
renewal is in the public interest.
CRIMINAL LAW
Note: The envelope or package so deposited
shall not be opened, or the recordings
replayed, or used in evidence, or their contents
revealed, except upon order of the court, which
shall not be granted except upon motion, with
due notice and opportunity to be heard to the
person or persons whose conversation or
communications have been recorded.
NOT ADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE [Sec. 4, RA
4200]
Any communication or spoken word, or the
existence, contents, substance, purport, effect,
or meaning of the same or any part thereof, or
any information therein contained obtained or
secured by any person in violation of the
preceding sections of this Act shall not be
admissible in evidence in any judicial, quasijudicial, legislative or administrative hearing or
investigation.
Recordings made under court authorization
should be deposited with the court
All recordings made under court authorization
shall, within forty-eight hours after the
expiration of the period fixed in the order, be
deposited with the court in a sealed envelope
or sealed package, and shall be accompanied
by an affidavit of the peace officer granted such
authority stating:
• the number of recordings made,
• the dates and times covered by
each recording,
• the number of tapes, discs, or
records included in the deposit,
and
• certifying that no duplicates or
copies of the whole or any part
thereof have been made, or if
made, that all such duplicates or
copies are included in the envelope
or package deposited with the
court.
Page 306 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
XII. BOUNCING CHECKS
LAW [B.P. BLG. 22]
Elements [Sec. 1 (1), B.P. Blg. 22]
1. Making, drawing, and issuance of any
check to apply for account or for value
2. Knowledge of the maker, drawer, or
issuer that at the time of issue he does
not have sufficient funds in or credit
with the drawee bank for the payment
of the check in full upon its
presentment; and
3. Subsequent dishonor of the check by
the drawee bank for insufficiency of
funds or creditor dishonor for the same
reason had not the drawer, without any
valid cause, ordered the bank to stop
payment. [Campos v. People, G.R. No.
187401(2014)]
Penalty: Imprisonment of not less than 30 days
but not more than one (1) year or by a fine of
not less than but not more than double the
amount of the check which fine shall in no case
exceed P200,000, or both such fine and
imprisonment at the discretion of the court.
Elements [Sec. 1, par. 2, BP Blg. 22]
1. Making or drawing and issuing a check
having sufficient funds in or credit with
the drawee bank
2. Failure to keep sufficient funds or to
maintain a credit to cover the full
amount of the check if presented within
a period of ninety (90) days from the
date appearing thereon
3. Check is dishonored by the drawee
bank.
Penalty: Same as above.
Note: Where the check is drawn by a
corporation, company or entity, the person or
persons who actually signed the check in
behalf of such drawer shall be liable.
Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds
[Sec. 2, BP Blg. 22]
General Rule: The making, drawing and
issuance of a check payment of which is
refused by the drawee because of insufficient
funds in or credit with such bank, when
presented within ninety (90) days from the date
of the check, shall be prima facie evidence of
CRIMINAL LAW
knowledge of such insufficiency of funds or
credit.
Exception: Unless maker or drawer pays the
holder thereof the amount due thereon, or
makes arrangements for payment in full by the
drawee of such check within (5) banking days
after receiving notice that such check has not
been paid by the drawee.
Notice of dishonor is required under Section 2
of B.P. Blg. 22 which states that the maker or
drawer is required to pay the amount of the
check within five days from receipt of notice of
dishonor. Such notice is necessary for
prosecution and without proof of such notice,
knowledge of insufficiency of funds cannot be
presumed and no crime can be deemed to exist
[People v. Ojeada, G.R. Nos. 104238-58
(2004)]. Such notice is still necessary even for
closed accounts [Yu Oh v. CA, G.R. No.
125297 (2003)] except when the account was
closed even before issuance of the check
[Lopez v. People, G.R. No. 166810 (2008)].
Duty of Drawee; Rules of Evidence [Sec. 3,
BP Blg. 22]
It shall be the duty of the drawee of any check,
when refusing to pay the same to the holder
thereof upon presentment, to cause to be
written, printed, or stamped in plain language
thereon, or attached thereto, the reason for
drawee's dishonor or refusal to pay the same:
Provided, That where there are no sufficient
funds in or credit with such drawee bank, such
fact shall always be explicitly stated in the
notice of dishonor or refusal.
Prima facie evidence: In all prosecutions
under this Act, the introduction in evidence of
any unpaid and dishonored check, having the
drawee's refusal to pay stamped or written
thereon or attached thereto, with the reason
therefor as aforesaid, shall be prima facie
evidence of the making or issuance of said
check, and the due presentment to the drawee
for payment and the dishonor thereof, and that
the same was properly dishonored for the
reason written, stamped or attached by the
drawee on such dishonored check.
Page 307 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Distinguished from Estafa under Art. 315
2(d) [Nierras v. Dacuycuy, G.R. Nos. L5956876 (1990)]
B.P. Blg. 22
Deceit and damage are
not essential elements
Art. 315, par. 2
(d)
Deceit and
damage are
required
Mere issuance of a check No such
that is dishonored gives
presumption
rise to the presumption of
knowledge on the part of
the drawer that he issued
the same without
sufficient funds and hence
punishable
Drawer of a dishonored
check may be convicted
even if he had issued the
same for a pre-existing
obligation
Such
circumstance
negate criminal
liability
Crime against public
Crime against
interest as it does injury to property
the entire banking system
Mala prohibita
Mala in se
Page 308 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
XIII. COMPREHENSIVE
DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT
OF 2002 [R.A. 9165 AS
AMENDED BY R.A. 10640]
Note: R.A. 9165, as amended by R.A. 10640
has repealed Book Two, Title V (Crimes
Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs)
of the RPC.
DEFINITION OF TERMS:
(a) “Dangerous Drugs” (DD) – Those listed in
the schedules annexed to the:
1. 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic
Drugs, as amended by the 1972
Protocol; and
2. 1971
Single
Convention
on
Psychotropic
Substances
as
enumerated in the attached annex
which is an integral part of this Act.
[Sec. 3 (j), R.A. 9165]
(b) “Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals” (CP & EC) – Include those listed
in Tables I and II of the 1988 UN Convention
Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances as enumerated in the
attached annex, which is an integral part of this
Act. [Sec. 3 (h), R.A. 9165]
CRIMINAL LAW
(f) “Pusher” – Any person who sells, trades,
administers, dispenses, delivers or gives away
to another, on any terms whatsoever, or
distributes, dispatches in transit or transports
dangerous drugs or who acts as a broker in any
of such transactions, in violation of this Act.
[Sec. 3(ff), RA 9165]
ACTS PUNISHABLE UNDER R.A. 9165:
1.
Sale,
Trading,
Administration,
Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and
Transportation of Dangerous Drugs and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals [Sec. 5, R.A. 9165]
Punishable Acts [ST-A-DiDeDi-T]:
Acts
Sale of DD
and/or CP/EC
[PP]
There must be:
● Proof that the
transaction or sale took
place; and
● Presentation in court
of the corpus delicti or
illicit drug as evidence
[People v. Turemutsa,
G.R. No. 227497, (2019)]
Trading
Transactions involving
the illegal trafficking of
dangerous drugs and/or
controlled precursors and
essential chemicals using
electronic devices such
as, but not limited to, text
messages, email, mobile
or landlines, two-way
radios, internet, instant
messengers and chat
rooms or acting as a
broker in any of such
transactions whether for
money or any other
consideration in violation
of this Act. [Sec. 3 (jj), RA
9165]
Administrating
Any act of introducing
any dangerous drug
into the body of any
person, with or without
his/her knowledge, by
injection, inhalation,
ingestion or other means,
(c) “Drug Syndicate” – Any organized group
of two (2) or more persons forming or joining
together with the intention of committing any
offense prescribed under this Act. [Sec. 3 (o),
R.A. 9165]
(d) “Financier” – Any person who pays for,
raises or supplies money for, or underwrites
any of the illegal activities prescribed under this
Act. [Sec. 3 (q), R.A. 9165]
(e) “Protector or Coddler” – Any person who
knowingly and willfully consents to the unlawful
acts provided for in this Act and uses his/her
influence, power or position in shielding,
harboring, screening or facilitating the escape
of any person he/she knows, or has reasonable
grounds to believe on or suspects, has violated
the provisions of this Act in order to prevent the
arrest, prosecution and conviction of the
violator. [Sec. 3(ee), RA 9165]
Elements/Definition
Page 309 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
or of committing any act
of indispensable
assistance to a person in
administering a
dangerous drug to
himself/herself unless
administered by a duly
licensed practitioner for
purposes of medication.
[Sec. 3 (a), RA 9165]
CRIMINAL LAW
d. On any person who organizes,
manages or acts as a “Financier” of any
of the illegal activities. [Sec. 5 (6), RA
9165];
2. Possession of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 11,
R.A. 9165]
Elements: [PNF]
1. The accused is in Possession of an
item or object, which is Identified to be
prohibited or regulated drug
2. Such possession is Not authorized by
law; and
3. The accused Freely and consciously
possessed the drug [People v.
Trinidad, G.R. No. 199898 (2014) citing
People v. Quiamanlon, G.R. No.
191198 (2011)]
Dispensation
Any act of giving away,
selling or distributing
medicine or any
dangerous drug with or
without the use of
prescription. [Sec. 3 (m),
RA 9165]
Delivery
Any act of knowingly
passing a dangerous
drug to another,
personally or otherwise,
and by any means, with
or without consideration.
[Sec. 3 (k), RA 9165]
Constructive Possession
Exists when the drug is under the dominion and
control of the accused or when he has the right
to exercise dominion and control over the place
where it is found. [id.]
Distribution
Transportation
–
Note: Exclusive possession or control is not
necessary. [id.]
Note: In the Illegal sale of DD and/or CP/EC,
presentation of the buy-bust money is not
indispensable to the prosecution of a drug case
[People v. Martin, G.R. No. 193234 (2011)].
Maximum Penalty is Imposed [100 - UVF]:
a. If the illegal activities transpire within
100 meters from a school [Sec. 5 (3),
RA 9165];
b. Using minors or mentally incapacitated
individuals as runners, couriers and
messengers, or in any other capacity
directly connected to the dangerous
drugs and/or controlled precursors and
essential chemical trade [Sec. 5 (4), RA
9165];
c. If the Victim of the offense is a minor or
a mentally incapacitated individual, or
should a dangerous drug and/or a
controlled precursor and essential
chemical involved in any offense herein
provided be the proximate cause of
death of a victim thereof [Sec. 5 (5), RA
9165];
Presumption of Possession
When prohibited and regulated drugs are found
in a house or other building belonging to and
occupied by a particular person, the
presumption arises that such person is in
possession of such drugs in violation of law,
and the fact of finding the same is sufficient to
convict [People v. Torres, G.R. No. 170837
(2006)]
Possession is Absorbed in the Sale of DD
Possession of prohibited or dangerous drugs is
absorbed in the sale thereof [People v. Posada,
G.R. No. 196052 (2015)].
3. Use of Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 15, R.A.
9165]
Committed by a person apprehended or
arrested, who is found to be positive for use of
any dangerous drug, after a confirmatory test
[Sec. 15, RA 9165]
Note: Section 15 shall not be applicable where
the person tested is also found to have in
his/her possession such quantity of any
dangerous drug provided for under Section 11
Page 310 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
of this Act (Possession of Dangerous Drugs),
in which case the provisions stated therein
shall apply [id.]
Confirmatory Test
An analytical test using a device, tool or
equipment with a different chemical or physical
principle that is more specific which will validate
and confirm the result of the screening test.
[Sec. 3 (f), RA 9165]
Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances in
the Commission of a Crime by an Offender
Under the Influence of Dangerous Drugs
Notwithstanding the provisions of any law to
the contrary, a positive finding for the use of
dangerous drugs shall be a qualifying
aggravating circumstance in the commission of
a crime by an offender, and the application of
the penalty provided for in the Revised Penal
Code shall be applicable [Sec. 25, RA 9165]
OTHER PUNISHABLE ACTS:
1. Importation of Dangerous Drugs
and/or Controlled Precursors and
Essential Chemicals [Sec. 4, R.A.
9165]
2. Maintenance of a Den, Dive, or
Resort [Sec. 6, R.A. 9165]
Den, Dive, or Resort
A place where any dangerous drug
and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical is administered,
delivered, stored for illegal purposes,
distributed, sold, or used in any form.
[Sec. 3 (l), R.A. 9165]
3. Employees and Visitors of a Den,
Dive, or Resort [Sec. 7, R.A. 9165]
Acts Punished: [EV]
a. Employment in a den, dive or
resort, by an employee who is
aware of the nature of the place
as such; and
b. Visiting of any person, not
being included in (1), who is
aware of the nature of the place
as such and shall knowingly
visit the same.
Employee of a Den, Dive, or Resort
The caretaker, helper, watchman, lookout,
and other persons working in the den, dive
CRIMINAL LAW
or resort, employed by the maintainer,
owner and/or operator where any
dangerous drug and/or controlled
precursor and essential chemical is
administered, delivered, distributed, sold
or used, with or without compensation, in
connection with the operation thereof.
[Sec. 3(p), RA 9165]
4. Manufacturing Dangerous Drugs
and/or Controlled Precursors and
Essential Chemicals [Sec. 8, R.A.
9165]
Manufacturing
The
production,
preparation,
compounding or processing of any DD
and/or CP and EC, either directly or
indirectly or by extraction from
substances of natural origin, or
independently by means of chemical
synthesis or by a combination of
extraction and chemical synthesis, and
shall include any packaging or
repackaging of such substances,
design or configuration of its form, or
labeling or relabeling of its container
[Sec 3(u), RA 9165]
Exception: Does not include the
preparation, compounding, packaging
or labeling of a drug or other
substances by a duly authorized
practitioner as an incident to his/her
administration or dispensation of such
drug in the course of his/her
professional
practice
including
research, teaching and chemical
analysis of dangerous drugs or such
substances that are not intended for
sale or for any other purpose. [id.]
Presence of CP and/or EC as Prima
Facie Evidence
The presence of any controlled
precursor and essential chemical or
laboratory
equipment
in
the
clandestine laboratory is a prima facie
proof of manufacture of any dangerous
drug. [Sec. 8(3), RA 9165]
Aggravating Circumstances [Sec. 8
(3), R.A. 9165]
If the clandestine laboratory is
undertaken or established under the
following circumstances [M-100-BCE]:
Page 311 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
a. Any
phase
of
the
manufacturing process was
conducted in the presence or
with the help of Minor/s;
b. Any phase or manufacturing
process was established or
undertaken within one hundred
(100) meters of a residential,
business, church or school
premises;
c. Any clandestine laboratory was
secured or protected with
Booby traps;
d. Any Clandestine laboratory
was concealed with legitimate
business operations; or
e. Any
Employment
of
a
practitioner,
chemical
engineer, public official or
foreigner
5. Illegal
Chemical
Diversion
of
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals [Sec. 9, R.A. 9165]
Chemical Diversion
The sale, distribution, supply or
transport of legitimately imported, intransit, manufactured or procured
controlled precursors and essential
chemicals, in diluted, mixtures or in
concentrated form, to any person or
entity engaged in the manufacture of
any dangerous drug, and shall include
packaging, repackaging, labeling,
relabeling or concealment of such
transaction through fraud, destruction
of documents, fraudulent use of
permits, misdeclaration, use of front
companies or mail fraud. [Sec. 3(d), RA
9165]
CRIMINAL LAW
Possession of such Equipment as
Prima Facie Evidence of Use
The possession of such equipment,
instrument, apparatus and other
paraphernalia fit or intended for any of
the purposes enumerated in the
preceding paragraph shall be prima
facie evidence that the possessor has
smoked, consumed, administered to
himself/herself, injected, ingested or
used a dangerous drug and shall be
presumed to have violated Section 15
(Use of Dangerous Drugs) of this Act.
[Sec. 12 (2), RA 9165]
8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs
During Parties, Social Gatherings or
Meetings [Sec. 13, R.A. 9165]
Any person found possessing any
dangerous
drug during a party, or
at a social gathering or meeting, or in
the proximate company of at least two
(2) persons, shall suffer the maximum
penalties provided for in Section 11 of
this Act (Possession of Dangerous
Drugs), regardless of the quantity and
purity of such dangerous drugs [id.]
9. Possession
of
Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus and Other
Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs
During Parties, Social Gatherings or
Meetings or in the proximate
company of at least 2 People [Sec.
14, R.A. 9165]
10. Cultivation or Culture of Plants
Classified as Dangerous Drugs or
are Sources Thereof [Sec. 16, R.A.
9165]
6. Manufacturing or Delivering of
Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus,
and
Other
Paraphernalia
for
Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals
[Sec. 10, R.A. 9165]
11. Failure in Maintaining and Keeping
of Original Records of Transaction
on
Dangerous
Drugs
and/or
Controlled Precursors and Essential
Chemicals in Accordance with Sec.
40 of R.A. 9165 [Sec. 17, R.A. 9165]
7. Possession
of
Equipment,
Instrument, Apparatus and Other
Paraphernalis for Dangerous Drugs
[Sec. 12, R.A. 9165]
12. Unnecessary
Prescription
of
Dangerous Drugs [Sec. 18, R.A.
9165]
13. Unlawful Prescription of Dangerous
Drugs [Sec. 19, R.A. 9165]
Page 312 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
14. “Planting” of any dangerous drug
and/or controlled precursor and
essential chemical, regardless of
quantity and purity [Sec. 29, R.A.
9165]
Immunity from Prosecution [Sec. 33]
Any person shall be exempted from
prosecution or punishment for the offense with
reference to which his/her information of
testimony were given, and may plead or prove
the giving of such information and testimony in
bar of such prosecution, when the person:
[VIT]
a. Violated Sections 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, and
19, Article II of this Act:
b. Voluntarily gives Information about; a.
Any violation of Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 10,
13, and 16, Article II of this Act as well
as any violation of the offenses
mentioned if committed by a drug
syndicate, or b. Any information leading
to the whereabouts, identities and
arrest of all or any of the members
thereof;
c. Who willingly Testifies against such
persons
Conditions which must concur in order for
the person to enjoy Immunity from
Prosecution: [NN-CMC]
1. The information and testimony are
Necessary for the conviction of the
persons described above;
2. Such information and testimony are
Not yet in the possession of the State;
3. Such information and testimony can be
Corroborated on its material points;
4. the informant or witness has not been
previously convicted of a crime
involving Moral turpitude, except when
there is no other direct evidence
available for the State other than the
information and testimony of said
informant or witness; and
5. The informant or witness shall strictly
and faithfully Comply without delay,
any condition or undertaking, reduced
into writing, lawfully imposed by the
State as further consideration for the
grant of immunity from prosecution and
punishment. [Sec. 33(1-5), RA 9165]
Note: The above provision operates in spite of
the provisions of Section 17, Rule 119 of the
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and the
CRIMINAL LAW
provisions of Republic Act No. 6981 or the
Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act of
1991 [Sec. 33, RA 9165].
Immunity may be Enjoyed by a Witness
Who Does Not Appear to be the Most Guilty
Immunity may be enjoyed by an informant or
witness who does not appear to be most guilty
for the offense with reference to which his/her
information or testimony were given. Provided,
there is no direct evidence available for the
State except for the information and testimony
of the said informant or witness. [id.]
Termination of the Grant of Immunity
The immunity granted to the informant or
witness shall not attach: [Sec. 34, RA 9165]
1. Should it turn out subsequently that the
information and/or testimony is false or
made only for the purpose of harassing or
in any way prejudicing the persons
described in the preceding Section.
2. In case an informant or witness under this
Act fails or refuses to testify without just
cause, and when lawfully obliged to do so,
or should he/she violate any condition
accompanying such immunity as provided
above.
Note: In case the informant or witness referred
to under this Act falls under the applicability of
this Section hereof, such individual cannot avail
of the provisions under Article VIII of this Act
(Program for Treatment and Rehabilitation of
Drug Dependents). [Sec. 34(3), RA 9165]
CHAIN OF CUSTODY RULE [SEC. 21, R.A.
9165, AS AMENDED BY RA 10640]
Chain of Custody
The duly recorded authorized movements and
custody of seized drugs or controlled chemicals
or plant sources of dangerous drugs or
laboratory equipment of each stage, from the
time of seizure/confiscation, to receipt in the
forensic laboratory, to safekeeping, to
presentation in court for destruction.
[Dangerous Drugs Board Resolution No. 1,
Series of 2002, Implementing RA 9165, Sec.
1(b)]
Procedure [Sec. 21, 9165, as amended by RA
10640]
PDEA shall take charge and have custody of
all dangerous drugs, plant sources of DDs, CPs
and ECs, as well as instruments/paraphernalia
Page 313 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
and/or laboratory equipment confiscated,
seized and/or surrendered, for proper
disposition in the ff manner: [PP-SCFI-BCP]
1. Apprehending team having initial
custody shall conduct a physical
Inventory of the seized items and
Photograph the same in:
a. The presence of the
accused or the person/s
from whom such items
were confiscated and/or
seized; or
b. His/her representative or
counsel, with:
i. An
elected
public
official; and
ii. Representative of the
National Prosecution
Service or the media
who shall be required
to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given
a copy thereof.
Place of Conducting Inventory and
Photograph
a. Place where the search
warrant is served; or
b. Nearest police station; or
c. Nearest
office
of
the
apprehending
officer/team,
whichever is practicable, in
case of warrantless seizures.
2. Submit items confiscated within 24
hours to the PDEA Forensic Laboratory
for a qualitative or quantitative
examination;
3. Certification of the forensic laboratory
examination results, shall be issued
immediately upon the receipt of the
subject item/s.
Partial Laboratory Examination
Report – allowed to be issued
provisionally when the volume of the
items do not allow the completion of
testing within the time frame, stating
the quantities of dangerous drugs still
to be examined by the forensic
laboratory:
Provided,
a
final
certification
shall
be
issued
immediately upon completion of the
said examination and certification;
CRIMINAL LAW
4. Filing of a criminal case in court;
5. After the filing, the Court shall, within 72
hours, conduct an ocular Inspection of
the
confiscated,
seized
and/or
surrendered items;
6. PDEA, within 24 hours, shall thereafter
proceed with the destruction or Burning
of the items, in the presence of the
following:
a. Accused or representative or
counsel; and
b. Representative from:
i.
Media;
ii.
DOJ,
iii.
Civil society groups;
and
iv.
Any elected public
official.
7. Sworn Certification shall be issued by
the Dangerous Drugs Board, as to the
fact of destruction or burning of the
items. A representative sample,
however, shall be submitted to the
court having jurisdiction over the case.
8. After the Promulgation and judgment in
the criminal case, the representative
sample, with leave of court and after
informing the board of the termination
of the case, the prosecutor shall
request the turn over of the
representative sample to the PDEA for
proper disposition and destruction
within 24 hours from receipt.
LAPSES IN PROCEDURE
Minor Lapses
Failure of the apprehending team to strictly
comply with the procedure laid out in Section
21 of RA 9165 and its IRR does not ipso facto
render the seizure and custody over the items
as void and invalid [People v. Lim, G.R. No.
223556 (2017)].
Two Conditions that Must be Complied with
To Justify a Minor Procedural Lapse
The prosecution must satisfactorily prove that:
i.
There is Justifiable ground for
noncompliance; and
ii.
The integrity and evidentiary value of
the seized items are properly
Preserved. [id.]
Page 314 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Unjustified Failure to Comply Results to the
Acquittal of the Accused
Unjustified failure of the authorities to comply
with Sec. 21 raises reasonable doubt on the
authenticity of the corpus delicti [People v.
Gaa, G.R. No. 222559 (2018)].
Rationale: suffices to rebut the presumption of
regularity in the performance of official duties,
acquitting the accused from liability. [id.]
PLEA BARGAINING
Section 23 of Republic Act No. 9165 is
declared unconstitutional for being contrary to
the rule-making authority of the Supreme Court
[Estipona v. Lobrigo, G.R. No. 226679, (2017)]
Note: The SC, in the exercise of its rulemaking
power, has issued OCA Circular 90- 2018 (May
4, 2018) to enjoin the courts to comply with AM
No. 18-03-16 (Adoption of the Plea Bargaining
Framework in Drugs Cases).
Page 315 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
XIV. CYBERCRIME
PREVENTION ACT OF 2012
[R.A. 10175]
PUNISHABLE ACTS
1. Offenses against the confidentiality,
integrity and availability of computer data
and systems:
a. Illegal Access. – The access to the
whole or any part of a computer system
without right.
Access refers to the instruction,
communication with, storing data in,
retrieving data from, or otherwise
making use of any resources of a
computer system or communication
network. [Sec. 3(a), R.A. 10145]
Without right refers to either: (i)
conduct undertaken without or in
excess of authority; or (ii) conduct not
covered by established legal defenses,
excuses, court orders, justifications, or
relevant principles under the law. [Sec.
3(h), R.A. 10145]
b. Illegal Interception. – The interception
made by technical means without right
of any non-public transmission of
computer data to, from, or within a
computer
system
including
electromagnetic emissions from a
computer system carrying such
computer data.
Interception refers to listening to,
recording, monitoring or surveillance of
the content of communications,
including procuring of the content of
data, either directly, through access
and use of a computer system or
indirectly, through the use of electronic
eavesdropping or tapping devices, at
the same time that the communication
is occurring. [Sec. 3(m), R.A. 10145]
c. Data Interference. — The intentional
or reckless alteration, damaging,
deletion or deterioration of computer
data,
electronic
document,
or
electronic data message, without right,
CRIMINAL LAW
including
the
introduction
or
transmission of viruses.
d. System
Interference.
—
The
intentional alteration or reckless
hindering or interference with the
functioning of a computer or computer
network by inputting, transmitting,
damaging, deleting, deteriorating,
altering or suppressing computer data
or program, electronic document, or
electronic data message, without right
or authority, including the introduction
or transmission of viruses.
e. Misuse of Devices.
i.
The use, production, sale,
procurement,
importation,
distribution,
or
otherwise
making available, without right,
of:
a. A device, including a
computer
program,
designed or adapted
primarily
for
the
purpose of committing
any of the offenses
under this Act; or
b. A computer password,
access code, or similar
data by which the
whole or any part of a
computer system is
capable
of
being
accessed with intent
that it be used for the
purpose of committing
any of the offenses
under this Act.
ii.
The possession of an item
referred to in paragraphs
5(i)(aa) or (bb) above with
intent to use said devices for
the purpose of committing any
of the offenses under this
section.
f.
Cyber-squatting. – The acquisition of
a domain name over the internet in bad
faith to profit, mislead, destroy
reputation, and deprive others from
registering the same, if such a domain
name is:
i.
Similar,
identical,
or
confusingly similar to an
existing trademark registered
Page 316 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
with
the
appropriate
government agency at the time
of
the
domain
name
registration:
ii.
Identical or in any way similar
with the name of a person other
than the registrant, in case of a
personal name; and
iii.
Acquired without right or with
intellectual property interests in
it.
2. Computer-related Offenses:
Computer refers to an electronic, magnetic,
optical, electrochemical, or other data
processing or communications device, or
grouping of such devices, capable of
performing logical, arithmetic, routing, or
storage functions and which includes any
storage
facility
or
equipment
or
communications facility or equipment directly
related to or operating in conjunction with such
device. It covers any type of computer device
including devices with data processing
capabilities like mobile phones, smart phones,
computer networks and other devices
connected to the internet. [Sec. 3(d), R.A.
10145]
a. Computer-related Forgery. —
i.
The input, alteration, or
deletion of any computer data
without right resulting in
inauthentic data with the intent
that it be considered or acted
upon for legal purposes as if it
were authentic, regardless
whether or not the data is
directly
readable
and
intelligible;
Alteration
refers
to
the
modification or change, in form
or substance, of an existing
computer data or program.
[Sec. 3(b), R.A. 10145]
The act of knowingly using
computer data which is the
product of computer.
CRIMINAL LAW
3. Content-related Offenses:
a. Cybersex. — The willful engagement,
maintenance, control, or operation,
directly or indirectly, of any lascivious
exhibition of sexual organs or sexual
activity, with the aid of a computer
system, for favor or consideration.
b. Child Pornography. — The unlawful
or prohibited acts defined and
punishable by Republic Act No. 9775 or
the Anti-Child Pornography Act of
2009, committed through a computer
system: Provided, That the penalty to
be imposed shall be (1) one degree
higher than that provided for in
Republic Act No. 9775.
c. Unsolicited
Commercial
Communications.
—
The
transmission of commercial electronic
communication with the use of
computer system which seek to
advertise, sell, or offer for sale products
and services are prohibited unless:
i.
There is prior affirmative
consent from the recipient; or
ii.
The primary intent of the
communication is for service
and/or
administrative
announcements
from
the
sender to its existing users,
subscribers or customers; or
iii.
The following conditions are
present:
o The commercial electronic
communication contains a
simple, valid, and reliable
way for the recipient to
reject. receipt of further
commercial
electronic
messages (opt-out) from
the same source;
o The commercial electronic
communication does not
purposely disguise the
source of the electronic
message; and
o The commercial electronic
communication does not
purposely
include
misleading information in
any part of the message in
order to induce the
Page 317 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
recipients
message.
to
read
the
d. Libel. — The unlawful or prohibited
acts of libel as defined in Article 355 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
committed through a computer system
or any other similar means which may
be devised in the future. [Sec. 4, R.A.
10145]
Other Offenses
i.
Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of
Cybercrime. – Any person who willfully
abets or aids in the commission of any
of the offenses enumerated in this Act
shall be held liable.
ii.
Attempt in the Commission of
Cybercrime. — Any person who
willfully attempts to commit any of the
offenses enumerated in this Act shall
be held liable. [Sec. 5 R.A. 10145]
Coverage of the law; aggravating
circumstance
All crimes defined and penalized by the RPC,
as amended, and special laws, if committed by,
through and with the use of information and
communications technologies shall be covered
by the relevant provisions of this Act:
Provided, That the penalty to be imposed shall
be one (1) degree higher than that provided for
by the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and
special laws, as the case may be. [Sec. 6 R.A.
10145]
Double jeopardy
A prosecution under this Act shall be without
prejudice to any liability for violation of any
provision of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, or special laws. [Sec. 7 R.A. 10145]
Disclosure of Computer Data
Law enforcement authorities, upon securing a
court warrant, shall issue an order requiring
any person or service provider to disclose or
submit subscriber’s information, traffic data or
relevant data in his/its possession or control
within seventy-two (72) hours from receipt of
the order in relation to a valid complaint
officially
docketed
and
assigned for
investigation and the disclosure is necessary
and relevant for the purpose of investigation.
[Sec. 14, R.A. 10145]
CRIMINAL LAW
Search, Seizure and Examination of
Computer Data
Where a search and seizure warrant is properly
issued, the law enforcement authorities shall
likewise have the following powers and duties.
[Sec. 15, R.A. 10145]
Within the time period specified in the warrant,
to conduct interception, as defined in this Act,
and:
1. To secure a computer system or a
computer data storage medium;
2. To make and retain a copy of those
computer data secured;
3. To maintain the integrity of the relevant
stored computer data;
4. To conduct forensic analysis or
examination of the computer data
storage medium; and
5. To render inaccessible or remove
those computer data in the accessed
computer
or
computer
and
communications network.
Pursuant thereof, the law enforcement
authorities may order any person who has
knowledge about the functioning of the
computer system and the measures to protect
and preserve the computer data therein to
provide, as is reasonable, the necessary
information, to enable the undertaking of the
search, seizure and examination.
Law enforcement authorities may request for
an extension of time to complete the
examination of the computer data storage
medium and to make a return thereon but in no
case for a period longer than thirty (30) days
from date of approval by the court. [Sec. 15,
R.A. 10145]
Custody of Computer Data
All computer data, including content and traffic
data, examined under a proper warrant shall,
within forty-eight (48) hours after the expiration
of the period fixed therein, be deposited with
the court in a sealed package, and shall be
accompanied by an affidavit of the law
enforcement authority executing it stating the
dates and times covered by the examination,
and the law enforcement authority who may
access the deposit, among other relevant data.
The law enforcement authority shall also certify
that no duplicates or copies of the whole or any
part thereof have been made, or if made, that
all such duplicates or copies are included in the
Page 318 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
package deposited with the court. The package
so deposited shall not be opened, or the
recordings replayed, or used in evidence, or
then contents revealed, except upon order of
the court, which shall not be granted except
upon motion, with due notice and opportunity
to be heard to the person or persons whose
conversation or communications have been
recorded. [Sec. 16, R.A. 10145]
Destruction of Computer Data
Upon expiration of the periods as provided in
Sections 13 and 15, service providers and law
enforcement authorities, as the case may be,
shall immediately and completely destroy the
computer data subject of a preservation and
examination. [Sec. 17, R.A. 10145]
Exclusionary Rule
Any evidence procured without a valid warrant
or beyond the authority of the same shall be
inadmissible for any proceeding before any
court or tribunal. [Sec. 18, R.A. 10145]
Restricting or Blocking Access to
Computer Data
When a computer data is prima facie found to
be in violation of the provisions of this Act, the
DOJ shall issue an order to restrict or block
access to such computer data. [Sec. 19, R.A.
10145]
Liability under P.D. 1829
Failure to comply with the provisions of Chapter
IV (Sec. 10-19) hereof specifically the orders
from law enforcement authorities shall be
punished as a violation of Presidential Decree
No. 1829 with imprisonment of prision
correctional in its maximum period or a fine of
One
hundred
thousand
pesos
(Php100,000.00) or both, for each and every
noncompliance with an order issued by law
enforcement authorities. [Sec. 20, R.A. 10145]
Page 319 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
CRIMINAL LAW
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
XV. NEW ANTICARNAPPING ACT OF 2016
[SECS. 3 TO 4, R.A. 10883]
Carnapping is the taking, with intent to gain, of
a motor vehicle belonging to another without
the latter’s consent, or by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons, or by using
force upon things.
No Bail
Any person charged with carnapping or when
the crime of carnapping is committed by
criminal groups, gangs or syndicates or by
means of violence or intimidation of any person
or persons or forced upon things; or when the
owner, driver, passenger or occupant of the
carnapped vehicle is killed or raped in the
course of the carnapping shall be denied bail
when the evidence of guilt is strong. [Sec. 3 RA
10883]
Concealment of Carnapping [Sec. 4, RA
10883]
Any person who
conceals
carnapping
Any public
official or
employee who
Punished with
imprisonment of six
(6) years up to
twelve (12) years and
a fine equal to the
amount of the
acquisition cost of the
motor vehicle, motor
vehicle engine, or any
other part involved in
the violation;
Provided, That if the
person violating any
provision of this Act is
a juridical person,
the penalty herein
provided shall be
imposed on its
president, secretary,
and/or members of the
board of directors or
any of its officers and
employees who may
have directly
participated in the
violation.
directly commits
the unlawful acts
defined in this
Act or is guilty of
gross negligence
of duty or
connives with or
permits the
commission of
any of the said
unlawful acts
paragraph, be
dismissed from the
service, and his/her
benefits forfeited and
shall be permanently
disqualified from
holding public office.
Penalties for Carnapping [Sec. 3, RA 10883]
When the carnapping
is committed without
violence against or
intimidation of
persons, or force
upon things
Imprisonment for
not less than twenty
(20) years and one
(1) day but not
more than thirty
(30) years
When the carnapping
is committed by
means of violence
against or
intimidation of
persons, or force
upon things
Imprisonment for
not less than thirty
(30) years and one
(1) day but not
more than forty (40)
years
When the owner,
Life imprisonment
driver, or occupant
of the carnapped
motor vehicle is
killed or raped in the
commission of the
carnapping.
Shall, in addition to the
penalty prescribed in
the preceding
Page 320 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
XVI. SPECIAL PROTECTION
OF CHILDREN AGAINST
ABUSE, EXPLOITATION,
AND DISCRIMINATION ACT
[SECS. 3 (A), 5 AND 10, R.A.
7610]
Children
Refers to person below eighteen (18) years of
age or those over but are unable to fully take
care of themselves or protect themselves from
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because of a physical or mental
disability or condition; [Sec. 3(a), R.A. 7610]
Children Exploited in Prostitution and Other
Sexual Abuse
Children, whether male or female, who for
money, profit, or any other consideration or due
to the coercion or influence of any adult,
syndicate or group, indulge in sexual
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed
to be children exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse.
Punishable Acts [Sec. 5, R.A. 7610]
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed
upon the following:
1. Those who engage in or promote,
facilitate or induce child prostitution
which include, but are not limited to,
the following:
a. Acting as a procurer of a child
prostitute;
b. Inducing a person to be a client
of a child prostitute by means of
written or oral advertisements
or other similar means;
c. Taking advantage of influence
or relationship to procure a
child as prostitute;
d. Threatening or using violence
towards a child to engage him
as a prostitute; or
e. Giving monetary consideration
goods or other pecuniary
benefit to a child with intent to
engage
such
child
in
prostitution.
CRIMINAL LAW
2. Those who commit the act of sexual
intercourse of lascivious conduct
with a child exploited in prostitution
or subject to other sexual abuse;
a. Provided, That when the
victims is under twelve (12)
years of age, the perpetrators
shall be prosecuted under
Article 335, paragraph 3, for
rape and Article 336 of Act No.
3815, as amended, the
Revised Penal Code, for rape
or lascivious conduct, as the
case may be:
b. Provided, That the penalty for
lascivious conduct when the
victim is under twelve (12)
years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period;
and
3. Those who derive profit or
advantage therefrom, whether as
manager
or
owner
of
the
establishment
where
the
prostitution takes place, or of the
sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment
serving as a cover or which engages
in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has
been issued to said establishment.
Page 321 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
Designation of the Crime & Imposable Penalty [People v. Tulagan, G.R. No. 227363, Mar. 12,
2019]
Designation of the Crime & Imposable Penalty
Age of Victim:
Under 12 years old or demented
12 years old or below
18, or 18 under special
circumstances
18 years
old and
above
(i.e., are unable to fully
take care of themselves
or protect themselves
from abuse, neglect,
cruelty, exploitation or
discrimination because
of a physical or mental
disability or condition Sec. 3(a), R.A. 7610)
Crime Committed:
Acts of Lasciviousness
commit-ted
against children
exploit-ted in
prostitution or
other sexual
abuse
Acts of Lasci-vious-ness under
Article 336 of the RPC in relation to
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
reclusion temporal in its medium
period
Lascivious conduct
under Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610: reclusion
temporal in its medium
period to reclusion
perpetua
Not applicable
Sexual Assault
commit-ted
against children
exploit-ted in
prostitution or
other sexual
abuse
Sexual Assault under Article 266A(2) of the RPC in relation to
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
reclusion temporal in its medium
period
Lascivious Conduct
under Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610: reclusion
temporal in its medium
period to reclusion
perpetua
Not applicable
Sexual Intercourse committed against
children exploitted in prostitution
or other sexual
abuse
Rape under Article 266-A(1) of the
RPC: reclusion perpetua, except
when the victim is below 7 years
old in which case death penalty
shall be imposed
Sexual Abuse under
Section 5(b) of R.A. No.
7610: reclusion temporal
in its medium period to
reclusion perpetua
Not applicable
Rape by carnal
Know-ledge
Rape under Article 266-A(1) in
relation to Art. 266-B of the RPC:
reclusion perpetua, except when
the victim is below 7 years old in
which case death penalty shall be
imposed
Rape under Article 266A(1) in relation to Art.
266-B of the RPC:
reclusion perpetua
Rape under
Article 266A(1) of the
RPC: reclusion perpetua
Note: This is subject to R.A. No.
9346 entitled "An Act Prohibiting
the Imposition of Death Penalty in
the Philip-pines."
Page 322 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
Rape by Sexual
Assault
CRIMINAL LAW
Sexual Assault under Article 266A(2) of the RPC in relation to
Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610:
reclusion temporal in its medium
period
Lascivious Conduct
under Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610: reclusion
temporal in its medium
period to reclusion
perpetua
Sexual
Assault
under
Article 266A(2) of the
RPC:
prision
mayor
Note: R.A. 11648 amends several provisions related to Rape, R.A. 7610, Crimes Against Chastity and
Crimes Against Public Morals. Notably, among others, the threshold age for statutory rape has been
adjusted to 16 years old. However, it was only approved on March 4, 2022. This is beyond the June
30, 2021 cut-off for the 2022 Bar Exam.
Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse, Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions Prejudicial to the
Child's Development. [Sec. 10, R.A. 7610]
Acts
Penalty
Any person who shall commit any other acts
of child abuse, cruelty or exploitation or to be
responsible for other conditions prejudicial to
the child's development including those
covered by Article 59 of Presidential Decree
No. 603, as amended, but not covered by
the Revised Penal Code, as amended
Prision mayor in its minimum period.
Any person who shall keep or have in his
company a minor, twelve (12) years or under
or who in ten (10) years or more his junior in
any public or private place, hotel, motel, beer
joint, discotheque, cabaret, pension house,
sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or
other tourist resort or similar places
Prision mayor in its maximum period and a fine of
not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000):
Any person who shall induce, deliver or offer
a minor to any one prohibited by this Act to
keep or have in his company a minor as
provided in the preceding paragraph
Prision mayor in its medium period and a fine of
not less than Forty thousand pesos (P40,000);
Any person, owner, manager or one
entrusted with the operation of any public or
private place of accommodation, whether for
occupancy, food, drink or otherwise,
including residential places, who allows any
person to take along with him to such place
or places any minor herein described
Prision mayor in its medium period and a fine of
not less than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000), and
the loss of the license to operate such a place or
establishment.
Provided, That this provision shall not apply to any
person who is related within the fourth degree of
consanguinity or affinity or any bond recognized by
law, local custom and tradition or acts in the
performance of a social, moral or legal duty.
Provided, however, That should the perpetrator be
an ascendant, stepparent or guardian of the minor,
the penalty to be imposed shall be prision mayor in
its maximum period, a fine of not less than Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000), and the loss of
parental authority over the minor.
Page 323 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
Any person who shall use, coerce, force or
intimidate a street child or any other child to;
(1) Beg or use begging as a means of living;
(2) Act as conduit or middlemen in drug
trafficking or pushing; or
(3) Conduct any illegal activities,
Prision correccional in its medium period to
reclusion perpetua.
Note: For purposes of this Act:
• The penalty for the commission of acts
punishable under Articles 248, 249,
262, paragraph 2, and 263, paragraph
1 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the
Revised Penal Code, for the crimes of
murder, homicide, other intentional
mutilation, and serious physical
injuries,
respectively,
shall
be
reclusion perpetua when the victim is
under twelve (12) years of age.
•
The penalty for the commission of acts
punishable under Article 337, 339, 340
and 341 of Act No. 3815, as amended,
the Revised Penal Code, for the crimes
of qualified seduction, acts of
lasciviousness with the consent of
the offended party, corruption of
minors, and white slave trade,
respectively, shall be one (1) degree
higher than that imposed by law
when the victim is under twelve (12)
years age.
•
The victim of the acts committed under
this section shall be entrusted to the
care of the Department of Social
Welfare and Development.
Page 324 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022
SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
CRIMINAL LAW
XVII. SWINDLING BY
SYNDICATE [P.D. NO. 1689]
corporations/associations from
the general public
Estafa or Other forms of Swindling
Any person or persons who shall commit estafa
or other forms of swindling as defined in Article
315 and 316 of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, shall be punished by:
• Life imprisonment to death if the
swindling (estafa) is committed by a
syndicate consisting of five or more
persons formed with the intention of
carrying out the unlawful or illegal act,
transaction, enterprise or scheme, and
the defraudation results in the
misappropriation of money contributed
by stockholders, or members of rural
banks,
cooperative,
"samahang
nayon(s)", or farmers association, or of
funds
solicited
by
corporations/associations from the
general public.
When not committed by a syndicate as above
defined, the penalty imposable shall be
reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua if
the amount of the fraud exceeds 100,000
pesos.
Syndicated Estafa under PD
1689
Estafa
under
Art. 315
and 316
Estafa or other forms of swindling as
defined by Art. 315 and 316 RPC was
committed
Committed by a syndicate
consisting of five or more
persons formed with the
intention of carrying the
unlawful or illegal
act/transaction/enterprise/sche
me
Committe
d by less
than five
persons
The defraudation results in the
misappropriation of money
contributed by stockholders, or
members of rural banks,
cooperative, “samahang
nayon(s)”, or farmers
association, or of funds
solicited by
No such
result
Page 325 of 325
UP Law Bar Operations Commission 2022