Here, there is war but the Philippines is not involved in ARTICLE 121 FLIGHT TO ENEMY'S COUNTRY
the said war. ELEMENTS:
1. That there is s war in which the Philippines is
Q: There is a war between country X and country Y. Here involved.
comes Pedro, a Filipino citizen, he was siding with country 2. That the offender must be owing allegiance to the
X. Is he liable? Philippine Government
A: No, he is not liable of violation of neutrality 3. That the offender attempts to flee or go to enemy's
because in the problem, it did not say that the country
competent authority (the President) issued a 4. That going to the enemy country is prohibited by a
proclamation or regulation imposing neutrality. competent authority
The violation will only arise if there is a proclamation or There must be a declaration or a proclamation issued
regulation imposing neutrality and a Filipino citizen by a competent authority, that no Filipino shall flee to
violates such declaration or regulation issued by a the enemy's country and the offender violates such
competent authority. Therefore, absence of such proclamation.
declaration of neutrality, the crime of violation of Mere attempt will readily rise to the crime. It is not
neutrality does not arise. necessary that the offender has actually gone to the
country.
ARTICLE120 CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE There must be declaration or proclamation prohibiting
COUNTRY flight to enemy state.
ELEMENTS:
1. That it is in time of war in which the Philippines is
involved.
2. That the offender makes correspondence with an
enemy country or any territory occupied by enemy ARTICLE 122 PIRACY
troops. ELEMENTS:
3. That the correspondence is either 1. The first element is where the vessel is
a.) Prohibited by the Philippine Government located. The vessel can either be on the high
b.) Carried on in ciphers or conventional signs seas or on Philippine waters (this was brought
c.) Containing notice or information which might about by the amendment of RA 7659). Before
be useful to the enemy the amendment of RA 7659, Piracy under
Article 122 can only be committed when the
Here, there is a war in which the Philippines is vessel is on the high seas. But because of
involved. this amendment brought about by RA 7659,
Piracy now under Article 122 can be
Q: The Philippines is at war with the another country. Here committed when the vessel is on Philippine
comes X, a Filipino citizen, he has a pen pal who is a waters.
citizen of the country which is at war with the Philippines.
The competent authority or the President issued a 2. The second element provides for the
declaration of proclamation saying that there should be no offenders. The offenders must NOT be
correspondence to the enemy state. But X missed his members of the complement or passengers of
penpal, and so, he wrote in a small piece of paper, "i love the vessel. Therefore, the offenders must be
you, i miss you, muamua!" Is X liable of the crime of STRANGERS to the vessel. They must be
correspondence with the enemy? coming from the outside, not from the inside.
A:X is liable because there was a declaration issued
by a competent authority that correspondence with the 3. The third element refers to the mode of
hostile country is prohibited and if there is no committing piracy.
declaration, proclamation coming from the competent a. The offenders either ATTACK or
authority prohibiting correspondence, the crime will SEIZE the vessel.
only arise if the said crime is carried on in ciphers or b. The offenders either SEIZE IN
conventional signs or Containing notice or information WHOLE or IN PART the cargo, the
which might be useful to the enemy. equipment or the personal
ILLUSTRATION:
Q: The vessel is on the sea going to Mindoro. So while the
ship is on its way to Mindoro, suddenly there comes a big
storm. The commander or the captain of the ship said that
they should first move towards the shore and let the storm
comes calm in order to ensure the safety of the passengers
of the vessel. The passengers of the vessel and members
of the complement didnt want the decision of the said
captain of the ship and so they seize the captain of the ship
and manned the vessel until they reach Mindoro. What
crime, if any, is committed by these members of the
complement and passengers of the vessel?
A: They are liable of MUTINY. The vessel is on
Philippine waters. The offenders are members of
the complement and they go against the lawful
authority of the captain of the ship. Therefore they
are liable of mutiny.
This is in the exercise of the freedom of speech, ARTICLE133 OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS
freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. However, ELEMENTS:
these 3 freedoms are not absolute. The Supreme Court
See: People vs. Ladjaalam and Celino Sr. vs. People Under Section 1 of PD 1866 as amended, it also provided
Under Section 1 If the use of an unlicensed that a person can only be held liable of illegal possession of
firearm is in furtherance of, incident to, or in unlicensed firearm provided that no other crime was
connection with the crime of rebellion or sedition, committed by the person arrested. It is necessary that no
or attempted coup dtat, such use of unlicensed other crime was committed by the person arrested.
firearm shall be absorbed in the crime of rebellion,
sedition or attempted coup dtat. PEOPLE VS. LADJAALAM
The police officers armed with a warrant of arrest
Therefore, the use of unlicensed firearm in case of went to the house of WalpanLadjaalam to effect
rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup dtat will the warrant of arrest. WalpanLadjaalam, upon
not bring about a separate or distinct charge. seeing the police officers, fired shots at the
There is only one crime that is rebellion or officers. Hence, he was charged with direct
sedition, or attempted coup dtat. The use of assault with multiple attempted homicide. Aside
unlicensed firearm is not even an aggravating from that, he was also charged with illegal
circumstance. It is absorbed in the crime of possession of unlicensed firearms. He was
rebellion or sedition, or attempted coup dtat. convicted of both crimes before the Regional Trial
Court. On appeal before the Supreme Court, SC
Under the same Section 1 of PD 1866 as said the illegal possession of firearms case should
amended by RA 8294, if the use of an unlicensed be dismissed. He should be acquitted in the said
firearm is in the crime of homicide or murder, as case because he committed another crime, and
the case may be, the use of unlicensed firearm that is, DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MULTIPLE
shall be considered as an aggravating ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE.
circumstance. So in the law, it is an
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE. What about in the case of CELINO, SR. VS. PEOPLE?
In this case, it was election time, there was a
WHAT KIND OF AGGRAVATING COMELEC gun ban. A person was found in
CIRCUMSTANCE? possession of an unlicensed firearm. Arrested, he
As decided by the Supreme Court in number was charged of 2 crimes: (1) violation of the
of cases, it is a SPECIAL AGGRAVATING COMELEC gun ban, and (2) illegal possession of
CIRCUMSTANCE which cannot be offset by unlicensed firearms. During the arraignment for
any mitigating circumstance. The Supreme the violation of the COMELEC gun ban, he
Court also held that the use of the word pleaded not guilty. However, during the
homicide or murder under Section 1 is in its arraignment for illegal possession of an
generic sense, therefore, whatever be the unlicensed firearm, he filed a motion to quash the
kind of killing for as long as the unlicensed information. According to him, he cannot be
firearm is used, such use of unlicensed charged of illegal possession of an unlicensed
ARTICLE168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSIFICATION (ART 170, 171, 172)
FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER In case of FALSIFICATION, to amount to falsification,
INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT it is necessary that the writing that is falsified must be a
ELEMENTS: document in a legal sense of the word capable of
making rights and/or extinguishing an obligation.
1. That any treasury or bank note or certificate
Therefore, it must be complete in itself so that it would
or other obligation and security payable to be sufficient in evidence.
bearer, or any instrument payable to order or Falsification of mere forms does not amount to
other document of credit not payable to falsification of a public document. Because the said
bearer is forged or falsified by another form is not yet complete in itself it has no name, no
person. address an unfilled-out/up form. It is not falsification.
2. That the offender knows that any of those
ILLUSTRATION:
instruments is forged or falsified.
Q: So what if A was found outside the building of the LTO
3. That he performs any of these acts ---- office. He was carrying falsified unfilled-out/up forms of
drivers license. It was distinct, it was falsified, it was not the
A: NO. Because what he is carrying is only an It is necessary to distinguish the kind of document that
unfilled-out form. It is not yet complete in itself. It is is being falsified - whether it is a public, official,
not yet capable of creating rights or extinguishing commercial or private because of the different effects.
an obligation. It is not yet susceptible of evidence
of the facts stated thereon. If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC, OFFICIAL OR
COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT, damage or intent to
Q: So what crime if any was committed by A? cause damage to the offended party or to any other
person is not an element.
A: A merely committed violation of Article 176
that is mere possession of instrument or On the other hand, if what has been falsified is a
implements for falsification, but not yet falsification PRIVATE DOCUMENT, for the crime to arise, it is
of a public document. necessary that there must be damage or at least,
intent to cause damage to the private offended party or
There 4 types of documents which may be falsified: to any other party.
1. PUBLIC DOCUMENT a document which is If what has been falsified is a PUBLIC OR OFFICIAL
issued by a notary public or competent public DOCUMENT, it is not necessary that there be damage
official with the solemnities required by law or intent to cause damage. Because a public
document an official document - is presumed
2. OFFICIAL DOCUMENT a document issued by a authentic and legal. It is presumed to be prima facie
public official in the exercise of his official evidence of the facts stated therein. As such, the
functions moment it is falsified, the crime will immediately arise,
without need that there be damage on the part of the
3. COMMERCIAL DOCUMENT any document offended party. Because in Falsification of a Public
defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce Document, what has been violated is the
or any other mercantile law PERVERSION OF TRUTH being solemnly proclaimed
by the said document. Hence DAMAGE IS NOT AN
4. PRIVATE DOCUMENT a document, a deed or ELEMENT.
instrument executed by a private person without
the intervention of the notary public of any other ARTICLE171 FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER,
person legally authorized, by which document EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL
some disposition or agreement is proved, MINISTER
evidenced or set forth The first kind of falsification under Article 171, we have
the falsification committed by a public officer,
Is a public document distinct from an official
document? employee or notary public or an ecclesiastical minister.
ELEMENTS:
All official documents are considered as 1. The offender is a public officer, employee, notary
public documents, but not all public public or an ecclesiastical minister.
documents are considered official
documents. Before a public document may 2. He takes advantage of his official position.
be considered as an official document, it is The offender is said to have taken
necessary that it shall be issued by a public advantage of his position or office when:
officer in the exercise of his official functions. a. He has the duty to make or prepare
There is a law that requires a public officer to or to otherwise intervene in the
issue the said public document, then it preparation of the document; or
becomes an official document. b. He has the official custody of the
document which he falsifies
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT, one which has been
executed by a private person, if there is no intervention 3. That the said offender falsifies a document by
of public official. committing any of the following modes stated
therein:
A PRIVATE DOCUMENT however, even though a. By counterfeiting or imitating any
executed by a private person without the intervention handwriting, signature or rubric.
of a notary public or a legally authorized person, can b. Causing it to appear that persons
also become a public document. That is when the said have participated in any act or
private document is submitted to the public officer and proceeding when they did not in fact
it becomes part of the public records. The moment the so participate.
said private document becomes part of the public c. Attributing to persons who have
records, it is now a public document and when it is participated in an act or proceeding
ARTICLE185 MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS In public auction, it is necessary that the public must
There are two acts punishable under Article 185 be able to get the best price for the thing being
I. SOLICITING GIFT OR PROMISE auctioned. If there will be less bidders, less
By soliciting any gift or promise as a participants in the said public auction, then the public
consideration for refraining from taking will not be able to get the best price for the thing
part in any public auction. subject of the public auction. Here, if the non-
The mere act of soliciting any gift or participation of the other bidders was caused by a
promise, so that he will refrain from person, then he is liable under Article 185. Again, the
taking part of the public auction, will intention of the offender is to cause the reduction of
already give rise to the crime. It is not the price of the thing which is the subject of the public
necessary that he actually received the auction.
gift, it is not necessary that he actually
will not participate in the said auction.
ELEMENTS: ARTICLE186 MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN
1. There be a public auction. RESTRAINT OF TRADE
2. Such act or acts be HIGHLY SCANDALOUS as Q: So what if a wife and a husband, celebrating their
offending against decency or good customs anniversary, engaged in sexual intercourse in their terrace.
It is necessary that the act must be So the act is committed in their premises, in the terrace of
highly scandalous and offensive to their house. However, the gate was open and so passersby
morals, offensive to decency and would see them performing the sexual intercourse. Are
offensive to good customs. they liable for grave scandal?
3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not A: YES. They are liable for grave scandal. The
expressly falling within any other article of this said act does not constitute another offense in the
Code. RPC because they have the right to engage in
The third element requires that it must sexual conduct. The sexual conduct was
not expressly fall within any other performed in the privacy of their home however;
article of this code. It must not people witnessed the commission of the said act.
constitute any other violation in the It now becomes a highly scandalous act because
RPC. Grave scandal is a crime of it is within the knowledge of the public or within
last resort because you only file a public view.
complaint for grave scandal when the
said act is not punishable under any Q: What if A and B are boyfriend and girlfriend. The
other article in the RPC. girlfriend is 11 yrs old and the boyfriend is 21 yrs old. And
4. The act or act complained of be committed in a because it is their monthsary the girlfriend thought of giving
public place or within the public knowledge or herself as a gift and engaged in sexual intercourse in a
view. public place Are they liable for grave scandal?
Then the fourth element provides that A: NO. They are not liable for grave scandal. The
the highly scandalous act must be man is liable for statutory rape. A man who had
committed either in a public place or sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years of
within public knowledge or view. If the age, regardless of the consent, regardless of the
highly scandalous act is committed in willingness of the said child, the man is liable for
a public place, the crime of grave statutory rape. Because in so far as criminal law is
scandal will immediately arise. The concerned, a child under 12 yrs old has no
place being public, the law presumes intelligence of his/her own and is not capable of
that someone may have witnessed giving a valid consent. Therefore, even if the girl
the commission of the highly voluntarily gave herself in so far as the law is
scandalous act. However, if the crime concerned, it is still statutory rape. It is not grave
is committed or if the highly scandal because the third element is wanting. The
scandalous act is committed in a said act fall under the violation of article of RPC
private place, for the crime of grave that is under article 266-A for rape. As I said,
scandal to arise, it is necessary that it grave scandal is a crime of last resort. You only
must be witnessed by one or more charge it when the crime committed does not
persons to be said that it is within the constitute any other violation in the RPC.
public knowledge or public view.
ARTICLE201 IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE
ILLUSTRATION: PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS, AND INDECENT
SHOWS
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment (14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority upon another in his/her custody that causes
(b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts committed
severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or
by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority
more parts of the body, such as:
which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or
undermine a person's dignity and morale, such as:
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching,
kicking, striking with truncheon or rifle butt or other
(1) Blindfolding;
similar objects, and jumping on the stomach;
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water (6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person
polluted with excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood deprived of liberty from one place to another,
until the brink of suffocation; creating the belief that he/she shall be summarily
executed;
(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and
stressful bodily position; (7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion (8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed
of foreign objects into the sex organ or rectum, or by the person's family, relatives or any third party;
electrical torture of the genitals;
(9) Denial of sleep/rest;
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts
of the body such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, (10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person
etc.; naked, parading him/her in public places, shaving
(b) To have sufficient government protection against all (b) By concealing the act of torture or other cruel,
forms of harassment; threat and/or intimidation as a inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment
consequence of the filing of said complaint or the and/or destroying the effects or instruments
presentation of evidence therefor. In which case, the State thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or(c) By
through its appropriate agencies shall afford security in harboring, concealing or assisting m the escape of
order to ensure his/her safety and all other persons the principal/s in the act of torture or other cruel,
involved in the investigation and prosecution such as, but inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment:
not limited to, his/her lawyer, witnesses and relatives; and Provided, That the accessory acts are done with
the abuse of the official's public functions.
(c) To be accorded sufficient protection in the manner by
which he/she testifies and presents evidence in any fora in Aggravating Circumstances in torture:
order to avoid further trauma. (1) Torture resulting in the death of any person;
(2) Torture resulting in mutilation;
Who are Criminally Liable. - Any person who actually (3) Torture with rape;
participated Or induced another in the commission of (4) Torture with other forms of sexual abuse and, in
torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or consequence of torture, the victim shall have become
punishment or who cooperated in the execution of the act insane, imbecile, impotent, blind or maimed for life; and
of torture or other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (5) Torture committed against children.
or punishment by previous or simultaneous acts shall be
liable as principal Note:
Any superior military, police or law enforcement officer or Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be
senior government official who issued an order to any lower absorbed by any other crime or felony committed
ranking personnel to commit torture for whatever purpose as a consequence, or as a means in the conduct
shall be held equally liable as principals. or commission thereof. In which case, torture shall
be treated as a separate and independent criminal
The immediate commanding officer of the unit concerned of act whose penalties shall be imposable without
the AFP or the immediate senior public official of the PNP prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for
and other law enforcement agencies shall be held liable as by domestic and international laws. (Sec 15)
a principal to the crime of torture or other cruel or inhuman
and degrading treatment or punishment for any act or
3rd Act - Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way ARTICLE 215 PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS
of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature ELEMENTS:
different from that provided by law. 1. Offender is an appointive public officer
2. He becomes interested, directly or indirectly in any
Here, under the third act, it does not refer to the transaction of exchange or speculation
amount of payment. It refers to the KIND OR NATURE OF 3. Transaction takes place within the territory subject to
PAYMENT. So, when the law says that it should be paid in his jurisdiction
cash, ONLY CASH may be received by the said collecting 4. He becomes interested in the transaction during his
officer. incumbency
When is there prima facie presumption of malversation? Q: His contention was, it cannot be malversation, because
- Under Article 217, there arises prima facie the firearm was owned by a private person. It is not a public
presumption of malversation of public funds or property, therefore I cannot be held liable for malversation.
property when demand is made by a duly Is the contention correct?
authorized officer to an accountable public officer A: His contention is wrong. The said firearm
to account for public funds or property, and the has already been confiscated by public
same is not forthcoming authority, therefore it is now deemed,
CUSTODIA LEGIS. The moment it is in
ILLUSTRATION: custodialegis, it loses its character as a private
So the COA auditor, appeared and conducted an property and it now assumes a character of a
audit He demanded for the said amount, the said public property. Hence the crime committed is
accountable public officer cannot reduce the said amount. Malversation.
There arises the prima facie presumption that he has
malverse the said public funds or property. Although that is Q: What if, there was this collecting officer, a cashier, and
what is written under Article 217, last paragraph. The there were many persons paying. And the long line persons
Supreme Court in the number of cases said: paying, one cashier said that he needed to answer the call
Mere shortage in audit will not suffice. For the Prima of nature, and so he asked another fellow cashier to look
facie presumption to arise the following requisites after his drawer, and so, he left and went to the restroom.
must be present: - It is necessary that there must be But he also left the key of his drawing on the key holder.
complete, thorough and reliable audit. And so, the moment he left, his fellow cashier went to his
- In the said complete, thorough and reliable audit, drawer and opened it and took Php 2000 from the
the following were discovered: collection of A on the same day. Then A arrived, and he
a. The public officer indeed receive the public then accepted collections. In the afternoon, there was a
funds or property. That is, he is an surprise audit coming from the COA. and it was discovered
accountable public officer that based on the receipts, The php 2000 were missing
b. The said public funds and property was from the collection of A. Therefore, A was charged. What
missing, or there was a shortage, or he crime if any, has been committed by A? Is A liable for
cannot produce it, and malversation?
c. The said public officer cannot give a
justifiable reason, a legal excuse for the said A: Yes, he is liable for malversation through
shortage or missing of public funds or negligence. That is the passive act. That is
property. through his abandonment or negligence, he
permitted another person, Cashier B to
If all of these are present, the Supreme Court says misappropriate a part of his collection for the day.
that there arises the prima facie presumption that there is Hence A is also liable for Malversation. Not B, but
malversation of public funds or property. Therefore, there A, the one who went to the restroom, because he
may NOT be direct evidence to convict one for is the one accountable for the said public funds in
malversation of public funds or property. Obviously, there his drawer.
cannot be any witness, because when you say direct
evidence, there is a witness. Of course, he would not let That other person, B, who took the said property
anyone see him malversing the funds. It suffices in the is liable for qualified theft. because he was
audit, these three things were discovered. If these three are entrusted with the same funds, and he took the
discovered, then there arises the prima facie presumption same funds.
Q: What if, there was this rape in a warehouse, in the ARTICLE 218 FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER
course of the said rape, dangerous drugs worth millions of TO RENDER ACCOUNTS
pesos were confiscated and they were placed in the PDEA ELEMENTS:
warehouse. The persons therein were charged with illegal 1. Offender is a public officer, whether in the service or
possession of dangerous drugs. In the course of the separated therefrom
hearing in this possession of dangerous drugs, the court 2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
sent a subpoena to the PDEA custodian, to bring to the property
Court the said dangerous drugs which were confiscated. 3. He is required by law or regulation to render accounts
And so, on the designated day, the said PDEA agent to the Commission on Audit, or to a provincial Auditor
boarded all the dangerous drugs confiscated in a PDEA 4. He fails to do so for a period of two months after such
van and off he went to the Court. However, before the accounts should be rendered
PDEA agent could reach the court, here comes two
motorcycles who went in and fired at him, and he fell on his ARTICLE 219 FAILURE OF RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC
seat, lifeless. And then, a big vehicle arrived at the back of OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING
the said PDEA van and took all the said dangerous drugs. THE COUNTRY
Now the said PDEA agent was brought into the hospital ELEMENTS:
and despite the fatal wound, because of the immediate 1. Offender is a public officer
medical intervention, he survived. Is he liable of any 2. He must be an accountable officer for public funds or
crime? property
3. He must have unlawfully left (or be on the point of
A: Yes, he is liable of Malversation of public leaving) the Philippines without securing from the
funds or property under Article 217 through Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his
Negligence. There was inexcusable negligence accounts have been finally settled
on his part said the Supreme Court, because all
by himself, carried the millions worth of dangerous ARTICLE 220 ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR
drugs in the PDEA van, considering the value of PROPERTY (Technical Malversation)
the said dangerous drugs, he should have asked ELEMENTS:
for back up. Yes, he survived, but he was charged 1. Offender s a public officer
The offender refuses to disobey the suspension of the ARTICLE 235 MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS
said order which was disapproved by the said public officer. ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He has under his charge a prisoner or detention
ARTICLE 233 REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE prisoner
ELEMENTS: 3. He maltreats such prisoner either of the following
1. Offender is a public officer manners:
2. Competent authority demands from the offender that a. By overdoing himself in the correction or
he lend his cooperation towards the administration of handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner
justice or other public service under his charge either:
3. Offender fails to do so maliciously i. By the imposition of punishments not
authorized by the rules and regulations
Public officer who shall fail to lend his cooperation ii. By inflicting such punishments (those
towards the administration of justice or any other public authorized) in a cruel or humiliating
service despite demand by competent authority. manner
1. When the injured person becomes insane, Under the THIRD CIRCUMSTANCE/CATEGORY:
imbecile, impotent, or blind in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted. When the offender becomes DEFORMED.
2. When the injured person:
a. Loses the use of speech or the So what is this so-called DEFORMITY which will result in
power to heal or to smell, or looses serious physical injury?
an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a
leg; or Q: A hacked B with the use of a bolo on his stomach. So
b. Loses the use of any such member, there was a big mark on his stomach despite the fact that it
or was already healed, there was a big scar on the said
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work stomach. The doctor said that the said injury requires
in which he was therefore habitually medical treatment for 2 weeks. What crime is committed?
engaged in the consequence of the Is it serious physical injury or is it less serious physical
physical injuries inflicted injury?
3. When the injured:
a. Becomes deformed A: The crime committed is only LESS SERIOUS
b. Loses any other member of his PHYSICAL INJURY. There was no deformity.
body; or Although there was a big scar on the stomach, it
c. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the would not amount to deformity. An injury in order
performance of the work in which he to amount to deformity which would bring about
was habitually engaged for more serious physical injury must result to a physical
than 90 days, in consequence of the ugliness on a person. There are 3 requisites befor
physical injuries inflicted deformity may be considered as a serious physical
4. When the injured person becomes ill or injury:
incapacitated for labor for more that 30 days (but
must not be more than 90 days), as a result of the 1. There must be physical ugliness produced on
physical injuries inflicted. a body of a person
A: Yes. The Supreme Court said that the woman Therefore, under any all circumstances which involves the
who is sleeping is unconscious. sweetheart defense theory will not lie in favor of a man.
ANTI-HAZING LAW R.A. 8049 If the said initiation rite took place in the
house of a member or an officer of the said
Q: What is hazing? fraternity or sorority; the parents of the said
A: Hazing is an initiation rite or practice which is members or officers shall be held liable not as
used as an admission into membership in any an accomplice but as a principal if they have
fraternity or any other organization wherein the such knowledge of the said conduct of the
said recruit/neophyte/applicant is placed under the initiation rites and they did not perform any
an embarrassing or humiliating situations such as act inorder to prevent its occurrence.
forcing him to do menial, silly, and foolish tasks or Q: When is there a prima facie evidence of participation?
services or subjecting him into psychological or A: Any person who is present in the said hazing
physical injury or crime. or initiation rite shall constitute a prima facie
evidence that there is a participation and shall be
Q: Is hazing totally prohibited in the Philippines? held liable as principal.
A: No. Hazing is not totally prohibited in the
Philippines. Hazing is allowed provided that the Q: What if in the said hazing an officer beat an applicant
following requisites are present: and he hit the neck thereby causing the death of the said
neophyte/recruit/applicant and so when prosecuted he
1. There must be a prior written notice sent to said: I have no intention to commit so grave a wrong as
the head of the school authorities or the head that committed. Can such defense be used so as to
of the organization 7 days before the said mitigate his criminal liability?
initiation rites and this prior written notice shall A: No such defense is prohibited defense. Under
contain the following: RA 8049; the defense that such person has no
a. It shall indicate the date of the said intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
initiation rites which shall not be more committed cannot be used by an accused under
than 3 days. RA 8049.
b. It shall indicate/state the names of the
neophytes or applicants who will Whenever a person hits an
undergo the said hazing or initiation applicant/neophyte, he is already performing a
rites. felonious act therefore he shall be held
c. It shall contain an undertaking which criminally liable for all the consequences of his
states that there shall be no physical actions. (Art 4 book 1)
violence employed in any form on In the case of Lenny Villa Hazing; Sereno et.
these neophyte recruits or applicants. al. considered Art. 4 wherein they ruled
Reckless Imprudence resulting to homicide.
2. Upon the receipt of such prior written notice; o (I disagree) In Reckless imprudence,
the head of the school or organization shall the said person must be performing an
assign atleast 2 representatives from their act which is not felonious but by
school or organization who must be present reason of negligence or imprudence, a
during the time of the said initiation rite or felony resulted. Therefore, in the case
hazing and these 2 representatives shall see of Lenny Villa, the ruling shall be
to it that no amount of physical violence shall homicide, it shall not be reckless
be employed on any person or any neophyte imprudence.
or recruit or applicant during the said hazing
or initiation rite. ANTI- CHILD ABUSE ACT R.A. 7610
In so far as RA 7610 is concerned; Children are those:
Q: What if in the course of the said hazing or initiation rite
someone died or suffered physical injuries; who shall be Below 18 years of age
held criminally liable? Above 18 years of age who does not have the
A: If in the course of hazing or initiation rite, capacity to fully protect themselves against any
someone died or some suffered any physical abuse, cruelty or maltreatment because of their
injuries; all of the officers and members of the said physical or mental disability.
fraternity or organization who are present and who
participated in the said initiation rite shall be Q: What if two children, A and B were fighting over a gun
liable as principal. toy. The mother of A saw B beating A so As mother held B
Any of the circumstances present, then we have Circumstances which will qualify the penalty:
serious illegal detention. 1. If the purpose of the kidnapping is to extort
ransom from the victim or from any other person.
Q: Who is the offender in Art 267? Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention
A: He must be a private individual because for Ransom.
if he is a public officer who has been vested
by law to make arrest and he detains a Q: What is ransom?
person; it will be arbitrary detention under Art A: A ransom is the money, price, or any
124. other consideration given or demanded
Q: Can a public officer commit kidnapping and serious for the redemption of the liberty of the
illegal detention? person who has been detained or
A: Yes if the said public officer has not been incarcerated.
vested by law with the authority to effect
arrest and to detain a person then the said PEOPLE VS. MAMANTAK
public officer is acting in his private capacity. - While the mother and the daughter where in a
Although a public officer; since he is acting in food chain in tondo; the mother lost the said child.
his private capacity, the crime committed is - she had been looking for the said child for a year.
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under - A year and six months thereafter, the said mother
Art 267 and not arbitrary detention under Art received a call from a woman who sounded to be
124. a masculine man from Lanaodel Norte according
to the said woman.
The second element requires that the offender kidnaps - The woman said that she has the child with her
or detains another or in any other manner depriving and the woman was demanding P 30,000 in
him of his liberty. exchange for the child.
- The said woman, Mamantak and company asked
Q: When is there detention? the mother to go to a certain restaurant.
2. When the victim is killed or dies as a consequence In so far as the father who has been
of the kidnapping or detention. killed; since he is not the victim of serious
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal illegal detention, it will constitute a
Detention with Homicide. separate and distinct crime of: homicide.
This is a special complex crime.
Therefore, since it is a special Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed
complex crime; regardless of by the said kidnapper. Kidnapping and
the number of victims killed; it is serious illegal detention in so far as the
still kidnapping and serious child is concerned and homicide in so far
illegal detention with homicide. as the father who has been killed is
concerned.
PEOPLE VS. LARANAGA
- There were two kidnap victims and these two 3. When the victim is raped.
sisters were both killed and raped yet the SC held Kidnapping and Serious Illegal
that the crime committed was kidnapping and Detention with Rape.
serious illegal detention with homicide and rape.
- Despite the fact that there were 2 victims who It is necessary that the victim is the one who
were killed and raped because regardless of the has been raped.
numbers of the victims killed, since it is a special Again; since this is a special complex crime;
complex crime; in the eyes of the law there is only regardless of the times that the victim has
been raped. The crime committed is only
The presence of any of these circumstances will bring ART 268 SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION
about the imposition of maximum penalty of death. Slight illegal detention is committed by: any
person who shall kidnap or detains another or in
Q: A, a 6 yr old child is playing at a playground at any other manner deprive him of his liberty when
about 5 oclock in the afternoon while the mother is the said detention is illegal absent of any of the
hanging clothes. A man (X) gave the child a candy and circumstances under Art 267; it will only be slight
the child was so happy. Later, the man again illegal detention.
approached the child and gave the child money and
then the said man invited the child to go with him. Q: What if A was so envious of his neighbor. To teach
Since the child was so happy because the man was so the neighbor a lesson, he kidnapped and detained the
good to her; the child went with the said man. At 6 said neighbor and placed the said neighbor in a
oclock; the mother came looking for the child but the secluded place in a vacant area one morning.
child was no longer in the playground. Meanwhile, the However, later on, A felt sorry for his neighbor and he
man brought the child to his place. That evening, the released his neighbor that night. What is the effect in
mother kept on looking for the child however they the criminal liability of the offender A?
could not locate the child. In the house of the man, the A: Under Art 268 (Slight Illegal
child was molested and raped twice. The following Detention); if the offended party has
morning, when the mother opened the door of the been released. Such release will be
house, she saw her child at the door with torn clothes considered as a privileged mitigating
and blood. So the man was charged with serious circumstance because from the penalty
illegal detention with rape. Is the charge correct? of reclusion temporal, the penalty would
A: The charge is wrong because the be lowered by one degree that is prision
obvious intention of the man is to rape mayor.
the child and not to detain the child Note however that this voluntary release of the victim
therefore the SC said: the crime may only be considered as a privileged mitigating
committed would be 2 counts of circumstance the ff requisites must concur:
statutory rape not only a single 1. It is necessary the release has been
indivisible offense of kidnapping and made within 3 days from the
serious illegal detention with rape but 2 commencement of the said
counts of statutory rape because the said kidnapping.
child is under 12 years of age and she 2. It must have been made without the
was raped and molested twice. offender having attained or
Therefore, unless and until there was an accomplished his purpose.
intent to detain on the part of the 3. It must have been made before the
offender; it could be any other crime but institution of the criminal
not kidnapping and serious illegal proceedings against the said
detention. offender.
Q: A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy If all of these 3 are present then such
and placed him inside the van. The following morning, voluntary release of the offender will
the said enemy was found in a vacant lot with 10 mitigate the criminal liability of the said
gunshot wounds. What crime is committed? offender.
A: The crime committed is Murder.
Obviously, there was no intent to detain Q: What if the person kidnapped by A is a public
the offended party. The intent was to kill officer? He is mad with the said public officer and
him. Therefore the crime committed is so he kidnapped the same and detained him in
murder and not kidnapping and serious the morning. In the evening, he immediately
illegal detention with homicide or murder released the public officer because he told himself
as the case may be. that perhaps the NBI would look after him so he
immediately released the public officer. Will such
Inorder for kidnapping and serious illegal detention to release mitigate his criminal liability?
amount to with rape, murder, with homicide with A: No. the fact that the person kidnapped
physical injuries; it is necessary that there is an intent is a public officer; the crime would
to detain and in the course of the said detention, the immediately be kidnapping and serious
illegal detention under 267. And if the
ART 277 ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY A PERSON Note: If the delivery of the said child is on the basis of a
ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE OF consideration, compensation or money, the penalty will be
PARENTS QUALIFIED.
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. Abandonment of a child by a person Mere act of delivering the child gratuitously under 16
entrusted with his custody. years of age; the crime is already committed.
It is committed by: any person The fact that it is with consideration; the penalty will be
who, having entrusted with the qualified.
living and education of a minor
shall deliver a minor to a public
institution or other persons ART 280 QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO DWELLING
without the consent of the person It is committed by: a private individual who shall
who entrusted such minor to the enter the dwelling of another against the will of
care of the offender or, in his the latter.
absence, without the consent of
the proper authorities. ELEMENTS:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. Indifference of parents It is committed by a private individual
It is committed by: any parent because if it is a public officer; then the
who neglects any of his children crime is under Art 128 which is: Violation
by not giving them the education of Domicile.
which their station in life requires 2. He enters the dwelling of another
and financial capability permits. 3. Such entrance is against the will of the latter.
As discussed under Art. 128; when
ART 278 EXPLOITATION OF A CHILD the law says against the will, there
ACTS PUNISHED: must be a prohibition or opposition
Trespass to property is committed by: any person ARTICLE 282 GRAVE THREATS
who enters a closed premises or fenced estate PUNISHABLE ACTS:
which at that time is uninhabited and the 1. Threatening another with the infliction upon his
prohibition to enter is manifest and the offender person, honor or property or that of his family of
enters the said uninhabited place without any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
securing the permission of the owner or the care money or imposing any other condition even
taker thereof. though not unlawful, and the offender attained his
purpose.
TRESSPASS TO TRESSPASS TO 2. By making such threat with the infliction upon his
DWELLING PROPERTY person, honor or property or that of his family of
any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding
Place entered into is a money or imposing any other condition even
Place entered into is
closed premises or a though not unlawful and without the offender
a dwelling and
fenced estate which is attaining his purpose. (Elements for this act are
uninhabited.
uninhabited. the same with the first except that the purpose is
Prohibition to enter not attained.)
Prohibition to enter
can either be 3. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
must be manifest.
expressed or implied. person, honor or infliction upon his person, honor
Entry was made Entry was made without or property or that of his family of any wrong
against the will of the securing the permission amounting to a crime, the threat not being subject
owner or the from the owner or the to any demand of money or imposition of any
possessor of the said care taker of the said condition.
dwelling. property.
ARTICLE 283 LIGHT THREATS
Light threats is committed if a person threatens another
Q: Lets say there are these town houses. In one with the commission of any wrong which does not amount
of the town houses, town house A; theres no to a crime. But it always subject to a demanded money or
person living at the moment and there was this the imposition of any other condition even though not
sign: FOR RENT/ FOR LEASE. X entered the said unlawful.
town house. What crime is committed by X? Is it
Art. 284 BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR
The mere act of seizing the correspondence of another Q: So what if A told B to come inside his room and when B
with the intention to discover the secrets, the crime is entered the room, A started scolding B. In scolding B, A
already consummated. It is not necessary that the secret said scandalous remarks against B. Unknown to A, B was
be revealed, it is not necessary that there be damage on tape recording the private conversation between them. Can
the part of the offended party. B later use the said tape recording in order to file a case of
defamation or slander against A?
ARTICLE 291 REVEALING SECRETS WITH THE A: NO. Because the said act of tape recording
ABUSE OF OFFICE without being authorized by all the parties to a
This is committed by a manager or by an employee or by a private communication or spoken word is
servant who reveals the secrets of his principal or master inadmissible in any judicial, quasi-judicial,
learned by him in such capacity. legislative or administrative proceedings or
It is the REVELATION OF SECRETS which will investigation.
consummate the crime, not merely discovery but
revelation of the said secrets. Again, damage is not an The ONLY EXCEPTION is when a police officer or peace
element. It is not necessary that the offended party be officer is authorized by written order of the court to listen to,
prejudiced or damaged. intercept or record any communication in crimes involving
treason, espionage, inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals, piracy, mutiny, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal
ARTICLE 292 REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL to commit rebellion, sedition, conspiracy to commit sedition
SECRETS and kidnapping. Only in these instances and provided that
This is committed by any person in charge, employee or the said peace officer is authorized by a written order
workman of a manufacturing or industrial establishment coming from the court may he be allowed to intercept,
who shall learn and discover the secrets of the industry and listen to or record the private communication or spoken
shall reveal the same to the prejudice of the owner thereof. word.
In case of revelation of industrial secrets, mere revelation
of those secrets will not suffice. There must be
DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAUSED TO THE TITLE TEN
OFFENDED PARTY. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
The law requires to the prejudice of the owner thereof. Art. 293 Who are guilty of robbery?
Robbery is committed by any person, who with
RA 92400 - ANTI-WARTAPPING LAW intent to gain shall take any personal property belonging to
The following acts are punishable: another by means of violence against, or intimidation of any
1.) It shall be unlawful for any person, without person, or using force upon anything.
securing the consent of all the parties to any
private communication or spoken word, to tap Elements of Robbery:
any wire or cable, or by using any other 1. That the offender unlawfully takes a personal
device or arrangement to secretly overhear, property
intercept or record such private 2. That the said personal property belongs to
communication or spoken word by using a another person
device commonly known as a Dictaphone or 3. There must be intent to gain in the taking of the
dictagraph, walkie talkie, tape recorder, or said property
other similar devices. 4. That the said taking is either by means of violence
2.) Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire against, or intimidation of any person, or using
record, disc record, or any other such record, force upon anything
or copies thereof, of these private 5.
communication or spoken word. Unlawful taking is the deprivation of the offended party of
3.) Replaying these any tape record, wire record, his personal property with an element of permanency. So, it
disc record to another person. is necessary that in taking the personal property from
another person, there is an element of permanency.
Q: So what if, A, B, and C entered the house of X in order Q: So a woman was walking on her way home and
to commit robbery. They have already taken the valuables because it was pay day here comes X. X dragged the
when the owner of the house was awaken. It was only A woman in a dark place and took the bag and took the
who saw the owner of the house was awaken and so A money inside it. And then he found the woman attractive so
shot X and killed him. Are they all liable for robbery with he raped the woman not once but twice. What crime/s is
homicide or only A who shot X? committed?
A: All of them are criminally liable for the crime of A: X committed the crime of robbery with rape
robbery with homicide. Under Article 8, that in case of an regardless of the times the woman was raped.
express or direct conspiracy, the conspirators are liable
only for the crime agreed upon. The crime agreed is to CASE OF PEOPLE vs SUYU
commit robbery but how come all of them are liable for Two persons, boyfriend and girlfriend, they were
homicide? Because it falls under the exception that when having snack and saw the shadow of 3 men. And these 3
the resulting felony is a special complex crime because you men were pushing the truck trying to open the door. They
cannot separate or divide a special complex crime. took their valuables and the boyfriend hurriedly left the
Therefore, even if it was only A who killed the victim, even girlfriend allegedly to ask help to the police. And so the
if their agreement is only to commit robbery, because girlfriend was alone with the three men and they dragged
homicide or the killing was committed by reason or on her into a nipa hut and there she was raped by the
occasion of the said robbery, all of them are criminally mastermind, Suyu. Not only she was raped by Suyu but
liable for the crime of robbery with homicide. also Cainglet while, the other two was outside serving as
The only exception to the exception is when B lookouts. So the said woman, Clarissa, was raped by two
and C performed acts in order to prevent A from committing persons and she was raped three times. Suyu and Cainglet
the homicide. raped her by carnal knowledge. Not only that, Cainglet also
inserted two fingers to her genitals therefore, he also
CASE OF PEOPLE vs CABBAB committed rape by sexual assault. What crimes are
Let us say, A and B versus X, Y and Z. A and B committed by the 4 persons? What crime/s they should be
committed robbery and upon leaving the said place, X and criminally liable of?
Y saw A and B and shot them and made gun fires. Z, a
police officer dove into the canal in order to prevent himself Supreme Court said, they are all liable for the
from being killed. A and B went directly to X and Y and single indivisible offense of Robbery with Rape.
killed them both. And thereafter, A and B took the winnings. Regardless of the fact that two persons raped the victim,
Based on the circumstances or facts the fiscal filed the regardless of the fact that the victim was raped 3 times,
following cases before the RTC, robbery, double murder, regardless of the fact that there is two nature of rape
and attempted murder, robbery because of the taking of the committed against the victim (rape by carnal knowledge
winnings, double murder for the death of X and Y and and rape by sexual assault), still the crime committed is the
attempted murder as to the police officer who dove into the single indivisible offense of robbery with rape.
canal. What is the ruling of the RTC? It said wrong ka
fiscal! The crime is robbery with double homicide and There are four conspirators but not all of them
attempted murder. Then it went to appeal on the Court of raped the victim. Yet they are all liable for robbery with rape
Appeals, sabiniya wrong fiscal! Wrong ka din RTC! The because the two lookouts did not perform acts in order to
crime committed is robbery with homicide and attempted prevent the consummation of the said rape. So since it is a
murder. Then it went up to the Supreme Court. Sc said, special complex crime and a single indivisible offense all
malika fiscal! Mali ka RTC! Mali kadn CA! Mali kayo lahat! the other rapes are merged into a composite integrated
The only crime committed is the single indivisible crime of whole that is robbery with rape.
robbery with homicide. Because all the acts are considered The same theory applies in case of robbery with intentional
absorbed in the crime of robbery with homicide despite the mutilation and robbery with arson.
fact that two persons were killed, despite the fact that one
person was greatly injured, all these circumstances are Robbery with intentional mutilation, arson and serious
physical injuries
his person or liberty, it could be any other demanded as a redemption for the liberty of
crime but not kidnapping and serious illegal the person detained. Any money, price or
detention. consideration which is given in exchange for
- The law requires that detention must be the liberty of the person detained or
illegal. Therefore, there should be no incarcerated is considered ransom.
reasonable ground thereof.
- People vs. Mamantak
Circumstances that will make the crime serious While the mother and her daughter were in a
illegal detention: food chain in Tondo, the mother lost her
a. The kidnapping or detention shall have daughter. She searched for her daughter over
lasted more than three days; a year. A year and 6 months thereafter, she
b. It shall have been committed simulating received a phone call from a Muslim woman
public authority; claiming that she has her daughter and she
- By pretending to be a public officer, was demanding P30,000 in exchange of her
pretending to be NBI agent. child. The woman instructed the mother to go
c. Any serious physical injuries shall have to a restaurant, where the exchange will take
been inflicted upon the person kidnapped place. However, the mother already reported
or detained; or if threats to kill him shall the call to the police. When they were in the
have been made; restaurant and while the exchange was taking
d. The person kidnapped or detained shall place, the police apprehended Mamantak.
be a minor, female or public officer. The crime charged was kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. The
The presence of any of these circumstances will RTC convicted the accused, however for
make the crime serious illegal detention and the kidnapping and serious illegal detention but
absence of any of these circumstances will make not for ransom. According to the RTC, the
the crime slight illegal detention under Article 268. amount given, 30 thousand pesos, is such a
small amount to be considered ransom.
Note that the penalty is reclusion perpetua to According to the RTC it is merely a payment
death. What then are the circumstances that will for the board and lodging of the child during
qualify the penalty that will make the institution of the child was held by Mamantak.
the maximum penalty of death? - SC: The crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with ransom. Kahit 5
- The circumstances are the following: pesos pa yan if it was given or demanded as
a. If the purpose of the kidnapping or a redemption for the liberty of the person
detention was to extort ransom from the detained it is already considered as ransom.
victim or any other person. Therefore, we There is no such thing as small amount in so
have kidnapping and serious illegal far as ransom is concerned.
detention with ransom.
b. If the person kidnapped or detained died Example
or is killed as a consequence of A was indebted to B. B was asking for the
kidnapping and serious illegal detention, payment, however A failed to pay. B got fed up
we have kidnapping and serious illegal therefore he kidnapped the minor child of A. B
detention with homicide. called A telling him that he would only release his
c. If the person kidnapped or detained is child if he pays his indebtedness of half a million.
raped, we have kidnapping and serious Is the crime of kidnapping and serious illegal
illegal detention with rape. detention with ransom committed?
d. If person kidnapped or detained is - Yes, it is already kidnapping and serious
subjected to torture or other illegal detention with ransom even if the
dehumanizing acts. amount being asked by the kidnapper is the
indebtedness of the father of the kidnapped
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with child. So any amount given or demanded for
Ransom the release of the person detained, that is
- Ransom already considered ransom.
- Any money, price or consideration given or
Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention with NOTE: The same is true for kidnapping and
Homicide serious illegal detention with rape. It is necessary
- It is a special complex crime. Therefore, since that the victim is the one raped and since it is
it is a special complex crime, regardless of again a special complex crime regardless of the
the number of the victims, it is still kidnapping number of times that the victim was raped the
and serious illegal detention with murder or crime committed is only kidnapping and serious
homicide. illegal detention with rape. There is no such crime
as kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
- People vs. Laranaga multiple rapes. Only kidnapping and serious illegal
- There were 2 kidnapped victims. They were detention with rape and so with kidnapping and
sisters kidnapped and raped, thereafter killed. serious illegal detention with physical injuries
SC held that even though there were 2 which is also a special complex crime.
victims the crime committed is kidnapping and
serious illegal detention with homicide. Example:
A, is a 6 year old child, while playing in the
- NOTE: It is the victim himself or herself who playground was approached by X and gave her
died. If it is another person, it is another candy. Meanwhile, the mother was busy hanging
separate and distinct crime because the law their clothes. After a while, X came back and this
is particular that the victim himself is the one time gave the child money. The child was so
that is killed or dies as consequence thereof. happy and easily persuaded to go with X. The
mother searched for her daughter but she was
Example: nowhere to be found. X brought the child in his
A kidnapped the child of B who is his enemy. house and molested her twice. The following day,
Child is 10 years old. While being held, the child the mother found her child in their house with torn
tried to escape. A caught the child trying to and blooded clothes. The crime charged was
escape. He shot the child. What was the crime kidnapping and serious illegal detention with rape.
committed? Is the crime charged proper?
- The crime committed was kidnapping and - No, the charge is wrong because the obvious
serious illegal detention with homicide intention is to rape the child and not to detain
her. SC held that the man is guilty of 2 counts
But what if in the same problem, the father told the of statutory rape because the child is below
NBI agents about the kidnapping. The agents 12 years of age and she was molested twice.
were ale to track down than place where the child Therefore, unless and until there was an
was being kept. They went over the hide out and intention to detain the child on the part of the
exchange of gunfire took place. The father saw offender, it could be any other crime but not
that his child and took him away. While they were kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
escaping the kidnapper saw them and shot the
father. What crime or crimes was or were A saw his enemy walking. He abducted his enemy
committed? and placed him in a vacant lot. The following
- In so far as the minor is concerned, the crime morning, his enemy was found in a vacant lot
committed is kidnapping and serious illegal dead with 10 gun shot wounds. The crime
detention. Even if it has not lasted for a period committed is murder. Obviously there was no
of more than three day, the fact that the victim intent to detain the said offended party. The intent
is a minor, the crime committed is kidnapping was to kill him. Therefore, the proper charge is
and serious illegal detention. murder and not kidnapping and serious illegal
- In so far as the father is concerned, since he detention with murder or homicide as the case
is not the victim of the crime of kidnapping, a maybe. In order to amount to kidnapping and
separate crime of homicide should be filed. serious illegal detention with homicide or murder
- Therefore, there are 2 crimes committed by or physical injuries, it is necessary that there must
said kidnapper: kidnapping and serious illegal be intent to detain and in the course of such
detention, in so far as the minor is concerned detention the victim is killed or raped or subjected
and homicide in so far as the father is to torture or other dehumanizing acts.
concerned.
If any of the circumstances is absent it will only be
slight illegal detention under article 268. mitigate the criminal liability of the offender.
uninhabited place. Uninhabited place is one 4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the
where there is remote possibility for the victim latter is abandoned
to receive some help. Luneta Park is a public
place. Therefore, A cannot be held liable Penalty will be qualified if
under Article 275. a. death of the minor shall result by reason of
such abandonment or
1st Act b. the safety of the child has been placed in
Example danger.
A was hunting in the forest. He found B in the
middle of the forest. There was a big trunk of a Art. 277. Abandonment of minor by person entrusted
tree in his neck; thus, B cannot move. He was with his custody; indifference of parents
begging for help. A however just left. B thereafter 2 acts punished:
was rescued. Can A be held liable under Article
275? 1) Abandonment of a child by a person
- Yes because A found B in an uninhabited entrusted with the custody
place, the forest. He was wounded, he was in Elements:
danger of dying because there was a big 1. The offender is any person who has
trunk in his neck. There was no detriment on charge of the rearing or education of
the part of A if he renders assistance but he a minor
failed to render the same. Therefore he is 2. The he deliver said minor to a public
liable under Article 275. institution or other persons
3. That it is without the consent of the
But what if A found B. B was bitten by a snake one who entrusted such child to his
and it was still there. B was asking for help but A care or in the absence of the latter,
did not help him because he was afraid that the without the consent of the proper
snake too might bite him. Can A be held liable authorities
under Article 275?
- No, because helping B would be detrimental 2) Indifference of Parents
on his part. Elements:
1. The offender is a parent
2nd Act 2. The he neglects his children by not
Example giving them the education
A was driving his car when suddenly it tripped 3. That his station in life requires such
over a stone. The stone flew, hitting the left eye of education and financial conditions
a bystander. Is A liable? permits it
- No because it was purely accidental. It is an
exempting circumstance. he was performing a Art. 278. Exploitation of minors.
lawful act with due care. An incident The following are the acts punished:
happened without fault or accident on his
part. 1) Any person who shall cause any boy or
girl under sixteen years of age to
However, when the left eye of the bystander bled, perform any dangerous feat of
he saw it, instead of bringing the person to the balancing, physical strength, or
hospital, he sped up. Is A criminally liable? contortion;
- Yes, A is criminally liable. When he failed to
render assistance to his victim, he is 2) Any person who, being an acrobat,
criminally liable under Article 275. gymnast, rope-walker, diver, wild-animal
tamer or circus manager or engaged in a
Art. 276. Abandoning a minor similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions
Elements: of these kinds children under sixteen
1. Offender is any person who has custody of a child years of age who are not his children or
2. The child is under 7 years of age descendants;
3. That he permanently, deliberately and consciously
abandons such child 3) Any person engaged in any of the
Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling Trespass to Dwelling vs. Trespass to Property
Elements:
1. Offender is a private person Trespass to Dwelling Trespass to Property
2. He enters the dwelling of another Place is a dwelling and Place is a closed
3. That such entrance is against the latters will inhabited premise or the fenced
estate of another
Trespass to Dwelling or Qualified Trespass to which is unihabited
Dwelling is committed by any private person who Prohibition to enter can Prohibition to enter
shall enter the dwelling of another against the
either be express or must be manifest 3) Threaten another with the infliction upon the
implied person, honor or property of the latter or of his
Entry was made against Entry was made family of any wrong amounting to a crime without
the will of the without seeking the the demand of money or imposition of any other
owner/possessor of permission of the condition
property owner/caretaker
thereof Art. 283. Light threats
Light threats:
Example - Any threat to commit a wrong not constituting a
Townhouse A was currently uninhabited. There was a crime, but it is always subject to a demand of
notice posted that it was for rent. X entered the said money or imposition of any other condition, even
townhouse. What crime was committed by A? though not unlawful
- Trespass to Property because at that time the
premises was closed and uninhabited and he Art. 284. Bond for good behavior
enters without securing the permission of the Example:
owner or the caretaker. A threatened to kill B. B filed a case of grave threats
against A. Upon filing of the case, what bail if any should
A and B, husband and wife, went on vacation for a the court impose upon A?
month. Their house was therefore uninhabited. X learned ANS: BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR - is a bail
that there was no one inside the house. he entered the required by the court to be posted by any accused
house. what crime was committed? Is it Trespass to only in the crimes of grave threats and other light
Property or Qualified Trespass to Dwelling? threats. This is to ensure that the offender will not
- Qualified Trespass to Dwelling. It is a residential make good the threat imposed by him. Failure to
place and someone is occupying it even if at the post the bond, the offender shall be sentenced to
moment it is uninhabited because the owners destierro.
went on vacation. It is considered an inhabited
place therefore the moment someone enters, it Art. 285. Other light threats
is considered trespass to dwelling and not Acts punished:
trespass to property.
1) Threatening another with a weapon or draw such
Section Three Threats and coercion weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-
defense
3 kinds of threats:
1. Grave threats
2. Light threats
3. Other light threats 2) Orally threatening, in the heat of anger, another
with some harm not constituting a crime, and who
Art. 282. Grave threats by subsequent acts show that he did not persist in
Acts punished: the idea involved in his threat
Threats can be committed personally, orally, in writing or will tell the Bureau of Customs that your car is
through an intermediary. If committed in writing or smuggled.
through an intermediary, the penalty is qualified.
CRIME: Light threats. A threatened to commit a
DISTINCTION: GRAVE, LIGHT, OTHER LIGHT wrong not constituting a crime. It is not a crime to
THREATS tell Customs that the car was smuggled. The
GRAVE LIGHT OTHER LIGHT threat is subject to a demand of money or the
THREATS THREATS THREATS imposition of any other condition, even though not
The threat is The threat does Committed by unlawful.
always & always not amount to a threatening another
amounting to crime. It is with a weapon or
and constituting always and draw such weapon
a crime. It may always subject in a quarrel, unless
A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter
or may not be to a demand of it be in lawful self-
seeking for payment of debt. B said, get out of my
subject to money or the defense; or orally
house. If I still see you later afternoon in my house when
demand of imposition of threatening, in the
I come back, I will kill you!
money or any other heat of anger,
imposition of condition, even another with some
CRIME: B committed Grave threats because there
other conditions. though not harm not
is a promise of a future wrong of killing to be
The offender unlawful. constituting a crime,
committed in the afternoon.
may or may not and who by
attain his subsequent acts
purpose. show that he did not
persist in the idea
involved in his A, creditor of B, was inside the house of the latter
threat; or orally seeking for payment of debt. B said, get out of my house
threatening to do right now or else I will kill you!
any harm not
constituting a felony. CRIME: B committed Grave coercion. The threat
is present, direct, personal, immediate and
imminent. It is not in the future.
Example:
A learned that B was spreading negative rumors against Art. 286. Grave coercions
him. A was so mad so he went to the house of B and 2 ways to commit grave coercion:
shouted, B get out of your house. I will kill you! I will kill 1. PREVENTIVE COERCION
you! But B did not go out of the house. Instead, it was - if a person prevents another by means of
the son of B who went out. A told the son to let his father violence or intimidation from doing
go out because A would kill him. Upon hearing this, the something not prohibited by law.
son went inside the house and did not go back. B as well Example:
did not go out. Later, A left Bs house. A wanted to enter the house of B against the latters will.
X saw A, so he prevented A. Nevertheless, A continued
CRIME: A committed other light threats. A, in the to enter. Because of this, X boxed A resulting to slight
heat of anger, orally threatened B with a wrong physical injuries.
constituting a crime but he did not pursue the CRIME: Slight physical injuries because X
idea. prevents a person from doing something
prohibited by law. In grave coercion, the offender
prevents someone to do something not prohibited
by law.
A saw that B has a new Lexus. A knew that the car was 2. COMPULSORY COERCION
smuggled. A told B. If you will not give me 500,000php, I
private communication between them. Can B use the there is intent to gain on the part of the
record in filing a case for slander against A? offender
ANS: No, because the act of tape recording 3. Intent to gain in taking the property
without being authorized by all the parties in a - Intent to gain is an internal state of
private communication is inadmissible in evidence mind. The law presumes that there is
in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative or intent to gain the moment that there is
administrative proceeding or investigation. taking of personal property of another
4. Taking is with violence and intimidation or
The only exception is when a police officer is force upon things
authorized by a written order of the court to
listen to, intercept or record any communication in Section One Robbery with violence against or
crimes involving treason, espionage, provoking intimidation of persons
war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy, mutiny in
the high seas, rebellion, conspiracy and proposal Art. 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation
to commit rebellion, inciting to rebellion, sedition, of persons
conspiracy to commit sedition, inciting to sedition
and kidnapping. 2 Types of Robbery:
1. WITH VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION
2) Knowingly possessing any tape record, wire - In this kind of robbery, the value of the
record, disc record, or any other such record, or property taken is immaterial because the
copies thereof, of any private communication or penalty is dependent on the violence
spoken word employed by the offender.
2. WITH FORCE UPON THINGS
3) By replaying the wire record, tape record, disc - The value of the property taken is material
record for any other person or persons; or because the penalty is dependent upon the
communicating the contents thereof, either value of the property.
verbally or in writing, to another person
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AND
4) Furnishing transcriptions of the wire record, disc INTIMIDATION
record or tape record, whether totally or partially, ACTS:
to any other person 1) When by reason or on the occasion of
robbery, homicide is committed
Title Ten 2) When robbery is accompanied by rape,
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY intentional mutilation, or arson
3) When by reason or on the occasion of
Chapter One robbery, any of the serious physical injuries
ROBBERY IN GENERAL resulting to insanity, imbecility, impotency or
blindness was committed
Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery 4) When by reason or on the occasion or
ROBBERY- committed by any person who, with intent to robbery, any of the of the serious physical
gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, injuries resulting to the loss of the use of
by means of violence or intimidation of any person, or using speech or the power to hear or to smell, or
force upon anything shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm,
or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such
Elements: member, or shall have become incapacitated
1. Offender unlawfully takes the personal for the work in which he was therefor
property of another habitually engaged
UNLAWFUL TAKING - deprivation of the 5) When the commission of the robbery is
offended party of his personal property. carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for
2. The personal property belongs to another the commission of the crime
person 6) In the execution of the robbery, and in
- If the property does not belong to consequence of the physical injuries inflicted,
another person, it cannot be said that the person injured shall have become
deformed, or shall have lost any other part of
his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or A was about to go out bringing with him the valuables
shall have been ill or incapacitated for the he robbed. However, he bumped the door. This
performance of the work in which he as awakened the owner, X, who tried to chase A. They
habitually engaged for a period of more than reached the garden part of the house. While therein, A
ninety days positioned himself to shoot X, so X jumped on A to
7) If the violence employed in the commission or struggle possession of the gun. In the course of the
robbery does not constitute the physical struggle, the gun fired and hit a balot vendor who
injuries covered by sub-divisions 3 and 4 of passed by the house of X.
said Article 263 or that only intimidation is CRIME: Robbery with homicide. Since it is a
employed. special complex crime, even if the victim of
Based on the foregoing, there exists crimes such as robbery is different from the victim of homicide or
robbery with homicide, robbery with rape, robbery with even if the killing is accidental, there is only a
serious physical injuries and robbery with unnecessary single indivisible crime committed. So long as the
violence and simple robbery. killing is by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery.
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
- is a special complex crime because in reality A, B and C entered the house of X to commit robbery.
there are two crimes committed but in the After taking the valuables and as they were about to
eyes of the law, there is only one crime. For leave, X was awakened. Among the three, it was only
as long as the original intent or original A who shot and killed X.
criminal design of the offender is to rob, the CRIME: All are criminally liable even if it is only A
killing may take place before, during or after who shot X. While there is a rule that in an
the robbery express or direct conspiracy the conspirators are
liable only for the crime agreed upon by them, the
- regardless of the number of persons killed, situation however falls under the exception.
there is only one crime committed. Also, even EXCEPTION: That is, when the conspiracy results
if the killing is unintentional or accidental, to a special complex crime. The crimes cannot be
there is still one crime committed. separated from each other. Thus, even if its only
A who shot X or even if the agreement is only to
- even if the victim of the killing is different from commit robbery, since homicide was committed by
the victim of the robbery, still it is robbery with reason or on the occasion of robbery, all are
homicide. This constitutes the difference criminally liable for the crime of robbery with
between kidnapping with serious illegal homicide.
detention because in this crime, the victim of EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: is when B
the kidnapping must also be the victim of the and C performed acts to prevent A from killing X.
killing
Example: People vs Cabbab
A went to the house of B and took the valuables In a game played by A, B, X, Y and Z, it was A who won
therein. During the taking, one jewelry box suddenly the game. After the game, while A, B and Z were about to
fell on the floor. This awakened the owner of the leave, X and Y were furiously looking at them. Suddenly, X
house, X. When A saw this, he immediately shot X and Y fired several shots against A, B and Z. Z, who was a
CRIME: Robbery with homicide because by police officer, dove into the canal in order to prevent
reason or on the occasion of robbery, homicide himself from being killed. Z was injured. Unfortunately, A
was committed. and B were killed and thereafter, the winnings of A were
taken by X and Y.
In same problem, wife of X was also awakened and Fiscal filed the cases of - 1. Robbery because of the taking
she started to shout. Because of this, A also shot the of the winnings, 2. Double murder because of the death of
wife A and B, and 3. Attempted murder insofar as Z is
CRIME: Robbery with homicide even if two concerned.
persons were killed since the crime is a special RTC ruled that the charges were wrong because the crime
complex crime. All the offenses are merged into a committed is robbery with double homicide and attempted
single indivisible crime of robbery with homicide. murder
Upon appeal, CA ruled that the ruling of RTC is incorrect Even if not all of the offenders raped the victim,
because the crime committed is robbery with homicide and still all of them are criminally liable for the crime of
attempted murder robbery with rape because the two lookouts did
SC: The Fiscal, RTC and CA were all wrong. The not perform acts to prevent the rape.
crime committed is only the single indivisible
offense of robbery with homicide. All the acts are ROBBERY WITH INTENTIONAL MUTILATION,
considered absorbed by robbery with homicide ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES AND
despite the fact that 2 persons were killed and 1 ROBBERY WITH ARSON
person was injured. All these circumstances are - For as long as the original intent is to commit
merged into an integrated whole; that is, the single robbery, the intentional mutilation, serious
indivisible offense of robbery with homicide physical injury or arson may be committed
before, during or after the robbery.
ROBBERY WITH RAPE Example:
- is also a special complex crime. So long as It was payday. A and B saw X with a bag. A and B
the intention of the offender is to commit signaled X to give them his bag. X gave the bag and left.
robbery, the rape can be committed before, A and B went to a nearby waiting shed bringing with
during and after the robbery. Regardless of them the bag of X. In the waiting shed, A and B divided
the number of rapes, there is only a single the money of X. In the course of the partition, A gave B
indivisible crime. There is no such crime as only a small share of the money. B got mad. B shot A.
robbery with multiple rapes. CRIME: Robbery with Homicide, even if it was an
Example: offender killed. This is because the killing took
A woman was walking on her way home. It was payday place by reason of the robbery, while A and B
and her salary was inside her bag. X, the robber, took were dividing the loot.
the bag of the woman and got the money therein. X
found the woman attractive so he raped her twice. In the same problem, while A and B were dividing the
CRIME: Robbery with rape, regardless of the loot, B got a small share. Because of this, B without
number of times the woman was raped. intent to kill shot A who suffered serious physical injuries.
CRIME: Robbery with serious physical injuries
have entered said place to take the property of In the same problem, what if A was in need of money, he
another. saw the expensive watch of B on top of the table and
sold the watch. What crime was committed?
Example A committed the crime of theft since there is no
A, in order to rob the house made an opening in the roof, breaking or forcibly opening the receptacle. Under
sufficient for him to enter. So he used a rope in going Art 332, he is only liable for civil liability. They are
down and thereafter he took the valuables and then left. free from criminal liability.
What crime is committed?
Robbery by use of force upon things. A made an Art. 332. Persons exempt from
opening and he was able to enter fully. criminal liability. No criminal, but
only civil liability, shall result from the
What if he made an entry, let down a rope with a hook commission of the crime of theft,
and used it in taking the valuable. swindling or malicious mischief
The crime committed only is theft with aggravating committed or caused mutually by the
circumstance of the breaking of the roof. His body following persons:
did not enter the premises. 1. Spouses, ascendants and
descendants, or relatives by affinity
2) When the offender manages to enter said in the same line.
inhabited place, dwelling, public place or place 2. The widowed spouse with respect
dedicated to religious worship without any to the property which belonged to
unlawful entry, or is an insider, and once inside, the deceased spouse before the
he used force in opening in order to: same shall have passed into the
a. Break doors, wardrobes, chests, or possession of another; and
any other kind of locked or sealed 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-
furniture or receptacle in-law and sisters-in-law, if living
NOTE: together.
The second act is when the offender was able to The exemption established by this article
enter without unlawful entry or was an insider and shall not be applicable to strangers
once inside, breaks the doors, wardrobes, chest, participating in the commission of the
receptacles, and thereafter took the personal crime.
properties inside the house.
Since it refers to simple crimes, if the crime committed is
Example estafa through falsification of public document, there will
A and B are brothers, living in the same house and in the be criminal liability. This exemption from criminal liability
same room but have different cabinets where each of the will only lie in the cases mentioned in Art. 332.
cabinets have locks. One time brother A was in need of
money and wanted to borrow money from brother B, but 3) When the offender manages to enter said
brother B was out of the house. So what brother A did inhabited place, dwelling, public place, or place
was that he forcibly opened the cabinet of brother B and dedicated to religious worship without any
took the expensive jewelries of brother B and unlawful entry, once inside he took the sealed
appropriated the jewelry? What are the crimes receptacle outside to be opened or forced open.
committed? Is Brother A only liable civilly?
A is guilty of robbery with use of force upon things. The offender was able to enter and once inside,
He is an insider, and he used force to break open he did not use force to open the close cabinet or
the cabinet of B. He did not commit theft. Since receptacle. Instead, he took the cabinet and
the crime committed is robbery, brother A is receptacle outside to open it.
criminally liable and civilly liable. Because under
Article 332, it is only on cases of theft, swindling, Circumstances that will qualify robbery with use of
estafa, and malicious mischief, wherein theres no force upon things:
criminal liability but only civil liability in case of Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a
relatives living together. band.
Under Article 300, if robbery is committed with
in an uninhabited place and by a band the
law used the conjunction AND, both must
concur in order to amount a qualifying The crime committed is robbery with physical
circumstance, to increase the penalty. So it injuries depending on the injuries sustained by the
should be in an uninhabited place and by a victim. In order to amount to robbery with
band, therefore both must be present. homicide, it is necessary that both crimes must be
present and there is no such thing as robbery
Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in with frustrated homicide or attempted
an uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use of homicide, for it is the law which provides for the
firearm on a street, road or alley. crime which must be complexed, and the law does
In case of robbery with serious physical injuries, not provide that frustrated homicide or attempted
unnecessary violence or simple violence, how will the homicide must be complexed with robbery.
crime be qualified?
The answer is under Art. 295, where if the said In the instant case, since the killing took place at
robbery is: the spur of the moment, then it is robbery with
1. Committed in an uninhabited place OR homicide.
by a band
2. By attacking any moving train, street car,
motor vehicle or airship Chapter Two
3. By entering the passengers BRIGANDAGE
compartments in a train; or
4. Taking the passengers by surprise in What if robbery was committed by 4 armed men?
their respective conveyances
5. On a street, road, highway, or alley and Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by
the Intimidation is made use of a firearm the members thereof.
A was walking, suddenly there are 4 men with knives and
NOTE: took As bag which is full of money. A put up a fight. And
That in case of robbery with violence or so these armed men killed A. What crime is committed?
intimidation on persons, the qualifying Is the crime committed robbery in band with homicide?
circumstances are present, only one of these is There is no such crime as robbery by a band with
sufficient to qualify the penalty. The law here uses homicide. The said use of band is only an
the conjunction OR not AND. aggravating circumstance. The proper designation
of the crime is robbery with homicide. The fact that
Example: it is committed by 4 armed men is only an
A went to the house of B. A told B this is a hold up and aggravating circumstance. Under Art. 296, if a
bring out the valuables. Instead of bringing the valuables band committed robbery, it is only an aggravating
to A, B panicked and shouted. A therefore shot B. B died. circumstance.
A also panicked and left the place without bringing his
loot. What is/are the crime/s committed? Art. 306. Brigandage.
The crime committed by A is attempted robbery Under Article 306, it is committed by at least 4 armed men
with homicide. This is also a special complex for the purposes of -
crime. Here robbery was attempted because he 1. committing robbery in the highway;
was unable to take any of the property. The fact 2. kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or
that A was able to announce hold-up and bring the ransom
valuables to him means that the original design is 3. for any other purpose to be attained by means of
to commit robbery. It was attempted because he force and violence.
was unable to take the property, and in the course
of thereof, he killed the owner. Art. 296 Art. 306
Both require at least 4 armed persons
In order to amount to special complex crime, it is It is required that the 4 The crime is already
necessary that both the robbery and homicide armed men must actually consummated by the mere
must be consummated. take part in the commission fact that 4 armed men
of the robbery formed a band of robbers.
What if in the course of robbery, the said owner was shot It is not required that they
but was able to survive. What crime is committed? actually commit the
enumerated purposes.
In PD 532, brigandage is defined as the seizure of any The definition is almost the same as robbery. The
person for ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes, or difference lies in the case of robbery where there is
the taking away of property of another by means of violence or intimidation of persons and use of force upon
violence against or intimidation of persons of force upon things, while in theft, there is no violence, intimidation
things or other unlawful means, committed by any person against persons or force upon things.
on any Philippine highway.
Example:
Art 306 vs. PD 532, or the Anti-Highway Robbery Law 1. A person who found a lost personal property of
of 1974 another but did not give it to the police, there is
theft.
Art. 306 PD 532 2. A damaged the property of B, he make use of that
Requires that there must be No requisite as to the # of damage.
at least 4 armed men perpetrators of the crime 3. There is a vacant lot guarded by X. A person
Even a single person can entered the vacant lot and took the fruits.
commit the crime of
brigandage Valenzuela v. People
The mere formation of the There must be an actual There is no frustrated theft. In this case, the offender took
band of robbers for any of commission of the crime or boxes of tide from SM North Edsa and placed it in the taxi.
the purposes mentioned will no crime will arise Before they were able to left the premises of SM, they were
bring about the crime apprehended. The offenders were charged of
There is a predetermined or There is no preconceived consummated theft. They did not deny that they committed
preconceived victim victim. It is committed theft but their defense is that they committed frustrated
indiscriminately on any theft.
person passing on the The SC En Banc in 2007 ruled that there is no crime as
highway as long as it is frustrated theft. In case of theft, unlawful taking is deemed
committed in a Philippine complete the moment the offender gain possession of the
highway. property of another, theft is consummated.
jewelries with grave abuse of confidence. Is A liable for immediate medical treatment. What is/are the crimes
qualified theft? committed by X?
Yes, according to the Supreme Court, the law The crime committed by X is only carnapping. The
uses the conjunction OR. The fact that the fact that X shot A, where there is frustrated
accused is a domestic servant, it will suffice. The homicide, it falls under violence or intimidation
law does not require that abuse of confidence to which was used by the offender in committing the
be established. It will suffice that the accused is a crime. Since there is violence, the penalty is 17
domestic servant. years and 4 months to 30 years.
A was a security guard. The owner of the house left his If again, in the same problem, A tried to stop X and X
key to the security guard. However, the security guard shot A. A died. What is the crime committed?
used the key to open the house of the owner and took The fact that the owner is killed or raped as a
the valuables. What crime is committed? consequence, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to
The Security Guard is liable for qualified theft death. It will bring about a higher penalty, but
because of grave abuse of confidence. not as a special complex crime because it is a
Special Penal Law. Though it is akin to a special
RA 6539 (ANTI-CARNAPPING ACT) complex crime, the killing is absorbed. The crime
is carnapping. It is also not a bailable offense.
Carnapping- is the taking with intent to gain, of motor
vehicle belonging to another without the consent of the
latter, or by means of violence against or intimidation of PD 533 (ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW)
persons, or by use of force upon things.
Cattle Rustling - defined as the taking away by any
Elements: means, method or scheme, without the consent of the
1. Actual taking of motor vehicle owner/raiser, of any large cattle whether or not for profit or
2. The vehicle belongs to another for gain, or whether committed with or without violence
3. There is intent to gain in the taking of the vehicle against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. It
of another includes the killing of a large cattle or taking it as a meat or
4. Said taking is taking without the consent of the hide without the consent of the owner/raiser.
owner or by means of violence or intimidation or
by means of force upon things. Large Cattle- shall include cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass,
or other domesticated member of the bovine family. Goats
Example: are not large cattle. (sabi nung isang justice sa SC na prof
A was driving his car and suddenly felt the need to naming dati, si Lawyer daw pag kinidnap cattle rustling daw
answer the call of nature so he parked his vehicle. tawag dun. Ang evil nya!)
Suddenly, there was X and saw A was out of the car, and
the door of the car was open and the key was left inside Example:
the car. X drove away with the car. What is the crime As carabao was tied on the mango tree. X saw the
committed? carabao alone. So what X did was he untied the carabao
The crime committed is carnapping. Even if there and took the carabao away. A saw X with his carabao so
is no violence or intimidation against person or A tried to catch up with X. As A was able to catch up with
force upon things, so long as said taking is without X, a fight ensued. X took his bolo and hacked A to death.
the consent of the owner, it will amount to What is the crime committed by X?
carnapping. The crime committed by X is only cattle rustling.
The fact that the owner was killed is within the
Under Sec. 14, the penalty if there no violence or meaning of violence or intimidation against
intimidation against persons or use of force on persons. It will not bring about a separate and
things, the penalty is 14 years and 8 months to 17 distinct crime of murder. The Anti-Cattle Rustling
years and 4 months. Law, although a special law, is not malum
prohibitum but a malum in se. Under Sec. 10 of
In the given situation, what if A saw X and there was a the law, it is expressly provided that this law
fight that ensued between them. X shot A, and X was amends Art. 309 and 310 of the RPC. Since it is
able to take the vehicle. A however survived due to an amendment, the SC it is a malum in se and not
a malum prohibitum.
Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library Chapter Five
and National Museum. CULPABLE INSOLVENCY
The value of the property is immaterial because
the law prescribed the penalty of arresto mayor or Art. 314. Fraudulent insolvency. Any person who shall
fine or both. abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors,
shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if he be a
Chapter Four merchant and the penalty of prision correccional in its
USURPATION maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period, if
he be not a merchant.
Art. 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation of
real rights in property. Chapter Six
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
2 acts punished under Art 312:
1) Occupation of real property which is committed by Art. 315. Swindling (estafa). Any person who shall
any person who by means of violence against or defraud another by any of the means mentioned here in
intimidation shall occupy the real property of below shall be punished by:
another
2) Usurpation of real rights in property committed by 1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
any person who by means of violence against or period to prision mayor in its minimum period, if the
intimidation shall usurp any real rights in property amount of the fraud is over 12,000 pesos but does not
of another person exceed 22,000 pesos, and if such amount exceeds the
latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall
Example: be imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for
There was a vacant lot. Here comes A and B and his each additional 10,000 pesos; but the total penalty
family. The said land or property was being guarded by which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years.
X. A and B went inside the vacant lot and tried to build a In such cases, and in connection with the accessory
nipa house because they do not have any house. And so penalties which may be imposed under the provisions
the guard told them that A and B has no right to build a of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor
nipa house because the lot is owned by Y. However, A or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
and B told the guard that they do not have any house. In
the course of the argument, A and B killed the guard. 2nd. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
What is/are the crimes committed? and medium periods, if the amount of the fraud is over
6,000 pesos but does not exceed 12,000 pesos;
The crime committed is only occupation of real
property. The killing is only a means to occupy the 3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum
real property. It falls under violence against or period to prision correccional in its minimum period if
intimidation of persons in occupying the real such amount is over 200 pesos but does not exceed
property. 6,000 pesos; and
In the same problem A and B put up their house in the 4th. By arresto mayor in its maximum period, if such
vacant property. The owner learned this and went to A amount does not exceed 200 pesos, provided that in
and Bs house. However, A and B killed the owner. the four cases mentioned, the fraud be committed by
In this case, two crimes are committed. The killing any of the following means:
took place after occupying the place. This time,
the crimes committed are occupation and 1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence,
homicide or murder as the case maybe. namely:
(a) By altering the substance, quantity, or
Art. 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks. Any quality or anything of value which the
person who shall alter the boundary marks or monuments offender shall deliver by virtue of an
of towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks obligation to do so, even though such
intended to designate the boundaries of the same, shall be obligation be based on an immoral or
punished by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 100 illegal consideration.
pesos, or both. (b) By misappropriating or converting, to the
Example:
A is bound to deliver boxes of marijuana to B. At the A went to the bank and then A told the teller, Here is
bottom of the box were inferior qualities of marijuana 100k, kindly deposit this to my account. Here is my
while on top are high grade marijuana. Is A liable of passbook and here is the money. Deposit it because I
estafa? am in a hurry and I will drop by later in the afternoon.
A is liable for estafa. B can file a case of estafa However, A was not able to drop by in the afternoon. So
against A. (for purposes of example only because A went the following day. When A asked for the
B may be held liable for dangerous drugs act) passbook, he realized that the 100k was not deposited
by the teller to his account. The teller misappropriated
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the the 100k. What is the crime committed?
prejudice of another, money, goods, or any other The crime committed is Qualified Theft. The SC
personal property received by the offender in ruled that when the depositor leaves to the bank
trust or on commission, or for administration, or his money for deposit, what has been transferred
under any other obligation involving the duty to is only the material or physical possession. The
make delivery of or to return the same, even juridical possession of the money remains with the
though such obligation be totally or partially owner of the money. Hence, when it is
guaranteed by a bond; or by denying having misappropriated by the teller of the bank, it is only
received such money, goods, or other property. qualified theft and not estafa.
The moment that the offended party entrusted the A works in the field and makes cash advance to his
money or goods or any other personal property to company. One time he went to a certain place and there
the offender, it is necessary that there must be a is a cash advance. When A returned, A failed to liquidate
transfer of juridical possession. Juridical the expenses in the cash advance despite demands.
possession is a legal right over the property; What is the crime committed by A?
possession in the concept of the owner. During According to the SC, a cash advance is in the
the time that the possessor has legal possession nature of a loan. When an employee makes a
of the property, even the owner cannot file estafa cash advance to the company, it is in effect
to the possessor because it is the rightful obtaining a loan from the company. Therefore
possessor at that moment. ownership is transferred to the employee because
there is no obligation to return the very same
If what has been transferred is material or physical money. Hence there can be no estafa. Since
possession, and the offender misappropriates the ownership was transferred and that the employee
same, he is only liable for qualified theft. cannot pay, we have the relationship of creditor
and debtor, not that entrustor- entrustee. There
Example: will be no criminal case but only civil liability.
A rented a bicycle from B for Php500 for 2 hours. A was Hence, we have a civil case of collection for sum
in possession of the said bicycle. 2 hours had lapsed, A of money.
was not able to return the bicycle to B. B demanded that
A return the bicycle, but A did not. What is the crime (c) By taking undue advantage of the signature of the
committed by A? offended party in blank, and by writing any
The crime committed by A is estafa because it document above such signature in blank, to the
there is a lease agreement. What has been prejudice of the offended party or of any third
transferred to A is juridical possession of the person.
property by virtue of the lease agreement.
Example:
A gave B a watch. A told B This is my watch, use it as a The owner of the company has blank documents with his
collateral for my debt. B however, instead of using it as signature and gave it to his secretary. The said
collateral for the loan of A, sold the watch and documents will be used in case of emergency. One time
appropriated the proceeds of the watch. What is the the secretary wrote a document above the blank
crime committed? signature stating that the said owner will be assuming the
The crime committed by B is qualified theft and indebtedness of the secretary.
not estafa. There is no transfer of juridical The crime committed by the secretary is estafa
possession. A remains to be the owner of the because there is abuse of confidence. The owner
watch, and said watch is only used as a collateral. entrusted the blank document to the secretary.
What if the secretary placed the blank document it on the (d) By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in
table. Here comes a visitor, and upon seeing the blank payment of an obligation when the offender
document, he took one and then he went to his house therein were not sufficient to cover the amount
and wrote a document stating that the said owner shall of the check. The failure of the drawer of the
assume his liability. check to deposit the amount necessary to cover
The crime committed is not estafa but falsification his check within three (3) days from receipt of
of a private document because he made it appear notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder
that the owner participated in procuring the that said check has been dishonored for lack of
document when in fact, the owner did not. insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie
evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or
ESTAFA BY MEANS OF FALSE PRETENSE or BY fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885,
FRAUDULENT ACTS PRIOR TO OR SIMULTANEOUS approved June 17, 1967.)
TO THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE (2ND form)
BP 22 (BOUNCING CHECKS LAW)
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to 2 acts punished in BP 22:
possess power, influence, qualifications, 1) Making or drawing and issuing a check knowing at
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary the time of issue that he does not have sufficient
transactions, or by means of other similar funds.
deceits. The offender knows that he does not have
sufficient funds in his account at the time of the
Example: issuance of the check.
A, Band C are newly graduates. They just passed the
nursing board exam. X learned that A, B, and C passed 2) Failing to keep sufficient funds to cover the full
the board so he went to the house of A, B and C and told amount of the check.
them that X has a placement agency that will help them The funder knows that he has sufficient amount at
find work abroad. AB and C believed X, and X demanded the time of the issuance of the check but failed to
that they give X 100k for processing fees. A, B, and C keep sufficient funds to cover the amount after the
never saw X again. Later X was arrested. What are the issuance of the check. The crime will arise for his
crimes committed by X? failure to keep sufficient funds or maintain his
X may be liable of estafa by falsely pretending to credit to cover the full amount for a period of 90
possess power or agency, where in fact, he is not days from the date appearing on the check.
licensed by the POEA of Department of Labor.
Example:
Can he also be held liable for illegal recruitment? A is building a house, so he went to B, who is the owner
He can also be liable for illegal recruitment under of the hardware store. A told B that he doesnt have any
the labor code. money at the moment but he will be issuing a check
guaranteeing that it will be funded on the 15 th, which is
Under PD 2018, which amended Article 38 and 39 the maturity date. B believed As representation that the
of the Labor Code, where if illegal recruitment is check will be funded so B placed the construction
committed by a syndicate (3 or more persons) or materials to A. On the 15th day of the month, the check
in large scale (where the victims are 3 or more bounced. B sent a notice of dishonor to A, but despite
persons individually or as a group), the crime such notice of dishonor, months had passed and yet A
committed is economic sabotage. still failed to pay. What crimes may be filed against A?
B may file a case of estafa because the said
By reason thereof, the offender is liable for 2 check was issued in concomitance with the said
crimes, and that is estafa and illegal recruitment. fraud. Where it not for the said check, B would not
give the construction materials to A.
Can the offender be prosecuted at the same time?
Yes, because estafa requires illegal deceit or false Aside from that, can A also be held liable for violation of
pretense, while in illegal recruitment does not BP22?
require deceit or false pretense. The mere fact of A may also be held liable for violation of BP 22. It
recruiting where he does not have any license will apply in any cases the moment the check
makes him liable for illegal recruitment.
bounce. The essence of BP22 is the issuance of knowledge of insufficiency of funds can be proven
the worthless check. by other evidence.
o However, said offense will not automatically Penalty for violation of BP22:
amount to estafa. In order to amount estafa, it is Imprisonment of not less than 30 days but not
necessary that the issuance of the check is the more than 1 year or a fine of not less than but not
reason of the defraudation. That is, where it not more than double the amount of the check which
for the said check, where it not for the promise of fine shall in no case exceed PHP200,000, or both
the said check, the offended party would not have such fine and imprisonment at the discretion of the
parted with his property or money. court.
o In order to amount estafa by postdating a check,
the issuance of the check must not be in payment NOTE:
of a pre-existing obligation. It is necessary that the In consonance with this penalty, the SC in the
obligation is in concomitance with the issuance of cases of Rosalie v. CA and VACA v. CA, SC
the check. issued AC 10-2000. In this Supreme Court AC,
o In case of BP 22, even if in payment of pre- because of its decision in the said cases, in lieu of
existing obligation, the moment the check penalty, in lieu of imprisonment, the proper
bounced, BP 22 will apply. penalty to be imposed would be fine, if the
o In case of estafa, the offender must make good of offender acted in good faith or clear mistake of
the check within a period of 3 days. In BP 22, the fact without any taint of negligence.
offender must make good of the check within 5
banking days. The SC again issued AC 13-2001 to clarify the
first circular. AC 13-2001 states that the tenor and
When is there prima facie evidence of knowledge of intent of AC 10-2000 does not erase imprisonment
insufficiency of funds in BP 22? as an alternative penalty. What 10-2000
Section 2 of BP 22, there arises the prima facie knowledge establishes is a rule of preference, and that is, if
of insufficiency of funds when the offender makes or draws the offender acted in good faith, and there is clear
and issues a check which bounced when deposited within mistake of fact without any taint of negligence, fine
the period of 90 days from the moment of its issue. should be the appropriate penalty. Nevertheless,
still whether to impose penalty of imprisonment of
Elements of prima facie knowledge: fine is within the sound discretion of the court.
1. The check must be deposited within 90 days from
date appearing on the check; In case the penalty imposed is only fine, there is
2. There must be notice of dishonor received by the no hindrance in the court to impose subsidiary
drawer of the check; imprisonment in case of failure to pay fine.
3. The drawer of the check failed to make good of
the check within 5 banking days from receipt of Art. 316. Other forms of swindling. The penalty of
the notice of dishonor. arresto mayor in its minimum and medium period and a fine
of not less than the value of the damage caused and not
If the drawer was able to make good of the more than three times such value, shall be imposed upon:
check within 5 banking days, the prima facie 1. Any person who, pretending to be owner of any real
presumption of knowledge of insufficiency of property, shall convey, sell, encumber or mortgage
funds will not arise. the same.
2. Any person, who, knowing that real property is
Example: encumbered, shall dispose of the same, although
If the holder deposited the check on the 100 th day. Can such encumbrance be not recorded.
the drawer of the check be still held liable for violation of 3. The owner of any personal property who shall
BP 22? wrongfully take it from its lawful possessor, to the
Yes, the drawer is liable for violation of BP 22. prejudice of the latter or any third person.
What is erased only is the prima facie knowledge 4. Any person who, to the prejudice of another, shall
of insufficiency of funds. But so long as the check execute any fictitious contract.
is not a stale check (check beyond 6 months or 5. Any person who shall accept any compensation
120 days). If said check is dishonored, violation of given him under the belief that it was in payment of
BP 22 can still arise, because the prima facie services rendered or labor performed by him, when
in fact he did not actually perform such services or province where such property is located.
labor.
6. Any person who, while being a surety in a bond Chapter Eight
given in a criminal or civil action, without express ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING
authority from the court or before the cancellation of DESTRUCTIONS
his bond or before being relieved from the obligation
contracted by him, shall sell, mortgage, or, in any
other manner, encumber the real property or Chapter Eight
properties with which he guaranteed the fulfillment of ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING
DESTRUCTIONS
such obligation.
Art. 320. Destructive arson. The penalty of reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua
Art. 317. Swindling a minor. Any person who taking shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:
advantage of the inexperience or emotions or feelings of a 1. Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or military powder
minor, to his detriment, shall induce him to assume any or fireworks factory, ordinance, storehouse, archives
obligation or to give any release or execute a transfer of or general museum of the Government.
any property right in consideration of some loan of money, 2. Any passenger train or motor vehicle in motion or
vessel out of port.
credit or other personal property,whether the loan clearly 3. In an inhabited place, any storehouse or factory of
appears in the document or is shown in any other form, inflammable or explosive materials.
shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor and a fine of a sum
ranging from 10 to 50 per cent of the value of the obligation Art. 321. Other forms of arson. When the arson
contracted by the minor. consists in the burning of other property and under the
circumstances given hereunder, the offender shall be
punishable:
Art. 318. Other deceits. The penalty of arresto mayor
1. By reclusion temporal or reclusion perpetua:
and a fine of not less than the amount of the damage (a) if the offender shall set fire to any building,
caused and not more than twice such amount shall be farmhouse, warehouse, hut, shelter, or vessel in port,
imposed upon any person who shall defraud or damage knowing it to be occupied at the time by one or more
another by any other deceit not mentioned in the preceding persons;
articles of this chapter. (b) If the building burned is a public building and value
of the damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
Any person who, for profit or gain, shall interpret dreams,
(c) If the building burned is a public building and the
make forecasts, tell fortunes, or take advantage of the purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used
credulity of the public in any other similar manner, shall in instituting prosecution for the punishment of
suffer the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding violators of the law, irrespective of the amount of the
200 pesos. damage;
(d) If the building burned is a public building and the
Chapter Seven purpose is to destroy evidence kept therein to be used
in legislative, judicial or administrative proceedings,
CHATTEL MORTGAGE irrespective of the amount of the damage; Provided,
however, That if the evidence destroyed is to be used
Art. 319. Removal, sale or pledge of mortgaged against the defendant for the prosecution of any crime
property. The penalty or arresto mayor or a fine punishable under existing laws, the penalty shall be
amounting to twice the value of the property shall be reclusion perpetua;
imposed upon: (e) If the arson shall have been committed with the
intention of collecting under an insurance policy
1. Any person who shall knowingly remove any
against loss or damage by fire.
personal property mortgaged under the Chattel
Mortgage Law to any province or city other than the 2. By reclusion temporal:
one in which it was located at the time of the (a) If an inhabited house or any other building in which
execution of the mortgage, without the written people are accustomed to meet is set on fire, and the
consent of the mortgagee, or his executors, culprit did not know that such house or building was
occupied at the time, or if he shall set fire to a moving
administrators or assigns.
freight train or motor vehicle, and the value of the
2. Any mortgagor who shall sell or pledge personal damage caused exceeds 6,000 pesos;
property already pledged, or any part thereof, (b) If the value of the damage caused in paragraph (b)
under the terms of the Chattel Mortgage Law, of the preceding subdivision does not exceed 6,000
without the consent of the mortgagee written on the pesos;
back of the mortgage and noted on the record
hereof in the office of the Register of Deeds of the
If the intention is to kill the offended party, and the means When is there simple arson otherwise known as other
employed is through burning the house, the crime cases of arson in PD 1613?
committed is MURDER. If however, the intention of the Burning of:
offender is to destroy the property of the offended party by 1. Any building used as offices of the government or
fire, and the offender did not know that someone is inside any of its agencies;
and death results, the crime is still simple arson. It will only 2. Any inhabited house or dwelling;
qualify the penalty to RP to death.
Penalty for destructive arson: Reclusion Perpetua to It is a crime which can only be committed by means of
Death intent. There must be deliberate intent to cause damage to
If as a result of the commission of any acts of the property of another, because if there is no intent to
destructive arson, death results, the penalty cause damage in the property, the liability will be damages
should be death. only; civil liability and not criminal liability.
In case of simple arson, reclusion temporal to
reclusion perpetua Sample problem:
Under Sec 5 of PD 1613, if by reason or on the A and B were fighting, and in the course of their fight, A fell
occasion of simple arson, death results, the on the floor and the floor was damaged. The liability will
penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. Therefore, only be a civil action for damages.
whatever may be the crime may be, if by reason of
said arson, death results, it will aggravate the Special cases of Malicious Mischief:
crime of arson and the homicide will be absorbed 1. Causing damage to obstruct the performance of
in the arson. public functions;
2. Using poisonous or corrosive substances
3. Spreading any infection or contagion among cattle
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF 4. Causing damage to the property of the National
Art. 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. Any Library or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
person who shall deliberately cause the property of road, promenade, or any other thing used in
another any damage not falling within the terms of the common by public
next preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious
mischief.
Art. 330. Damage and obstruction to means of
Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. Any communication. The penalty of prision correccional
person who shall cause damage to obstruct the in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
performance of public functions, or using any upon any person who shall damage any railway,
poisonous or corrosive substance; or spreading any telegraph or telephone lines.
infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars,
damage to the property of the National Museum or collision or other accident, the penalty of prision mayor
National Library, or to any archive or registry, shall be imposed, without prejudice to the criminal
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing used liability of the offender for the other consequences of
in common by the public, shall be punished: his criminal act.
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and medium For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds electric wires, traction cables, signal system and other
1,000 pesos; things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not exceed the constitute an integral part of a railway system.
abovementioned amount but it is over 200 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not exceed 200 Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public
pesos. monuments or paintings. Any person who shall
destroy or damage statues or any other useful or
Art. 329. Other mischiefs. The mischiefs not ornamental public monument shall suffer the penalty of
included in the next preceding article shall be arresto mayor in its medium period to prision
punished: correccional in its minimum period.
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or
periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds ornamental painting of a public nature shall suffer the
1,000 pesos; penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment, in the
periods, if such value is over 200 pesos but does not discretion of the court.
exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than the value of Chapter Ten
the damage caused and not more than 200 pesos, if the EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
amount involved does not exceed 200 pesos or cannot IN CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
be estimated. Art. 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. No
criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the
Forcible abduction- taking away of a woman against her In qualified seduction and consented abduction, acts of
will with lewd design. lasciviousness in circumstances of seduction: INSTANCES
WHERE VIRGINITY IS AN ELEMENT
Woman can be any person. Age, virginity, civil status is not
material. For as long as the taking away is done with lewd Note: In consented abduction, sexual intercourse is not an
design and against her will. element, so if after the woman ran away with the man, yet
note that sexual intercourse is not an element. If she does not want to have sexual intercourse but the man
by reason of the forcible abduction, the man had forced her and was able to succeed in having sexual
sexual intercourse with the woman, it may result in intercourse, the crime committed is consented abduction
a complex crime of rape with forcible abduction. with rape.
Art. 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes Simulation of birth- takes place when the woman pretends
against chastity. Person guiltyof rape, seduction or to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on the day of the
abduction, shall also be sentenced: delivery, takes the child of another as her own.
1. To indemnify the offended woman.
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should Sample problem:
prevent him from so doing. 1. A was a pregnant. She told the midwife that she
3. In every case to support the offspring. does not want the baby. The midwife said that she
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided knew a couple who wanted a child. This couple
for in Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced, in took the baby and registered the child as their
the same proceeding or in a separate civil proceeding, own. What are the crimes committed and who are
to indemnify for damages caused to the offended liable?
spouse.
All of them are all liable for simulation of birth. The said
Art. 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers, couple pretended that the child is their own child. In that
or other persons entrusted with the custody of the case, said child lost its original status.
offended party. The ascendants, guardians,
curators, teachers and any person who, by abuse of 2. In substitution of a child, the classic example is
authority or confidential relationships, shall cooperate MARA and CLARA.
as accomplices in the perpetration of the crimes
embraced in chapters, 3. In the 3rd act, it is necessary that the child is
second, third and fourth, of this title, shall be punished legitimate, not illegitimate. The offender conceals
as principals. or abandons the legitimate child and the intention
of the offender is to lose the childs civil status.
Teachers or other persons in any other capacity
entrusted with the education and guidance of youth, Sample problem:
shall also suffer the penalty of temporary special 1. The offender abandons the child in the forest. The
disqualification in its maximum period to perpetual child is one month old. Later however the child
special disqualification. was rescued. The crime committed was attempted
Any person falling within the terms of this article, and parricide, because it can be seen that there was
any other person guilty of corruption of minors for the intent to kill.
benefit of another, shall be punished by special
disqualification from filling the office of guardian. 2. A couple gave birth to its 13th child. They are very
poor. So the couple placed the baby in the gate of
Title Twelve a well-known family. What crimes are committed?
CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS -Crime committed abandonment of the legitimate
Chapter one child with the intent to lose its civil status. There is
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS AND USURPATION OF CIVIL no other intent of the parents but to lose its status
STATUS as a poor child.
Art. 347. Simulation of births, substitution of one child
for another and concealment or abandonment of a
legitimate child. The simulation of births and the Art. 348. Usurpation of civil status. The penalty of
substitution of one child for another shall be punished prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who
by prision mayor and a fine of notexceeding 1,000 shall usurp the civil status of another, should he do so
pesos. for the purpose of defrauding the offended part or his
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person heirs; otherwise, the penalty of prision correccional in
who shall conceal or abandonany legitimate child with its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed.
intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.
Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in Chapter Two
violation of the duties of hisprofession or office, shall ILLEGAL MARRIAGES
cooperate in the execution of any of the crimes Art. 349. Bigamy. The penalty of prision mayor shall
mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs, shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract a
suffer the penalties therein prescribed and also the second or subsequent marriage before the former
penalty of temporary special disqualification. marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the
absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead
Three acts punished under Art. 347: by means of a judgment rendered in the proper
1. Simulation of birth proceedings.
2. Substitution of a child
Sample problem:
Forms of libel: Venue: RPC provides that even if the crime is prision
1. Written defamation correccional, it must be filed before the RTC where the
2. Oral defamation article was printed or first published, or RTC where any of
3. Slander by deed the offended party is residing. Note that this is a
4. Defamatory acts substantive law. It is not found in the Rules of Court
If the offended party is a public officer and is working in
Elements of libel: Manila, it must be filed before RTC of Manila or where the
1. There must be an imputation or allegation of a article was first published. If the public officer is not working
crime, or a vice of defect, real or imaginary, or any in Manila, it shall be filed in the RTC where he is working at
act or omission, condition, status or circumstance the time of the commission of the offense or where the
which tend to dishonor or discredit a natural or libelous article was printed or was first published.
juridical person. If private individual is the offended party, RTC of the place
2. That there must be a publication of these where the private individual resides at the time of the actual
imputation; commission of the offense or where the libelous material
3. The identity of the person defamed must be was published
established or identified;
4. The existence of malice. ORAL DEFAMATION/SLANDER
1. Grave oral defamation- when serious and insulting
and nature.
Publication- satisfied the moment that a 3rd person has
heard or read the libelous statement, even if the person Factors to consider: not only the grammar and meaning,
pertained has not read it. So the basis is that a 3 rd person but also the:
has heard or read the libelous statement. a) Personal relations of the accused and the
offended party
Identity of the person- must be identified, not necessary b) Facts and Circumstances surrounding the case
that the person must be named. It suffices that the person c) Social standing and position of the offended party.
is described and identifiable by a third person.
PUTANG INA MO is not a slanderous remark; it is
Malice- malice is presumed as a rule for every statements merely an expression of the Filipino People.
made. However in defamatory statements, if the offender (Pader vs People)
cannot state any good intention for stating defamatory 2. Simple slander
statements, the law presumes malice.
Prosecution need not prove malice because the law SLANDER BY DEED
presumes malice. This is MALICE IN LAW. Slander by deed- refers to acts not words, with the intent to
defame the person. It can also be (a)serious, grave slander
Instances: by deed, or (b) simple slander by deed.
Malice in fact- refers to privilege in communication, refers to A priest was slapped by a person, serious slander
private communication, reports, or any acts performed by a by deed
public officer. In this case the law does not presumes
Section Two. General provisions
Take note of the case of Ivler vs Modesto. Definition of Work, Education, or Training Related Sexual
Reckless imprudence or negligence is the crime itself. Harrassment
Hence, once committed or acquitted of a specific act of - Committed by an employer, employee, manager,
reckless imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted supervisor, agent of the employer, teacher, instructor,
again for that same act. For the essence of the quasi professor, coach, trainor, or any other person who, having
offense of criminal negligence under Art 365 of the RPC authority, influence or moral ascendancy over another in a
lies in the execution of an imprudent or negligent act that if work or training or education environment, demands,
intentionally done, would be punishable as a felony. The requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the
law penalizes thus the negligent or careless act, not the other, regardless of whether the demand, request or
result thereof. The gravity of the consequence is only taken requirement for submission is accepted by the object of
into account to determine the penalty; it does not qualify said Act.
the substance of the offense. And, as the careless act is