CRIMINAL LAW BOOK ONE CHARACTERISTICS OF CRI L LAW What are the characteristics of criminal law? Explain each. Criminal law is general, territorial, and prospective. Itis general, hence penal laws and those of public security and safety are obligatory upon all who live and sojourn in the Philippine territory (Art. 14, NCC). It is territorial, meaning, penal laws of the Philippines have the force and effect only within the Philippine territory except as provided under Art, 2 of the RPC. It is prospective, thus, ‘a penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when committed. Art. 366, RPC says that crimes are punished under the laws in force at the time of their commission, Encoptons soi Laveen RoE Finis ef rate a The main yard determination of under the terme’ immunity from missions or mer p fl others (Minucher wo ‘eptiticd to immunity is the ‘Qiily “diplomatic agents,” se with blanket diplomatic inatic“agents” as the heads of ‘same privileges from all General Rule: P Exceptions: Treat AAA committed adi r was in China. During the AR je cannot be made liable for the sald crime beca jomjef/the crime, he was outside the in able? territorial jurisdict No. Under the prinple Seite 9 pines are enforceable only within its security’ and the law of natioris~shal Unishable-even if committed outside the Philippine jurisdiction, Treason is a crime against(national séeufty and the law of nations. Hence, he is liable for treason even if twas committed outside the Philppine.territory. AAA and BBB were married in the P! 's. When AAA went abroad to work, he met girlfriend, CCC. They renewed their friendship and rekindled their affections for each other and eventually got married in California. When BBB found out about the second marriage, she filed a case of Bigamy against AAA and CCC in the Philippines. Will the case prosper? No, the case will not prosper. Under the principle of territoriality, Philippine penal laws, are enforceable only within its territory unless the act is one that falls under exceptions provided in Article 2, RPC. Bigamy is not among those mentioned in Article 2. Hence, the Philippine Courts have no jurisdiction over the bigamous marriage contracted by AAA in California, Saw Bepa Cource oF Law 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OPERATIONSCRIMINAL LAW_.: - 7. What are the rules on crimes committed on ships or airships? The following rules shall be considered: a. In crimes committed on Philippine ships or airships, the RPC applies whether the said ship or airship is found in Philippine waters or in the high seas as long as the ship or airship is registored under the Philippine laws b. In crimes committed on private or merchant vessels found in Philippine territorial waters, the English Rule shall be applied which provides that crimes perpetrated under such circumstances, are in general triabie in the courts of the country within territory they were committed, and cc. Incrimes committed on foreign warships, the nationality of the warship or airship determines the applicabie penal laws to the crimes committed therein as such ships or airships are considered to be an extension of the territory of the country to which they belong (REYES, Book Gne, at 25-31), Prospectivity 8 General Rule: An act cannot be penalized if it was nct punishable at the time of its commission Exception: A new law may be applic Exception to the exception: a, When.the new law expres b. When tite pffender is @ hat ay ions are favorable to the accused ero es ravi J MAURIN'SEV. MALAPROHIGITA 9. Discuss the aiffevences bebwelenlerimés nfala in 88 and mala\prohibica Grint aw heen sided eras me at engin ness cal ad mel ine: and acs which would nott i beg called acts mala prohibita. mafulect is cone. The rule.on the subject is that Tilaels mate propibita, the only inquiry i, has the law beea Mi a ME of 1e offender is immaterial. When the 40. Are all mala in = i special penal lay No. A common gafore fo the RPC while all mala h fo distinguish between mala irimorality or vileness of the itis a crime mala in se; on the jg-its commission by reasons of jef or not a crime involves moral ‘the circumstances surrounding fice end mala proha penalized act. If thé itselt Contrary, iti not ter ot public policy, then Nis In the final analysis. {urpitude is Ultimately cation ee the violation ofthe statute AAS “Se es When the acts complained of-are'l ef are deemed mata in se, even if they are unithed bya opel Taw: Recerlhg eon Must be claty established with the other Elements of the crime: otherwise, no cimé is committed. On the other hand, in crimes that are mala prohibita, the criminal acts are not inherently immoral-but become punishable only because the law says they are forbidden (Garcia v. Court of Appeals, 2006), el inner 11. Are there felonies under the RPC which are mala prohibita? Are there crimes punished under special penal laws which are considered mala in se? Yes. Under the RPC, the crime of technical malversation is malum prohibitum. Criminal intent is not an element of technical malversation. The law punishes the act of diverting public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular public purpose to another public purpose. It is malum prohibitum (Ysidoro v. People, 2012) Yes. Plunder, defined and punished under RA 7080, as amended, is a crime malum in se. Plunder is 2 malum in s@, requiring proof of criminal intent. Precisely because the constitutive crimes are mais in se the element of mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for plunder. The legisiative declaration in RA 7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies that it is malum in se. For when the acts punished Sax Bea Cousce oF LAW 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OrerarionsCRIMINAL LAW am are inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are mala are punished in a special Iaw, especially since in the case of plunder tne predicate crimes are mainly mala in se. Indeed, it would be absurd to weat prosecutions for plunder as though thay are mere prosecutions for violations of the Bouncing Check Law (B.P. Big. 22) or of an ordinance against Jaywalking, without regard to the inherent wrongness of the acts (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 2011}, 9 se and it does not matter that such acts Violation of Section 27(b) of RA 6646 involving tampering. increasing or decreasing the number of votes is malum in se. Tampering, increasing or decreasing the number of votes received by a candidate in any election or refusal, after proper verification and hearing, to credit the correct votes or deduct such tampered votes is inherently immoral. For otherwise, even arrars and mistakes committed due to overwork and fatigue would be punishable. Given the volume of vates to be counted and canvassed within a limited amount of time, errors and miscalculations are bound to happen. And it could not be the intent of the law to punish unintentional election canvass errors (Garcia v, Court of Appeals, supra). 12, What is the nature of hazing defined itis'@ orime mela protic. Hatt vieen the proposed law (RA 8048) and thegore,principle of mai PC ongress did not simply enact an amendment iret, Instoag aa UBSRANEepeIToae ot ae prohibitaThe) set of hazing public pokey of is not inherently immoral. bul ust be prohibifGd. Actarkingly the existence of criminal inigat is Immaterial in the i a Aine LEGE Aso. the defense Be raised in its proseuion (Dungo v. People 4, GOLLEG r fA } 43. May felonies p; No. RPC does that a mala in SefelOny ( absorb mala probibits-cri 9 in-Dariage to Property) cannot 4, arid RA 7942). What makes the at Irakeyrthe latter crimes are the i It is important where the’ Jot Ravirg committed a crime is in dispute or where the identi seus-from an unreliable source and testimony is inconclusive and nol bt . 46. ofterertate general rom spacitcSAlane. SD General Intent is presumed inthe commission of @ felony. Speci Intent must be proven as tn elomont of felony. 17. What circumstances may be considered to determine the presence or absence of itont to kill? Motive; Nature or number of weapons used in the commission of the crime; Nature and number of wounds inflicted on the victim; Manner the crime was committed; and Words uttered by the offender at the time the injuries are inflicted by him on the victim (People v. Mapalo, 2007), a b. ©. 4 e Saw Bepa Cource oF Law 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OPERarionsCRIMINAL LAW _= = 4, RPC 18, What are the requisites in order for a person to be held criminally liable for a felony which is different from that which he intended to commit? Under Article 4 of the RPC, a person may be criminally llabie for a felony different from that which h intended to commit, provided: (2) that a felony was committed and (b) that the wong done to the aggrieved person be the direct consequence of the crime committed by the perpetrator (People v. Sales, 2014). 19, What are the concepts contemplated in Art. 4, RPC? ‘a. Aberratio Ictus — mistake in the blow b. Error in Personae — mistake in the identity of the victim c. Praeter Intentionem — injury was greater than that which was intended 20. Define proximate cause. Proximate cause is that cause, whic} efficient cause, produces the, i, turel_and continuous sequence, unbroken by any 41. would not have ocourred, 21. AAA, witidéjfirearm and with intentito | ‘Shots towards the direction of BBB inflicting wound at park of the latter's body which caused his death, In the procass, CCC was also hit and died-as ajresult. Is AAA also liable ECM coc? Yes. The factthat the target, a 's assault Was BBB, Agt CCC, did not exduse-his hitting and killing of COC. The'fatal hitind.of COC was the naluralland-diréct congegbende of AAA's felonious ceacly assault against-BBB. AAA's berratio ictus, ‘cr-misiake in the blow, a circumstance that peither eer EAsbilly nok hitigated his criminai ability Under Article 4°of any persofcommitting a felony although the wrongful acta siv-Reople, 2011), 22. Awas on board hit ing blue | Four (4) armed men, W, X, fing at A’s car. During the ent, was hit by a stray builet. W, X, ¥ a a lately isft the crime scene. A and B died. Are they li Yes. Criminal tabi different from that coneoquerces whine The rationale of causado, or he ving the RPC, pursuant {ct committed in violation While it may not have baeh death caused by the bullet Geadly assault against A (Pe éiifough the wrongful act be felony is responsible for all the \6t foreseen or intended or not. Ja causa 0s causa del mal 1@ evil caused. Article 4 of “criminal liability for the acts quences resulting therefrom, thig fact will not exculpate them. B's 23. Same facts as No. 18. During the fal appreciated the qualifying circumstance of treachery as regards the death ofA. Hence W, X,Y and Z were convicted of murder for A’s death. May treachery be appreciated as regards the death of B? Yes. Although B's death was by no means deliberate, treachery may be appreciated in cases of aberratio ictus (People v Adriano, 2015). In treachery, it makes no difference whether or not the victim was the same person whom the accused intended to kill. The reason for this rule is that when there is treachery, it is impossible for either the intended victim or the actual victim to defend himself against the aggression (People v. Andaya as cited in Reyes, Criminal Law Book 1, 2017). 24, State the requisites of mistake of fact. a. The act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them to be: b. The intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful; and ©. The mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused (US v. Ah Chong, 1910). San Brox Couzce oF Law 2017 Cewrrauizep Bar OperationsCRIMINAL LAW a 25. Differentiate mistake of fact from mistake of law. Mistake of fact negates particular intent which is a necessary ingredient of a crime, hence, could be a basis for the defense of good faith. Mistake of law, on the other hand, does not excuse ¢ person, even a lay person, from liability. It is sufficient to say that everyone is presumed to know the law, and the fact that one does not know that his act constitutes @ violation of the law does nol exempt him from the consequences thereof (Diego vs. Castillo, August 11, 2004: US v. Ah Chong, March 19, 1910) IMPOSSIBLE CRIME 26. What are the requisites of an impossible crime? a. The act performed wouid be an offense against persons of property: b. Act was done with evil intent; and ¢._ Its accomplishment was inherently impossible, or the means employed was either inadequate or ineffectual (Art. 4 (2), RPC) ‘ck as payment for merchandise bought by a 27. AAA, a collector for Company XYZ " client. Instead of remittin, ch dep i r brother-in-law’s bank account, However, the bank sub: ore “Sai k for being unfunded. When prosecuted for qualified Sigtes ti houlld’only be hold liable for impossible crime. Is jument'torrect? ™ ee Yes AAA iscagiase for imposSPatctnp. AS ge Ye that AAA ook posession of he check meant for Company'XYZ, she had perfotnied ail (He"acts to consummate the’crime of theft. Were it not for the Tact that the EhpekMaubeea, Ghotwoulgeve teoSNGd We thee ele trocar ane not rightfully hersiHence, AAA is not liable for qualified theft but only for animpossible crime (Jacinto v. People, 200: a Ss WM’ thinking that S88 was Ing that day. Whet on AAAs abl 9.8) physical impossibility which rendered the intend ie ‘com Henca,-Rick is only liable for an tinuously fired at BBB's bedroom \AA;-BBB loft for Manila early 29. May courts modi 7 the property, the court cannot modify the range of Pi secon fe Primordial duty of the Court is merely to apply the Taviin ‘ay thar 9 aislative powers by judicial legisiation : jot make or supervise legislation, moditfysrevis Model, oF rewrite the law, or give the law @ construction whieiiskeepdgnant to its shoulé apply the law in a manner that would give effect to thefrlstteranc es ‘when the law is clear as to its intent and purpose. The remedy here is to dpply ArficlesS ef the RPCThe court will impose the penalty although Spaessive, and recommend executive etémency tntne Department of Justice (Corpuz v: People, 2014) STAGES OF EXECUTION 30. What are the different stages of execution? 2. Attempted stage - offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance ». Frustrated stage - offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as @ consequence, but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of cause independent of the. will of the perpetrator. ©. Consummated stage - offender performs all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present (Art. 6, RPC). San Bra Cour oF Law 2017 Centauizep Bar Opexations31, AAA was awakened when she felt that somebody was on top of her. She then realized that BBB was mashing her breasts, touching her private parts. and that she was totally naked. She fought back and was able to kick him twice; hence, BBB was not able to pursue his lustful desires. An Information for attempted rape was filed against BBB. Was BSB charged correctly? No. BBB should have been charged with acts of lasciviousness. The character of the evert acts for purposes of the attempted stage is that it indicates the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacies nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. The intent to commit rape should not easily be inferred against the petitioner, even from his own declaration of it, if any, unless he committed overt acts directly leading to rape. In this case, merely climbing on top of a naked female does not constitute attempted rape without proof of his erectile penis being in a position to penetrate the female's vagina, Hence, the acts of BBB are not sufficient to constitute attempted rape (Cruz v. People, 2014}, 32. AAA and BBB took 15 box yying for their price and loaded them on a push cart. They were y guard hauling the push cart at the pacing st oeding the 5B Were convicted of consummated theft.-O' fea!,, AAA and BBB argued that they should only'be held liable for frustrated theft since at the tine he was apprefignded).they-werel ever placed In a position t6 freely dispose or the arletbs Ulan is ther confontion tore? = fae No. The abilityotithe offeridente freely-dispdse of thd property sidieh is not a constitutive element of tne crime of theft & injuries; and @. Art, 266-B on rp er 48. What is a composité-€t : SF A composite crime, sa ‘ Compsted of two or more eximes that the law treats 28 4 si ing-ine product of @ single criminal j lew and differs from a compound or 49, Differentiate a composite ci In a composite crime, the composi the offenses.is fixed by law, but in a complex or compound crime, the combination of the offerisés is not specified but generalized, that is, grave and/or less grave, or one offense being the necessary means to commit the other. In @ composite crime, the Penalty for the specified combination of crimes is specific, but in a complex or compound crime the penalty is that corresponding to the most serious offense, to be imposed in the maximum period. A light felony that accompanies the commission of a complex or compound crime may be made the subject of a separate information, but a light felony that accompanies a composite crime is absorbed (People v. Esugon, 2015). 50. When A, B, and several companions saw the yellow-pick service vehicle of Mayor X approaching towards the waiting shed where they were waiting on, they opened fire and rained bullets on the vehicle using high-powered firearms. Two of Mayor X's escorts died while five others were injured. What crime, if any, was committed? The accused:are liable for the separete crimes of 2 counts of murder and 7 counts of attempted murder. San Bea Couzce or Law 2017 Crnreauize Bar Orerarions10 Ina complex crime, two or more crimes are actually committed, however, in the eyes of the law and in the conscience of the offender they constitute oniy one crime, and thus. only one penalty is imposed. Deeply rooteu is the doctrine thal when various victims expire trom separate shots, such acts constitute separate and distinct crimes. In this case, the killing and wounding of the victims were not the result of a single discharge of firearms for accused opened fire and rained bullets on the vehicle boarded by Mayor X and his group. As a result, two security escorts died while five others were injured. Moreover, more than one gunman fired at the vehicle of the victims. Obviously, accused performed not only a single act but several individual and distinct acts in the commission of the crime. Thus, Article 48 of the RPC would not apply for it speaks only of a “single act’ (People v. Nelmida, 2012), 51. R was informed that his brother E was kidnapped. R was then instructed to bring the ransom fo the kidnappers at the Libingan ng mge Bayeni. One of the kidnappers tock the money and Grove away, The dead body of & was found a day after the kidnappers were arrested. What crime, if any, id the kidnappers co he kidnappers are guilty ge Where the person kicnap was purpeselysought or wa ‘and mardgt or homicide ean no longer bé-compiexed undet 18, nor be treated as separa imes, but stall Ke punished as a cori core ems uncer en ezaer-OU RU ge, 0 enetaga WA Ne. 752. ne Kidnapping tas Committed for the purpose. of exoifing ransom, hence, they, should be liable for the spe com ie cisois BPeor ih Horiba (eeorle ¥:Ppnsldo, 2014) 52, What is the penal 53, What is the offei According to Art serious crime, the-samé to Be ineffectual, and will Met atta 54, May robbery intimidation of p Yes. The compl violence against of entered the reside committing the robbs more serious crime. ‘All People, 2015). jith violence against or wen cc ea obbéry in an inhabited-house, the ‘one’is the act of all (Fransdilla v. 55. May the provisions of the RPO’apply 40 violations of special penal laws? Yes. Art. 10. RPC provides that the-RPC shall Be Supplementary to special penal laws, unless the latter should specially provide the ‘contrary. The suppletory application of RPC in BP 22 is not proscribed. Thus, provisions on conspiracy in RPC suppletorily applies to BP 22 (Ladonga v. People, 2008). RPC provision on subsidiary imprisonment suppletorily applies to BP 22 (Yu v. People, 2004). JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES 56, What are the requirements of self defense? a. Unlawful aggression; b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to, prevent or repel it; and c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. San Bepa Couzce oF LAW 2017 Cenraauizep Bar OPERATIONSCRIMINAL LAW 57. What is unlawful aggression? Unlawful aggression is an assault or at least a threatened assault of an immediate and imminent kind. There must be a actual physical assault upon a person or at least a threat to inflict reai injury. Unlawful aggression on tne part of the victim is the primordial element of the justifying circumstance ot self-defense. Without unlawful aggression, there can be no justified killing in defense of oneseif. The test for the presence of unlawful aggression under the circumstances is whether the aggression from. the victim put in real pen the life or personal safety of the person defending himself; the peril must not be an imagined or imaginary threat. 58. What are the elements of unlawful aggression? Accordingly, the accused must establish the concurrence of three elements of unlawful aggression, namely: (a) there must be a physical or material attack or assault; (b) the attack or assault must be actual, or, atleast, imminent; and (c) the attack or assault must be uniawtul (People v. Nugas, 2011). 59. What are the kinds of unlawful aggression? Define each. a, actual or material uniawful aggres: b. imminent unlawful aggressia Actual of higterial unlawful ‘ wysical force or with a weapon, an offensive“ach that positively determines the intent of the aGgressor to cause. the” injury. Imminent unlawful aggression means an atteek that isimifi Bing orAt the point of happaaingiif must not consist imamate tresens aude, gore ibe Pen ata, trust Bealecave and eostively Strong (ike sing 4 revolier at arbtier Sub inte 3d sndot BxSpening & kate and making a mation as if fo slack) ninent unlaw/ul aggression mus pers threatening attitude of re victim, id to his hip wher weapon until A wag's even after C fell to the: No, the justifying- jon, thd Tinpatition of subsidiary penalty in case of failure aking J Suffer, subsidiary imprisonment (Ramos v. Gonong, & 83. Will a convict who has undergone subsidiary penalty be totally relieved from paying the fine? No. The subsidiary liability which the convict may have suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him from the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve (Art. 39, RPC). THREE-FOLD RULE 84, What are the requisites for the three-fold rule? a. Maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him; b. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years; and c. Atleast 4 penalties to be served. Sax Bepa Cousce oF Law 2017 Cenraauizep Bar OrerarionsPARDONING POWER 85. Will an absolute pardon granted by the President restore the civii and political rights of the convict pardoned? No. Art. 36, RPC provides that a pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. A close scrutiny of the text of the pardon extended to former President Estrada shows that both the principal penalty of reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties are included in the pardon. The first sentence refers to the executive clemency extended to former President Estrada who was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of plunder and imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua. The latter is the principal penalty pardoned which relieved him of imprisonment. The sentence that followed, which states thet “(h)e is hereby restored to his civil and polilical rights,” expressly remitted the accessory penalties that attached to the principal penally of reclusion perpetia. Hence, even if we apply Articles. 36 and 41 of the RPC, it is indubitable from the tex{ of the pardon that the accessory penalties of civil interdiction and perpetual absolute [2 expressly remitted together with the principal penalty of reclusion perpetuay e rated absolute pardon py the President. for mayor. Under the Local’ Government Code in relation to ction Code, he-is/disqualiffed-from running. Can legislative ‘action limit the gion Code, Ney satan ‘ the tos GavedtinSnt'Sos@ (LSC) in relation to Section Election Code (QEC) was removed by langé-of the absolute pardon Sit may be apparent that th AQfapot the LGC is worded in jerprohibition ~ a plenary who has been granted pardon or amr plenary pardon involving moral turpitude, inter alia, to run ition (Vidal v. COMELEC, 2015). 87. May a person seit No. The ISLAW iscexterided ohly indivisible penalty winedea mini ivigble genaltes, Reclusion perpetua is an (Pgople Ssaarson, 2006) 88, What are the purpos In this Jurisdiction, the wis yt law, reads: (e) promote Yalan offender vy providing him with individualized treatment; ( portunity gine reformation of a penitent offender which might be less probable if he wére-to serve @prigon‘sentence; and (c) prevent the commission of offenses (Colnares v. People, 2011) > 89. May a person who appealed his conviction still avail of the benefits of the Probation Law? No. As a provided in the Probation Law, a8 amended by RA 10707, no application for probation shall be entertained or granted ifthe defendant hes perfected the appeal from the judgment of conviction However, when a Judgment of conviction Imposing @ non-probationable penalty 1s appealed oF reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the imposition of a probationgble penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified decision before such decision becomes final. The application for probation based on the modified decision shell be fled in the tal Court where the judgment of eénviction imposing a non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in the tial court where such case has since ben re-rafied, Ine case involving several defendants where some have taken further appeal, the other defendants may apply for probation by submitting a writen pplication and attaching thereto a certifed true copy of tho judgment of constion San Bra Couzce or Law 2017 Cextrauizen Bar Oresarions 1718 CRIMINAL LAW. zzz / 90. Who are disqualified to avail of probation? Apperson: a. sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six (6) years, b. convicied of any crime against the national secunty’ . previously convicted by final judgmeni of an offense punished by imprisonment of more than 6 months and 1 day andlor a fine of more than P1,000.00; d,_ who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree; and . who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of this Decree became applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof, 91. What is the effect of the termination of the period of probation? After the period of probation and upon consideration of the report and recommendation of the probation officer, the court may order the final discharge of the probationer upon finding that he has {ulflled the terms and conditions of his probation and thereupon, the case is deemed terminated, The final discharge of the probationer restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended ‘ liability as to the offense for which provides that Ie, trading, administration, dispensation, Gelivery, distribution and transportatior 2 imprisonineht to deati, Hence, the Probation Law will not be applicable. ye 983, What is the effect Sf prob: The Probation aw. speci sentence. During-tte him including thea 7, \ds the execution of the ‘Ke penalty imposed upon public office (Moreno v. ‘94. Will probation su No. Probation d imposed. The reo tify his. retention in the government servi the accused; and not his 95. A was found guilt i vel of p Hetwas sentenced to suffer the Penalty of liveer art yeorreccional for each count. May he apply for probation — Yes. Multiple conviction tong jot determine probation. Where the trial court sentenced the ision and multiple prison terms are 2 -gdd@t together in determining whether or not the accused would be eligible for-pro {of terms are distinct from each other, and if none of the terms exceeds the limits of years“setout in the Probation Law, the accused is not disqualified by the penalty. The number of offenses iSimmaterial as long as all the penalties imposed taken separately are within the piobationable penalty. Section 9() of the Probation Law as amended, Uses the word “maximum” not total, when it states that the “benefits of this Decree shall not be extended to those xxx sentenced to Serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years. Evidently, the law does not intend to sum up the penalties imposed but to take each penalty separately and distinctly with the others (Francisco v. CA, 1995) imposed on him, the multipl San Bepa Cousce oF Law 2017 Centaauuzep Bar OPERATIONSEXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILI 98. How is criminal liability totally extinguished? According to Art. 88, criminal lability is totally extinguished by Death of the convict Service of sentence Amnesty Absolute pardon Prescription of the crime Prescription of the penaity Marriage of the offended woman in seduction, Probation bduction, acts of lasciviousness, and rape 97. An Information for rape was filed against A. However, the court found him guilty only of acts of lascviousness, For purposes of determining the prescriptive period of the crime, which penalty should be considered? Penalty for the crime proved an accuged has been found t licabie prescriptive period. Thus, where se ificludible within the graver offense charged i annot be cor pSiomerone eetaithes apesy preactbed _Tg hold étherwise would béIc¢sahctjon a circumvention of the law on prescription By.the simple axsedient of accusing the defendant of the graver offense (Dainasc6-¥.(Ladui, 1988, ciing Franciseg-vsCourt of Appeals, 1983), x YW COLI 98. Pending the appeal of his conviction, A died. What is the effect of his death to his eriminal and civil liabilities? iz fecoring to ARB") APC, Final liabi death of the comme p}cont tally extinguished by the extinguished if the offender 1é service of personal or inlarias) refers to fines and accused and is a déath of A extinguished his criminal liability fo ivil lability directly arising 99. Does novation ex‘ No. Novation is not jereby criminal liability can be ~ extinguished; hence, the rise of criminal liability or to similar disguise (Mila v. People, 20% > 100.N was convicted of the crime of Rebellion. While serving sentence, he escaped from jail Captured, he was charged with, and convicted of, Evasion of Service of Sentence. Thereaiter, the President of the Philippines issued an amnesty proclamation for the offense of Rebellion. N applied for and was granted the benefit of the amnesty proclamation, N now claims that the amnesty extends to the offense of Evasion of Service of Sentence. Is N's claim proper? Yes, N’s claim is proper. The sentence evaded proceeded from the offender as a crime of Rebellion which has been obliterated by the grant of amnesty to the offender (Art. 89[3], RPC). Since the amnesty erased the criminal complexion of the Rebellion and rendered such act as though innocent, the sentence lost its legal basis. The purported evasion thereof therefore cannot subsist. Amnesty obliterates, not only the basis of conviction, but also all the legal effect thereof (People v. Patriarca, 2000). Saw Broa Couece or Law 2017 Cewrrauizen Bar Orerarions 29BOOK TWO 20 101. fn an Information, A was charged with willful malversation. However, during the trial, what was proven was that he committed malversation through negligence. May A be convicted of malversation through negligence? Yes. Malversation may be committed either through a positive act of misappropriation of public funds or property, or passively through negligence. Even when the Information charges willful malversation, conviction for malversation through negligence may still be adjudged if the evidence Utimately proves the mode of commission of the offense. The dolo or the culpa present in the offense is only 2 modality in the perpetration of the felony. Even if the mode charged differs from mode proved, the same offense of melversation is involved and convietion thereof is proper (Torres: v. People, 2011). 102. A killed B, Thereafter, rt convicted A of the crime of murde: jed that thi gs outraging or scoffing at the corpse yale ig to murder. Is the trial court correct? _A\ ~~ Yes. Meré-defapitation of the SeypheIudec Epps Auresina ‘or sooffingat ths corpse, thus, ‘waiving te fing to murder (PRGFIe V Whseanhian, 200%), \ 103. A, who was B filed five counts of special complex: rosper? ‘crime of kidnapping with 104, R kidnapped hi cries and shout Z regardless of whether the king wes purpo ies poping and murder or hoice can'no longer be cot 148.0 Zrimos, but shal be punished 2 2 special come : 7 BS amended by RA No. 7659 (Peopie v. Monta, y a 108. True or false. 3” The presence of hymenal lacerations is'an Bssential element of rape BL Being sweethearts negate thecommission bttape c. Carnal knowledge of a female mental retardate rape G, $orea ot violence in rape Gases must be always be overpowering or iresistibe, Ammwors SESS. The presence of hythenal lacerations is not @ required clement in the crime of rape (People v. Otos, 2017) wb. ere NG weltsetlod that being sweethearts does not negate the commission of ape because Ta ae does nat give appellant cane to ave sovalinercoutso against her wl and wil not Sronerate him forthe eranal charge of rape (People v. Olesco, 2011) eee al noulecige of 2 mental elardae ts repe under paragraph of Ace 266-A ofthe RPG, se amenced by RA 8389 because a mental reardate is not capable of giving her consent {oe sequal oc (People v. Funes, 2017), ‘San Bepa Couzcr oF Law 2017 Cenrrauizen Bar Orenations— . False. Jurisprudence firmly holds that the force or vioience required in rape cases is relative: it does not need to be overpowering oF irresistible; ii is present wnen it allows the offender to consummate his purpose (People v. Dela Paz, 667 SCRA 385), 108. Can a husband commit rape against his wife? | ‘Yes. Husbands do not have property rights over their wives’ bodies, Sexual intercourse, albeit within the realm of marriage, if not consensuai, is rape. Clearly, it is now acknowledged that rape, as a form of sexual violence, exists within marriage. A man who penetrates her wife without her consent or against her will commits sexual violence upon her, and the Philippines, as 2 State Party to the CEDAW and its accompanying Declaration. defines and penalizes the act as rape under RA 8353. A | woman is no longer the chaltel-antiquated practices labeled her to be. A husband who has sexual intercourse with his wife is not merely using a property, he is fulfilling a marital consortium with a fellow human being with dignity equal to that he accords himself. He cannot be permitted to violate this dignity by coercing her to engage in a sexual act without her full and free consent (People v Jumawan, 2014) 107. On Febvidiyst, 2017, A, 8 5 ed X's residence in Sampaloc, Manila,“arid declared a hold up. A and B stayed outside sted as lookout: The armed men inquired froma the people insidé:the\house Page, money and other valuables were hidden; thereafter, they took cash amounting te P10,000.00, personal belongings worth 5,000.00, snd an air gun valued at P2,340,00..6 then brought drie of the eccupants of the house outside, and shot him. Is thera-a crime of robe je committed by a band?” No. Whenever horficide Hae Been committed: ; those who took paft-as aripcipals ifthe robbsy oe rt ie uilty-25-principals of robbery with ess jil appears that they sought to There is no crt committed by a | | | | | | bans sobbery with homicide is rominatédas robbery with homicide (be) appreciated as an ordinary ‘Baeathe or D 108. Ms. X, a teller af 00 ‘Aecount with Piggy Bank by forging the signatut 7 alsiips! be charged with the complex crime of estafa thro c “e document, by forging thea ® depositor concerned had si gned't e ind falsification of 2 commercial slips to make it appear that the rderto enable her to withdraw the amounts. thevestafa would not have been consummated tro v. People, 2015), 109. What are the elements of estafa through falsification of public documents? ‘The elements of estafa through falsification of public documents are as follows: a. the accused uses a fictitious name, or falsely pretends to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or employs other similar deceits; b. such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud: ©. the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means, that is, he was induced to part with his money or property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means; and | d. as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage. It is required that the false statement or fraudulent representation constitutes the very cause or the only motive that induced the | ‘complainant to part with the thing (Metrobank v. Tobias Ill, 2012) ‘San Bepa Couteor oF Law 2017 Centaauzep Bar Orgrations 21