ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

1. While C was ordering bread at a store, D suddenly appeared and, without uttering a
word, stabbed C once on the left side of C's body using a sharpened bamboo stick. D
immediately fled. C was brought to a Medical Center where he was treated as an out-
patient. 22 days thereafter, C was brought to the San Lazaro Hospital where he died the
following day due to tetanus infection secondary to stab wound.

The relatives of C filed a case of Homicide, based on Article 4(1), RPC – Proximate Cause
Doctrine, against D. If you were the Judge, would you convict D as charged?
Bar
If YES, why?
Answer:
If NO, why? What, if any, is the criminal liability of D? Explain.

Bar
ChanRobles
No, proximate cause doctrine does not apply. D is liable for Slight Physical Injuries, with the
aggravating circumstance of treachery.

2. Entrusted by his employer to get a check from a client, X did as instructed. However,
instead of remitting the check to his employer, X deposited the check to his account, which
was thereafter dishonored by the drawee bank due to insufficiency of funds.

The employer filed a case of Qualified Theft against X, as he gravely abuse the confidence
reposed on him. If you were the Judge, would you convict X a charged?

If YES, why?

If NO, why? What, if any, is the criminal liability of X? Explain.

Answer:

No. X is liable of an Impossible Crime.

Cha
3. X and his two daughters, Y and Z, were in their home. Thereafter, when X stepped
outside, accused, who was approximately five meters away from X, shot the latter, with the
use of a 12-gauge shotgun, inflicting a not so serious wound. X called Y for help. When Y
and Z rushed to X’s aid, accused shot Y in the abdomen. Thereafter, accused fled the crime
scene. X and Y were rushed to the hospital. Y was pronounced dead on arrival while X made
a full recovery after treatment of his gunshot wound.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

The RTC convicted accused of murder and frustrated murder. On appeal, if you were a
Justice of the CA, would you uphold the conviction? Explain.

Answer:

I would uphold the conviction for Murder but I would downgrade the Frustrated Murder to
Attempted Murder.

Since Gregorio’s gunshot wound was not mortal, appellant should be convicted of
attempted murder and not frustrated murder.

4. X, intoxicated, urinated at the store of Y in the public market. Y confronted X and a

heated argument ensued between them. The moment Y turned his back at X, X stabbed Y
causing his death. X was arrested and case of Murder, qualified by treachery, was filed
against X?

If you were the Judge, would you appreciate treachery against X? Explain.

Answer:

No treachery. Th e attack was impulsively done, hence,

the accused could not have made preparations for the attack.

Bar ChanRobles
5. After AAA was introduced to X, she convinced AAA to accompany her at a wake at
where a man known by the name “Speed” was waiting. AAA saw “Speed” give money to X.
Parañaque City. Then, they went to Bulungan Fish Port along the coastal road to ask for
Thereafter, “Speed” wielded a knife and tied AAA's hands to the papag and raped her. AAA
some fish. Afterwards, AAA and X proceeded to the Kubuhan located at the back of the
asked for X's help when she saw the latter peeping into the room while she was being
Bulungan Fish Port. When they reached the Kubuhan, X suddenly pulled AAA inside a room
raped, but X did not do so. After the rape, “Speed” and X told AAA not to tell anyone what
had happened or else they would get back at her.

“Speed” and X were charged with the crime of Rape – “Speed” as Principal by Direct
Participation and X as Principal by Indispensable Cooperation.

Are they liable as charged? Explain.

Answer:

Speed is liable as a Principal by Direct Participation. X is not liable as a Principal by

Indispensable Cooperation as her acts are not indispensable to the consummation of Rape.

6. While the Mayor X and his security escorts, on board a service vehicle, were passing the
waiting shed, A, B, C and their cohorts opened fire and rained bullets on the vehicle of

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Mayor X using high-powered firearms. The Mayor and another escort were not hit, but 2 of
his security escorts died, while 5 other escorts sustained physical injuries.

A, B, C and their cohorts were indicted for the complex crime of Double Murder with
Multiple Attempted Murder.

If you were the Judge, would you convict them as charged? Explain.

Answer:

NO. Accused are criminally liable of the separate crimes of 2 counts of Murder and 7 counts
of Attempted Murder qualified by treachery. The killing and wounding of the victims were
not the result of a single but of several acts of the accused, thus, making Art. 48 of the RPC
inapplicable.

7. While six navy personnel were having a drinking spree at a bar, one of them had an
altercation with P. To prevent further trouble, they left. They were walking by the roadside,
on their way back to their camp, when P’s speeding van mowed them down. P stepped on
the accelerator of his van, swerved to the right side of the road, and rammed through the

navy personnel, killing 2 of them and injuring four others.

A complex crime of Double Murder with Multiple Attempted Murder was filed against P.
ChanRobles
Bar
If you were the Judge, how would you rule on the case? Explain your decision.
P is criminally liable for the complex crime of Double Murder with Multiple Attempted
Answer:
Murder qualified by treachery with the generic aggravating circumstance of use of motor
vehicle.

8. On 30 August 1995, XX issued a check to YY in payment of a loan. YY deposited the

check on its maturity date, 15 November 1995. On 15 December 1995, XX received a notice
of dishonor that the check he issued in favour of YY was dishonored due to insufficient
funds but he failed to make good the check within 5 banking days. On 16 September 1997,
YY filed a case for Violation of BP 22 against XX before the Office of the Public Prosecutor.
After several Motions and Appeals on the case, the Office of the Public Prosecutor filed the
case for Violation of BP 22 before the MeTC on 3 February 2000.

Will the case prosper? Or has the crime prescribed?

Answer:

Yes, the case will prosper. The crime has not yet prescribed because the filing of the case
before the Office of the Public Prosecutor on 16 September 1997 interrupted the running of

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

the 4-year prescriptive period that commenced upon the receipt of notice of dishonour on
15 December 1995.

9. Accused was found guilty of 10 counts of rape for having carnal knowledge with the
same woman against her will. The Judge imposed upon him the penalty of 40 years
imprisonment under the Three Fold Rule and civil indemnity of P50,000.00.

Is the court correct?

If YES, why?

If NO, why? What then is the appropriate penalty? Explain.

Answer:

The court is wrong because the Three Fold Rule applies to service of sentence, not on the
imposition of penalty. The proper penalty is Reclusion perpetua for each count of rape and
civil indemnity of P50,000.00 for each count of rape.
10. LB, the Cashie r/Manager of PP Cooperative, was in ch
ing deposits from
arged of receiv
and releasing loans to the members of the cooperative. On September 2, 2007 LB made it

Bar
appear that she released Cash Voucher No. 305A for a P15,000.00 loan to a certain EO by
ChanRobles
falsifying EO’s signature, i.e., by signing above the name EO, making it appear in the records
that EO was the payee and recipient of the loan. EO was not a member of PP Cooperative.

What crime/s if/are committed by LB? Explain.

Answer:

Falsification of a private document.

11. On July 2000, Major C was assigned as the Commanding Officer of the 22nd FSU of the
PSG, Malacañang Park, Manila. His duty was to supervise the disbursement of funds for the
PSG personnel and to perform other finance duties as requested by the PSG Commander.
On December 19, 2000, he received a check from Director A in the amount of P1,975,000
representing the Special Allowance of PSG personnel. Accompanied by two personnel, he
went to the Land Bank and encashed the check. He placed the money in a duffel bag and
kept it inside the steel cabinet in his office together with the P1,295,000 that was earlier
also entrusted to him by Gen. D. Major C is the only one with the keys to his office. Although
there was a safety vault in his office, he opted to place the money inside the steel cabinet
because he was allegedly previously informed by his predecessor that the safety vault was
defective.

On December 21, 2000, Major C informed Major B that the money he (Major C) was
handling, the Special Duty Allowance for the month and other Maintenance Operating
Expenses, in the amount of more or less P3 Million, was missing from his custody.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Is Major C liable of any crime? Explain.

Answer:

Major C is liable of Malversation of Public Funds.

12. AAA had always been going to the house of X for 4 months. AAA was 39 years of age,
diagnosed to be suffering from “moderate mental retardation with a Mental Age of (6) six
years and (8) eight months and an IQ of (41) forty-one.”

One morning, while AAA was holding a dog outside her residence, X approached her and
gave her P200.00 to buy some junk food. X then asked her to go with him to his house.
Upon reaching the house, X ordered AAA to lie down. X had carnal knowledge of AAA.
Thereafter, X ordered her to put her dress on. AAA was later fetched by her sister at X’s
house.

What crime, if any, is committed by X?

Answer:

X is liable of Qualified Rape.

13. NA, LD, and LG were having a drinking spree when they saw XXX waiting for a ride. LD
Bar
and LG approached her. XXX tried to get away but LD and LG took their shirts off and were
ChanRobles
laughing while waiving their shirts in the air. Then NA suddenly appeared from the dark
portion of the vacant lot holding an icepick and stabbed XXX on the right thigh.
Simultaneously, LD, LG, and NA jumped at XXX and covered her mouth. XXX slumped on the
pavement while LD, LG, and NA crowded her. They pulled down her skirt and forcibly
undressed her. As the three were undressing themselves, XXX tried to escape again so NA
stabbed her five times, thus causing her instantaneous death.

What is/are the crime/s committed by NA, LD, and LG? Explain.

Answer:

Attempted Rape with Homicide, a special complex crime.

14. Friends, X and Y,were walking along the rice paddies on their way to apply for work at
a canteen near the highway when suddenly, Z, who was holding an ice pick and a lead pipe,
waylaid them and forcibly brought them to a grassy area at the back of a concrete wall.
Without warning, Z struck X in the head with the lead pipe causing her to feel dizzy and to
fall down. When Y saw this, she cried out for help but Z also hit her on the head with the
lead pipe, knocking her down. Z stabbed Y several times with the ice pick and thereafter
covered her body with thick grass. Z then turned to X. He hit X in the head several times
more with the lead pipe and stabbed her on the face. While X was in such defenseless
position, Z raped her. After raping X, Z also covered her with grass. At that point, X passed
ChanRobl

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

out. When X regained consciousness, it was nighttime and raining hard. She crawled to get
help.

Two crimes: Murder and Rape were filed against Z. If you were the Judge, would you
convict Z as charged?

Answer:

No. I would hold Z criminally liable of the special complex crime of Rape with Homicide
with the generic aggravating circumstance of treachery.

15. X testified that he knew Y for a long time. He stated that he was on his way home to the
neighboring barangay, when, at around 9:00 p.m. on October 9, 2003, in the light of a bright
moon, he saw Y entered the house of L, which was lit with a lamp, and poked a gun to the
victim’s right forehead and demanded money. X hid behind a tree ten meters away. When
the victim stated that the money was not in his possession, Y shot him. He went home and
reported the incident the following morning.

Of what crime is Y liable of? Explain. What aggravating circumstance/s attended the

commission of the crime?

Answer:

Bar
Y is liable of Attempted Robbery with Homicide, a special complex crime under Article 297,
RPC.
ChanRobles
16. AMCGS undertook a building construction in Session Road, Baguio City. AMCGS
subcontracted the fabrication and erection of the building’s structural and steel framing to
Anmar. Anmar ordered its construction materials from Linton Commercial in Pasig City. It
hired Junio Trucking to deliver the construction materials to its project site in Baguio City.
It assigned X as project manager with general managerial duties, including the receiving,
custody, and checking of all building construction materials.

On two occasions, X instructed B, Junio Trucking’s driver, and about 10 Anmar welders, to
unload flange steel beams at Marcos Highway, Baguio City.

When an inventory of the construction materials at the project site was conducted by M,
Anmar’s warehouseman, it was discovered that several wide flange steel beams had been
unloaded along Marcos Highway. There, M found and took pictures of some of the missing
steel beams. He reported the matter to the Baguio City police and contacted Anmar to send
a truck to retrieve the steel beams, but the truck came weeks later and, by then, the steel
beams could no longer be found. The stolen steel beams amounted to P2,269,731.69.

X was charged with, and convicted of, Qualified Theft. On appeal, he argues that his
conviction was improper because the alleged stolen beams or corpus delicti had not been

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

established. He asserts that the failure to present the alleged stolen beams in court was
fatal to the prosecution’s cause.

a) If you were a Justice of the appellate court, would you affirm the conviction? Why?

b) What do you mean by corpus delicti?

c) In Theft, what constitutes the corpus delicti?

Answer:

a) If I were a Justice of the appellate court, I would affirm the conviction for Qualified
Theft.

b) “Corpus delicti refers to the fact of the commission of the crime charged or to the body
or substance of the crime.

c) In theft, corpus delicti has two elements, namely: (1) that the property belongs to the
owner, and (2) that it was lost by felonious taking.

17. According to complainant L, on April 30, 1997, W

placed an order for 200 bags of rice
over the telephone; that because of W’s assurance that he had the means to pay them
Bar ChanRobles
because he had a lending business and money in the bank, they accepted the order; that he
released the goods to W on April 30, 1997 and at the same time received BPI Check for
P200,000.00 payable to cash and postdated May 8, 1997; that when he deposited the check
with Solid Bank, his depository bank, the check was dishonored due to insufficiency of
return to Cebu; and that despite repeated demands, W did not pay him. Hence, he filed a
funds; that he called W about the matter, and the latter told him that he would pay upon his
case of Estafa under Article 315(d) against W.

During the trial, on cross-examination, L admitted that he did not personally meet W
because they transacted through telephone only; that he released the 200 bags of rice
directly to RC, the brother-in-law of W, who signed the delivery receipt upon receiving the
rice.

In his defense, W said he issued the BPI Check to RC, his brother-in-law, not to L. He denied
having any telephone conversation or any dealings with L. He explained that the check was
intended as payment for a portion of RC’s property that he wanted to buy, but when the
sale did not push through, he did not anymore fund the check.

If you were the Judge that heard the case:

a) would you hold W criminally liable of Estafa by Postdating a Check? Explain.

b) would you hold him civilly liable for the value of the check? Explain.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Answer:

As the Judge, I would hold W civilly liable liable, but not criminally liable of Estafa by
Postdating a Check.

In every criminal prosecution, the identity of the offender, like the crime itself, must be
established by proof beyond reasonable doubt. W could not be held guilty of estafa simply
because he had issued the check used to defraud L. The proof of guilt must still clearly show
that it had been W as the drawer who had defrauded L by means of the check.

Nevertheless, an accused, though acquitted of estafa, may still be held civilly liable. W as the
admitted drawer of the check was legally liable to pay the amount of it to L, a holder in due
course.

18. X, through deceit, was able to secure the signature and thumbmark of Y, his mother in
law, on a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) designating X as Y’s attorney-in-fact, to sell and
dispose 4 pieces of land in Tagaytay. X told X, who was old and almost blind, that the
documents she was being made to sign involved her taxes.
On the basis of the aforesaid SPA, X sold the said properti
total amount of
es of Y in the
P22million. X failed to account for the same and never delivered the proceeds to Y.

Bar ChanRobles
Is X criminally liable? Or is he civilly liable only under Article 332, RPC?

Answer:

YES. X is liable of Estafa thru Falsification a Public Document. The absolutory cause under
Art. 332 is strictly limited to the felonies mentioned therein: the simple crimes of theft,
swindling, & malicious mischief.

19. X rape 15-year old AAA on February 1, 2001 while the victim was alone inside her
house. X, who had a knife with him, threatened to kill AAA if she resisted and informed
anybody of the incident. X is the victim’s brother-in-law, being married to her older sister,
and the couple lived in a nearby house.

On February 26, 2001, AAA was about to enter the school campus with her friend arrived
on a tricycle driven by his uncle. X then pulled AAA towards the tricycle. She tried shouting
but he covered her mouth. He brought her to a dress shop where he asked someone to give
her a change of clothes as she was in her school uniform. He then brought her to his sister’s
house where he raped her inside a bedroom.

Two cases were filed against X – Qualified Rape and the complex crime of Forcible
Abduction with Rape.

If you were the Judge, would you convict X a charged? Explain.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph
ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

Answer:

Two (2) counts of Qualified Rape.

20. During an evening procession, X learned that brothers A and B, minors, threw stones
on her two young daughters, Y and Z; and that A burned Y’s hair. Angrily, X went up to A,
struck A at the back with his hand, and slapped A on the face. Then X went to the brothers’
house and challenged their father to a fight, but W, the father, did not come out of the house
to take on X. The doctors who examined A issued medical certificate attesting that A
suffered contusions that would heal from 5 to 7 days.

The Office of the Public Prosecutor filed a case of Violation of RA 7610 – The Anti-Child
Abuse Law against X.

If you were the Judge, would you convict X as charged?

If YES, why? Explain.

Answer:
If NO, why? Of what crime you would convict X? Explain.

Bar
ChanRobles
If I were the Judge, I would not convict X of Violation of RA 7610. There was no showing
that his laying of hands on A had been intended to debase the “intrinsic worth and dignity”
of A as a human being, or that he had thereby intended to humiliate or embarrass A.

Considering that A’s physical injury required five to seven days of medical attention, X is
liable for slight physical injuries under Article 266 (1) of the Revised Penal Code with the
mitigating circumstance of passion or obfuscation.

www.chanroblesbar.com : www.chanroblesbar.com.ph