Anda di halaman 1dari 20

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof.

Gutierrez \ Page 1
Criminal Law II • The law of treason does not prescribe all • Adherence, unlike overt act, need not be
kinds of social, business and political proved by the oaths of two witnesses.
Case Ticklers intercourse bet the belligerent occupants of • Makapili as an overt act: the membership
the invaded country and it inhabitants. must be established by the deposition of two
PART I witnesses.
People vs. Prieto • It is necessary to produce two direct
Crimes Against National Security and the Law of witnesses to the whole overt act. It may be
Nations That the accused help in torturing guerillas with possible to piece bits together of the overt
Japanese soldiers: act, but if so, each bit must have the support
TREASON of two oaths.
• two-witness rule: It is necessary that the two
Laurel vs. Misa witnesses corroborate each other not only on ESPIONAGE
the whole overt act but on any part of it.
That the accused claim that his allegiance as a Filipino • Torture and atrocities as aggravating CA 616
citizen was suspended and that there was a change of circumstances –the use hereof instead of the
sovereignty over the Phil Islands: usual and less painful method of execution PIRACY
• A citizen or subject owes, not a qualified and will be taken into account to increase the
temporary, but an absolute and permanent penalty under art. 14(21). People vs.Lol-lo and Saraw
allegiance, which consists in the obligation of • Plea of guilty to some counts: considered
fidelity and obedience to his government of mitigating circumstance. That the accused are claiming that they do not belong
sovereign. The absolute and permanent to the Phil territory:
allegiance of the inhabitants of a territory People vs. Manayao
occupied by the enemy to their legitimate
government or sovereign is not abrogated or
• Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on
That the accused with a band, massacred a barangay
severed by the enemy occupation, because the high seas, without lawful authority and
and two 10-year old girls witnessed the crime:
the sovereignty of the government or done animo furandi (with intent to steal) and
sovereign de jure is not transferred thereby in the spirit and intention of universal
• Makapili is not part of the Japanese Army but
the occupier. hostility.
just an org of Filipino traitors, pure and
• Just as treason may be committed against simple. • Piracy is a crime not against any particular
the Federal as well as against the State Govt, • Defense of State: constitutional duty of State byt against all mankind. It may be
in the same way treason may have been citizen cannot be cast off in time of war. The punished in the competent tribunal or any
committed during the Japanese occupation citizen has a constitutional duty to defend the country where the offender may be found or
against the sovereignty of the US as weel as State and cannot be cast off when his country into which he may be carried. The jurisdiction
against the sovereignty of the Phil is at war by the siple expedient of subscribing of piracy unlike all other crimes had not
Commonwealth; and that the change of our to an oath of allegiance to support the territorial limits.
gorm of govt from commonwealth to republic constitution or laws of a foreign country, and
does not affect the prosecution of those an enemy country at that, or be accepting a People vs. Rodriguez
charged with the crime of treason committed commission in the military, naval or air
during the commonwealth, bec it is an service of such country or by desserting from • PD 532 (Anti-Piracy Law) amended 134 and
offense against the same govt and the same the Phil Army, Navy or Air Corp. its effect was to create the crime of qualified
sovereign people. piracy where rape, murder or homicide is
People vs. Adriano committed. No mitigating circumstance shall
People vs. Perez be appreciated regardless of plea of guilt.
That the accused is a member of the Makapili and • Recall: crew members of the vessel
That the women were brought by the accused to the wore uniforms and that the two witnesses refer to committed crime
Japanese soldiers for sexual purposes: different acts on different days:
People vs. Siyoh
• Commandeering of women to satisfy the lust • Makapili direct evidence of adherence and
of Japanese officers or men or to enliven the giving aid and comfort to enemy. Unless That the accused committed with triple murder and
entertainments held in their honor was not forced upon one against his will, membership frustrated murder in piracy:
reason even though the women and the in the makapili org imports treasonable
entertainments helpted to make life more intent, considering the purpose for which the • Recall: There was a lone survivor Antonio De
pleasant for the enemies and boost their organization was created, the members Guzman who was shot in the waters but was
spirit. would shed blood and sacrifice their lives. not killed.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 2
• Number of persons killed on the occasion of • The case where the firearm was left to be Rule 126
piracy, not material; Piracy, a special complex buried to the ground and the wife pointed
crime punishable by death—but the number where the firearm was. Stonehill vs. Diokno
of persons killed on the occasion of piracy is • Warrant of arrest; personal knowledge
not material. PD 532 considers qualified required of an officer arresting a person who • Several judges issued 42 search warrants to
piracy as a special complex crime punishable has just committed is committing or is about seize all docs and papers showing all business
by death. (not anymore-RP) to commit an offense-udner sec6(a) of Rule transactions of petitioners.
113, the officer arresting a person who has • Requisites for issuing search warrants-
HIJACKING committed, is committing, or is about to Constitution provides that no warrant shall
commit an offense must have personal issue but upon probable cause, to be
RA 6235 knowledge of that fact. The offense must also determined by the judge, and that the
be committed in his presence. warrant shall particularly describe the things
Crime Against the Fundamental Laws of the State • For arrests without warrant to be lawful, it is to be seized.
required that a crime must in fact or actually • Search warrants authorizing the seizure of
ARBITRARY DETENTION have been committed first. In arrests without books of accounts and records showing all the
warrant under Sec 6(b) it is not enough that business transactions of certain person,
Rule 112, sec 6 there is reasonable ground to believe that the regardless of whether the transactions were
person to be arrested has committed a crime. legal or illegal, contravene the explicit
Rule 113, sec 5 A crime must in fact or actually have been command of the Bill of Rights that the things
committed first. That a crime has actually to be seized should be particularly described
Umil vs. Ramos been committed is an essential precondition. and defeat its major objective of eliminating
It is not enough to suspect that a crime may general warrants.
• Case of 8 habeas corpus. have been committee. The fact of the
• Arrest without a warrant is justified when the commission of the offense must be Burgos vs. Chief of Staff
person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto. undisputed. The test of reasonable ground
An arrest without a warrant of arrest under applies only to the identity of the perpetrator. • 2 search warrants against Metropolitan Mail
sec. 5 par a and b of Rule 113 of the Rules of and We Forum newspapers premises.
Court, as amended, is justified when the Milo vs. Salanga • Probable cause for search: as such facts and
person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto, circumstances which would lead a reasonably
viz in the act of committing an offensel or • The barrio captain who detained a person for discreet and prudent man to believe that an
when an offense has just been committed 11 hours. His contention was that he is not a offense has been committed and that the
and the person making the arrest has public officer. objects sought in connection with the offense
personal knowledge of the facts indicating
that the person arrested has committed it.
• Arbitrary detention is committed by a public are in the place sought to be searched.
• A search warrant against a publisher must
• Habeas Corpus; Subversion; The crimes of officer who, without legal grounds, detains a
particularize the alleged criminal or
rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or proposal person. The officer liable for Arbitrary
subversive material to be seized. The
to commit such crimes and offenses detention must be vested with authority to
application and/or its supporting affidavits
committed in furtherance thereof of in detain or order the detention of persons
must contain a specification, stating with
connection therewith constitute direct accused of a crime.
particularity the alleged subversive material
assaults against the State are in the nature • PD 299 was signed into law, barrio captains
he has published or intending to publish.
continuing crimes. Rolando Dural was or barangay captain were recognized as
arrested for being a member of the NPA, an persons in authority.
outlawed subversive organization. Subversion OFFENDING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS
being a continuing offense, the arrest of DELAY IN DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSON
Rolando Dural without warrant is justified as People vs. Mandoriao
it can be said that he was committing an EO 272
offense when arrested. The crimes, and • The case where the microphone was allegedly
crimes or offenses committed in furtherance Rule 112, sec 7
grabbed (but there was no sound when the
thereof or in connection therewith constitute accused spoke).
direct assaults against the State and are in RA 7438
• A religious meeting is an assemblage of
the nature of continuing crimes. people met for the purpose of performing
acts of adoration to the Supreme Being or to
People vs Burgos perform religious services in recognition of
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED
God as an object or worship, love and
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 3
obedience, it matters not the faith with notoriously offensive to the feelings of Enrile vs. Amin
respect to the Deity entertained by the religious persons, provided there was no
persons so assembled. intent to mock, scoff at or to desecrate any • Enrile was charged with rebellion complexed
• Mere saying of prayers and singing of hymns religious act or object venerated by people of with murder and a violation under PD 1829
would render such place as place devoted to a particular religion. Sec. 1(c) obstruction of justice bec he gave
religious worship. food and comfort to Honasan.
• Notoriously offensive- must be direct against People vs. Nanoy • Being in conspiracy with Honasan, petitioner’s
a dogma or ritual or upon an object of alleged act of harboring or concealing was fo
veneration. Mere grabbing of mic might be • Drunk got inside a Church and grab the song no other purpose but in furtherance of the
punishable as public disturbance under 153. leader. crime of rebellion thus constituting a
• The accused is only guilty of unjust vexation component thereof. It was motivated by the
People vs. Baes penalized by 287 (2). He did not perform acts single intent or resolution to commit the
notoriously offensive to the feelings of the crime of rebellion. The decisive factor is the
• The case where the funeral passed thru the faithful. Neither did he cause such serious intent or motive.
Catholic churchyard. disturbance as to interrupt or disturb the • All crimes whether punishable under a special
• The court held that WON the act complained services of the congregation. law or general law which are mere
of is offensive to the religious feelings of the components or ingredients or committed in
Catholics, is a question of fact which must be Crimes Against Public Order furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the
judged only according to the feelings of the crime of rebellion and cannot be isolated and
Catholics and not those of other faithful ones, REBELLION, INSURRECTION, COUP D’ETAT charged as separate crimes in themselves. So
for it is possible that certain acts may offend whether punishable by RPC or a special law,
the feelings of those who profess a certain RA 6968 the Hernandez case still is the ruling that
religion, while not otherwise offensive to the these common crimes are absorbed in
feelings of those professing another faith. Enrile vs. Salazar rebellion.
• Laurel Dissenting: Offense to religious
feelings should not be made to depend upon • Honasan charged with rebellion with murder People vs Dasig
the more or less broad or narrow conception and multiple frustrated murder.
• Hernandez doctrine prohibits complexing of
of any given particular religion but should be • Case where the accused shot a police during
gauged having in view the nature of the acts rebellion with any other offense. The rejection
a gun battle with other traffic enforcers.
committed and after scrutiny of all the facts of both options shapes and determines the
• Appellant is liable for the crime of rebellion,
and circumstances which should be viewed primary ruling of the Court, which is that
Hernandez remains binding doctrine not murder, not murder with direct assault
through the mirror of an unbiased judicial
operating to prohibit the complexing of upon a person in authority.
criterion. Otherwise, the gravity of leniency of
rebellion with any other offense committed on • Rebellion is committed by taking up arms
the offense would hinge in the subjective
characterization of the act from the point of the occasion thereof, either as a means against the government, among other means.
view of a given religious denomination or sect necessary to its commission or as an In this case, appellant not only confessed
and in such a case, the application of the law unintended effect of an activity that voluntarily his membership with the sparrow
would be partial and arbitrary, withal, constitutes rebellion. unit but his killing of the officer. The sparrow
dangerous, especially in a country said to • Gutierrez Jr Concurring: Rebellion consists of unit is the liquidation squad of the NPA with
once the scene of religious intolerance and many acts; the crime of rebellion consists of the objective of overthrowing the duly
prosecution. many acts. The dropping of one bomb cannot constituted govt.
be isolated as a separate crime. of rebellion. • The ISLAW is not applicable to persons
People vs. Tengson Neither should the dropping of one hundred convicted of rebellion. Crime of rebellion is
bombs or the firing of thousands of machine penalized by prison mayor and fine not
• Burial rights performed inside a Roman gun bullets be broken up into a hundred or exceeding 20K. (But this is now changed by
Catholic Cemetery. thousands of separate offenses. The killing of RA 6968 as shown in 135).
• For an act to be notoriously offensive to civilians during a rebel attack on military •
religious feelings it must be directed against a facilities furthers the rebellion and is part of People vs. Lovedioro
religious practice or dogma or tiutal ofr the the rebellion.
purpose of ridicule. The act of performing • A policeman was walking and he was killed by
burial rites inside a Roman Cathoilic Umil vs. Ramos, supra the accused.
Cemetery, in accordance with the rules of
practices of the sect Christ is the Answer by • As a continuing crime. • In deciding if the crime committed is rebellion
reading passages from the bible, etc is not not murder, it becomes imperative for the
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 4
courts to ascertain won the act was done in US vs Tolentino distribution of free food, drinks and cigs at 2
furtherance of a political end. The political public meetings
motive of the act should be conclusively • Theatrical work which was alleged to be • Sec 15, Art VI of the Constitution makes it
demonstrated. seditious. clear that parliamentary immunity from
• It is not enough that the overt acts of • 7 modes of committing the offense: arrest does not cover any prosecution for
a. uttering seditious words or speeches treason, felony, and breach of the peace.
rebellion are duly proven. From the
b. writing, publishing, or ciculating of scurrilous • American law: Bu common parliamentary law,
foregoing, it is plainly obvous that it is not
libels against the govt. the members of the legislature are privileged
enough that the overt acts of rebellion are
c. writing, publishing or circulating of scurrilous from arrest on civil process during the
duly proven. Both purpose and overt acts are
libels which tend to disturb or obstruct any session of that body, and for a reasonable
essential components of the crime. With
lawful officer in executing his office time before and after, to enable them to go to
either of these elements wanting, the crime
d. or which tend to instigate others to cabal or and return from the same. A prosecution for
of rebellion legally does not exist.
meet together for unlawful purposes a criminal offense is thus excluded from this
• If no political motive is established and
e. which suggest or incite rebellious grant of community.
proved, the accused should be convicted of
consipiracies
the common crime and not of rebellion. In
f. which tend to stir up people against lawful ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS
cases of rebellion, motive relates to the act,
authorires or to disturb the peace of the
and mere membership in an organization
community, safety and order of the govt RA 8294
dedicated to the furtherance of rebellion
g. knowlingly concealing such evil practices
would not, by and of itself, suffice.
People vs. Quijada
Espuelas vs. People
SEDITION
• Case where a dance was held in a basketball
• Suicide note that he was not pleased with court and Quijada kept on pestering Iroy’s
People. Cabrera
Roxas administration. sister and Quijada killed the brother.
• A published writing which calls our govt one • He was convicted of two separate offenses of
• Phil Constabulary vs. the Manila police where
of corroks and dishonest persons infested murder and illegal use of firearm aggravated
the PC vowed revenge.
with Nazis and Fascists i.e. dictators and with illegal use of firearm.
• Sedition in its more general sense is the
which reveals a tendency to produce
raising of commotions or disturbances in the
dissatisfaction or a feeling incompatible with
• The unequivocal intent of the second par of
State. section 1. of PD 1866 is to respect and
the disposition to remain loyal to the govt is a
• The Phil Law on the subject makes all persons preserve homicide or murder as a distinct
scurrilous libel against the govt.
guilty of sedition who rise publicly and • Criticism of govt how it may legally be done- offense penalized under the RPC and to
tumultously in order to obtain by force or increasae the penalty for illegal possession of
any citizen may criticize his govt and govt
outside of legal methods any one of five firearm where such a firearm is used in killing
officials and submit his criticism to the free
objects, including that of inflicting any act of a person.
trade of ideas. However such criticicim should
hate or revenge upon the person or property • Its clear language yields no intention of the
be specific and therefore constructive
of any official or agent of the Insular Govt or lawmaker to repeal or modify, pro tanto,
specifying particular objectionable actuations
of a provincial or municipal govt. Articles 248 and 249 of the RPC in such a way
of the govt. it must be reasoned or tempered
• It is not necessary that the offender should that if an unlicensed fiream is used in the
and not a contemptuous condemnation of the
be a private citizen and the offended party a entire govt set up. commission of homicide or murder, either of
public functionary. these crimes, as the case may be, would only
• Conspiracies are generally proved by a Umil vs. Ramos, supra serve to aggravate the offense of illegal
number of indefinite acts, conditions and possession of firearm and would not anymore
circumstances which vary according to the • Sedition as a continuing act. be separately punished.
purposes to be accomplished. IF it be proved • The words of the subject provision are
that the defendants pursued by their acts the palpably clear to exclude any suggestion that
same object, one performing one part and VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY either of the crimes of homicide and murder,
another part of the same so as to complete it as crimes mala in se under the RPC is
with a view to the attainment of that same Martinez vs. Morfe obliterated as such and reduced as a mere
object one will be justified in the conclusion aggravating circumstance in illegal possession
that they were engaged in a conspiracy to • Martinez and Bautista were members of the of firearm whenever the unlicensed firearm is
effect that object. used in killing a person.
Constitutional Convention. They were
INCITING TO SEDITION
arrested for falsification of docs-birthday and • The only purpose of the provision is to
increase the penalty prescribed in 1st par of
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 5
sec 1—reclusion temporal in its max to • The Maypr was a person in authority and • The prescription commence from date when
reclusion perpetua to death. Tolentino was a policeman who at the time culprit should evade the service of his
was in uniform. They were performing their sentence.
People vs. Feloteo official duties to maintain peace and order in
the community. People vs. Abilong
• Accused played with an armalite and shot
Sotto who was playing with friends after their People vs. Dollantes • The accused was sentenced with destierro
drink. (100M from Manila)
• Under RA 8294, the offeses of murder and • The case where the accused brandished a • One who, sentenced to destierro by virtue of
illegal use or possession of firearm are final judgment, and prohibited from entering
knife challenging anyone to fight with him
integrated into a single offense. In the recent the City of Manila, enters said city within the
when the brgy. Captain was giving a speech.
case of People vs. Molino, gave retroactive period of his sentence is guilty of evasion of
• Barangay captain was killed while in the
application to RA No. 8294 considering that sentence under article 157, RPC.
under the new law, the offenses of murder performance of his duties. The records
and illegal use or possession of firearm are showed that the barangay captain was in the
VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON
integrated into a single offense. act of trying to pacify the accused who was
• With the amendments introduced by RA 8294 making trouble in the dance hall when he was
Torres vs. Gonzales
stabbed to death.
to PD 1866, the use of unlicensed firearm in
killing the victim is no longer considered as a • The accused was convicted of estafa but then
DELIVERY OF PRISONERS FROM JAIL
separate offense, instead, it is considered as he was granted a conditional pardon provided
an aggravating circumstance. Liable for he would not violate any penal laws. He was
Alberto vs. De la Cruz
murder and the use of firearm is only an charged 20 counts of estafa but he was not
aggravating circumstance. yet convicted of final judgment.
• Case where the accused was summoned at
• A convict granted conditional pardon who is
People. Vs. Narvasa the house of the governor to fix the fence.
recommitted must of course be convicted by
• In order to be guilty under 223 (connivance) final judgment of a court of the subsequent
• There was a report of missing carabaos, pigs, and 224 (negligence), it is necessary that the crime or crimes with which he was charged
and goats. Police chanced upon the gang of public officer had consented to, or connived before the criminal penalty for such
appellants. There was a volley of gunfire and in, the escape of a prisoner on the part of the subsequent offense can be imposed upon.
a policeman was killed. The trial court person in charge is an essential condition in The parolee or convict who is regarded as
convicted the accused illegal use of firearm in the commission of the crime of faithfulness in having violated the provisions thereof must
its aggravated form. the custody of the prisoner. If the public be charged, prosecuted and convicted by final
• The second element of illegal possession of officer charged with the duty of guarding him judgment before he can be made to suffer
does not connive with the fugitive, then he the penalty under 159.
firearms can be proven by the testimony or
has not violated the law and is not guilty of
the certification of a representative of the
the crime. QUASI-RECIDIVISM
PNP Firearms and Explosives Unit that the
• Negligence in the custody of a prisoner under
accused was not a license of the firearm in
224 of the RPC punishable if it is definitely People vs. Dionisio
question.—As to proof that appellants had no
license or permit to possess the firearm in and deliberately committed.
• The Happy Go Lucky gang vs. Batang
question, we have held that the second
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE Mindanao case.
element of illegal possession of firearms can
• The accused are quasi-recidivists, having
be proven by the testitmony or the
certification of a representative of the PNP Tanega vs. Masakayan committed the crime charged while serving
Firearm and Explosives Unit that the accused sentence for a prior offense. The maximum
was not a licensee of the firearm in question. • Accused was convicted with slander but she penalty prescrived by law for the new felony
didn’t serve her sentence. (murder) is death, regardless of the presence
DIRECT ASSAULT • The elements are that the offender is a or absence of any mitigating or aggravating
convict by final judgment; he is serving the circumstance or the complete absence
People vs. Beltran sentence of deprivation of liberty and he thereof. But for lack of requisite votes,
evades the service of sentence by escaping reclusion perpetua is imposed.
• Battle in the Puzon’s compound. during the term of his sentence.
Crimes Against Public Interest
• Shooting at the mayor and a policeman on
duty is attempted murder with assault.
COUNTERFEITING
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 6
mentioned therein, the appearance of a true case of a public document with continuing
People vs. Kong Leon and genuine document). This provision does interest affecting the public welfare which is
not only contemplate situations where a naturally damaged if that document is
• The Spanish Penal Code from which the law spurious, false or fake document or falsified where the truth is necessary for the
punishing the fabrication and uttering of instrument is given the appearance of a true safeguard and protection of that general
counterfeit coins is evidently derived, the and genuine document, but also to situations interest.
fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from involving originally true and genuine
circulation is punishable, it stands to reason documents which have been withdrawn or Luague vs. CA
that the counterfeiting of foreign coin, even if demonetized, or have outlived their
withdrawn from circulation in the foreign usefulness. The case under consideration • Case where the wife signed the payroll
country of its origin, should also be could not come within the second paragraph warrant after her husband died.
punishable, because the reason for punishing of the aforesaid article (By erasing, • Absence of criminal intent by petitioner wife
the fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from substituting , counterfeiting or altering by any when she signed her husband’s name as
circulation is not alone the harm caused to means the figures, letters, words or signs payee. Absence of damage an element to be
the public by the fact that it may go into contained therein) because no figure, letter, considered to determine presence of criminal
circulation, but the danger that a word, or sign contained in Exhibit A has been intent. Govt did not sustain financial loss due
counterfeiter produces by his stay in the erased, substituted, counterfeited or altered. to encashment of checks by the wife.
country, and the possibility that he may later The forgery consists in the addition of a word
apply his trade to making of coins in actually in an effort to give to the present document
• While it is not meant to imply that if there is
circulation. the appearance of the true and genuine no damage there can be no falsification, but
• The law of the US on its currency became a certificate that it used to have before it was that the absence of damage is an element to
part of the general law which our courts of withdrawn or has outlived its usefulness. be considered to determine whether or not
justice are bound to apply and enforce. there is criminal intent. (Damage is not
necessary in falsification but is intent
FALSIFICATION necessary?)
MUTILATION OF COINS
People vs. Romualdez Cabigas vs. People
PD 247
• Case of Bar Exam where the scores of a • Case of lost treasury bills and that on the
certain Mabunay were changed. Securities Delivery Receipt, he crossed out
FORGERY • The contention that the papers which with a red ink the said doc and notated “for
defendant ER altered were not public or adjustment”.
Del Rosario vs. People official documents is untenable because the • There is no falsification if the correction was
examination of candidates for admission to made to speak the truth. It is a settled
• Erasure and alteration of figures in genuine the bar is a judicial function. The alterations doctrine that in falsification byu an employee
treasury notes-The possession of genuine made in such papers, under the under par no 4 of Art 171 which reads by
treasury notes of the Philippines any of the circumstances proven in this case, of the making untruthful statements in the narration
“figures, letters, words or signs contained” in grades given to them by the correctors, of facts, the ff elements must concur:
which had been erased and/or altered, with constitute the crime of falsification of public a. offender makes in a doc untruthful
knowledge of such erasure and alteration, documents. satatments in a narration of facts
and with the intent to use such notes in b. that he has a legal obligation to disclose the
enticing another to advance funds for the Beradio vs. CA truth of the facts narrated by him
avowed purpose of financing the manufacture c. the facts narrated by the offender are
of counterfeit treasury notes of the • The accused was the Chief of Office, Office of absolutely false
Philippines, is punishable. Election registrar who was accused as having d. that the perversion of truth in the narration of
falsified her daily time record. facts was made with the wrongful intent of
People vs. Galano injuring a third person
• Where non-faithful statement of daily hours
of work in time record has not caused • In the absence of a legal obligation to
• Balut case and the Victory note payment damages to the Govt, no crime of falsification disclose or reveal the truth, accused cannot
• can accrue. While it is true that a time record be convicted of falsification. The practice was
• The forgery here committed comes under the is an official document, it is not criminally for his own convenience and also for
first paragraph of Article 169 or the Code (By falsified if it does not pervert its avowed reference purposes.
giving to a treasury or bank note or any purpose as when it does not cause damage to
instrument payable to bearer or to order the government. It may be different in the People cs. Sandaydiego
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 7
or commercial document is only a necessary any department or agency of the Phil Goct or
• Case where Samson made vouchers for the means to commit the estafa. of any foreign govt (Usurpation of authority)
alleged construction of a bridge but there • In the crime of falsification of a public b. under pretense of official position, performs
wasn’t really any construction. The vouchers document, the prescriptive period any act pertaining to any person in authority
were encashed at Sandaydiego’s office and commences from the time the offended party or public officer of the Phil Govt or any forein
not at the Cashier’s. had constructive notice of the alleged forgery govt or any agency thereof, without being
• A person in possession of falsified document after the document was registered with the lawfully entitled to do so. (Usurpation of
and made us of it is presumed to be material Register of Deeds. official functions)
author of falsification. • Accused was previously a member of the said
USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS
• If falsification was resorted to hide organization however it was not proven by
malversation, falsification and malversation the prosecution that he was dismissed from
People vs. Dava
are separate offenses, not complex crimes. the org and that he no longer possesses such
Each falsification of a voucher constitutes one authority. However the SOLGEN argued that
• Case where Dava acquired a falsified driver’s
crime and falsification of each voucher in makes no difference whether the accused
license after his previous license was was suspended or dismissed from the service
constitutes one offense. It is settled that if confiscated due to a felony he committed.
the falsification was resorted to for the for both imply the absence of power to
• Driver’s license a public document. represent oneself as vested with authority to
purpose of hiding the malversation, the
• The driver’s license being a public document, perform acts pertaining to an office to which
falsication and maversation are separate
proof of the fourth element of damage caused he knowingly was deprived of. He should
offenses. The falsification of six vouchers
to another person or at least an intent to have been charged of usurpation of official
constitutes six separate or distinct offenses
cause such damage has become immaterial. functions and not of usurpation of authority,
and each misappropriation as evidenced by a
• In falsification of public or official documents, thus, he was acquitted.
provincial voucher constitutes a separate
offense. The six misappropriations evidenced the principal thing being punished is the
by the six vouchers constitute six distinct violation of the public faith and the USING FICITITIOUS NAME
offenses. ( As compared to Villalon, Dava destruction of the truth proclaimed therein.
and Cortez case?) CA 142
USURPATION
Syquian vs. People
People vs. Cortez Legamia vs. IAC
• Mayor appointed one woman as clerk but
• Case where the accused pretended to be a • Case where a woman used the name Corazon
there were no funds available and no special
ordinance creating said position. BIR agent and that he presented an ID card Reyes instead of Corazon Legamia y Rivera
• The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a with other BIR papers. bec she has been living with Emilio Reyes for
• The crime was usurpation of authority thru 20 years but not married.
third person is not necessary when the
falsified document is a public document. falsification of a public document by a private • She assumed the role as his wife and used
person. The falsification was the means his name without any sinister purpose or
People vs. Villalon employed by the defendant to perpetrate the personal material gain in mind. She applied
crime of usurpation. for benefits upon his death not for herself but
• Case where a document of mortgage was for their son. (“You may have your own
Gigantoni vs. People Corazon” statement of the Court).
falsified by the accused alleging that he has
obtained the signatures of the De Guzman
• Case where accused claimed that he was an ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA
brothers.
agent of CIS of the Phil Constabulary and
• The falsification of a public document may be went to Pal to conduct verification of same RA 75
a means of committing estafa because before travel by the Black Mountain officials and
the falsified document is actually utilized to presented an ID.
defraud another, the crime of falsification has • Usurpation of authority and usurpation of RA 493
already been consummated, damage or official functions- Art 177 of the RPC on
intent to cause damage not being an element usurpation of authority or official functions- PERJURY
of the crime of falsification of public, official any person:
or commercial documents. The damage to Diaz vs. People
another is caused by the commission of a. who knowingly and falsely represent himself
estafa, not by falsification of the document,
to be an officer, agent and representative of
hence, the falsification of the public, official
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 8
LOI 816 discernable reaction in the public or audience
• Case where the accused made it appear that
witnessing the same. The object of the law is
he was a 4th yr student with Bachelor of Arts IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND to protect the morals of the public. The
at the Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges EXHIBITIONS reaction of the public, therefore, during the
and this was a requirement for his performance of the dance by the appellant
reappointment as School Administrative Asst. should the gauge in the determination
• As defined, perjury is the willful and corrupt PD 960 as amended by PD 969 whether appellant’s danicing or exhibition
assertion of falsehood under oath of was indecent or immoral. The test in the
affirmation administered by authority of law People vs. Kottinger Kottinger applies.
on a material matter.
• All elements present: • WON the pictures portraying the inhabitants People vs. Padan
of the bountry in native dress are
a. that the accused made a statement under obscene/indecent. • The Toro case.
oath or executed an affidavit upon a material • The word obscene and the term obscenity • But an actual exhibition of the sexual act,
matter. may be defined as meaning something preceded by acts of lasciviousness, can have
b. That the statement or affidavit was made offensibve to chastity, decency or delicacy. no redeeming features. In it there is no room
before a competent officer, authorized to • Indecency is an act against good behaviour for art. One can see nothing in it but clear
receive and administer oath and unmitigated obscenity, indecency and an
and a just delicacy.
c. That in that statement or affidavit, the offense to public morals, inspiring and
• Test of Obscenity: The test ordinarily followed
accused made a willful and deliberate causing as it does, nothing but lust and
by the courts in determining whether ea
assertion of a falsehood lewdness and exerting a corrupting influence
particular publication or other thing is
d. That the sworn statement or affidavit exp on the youth of the land.
obscene within the meaning of the statutes,
containing the falsity is required by law or
is whether the tendency of the matter
made for legal purpose. VAGRANCY
charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt
those whose minds are open to such immoral
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS PD 1563
influences and into whose hands a publication
or tother article charged as being obscene
Ouano vs. CA Perez vs. Navarro-Domingo
may fall.
• Another test of obscenity is that which shocks
• Case where auction was manipulated. • Vagrancy law declared unconstitutional by the
the ordinary and common sense of men as an
• Causing another bidder to stay away from the MTC.
indecency.
auction in order to cause reduction of the
price of the property auctioned. These acts
• Test: What is the judgment of the aggregate • There cannot be malice by mere loitering or
sense of the community reached by the tramping or wandering about without visible
constitute a crime where Ouano and Eschavez
publication or other matter? What is the means of support because the only person
had promised to share in the property in
probably reasonable effect on the sense of affected thereby or prejudiced or injured by
question as a consideration for Ouano’s
decency, purity, and chastity of society such circumstances would be the person
refraining from taking part in the public
extending to the family? himself and not other third parties. There is
auction, and they had attempted to cause
and in fact succeeded in causing another nothing to protect society from these acts
People vs. Aparici and it is this precisely which is repugnant
bidder to stay away from the auction in order
to cause reduction of the price of the because it impinges on the individual’s right
• Case where the woman danced wearing furry of freedom of expression and freedom of
property auctioned.
• Property forfeited in favor of the govt. white girdle with a middle piece punctuating locomotion, as guaranteed by the Bill of
attend on the things she was supposed to Rights.
hide. • Lack of visible means of support should be
Crimes Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs
• Test of Obscenity: It may be conceded that punishable unless it affects other persons or
RA 9165 nudity itself is not inherently indecent prejudices them.
obscene. Mere nudity in painting and • Poverty cannot be a criminal act. (Attacking
Crimes Against Public Morals sculpture is not obscenity as they may be the social status of the person).
considered pieces of art. But the artistic, the
GAMBLING aesthetic and the pulchritude in the nude RA 9208
body of a living woman may readily be
PD 1602 transformed into an indecent and obscene
object, by postures and movements of such Crimes Committed by Public Officers
body which produce perceptible and
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 9
BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS Graft Law bec his salary was out of prop with This presumption is juris tantum. It may be
his present acquisition of cash and properties. rebutted by the public officer or employee by
Manipon vs. Sandiganbayan • Test to determine whether a proceeding is showing to the satisfaction of the court that
cibvil or criminal: forfeiture proceedings may his acquisition of the property was lawful.
• Case where the deputy sheriff said that he either be civil or criminal in nature and may • In determining whether of not there is
can remedy the withdrawal of the garnished be in rem or in personam. unexplained wealth under RA 1379 the courts
amount so that they can have something for • If the proceeding does not involve the are not bound by the statements of assets
New Year. conviction of the wrongdoer for the offense and liabilities filed by the resp. The statute
• Direct bribery: The crime of direct bribery as charged the proceeding is of a civil nature affords the resp every opportunity to explain
defined in 210 in RPC consists of the ff and under the statutes which specifically so to the satisfaction of the court how he had
elements: provide, where the act or omission for which acquired the property in question.
1) that the accused is a public officer the forfeiture is imposed is not also a
2) that he received directly or through another misdemeanor, such forfeiture may be sued for RA 3019
some gift or present, offer or promise and recovered in a civil action.
3) that such gift, present or promise has been • The proceeding in Anti-Graft Law is not a Morfe vs Mutuc
given ion consideration of his commission of criminal proceeding bec it does not terminate
some crime, or any act not constitutiong a in the imposition of a penalty but merely in • Case where the constitutionality of RA 3019
crime, or to refrain from doing something the forfeiture of the properties illegally was challenged bec it infringes liberty.
which it is his official duty to do and acquired in favor of the State and bec the • To declare a law unconstitutional, the
4) that the crime or act relates to the exercise of procedure outlined therein leading to infringement of constitutional rights must be
his functions as public officer forfeiture is that provided in a civil action. clear, categorical, and undeniable. While in
• The promise of a public officer to perform an the attainment of public good, no
act or to refrain from doing it may be express Cabal vs. Kapunan infringement of clear, categorical, and
or implied. undeniable, that what the Constitution
condemns, the statue allows. In other words,
• Case where the AFP chief of staff was
to declare a law unconstitutional, such
charged with graft and corruption and his constitutional violation must be clear and
defense was his rights against self- categorical.
Dacumas vs. Sandiganbayan incrimination. •
• Proceedings for forfeiture of peoperty are
Jaravata vs. Sandiganbayan
• The settlement of tax liability which reduced deemed criminal or penal and hence, the
the tax of the Revilla Interiors. exemption of defendants in criminal cases
• Pulling out assessment papers and the like from the obligation to be witness against • Case where the teacher received payments
themselves are applicable thereto. from other teachers for the release of their
was not part of his official duties, thus
salary differentials.
elements for direct bribery were not all met. • Distinguished from Almeda v.s Perez, wherein
• There is no law which invests the petitioner
• Besides the promised act was not impossible an amendment in the information was
with the power to intervene in the payment of
to carry out given his 29 years in service, he allowed bec it is only civil in nature however
the salary differentials of the complainants or
surely knows his way around. (expanded this doctrine refers to the purely procedural
anyone for that matter. Far from exercising
meaning of official duties) aspect of the said proceeding and has no
any power, the petitioner plated the humble
bearing on the substantial rights of the
role of a supplicant whose mission was to
PD 46 respondents therein particularly their
expedite payment of the salary differentials.
constitutional right against self-incrimination.
In his official capacity as assistant principal,
he is not required by law to intervene in the
PD 749 Republic vs. CA
payment of the salary differentials.
Accordingly, he cannot be said to have
GRAFT AND CORRUPTION • Case where the Staff Engr of the Reg Office
violated the law aforecited although he
of the Bureau of Public Highways in Cebu was exerted efforts to facilitate the payment of
RA 1379 charged with graft and corruption but was the salary differentials.
later able to justify the acquired properties • Sec 3 (b) of RA 3019 refers to a public officer
Almeda vs. Perez and wealth.
whose official intervention is required by law
• Law creates a presumption against the public
in a contract or transaction. (“in his pofficial
• Case where the accused is an NBI director officer or employee who acquires property capacity has to intervene under the law”).
and was charged with violation of the Anti- grossly disproportionate to his income i.e.
that the property was unlawfully acquired. Trieste vs. Sandiganbayan
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 10
• Case where Azarcon was requested by the
• Case where the Mayor has signed vouchers
MALVERSATION Director of the BIR to distraint the goods,
where he has granted the bidding to Trigen chattels or other props of Ancla bec a
where he is also the President and a major Labatagos vs. Sandiganbayan delinquent taxpayer.
stockholder. • Although sec 206 of the NIRC authorizes the
• What the Anti-Graft Law prohibits is the • Case of the pregnant cashier and collecting BIR to effect a constructive distraint by
actual interevention by a public official in the officer who filed for an LOA but still went to requiring any person to preserve distrained
transaction in which he has a financial the office to collect tuition fees and other fees prop there is no provision in the NIRC
interest. What is contemplated in section 3(h) for the uniform of the basketball team of the constituting such person a public officer by
of the law is the actual intervention in the school. reason of such requirement. The BIR’s power
transaction in which one has financial or • Malversation consists not inly in authorizing a private indiv to act as
pecuniary interest in order that liability may depositary cannot be stretched to include the
misappropriation or converting public funds
attach. power to appoint him as a public officer.
or property to one’s personal use but also
• The official need not dispose his shares in the • Consideration of ART. 222 private indiv as
knowingly allowing others to make use or of
corporation as long as he dons not do misappropriate them. public officer. SC ruled that a private indiv
anything for the firm in its contract with the who has in his charge any of the public funds
office. For the law iams to prevent dominant Estepa vs. Sandiganbayan or prop enumerated and commits any of the
use of influecen, atuhoroty and power. acts defined should likewise be penelized with
• Paymaster case. the same penalty meted to erring public
Mejorada vs. Sandiganbayan officers. Nowhere in the said provision is it
• In crime of malversation, all that is necessary
expressed or implied that a private indiv be
for conviction is proof that accountable officer
• Case of the Engr who has negotiated with the deemed a public officer. Azarcon and Ancla,
had received the public funds and that he did
house and lot owners for the construction of his co-accused, are both private indivs.
not have them in his possession when
a road and the complainants alleged that
demand therefore was made and he could not
they were divested of a large proportion of INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS
satisfactorily explain his failure so to account.
their claims and receiving payment in an
• An accountable officer may be convicted for
amount even lower that the actual damage Rodillas vs. Sandiganbayan
malversation even if there is not direct
they incurred.
evidence of personal misappropriation where • Case where the police allowed the woman to
• Section 3 cited above enumerates in eleven
he has not been able to explain satisfactorily
subsections the corrupot practices of any go to the CR without inspecting first if there
the absence of the funds involved.
public officer declared unlawful. Its reference was a way for her to escape.
• Under 217 there is prima facie evidence of
to any public officer is without distinction or • It was improper for pet to allow pris to have
malverdation where the accountable public
qualification and it specifies the acts declared lunch with family when he was supposed to
officer fails to have duly forthcoming any
unlawful. The last sentence of the par (e) is bring the pris back to jail which is 1K away
public funds with which he is chargeable upon
intended to make clear the inclusion of from the sala of the judge. It is his duty to
demand by duly authorized officer.
officers and employees of offices or govt corp take necessary precautions to assure the
which under the ordinary concept of public absence of any means of escape. A failure to
Ilogon vs. Sandiganbayan
officers may not come within the term. It is a undertake these precautions will make his act
strained construction of the provision to read one of definite laxity of negligence amounting
• Vales case.
it as applying exclusively to public officers to deliberate non-performance of duty.
charged with the duty of granting licenses • The fact that petitioner did not personally use
and permits or other concessions. the missing funds is not a valid defense and
will not exculpate him from his criminal Crimes Against Persons
PLUNDER liability. And as aptly found by respondent
Sandiganbayan, the fact the immediate PARRICIDE
RA 7080 superiors of the accused have acquiesced to
the practice of giving out case advances for People vs. Jumawan
convenience did not legalize the
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan disbursements. • Presentacion should have been accused of
parricide but her relationship with deceased is
Azarcon vs. Sandiganbayan not alleged in the information, she, like the
others, can be convicted of murder only
qualified by abuse of superior strength.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 11
• Although not alleged in the information, overwhelming the accused after chancing intention to cause an abortion. Appellant
relationship is an aggravating circumstance upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. alleges that, assuming he indeed killed his
aand should be assigned against appellants. But the killing should have been actually wife, there is no evidence to show that he
Relationship is inherent in parricide but she motivated by the same blind impulse and had the intention to cause an abortion. In this
stands convicted of murder. As to the others, must not have been influenced by external contention, appellant is correct. He should
the relationships of father-in-law and brother- factors. not be held guilty of the complex crime of
in-law aggravate the crime. Penalty for Parricide with Intentional Abortion but of the
murder with aggravating circ is death but complex crime of Parricide with Unintentioanl
there is a lack of the necessary votes MURDER AND HOMICIDE Abortion. It has not been established that
therefore, reclusion perpetua. there was intent to cause abortion.
People vs. Buensuceso
People vs. Tomotorgo
• Case where the policeman was trying to get HAZING
• Art. 49 not apply to cases where more the knife from Tayag and eventually led to a
serious consequences not intended by the chase and killed Tayag. RA 8049
offender result from his felonious act bec • Where several assailants inflicted wounds on
under art. 4, par 1 of the same Code, he is a victim but it cannot be determined who
liable for all the direct and natural inflicted which wound, all the assailants are
consequences of his unlawful act. His lact of liable for victim’s death. RAPE
intention to commit so grave a wrong is, at •
best, mitigating. People vs. Pugay RA 8353
• People vs. Alburquerque: Art 49 applies only
to cases where the crime committed is • There is nothing in the records that shows
different from that intended and where the that there was a precious conspiracy or unity
felony committed befalls a different person. of criminal purpose and intention bet the two People vs. Orita
• People vs. Laureano et. Al.: Art 246 of the accused immediately before the crime. There
RPC punishes parricide with the penalty of was no animosity and their meeting at the • 16-year old nirape sa boarding house. Babae
reclusion perptua to death, which are two scene of the crime was accidental. They only tumakas nang nakahubo.
indivisible penalties. As the commission of the want to make fun of the deceased. • Perfect penetration is not essential for the
act was attended by mitigating circ with no • There is an absence of intent to kill and that consummation of rape—clearly in the crime of
aggrav, the lesser penalty, which is rec his act was just part of their fun-making that rape, from the moment the offender has
perpetua should be imposed. evening. Treachery-deliberate attack and carnal knowledge of his victim he actually
• SC held that the fact that appellant intended employing means to insure its execution attains his purpose and from that moment
to maltreat the victim only or inflict physical removing any form of defense from the also all the essential elements of the offense
injuries does not exempt him from liability for offended party. have been accomplished. Nothing more is left
the resulting more serious crime. • His act however doesn’t relieve him of crim to be done by the offender because he has
resp. Burning the clothes of victim would performed the last act necessary to produce
cause at the very least some kind of physical the crime. Thus, the felony is consummated.
DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER injury. • Uniform has been set that for the
EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES • ART 4, criminal liability shall be incurred by consummation of rape, perfect penetration is
any person committing a felony although the not essential. Any penetration of the female
People vs. Abarca wrongful act done be different from what is organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of
intended. the labia or lips of the female organ, without
• Elements of Art. 247: a. legally married • Pugay was convicted of Homicide thru rupture of the hymen or laceration of the
surprises spouse in the act of sex with reckless imprudence and Samson was vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction.
another person b. that he kills any or both of convicted of Homicide. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no
them in the act or immediately after. These penetration of the female organ bec not all
elements present in the case. acts of execution was performed. The
• Although an hour has passed bet the sex act UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION offender merely commenced the commission
and the shooting of Koh, the shooting must of a felony directly by overt acts.
be understtod to be the continuation of the People vs. Salufrania
pursuit of the victim by the accused. People vs. Mangalino
• Art only requires that the death caused be • Parricide with unintentional abortion. No
the proximate result of the outrage evidence to show that accused had the
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 12
• 6-year old, Grade I pupil, nirape ni Lolo. scrape of the penis on the external layer of • Accused-appellant’s relationship to the victim
Binigyan ng P2.00. the victim’s vagina, or the mons pubis—there although proven but not alleged in the
• In Statutory rape, proof of intimidation or must be sufficient and convincing proof that information, cannot be considered to be
force used on the victim or lack of it is the penis indeed touched the labias or slid qualifying circumstance—the bove indictment
immaterial. Carnal knowledge with a woman into the female organ and not merely stroked has not specifically alleged that the accused-
below 12 years of age is statutory rape. the external surface thereof, for an accused appellant is the victim’s father; accordingly,
• Full penetration is not required. It is enough to be convicted of consummated rape. accused-appellant’s relationship to the victim
that there is proof of entrance of the male • In People vs. De la Pena we clarified that the although proven during the trial cannot be
organ within the labia or pudendum of the decisions finding a case for rape even if the considered to be a qualifying circumstance.
female organ. Slightest penetration enough attacker’s penis merely touched the external
to consummate the crime. portions of the female genitalia were made in People vs. Berana
the context of the presence or existence of an
People vs. Balbuena erect penis capable of full penetration. Where • Brother-in-law raped the 14-year old sister of
the accused failed to achieve an erection, had his wife with consent of the young child. Guy
• Tomboy na nirape. a limp or flaccid penis or an oversized penis claims he was seduced.
• Absence of injury on victim and absence of which could not fit into the victim’s vagina, • Proof of external injuries inflicted on the
torn dresses and underwear does not negate the Court nonetheless held that rape was complainant is not indispensable in a
truth of rape complaint and credibility of consummated on the basis of the vicitm’s prosecution for rape committed with force or
victim’s testimony. testimony that the accused repeatedly tried violence.
• Description of a typical Filipina. That a Filipina but in vain to insert his penis into her vagina • Affinity is defined as the rlation which one
could not easily decide to come out in the and in all likelihood reached the labia of her spouse bec of marriage has to blood relatives
open and be subjected to public contempt pudendum as the victim felt his organ on the of the other. The connection existing, in
and ridicule. lips of her vulva, or that the penis of the consequence of marriage bet each othe
accused touched the middle part of her married persons and the kindred of the other.
People vs. Castro vagina. To effectively prosecute accused-aplealng for
• And the labias, which are required to be the crim of rape committed by a relative by
• Si Kuya pinatayo si Diana sa inodoro at doon touched by the penis, are by their natural affinity within the third civil degree, it must
minolestiya. Diana 6 years old. situs or location beneath the mons pubis or be established that a) he is legally married to
• Entry, to the least extent, of the labia or lips the vaginal surface, to touch them with the the complainant’s sister and b) complainant
of the female organ is sufficient. penis is to attain some degree of penetration and accused-appellant’s wife are full or half
beneath the surface, hence, the conclusion blood siblings.
People vs. Atento that touching the labia majora or the labia
minors of the pudendum constitutes RA 9262
• Rape with a 17-year old retardate who claims consummated rape.
that sex was “masarap”. Intellect of a 9-12
year-old kid. People vs. Gallo
• If sexual intercourse with a victim under
PART II
twelve years of age is rape, the it should • Accused wanted to apply retroactivity of
follow that carnal knowledge with a 17-year
doctrine in subsequent cases to make his Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security
old whose mental capacity is that of a 7-year
penalty reclusion perpetua instead of death.
old would constitute rape. “This is even so
• The additional attendant circumstances KIDNAPPING AND ILLEGAL DETENTION
even if the circumstances of force and
intidmidation or of the victim being deprived introduced by RA 7659 should be considered
as special qualifying circumstances distinctly People vs. Tomio
of reason or otherwise unconscious are
absent. aaplicable to the crime of rape and if not
pleaded as such could only be appreciated as • Japanese guy was tricked by his countrymen.
People vs. Campuhan generic aggravating circumstances. The Court • Even granting for the sake of argument that,
in the case of People vs. Garcia ratiocinated in effect, there was created a simple loan
• Nahuli ni nanay si houseboy na that the additiona lattnedant circumstances contract bet appellants and Mr. Nagao, as
introduced by RA 7659 should be considered asserted by the appellant, the deprivation of
pinagtangkaang rape-in ang 4-year old na
as special qualifying circumstances distinctly the former’s liberty until the amount shall
anak.
applicable to the crime of rape and if not have been fully “paid” to them, is still
• Touching when applied to rape cases does not
pleaded as such could only be appreciated as kidnapping or illegal detention for ransom. In
simply mean mere epidermal contact,
generic aggravating circumstances. People vs. Akiran-If the kidnapping were to
stroking or grazing of organs, aslight brush or
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 13
compel the victim to fulfill his promise locked up, physically restrained of her liberty of her liberty, unable to move—and get out—
defraying the hospital expenses of a brother or unable to communicate with anyone. as she pleased.
of one of the accused, there is still kidnapping
for ransom, since if that were indeed the People vs. Padica
purpose, the accused need not kidnap the KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR
victim.
People vs. Mercado
• Crime committed was murder, not kidnapping
People vs. Ty
for ransom with murder. Purpose of taking
• Sister of the “wife” was dragged and kept in a the victim was to kill him. Where the taking • Kidnapping and failure to return a Minor. The
of the victim was incidental to the basic
store until she tells the accused where her essential element of the crime is that the
purpose to kill, the crime is only murder, and
sister is. offender is entrusted with the custody of the
this is true even if, before the killing but for
• Where the victim was actually restrained or minor but what is actually punishable is not
the purposes thereof, the victim was taken
deprived of her freedom by the accused to the kidnapping of the minor but rather the
from one place to anther. Thus, where the
force her to produce her sister, the common- deliberate failure or refusal of the custodian
evident purpose of taking the victims was to
law wife of the accused, the rim is not grave of the minor to restore the latter to his
kill them, and from the acts of the accused it
coercion but illegal detention. parents or guardians. –the essential element
cannot be inferred that the latter’s purpose
• Mitigating circ of obfuscation must arise from herein is that the offender is entrusted with
was actually to detain or deprive the victims
lawful sentiments. the custody of the minor but what is actually
of their liberty, the subsequent killing of the
punishable is not the kidnapping of the minor,
victims constitutes the crime of murder,
People vs. Del Socorro as the title of the article seems to indicate,
hence the crime of kidnapping does not exist
but rather the deliberate failure or refusal of
and cannot be considered as a component
the custodian of minor to restore the latter to
• Accused allegedly found a girl and claimd that felony to produce a complex crime of
his parents or guardians. Said failure or
the little girl voluntary went with her. Gave kidnapping with murder. In Masilang case,
refusal, however, must not only be deliberate
her to a physician in Rizal. although the accused had planned to kidnap
but must also be persistent as to oblige the
• Obiter: The court here commented- to cut the victim for ransom but they first killed him
parents or the guardians of the child to seek
down on the illicit traffic of children, the Court and it was only later that they demanded and
the aid of the courts in order to obtain
urges the prosecution of persons to whom obtained the money, such demand for ransom
custody. The key word therefore of this
children are sold or given away for a valuable did not convert the crime into kidnapping
element is deliberate.
consideration. Oftentimes, it is only the since no detention or deprivation of liberty
abductor or kidnapper who is prosecuted. Yet was involved, hence he crime committed was
RA 7610
the person to whom the kidnapped child is only murder.
given and who may have wittingly or
unwittingly given the motivation for the
abduction, goes scot-free, even as the People vs. Ramos
intention of this person is to keep and raise ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S VICTIM
the child as his own. By keeping the child, • Si Ninang kinidnap at hiningan ng pera
under these circumstances, is he not guilty of pambayad dahil asawa manganganak. Lamera vs. CA
serious illegal detention? • The essence of the crime of kidnapping as
defined and penalized is actual deprivation of • Accused was charged with reckless
the victim’s liberty coupled with an imprudence resulting in damage to property
People vs. Lim indubitable proof of intent on the part of the with multiple physical injuries and
malefactor to effect such restraint on the abandonment of one’s victim. He files against
• There is no kidnapping when the fact of offended party’s liberty. The term “actual double jeopardy.
detention which is an essential element of the deprivation of liberty” consists not only of • The articles 365 and 275 are two different
crime charged, was not clearly established. placing a person in an enclosure but also of and distinct offenses. Quasi-offense under
• There is no kidnapping in this case. The two detaining a person or depriving him in any 365 are committed by means of culpa.
minors voluntarily entered the appellant’s manner of his liberty. Crimes against Security are committed by
residence. The fact of detention which is an • For kidnapping to exist, it is not necessary means of dolo.
essential element in the crime charged was that the offended party be kept within an • In 365, failure to lend help to one’s victim is
not clearly established. There was no showing enclosure to restrict her freedom of neither an offense by itself nor an element of
that there was actual confinement or locomotion. It is not enough that, as in the the offense therein penalized.
restriction of the person of the offended instant case, she was in any manner deprived • The identity of offenses that must be shown
party. There was no indication that Aida was need not be absolute identity: the first and
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 14
second offenses may be regarded as the • Where the expression putang ina mo is not • The force which is claimed to have compelled
same offense where the second offense considered slanderous—the is a common criminal conduct against the will of the actor
necessarily includes the first offense or is expression in the dialect that is often must be immediate and continuous and
necessarily included in such first offense or employed not really to slander but rather to threaten grave danger to his person during
where the second offense is an attempt to express anger or displeasure. It is seldom, if allof the time the act is being committed.
commit the first or a frustration thereof. ever, taken in its literal sense by the hearer, That is, it must be a dangerous force
• For the constitutional plea of double jeopardy that is a reflection on the virtue of a mother. threatened “in praesenti”. It must be a force
to be available, no all the technical elements threatening great bodily harm that remains
constituting the first offense need be present GRAVE COERCION constant in controlling the will of the unwilling
in the technical definition of the second participant while the act is being performed
offense. Timoner vs. People and from which he cannot withdraw in safety.

GRAVE THREATS • Mayor fenced public nuisance. UNJUST VEXATION


• Abatement of public nuisance without judicial
People vs. Timbol proceedings, municipal mayor not criminally People vs. Reyes
liable when he acted in good faith in
• The husband was asked by the accused if he authorizing the fencing of a barbershop for • Accused fenced a land which they alleged
can be alone with the accused’s wife and being a public nuisance bec it occupied a belong to them since the Church which stood
there he molested the wife. portion of the sidewalk. Art 699 authorizes on the land they have donated was destroyed
• Acts of lasciviousness: pardon which was not the abatement of a public nuisance without (11 pm while pabasa was being held).
given by the offended party herself, but by judicial proceedings. • The construction of a fence, even though
her husband and that the same was granted • Grave coercion is committed when a person irritating and vexatious under the
by the latter after the filing of the complain who without authority of law, shall by means circumstances to those present is not such an
cannot extinguish the criminal resp of the of iolence, prevent another from doing act as can be designated as notiously
accused for even a pardon givben after the something not prohibited by law or compel to offensive to the faithful as normally such an
presentation of the complaint will not operate do something against his will either it be right act would be a matter of complete
in favor of the accused and exonerate him. or wrong. indifference to those not present, no matter
• The aggravating circ of craft and dwelling are • Elements: how religious a turn of mind they might be.
present in the commission. a. that any person be prevented by another The accused here were just convicted of
• The threats that were not made by the from doing something not prohibited by law, unjust vexation.
accused to the offended party but to his wife or compelled to do something against his will,
while said accused was abusing her, which be it right or wrong. People vs. Anonuevo
form part of the element of intimidation that b. That the prevention or compulsion be
the accused employed to succeed in his lewd effected by violence, either by material force • The accused grabbed the breasts of the
designs, cannot be considered separate and or such display of it as would produce complainant from behind while a religious
independent from the crime of abuse of intimidation and control the will of the ceremony was being held inside the church.
chastity to constitute another crime of offended party • Unjust vexation if no lustful designs present.
threats. c. That the person who restrained the will and
Considering the religious atmosphere
liberty of another had no right to do so, or, in
prevailing at the time the accused kissed and
Reyes vs. People other words, that the restraint was not made
embraced the offended girl and the presence
under authority of law or in the exercise of a
of many people it would be error in the
• “Agustin, putang ina mo” case. lawful right.
absece of clear proof as to the motive, to
• 282 elements:
ascribe the conduct of the appellant to lustful
a. that the offender threatened another person Lee vs. CA
designs or purposes. The accused should be
with the infliction upon his person of a wrong declared guilty of unjust vexation, with the
b. that such wrong amounted to a crime • Check which was forged by the complainant.
aggravating circumstance of having
c. that the threat was not subject to a condition She charged the bank manager of grave
committed it in a place dedicated to religious
• The demonstration led by petitioner against coercion.
worship.
the complainant in front of the main gate • There is nothing unlawful on the threat to
with placards with threatening statements sue. Petitioner’s demand that the private resp Crimes Against Property
with the deliberate purpose of creating in the return the proceeds of the check
mind of the person threatened with the belief accompanied by a threat to file criminal ROBBERY
that the threat would be carried into effect. charges was not improper. There is nothing
unlawful on the threat to sue. Napolis vs. CA
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 15
committing the robbery. The evidence shows that has to be taken into consideration.
• Store vs. House case—robbery thru the store that the accused gained entry into the house Further, whenever a homicide has been
to the house. of Kalitas by breaking the door with an axe committed as a consequence of or on the
and not but burning the same. occasion of a robbery, all those who took part
• That where robbery, though committed in a
as principals in the commission of the crime
inhabited house, is characterized by ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE are also guilty as principals in the special
intimidation, this factor supplies the complex crime of robbery with homicide
controlling qualification so that the law to People vs. Mangulabnan although they did not actually take part in the
apply is article 294 and not art 299 of the homicide unless it clearly appeared that they
RPC. This is on the theory that robbery which • Case where the father hid himself inside the endeavored to prevent the homicide.
is characterized by violence or intimidation ceiling.
against the person is evidently graver than • Crime of robbery with homicide when may People vs. Tapales
ordinary robbery committed by force upon
exist.—In order to determine the existence of
things, because where violence or • Hinoldup yung mag-boyfriend sa taxi tapos
the crime of robbery with homicide, it sis
intimidation against the person is present nirape yung babae at pinatay yung lalaki.
enough that a homicide would result by
there is greater disturbance of the order of • Robbery with homicide-where the crime
reason or on the occasion of the robbery and
society and the security of the indivual.
it is immaterial that the death would charged is robbery with homicide and rape,
• Indeed, one who, by breaking a wall, enters,
supervene by mere accident provided that the legal definition of the crime is robbery
with a deadly weapon, an inhabited house the homicide be produced by reason or on with homicide with rape considered as an
and steals therefrom valuable effects, without occasion of the robbery inasmuch as it only aggravating circumstance.
violence against or intimidation upon persons the result obtained, without reference or • The Court has consistently held that the legal
is punishable under 299 RPC with reclusion distinction as to the circumstances, causes, definition of the crime committed herein is
temporal. Pursuant to the above view, modes or persons intervening in the Robbery with Homicide, with Rape being
adhered to in previous decisions, if, aside commission of the crime, that has to be taken considered an aggravating circumstance. It is
from performing said acts, the thief lays hand into consideration. the uniform jurisprudence of the Supreme
upon any person, without committing any of • There is conspiracy and all of the persons Court that where the crime charged is
the crimes or inflicting any of the injuries
who perpetuated the robbery are liable of the robbery with homicide and rape, the legal
mentioned in subparagraphs 1 to 4 of Art 294
crime of robbery with homicide. definition of the crime is robbery with
of the same Code, the imposable penalty
homicide punishable under par 1, Art 294 of
under par 5 shall be much lighter. This defies
People vs. Calixto the RPC and the rape committed on the
logic and reason accdg to the court.
occasion of that the crime is considered an
• Violence or intimidation against the person is
• Robbed the bank and one of the robbers was aggravating circumstance. Instead of
evidently grabber than ordinary robbery ignominy, therefore, it is the rape itself that
accidentally hit and eventually died. No
committed by force upon things. Art. 294 aggravates.
suspect as to who caused the death.
applies only where robbery with violence
• Members of a group of robbers can be held
against or intimidation of person takes place People vs. Quinones
criminally liable for robbery in band with
without entering an inhabited house, under
homicide where in course of robbery they
the conditions set forth in ART 299 of the • Robbed a car by putting sacks on the road
shot and killed one of their own group.
RPC. Crime is a complex one under Art. 48.
and committed multiple murder.
Doctrines of prev cases were abandoned.
People vs. Pecato • Special complex crime-there is no crime of
robbery with multiple homicide under the RPC
People vs. Biruar
• The relatives of the victim were the ones who the number of persons killed is immaterial
killed him and before they did so, they asked and does not increase the penalty under 294
• Accused pretended to be relatives and when
him if he recognizes them. of the said Code—The Court finds that the
they were allowed to come up the house,
accused were incorrectly sentenced by the
they robbed the house. They then burned a • Actual Participation in the Homicide is not
trial court. The reason is that there is no
house also in the same neighborhood after necessary unless it clearly appeared that the crime robbery with multiple homicide under
they got the gun and some properties from accused endeavored to prevent the homicide the RPC. The charge should have been for
the previous house and then to another. —As long as the homicide resulted during or robbery with homicide only regardless of the
• Accused were charged with 3 separate crimes because of, the robbery, even if the killing is fact that three persons were killed in the
of robbery in Band. by mere accident, robbery with homicide is commission of the robbery. In this special
• Herein accused performed different acts with committed; it is only the result obtained, complex crime, the number of persons killed
distinct purposes which resulted in juridically without reference or distinction as to the is immaterial and does not increase the
independent crimes. The burning of the circumstances, causes, modes, or persons penalty in Art 294.
house of George Kalitas was not the means in intervening in the commission of the crime
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 16
• Reclusion perpetua even when multiple • The house was robbed and the maids were would be an ingredient thereof. The phrase
killings were present. One penalty. raped but the maids didn’t testify as witness. “necessary means” merely signifies that one
They only executed affidavits. crime is committed to facilitate and insure the
ROBBERY WITH RAPE • One who did not take part in rape but only in commission of the other.
robbery is guilty only of robbery. Dwelling,
People vs. Patola nighttime and use of vehicle aggravating n ROBBERY IN BAND
rape.
• Accused were drinking beer in front of the • Accused Juan Moreno, who took no part in People vs. Apduhan
store and when it was closing time already, the rape is guilty of robbery only under 294
raped the 2 salesgirls. (5) of the RPC but as to the accused who • Robbery with homicide-interrelation among
art 294, 295, 296 of the RPC.
• Robbery with rape with the use of a deadly raped the maid guilty of the special complex
• 295 provies that when the offenses dexcribed
crime of robbery with rape under 294 (2) of
weapon, a complex crime. Penalty for robbery in subdivisions 3, 4, 5 of 295 are committed
the RPC. But there are aggravating circ which
with qualified rape under Art. 294(2) or 335. by a band, the proper penalties must be
have to be considered such as dwelling,
There used to be a controversy as to whether imposed in the maximum. The circumstances
nocturnity and the use of a motor vehicle.
robbery with qualified rape should be of band is therefore qualifying ony in robbery
penalized under Art. 294 (2) or under 335 punished by sub 3, 4, 5 or 294.
People vs. Balacanao
which imposes a penalty of reclusion Consequently, art 295 is inapplicable with
perpetua to death. That controversy was set homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, and
• A house was robbed and the wife was raped
at rest where it was held that robbery with lesions graves resulting in insanity, imbecility,
by the robbers. It was supposed to be the
qualified rape should be punished under Art. impotency or blindness. If the foregoing
young girl but she was spared.
294 (2). It should be stressed that in this classes of robbery which are described in 294
• All the conspirators-participants are liable as
case the accused were not charged with 1 and 2 are perpetrated by a band, they
qualified rape alone, a crime against chastity, principals of the crime of robbery with rape.
• Every complaint or information should state would not be punishable under 295 but then
but with robbery with rape, a crime against cuadrilla would be a generic aggravating circ
property. The trial court applied in this case not only the qualifying but also the
aggravating circumstances. under art. 14. There is no crime as robbery
Art. 335. It regarded article 294(2) as having with homicide under 294(1) but the element
been amended by Art. 335. That is why it of band, as stated above, would be
imposed the death penalty. ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES
appreciated as ordinary aggravating circ.
People vs. Salvilla • With regard to their use of unlicensed
People vs. Dinola
firearm, in order for this to be appreciated as
• Robbery; from the moment the offender special aggravating circ to justify the
• Case where a 34 laborer raped a 17-year old
gained possession of the thing, even if the imposition of the max period of the proper
girl then robbed her watch after raping her. penalty, it is a condition sine qua non that the
• If the original design was to commit rape but culprit had no opportunity to dispose of the
same, the unlawful taking is complete. It is offense charged be robbery committed by a
the accused after committing rape also band within the contemplation of Art. 295.
committed robbery bec the opportunity no defense either that appellant and his co-
accused had no opportunity to dispose of the Since 295 does not apply to subdivisions 1
presented itself, the criminal acts should be and 2 of 294 (the accused is charged under
viewed as two distinct offenses, The taking of personal things taken. That fact does not
affect the nature of the crime. From the 294(1), then the special aggravating factor in
the watch by the accused was more of an question which is solely applicable to robbery
afterthought, even accidental. If the intention moment the offender gained possession of
the thing, even if the culprit had no in band under 295 cannot be considered in
of the accused was to commit robbery but fixing the penalty even when the crime was
rape was also committed even before the opportunity to dispose of the same, the
unlawful taking is complete. committed by a band and the use of
robbery, the crime of robbery with rape is unlicensed firearm.
committed. However, if the original design • The crime of serious illegal detention was
was to commit rape but the accused after such a necessary means as it was selected by ROBBERY BY THE USE OF FORCE UPON THINGS
committing rape also committed robbery bec appellant and his co-accused to facilitate and
the opportunity presented itself, the criminal carry out their evil design to stage a robbery. People vs. Jaranilla
acts should be viewed as two distinct Under Art 48, a complex crime arises “when
offenses. an offense is a necessary means for • Taking of six roosters.
committing the other”. The term “necessary • One essential requisite of robbery with force
People vs. Moreno means” does not connote indispensable upon things under 299 and 302 is that the
means for if did then the offense as a malefactor should enter the building or
“necessary means” to commit another would dependency where the object to be taken is
be an indispensable element of the latter and
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 17
found. Art 299 and 302 clearly contemplate carnapping law. Ex. Test runs of vehicles committed against only a predetermined or
that the malefactor should enter the building. before being bought. particular victim.
If the culprit did not enter the building, there
would be no robbery with force upon things.
• Tricycle considered as motor vehicle. Any
People vs. Pulusan
• Building-any structure not mentioned in 299 vehicle which is motorized using the streets
which are public, not exclusively for private
used for storage and safekeeping of personal
use, comes within the concept of motor • A conviction for highway robbery requires
property.
vehicle. Tricycle is not included in the proof that he accused were organized for the
• It is not an indispensable element of theft
exceptions and is deemed to be that kind of purpose of committing robbery
that the thief carry, more or less far away,
motor vehicle defined. indiscriminately. As manifest in its preamble,
the thing taken by him from its owner.
the object of the decree is to deter and
HIGHWAY ROBBERY punish lawless elements who commit acts of
CARNAPPING
depredation upon persons or properties of
PD 532 innocent and defenseless inhabitants who
RA 6539
travel from one place to another thereby
disturbing the peace and tranquility of the
nation and stunting the economic and social
People vs. Puno progress of the people. A conviction for
People vs. Dela Cruz
highway robbery requires proof that the
• For kidnapping to exist, there must be accused were organized for the purpose of
• Conspiracy need not be established by direct
indubitable proof that the actual intent of the committing robbery indiscriminately. There is
evidence of the acts charged, but may and no such proof in this case. Neither proof of
malefactors was to deprive the offended party
generally must be proved by a number of indiscriminate robbery.
of her luberty and not where such restraint of
indefinite acts, condition and circumstances
her freedom of action was merly an incident
which vary according to the purpose to be
in the commission of another offense
accomplished. The existence of conspiracy CATTLE RUSTLING
primarirly intended by the offenders.
may be inferred from acts tending to show a
• Ransom is the money price or consideration
community of design or purpose. PD 533
paid or demanded for redemption of a
• Even if the sworn statements of appellants
captured person or persons, a payment that
Beloso and Salvador are declared
releases from captivity vs. cash and checks
inadmissible for having been given without
given at gunpoint voluntarily.
the presence of counsel, their culpability is Taer vs. CA
• PD 532 is not a modification of ART 267 of
borne out by evidence independent of the
the RPC on kidnapping and serious illegal
same. Their liability was proven by the • Yung kalabaw na pinaalaga kay Taer.
detention but of 306 and 307 on brigandage.
physical evidence on record. • Mere approval of an act without cooperation
• The main objective of the Brigandage Law is
• Carnapping with homicide-carnapping defined
to prevent the formation of a band by more does not constitute conspiracy. Mere
as the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of
than three armed persons for the purposes
vehicle belonging to another without the the act, without cooperation or agreement to
indicated in 306. On the other hand, if
latter’s consent, or by means of violence cooperate, is not enough to constitute one a
robbery is committed by a band, whose
against or intimidation of persons, or by part to a conspiracy absent the intentional
members were not primarily organized for the
using force upon things. There is a graduation participation in the transaction with a view to
purpose of committing robbery or kidnapping
of penalty for carnapping alone, carnapping the furtherance of the common design and
etc the crime would not be brigandage but
with intimidation of persons and force upon purpose.
only robbery.
things and carnapping with homicide. • A person who took care of stolen carabaos, a
• The purpose of brigandage is, inter alia,
mere accessory. At most the facts establish
Izon vs. People indiscriminate highway robbery. If the Taer’s knowledge of the crime. At yet without
purpose is only a particular robbery, the having participated either as principal or as
• Vehicles which use streets with or without the crime is only robbery, or robbery in band if an accomplice, for he did not participate in
required license comes withing the protection there are at least four armed participants. the taking of the carabaos, he took part
of the law. Highways are always public, free • PD 532 punishes as highway robbery or subsequent to the commission of the act of
for the use of every person. There is nothing brigandage only acts of robbery perpetrated taking by profiting himself by its effects.
in the law that requires a license to use a by outlaws indiscriminately against any
public highway to make the vehicle a “motor person or persons on Phil highways as Ordonio vs. CA
vehicle” within the definition given the anti- defined therein and not acts of robbery
• Case where the calf went to its mom.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 18
• Castle rustling as defined in Sec 2(C) of PD ILLEGAL FISHING PD 705, sec. 68
533 is taking away by any means, methods
or schemes, without the consent of the RA 8550 sec. 86 et seq.
owner/raiser, of any of the abovementioned
animals whether or not for profit or gain, or Hizon vs. CA
whether committed with or without violence Mustang Lumber, Inc. vs. CA
against or intimidation of any person or force • Search and seizure without search warrant of
• The foregoing disquisitions should not, in any
upon things .It includes the killing of large
vessles and aircrafts for violations of customs
cattle, or taking its meat or hide without the manner, be construed as an affirmance of the
laws have been the traditional exceptions to
consent of the owner/raiser. respondent Judge’s conclusion that lumber is
the constitutional requirement of a search
excluded from the coverage of Sec 68 of PD
warrant. It is rooted on the recognition that a
705 as amended, and thus possession thereof
vessel and an aircraft, like motor vehicles,
THEFT without the legal documents is not a crime.
can be quickly moved out of the locality or
On the contrary, this Court rules that such
jurisdiction in which the search warrant must
People vs. Gulinao possession is penalized in the said section bec
be sought and secured.
lumber is included in the term timber.
• The offense of illegal fishing is committed
• Theft was committed, not robbery with the • Illegal Logging; Revised Forestry Code of the
when a person catches, takes or gathers or
use of violence against or intimidation of Phil; where a lumber-dealer’s license or
causes to be caught, taken or gathered fish,
person; taking of ring of victim was merely permit has been suspended, he has
fishery or aquatic products in Phil waters with
an afterthought and the force employed in absolutely no right to possess, sell, or
the use of explosives, electricity, obnoxious or
the killing has no bearing on the taking of the otherwise dispose of lumber and the
poisonous substances. The law creates a
ring. Secretary or Environment and Natural
presumption that illegal fishing has been
• Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful Resources or his authorized representative
committed when:
taking of the car. has the authority to seize the lumber.
a. explosives, obnoxious or poisonous
substances or equipment or device for
Santos vs. People FENCING
electric fishing are found in a fishing boat or
in the possiosion of a fisherman
• Case where the car was brought to a repair PD 1612
b. when fist caught or killed with the use of
shop but it wasn’t repaired and wasn’t explosives, etc are found in a fishing boat.
returned. There is a presumption that the operator or
• Theft distinguished from estafa; if the the fishermen are engaged in illegal fishing
accused was only entrusted with de facto ESTAFA
under these circ.
possession of the thing, his misappropriation
of the same constitutes theft. The principal A. THROUGH UNFAITHFULNESS OF ABUSE OF
QUALIFIED THEFT
distinction bet the two crimes is that in theft CONFIDENCE
the thing is taken while in estafa the accused Empelis vs. IAC
receives the property and converts it to his Manahan vs. CA
own use or benefit. There be theft even if the • How qualified and simple theft of coconuts
accused has possesstion of the property. If he • Elements of estafa:
committed: Art 310 states that the crime of
was entrusted only with the material or a. that personal property os received in trust, on
theft shall be punished by the next higher
physical (natural) or de facto possession of commission, for administration or under any
degree if the property stolen consists of
the thing, his misappropriation of the same other cic involving the duty to make delivery
coconut taken from the premises of a
constitutes theft, but if he has the juridical of or to return the same, even though the
palantation. Stealing of coconuts when they
possession of the things, his conversion of obligation is guaranteed by a bond
are still in the tree of deposited on the
the same constitutes embezzlement or b. that there is conversion or diversion of such
ground within the premises is qualified theft.
estafa. property by the person who has so recived it
When the coconuts are stolen in any other
or a denial on his part that he received it
place, it is simple theft.
THEFT OF ELECTRICITY; ILLEGAL WATER, ELECTRIC c. that such conversion, diversion or denial is to
OR TELEPHONE CONNECTIONS the injury of another
d. that there be a demand for the return of the
ILLEGAL LOGGING
PD 401; RA 7832; RA 8041 property.
• Although a contract of lease is not fiduciary in
PD 330
nature, still the clause “any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of or
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 19
return” personal properry is borad enough to violation of this undertaking constitutes damage or injury must be established by
include a “civil obligation”. estafa under sec. 13, PD 115. sufficient and competent evidence in order
• Equally essential before the offense of estafa that the crime of estafa may be established.
under 315(b) of the RPC can be considered Lee vs. Rodil Deceit is the false representation of a matter
committed, is that the refusal or failure to of fact (whether by words or conduct, by
deliver or return is, in turn, predicated on • Trust receipts Law; Violation of a trust receipt false or misleading allegations, or by
misappropriation or conversion by the agreement constitutes the crime of estafa. concealment of that which should have been
accused of the subject of the obligation. • PD 115 was not applied in the Cuevo and Sia disclosed) which deceives or is intended to
• But it was shown that accused did exert all cases bec the questioned acts were deceive another so that he shall act upon it to
efforts to recover and retrieve the dump truck committed before its effectivity. his legal injury.
from Gorospe. He was not convicted • Although one of the essential elements of
criminally but only liable civilly. B. THROUGH FALSE PRETENSES, FRAUDULENT
estafa is damage or prejudice to the offended
ACTS OR MEANS
party, in the absence of proof thereof the
Saddul vs. CA
offender would at least be guilty of attempted
Celino vs. CA
estafa. Appellant commenced the commission
• The words convert or misappropriate connote
of the crime of estafa but he failed to perform
an act of using or disposing of another’s • Pinaniwalang may dwende at may
all the acts of execution of execution which
property as if it were one’s onw, or of kayamanan. would produce the crime, not by reason of his
devoting it to a purpose or use different from • Art 315, 2(a)—Any person who shall defraud own spontaneous desistance but bec of his
that agreed upon. To misappropriate to one’s another by any of the means mentioned apprehension by the authorities before he
own use includes, not only conversion to herinbelow shall be punished by: xxx2. By could obtain the amount. Since only the
one’s personal advantage, but also every means of any of the ff false pretenses of intent to cause damage and not the damage
attempt to dispose of the property of another fraudulent acts executed prior to or itself has been shown, resp court correctly
without right. simultaneously with the commission of the convicted appellant of attempted estafa.
• Conversion is an unauthorized assumption fraud: (a) By using a fictitious name, or
and exercise of the right of ownership over falsely pretending to possess power, People vs. Ong
goods or personal chattels belonging to influence, qualifications, property, credit,
another, resulting in the alteration of their agency, business or imaginary trasactions; or • Elements of estafa in general are:
condition or the exclusion of the owner’s by means of other similar deceits.
rights. It takes place when a person actually (1) that the accused defrauded another
appropriates the property of another to his Abejuela vs. People a. by abuse of confidence or
own benefit, use and enjoyment. b. by means of deceit
• Estafa thru falsification of commercial (2) that damage of prejudice capable of pecuniary
TRUST RECEIPTS documents; Although petitioner was unaware estimation is caused to the offended party or third
of the criminal workings in the mind of Balo, person; In crime of estafa by postdating or
PD 115 he nevertheless unwittingly contributed to issuing a bad check, deceit and damage are
their eventual consummation by recklessly essential elements of the offense and have to be
entrusting his passbook to Balo and by established with satisfactory proof to warrant
signing the withdrawal slips—Banco Filipino conviction.
Allied Banking Corp vs. Ordonez suffered damages. Although Abejuela was • RA 4885 has eliminated the requirement
unaware of the criminal workings in the mind under the old provision for the drawer to
• In trust receipts, there is an obligation to of Balo, he nevertheless unwittingly inform the payee that he had no funds in the
repay the entruster. Their terms are to be contributed to their eventual consummation bank of the funds deposited by him were not
interpreted in accordance with the general by recklessly entrusting his passbook to Balo sufficient to cover the amount of the check.
riles on contracts, the law being alert in all and by signing the withdrawal slips. • In this case, the prosecution failed to prove
cases to prevent fraud on the part of either Abuejuela failed to exercise prudence and
that accused-appellant had such knowledge
party to the transaction. The entrustee binds care.
with respect to the subject checks that he
himself to sell or otherwise dispose of the
indorsed.
entrusted goods with the obligation to turn Koh Tieck Heng vs. People
over to the entruster the proceeds if sold, or
BOUNCING CHECKS
return the goods if unsold or not otherwise • The use of the spurious checks by itself fraud
disposed of, in accordance with the terms and or deceit, one of the two essential requisites BP 22
conditions specified in the trust receipt. A of the crime of estafa—basically the two Nierras vs. Dacuycuy
essential requisites of fraud or deceit and People vs. Grospe
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 20
BP 22 Circular Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera
Que vs. People
People vs. Nitafan
Lim Lao vs. CA Crimes Against the Civil Status of Person
Idos vs. CA
SIMULATION OF BIRTHS
OTHER DECEITS
People vs. Sangalang
Villaflor vs. CA
Veloso vs. Sandiganbayan BIGAMY

SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE People vs. Aragon

PD 1689 Crimes Against Honor

LIBEL

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF Malit vs. People


Mercado vs. CFI
Caballes vs. DAR Agbayani vs. Sayo
Newsweek vs. IAC
Lacsa vs. IAC
PD 1728 Soriano vs. IAC
Bulletin Publishing Corp vs. Noel
Santos vs. CA
Sazon vs. CA
Crimes Against Chastity Vasquez vs. CA

ACTS OF LASCIVIUOUSNESS
SLANDER
People vs. Famularcano SLANDER BY DEED
INCRIMINATING AN INNOCENT PERSON
CHILD PROSTITUTION WIRETAPPING

RA 7610, sec. 5 and 6 RA 4200

Quasi-Offenses
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
People vs. Fontanilla
Babanto vs. Zosa People vs. Cano
Perez vs. CA Ibabao vs. People
Buerano vs. CA
ABDUCTION; FORCIBLE ABDUCTION WITH RAPE Gan vs. CA
Carillo vs. People
People vs. Sunpongco
People vs. Jose
People vs. Alburo
People vs. Godines

PROSECTION OF PRIVATE OFFENSES